What is Contemplative Christianity?

[Windwalker]

It's like I want to hear more what happened after you knocked out. I'm serving the God in the Bible who is the spirit and truth. I believe in Nicene and Apostles Creed like Sojourner did, but different in application. I'm being aware and based on the Scripture like Katiemygirl and InChrist.

What happened is I tried to find Answers because I wanted something "concrete" to believe in, like you. That's was only a pitstop, as it were, trying to find those Answers with a capital A in fundamentalist doctrines like those that you and the others you cite latched onto. The Spirit, my Heart, and my Soul, would not allow me to stop there, as that was merely a reflection of my own desires for safety and security.

If that will be the case, there will be no technology right now and all things around us here; no basis or standards. No right or wrong, no moral, and likewise it is like no God exist.

Oh, that's complete nonsense. We are dealing with the human mind and the human heart, not the laws of physics! You cannot compare the enormous complexity of the former with dumb rocks hurtling through space. Science can predict where Pluto will be in 1000 years, but it cannot predict where your dog will be in 3 seconds from now! This is not an analogy at all.

Ok. You said that your basis is "the fruits of the Spirit" as the evidence. I asked you if by their fruit should be the basis, how about other's faith's/beliefs that had peace, love, kindness, faithfulness etc.. Well, it boils down to the standard--the Scripture. If the Scripture is not my basis, I may do believe what your basis are by just looking different faiths; you may get the goodness from the other's faith, faithfulness from the other's faith etc.. It does not lean on one direction. If we say that we believed in Nicene and Apostles Creeds, why should we seek from the faith of others? It is like make out of a joke with your faith by not having sincerity in one's faith. If somebody says he is a Muslim, then he should be truly a Muslim and so on.

What in the hell is that as an answer??? Seriously, just answer the question. If the the HIndu, the Buddhist, and the Muslim individuals are producing the fruits of the Spirit, then how do you reconcile that with what Jesus said that, "An evil tree cannot bear good fruit". How do you reconcile them? I will not let you off the hook here.

 

[Yoshua]

So, to you, life is nothing but some detached, academic exercise?

Ok then. It is like you already accepted that the right definition of "raphah" is wrong because this is your way to exegete the text. I cannot even remember that we studied to do your own way of interpreting Scriptures in my subject of Hermeneutics.

Why are you afraid of the term?? Communion consists of several mystic elements. First, Jesus said that the bread and wine were his body and blood. Second, from the earliest days of the church, the belief was that there was only one Eucharist -- in all times and in all places, and that Christians of the present day are joined with Jesus and the disciples in the upper room, mystically eating the same bread that the disciples ate. That's mysticism. Unless you water it down into something that neither the biblical writers nor early church envisioned it to be.

No. it is because I don't want to be a hypocrite. I don't adhere to contemplative teachings and practices so I need to be consistent, and not like a reed that will be easily destroyed by the wind. There are a lot of practices and terms that seemed similar with Contemplative (I know that), there are even christian pastors that were involved in the contemplative practices. When we did a communion, we call it a communion, and we never named it as "mysticism."

That's because evangelicals dismiss the early church, even as they say they embrace it.

And there's a reason for every changes that they make, I believe this is the truth.

Thanks

 

[Yoshua]

What happened is I tried to find Answers because I wanted something "concrete" to believe in, like you. That's was only a pitstop, as it were, trying to find those Answers with a capital A in fundamentalist doctrines like those that you and the others you cite latched onto. The Spirit, my Heart, and my Soul, would not allow me to stop there, as that was merely a reflection of my own desires for safety and security.

Ok. That is a very short message. So you are a seeker then. May I ask you something? where did you go to church? Do you know some well-known pastors or preachers that holds the same belief as you do?

Experiences are experiences. How we understand them is always a matter of interpretation. No interpretation is infallible. They are in fact all relative. Do you understand that?

Oh, that's complete nonsense. We are dealing with the human mind and the human heart, not the laws of physics! You cannot compare the enormous complexity of the former with dumb rocks hurtling through space. Science can predict where Pluto will be in 1000 years, but it cannot predict where your dog will be in 3 seconds from now! This is not an analogy at all.

When you say it is relative, do you mean that anything that happened (experiences) are related into something without any basis or point of reference?

What in the hell is that as an answer??? Seriously, just answer the question. If the the HIndu, the Buddhist, and the Muslim individuals are producing the fruits of the Spirit, then how do you reconcile that with what Jesus said that, "An evil tree cannot bear good fruit". How do you reconcile them? I will not let you off the hook here.

Ok. That is a good challenge. Allow me to explain it in biblical.

2590 karpós – properly, fruit; (figuratively) everything done in true partnership with Christ, i.e. a believer (a branch) lives in union with Christ (the Vine). By definition, fruit (2590 /karpós) results from two life-streams – the Lord living His life through ours – to yield what is eternal (cf. 1 Jn 4:17).

