What is Contemplative Christianity?

[Windwalker]

It is not surprising to hear a Christian who became Atheist, and other beliefs. As I converse with the member (before and until now) who is inside the cult churches/or other beliefs, I’m familiar with the reason why they shifted to false faiths. The prime reason is--they did not see the truth due to ignorance of the word of God, and weak foundation of his faith. Scripture is secondary to his faith. Seeking supernatural satisfaction as God speaking to them in replacement of the Scripture; Signs and wonders. Other reasons are life insecurity who finds his needs for companionship and love who will fill their emptiness. They fall on the other faith so they may fill their spiritual needs whatever it takes. But some who shifted to the other faiths see the light of the truth--as they can see vividly the error of the faith that they embraced before.

You completely missed the point of the semi-fictitiousness story I made up. It was to point out the mentality of believing hard in one thing, becoming disillusioned for whatever reason, and then simply switching that mentality to another belief, moving from a New Age fanatic, to a fundamentalist Christian fanatic. The problem is not the belief systems, but the fanatic practicing them. It's like the old saying, "You can take the boy out of the country, but you can't take the country out of the boy." Whether he's New Age or Christian, or Buddhist, or Hindu, the dude is still the same person.

Claiming the truth that comes out of the mouth of a believer is a universal thing. The “Truth” that they claiming may not be justified as the Truth of Jesus. How would you know what he believe is the truth? Yes, it’s nice to hear someone saying he knows the truth, but what is the truth?

The truth is relative to the person who believe it. My friend, like you, was so certain of his beliefs as a Christian, now he was equally certain he had the truth as an atheist. He had as much, if not far better evidence of "being right" as an Atheist as he did as a Christian, but missed the point - as do you. My analogy went sailing straight over your head.

No believer of such faith will confess that his faith is not the truth. The real question here is: What is the truth that Jesus was saying? Is it the truth that the basis is the word in the Scripture or not?

I see you're practicing your daily mantra chant again. We've already addressed this. Vain repetitions of your "sola-scriptura mantra" will not change the fact of the blatant errors of your reasoning.

 

[Windwalker]

In everything we do, the measure is—if God will be pleased with what you are doing.

There you go. My analogy worked for you. The Bible does not specify sexual practices for the marriage bed. The measure of its validity is its effectiveness in bringing closeness and intimacy to the couple, not if it follows some "owner's manual" of your sexual organs contained in some holy book somewhere. It is what you do with your body that bring either goodness and health, or harm and dysfunction. The outcome of the practice is the measure of its validity, or not.

And so it is also with meditation practices, in all their many shapes and forms, techniques and positions, routines and schedules, etc. No detailed practice of prayer is laid out in the NT, and like making love with your spouse, God leaves it up to us to "fulfill his word", by doing things that result in goodness and health, growth and the realizing of the fruits of the Spirit in our lives. If what we are doing, does that, then we are pleasing God. Absolutely! We know we are pleasing God when he draws nigh unto us in these things. What does scripture teach? "Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you"

How do I know my meditation practices are right for me? How do I know they are in fact "pleasing to God"? The result. I draw nigh to God, and God draws nigh to me. My life becomes filled with a heart of abundance, and the fruits of the Spirit flow from me. The fact that God meets me in meditation, speaks quite substantially to the fact it is pleasing to God. And the result is in fact substantiated by scripture, "By their fruit you shall know them".

And you chose, against scripture, to call it of the devil!

What if a believer did something not pleasing in God’s eyes? and for him very pleasing to his own eyes, would we believe that he is filled with the spirit of God, or guided by the Spirit of God?

Nope. They would not.

Whenever in my meditation practices the focus shifts from God to myself, I withdraw myself from God and am stuck in an operating mode coming out of my own separate egoic self. But when I realize this and put the focus back on God, or on Spirit, then immediately the floodgates of heaven are opened to me again and Spirit fills my heart, my mind, and my being with its Presence. God "draw nigh" to me. And then Spirit in fact guides me. I have to "die to myself" in this way, and when I do, then God can guide the mind and the heart.

In spiritual life, it is either you believe in the word of God (Scripture)--following it or not. There are a lot of carnal Christians today due to their inability to beat their body, and allow the Spirit to work in their lives.

So your spiritual technique is beating your body? How has that been working for you? Not too well, I'll bet. BTW, where is THAT taught in scripture as a prayer technique? Do you use your fists, cords, forks, hot lighters against your skin, etc?

This is the reason why we should need the guidance of His word, what more if you ignore and not prioritize the Scripture? No specification on what to do just like intimacy with couples, what more if without Scripture? You get lost.

I would argue you in fact do get lost when you rely on just reading the Bible without the Spirit within you, actively, consciousness, guiding your very thought processes that are doing the reading! That's what you seem to clearly lack, and why you end up saying things that deny the work of Spirit in the lives of others because you can't seem to see them on the pages of the Bible you are reading with the carnal mind, the mind of flesh, not yet able to eat "solid food" of Spirit.

It is so easy to say what you have mentioned. Doing it right and what works for oneself in spiritual does not make sense, if you do not submit to His word.

