Extension of Objectivism discussion regarding the soul

Various | Various | Various

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for all the information on Dallas Willard! I did a little surfing on him and the article you mentioned. It looks very interesting indeed! Hugs!!!

[unspun]

Thanks for your pings, A-G. I've been too lazy this evening to do my explicatin'. (You probably already know what I'm going to say, from what I've already said. And then again, you probably already know what I'll be trying to relate, too. ;-)

It's amazing, though, to do a Web search on a notable Christian speaker or writer. It seems that at least half the posts in the top 10 are usualy harsh criticisms -- from other Christians. Sounds like the FR "Religion Forum."

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for your post! I do very much look forward to your essay on the subject. I treasure your posts and though I believe I understand your position so far, I am interested in how you arrived at it and most especially, the Scriptures you rely on.

It's amazing, though, to do a Web search on a notable Christian speaker or writer. It seems that at least half the posts in the top 10 are usualy harsh criticisms -- from other Christians. Sounds like the FR "Religion Forum."

No kidding. Politics brings out emotions, religion brings them out absolutely. I guess that is to be expected because to a poster, his life depends on it.

I’m not a member of the Bereancall group, but I am very “Berean” in my ways – so anything I read or hear must stand up to Scriptural scrutiny and/or ring true to the Spirit for me to “take it in.”

I stay away from the religion forum mostly because - when it comes to religious matters - outside of the Word itself, I do not respect persons. A comment by the Pope carries as much weight with me as one by a pastor, you, Plato, betty boop, St. Francis, logos, Billy Graham, etc.

Naturally, I consider the historical significance and credentials of the one speaking – but it is not the who, but the what is said, that is important to me.

Some of the most overwhelming spiritual truths I’ve heard have come from very ordinary people (like the gray haired lady with the 5 lb Bible I spoke of earlier.)

As an example, with regard to walking by faith and Peter going out to meet Jesus on the water “sinking wasn’t his job.”

[unspun]

A-G, thanks for your views, I concur (though I wouldn't necessarily put myself in such lofty status as with your pastor(s), Plato, betty boop, St. Francis, logos, and Billy Graham --and of course the Pope. ;-). I condur.

I'm going to a Conservative Conference all day today and I'm already "late" but then again, I'm paying my own way --which makes me think of pinging Hank Kerchief. Hope it isn't just "meet, eat, and retreat," as I've heard the phrase used.

Clearly, one of the reasons God has given us pets is to teach us about how He and we fallen creatures do relate (and in some cases, should relate). I had an encounter with my mother's poodle last night that reminds me of your complaint about egocentric will. She wanted some of my ice cream. I wanted to give her a spoonful, but demanded she bring me her dish (a tiny plastic dish and she knew what I was talking about). I'd even toss it for emphasis and she could hardly resist jumping over to it, but she laid it down right after picking it up and continued to beg, "No, I don't want to play with the dish, I want some ice cream!"

This continuted for quite a little while and I even got on the floor with her and tried whatever I might to get her to pick up the dish and carry it over with me to where I was sitting. I eventually swatted her in the fanny lightly with the featherweight dish. At this she immediately growled a familial little growl and jumped up to the couch and tried to clearly express to me, "NO, NO, NO! IT'S NOT THE DISH I WANT, IT'S THE ICE CREAM LESS THAN A FOOT AWAY FROM THE NOSE I'M POINTING AT IT. PLEASE UNDERSTAND!"

I may eventually train Amber to pick up her dish and bring it to me. If so, may we all be so fortunate as her. Jesus said (phrs.) "It is my meat and drink to do the will of the Father." Thank you for emphasizing this.

[unspun]

I also concur.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for your post and for raising the metaphor of the companion animals! It was a very engaging suggestion and had me pondering the possibilities at some length.

For the purposes of keeping it simple I considered the four most common companion animals: dogs, cats, birds and fish – to see if they reveal any of the patterns of faith we see from time to time.

It seems to me that fish basically want to be fed but otherwise left alone. As a diver, I know that fish do have personalities which are much easier to engage face to face and hand to fin. But the personalities I’ve seen have more to do with curiosity and aggressiveness or passivity. In my experience, they’re not thinkers in any practical sense. (Exceptions with porpoises duly noted.)

