61 replies to this topic

[Big John]

Hi Aldo,

I have enjoyed this discourse (sort of, lol) but I am missing some of the distinctions you seem to make.  I may be a little slow.  (also not sure how you guys get these inserts to come up as their own little boxes)

 

======================================================================

Aldo--

Close.... those philosophers did think "that "being" or ontology or consciousness was in fact God" but they meant it to mean God's concsiousness not ours...

 

Your second paragraph is more interesting... We do really encounter God in human terms through his spirit (as defined by the Word in Christ), we experieince that encounter and have perceptions, conception and intutions of it... This is the stuff of existential (experiential) Christianity... our existence our experience.

 

My question is if we actually and really encounter and experieince the spirit of God, i.e. Christ in us and in existence, and if we live through Christ then also in our own being, why is this not the foundation of our faith and belief? Its real. Its here. ...

===================================================

 

Obviously, we must, at least at first, encounter God in human terms.  We have little more to go on other than our human experience.

 

Now - Not sure I get this question.  Why is ??this?? (define this) not the foundation of our faith and belief?  Not sure what you are driving at.  Please try to help me out.

 

==============================================

Aldo--

Well Lori...

 

In my walk, I find those who have actually experienced God much more persusaive, than those who rely on revelation alone and have only the revelation to share. I have a preference for learning by doing, than leaning through th einsights given by mere words. I find the latter a bit too much "through the intellect" as a mere insight to our cognition. Martin Luther, I think shared my experieince. He developed his 'theology of Cross' based on people actually having an experence of Christ in their lving, and he juxtaposed this to what he called 'theology of Glory' being the theology of the scholastics and Thomists of his day put forward as something to be learned rather known through experieince.

 

Your description in your second paragraph rings true to me... Christ discloses hiomself to me (and to children) by being within me and them, as the Word and Light of God, and I think that they experieince that presence sure as they experieince being alive.

 

have a good evening

=================================================

 

This may be semantics but the only way (that I see) that anyone has a revelation is hearing and/or seeing from God directly.  The experience of meeting with God is one of revelation - only.  If there is no revelation and/or inspiration I doubt the meeting and/or experience with God even took place.  When God passed, physically, before Moses, the reaction of the prophet was to bow down and worship.  I know that my prayer time really is more of worship time as I mostly seem to be transported (trying not to be too dramatic here) into seemingly heavenly realms.  And reading the bible is usually a very moving experience.  It seems like God is really speaking to me.  Very often seems to transcend my intellect and emotion and even consciousness.  Hope this is clearer than it appears to me.  lol  Anyway.  Would appreciate if you could help me understand what you are trying to share.

 

Thanks

Big John

[Lori Smith]

I thought I should elaborate on this a little more, not to attack anyone, but to further clarify my own position. I feel the need because I think my belief system is becoming more and more rare (I am a conservative). I say that for I attended a particular church on Sunday in my area because I was backlogged in my studies and my own church is 30 miles from my home. What I found at the church I attended was existentialism. I am also being taught existentialism in the seminary I attend. Our country is also embracing existentialism more and more. If you listen to our president speak, you will discover that he thinks in an existentialistic way.

 

According to P. De Vries, "Georg Willhelm Friedrich Hegel" believed that "the state is man's highest social achievement. While he emphasized family love, he viewed the state as a higher and more universal expression of family love. The state provides the actuality of the ethical ideal; the mind of the nation is the divine, 'the actual God,' knowing and willing itself." My own feeling is that this is pantheism, when everything becomes God. I notice in my discipleship class in seminary that system on top of system is promoted that we might create utopia and we will all come to oneness as we "experience" Christianity together. It's a socialistic mindset. However, when I speak with others who have this mindset, I realize that although we use the same Christian words, we don't worship the same God. When I was in church on Sunday, people had their hands in the air worshiping, but I could not join them in worship, for I could not worship another god.