Submit? What does that mean? I prefer the word "fulfill". That's the one Jesus used. I fulfill what Jesus taught, by living a life filled with Spirit. If you can do that by standing on your head 3 hours a day, then my response to you would be, "Welcome brother!". But the fact that you want everyone to look like you and deny them what works for them because it doesn't fit how YOU do things, well, the proper response to you should be, "I rebuke you. I admonish you to look within to what the Spirit teaches."

It may only works for you because it feels good spiritually and not for God.

But God draws nigh to me, and my life becomes filled with the fruit of the Spirit. Yes, God is pleased.

Where is your parameter, dividing line, the distinction, identification, justification, validity, authentication…. Where?

"By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?... A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit.... Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them." ~Mt. 7:16

"The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law" ~Ga. 5:22-23

Right there. And back we are to page one of this "debate". Please note, "against such things there is no law". Why are you trying to say there is a law against a practice that helps someone nurture these in their lives???? Again, what is wrong with you? Who exactly are you serving?

 

[Windwalker]

Colors are made by God, as different colors can be applied as different races or kind of people around the world. Whatever color they might have, they still look up to God as the maker of the colors–as Creator. Any attempt to take what is heard from other perspective and making them fit is their own choice--was his freedom of choice--given by the color Creator. The color cannot be in another color because they created that way as their genes. All colors shall bow unto their maker, submit, follow and obey His will. This is my simple analogy in your posted color.

Thanks

Goodness me! I actually went into the models of Spiral Dynamics because I knew Sojourner would be able to follow them. I didn't expect you would be able to grasp it much, if at all, but I didn't realize how little you would. This response is utterly ridiculous. But, thanks for trying.

 

[Windwalker]

You read his books and I believed you will learn something.

No, the only thing I will learn is how ignorance and a lack of education result in the spread of the sort of misinformation you are parrotting from these unqualified "whoevers" lurking out on the Internet with their blogs. Do you believe anything because it is in writing, or only those who agree with your beliefs, and since they do they become "authorities" to you?

Your comment is faster than researching what is New Age. As easy as Wikipedia may answer you that New Age used the methods same as yoga. No doubt about it.

He said the practice is New Age and then cited a book from the 14th century to prove it! New Age did not start in the 14th century, but the 1970s. The Cloud of Unknowing is NOT a "New Age" book!

I’m commenting in advance about the New Age who draws practices and philosophies from Christianity and other religions. Kindly take note that they are the one who distort the Christianity, same as the cult churches (who identified as Christians). On the contrary, to those who claimed they are Christians (follower of Christ) draw practices, philosophies and inspiration from New Age teachings. Hope this make it clear.

So, if a Christian adopts a Buddhist practice, that makes them New Age? How? Because you demonize New Age and call anything you don't like "New Age"? Yes, that is clear, actually.

Ok. No shutting down (see below -emptying mind). As we know, the practice of meditative mantra, choosing a sacred word, gazing an object or a light etc.. is a form of diverting his mind attention to this practices plus mantra chanting, and breathing technique. Those practices has been wrapped up in a nice box as tagged with new names as Centering, Breathe Prayer and other mystical contemplative techniques.

Your profound ignorance is on display again. Centering Prayer is not a mantra meditation. They do not sit and chant for 30 minutes straight or longer. It is not even a concentrative form of meditation, staring at a candle flame for an hour. You are conflating many different types of meditation practices as all the same thing, and they are not.

If you are going to say the practice is bad, you should at least know what they are.

In the first place, we traced this technique in Zen, Tm, Buddhist, Hindus and similar with New Age.

What is this garbage, "and similar with New Age". Get over this obsession of yours with New Age. What New Age does is borrow from Buddhist, Hindu, etc. So if Christianity has either their own unique forms that are similar to Buddhists or Hindus, that does not make them "similar to New Age". New Age is not a source of authority! It's not a tradition! It has no teachings of its own! It's not something Christians "borrow from", because New Age itself borrows from the traditions - even from the Christian tradition! So stop it with your nonsense already.

BTW, "Zen" is Buddhism. It's not a separate religion. Do you not know that?

Windwalker, Yes, Peter is praying;he prayed on how Jesus taught them to pray, and not the same as you are doing.

Then Jesus taught what I'm practicing. Thank you. However Peter was praying opened him to have a subtle-level vision, moving into a state of "ecstasy" as the scripture worded it. Thank you for validating that Peter's "prayer" was in fact a form of meditation practice taught by Jesus to him.

How can you match your prayer with his prayer if in the first place you do not agree with the Scripture as the infallible word of God.

There is absolutely NO requirement to agree with you about the nature of the Biblical texts being the so-called "infallible word of God". That is not taught in scripture, and is in fact a modern doctrine! Here's what I don't agree with: Your Theology. That is not the same as not finding Truth in scripture. It's not agreeing with YOU. Are YOU infallible?

All the rest of this reply from you is just you repeating your silly "solo-scriptura mantra" in vain repetitions. I'll skip the rest since it's all been dealt with rationally to the Nth degree already.

 

[Windwalker]

BTW, this business of Emptying the Mind, or "No thoughts", does not mean you are vacant! That is the core misunderstanding of you and your evangelical anti-meditation folks. You are NOT vacant in a state of "no-thought". If you were, then how would you be aware you had no thoughts? "Empty mind" simply means thoughts are not present, only AWARENESS is. It is a state of being 100% fully present in mind, without the distraction of thoughts.