Birds, especially parrots, can be trained to repeat some rather complex words and phrases and do interesting tricks for treats. Some have very cute personalities and they do develop an attachment to people (for good or ill.) However, in my experience, they’re not big thinkers, I doubt they understand most of what they say and little of what I say to them.

Cats are a whole ‘nother deal. They seem to understand what I say and sense my mood. But of all the companion animals I’ve owned, they are absolutely the most willful. They will come to me only when it is in their own self-interest to do so. Of course, when they do, they are a joy to cuddle. They are very, very difficult to train (at least for me.)

In my experience, most dogs have great humility. You can ignore them – even be mean to them – but they’ll still come back, wagging tail and looking for approval. If they’ve misbehaved, they’ll literally crawl whimpering for forgiveness. They enjoy being included in drives around time and such. And they are much easier to train because they seem to understand not only the body language but the spoken commands.

So, do I see any parallels to the attitude of believers? Based on my experience with these companion animals, you betcha! And thank you for pointing it out!

I hope your conference is a great success. Hugs!!!

[Alamo-Girl]

Sigh... I know better than to try to form a coherent sentence on a Saturday morning without that extra cup of coffee.

They enjoy being included in drives around time and such.

should be

They enjoy being included in drives around town and such.

[unspun]

More of will and willfulness, more about gnostic/dualistic error, a touch of father, child, and son, something about individuality and autonomy, and a taste of perfection:

Thank you for sharing the insights.  I tend to see things very similarly.  In the use of words with "will" as a root, I would want to do so in a way that would lend a true to life understanding of what will is.  (Back to that troublesome word, "willfulness.")  Hopefully, this will serve to be an encapsulated explication if that isn't an oxymoron.

Using the oppposites test, the opposite of "willfulness" to me would be "passivity."  As I look around, I don't even see an opposite of the word, "will" except for "willlessness" and I think this is not in the dictionary because either one has a God given will or one isn't a being, so I'd have to shift to thinking that word would be "null" or "dead" or "inanimate."  While sometimes and in some ways we need to be passive, we certainly have perfect responsibility to utilize our wills in compliance with God at all times.  And we are inevitably using our wills, even if we use our will so willfully that we are able to stifle normal will as the act of our will.  Certainly, we need to still or overcome what is wayward and vainglorious in ourselves.  But I don't think that God wants us to be less of the new self He gives us, just the oppposite.  Godly "compliance" is not like passivity.  Compliance is an act of the will, not an attempt to escape from it, or retard it, or starve it.  And compliance with God is only done fully when we actually agree with Him (rather than agreeing to go through the motions of obedience).  I won't look it up, but I'll guess that com-pliance means "apply with."  AMEN!  But "abandonment of will" is a non sequitur or an assault on one's life.  There is good will and bad will, egocentric will and God-submitted will, and while we abandon the former, we "lay hold of" the latter.

Romans 12
¹Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of God's mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God--this is your spiritual^[1] act of worship. ²Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God's will is--his good, pleasing and perfect will.

Look at the verbs there, conveyed in the Spirit: urge, offer, worship, (not conform), transform, renew, test, approve.  There's a whole lotta kinetic willpower goin' on there.  Importantly, there is an orchestration of all of our human faculties, created in the image of God as instruments of our being.  And to reduce it further, instruments of mostly what aspects of our being?  I think it's self evident: instruments of our overall relationality with God and our will.  If not this orchestration by our relationship of being in Christ and by the inseparable fact of our actively complying will, how could we pregress toward loving God with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength?  

But some of the consequences of passivity and trying to abandon one's faculties include:

1. stifled growth
2. missed opportunities to serve God in the way that fulfills his Great Commission
3. susceptibility to "spiritual leaders" who eclipse one's direct relationship with the Father in Christ
4. divination and any of the corruptions of it (different devils for different levels)
5. exaspiration

Elements of all five have existed in that church fellowship that I worshiped with for a few years.  They are also elements of the consequences of gnostic, dualistic influence in the Church.  And that is because of attempts to nullify what God has created in and around our lives --in each of our individual lives --each maintained by an autonomous relationship between God and the individual, as interrelated as we are.  Jesse Penn-Lewis wrote well in War on the Saints, about this problem which seems to arise in the Church like a mimicing weed, along with the greater movements of the Holy Spirit (his was during the Welsh Revival).