 

Now, I think social media has encouraged this type of networking. It used to be that the family was the primary unit and parents filtered everything their children watched. However, systems and all sorts of entities now have direct access to our children. As a result, our society is becoming "one." This forces me to draw back from those who embrace oneness, for I cannot serve two masters. Indeed, I cling to my separateness--even God is separate from me. I am me and I worship HIM. As I survey the landscape, I realize that I am the oddity and people are offended when I retreat. However, I cannot be close to or yoked to people who use the same Christian language I use, but who worship (what I feel) is another god. People have to decide on their own who is the true God. To clarify who my God is, it's the One A.W. Tozer knows ... He's the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

[Kevin Blankenship]

Lori, I like your post. It is about as close and clear to me about what existentialism really is. I have not really given much thought to existentialism, mainly because I hate typing the word. But it seems to be a clear and present danger to the Church.  But my thoughts don't end there. I will research this out and if existentialism IS what you are claiming it to be, and I have little doubt that your definition is correct, then I will not cast my lot with the ranks who embrace existentialism as being the Faith of Our Fathers.

   It's really odd. Really really odd. That what one hear preached and taught today is so far removed from what was taught in centuries past. And this is said with the realization that ALL teachers and preachers of the past are not in accord with the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. 

  But I have read your post with a fresh head this morning.....before the bombardment of worldly clamour starts it's onslaught on my mind. And I liked what you wrote.  My two cents.

[Lori Smith]

Hello my brother Kevin!

 

I have always said, and I will say again, I recognize in you the Spirit of the God I know. That's how I knew you were saved. I always enjoy reading what you have to say.

 

Shalom,

Lori

[Charles Miles]

After becoming almost totally confused reading the past 8-10 posts, I went back to the start of the thread and read it all ovar again.  How did that work?  Well, I`m not sure I understand aldo`s posts completely and it is probably due to my own limited intellect and understanding of the english language.  There is certainly nothing at all wrong with trying to understand the mechanics of how God`s being effects us, both physically and spiritually, but when man attempts to define terms that somehow explain and convey all that happens in the relationship between God and his children, I start to get dizzy and red lights start to flash in my soul.  Intellectual discussions of God`s infinitude, his grace, his lovingkindness, his omnisience, and his immuntibility, all come to an end at some point, because man simply cannot fathom these attributes of God.  He was not meant to fathom them.  BUT it is good that we ponder them and praise God for them.  Maybe I just don`t think in a philosophical manner, but for me to "experientially have Christ in myself" may simply mean that I have had a revelation from God into my soul that changes me from inside out! I like that and agree with that as what happened to me.  Now, if it is left to me to define what exactly happened on that hill in Jerusalem 2000 years ago, in philosophical or scientific terms, that justifies me before the God of all creation, I will pass on that!  If it is OK will everyone, I will use something God said he gave me....faith.  Faith that God will keep all he promised, fulfill all his covenents, and will come live in my heart.  I can`t define it and I certainly can`t explain it, but I know it is true.  I do not think it is a requirement that anyone, anywhere, need understand all the ins and outs of justification and sactification in order to obtain both.  Yes, God gave us all a brain and ability to think and reason, but there are things that cannot be reasoned out no matter how intelligent a person is.  In fact, I think in many cases a great intellect can be a hindrance to understanding the plan of God for our relationship with him, and therefore our salvation. Can anyone tell me just how much God loves me?  Can any man tell me how large infinity is?  Can reason answer the question...who is man that God should even concern himself with such a lowly, sinful, weak, unfaithful creature?

 

Sorry to kinda "go off" on this topic, but deep in the recesses of my soul, a warning buzzer keeps going off when man attempts to use his reasoning power to explain his relationship with Almighty God.  Maybe I`m wrong about it or maybe I`m just not intellectual enough to grasp complex existential definitions on the subject, but that`s just me and I am so careful with my relationship with my Father.  I love Him and that is a fact, but the most important thing is that HE LOVES ME and he loved me before I knew Him or loved Him at all. Why?  Doesn`t matter....He does because He said He does, and I will not cause confusion in my heart trying to explain why.  If I can reason myself into believing God loves me, then I can reason myself into believing He does not love me. Reasoning simply has no part(or no important part) in my faith or belief.

 

Praise God because He is who He is,

 

Charlie

[Candice]

As a result, our society is becoming "one." This forces me to draw back from those who embrace oneness, for I cannot serve two masters. Indeed, I cling to my separateness--even God is separate from me. I am me and I worship HIM. As I survey the landscape, I realize that I am the oddity and people are offended when I retreat. However, I cannot be close to or yoked to people who use the same Christian language I use, but who worship (what I feel) is another god. People have to decide on their own who is the true God. To clarify who my God is, it's the One A.W. Tozer knows ... He's the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

AMEN!! Well-stated Lori. Yet, even Tozer erred in his leanings and positive bent towards mystics like Guyon, Bother Lawrence, et al who were very existential in their approaches.