So, again, misinformation and misunderstanding of all of these things is the basis for all the objections that are made. None of them fit the actual practices or beliefs about them.

Prophecy: The response will be "but it's not taught in scripture", repeat mantra over and over hoping it will change the facts.

 

[sojourner]

A Buddhist, Hindu, TM will do a sacred communion to whom? Is it to Jesus?

Doesn't matter. Divinity is Divinity.

 

[sojourner]

Now, if we apply the yoga as a communion with the divine as a tenet for Christianity, why allow & apply yoga as a meditative practice for Christianity?

All meditative practices are vehicles for communion with the Divine. I never said yoga was appropriate for Xy.

Jesus has its road and a sure path of destination proceeding to Him. Why take a lot of other roads and own it, if there is a road directed to Jesus?

It does't matter what you call the destination. Some call it "Los Angeles." Some call it "The City of Angels." Some call it "Hollywood." All roads are sure paths.

Therefore we should trust God’s road so we make our path straight--as our faith must be straight to God.

God owns all the roads.

Oh my! So the Scripture is a joke and to be fun laughing at.

That's not what I said. I said that idolizing the texts through such farcical stances as sola scriptura is disdainful.

Not everything is spelled it in Scripture, then why does so?

Scripture was never intended to be the be-all-end-all of revelation.

 

[sojourner]

Ray Yungen, author, speaker and research analyst has studied religious movements for the last twenty years. He is available for radio and television interviews and for seminars, conferences and college assemblies. His exuberance for life and his love for Jesus Christ and for people are evident in his writing. Mr. Yungen resides in Salem, Oregon.

Thanks

I don't care. None of that makes him an expert. I've studied genealogy for 20 years. That doesn't make me a genealogist. Carrot Top is available for radio and television interviews and college assemblies, too. Fred Phelps loves the Lord, too. What's your point?

 

[sojourner]

All bread mystically become one loaf?

Correct.

I don’t see anything with the Lord’s Supper like the feeding of five thousand.

I'm sue you don't. I can't help your theological shallowness.

If I’m truly against the Bible, why don’t you show your evidence to me, and I’m curious to know about it.

I Just. Did. you won't accept it. You won't accept the biblical evidence. WTH is that all about??

That was a Roman Catholic Catechism made by man.

No it wasn't. That belief was present in the very beginning.

You choose what you like, and treat the Scripture as a notebook or a novel, just picking up what may fit to your belief such as the real body and blood, this is an obvious faulty interpretation.

I dont do that at all. it may appear so to one whose interpretational tools are limited and whose exegetical understanding is limited, but that's not the case.

How come it becomes an actual/real blood of Christ if it is stated that the liquid is the fruit of the vine?

John 6:55 -- "For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink..." How come it's actual/real flesh and blood, if it's food and drink?

if Jesus and His disciples went to that place, and at the same time (presumably) there is an event known as the Roman Symposium, what makes Jesus and His disciples practice of the Lord’s Supper as pagan? Do Jesus followed the pagan practices? I think this is what I need for you to answer.

Yes! They put a different religious twist on it, but the architecture of the meal and the surrounding celebrations is the same. If one attended a Roman symposium and a very early celebration of the the Eucharist, one would see, essentially, the same thing, with different words.

 

[sojourner]

We (human) don’t have the capability to become like the Father God.

Jesus did. And Jesus was fully human just like us.

Yet you find Christ in your practice? Yes, there’s a lot of people like you--who claimed they have Christ, but sidestepping with another practices; though still continuing what they doing--which seems right to them. In the case of Mr. Michael Sherif, he tasted it and experienced it, then awakened to the truth. He committed and submitted himself totally to Christ. How about those people who shifted to another faith, would you conclude that they shifted because they are not suited and not ready?

No, I'd say that Xy wan't true for them.

Yes, New Agers cannot have the same objective as Christians.

Bollocks.

The mystical silence has a similarity and connection with the New Age practices.

Correct.

For you info. The mystical silence for you is a Christian application, but not for the others.

For your info, "mystical silence" is a spiritual application, that is germane to many different religions.

What is “turned off”? Is this also the same application on how yoga forced a practitioner to divert his attention into something? You turned off your senses and focus on another thing.

No, your senses are heightened and your attention is focused.

While certain instances in the Bible describe mystical experiences, I see no evidence anywhere of God sanctioning man-initiated mysticism. Legitimate mystical experiences were always initiated by God to certain individuals for certain revelations and was never based on a method for the altering of consciousness. In Acts 11:5, Peter fell into a trance while in prayer. But it was God, not Peter, who initiated the trance and facilitated it. By Ray Yungen

This is a very simple example of trance which I witnessed before. It is clear that God initiated it. What I've observe to those who practiced mystical practices, they are the one who initiate and point it to God as God initiated it for them—to do it. Twisted interpretation? No, actually it is not. What we are looking here is the application, the situation and the validity of the occasion who initiated the mystical experience to the people. This is how we should check the Scripture, not as we do it because it works.

Mistaken is mistaken. You're mistaken and the idiot you're quoting is mistaken.