Jn 15:1,2: "1I am the true vine, and My Father is the vine-dresser. 2Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit (2590 /karpós), He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit, He prunes it so that it may bear more fruit" (NASU). (Strong's biblehub)

The "fruit" here means the "result," this is obviously the outcome of what the Holy Spirit produces. Take note that it is the Holy Spirit, now do we think that Hindus, Buddhist and Muslim have that Holy Spirit? I don't think so because they are not Christians, but they can have gentleness, faithfulness, peace.... on what extent? The fruit that we are discussing is not the same source that comes from the Holy Spirit. What I mean here that Holy Spirit does not dwell nor filled them because they are not a follower of Christ. Therefore, they may exerted their physical (not by the Holy Spirit) effort to work out their faithfulness, joy, peace, kindness, goodness, self-control, patience, love and gentleness.

Now to reconcile and give you understanding about the two "the fruit of the Spirit & An evil tree cannot bear good fruit," we should bear in mind that these statement of Paul & Jesus is for the follower and the other is the identification of good and evil.
Luke 6:44-45
44. A tree is identified by the kind of fruit it produces. Figs never grow on thorns, or grapes on bramble bushes.
45. A good man produces good deeds from a good heart. And an evil man produces evil deeds from his hidden wickedness. Whatever is in the heart overflows into speech.

Now, when we applied it with Hindus, Muslims and Buddhist, we may vividly see their own effort of good works (not a source from the Holy Spirit). So in application with the word of Jesus "An evil tree cannot bear good fruit" (applied mainly to Pharisees) may credited as their salvation by their own beliefs or faiths, and not by Christianity's salvation--eternal life offered. Their works may serve as their testimony of their faith to their God or deities that they worshiping. For Christianity, we believed in the Holy Spirit as (automatically) the result of the Holy Spirit's outworking. If you need more clarification on this, let me know.

Thanks

 

[Yoshua]

It's all psychological in nature. The power of suggestion. However, my purpose is not to examine and dissect these modern "deliverance" ministries in this thread, nor do I feel compelled to dissuade you of your chosen approach to religion. My responses in this thread are a defense against your misinformation about those who practice meditation or self-identify as mystics, and your attempts to convince them to abandon what works extremely well for them in their relationship with God, because you don't understand or believe in it, from your point of view as a "demon-slayer", or whatever self-identification you assume. This marks a sharp contrast between our approach to faith and that of your own.

Hi Windwalker,

If that would be psychological in nature, it is like saying we should use our mind to cast out demons. We never do that kind of deceitful ideas and I'm very of that. We applied the same as Paul did in casting demons.

Acts 16:18 This went on day after day until Paul, in great distress, turned and spoke to the demon within her. ``I command you in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her,'' he said. And instantly it left her.

This is the single focus of difference between your approach and ours, and where you simply will be unable to move forward in your thinking to see others points of view. I've touched on it before, but I believe it goes straight over your head as you simply cannot grasp an understanding that is conceptually beyond your current mode of thinking. I'll go into it anyway for the sake of others who read this. This is also the same point of departure for the earlier participants in this thread such as InChrist. All my focus will be on this single point going forward.

You spoke before and again later in this response from you that there needs to be a balance between experience and scripture (or an external authority or standard). I in fact do not disagree with you. But when I point out that you need to have experience to balance out and help inform HOW you read that external authority, you in fact chaff against that. In all your responses, including this one, it is quite clear that "balance" between experience and scripture is a full subjugation of experience to scripture. Not balance. Rather all experience must be judged by scripture as the sole authority. That again, is not "balance" at all. That is in fact a complete imbalance.

Those who take this imbalanced approach, such as the others in this thread who have voiced objection to the practice of meditation elsewhere as well as here, often will cite scriptures supporting their aversion to the inner subjective experience that "The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?" I have encountered this use of this verse to support "trusting the Bible" instead of what their own inner voices say, again, and again, and again, and again. Every time, and this time is no exception to the rule, I hear those who are afraid to trust themselves, and are in effect absolving themselves of any responsibility. "God says this in His Word! It's not me thinking this," and so forth are the types of responses that 'get them off the hook'. This is of course a true problem, and one which unless address will result in not only a psychological imbalance, but a spiritual imbalance as well.

That very verse in Jeremiah they cite is ripped out of context, stopping at the expression of dismay by the poet at the challenge of understanding their own heart and motivation. Those who cite that verse stop there and say "See the Bible says we should not look within, because we can't trust anything that comes out of it, that we must submit to an external authority, which is the Word of God!" But firstly, as I have pointed out unequivocally, that is itself a fallacy as the Bible is only as good as the one reading it! And if they have a 'deceived heart', they will read it through the lense of that heart. If they read it with a heart and mind of fear, they will see fear. And so forth.