All of the posts here make it a bit easier for me to know that we are to judge all things. I will just keep watching for this new hatchling at church to see if it goes anywhere. It may be another of those situations that I've found in some churches, i.e. there are two churches in one - the one you see which appears to be conservative and on target; the other is hidden and includes "other" ideas which are not biblical. This could be something like the Toronto Blessing which most people don't go to unless their privately invited by someone who thinks you'll be open. But, this event is no where posted in the bulletin for everyone to see. Been there - done that.

[chipped china]

Lori,

I think you should be careful with your pride of belief; one, that others are not worshipping the same God as you, and two that they are offended when you retreat. They may just feel sad for you because you place legalism over His love. Who are you to judge your brother or sister? I know the Holy Spirit gives us discernment but even the angels can be fooled sometimes with the tricks of Satan. If someone denies Christ it is one thing but to judge that they aren't worshipping the same God is another.

I too have beliefs and wish not to harm you, but you say you are a conservative and yet as a preterist don't take the bible literally.

[Candice]

Lori, I like your post. It is about as close and clear to me about what existentialism really is. I have not really given much thought to existentialism, mainly because I hate typing the word. But it seems to be a clear and present danger to the Church.  But my thoughts don't end there. I will research this out and if existentialism IS what you are claiming it to be, and I have little doubt that your definition is correct, then I will not cast my lot with the ranks who embrace existentialism as being the Faith of Our Fathers.
   It's really odd. Really really odd. That what one hear preached and taught today is so far removed from what was taught in centuries past. And this is said with the realization that ALL teachers and preachers of the past are not in accord with the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. 
  But I have read your post with a fresh head this morning.....before the bombardment of worldly clamour starts it's onslaught on my mind. And I liked what you wrote.  My two cents.

Very good way to word it Kevin.

[Candice]

We may well say that we worship another god than the One True God, but I don't know the heart of another person, so I cannot know that.

[Lori Smith]

Betsy,

 

You are correct in saying I shouldn't judge the heart of another. For that statement, I apologize. However, I do think that there are people who have different beliefs and different worldviews. So, I don't know if it is prideful for me to say that I'm approaching Christianity from a completely different angle than another. It's true. Sunday I was in a very loud, dark room with rude people whom I did not relate to at all. It was totally foreign to me. Thus, I can say it did not seem at all like we were worshiping the same God.

 

I am a partial preterist. I admit that I'm not a dispensationalist. Dispensationalism began in the 19th century. I think a straight forward reading of Scripture does not point to a pre-trib rapture. I also don't think Jesus is going to come back to earth and resume Old Testament sacrifices for old time's sake. 

[Lori Smith]

I attended Regent University and I had a professor that believed the Jesus came to fulfill Greek philosophy. He believed in universalism and that the Holy Spirit is present in all religions. He is very active in a Buddhist-Christian society. The dean of the School of Divinity is a big promoter of interfaith dialogue, and he also believes that the Holy Spirit is in all faiths. You can look at his bio and read some of his articles: http://www.regent.ed...taff/yong.shtml  It's pantheism. They look at Christianity as an experience, and they believe that the Holy Spirit can be experienced in other religions.

 

Now, I talked to Dr. Skip Horton Parker on the phone because I told him that he was pushing me to deny my beliefs. There are boundaries I simply cannot cross. I can worship with Presbyterians, Baptists, Catholics, but I cannot worship beside a pantheist. Ten years ago, no one would have asked me to. Here's the Society for Buddhist Christian Studies http://society-buddh...an-studies.org/

[Candice]