Oh my. Look at the content on what he is pointing at.

He's wrong about the content he's pointing at.

The mind is what he is talking about

He was conflating a trance with the Pentecost event.

He identified which is from God and which not is from God

No. He didn't. He thinks he did; you think he did. But you're both mistaken.

1 Cor. 1:18
18. For the word of the cross is to those who are perishing foolishness, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

Non sequitur.

What is bread? Did bread is a need for our body to prevent us from starving? If that is you reasoning, taking it now as literal as ‘bread,’ where in the Lord’s Prayer taught us to pray for our needs? Where?

How about in other country that does not eat bread? Did the Lord’s Prayer should not be applied to them? How about those who eat rice and corn?

Hey, this nonsense is your dog-and-pony show. I'm merely illustrating that this is the way you're treating the bible with regard to spiritual practices. Take it up with the right side of your brain.

Contemplative teaching pushing me to believe in mantra and yoga, without studying what is inside those practices. There are Scriptures that warned us to test the spirit, not believe in the doctrine of man/philosophy, avoidance of such practices, and warned us about false teachings etc… The Lord’s Prayer is a guide on how to pray, and not what to pray as dogmatically using the Lord’s Prayer, a personal prayer.

All of this is based in your misunderstanding of what's going on.

Yoga and mantra cannot be mixed nor attach with intercessory prayer--quoted with Scriptures.

Of course they can!

Proving the Scripture is not just by generalizing and dogmatically followed--in a literal way.

...which is exactly what you're attempting to do here.

Contemplative teaching/mystical followers are like paying their credit card bill without checking it—as blindly paying it.

Contemplation is the checking process.

If you knew what you were talking about, this might be an interesting discussion. As it is, it's merely tedious -- like teaching a pig to sing.

 

[sojourner]

1.) Did you believe that the account (in the Bible) about Jesus is real (really happened)?

No.

Did you believe that the casting out of demons (in the Bible) by Jesus is real (really happened)?

No.

Did you believe that Jesus believed evil spirit as unclean spirit?

I believe the writer thought that.

 

[Windwalker]

[GALLERY=media, 6304]Perspectives by Windwalker posted Sep 7, 2015 at 8:18 PM[/GALLERY]

 

[Yoshua]

I wanted to come back to finishing my comments on this post, keying in on your pounding the point of coming back to scripture as the "topmost basis", as you set aside all other factors and considerations that factor in as you repeat your insistence of conformity to your ideas. Always, throughout this discussion both Sojourner and I, as well WellNamed, and others, do in fact cite scripture supporting the practice.

Hi Windwalker,

I set aside all other factors and considerations and conformity of my ideas? Who do you think conform to his own ideas? Obviously it is not me because I followed the Scripture as my basis of truth. How about you? Who do you follow?

Yes, you cited few Scriptures to support your view, but until now, my questions for you to validate and justify the practices in light of the Scriptures were still left behind?

How can your partner (Sojourner) will use the Scripture as a supporting evidence if he did not fully trusted the Scripture? He has his own standard of accepting it as God’s infallible word.

But just as some people are "not ready" to do certain spiritual practices, such as your friend possibly, some people are not ready, not prepared, not able yet to see and hear what scripture itself teaches. They are not ready yet, because the vessel of their heart and mind is not yet matured to be able to receive that teaching. They can't see it, even though they read the words on the page, even though they hear others declare the truth of it from their own experiences. If you followed our conversation, the metaphor, poetry, revelation and evil spirit for him—is not acceptable to him—as true and authenticated account of God’s word.

The Apostle Paul speaks about Christians who are not yet ready to receive the deeper truths, that they are still operating out of the flesh. "Brothers and sisters, I could not address you as people who live by the Spirit but as people who are still worldly—mere infants in Christ. I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready." They argue amongst each other who is right, who's following the right teacher and who's not, and I'll add who's reading the Bible right and who is being deceived by the devil, etc. All of this black and white pounding of the pulpit, trying to show others are wrong in their chosen spiritual practices which are working well for them in their relationship with Spirit, is operating from the flesh.

Why use 1 Cor.3:1-3 about spiritual infancy to support the fact of a person who does yoga practice before and awakened to the truth of Christ? A proof text! Windwalker.

The Scripture has nothing to do with yoga practice, Paul did not uttered this statement to project about yoga. Where is the Spirit of truth guidance? This is the common dilemma for those who dwell with the New Age and contemplative mystical teachings. They will draw Scriptures that will paste it with their own analogy; lack of studies, and just interpreted it erroneously. The Scripture is not meant for casting lots; or as needed basis.

There is no black and white pounding of pulpit in the light of truth. The truth itself is visible. We pronounced the truth in accordance with the written word. We are just bringer of the God’s word, we don’t have the authority to add nor diminish the Scripture. God’s word is the one who convicts & expose a person regarding his spiritual direction.

If you believe Paul, then you must believe his word stated in the Bible.
2 Tim. 3:16-17
16. All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
17. that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.

1 Cor. 10:11
11. Now these things happened to them as an example, and they were written for our instruction, upon whom the ends of the ages have come.

Rom. 4:23
23. This about Abraham's acceptance was written not only for Abraham;
24. it was also written for us. We are going to be accepted, too. We believe in the One who raised our Lord Jesus from death.