But secondly and more to the point, what follows in Jeremiah in the next verse is that, "I the Lord search the heart and examine the mind". It is in meditation practice that you access that searching of the Spirit into the dark recesses of your heart and mind, and that all is brought to Light! That is exactly, precisely what happens. It is not "our efforts" as you falsely state, again and again, but it is through surrendering our searching to the Light of Spirit that we allow that penetrating sight of God to bring to light these things we hide from ourselves. In other words the practice of meditation is us allowing "The Lord [to] search the heart and examine the mind"! This is the exact, 100% opposite of what you think meditation practice is. In other words, you are flatley misinformed and wrong.

So those who fear that they cannot 'trust the heart", actually should practice meditation so they gain exposure to themselves through the Light of God shining into those dark places they fear to look. They fear trusting the heart, but the entire thrust of the NT is to teach one to hear that voice within and trust it. Those who turn solely to external authorities are in fact still hiding from that Light that examines the heart. It is indeed an act of faith to enter into meditation because you must not be afraid, but trust that God is there and will not let you fail as that which is hidden is brought to light for you to see.

Okay, so now that I have established that, here comes that actual balance. And by balance, I mean actual balance, not 98% Bible and 2% experience. I mean a give and take, inform and be informed equal exchange of the heart and the mind, of spirit and reason.

As I pointed out clearly that as someone matures and grows, how they read the Bible will reflect that growth and maturity, just as how someone who is immature their reading of scriptures will reflect that immaturity. This can be seen in any church in any corner of any street, let alone fit what is obvious through any sort of actual research. So what there is in fact a "relationship" between one's own development and how one sees and understands the nature of truth itself. No one can say, "It not me saying this, it's right here in God's word", because what they are reading is tied to their own personality, their own stage of development, their own culture, their own awareness of things, and so forth. It's not "God's word" independent of them, but a reflection of their own relationship to God that is seen. It is not independent of them. It cannot therefore be an external authority that dictates the truth that all must fall in line with. That cannot, and does not in fact exist anywhere, in anything. There is a relationship between "truth and facts".

If the external authority which is the Word of God should not dictate the truth, then who will dictate the truth?

I wrote this in another thread some time back I wish to share here and I'll highlight in bold the parts that someone should not miss in reading the whole of this. It was written in response to those who believe if they can just get back to the facts of history about Jesus that that will inform them about what is true and what is not. This applies as well as getting to the "truth of the Bible", as if that something exists independent of us somehow anyone can actually access:

This is a great error of our age to think the way you get to truth is to get back to what "actually happened." We don't understand the relationship between truth and facticity. This is an especially detrimental view when it comes to religious truths. We cannot understand it until the unitive eye of the heart opens, which provides a clarity of understanding of that relationship. In other words, even if you had a video recording of the historical Jesus, this still does not begin to open the truth of the events except that your own eyes of your heart can hear and see through that, that a certain level of maturity is present to understand that truth. At that point, the "facticities" are not the point, but props. The props don't tell the truth. The heart does.

We see and interpret through the lens of our current set of eyes we see through, and the myth of the given, that some truth lays "out there" for us to discover is a complete fallacy. When it comes to a spiritual understanding, this requires that unitive eye of the heart to see that relationship between truth and fact, a truth unbound to history. A timeless truth, that is seen again and again and again. These truths are timeless truths spoken in a language that the Unitive eye of the heart can see, but the separate ego mind interprets as facts, reduced instead to objective propositions one can just observe and make logical conclusions about and "believe" or disbelieve in. That is not what these truths are, and are therefore not understood as some objective observer.
If you are in true balance, working on the inner person, exposing the soul to the light of God to examine, with God and through God, our own hearts, then as it grows in understanding in that Light, how we read the Bible because illuminated by that inner Light that has been allowed to grow! That moves that relationship between 'truth and facticity' forward, rather than being stuck as something see as existing wholly outside of us.

The balance on a true spiritual path, one which actively includes the inner work, is to not just go on that experience only, but to take that experience of Spirit and move it to mind, and let what it sees in the world, in scripture, in others, feed itself back to the Heart. It moves from Spirit to mind and heart, and from heart and mind to spirit. It's up and down, back and forth. To be seeking experience alone, is to be out of balance. To be "trusting God's word", without inner experience, is to be out of balance. This is the truth of what I believe, and what I practice. Anything else you say about this which does not reflect that is false.

I don’t have anything against the experience as long as it is in line with the scripture. If the Bible said that God is spirit, and I would interpreted it as other than the spirit, I’m obviously changing it with my own method of understanding. I’m more concern on how and what kind of experience a person had. If somebody says he have seen Jesus and told him that by the end of this year, the end will come—the earth will be destroyed, will you readily believe his experience as valid in nature as the external authority?