After becoming almost totally confused reading the past 8-10 posts, I went back to the start of the thread and read it all ovar again.  How did that work?  Well, I`m not sure I understand aldo`s posts completely and it is probably due to my own limited intellect and understanding of the english language.  There is certainly nothing at all wrong with trying to understand the mechanics of how God`s being effects us, both physically and spiritually, but   BUT it is good that we ponder them and praise God for them.  Maybe I just don`t think in a philosophical manner, but for me to "experientially have Christ in myself" may simply mean that I have had a revelation from God into my soul that changes me from inside out! I like that and agree with that as what happened to me.  Now, if it is left to me to define what exactly happened on that hill in Jerusalem 2000 years ago, in philosophical or scientific terms, that justifies me before the God of all creation, I will pass on that!  If it is OK will everyone, I will use something God said he gave me....faith.  Faith that God will keep all he promised, fulfill all his covenents, and will come live in my heart.  I can`t define it and I certainly can`t explain it, but I know it is true.  I do not think it is a requirement that anyone, anywhere, need understand all the ins and outs of justification and sactification in order to obtain both.  Yes, God gave us all a brain and ability to think and reason, but there are things that cannot be reasoned out no matter how intelligent a person is.  In fact, I think in many cases a great intellect can be a hindrance to understanding the plan of God for our relationship with him, and therefore our salvation. Can anyone tell me just how much God loves me?  Can any man tell me how large infinity is?  Can reason answer the question...who is man that God should even concern himself with such a lowly, sinful, weak, unfaithful creature?
 
Sorry to kinda "go off" on this topic, but Maybe I`m wrong about it or maybe I`m just not intellectual enough to grasp complex existential definitions on the subject, but that`s just me and I am so careful with my relationship with my Father.  I love Him and that is a fact, but the most important thing is that HE LOVES ME and he loved me before I knew Him or loved Him at all. Why?  Doesn`t matter....He does because He said He does, and I will not cause confusion in my heart trying to explain why.  If I can reason myself into believing God loves me, then I can reason myself into believing He does not love me. Reasoning simply has no part(or no important part) in my faith or belief.
 
Praise God because He is who He is,
 
Charlie

Very true. Amen. These posts on existentialism as defined and "applied' to Christianity are confusing, and we know who the author of confusion is. It ought not be this way. Thank you Charlie.  I take these answers you provide, along with questions that seem like those God put to Job when Job questioned God, as "Gospel".

[aldo]

Hi Aldo,

I have enjoyed this discourse (sort of, lol) but I am missing some of the distinctions you seem to make.  I may be a little slow.  (also not sure how you guys get these inserts to come up as their own little boxes)

 

======================================================================

Aldo--

Close.... those philosophers did think "that "being" or ontology or consciousness was in fact God" but they meant it to mean God's concsiousness not ours...

 

Your second paragraph is more interesting... We do really encounter God in human terms through his spirit (as defined by the Word in Christ), we experieince that encounter and have perceptions, conception and intutions of it... This is the stuff of existential (experiential) Christianity... our existence our experience.

 

My question is if we actually and really encounter and experieince the spirit of God, i.e. Christ in us and in existence, and if we live through Christ then also in our own being, why is this not the foundation of our faith and belief? Its real. Its here. ...

===================================================

 

Obviously, we must, at least at first, encounter God in human terms.  We have little more to go on other than our human experience.

 

Now - Not sure I get this question.  Why is ??this?? (define this) not the foundation of our faith and belief?  Not sure what you are driving at.  Please try to help me out.

 

==============================================

Aldo--

Well Lori...

 

In my walk, I find those who have actually experienced God much more persusaive, than those who rely on revelation alone and have only the revelation to share. I have a preference for learning by doing, than leaning through th einsights given by mere words. I find the latter a bit too much "through the intellect" as a mere insight to our cognition. Martin Luther, I think shared my experieince. He developed his 'theology of Cross' based on people actually having an experence of Christ in their lving, and he juxtaposed this to what he called 'theology of Glory' being the theology of the scholastics and Thomists of his day put forward as something to be learned rather known through experieince.

 

Your description in your second paragraph rings true to me... Christ discloses hiomself to me (and to children) by being within me and them, as the Word and Light of God, and I think that they experieince that presence sure as they experieince being alive.

 

have a good evening

=================================================

 

This may be semantics but the only way (that I see) that anyone has a revelation is hearing and/or seeing from God directly.  The experience of meeting with God is one of revelation - only.  If there is no revelation and/or inspiration I doubt the meeting and/or experience with God even took place.  When God passed, physically, before Moses, the reaction of the prophet was to bow down and worship.  I know that my prayer time really is more of worship time as I mostly seem to be transported (trying not to be too dramatic here) into seemingly heavenly realms.  And reading the bible is usually a very moving experience.  It seems like God is really speaking to me.  Very often seems to transcend my intellect and emotion and even consciousness.  Hope this is clearer than it appears to me.  lol  Anyway.  Would appreciate if you could help me understand what you are trying to share.