How many percent from 1% to 100% that you believe the Bible is the infallible word of God?

2 Cor. 11:4
4. For if one comes and preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted, you bear this beautifully.

1 Tim. 6:3
3. If anyone advocates a different doctrine, and does not agree with sound words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and with the doctrine conforming to godliness,

Did Jesus teach us Buddhism, yoga , mantra chanting, prayer method in breathing/centering, prioritize mystical experiences into practice, emptying minds first etc…?

Did Jesus teach us to conform with such practices aside from what he imparted?

You ignore what others teach you from their own experiences that meditation practice is the utter laying down of the ego before God in the deepest forms of self-surrender, and you instead declare without any support that we are trying in our own efforts to become God, that this is an effort of the flesh and not of Spirit. In reality, it is the effort to "be right", to "obey scripture" in the manner you do, ignoring the heart, ignoring listening from within to Spirit and be led to hear and see through those eyes in your judgment of others, that is in fact an effort of the flesh. Being religious, seeking to follow scripture in order to "please God", is an effort of the flesh. It has yourself as the focal point, to be saved, to be righteous, to be a chosen one. Your salvation, your home in the sky, etc.

Without out any support? Did I posted to you before what is “higher-self “ defined in wikipedia? Here is what I’ve posted before.

Concept
The Higher Self is generally regarded as a form of being only to be recognized in a union with a divine source. In recent years the New Age faith has encouraged the idea of the Higher Self in contemporary culture, though the notion of the Higher Self has been interpreted throughout numerous historical spiritual faiths. Some denominations believe that the higher self is a part of an individual's metaphysical identity, while others teach that the higher self is essentially our tie to the heavens. Similar to the notion of the soul, the higher self can be defined by many different sects; while also being a topic of interest in the scientific and philosophical fields.

Religious views
Christian: In the Christian Interpretation, the Bible teaches that all beings contain a fragment of the Holy Spirit that ties them to the higher self, or God. The Holy Spirit is widely discussed by the church, but the idea of the individual higher consciousness is not taught as frequently. The church preaches that the soul is what connects us to God and that we must honor and keep our souls pure by following the morals and ethics of the bible.[2] Jesus said, "The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak" (Matthew 26:41); this echoed in other parts of the New Testament, especially Paul. A central tenet of Christianity is that the body is still under the bondage of sin and is therefore imperfect, though that will be rectified on Judgement Day, but true believers are "born again," which allows them to battle against the still-corrupt parts of themselves.

Hinduism: In Hinduism, the higher self is one and the same with the Jiva or individual self. With this perspective, the Hindu faith generally teaches that the higher self, or Atman is not an object possessed by an individual, rather the self is the subject which perceives. In his book, The Higher Self, Deepak Chopra utilizes the views of the Hindi denomination to support his claims concerning the divine force that is acquired with the awareness of the self. Hinduism teaches that through the examination of self-knowledge, or “atma jnana,” one can attain salvation by comprehending the true self.[3]

New Age: Most New Age literature defines the Higher self as an extension of the self to a more advanced and incorporeal realm. This Higher Self is essentially an extension of the worldly self. With this perspective, New Age text teaches that in exercising your relationship with the higher self, you will gain the ability to manifest your desired future before you. In other words, the self creates its own reality when in union with the Higher Self.[4]

Don't get me wrong, I do understand this as an early stage of development, where you begin by trying to conform to the rules, to please the parent for self-reward, etc., but it is not spiritual maturity. This is what Paul was saying that they were not yet ready to receive what they heard. They were not yet in a place where they could understand it. The heart has yet to open and blossom, where these things are understood from within. Then, the words will begin to make sense to the heart, and the heart will open into Spirit itself. Prior to this opening, the words are heard in this "worldly" context, this "babes in Christ" where they have learned a few truths, and then from this point of view in their immaturity try to "be right" in believing "correct doctrine", follow the right teacher, etc, etc. It's all external to them, yet. It's still the "milk", not the solid food of a spiritual path.

The "solid food" is that which grounds and centers someone in Truth itself, in Spirit, not in interpretations of verses being right or wrong. I can see why some truth is withheld from these babes, those who still are functioning from the worldly, or fleshly mind where it seeks to achieve and attain through its own efforts. They do not yet understand that it is a principle of letting go of control, and mistake the words to mean some form of external control over their thoughts and actions. To try to "find the truth in scripture" with their earthly mind. It is in fact an effort of the grasping mind seeking to possess for itself the truth that they seek to find their sense of security in.

Absolutely! The way you used the Scripture is truly not interpreted since you don’t have right or wrong interpretation. Oh my! This is where counterfeit beliefs sprouted. If you are going to certain far far place, would you need a map, or ask another person how to go there? or you just go blindly without knowing where to go? No direction or with direction? I believed this is the same as for spiritual path of righteousness; if there is no direction or a solid understanding where to go to that place, you get lost. You may arrive to a wrong place.