And here is one of those problems of interpretation of Scripture in passivity, that I referred to earlier:

'Aren't we supposed to be like Jesus, and didn't Jesus only do as He was specifically directed by the Father?  Just look at these passages?':

John 5
¹⁸For this reason the Jews tried all the harder to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.
¹⁹Jesus gave them this answer: "I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does. ²⁰For the Father loves the Son and shows him all he does. Yes, to your amazement he will show him even greater things than these.

John 12
⁴⁸There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; that very word which I spoke will condemn him at the last day. ⁴⁹For I did not speak of my own accord, but the Father who sent me commanded me what to say and how to say it. ⁵⁰I know that his command leads to eternal life. So whatever I say is just what the Father has told me to say."

Jesus was uniquely chosen to speak directly for the Father, in all His authority.  We don't tend to have that responsiblity. ;-)  If we do/would engage in prophesy, though, it is by special event where we act by means of the discrete Holy Spirit.  Further, Christ was so enmeshed in God, being fully God and fully man, that he was able to speak for the Father, even while speaking very much for himself (but with the "person" and "voice" in his language having full integrity, too)..  By comparison, we who accept Christ are yet only man, but with a spiritual nature intermingled with God -- we are not God.  Our responsibilities are man's responsiblities to God, not God's self adopted responsiblities.

Further, one point that  Henry Blackaby brings out so well in Exeriencing God is that Jesus had an apprentice son's knowledge of his Father.  Now, that, we can have.  We can observe how God is working around us, how he works through man, what opportunities He shows us to serve Him, and how He tends to work with and through us.  We can then learn better how to align our will with His will in fulsome (oops, that's another word with corrupted definition) um... "holistic," effective obedience.

I've been told that Dallas Willard in The Divine Conspiracy speaks for reality against absurdity too, when he professes that we don't have the mystical/impossible job of divining the will of God at every moment and not doing anything unless we have specific directions from God about our circumstances.  He refers to how a good father in suburbia may fence off a back yard and put playground paraphernaila and toys in the yard and he wants nothing more than to see his children play freely and rightly in the yard, highly motivated (inspired, exercised) by  their more innocent wills.  That is how those children enjoy each other and how we learn (and they appreciate their father for providing the playground).

When we are given a new spirit though, are we given a new will?  I tend to think so.  And as for that pesky matter of ultimately being granted "perfection," I tend to think from Scripture that our spirits are in a way, like the blastocyst: everything we willl have will be an enfolding of the new, God-mingled spirit that is the new man (and is developed by interaction with "other."  That is why, I think, all of creation awaits our "revelation," the revelation of what we are already, in spirit.

__________________________________________
Acknowledging thanks to friends of mine that went through this problem church fellowship, including one who referred me to Penn-Lewis and Willard, and to their Bible.

[cornelis]

; )

[unspun]

BTW, I also thank you for speaking of the fruitfulness (and even including rightesous kinds of fruityness) of God's creation. When we each find our compliance with God (the God of integrity for all who comply) we each become more of the unique individuals God continues to generate of us!

Colorful indeed, ain't we all?

[unspun]

But some of the consequences of passivity and trying to abandon one's faculties include:

6. conflictedness and irrationality
7. insanity

[man of Yosemite]

I suspect I'm not nearly as bright as many who are discussing this subject, but when I gaze into God's creation, I am dwarfed by the realization of the magnitude of what I see. The created world is so sublime, so brilliantly fashioned, a work of unknowable genius, that I must fall on my knees and say, "Glory be to you, oh God." Like Paul mentions in Romans, the natural world declares the glory of God, so that man is without excuse in his misdirected worship. I am a character on this stage, and yet, somehow I understand that behind it all is something far surpassing that which I see with my eyes. I sense that there is love behind this rush of atoms, and that keeps me on this course.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so very much for your explication, unspun!

Using the oppposites test, the opposite of "willfulness" to me would be "passivity." As I look around, I don't even see an opposite of the word, "will" except for "willlessness" and I think this is not in the dictionary because either one has a God given will or one isn't a being, so I'd have to shift to thinking that word would be "null" or "dead" or "inanimate." While sometimes and in some ways we need to be passive, we certainly have perfect responsibility to utilize our wills in compliance with God at all times.