 

Thanks

Big John

What you say of revelation I think is true... but I would add revelation through ideas from the mind of Christ and feelings from the heart of Christ, perhaps even intuition from the spirit of Christ... these all reveal

 

I like your choice of inspiration even more... we can look and see what Christ would see, hear and hear what Christ would hear, understand as Christ might understand, feel as Christ might feel…. That does not we are inspired. Inspiration is much more than revelation… We put Christ on with intention and commitment, then when we walk as Christ walks, Christ inspires us with his spirit till Christ in us lifts us from passive experiencing into being spiritual or Christian. The fruit emerges out of the spiritual active experience that we have by God’s grace through Christ in us.

 

While God pass before Moses, I think God pass through us, by way of Christ’s mind, spirit and heart. From your description, I would say when you pray you are being lifted by Christ and experiencing as Christ would experience.

 

In the Gospels, I note Christ spent most of his time working --- serving others, even washing their feet. Christ said he was doing his fathers work. Christ tells us to follow him and to also do God’s work by serving others. Love God and love others by serving others….

 

Just as you experience inspiration in prayer, and in reading the bible, you can also experience inspiration in doing God’s work…

 

When I look for God in this world, I would look to you… For my part, I would endeavour to be as Christ-like as possible and present Christ. I think this is what holiness is about….

 

I suppose to wrap up, I would say that what you experience in prayer is existential --- it really exists and its existence is possible because Christ exists. But, that similar experience is there for us in doing God’s work of serving others --- as Christ did before us.

regards

[aldo]

After becoming almost totally confused reading the past 8-10 posts, I went back to the start of the thread and read it all ovar again.  How did that work?  Well, I`m not sure I understand aldo`s posts completely and it is probably due to my own limited intellect and understanding of the english language.  There is certainly nothing at all wrong with trying to understand the mechanics of how God`s being effects us, both physically and spiritually, but when man attempts to define terms that somehow explain and convey all that happens in the relationship between God and his children, I start to get dizzy and red lights start to flash in my soul.  Intellectual discussions of God`s infinitude, his grace, his lovingkindness, his omnisience, and his immuntibility, all come to an end at some point, because man simply cannot fathom these attributes of God.  He was not meant to fathom them.  BUT it is good that we ponder them and praise God for them.  Maybe I just don`t think in a philosophical manner, but for me to "experientially have Christ in myself" may simply mean that I have had a revelation from God into my soul that changes me from inside out! I like that and agree with that as what happened to me.  Now, if it is left to me to define what exactly happened on that hill in Jerusalem 2000 years ago, in philosophical or scientific terms, that justifies me before the God of all creation, I will pass on that!  If it is OK will everyone, I will use something God said he gave me....faith.  Faith that God will keep all he promised, fulfill all his covenents, and will come live in my heart.  I can`t define it and I certainly can`t explain it, but I know it is true.  I do not think it is a requirement that anyone, anywhere, need understand all the ins and outs of justification and sactification in order to obtain both.  Yes, God gave us all a brain and ability to think and reason, but there are things that cannot be reasoned out no matter how intelligent a person is.  In fact, I think in many cases a great intellect can be a hindrance to understanding the plan of God for our relationship with him, and therefore our salvation. Can anyone tell me just how much God loves me?  Can any man tell me how large infinity is?  Can reason answer the question...who is man that God should even concern himself with such a lowly, sinful, weak, unfaithful creature?

 

Sorry to kinda "go off" on this topic, but deep in the recesses of my soul, a warning buzzer keeps going off when man attempts to use his reasoning power to explain his relationship with Almighty God.  Maybe I`m wrong about it or maybe I`m just not intellectual enough to grasp complex existential definitions on the subject, but that`s just me and I am so careful with my relationship with my Father.  I love Him and that is a fact, but the most important thing is that HE LOVES ME and he loved me before I knew Him or loved Him at all. Why?  Doesn`t matter....He does because He said He does, and I will not cause confusion in my heart trying to explain why.  If I can reason myself into believing God loves me, then I can reason myself into believing He does not love me. Reasoning simply has no part(or no important part) in my faith or belief.

 

Praise God because He is who He is,

 

Charlie

Charlie

 

You are right about a number of things...