This marks out the "true-believer" syndrome, as I'll call it. It's where their sense of security, of stability, is being tightly affixed to a set of beliefs, "correct doctrine", as it were. If these ideas, these beliefs are challenged by other points of view, they will fight tenaciously to maintain, protect, and preserve "the truth!" as they hold it in their minds. To have those ideas moved, or shown to be partial or incomplete, or in any ways not the rocksolid fortress they have made them to be for themselves, threaten their stability, their sense of self-identity, their being. They would be lost without their beliefs! And so what ensues in defense of these is irrationality, inhospitable attitudes and hostility towards other beliefs and practices outside those of their own. It is a worldly, fleshly approach. It is the effort of the flesh to try to seize the Truth of God for themselves.

Then there are those whose foundation is Faith. They are able to withstand the beliefs they hold to be true to be challenged or changed. They rest in a deep inner sense, an intuition of Spirit, where they simply trust and look to that which is beyond their own mind's ability to comprehend. They have beliefs too, but they act more as supports or ways to talk about their faith. Their beliefs or ideas about God can be shown to either be wrong, or incomplete, or not yet mature, and withstand the challenge because they trust in the sense that their hearts tell them, even though they cannot yet truly plumb the depths of what that is impressing upon them from within themselves. Beliefs are more easily changed for them, whereas the "true believer" must fight and defend to the last! This person is far more able to adapt and grow than the 'true believer' is who is set to shatter when the wind blows hard enough against their structures.

I think you starting to remove and throw into the garbage of what you believe in Psalm 119:105. “Thy word is a lamp to my feet, And a light to my path.”

Then there are those who move through that faith in their hearts into direct experience of That which their faith intuited. Faith becomes replaced by experience. And these are the mystics. It is no longer a matter of believing the "right things", or needing the structures of beliefs to be so well-defined and coherent and compressible, because they are now seen clearly as mere supports for the mind in order to talk about experience which is both wholly transcendent to them, and yet seen within all truths in relative light. The mystic is a person of faith, who through that faith has realized the Truth itself, both within themselves and all that is. They do not simply rest in their faith anymore, but in a direct and immediate Knowledge. They move through their own development to where their Ground is Spirit itself.

It just give me a realization that from the start of our conversation, I rarely see you quoting the word “Jesus,” you always quote the Spirit of Truth rather than Jesus. If I may ask if you have surrendered and committed your life to Jesus? Having believed and faith in Jesus?

So in the above you have stages: belief, faith, experience, and adaptation. The true believer is not a person of faith, but a fundamentalist who finds their security in the things they believe in. They "trust in the external authority". They make God, the anchor, but they fail to see that they are not yet opened to faith, which is internal. It is still resting in their ideas about things. Faith is of the heart. Faith is a heart knowledge. And faith then opens to experience. And experience then opens one to transformation of all of who they are, body, mind, soul, and spirit.

What? We make God , the anchor yet we are not opened to faith. How can we make God as our anchor if we did not have faith? We believe in faith that saves.

Rom. 10:17
17. So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.

The definition of your faith as the heart knowledge is man-made knowledge, you removed Christ in your knowledge about faith. Rom. 10 :17 involved Christ.

Thanks

 

[sojourner]

How can your partner (Sojourner) will use the Scripture as a supporting evidence if he did not fully trusted the Scripture?

That's a lie. I do trust the texts -- to be what they are and to do what they dod.

He has his own standard of accepting it as God’s infallible word.

1) They're not "my standards." They're accepted, scholastic standards of critical, exegetical discovery. 2) The texts aren't "infallible."

There is no black and white pounding of pulpit in the light of truth. The truth itself is visible. We pronounced the truth in accordance with the written word. We are just bringer of the God’s word, we don’t have the authority to add nor diminish the Scripture. God’s word is the one who convicts & expose a person regarding his spiritual direction.

And it's all filtered through your lens of understanding. Therefore, by definition, you have pronounced your truth, and brought your version of God's word. You add your flavor to it.

 

[Windwalker]

I set aside all other factors and considerations and conformity of my ideas? Who do you think conform to his own ideas? Obviously it is not me because I followed the Scripture as my basis of truth. How about you? Who do you follow?

You ignore others who also cite scripture, but have a different understanding of them than yourself. You only think your ideas are the only correct ones. You think others have to think in the manner you do, in order to be doing what is "in accord with scripture". Once again, you have yet to show where anything these practices are doing which is a violation of the injunctions Jesus taught. Whenever you point to something you think is a contradiction, it is always an error of understanding what you are criticizing, and when corrected, you ignore us and stick with your Internet authorities who have no credentials or credibility, or limited experience and failed practice who rather than accepting responsibility vivifies the systems itself.

When it comes to spiritual practice, I follow Spirit. After all, "spiritual" means of the Spirit, right? "The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit." It sounds to me Jesus placed the importance on following, or being led by Spirit. I don't really see the emphasis on "Biblical Infallibility" you hamer us with being found in Jesus' teach.

Yes, you cited few Scriptures to support your view, but until now, my questions for you to validate and justify the practices in light of the Scriptures were still left behind?

I've addressed them directly throughout this entire discussion, and so have all the other participants you ignore. I've repeated them at least a hundred times in fact, and you just ignored them and simply act like we didn't say anything. You didn't address why you didn't think they supported what we were saying. You just ignored them. That's not a discussion at all, you know.