Webster’s online doesn’t list the antonym for willfulness, but the synonym listed is unruly which further describes willfulness as follows: WILLFUL implies an obstinate determination to have one's own way .

Evidently you (like betty boop) are not using the word willful in that sense. I gather from your statement that you believe faith requires initiative and engagement (as in gears) - otherwise, one would be sitting there like a box of rocks or else just spinning their wheels.

OTOH, I use the term willfulness in the common usage - where unruliness would be the synonym and hence, obedience would be the antonym. That fundamental difference in word usage has caused much of our disagreement on this thread.

But laying the word usage aside, unspun, you and I have a further disagreement concerning how a born-again believer ought to deal with his self-will. To me it is a matter of theology (like a Peter v Paul dispute) and I don’t have a problem with your view being different from mine. But evidently the difference troubles you. Perhaps you feel I am dangerously misguided?

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I am very “Berean” on spiritual matters. I’ve read your post, listening for a confirmation in the Spirit and then studied Scriptures, both what you’ve cited and others known to me and to which I feel led in the Spirit:

And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming [thither] went into the synagogue of the Jews. These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. Acts 17:10-11

Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ. – I Cor 2:12-16

For Lurkers, the dispute is basically as follows:

Unspun sees the born-again believer retaining self-will which he uses in an ongoing relationship with the Lord. He cites Romans 12:1-2 for all the action verbs as opposed to passive verbs. He cites John 5:18-20 and John 12:48-50 as evidence that Jesus alone has the grant of authority to speak and do under the Father’s direction. He asserts that man remains man and his responsibility is to God. Although he acknowledges the spiritual nature of man is intermingled with God, he keeps the two mostly separate with man observing, acting and reacting, etc. A previous Freeper used the word “dance” which I offer again as a metaphor for this type of relationality, i.e. one leads, one follows, both “wills” survive.

I read a different answer in the Scriptures (quoted below.) In my reading, the believer surrenders his self-will completely to Jesus and abides in Him and He, in return, abides in the believer and produces fruit of the Spirit, i.e. the believer is the vessel of His will and not self-will. I assert that spiritual fruits cannot be produced by mortal effort. There is no relationality or dancing, because the two are become one. The believer gives up his self-will; he retains his identity but never again exists apart from Jesus in any practical sense of the word “exist.”

My “Berean” analysis of unspun’s Scriptures:

Unspun offers this passage to show action verbs: I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, [which is] your reasonable service. And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what [is] that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God. – Romans 12:1-2

The believer is told to be transformed by renewing his mind. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus commands us to be perfect --- which is a state of being and not an action:

Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect. – Matthew 5:48

Based on the following passage, I readily assert that being perfect is something man cannot do. It requires more (which will be discussed along with the subsequent passages quoted by unspun.)

For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; - Romans 3:23

Unspun offers these passages to illustrate Jesus’ authority and infers from them that Jesus alone has such authority:

Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God. Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise. For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel. – John 5:18-20

He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak. – John 12:48-50

Certainly Jesus was sent by the Father, the only begotten son of God. He is without peer. I never would dispute such. That God speaks through believers is supported by the existence of Scriptures.

To my spirit, the most important lesson of the passages unspun quoted is that Christ is the vessel of the Father’s will, not His own will. And, based on other Scriptures, that submission is what He wants of us as well:

Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me. I am the vine, ye [are] the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing. If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast [them] into the fire, and they are burned. If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you. Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be my disciples. – John 15:4-8

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts. If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit. – Galatians 5:22-25

The result of my “Berean” analysis is that I find no error in my previous position and thus will not change. I shall continue to pour myself into Him and try very hard to mortify my self-interest. The less of me, the more of Him, the better:

Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths. Be not wise in thine own eyes: fear the LORD, and depart from evil. – Proverbs 3:5-7

Unspun’s position also features the above kind of humility, mine may have an additional underline on meekness.