You just contradicted yourself. If you prioritize your reading of scripture, your experience is not in balance with scripture. It's imbalance if you prioritize one over the other. Your own words speak the truth of your own imbalance, and the imbalance you think others need to follow.

How can you operate a new machine (world view, experience, supernatural) without a manual, a guide or reference (Scripture)? It has nothing to do with experience. In case you know how to operate that machine, still, you will take your time to study the operation of the machine. This is the same thing with the Scripture, you will study on how to apply the Scripture in your spiritual walk. Without the Scripture, you may remain ignorant with the Word--lack of understanding on how to operate your life in the (right) path of righteousness.

The Standard is Spirit. You are conformed to the image of Christ, not the image of someone's interpretation of the Bible, which is what all perspectives of the Bible are - interpretations. The Bible does not interpret itself. Christ is not the Bible.

Ohh. My standard is the Word of God; if your standard is the Spirit to be conform to the image of Christ. How come that you can say—that I'm conforming to the image of someone’s interpretation? Just one example with the word “Be still” in original text meaning “rapah,” it’s unbelievable that Sojourner discarded the true meaning of the text inspite of he claimed to attained his Masteral in biblical studies, and very familiar in exegete the text. Then how he exegete the text? I requested him to produce an authority that proves the word “rapah” is meditation and quieting the mind. I haven’t got any answer from him.

The “Be still” (Hebrew, rapah) is used 46 times in the Old Testament with meanings everywhere from describing laziness to ordering relaxation. Some of the versions translated “Be still”, as “Cease striving ” (NASB), “Be quiet” (NCV), “Desist” (Young’s), or “Calm down” (CEV). There is no biblical usage or context does the Hebrew term directing God’s people to meditate and practice contemplative. God is telling on this passage to rest and to trust in Him.

The Scripture tell us not to be conform to the pattern of this world, but by renewing of one’s mind. How can we renew our mind—if our mind is prohibited to absorb the truth—even the truth is already laid down to our very eyes?

Rom. 12:2. And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect.

I’m reminded again by your phrase “Christ is not the Bible.” This is the same phrase that he uttered to me. This the friend whom I mentioned to you before; he believed and claimed that Jesus is talking with him, and always beside him. He is driven by signs and wonders to become an emerging church believer. He is also a non- scripture believer. I see the same spirit hovering around.

And here we are back at the crux of the problem. Your words reflect that. "Concrete". There it is right there, go no further! Concrete. You want Spirit to be concrete. Spirit is called spirit because it is like 'breath', like 'wind', not like a slab of concrete.

This of course brings to mind the verse in the NT which speaks, "And you show that you are a letter from Christ delivered by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts". Notice the sharp contrast here between the Spirit of the living God, and "concrete standards", those chiseled into hard stone? I think you are missing the entire thrust of what the spiritual life actually means. This is very clear contrast between external standards one conforms to, namely the law, as in legalistic standards, and that of internal, interior living, dynamic standards of Spirit itself. It's very clear to me. I can give you many more examples of how they approached this, in contrast with the legalistic approach of "concrete standards", those chiseled in stone, or those written in ink on the pages of the Bible as this "concrete standard".

Let me briefly explain something to you. I view the Bible as a guide, not a "concrete standard". A guide is quite different than a law. The Spirit of Truth will guide you," says Jesus. Not lay down the law you have to "obey" in order to know righteousness. Everything Jesus taught was about internal realization, through which the mind would be able to discern truth from untruth. It is not by following "concrete standards", which as I have pointed out are only as good as the one interpreting them. The entire thrust of the NT is about a spiritual awakening, being guided by the Holy Spirit into all truth. The standard is Spirit, not the Bible. And that standard of Spirit, is "living", not written in ink or chiseled into a "concrete standard of truth".

This path is the harder path to follow. Indeed. You have to let go of what you cling to for your sense of security, your "trust in the Bible", being one of them. And the reason for that is, because it is a deception to yourself that you say that what you read, how you understand with your human mind, reflects the truth of Spirit itself, which can only be know by Spirit itself. The true worshippers, says Jesus, worship in Spirit and in truth. The two go hand in hand. Without the illumination of Spirit, the Bible is dead. It is a lifeless slab of concrete that people project their own selves upon, and call it "God's word".

You also make me smile on your message because that is the exact words of what I’m telling you about believing of a certain Jesus talking to him. Both of you pulling me away to the Word of God with this message “You have to let go of what you cling to for your sense of security, your "trust in the Bible", being one of them.” What illumination will I got if I remove the Word of God? it is obviously my enemy—the devil. The illumination of Sprit is not the Spirit of God, it is the God of New Age. He is truly the illumined one, the brightest angel who turned back against God.