 

Reasoning has no place in finding God of God’s love…. when you experience God’s love… there is no need to reason it --- you know from your real existing experience

 

There is no need for 'explanation' --- God and love simply exist and the existence is experienced. We know: no explanation requred,

 

This also holds for your experiences of a revelation from God in your soul that changes you from the inside out.

 

 

regards

[chipped china]

I think doing Christ's work is the most fulfilling reality anyone can experience, besides knowing His Love and Glory. We just need to make sure it's God's and not ours.

[aldo]

Lori, I like your post. It is about as close and clear to me about what existentialism really is. I have not really given much thought to existentialism, mainly because I hate typing the word. But it seems to be a clear and present danger to the Church.  But my thoughts don't end there. I will research this out and if existentialism IS what you are claiming it to be, and I have little doubt that your definition is correct, then I will not cast my lot with the ranks who embrace existentialism as being the Faith of Our Fathers.

   It's really odd. Really really odd. That what one hear preached and taught today is so far removed from what was taught in centuries past. And this is said with the realization that ALL teachers and preachers of the past are not in accord with the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. 

  But I have read your post with a fresh head this morning.....before the bombardment of worldly clamour starts it's onslaught on my mind. And I liked what you wrote.  My two cents.

Kevin

 

Sounds like a good plan .... I would suggest you do not stay within the boundaries set for existentialism by the shallow material existentialists who seem to think that God does not exist in their world... the valid ideas go back several thousand years and have been expressed in various forms by many folks...

 

regards

[aldo]

I think doing Christ's work is the most fulfilling reality anyone can experience, besides knowing His Love and Glory. We just need to make sure it's God's and not ours.

Yes... that is the most serious task of discernment entrusted to us by Christ... That is why it is so important to know Christ by experience... and for those who know, to share their expereince with one another so each may be encouraged and spuured on their personal Christian walk...

[Meema]

I have been reading in this forum for some months now. I don’t usually post unless I feel I have something positive to contribute and/or it threatens to burst out of me if I don’t let it go. I’m not anti-social, just reticent because I usually see things from a perspective that is not common. Forever odd man out. In the past, in other forums, I have found my words to cause the sound of silence more often than not and so rather than be a conversation stopper, I refrain. If I cannot make my POV understood then what is the point of saying it?

 

But I am posting in this topic because I think it is important enough to risk being misunderstood. This is going to be lengthy and I apologize at the outset.

 

First let me explain that I am a self-imposed Christian outcast which means I have rejected churchianity, religiousity and most, if not all, of the doctrine that requires loyalty to a rule-of-law as determined and set forth by a group that has taken upon itself the responsibility to define and redefine Christianity–yet again. For the last two millennia there have been many multiples of Christian sects rise up to this onerous task and usually with one earnest and dedicated individual as the originator and guiding force. Sects come and then they go only to morph into new interpretations and incarnations. Sometimes they are so well disguised beneath layers of righteous sounding dogma they are almost even better than Christ Himself so that even the Elect could be fooled by the dazzle, and, indeed, often they are. 

 

From a mature spiritual stand point, one doesn't have to make a huge leap to see Satan's hand and motive in devising a new, better, improved, more sincere, more holy, more devout, more inspiring, more physically/spiritually and mentally healthy, thus even-better-at-getting-salvation, creed in order to first attract and then detract the masses. While the masses generally are more drawn to the dynamic improved doctrine that blurs the lines between human accountability and forgiveness, there are just as many seekers who are willing to embrace the more rigid, striving for perfection, self-denial based gospel. But do these not all fall under the guise of "another gospel" we are warned to be wary of in 2 Corinthians 11:4? - For if someone comes and proclaims another Jesus than the one we proclaimed, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or if you accept a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it readily enough. 

 

Never be dissuaded that Christians are constrained from using discernment about who is worshipping what. The first most often used smack down that derails us is the “judge not” rule. 

 

Tozer said it like this:

 

Love is of God, little children, so love everybody and all will be well. Thus speaks the devil, using Holy Scripture falsely for his evil purpose; and it is nothing short of tragic how many of God’s people are taken in by his sweet talk. The shepherd becomes afraid to use his club and the wolf gets the sheep. The watchman is charmed into believing that there is no danger, and the city falls to the enemy without a shot. So Satan

destroys us by appealing to our virtues.