How can your partner (Sojourner) will use the Scripture as a supporting evidence if he did not fully trusted the Scripture? He has his own standard of accepting it as God’s infallible word.

And here is the core why you do not accept or listen to anything we say. You feel we need to accept the modern doctrines of Biblical Inerrancy and Biblical Infallibility. You see him saying things like the Bible is full of cultural artifacts, that these are the words of fallible humans speaking the truths of God as they understood them at the time, as "not fully trusting Scripture". This is a false premise right at the outset, one which alienates you from growing in knowledge and truth. One which itself is not supported by Scripture. It is in fact a modern doctrine, not a Biblical doctrine.

Here's what Wikipedia says about the modern doctrine of Biblical Infallibility you are unaware of. "The idea of Biblical infallibility gained ground in Protestant churches as a fundamentalist reaction against a general modernization movement within Christianity in the 19th and early 20th centuries." It's modern, 19th and 20th century, and a reaction against Modernity. That those like Sojourner or myself, or frankly all others in this discussion find the modern doctrine misguided in thinking and in fact checking, does not mean we find no value or truth in Scripture. It's not a black and white matter as you seem incapable of not thinking in terms of. You are believing a modern doctrine, not something that was directly taught in scripture.

So if you are to say we are practicing a modern practice of meditation, you are no different in believing a modern doctrine of Biblical Infallibility. We find support for meditation in scripture, you find support for Biblical Infallibility in scripture, even though neither are explicitly taught.

Why use 1 Cor.3:1-3 about spiritual infancy to support the fact of a person who does yoga practice before and awakened to the truth of Christ? A proof text! Windwalker.

You don't follow what I posted. I quoted it to show how there are those, such as yourself and your friend, who are not ready to open themselves to things which are more advanced than what they are ready for. If they get ahead of themselves, it will result in confusion for them, or freak them out, or send them off into fanaticism or some such other spiritual disease. The evidence of the lack of preparedness, the "babes in Christ" that Paul speaks of them as, is all the debating of "authorities", etc which you are doing in this thread. "I am of Paul! I am of Apollos! You don't trust the scriptures! Where's your Biblical support!", etc.

The Scripture has nothing to do with yoga practice, Paul did not uttered this statement to project about yoga.

That's right, and I didn't quote it for that reason. You should read more careful what I say before creating a strawman response like this. Don't make me waste my time having to correct you all the time, every time. Be more careful, more focused in understanding what I type before responding.

Where is the Spirit of truth guidance?

Within the response of your soul.

This is the common dilemma for those who dwell with the New Age and contemplative mystical teachings. They will draw Scriptures that will paste it with their own analogy; lack of studies, and just interpreted it erroneously. The Scripture is not meant for casting lots; or as needed basis.

I frankly don't give a crap what New Age does and does not do. That has nothing to do with any of us in this thread. None of us identify with New Age. Should I start calling you a Muslim? I may as well since its what you are doing here. Quit trying to equate what we are doing as New Age. It is not. Quit lying. Quit bearing false witness.

There is no black and white pounding of pulpit in the light of truth.

Yet then why do you do it? I'll post this again here because it pertains:

[GALLERY=media, 6304]Perspectives by Windwalker posted Sep 7, 2015 at 8:18 PM[/GALLERY]

What you are doing in the image above is taking the truth of the blue square and pounding the pulpit in black and white thinking, "It's clearly the blue square, and cannot be the yellow circle, because it's a blue square! A blue square is not a yellow circle! You are WRONG! Where's your scripture that shows a yellow circle!" This is what you are doing throughout this discussion.

You are right, only by accident, that in the light of Truth, there can be no black and white thinking. Black and white thinking is inconsistent with Truth, which contains all perspectives, Blue Square, Yellow Circles, White Cylinders, etc. It sees "from above", outside and beyond all relative positions. If you were not thinking in Black and White terms, you wouldn't be trying to prove all of us wrong as you are.

The truth itself is visible. We pronounced the truth in accordance with the written word.

As you are perceiving it, calling that perception "The Truth!" You are in fact placing your ideas about Truth, as The Truth!, or saying your ideas are the truth of God itself. As I said, this is worldly thinking. "Babes in Christ", not ready for solid food.

We are just bringer of the God’s word, we don’t have the authority to add nor diminish the Scripture.

No, you are the preacher of your own ideas as the truth of God and lack the spirit of humility necessary in order to lead anyone into Truth itself, into Spiritual Knowledge.

How many percent from 1% to 100% that you believe the Bible is the infallible word of God?

None of the above. 0% is the correct answer. That is a modern doctrine formulated in the 19th Century in the West in response to rise of Modernity in Christianity, one which I feel does not reflect the truth of God as I understand it in my spiritual growth. That doctrine is not a requirement of Faith.

Without out any support? Did I posted to you before what is “higher-self “ defined in wikipedia? Here is what I’ve posted before.

Did I ever use the term "Higher Self" in any of this discussion? I don't believe I have, but in either case I don't find the term as bad as you do. But it has nothing to do with me saying your claim that meditation opens you to Satan is without support. What does the "higher self" have to do with you supporting your claim? None. You still haven't supported your claim, 43 pages later now!