1 Peter 5:8. Be of sober spirit, be on the alert. Your adversary, the devil, prowls about like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.

Eph. 6:10-17
The Armor of God
10. Finally, be strong in the Lord, and in the strength of His might.
11. Put on the full armor of God, that you may be able to stand firm against the schemes of the devil.
12. For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places.
13. Therefore, take up the full armor of God, that you may be able to resist in the evil day, and having done everything, to stand firm.
14. Stand firm therefore, having girded your loins with truth, and having put on the breastplate of righteousness,
15. and having shod your feet with the preparation of the gospel of peace;
16. in addition to all, taking up the shield of faith with which you will be able to extinguish all the flaming missiles of the evil one.
17. And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.

Worshiping God in Spirit is because God is spirit; the Holy Spirit is God, and that Spirit of God is my guide and my Comforter—the promised Holy Spirit. Finding, discovering and adding something to His spirit to become a belief is a blatant impact for the entry of a roaring lion.

I explained all of this above, but as far as me citing Scripture to support my message, I firstly in fact do, but I believe hearing the words of experience carries more weight than someone just merely quoting scripture. Any hack can quote the Bible, but not anyone can speak from experience. There was a difference between Jesus' words and that of the Pharisees quoting scripture. He spoke from a living knowledge of Spirit. From this then, Scripture begins to have true meaning, rather than lifeless words parroted by the religious. Ditto.

Jesus did not teach us to learn and focus by experience? After the 12 disciples were chosen, they were sent out to preach, teach, to do healings and cast out demons. They learned Jesus’ teachings by His parables, narratives and examples. Jesus never hindered the disciples to hear His words. Jesus didn’t say “Go and make a lot of spiritual experience rather than hearing my words.

Why? Does your experience gives you assurance of salvation?

Thanks

 

[sassysam29]

The difference was not in the deliverance of the words and or scripture. The pharisees TRUSTED in their OWN righteousness which we know is as filthy rags. Experience never trumps God's word because God's word is powerful when imparted by the Spirit. Do I agree that many parrot scripture without an indwelling Holy Spirit? Yes, I do, but what differenciates the pharisees from someone in Christ is trusting in Christ alone for salvation. People Hack God's word daily for their own greedy gain, not out of genuine love and faith.

 

[sassysam29]

They Hack God's word and His people I might add

 

[Windwalker]

Do I agree that many parrot scripture without an indwelling Holy Spirit? Yes, I do, but what differenciates the pharisees from someone in Christ is trusting in Christ alone for salvation.

Since when is trusting in Christ the same thing as trusting in your understanding of the Bible? Trusting in Christ is a matter of the Heart, not what you exegete in reading ink on paper.

People Hack God's word daily for their own greedy gain, not out of genuine love and faith.

And they do so to hide from God as well.

 

[sassysam29]

Since when is trusting in Christ the same thing as trusting in your understanding of the Bible? Trusting in Christ is a matter of the Heart, not what you exegete in reading ink on paper.


And they do so to hide from God as well.

I would be quite dillusional if I believed I could "hide from God". I simply know He is with me always. I am weak while He is strong. He speaks to me through His word and it's pretty much that simple. My life is His, there is no wisdom, experience, or doctrine I need to add to or take away from what He has graciously given. My trust is in Christ alone, my iterpretation of God's word isn't anyone's final authority, it is mine alone. If I place that requirement upon others I become like the pharisees. It's a choice to believe it and submit to it. I have peace in not knowing all the answers because God is greater than my human understanding. I am not here to "enforce" my choice....I am here to say that He has supernaturally changed my life and that the scriptures played a very huge part in that!!! Simple!

 

[sojourner]

nothing compares to the power of God and His word in my life

...Unless it's the Heart of God in your life...

 

[Windwalker]

Ok. That is a very short message. So you are a seeker then. May I ask you something? where did you go to church? Do you know some well-known pastors or preachers that holds the same belief as you do?

Are you trying to put a label on me so you can categorize me and put me into a little box of your understanding? I am a seeker in the general sense of what anyone who loves God should be. But if "a seeker" is a category of type of person, then good luck trying to fit me into anything you can understand. You don't even follow what I'm stating clearly in these posts, let alone hope to understand how I think at any of the deeper levels.

When you say it is relative, do you mean that anything that happened (experiences) are related into something without any basis or point of reference?

No. You don't understand relativism at all, do you? Of course there are points of reference and a basis for points of view, but those references are contextual, and those contexts will vary and so will the understandings based upon them as points of reference. You cannot point to something and say "This is Absolute", because the context you are seeing it from is relative, and not absolute. For instance, you are unable to see the relative nature of reality, and I am. Why? Our points of references are different.