(Now the man Moses [was] very meek, above all the men which [were] upon the face of the earth.) – Num 12:13

The meek will he guide in judgment: and the meek will he teach his way. – Psalm 25:9

For the LORD taketh pleasure in his people: he will beautify the meek with salvation. – Psalm 149:4

Blessed [are] the meek: for they shall inherit the earth. – Matthew 5:5

Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. – Matthew 11:29

Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, meek, and sitting upon an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass. – Matthew 21:5

But [let it be] the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, [even the ornament] of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price. – I Peter 3:4

Thank you so much for this excellent and timely discussion!

[unspun]

Alamo-Girl, please don't confuse an economy of quoting Scriptures with a reluctance to abide by them.  ;-)

Unspun sees the born-again believer retaining self-will which he uses in an ongoing relationship with the Lord. He cites Romans 12:1-2 for all the action verbs as opposed to passive verbs. He cites John 5:18-20 and John 12:48-50 as evidence that Jesus alone has the grant of authority to speak and do under the Father’s direction. He asserts that man remains man and his responsibility is to God. Although he acknowledges the spiritual nature of man is intermingled with God, he keeps the two mostly separate with man observing, acting and reacting, etc. A previous Freeper used the word “dance” which I offer again as a metaphor for this type of relationality, i.e. one leads, one follows, both “wills” survive.

Now, now, please also don't "put words in my mouth," either.  I don't see one of a new born spirit as one who may relate with God by his old, corrupted self-will.  I see him being given a new will, as a part of what it is to be a new being, in his as yet unrevealed new nature.  Further, I don't say that Jesus along has the authority to speak and do under the Father's direction.  How do you read that?  I said that He alone was able to know at any moment, all the pertinent specifics of the Father's will and direction regarding his circumstances.  

It is a part of being a being, to have a will, A-G.  Show me one who doesn't have one.  Clearly God told Adam to use his in the Garden of Eden, in tending it and in naming the animals.  The Scriptures state that Adam named them.  If God had named them, I'd guess that the Bible would say the God named them, but it says that Adam did.  Was he in accord with God, when he did?  Certainly.  He was in accord as one tending to that which God placed him in dominion.  Dominion of the earth being given to man was an allowance by God, of man to express himself, his will freely and in (ah say in) God's will.  :-)  The Logos of God reveals to us that Adam was created in the image of God.  That is thought to include eternal existence, will, consciousness including self consicousness, imagination, reason, passion, and a bunch more (the fruit of the spirit included).  Christ, in his holy carnal nature (man) is the Second Adam.  We are to be in Christ, communing with the Godhead and he in us.  And the state of he being in us doesn't mean that he relinquishes the fact of his faculty of will any more than we being in him relinquishes the fact of our faculties of will.

Rather in this union, this becoming one, we relinquish any state of our will which would disagree with God.  Remember, as Paul instructed, the marriage relationship is a mystery which speaks of God's relationship in Christ with mankind (mankind overall).  The will of a good wife is not replaced by her husband's in practice, rather she unites her will with her that of her husband.  (Shshsh, don't tell the "libbers" out there!)  And look at Jesus.  Not before, nor after his death and resurrection, was he not someone who did as He pleased.  His desire was to please God, as He asserted!  And in God, his desire was for bringing us into unity, with all of us people including Christ being fully formed persons, individuals with spirits, wills, minds, hearts, bodies, etc. all for God's pleasure --which is exactly what we want!

A human spirit inevitably has a will.  Let me clearly test you on this:  Do you desire to obey and please God?

Further, will you obey and please God in ways which are distinctly your own, compared to another person, because they are of you?  (Remember, Jesus told Peter, "What is it to you?" what was between Him and John.)

Doing so, does this make you any less His, acting just the way God wills?

(Now frankly, I may just be  prone to say that our will is not just spiritual either, as in dead old and living new, in Christ.  I may be  prone to think that our souls have wills too, maybe even our bodies --which tends to get back to the first subject of this thread, BTW.)  And that gets me to this key passage in Romans again...

I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, [which is] your reasonable service. And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what [is] that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God. – Romans 12:1-2

The believer is told to be transformed by renewing his mind. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus commands us to be perfect --- which is a state of being and not an action:

Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect. – Matthew 5:48

Based on the following passage, I readily assert that being perfect is something man cannot do. It requires more (which will be discussed along with the subsequent passages quoted by unspun.)

