[betty boop]

I used the exchange to illustrate grace through faith which is in the same ballpark as Voegelin's erudition (LOL!)

I was wondering if you'd come across the Apocalypse of Abraham before. It truly is marvelous. I suspect that Voegelin is saying something a lot stronger in these passages than a meditation on grace through faith. I'm pretty sure that's part of his meaning; but I think he's gone farther than that, speculating about the structure of human consciousness itself, of the "Within/Beyond" tension of man and God in their mutual participation -- a participation that can be refused by man, of course.

I gathered this on the strength of this remark: "Even when, in the climate of secularist epistemology, we believe ourselves to be safe from transcendence and to have immanent objects at hand, the humble object still is never god-forsaken but radiates transcendence in its immanent actus essendi."

It seems to me man is no mere "object," given his relation to God. Still, the man who turns away from God tends to "objectify" himself. Still, even then, he is "never god-forsaken," but does in fact radiate transcendence in the essential act of merely being what he is. And the reason for that is that God loves him. For some strange reason!!!

But I really found the quote above absolutely lovely for yet another reason -- the idea of objects not ever being "god-forsaken." If one has the eyes to see, one can see the signs of God everywhere in nature, in even the humblest crittur.

We no longer think according to the cosmological world view of the ancient world, the view that fills the world with many gods. But I do believe that we live in a world that is filled by the grace, the spirit of the One God -- the ground of our being and its Beyond; and this can be seen in the "objects" of creation. JMHO FWIW.

Thank you so much for writing, Alamo-Girl -- and for the outstanding essay on your theory of origins! Kudos!

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for your analysis and for the kudos! Indeed, Voegelin's is an exhaustive discussion of the subject broached in the Apocalypse of Abraham.

"Even when, in the climate of secularist epistemology, we believe ourselves to be safe from transcendence and to have immanent objects at hand, the humble object still is never god-forsaken but radiates transcendence in its immanent actus essendi."

I see Adamic man as incomplete, longing, transcendent. Some try to satisfy that longing by attaining a oneness with all that there is, some turn to self-made objects of worship or imaginings --- but most importantly, some turn to God. Those of us who turn to God receive an answer, surrender our will and become like a new branch on a vine.

The NT tells us that not everyone has “ears to hear” and thus, I do not see all of mankind experiencing that incompleteness. IOW, not all mankind is Adamic, having the breath of life; some are, in my view, immanent. Therefore, I conclude that whereas God never forsakes even the lowliest animal, transcendence does not actualize absent the breath of life.

My two cents…