To you, the world is black and white, true/false, good/evil, God/Satan, etc. To me, it is shades and gradients of relative truths, multiple faces of our own understandings projected onto reality. My context is quite different than yours, and it in fact does have a basis and point of reference. And through this, when I read the Bible, my understanding ends up reflecting those perspectives, those points of view, those vantage points, as it were. I certainly understand how you read and interpret the Bible, but my context shows me that any of our points of view are not absolute, whereas you lack that context and imagine they are. Google can be your friend here in trying to learn about these things,

Ok. That is a good challenge. Allow me to explain it in biblical.

I would prefer if people could explain their own beliefs in their own words rather than quoting scriptures. Remember, you and I read the same words and you hear something that makes sense to the context you are reading it from, but my context is larger than yours so I see stuff you do not. I understand them quite differently than your context allows you to see. But I'll summarize what I hear you saying from your explaination below:

Take note that it is the Holy Spirit, now do we think that Hindus, Buddhist and Muslim have that Holy Spirit? I don't think so because they are not Christians, but they can have gentleness, faithfulness, peace.... on what extent? The fruit that we are discussing is not the same source that comes from the Holy Spirit.

So it's "false" or "pseudo" fruit then? It's the fruits of the ego that simply look like the fruits of the Spirit, but aren't because they aren't Christians? The way we can tell if it's "real" fruit from the Holy Spirit is by whether or not they self-identify as Christians and mouth the Apostles creed? Does this summarize your view accurately?

What I mean here that Holy Spirit does not dwell nor filled them because they are not a follower of Christ. Therefore, they may exerted their physical (not by the Holy Spirit) effort to work out their faithfulness, joy, peace, kindness, goodness, self-control, patience, love and gentleness.

I see, that does summarize your view accurately. It's ego-fruit, not Spirit fruit because they don't self-identify as Christian. That's an interesting interpretation you have. I'll offer another possibility. God is not owned by the Christian religion. God transcends all religions. And if someone in another religion has a true, genuine heart for God, they in fact are capable of having a relationship with God without converting to what goes around calling itself the "true religion". The fruit they produce is in fact from the Holy Spirit, even if that is understood by a different name in their relative contexts.

So, rather than having to force-fit what you observe into your box of theologies, insulting the Spirit of God in them, it seems easier to extend the range of what God can do beyond the borders of Israel, into all the world, where there is "neither Jew nor Greek," nor Christian nor Hindu, but "all are one in Christ". To "follow Christ", does not mean to join a church and believe a defined set of beliefs. It is to follow the Living Spirit, which is Christ. I think my way of understanding fits better with what the Bible teaches, and with what we observe in reality that doesn't necessitate us denying Spirit when it exists and lives outside what our theologies can factor into themselves.

Since an evil tree cannot produce good fruit, and they are in fact producing good fruit, fruit of the Spirit as defined by scripture, then they are not evil trees. "By their fruit you shall know them". I know atheists who are better Christians than most Christians. I sound just like Jesus here, "Truly I tell you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are entering the kingdom of God ahead of you."

 

[sojourner]

Ok then. It is like you already accepted that the right definition of "raphah" is wrong because this is your way to exegete the text. I cannot even remember that we studied to do your own way of interpreting Scriptures in my subject of Hermeneutics.

I didn't say the definition was wrong. It's your interpretation that's lacking. That has nothing to do with exegesis, and everything to do with hermeneutics. If you've studied hermeneutics, you should know this.

When we did a communion, we call it a communion, and we never named it as "mysticism."

So... what would you call "one meal, spread out over time and space?" What would you call "bread being Jesus' body?"

And there's a reason for every changes that they make

Not every reason is a good one, or well-founded.

 

[Windwalker]

I would be quite dillusional if I believed I could "hide from God".

Oh, we can surprise ourselves how delusional we really are in this regards! Trust me, I'm being very candid here that even a practice of meditation can be an avoidance of God. Certainly religion can be one, without doubt. It's a more sneaky avoidance, because it looks like we are coming to God by doing these 'religious things', but in reality, it can be the greater self-deception because we can point to it in order to lie to ourselves. Just indulging yourself wantonly in the things of the flesh is obvious. Being religious and going through all the right motions is insidious. It's a deeper deception to our own selves.

The true tell of whether or not we are hiding ourselves from God, avoiding God, is how open we truly are. And I say this with no small confidence, there is no better, more effective way to see these avoidances in ourselves than to sit in naked silence before God, not hiding behind our thoughts, not hiding behind our self-conceptions, not hiding behind our religious and theological beliefs, but laying it all before the throne of God, as in death, and standing empty handing before the LIght of the Throne. Then, you will see those things you have been hiding when you allow God to show them to you. You may say you are not hiding, but I'll say you are deceiving yourself. We all do it. No exceptions. We have to face that "death moment", when all the things of this world fall away and we stand before the Infinite. That, is when we pass from death into Life.