In this passage, we have a Christian -- a regenerate with a perfect spirit.  It already "be" perfect!  Paul is telling the regenerate to actively renew his mind.  (The mind is, a "part" of his soul, along with his heart  -- I don't like to use the word "emotions" partly because that causes me to ask, "Emote from where? and the answer is "the heart".  BTW, I wonder, A-G, Is this where the kabbalah teaching interferes with the concepts conveyed through Scripture, where the spirit is the essence of our being, in our hearts (which along with our minds are constituent to our souls?)

The Holy Spirit and Paul are telling us so many things here, but the primary message is to... do things!  Here are the things to do (and doing is an act of the will):

a. present our bodes a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, one's reasonable service
Notice BTW,  the acknowledment here that not only is a Christian a man with a will to be motivated by, but also a body which is consecrated and with reason --with a heart too, since these are inseparable in the soul --all are to be set apart for the Lord by our obedience and here again obedience requires will, or it would be merely an autonomic act.

b. be transofrmed by the renewing of our minds, that we may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.  
That is something that must be done wilfully, of course.  And that again, is because God created man as a being, not an automoton.  The idea of a continuing nature of dominion in our circumstances is inferred here too, by our having to prove out what is the will of God.  And one isn't in the condition of having to prove something out, if one is merely given the answer.  Rather, we have to wilfully exercise the perfect nature of what we know of God's truth (which is what the Bereans did) and apply the perfect nature of our God-united spirit, in taking dominion over our own earthly souls (along with the rest of what is earthly).

BTW, we have all the authority of Christ when we act in his name -- but we have to act in his name, he doesn't animate us.

meekness

Yes, meekness!  I've been told over and over by pastors that the word for "meekness" here is the same word used for a trained horse -- power  willingly under the control of one's master -- trained.  I have no disagreement with this.

A-G, it's not that I don't believe we should offer all that we are to God, or that we are not unified with Him in Christ, or that we are not to abide in Christ.  It is just that I believe Him when He tells me what He is and what we are.  The wonderful thing in all this, is that we will be fully created beings, with a pure self to will to obey God with!  Now THAT will be living in Him!  And even now, do we in Him live  and move our being!  -- and have our being!  Clearly, in Christ, we move ourselves fully in accord with His desire.  Our new self-will is the will of the new, God-united self!  AMEN!!!  Maranatha!!!

(I'll not take the time to thoroughly proof read, with apologies.)

[unspun]

Man is a spirit, man has a soul (the mind, will and emotions), and man lives in a body. The term "man" is generic for human. Man's spirit will live forever.

I've heard this said and repeated before. I think it's a pretty good shorthand, though not complete. Are our spirits not also able to have will, consciousness, and passions? Well, doesn't the Holy Spirit?

[unspun]

And about "quiet spirit," certainly so! May we all have a quiet spirit. May we all have a spirit that is at rest in God and able to hear even his slight whispers (as Elijah felt the zephyr). And then may we be fully motivated of spirit and of all of our beings to do what we may to please God!

Unity in Christ, motivationally (volitionally) -- perhaps an oversimplification in some ways, yet I believe one derived from the Bible):

Father God -> God's Word -> God's Spirit -> our spirit -> our soul -> our physical self and acts

Our physical acts are necessarily motivated by our souls, which are motivated by our spirits, which are motivated by God's breath, which is sent from The Logos, which is sent by the Father.

That is how it works and just as Jesus wills the will of God, so do we, in Christ.

A teacher I've known has asked people to understand it by saying: "I will to will the will of God." Of course that has two meanings -- yet one.

That's interesting, since God is thoroughly God and a man is thoroughly a man, yet they may be thoroughly united.

[unspun]

A-G, I tend to share a desire to be thorough, with you. That being the case maybe I should also point out with you that not even Jesus has known all of the Father's will with complete certainty at all times. Hence, not knowing when his own return to earth will be and, "Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done."

That was at His point of indescribable agony over his impending separation from his Father (knowing not only His pain, but the pain this would cause His Father, too and perhaps especially the latter). Yet even then, he declared his true will: to have the Father's will done.

[betty boop]

I am a character on this stage, and yet, somehow I understand that behind it all is something far surpassing that which I see with my eyes. I sense that there is love behind this rush of atoms, and that keeps me on this course.