 

The point is that people are inclined to flock to whatever feels right and comforts self. While some are predisposed to sidestep the concept of sin and guilt, others desire to believe they can overcome sin and guilt by adhering to clearly delineated guidelines that promise to result in personal perfect goodness. While one offers unfettered freedom from guilt, the other devises yet new ways to feel guilty. Even at opposite poles from each other, both types of religiosity call to individual basic internal needs that have nothing to do with desire to follow Christ. 

 

The Devil is always in the details of self-interest. Self is always more interested in how it feels, how it fits in, how it is well established. How intellectually evolved it is. Perfectly perfected.

 

Neither of these extremes or the many compromises in between work for me, nor feeds or matures me in the spirit, or draws me closer to Christ, thus I choose to be an outcast rather than travel far and wide searching for THE RIGHT church/doctrine/concept. In order to make my way back to the peace that passes all understanding, I had to first admit that I had been working so hard at shaping myself into a true Christian I had forgotten that becoming and being a Christian is not about me at all. 

 

Not about me. And not about my having a healthy physical life and/or psyche either.

 

Mulling on this, I had an epiphany one day, while in my car, listening to a CD called The Love of God by Kenny Rogers. It is a wonderful combination of old gospel songs updated with a couple of new ones. I'm driving and listening and suddenly I am pierced to my core with a profound ache for the way things used to be; the old faith, the faith that was simple, uncomplicated, just dear hearts believing in God's promise to abide with us even when we struggle and hurt and can't see the light at the end of the tunnel. Faith like the old folks who gathered on Sunday mornings and sang What a Friend We Have in Jesus and Leaning on the Everlasting Arm. These were the precious lovers of God who lived their simple faith without a script or formula, the kind that didn't need fleshly strivings to perfection mind/body/soul, thus they were not in constant internal conflict over what to do, what not to do. Their moral compass was scripture based but they weren't perfect, just dear hearts who trusted like children that God guides us perfectly when we are willing to move over and give Him the wheel. 

 

And when that generation passed did they not go straight to Jesus, even without the slightest concern that they had not attained the higher intellectual understanding of God? 

 

Which begs the question: Do we need all this other stuff? Really?

 

I just want to be a Dearheart Christian. I want a simple, uncomplicated, no-strings-attached, unwavering faith. I don't need a new religion, established to satisfy a modern view, or a new interpretation founded on reinvention of old law in order to have a relationship with Christ. I don’t need psychoanalytical guidelines to a self-centered understanding of God. 

 

Neither simple nor complex, I just need an honest heart for Christ and total belief that He is willing and waiting to step in when I am ready to abandon making my relationship with Him more about me than Him. I realize this decision to disconnect is a singular personal choice and not for everyone but then that is the real point. True Christianity resides within a heart that hears HIs voice and does, doesn't, goes or stays on His command alone according to His will. I don’t even have to begin to understand it. When we are truly tuned-in we discover each of us has a dedicated frequency.

 

1 Corinthians 3:11 For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ.

 

[cue crickets]

[Kenny]

Meema

 

 

Excellent comments. I agree with most everything you posted. 

 

Your comments in post #58 were the sort of comments that awaken me and force me to pay attention. Reading through your post I get a certain sense that we share many of the same thoughts and have similar dispositions.

 

With comments like those I sure hope you post more often

 

Blessings

[Candice]

Meema and Kenny,
I agree. Maybe just going solo is the answer. It will certainly be the answer for many as we see the compromised churches as described in the Book of Revelation become so much more heretical that we will be forced out by God's Spirit. The underground churches in other countries where persecution is prevalent, i.e. Iran, Syria, Burma, et al, is that church you describe Meema. It isn't an institution. It was never meant to be that.

It would be the answer for me at this point for me if I were flying solo. However, I have a husband and son and must submit to my husband's authority. He would not like the idea of going solo. Perhaps a trip to Thailand refugee camp this summer will set things right as believers who have been ethnically cleansed from Burma live as orphans and widows show me what that looks like in a way that just does not exist here in the "Western world of Christianity'. Perhaps, when our son is out of the house, we can get a house church going. Perhaps, perhaps may never come because persecution is coming our way and this will remove the dross quickly!

I have no control over the existentialism factor coming on in our church. All I can do is take a stand against it and hope that believers who are like those you describe Meema, will rise up and take back the church to its original form. It is possible with the God of impossibilities.

Love,
Candice