What meditation practice actually does is it engages in the process of the death experience. The end of your ego. The dissolution of all we hold to in this world as we wholly surrender ourselves as in death to God. This is why many avoid such a "face to face" encounter. The fear of letting go. It's natural. We all do it.

 

[sojourner]

Do you know some well-known pastors or preachers that holds the same belief as you do?

Huh. More than I can count.

2590 karpós – properly, fruit; (figuratively) everything done in true partnership with Christ, i.e. a believer (a branch) lives in union with Christ (the Vine). By definition, fruit (2590 /karpós) results from two life-streams – the Lord living His life through ours – to yield what is eternal (cf. 1 Jn 4:17).

Jn 15:1,2: "1I am the true vine, and My Father is the vine-dresser. 2Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit (2590 /karpós), He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit, He prunes it so that it may bear more fruit" (NASU). (Strong's biblehub)

The "fruit" here means the "result," this is obviously the outcome of what the Holy Spirit produces. Take note that it is the Holy Spirit, now do we think that Hindus, Buddhist and Muslim have that Holy Spirit? I don't think so because they are not Christians, but they can have gentleness, faithfulness, peace.... on what extent? The fruit that we are discussing is not the same source that comes from the Holy Spirit. What I mean here that Holy Spirit does not dwell nor filled them because they are not a follower of Christ. Therefore, they may exerted their physical (not by the Holy Spirit) effort to work out their faithfulness, joy, peace, kindness, goodness, self-control, patience, love and gentleness.

Now to reconcile and give you understanding about the two "the fruit of the Spirit & An evil tree cannot bear good fruit," we should bear in mind that these statement of Paul & Jesus is for the follower and the other is the identification of good and evil.
Luke 6:44-45
44. A tree is identified by the kind of fruit it produces. Figs never grow on thorns, or grapes on bramble bushes.
45. A good man produces good deeds from a good heart. And an evil man produces evil deeds from his hidden wickedness. Whatever is in the heart overflows into speech.

Now, when we applied it with Hindus, Muslims and Buddhist, we may vividly see their own effort of good works (not a source from the Holy Spirit). So in application with the word of Jesus "An evil tree cannot bear good fruit" (applied mainly to Pharisees) may credited as their salvation by their own beliefs or faiths, and not by Christianity's salvation--eternal life offered. Their works may serve as their testimony of their faith to their God or deities that they worshiping. For Christianity, we believed in the Holy Spirit as (automatically) the result of the Holy Spirit's outworking. If you need more clarification on this, let me know.

And you took a hermeneutics class? Judging by this post, it was more of a "lame excuse" class. Spiritual fruit is spiritual fruit. An apple is still an apple, whether it's grown in Missouri or Washington. Similarly, Spirit is Spirit, no matter how it's identified.

If the external authority which is the Word of God should not dictate the truth, then who will dictate the truth?

God's authority isn't external -- it's internal.

I don’t have anything against the experience as long as it is in line with the scripture.

How do you know it's "in line with scripture" in any objective way, though? We've already shown that there is no objective interpretation.

I’m more concern on how and what kind of experience a person had. If somebody says he have seen Jesus and told him that by the end of this year, the end will come—the earth will be destroyed, will you readily believe his experience as valid in nature as the external authority?

Now this makes sense -- but probably not in the way you think. Yes, "kind" of experience is what concerns us here. But the kind of experience you cite is an experience highly colored by egotistical thinking. contemplation seeks to take the ego out of the equation.

How can you operate a new machine (world view, experience, supernatural) without a manual, a guide or reference (Scripture)? It has nothing to do with experience.

You can't fly a fighter jet by merely reading the owner's manual.

How come that you can say—that I'm conforming to the image of someone’s interpretation?

Because of what you just said:

My standard is the Word of God

Your standard. Yours. You're conforming to your own, subjective interpretation.

“Be still” in original text meaning “rapah,” it’s unbelievable that Sojourner discarded the true meaning of the text inspite of he claimed to attained his Masteral in biblical studies, and very familiar in exegete the text. Then how he exegete the text? I requested him to produce an authority that proves the word “rapah” is meditation and quieting the mind. I haven’t got any answer from him.

Don't put words in my mouth. I didn't say that the word meant "meditation." I said that "being still" consists of quieting the mind and deep, regular breathing.

The Scripture tell us not to be conform to the pattern of this world, but by renewing of one’s mind. How can we renew our mind—if our mind is prohibited to absorb the truth—even the truth is already laid down to our very eyes?

How does one renew the mind? We might ask, "How does one renew the body?" Do you, after a hard day's work, do more work? No! You sleep. You rest. You quiet your body. Don't you think the mind works the same way? After thinking, and stewing, and stressing, and worrying all day, how do you renew the mind? By resting it.