Beautifully said, man of Yosemite. The natural world is itself a revelation of God's love. God is love; and "who lives in love lives in God, and God in him." Thank you so much for writing.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so very much for your additional explanations this morning! Hugs!!!

You asked: The mind is, a "part" of his soul, along with his heart -- I don't like to use the word "emotions" partly because that causes me to ask, "Emote from where? and the answer is "the heart". BTW, I wonder, A-G, Is this where the kabbalah teaching interferes with the concepts conveyed through Scripture, where the spirit is the essence of our being, in our hearts (which along with our minds are constituent to our souls?

I’m not “into” the teaching of the Kabbalah any further than what I have posted here and thus, cannot answer your question. To me, it is like the opinions of anyone else. Some things ring true to my Spirit, others do not. One area that rings true to me is that the soul is as complex as the physical body. The Kabbalah says the ruach sits in the middle and is where we make choices, the nefesh is underneath – it is a “life force” just like any other animal and the neshamah is above being the breath of life given by God only to Adamic man. Some Kabbalists (not all) use the word spirit to describe the ruach and the word soul to describe neshama. That doesn’t ring true to me, the reverse fits better.

Alamo-Girl, please don't confuse an economy of quoting Scriptures with a reluctance to abide by them.

I don’t at all think that you are reluctant to abide by the Word. The only Scriptures I used to see if there was any error in my thinking are the ones you provided which were not many in number. The opinions and teachings of others are interesting but none of it rang strongly in my Spirit. I realize they have to you, but they have not to me – so I fast forwarded to the Scriptures you provided.

With regard to my attempt to summarize your position, you said:

Now, now, please also don't "put words in my mouth," either. I don't see one of a new born spirit as one who may relate with God by his old, corrupted self-will. I see him being given a new will, as a part of what it is to be a new being, in his as yet unrevealed new nature. Further, I don't say that Jesus along has the authority to speak and do under the Father's direction. How do you read that? I said that He alone was able to know at any moment, all the pertinent specifics of the Father's will and direction regarding his circumstances.

With regard to your question, ”How do you read that?” - I gathered it from this statement in your post at 308 (emphasis mine):

Jesus was uniquely chosen to speak directly for the Father, in all His authority. We don't tend to have that responsiblity. ;-) If we do/would engage in prophesy, though, it is by special event where we act by means of the discrete Holy Spirit.

My actual statement was this: He cites John 5:18-20 and John 12:48-50 as evidence that Jesus alone has the grant of authority to speak and do under the Father’s direction. The authority for special events, as I read your statement above, is by ”means of the discrete Holy Spirit.” Please accept my apology for any misrepresentation!

I am glad to see your statement ” I see him being given a new will, as a part of what it is to be a new being, in his as yet unrevealed new nature” as this brings us much closer in agreement.

You ask me this: A human spirit inevitably has a will. Let me clearly test you on this: Do you desire to obey and please God?

My answer is: More than that, I love Him with all my heart, mind, soul, strength and understanding.

You continue, and ask: Further, will you obey and please God in ways which are distinctly your own, compared to another person, because they are of you? (Remember, Jesus told Peter, "What is it to you?" what was between Him and John.) Doing so, does this make you any less His, acting just the way God wills?

I am not the one trying to change anyone’s thinking on this. For many posts, I’ve said that you and I are fundamentally different in this theology and that is fine with me. You’re the one who has been pressing me to change my mind.

Your explication of the Romans 12:1-2 passage describes your view as I understand it, the ”primary message is to … do things!” and ”we have to wilfully exercise the perfect nature of what we know of God's truth (which is what the Bereans did) and apply the perfect nature of our God-united spirit, in taking dominion over our own earthly souls (along with the rest of what is earthly).”

You’ve mentioned the playground metaphor, where God creates a playground and lets the kids go and play as they “will.” In that scenario, I’d be the toddler who doesn’t want to play with the other kids but instead looks at the Father her arms up saying “Up, Papaw, Pweese!”

Or in another example from the Word:

Now it came to pass, as they went, that he entered into a certain village: and a certain woman named Martha received him into her house. And she had a sister called Mary, which also sat at Jesus' feet, and heard his word.