It just give me a realization that from the start of our conversation, I rarely see you quoting the word “Jesus,” you always quote the Spirit of Truth rather than Jesus. I

When I use "Jesus" in discussion, which I have many times in this thread, it is when I am speaking of the human being who walked the earth teaching others the Way. In context I will say Jesus when speaking of things this man taught. When I say Christ, or Spirit, or the Spirit of Truth, or Truth, or Holy Spirit, I am speaking of the Divine in action or in motion, or in communication with the world. If I speak of God, it is inclusive of all of this, as well as the Infinite Transcendent and Immanent One.

So, the majority of this discussion is speaking of spiritual realization through meditation practices, thus the majority of the time I will speak of Christ, or Spirit. When I speak of the man who taught, I will generally say Jesus.

f I may ask if you have surrendered and committed your life to Jesus? Having believed and faith in Jesus?

A friend of mine recently had a realization that the prayer of "I surrender" actually had a connotation to him that was creating resistance for him "letting go". The idea of "surrender" as he was taking it, which is much in the manner you suggest it, has the suggestion of handing over your sword to the vanquishing Warlord whom you wishes to take control of everything you are, to take it away from you as in defeat. I thought that was an interesting realization on his part, and one that is in fact inherent in our way of thinking about what "surrender" means in regards to God. I think you interpret the word in that same vein. I don't, however.

Here's how I understand it instead. This "surrender", really is matter of 'letting go' into God. It is an action of not laying down my will to the Great Power above me, but a release of my own clinging to the things which prevent me from letting go, and merging into God. It is laying down my self-seeking in order to merge my will into God. God's will becomes my will. My will becomes God's will. I and my Father are One. That, is "surrender". Its is surrendering oneself to Love, for the sake of Love itself. It is marriage, not the conquered one laying down arms in defeat. There is a subtle, but vastly different attitude that either lays one low into "submission" before God as a conquering Dictator or Warlord, as in how you use it, or one which carries one into God, through Spirit in marriage and Unity, in how I use it. The former understanding is immature, the latter is mature.

What? We make God , the anchor yet we are not opened to faith. How can we make God as our anchor if we did not have faith? We believe in faith that saves.

You make your beliefs God. You aren't operating out of faith when you do that.

 

[InChrist]

I think whatever it is called, new age or ancient path, or however it may be "Christianized", in all its various forms, it is still the age old lie...

 

[InChrist]

And volume two...

 

[Windwalker]

Whatever. It's just more of the same ignorance. Fear and more fear. What this nonsense is is actually reductionistic materialism of modernity masked in mythic religion. Its saying ignore any internal reality for only objective truth which is it thinks is found in the Bible overlooking the fact that they have to interpret all of it with their own subjective point of view. All of this has been covered in depth in the past 44 pages. Fear fear nothing but fear.

 

[sojourner]

I think whatever it is called, new age or ancient path, or however it may be "Christianized", in all its various forms, it is still the age old lie...

There is sooo much misinformation, fear mongering, and deflection packed into this troubled collection of red herring and straw man fallacies, I don't know where to begin to refute it all; it's all just so ... wrong -- in its premise, its presentation of evidence, its conclusions. These bozos don't have Any. Idea. what the Emergent Movement is all about. Nor do they really have any idea what "biblical Xy" is. Fear, lies, and misinformation is no way to promote a true spirituality -- in any time. Never have I seen a better example of using blinders of fear as a way to market one's brand of religion. Perhaps when I have more time, I may waste some of it refuting the videos -- a waste because those who would be convinced already know that the videos are complete bullspit, and those who buy into that kind of fear mongering presented in the videos aren't going to be convinced by anything I might have to say, because they'd rather believe a bunch of confirmation bias than they would believe someone who really knows a lot about mystic spirituality and the Emergent Movement.

 

[Windwalker]

Oh my. I don't know why I exposed myself to their poison. I watched most of this, picking apart the errors along the way. I will summarize those videos thusly: Sick, paranoid delusions, conspiracy theory, spiritual illness, spiritual disease, narcissistic disorders, legalism, and Antichrist and demonic on top of it all. I need a bath to cleanse my mind and soul. Yuk.

I really, genuinely try to understand another's point of view out of compassion and love, to not judge those who see differently than myself but to learn to appreciate and respect with the heart of empathy, which is why I gave it an earnest shot. But these poor souls are against anything that brings love into the world. They see all efforts to reach out to others to help the problems of the world as part of a dark demonic conspiracy of Satan! This is no different than the religious who attacked Jesus as having a devil in helping heal others. It's the same spiritual and mental disease.

This brand of religion is ultra fundamentalist and sees conspiracy in all dark places, making a video of hell with the names of their enemy the Emergent Church embedded within it in their opening credit, filling each scene with dark, ominous devil-in-the-corner music. They explicitly said they would rather preach and make converts than help others in poverty and despair, since this is the end of the world. That is diseased. It is fearful, self-centered, legalistic, and Antichrist in everything they say and teach. It masks itself as truth, but it serves only itself. It is not just diseased, it's demonic. It is poison to the Spirit of God. No wonder they are anti-meditation!

For me to say this, it takes something rather severe. It isn't said lightly. Yuk, and yuk. Poison. Fundamentalism is a disease.