Haven't listened to the bonus episode yet, but (with regard to the meltdown towards the end of this episode) my observation of postlapsarian human nature is that of course it is the case that repeated acts form a habit and therefore making a solid attempt to follow a law will result in it becoming easier to follow that law, but also this is absolutely no guarantee that the following of that law will be animated by charity and without charity we are all the walking dead since it is life. If I have repented, amended my life, and decided to stop breaking basic traffic laws such as the speed limit, the next thing that the enemy will do is to prompt me to fall into pride "wow, I'm so much better than all of those other losers who are doubtless going to hell for driving 28 in a 25 zone" or to become angry at those around me for not respecting the law and then when I get to my destination I will lose my temper at some slight additional provocation. Or both. St. John of the Cross (at the start of the book Dark Night) describes some next-level ways that the capital sins are still present in someone who is trying to follow the law or a rule of a religious order.
(pondering further) The way out of the bind, classically, is to be made experientally (and perhaps painfully) aware of one's own nothingness, contingency, and incapacity actually to do anything good (and the need for total reliance on the grace of God, and confidence (as the Pope wrote about recently in a letter on St Therese) in his mercy); this is a remedy for pride (obviously) and for anger (first this would change to some risk of being angry at oneself for it, though), which is covered in the remainder of Dark Night and also by St. Paul's very confusing remarks about what the law is for. (I appreciated the mention of the four relationships that the fall broke: 1. God. 2. one's own self (thought provoking to me), 3. everyone else, 4. creation; I had not realized, because it is so dispassionately written, the real existential horror of Adam's realization "I am naked", which is essentially the inverse of "I am nothing (horror/despair) -> it's okay because God is everything and I trust him and I am happy for things to be this way", the shattering of it as a person falls out of right relationship with himself by refusing to embrace creatureliness.)
Because grace builds on nature the scenario is still repeated acts that form a habit, but they are acts of total dependence on God with the childlike trust exhibited by Christ our brother who goes before us to light the way.
I wonder if Dr. Scott could address the idea of culpability in Paul's letter? It seems to me that Paul is saying that knowledge of the law increased the culpability of sin for the Jews thus "increasing the transgression" of it, as opposed to the pagans who only had natural law and were still culpable but to lesser degree. And if this is the case, our culpability in the "new life" we live with Christ under grace through faith means something altogether different now. If our being justified and brought into the family of Christ is the means by which others come into the family by way of preaching and living as example (faith comes through what is heard), our culpability to the faith is the salvation of those around us. In other words, if we claim to be Christian and go on living in sin and judgement, others will see and be turned away from the faith, thus making us responsible for turning another form the family. Paul's final warning is to avoid those who create difficulties and dissensions in opposition to the doctrines by way of their own appetites. These people create divisions in the community which, to an outsider, would look to be unstable and unattractive. "The God of Peace will soon crush satan under your feet." I think this points directly back to the 5th and 6th verses in chapter 1 when Paul says "For the sake of His Name."
Haven't listened to the bonus episode yet, but (with regard to the meltdown towards the end of this episode) my observation of postlapsarian human nature is that of course it is the case that repeated acts form a habit and therefore making a solid attempt to follow a law will result in it becoming easier to follow that law, but also this is absolutely no guarantee that the following of that law will be animated by charity and without charity we are all the walking dead since it is life. If I have repented, amended my life, and decided to stop breaking basic traffic laws such as the speed limit, the next thing that the enemy will do is to prompt me to fall into pride "wow, I'm so much better than all of those other losers who are doubtless going to hell for driving 28 in a 25 zone" or to become angry at those around me for not respecting the law and then when I get to my destination I will lose my temper at some slight additional provocation. Or both. St. John of the Cross (at the start of the book Dark Night) describes some next-level ways that the capital sins are still present in someone who is trying to follow the law or a rule of a religious order.
(pondering further) The way out of the bind, classically, is to be made experientally (and perhaps painfully) aware of one's own nothingness, contingency, and incapacity actually to do anything good (and the need for total reliance on the grace of God, and confidence (as the Pope wrote about recently in a letter on St Therese) in his mercy); this is a remedy for pride (obviously) and for anger (first this would change to some risk of being angry at oneself for it, though), which is covered in the remainder of Dark Night and also by St. Paul's very confusing remarks about what the law is for. (I appreciated the mention of the four relationships that the fall broke: 1. God. 2. one's own self (thought provoking to me), 3. everyone else, 4. creation; I had not realized, because it is so dispassionately written, the real existential horror of Adam's realization "I am naked", which is essentially the inverse of "I am nothing (horror/despair) -> it's okay because God is everything and I trust him and I am happy for things to be this way", the shattering of it as a person falls out of right relationship with himself by refusing to embrace creatureliness.)
Because grace builds on nature the scenario is still repeated acts that form a habit, but they are acts of total dependence on God with the childlike trust exhibited by Christ our brother who goes before us to light the way.
I wonder if Dr. Scott could address the idea of culpability in Paul's letter? It seems to me that Paul is saying that knowledge of the law increased the culpability of sin for the Jews thus "increasing the transgression" of it, as opposed to the pagans who only had natural law and were still culpable but to lesser degree. And if this is the case, our culpability in the "new life" we live with Christ under grace through faith means something altogether different now. If our being justified and brought into the family of Christ is the means by which others come into the family by way of preaching and living as example (faith comes through what is heard), our culpability to the faith is the salvation of those around us. In other words, if we claim to be Christian and go on living in sin and judgement, others will see and be turned away from the faith, thus making us responsible for turning another form the family. Paul's final warning is to avoid those who create difficulties and dissensions in opposition to the doctrines by way of their own appetites. These people create divisions in the community which, to an outsider, would look to be unstable and unattractive. "The God of Peace will soon crush satan under your feet." I think this points directly back to the 5th and 6th verses in chapter 1 when Paul says "For the sake of His Name."
Love you guys. Thank you for all you do!