But Martha was cumbered about much serving, and came to him, and said, Lord, dost thou not care that my sister hath left me to serve alone? bid her therefore that she help me.

And Jesus answered and said unto her, Martha, Martha, thou art careful and troubled about many things: But one thing is needful: and Mary hath chosen that good part, which shall not be taken away from her. - Luke 10:38-42

Rudyard Kipling wrote The Sons of Martha in 1907:

The sons of Mary seldom bother, for they have inherited that good part;
But the Sons of Martha favour their Mother of the careful soul and the troubled heart.
And because she lost her temper once, and because she was rude to the Lord her Guest,
Her Sons must wait upon Mary's Sons, world without end, reprieve, or rest.
It is their care in all the ages to take the buffet and cushion the shock.
It is their care that the gear engages; it is their care that the switches lock.
It is their care that the wheels run truly; it is their care to embark and entrain,
Tally, transport, and deliver duly the Sons of Mary by land and main.

They say to mountains, "Be ye removed."
They say to the lesser floods, "Be dry."
Under their rods are the rocks reproved-they are not afraid of that which is high.
Then do the hill-tops shake to the summit-then is the bed of the deep laid bare,
That the Sons of Mary may overcome it, pleasantly sleeping and unaware.
They finger death at their gloves' end where they piece and repiece the living wires.
He rears against the gates they tend: they feed him hungry behind their fires.
Early at dawn, ere men see clear, they stumble into his terrible stall,
And hale him forth a haltered steer, and goad and turn him till evenfall.
To these from birth is Belief forbidden; from these till death is Relief afar.
They are concerned with matters hidden - under the earthline their altars are-
The secret fountains to follow up, waters withdrawn to restore to the mouth,
And gather the floods as in a cup, and pour them again at a city's drouth.

They do not preach that their God will rouse them a little before the nuts work loose.
They do not teach that His Pity allows them to drop their job when they dam'-well choose.
As in the thronged and the lighted ways, so in the dark and the desert they stand,
Wary and watchful all their days that their brethren's day may be long in the land.

Raise ye the stone or cleave the wood to make a path more fair or flat -
Lo, it is black already with blood some Son of Martha spilled for that!
Not as a ladder from earth to Heaven, not as a witness to any creed,
But simple service simply given to his own kind in their common need.

And the Sons of Mary smile and are blessed - they know the Angels are on their side.
They know in them is the Grace confessed, and for them are the Mercies multiplied.
They sit at the Feet - they hear the Word - they see how truly the Promise runs.
They have cast their burden upon the Lord, and - the Lord He lays it on Martha's Sons!

Unspun, I do not at all doubt your faith, your sincerity or your service to the Lord! I praise you for it and thank you. In God’s infinite wisdom we fit together perfectly in the body of Christ, some are more like Martha and some more like Mary.

But we both say Maranatha!!!

[betty boop]

...we who accept Christ are yet only man, but with a spiritual nature intermingled with God -- we are not God. Our responsibilities are man's responsiblities to God, not God's self adopted responsiblities.

My two cents worth (FWIW) regarding this question of will: It seems to me that to will is to act, to do, to assent. It is active. Of what value to God (I wonder) would our relationship with Him have, if it were based on pure passivity? After all, He it was who imbued man with Will and Reason. Why would He give us something, if it necessarily serves as an obstacle to spiritual union with Him? He wants our free assent -- which is willed assent. He wants "sons," for the purpose of relating to us Father to son, not merely to "absorb" our spirit into Himself. (I think the latter may be Satan's method, however. At least if C. S. Lewis' The Screwtape Letters has any truth in it....)

I think there is a certain "tension" between the apostles John and Paul, and I think this is the source of the disagreement you and A-G seem to be having. John -- the "beloved apostle" -- had immediate, loving, in-the-flesh connection with Jesus Christ while He walked on earth. And John faithfully followed -- by choice. Paul did not have this "in-the-flesh" contact with Christ -- but was called to spiritual union with Christ well after his transfiguration, crucifixion, and ascension.

Perhaps this may account for the difference between A-G's "Pauline" interpretation, and your more "Johannine" one, unspun. BOTH are true: It's just a question of emphasis. I've probably put the matter pretty crudely here.