What illumination will I got if I remove the Word of God?

The Word resides within you -- not on the pages of a book. "God's word will I hide in my heart..." Can you implant a bible in your peritoneal cavity???

The illumination of Sprit is not the Spirit of God, it is the God of New Age. He is truly the illumined one, the brightest angel who turned back against God.

So... the whole biblical, "I am the light of the world" thing is ... deceptive?
The whole biblical, "Let your light shine for all to see" thing is ... really Satan??

1 Peter 5:8. Be of sober spirit, be on the alert. Your adversary, the devil, prowls about like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.

Eph. 6:10-17
The Armor of God
10. Finally, be strong in the Lord, and in the strength of His might.
11. Put on the full armor of God, that you may be able to stand firm against the schemes of the devil.
12. For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places.
13. Therefore, take up the full armor of God, that you may be able to resist in the evil day, and having done everything, to stand firm.
14. Stand firm therefore, having girded your loins with truth, and having put on the breastplate of righteousness,
15. and having shod your feet with the preparation of the gospel of peace;
16. in addition to all, taking up the shield of faith with which you will be able to extinguish all the flaming missiles of the evil one.
17. And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.

God is love. Perfect love casts out fear. You seem to be clinging to the fear.

Worshiping God in Spirit is because God is spirit; the Holy Spirit is God, and that Spirit of God is my guide and my Comforter—the promised Holy Spirit.

And Spirit cannot be fed wholly through cognition of words on a page.

Does your experience gives you assurance of salvation?

Yes. It does. Much as experiencing my wife stroke my face assure me of her love.

 

[sojourner]

He speaks to me through His word and it's pretty much that simple. My life is His, there is no wisdom, experience, or doctrine I need to add to or take away from what He has graciously given.

And is this, then, an academic knowledge, or do you feel it? If you feel it, it's a heart thing. Hearts aren't fed through reading. They're fed through experiencing.

My trust is in Christ alone, my iterpretation of God's word isn't anyone's final authority, it is mine alone.

So... it's your authority, and not not God's authority? How egocentric of you!

It's a choice to believe it and submit to it.

It's your choice to dive into the river. But is it your choice where the strong current carries you? Sounds awfully like you're saying that you control the current. You control the relationship you have with God. Must be nice to have all that power over God!

 

[lovemuffin]

The "fruit" here means the "result," this is obviously the outcome of what the Holy Spirit produces. Take note that it is the Holy Spirit, now do we think that Hindus, Buddhist and Muslim have that Holy Spirit? I don't think so because they are not Christians, but they can have gentleness, faithfulness, peace.... on what extent? The fruit that we are discussing is not the same source that comes from the Holy Spirit. What I mean here that Holy Spirit does not dwell nor filled them because they are not a follower of Christ. Therefore, they may exerted their physical (not by the Holy Spirit) effort to work out their faithfulness, joy, peace, kindness, goodness, self-control, patience, love and gentleness.

The reasoning of your response seems to contradict that of the gospel:

"And behold, a lawyer stood up to put him to the test, saying, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” He said to him, “What is written in the Law? How do you read it?” And he answered, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself.” And he said to him, “You have answered correctly; do this, and you will live.”

But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?” Jesus replied, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him and departed, leaving him half dead. Now by chance a priest was going down that road, and when he saw him he passed by on the other side. So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was, and when he saw him, he had compassion. He went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he set him on his own animal and brought him to an inn and took care of him. And the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, ‘Take care of him, and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.’ Which of these three, do you think, proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?” He said, “The one who showed him mercy.” And Jesus said to him, “You go, and do likewise.” (Luke 10:25-37)
​

It would seem to me that the motivation in your response is similar to that expressed by the lawyer. Jesus' answer presupposes that the question is motivated by a desire to justify thinking of some groups as non-neighbors regardless of the actual results of their actions, just as you desire to reject the legitimacy of a non-Christian claims to "good fruit" regardless of their actions. But Jesus' rejects that kind of distinction. The neighbor is one who shows mercy without regard for the kind of qualifications you are making. There is a similar rejection of these kinds of arguments in Jesus' insistence that we love our enemies, do good to all, judge not, that not all who say "Lord, Lord" would be saved but those who do the will of the Father, and etc. Or in Paul's rejection of this kind of legal classification:

"For all who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law. For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified. For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus." (Romans 2:12-16)
​

​

 

[Windwalker]

Or in Paul's rejection of this kind of legal classification:

"For all who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law. For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified. For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus." (Romans 2:12-16)​

That's a great reference! Yes, here you have those who are not the religious "in-group" being spoken of as fulfilling the law before those what claim the law and yet do not do it, because their hearts are full of religious conceit. "It can't be 'real fruit' because they are not Christians by name!". And I too had been thinking about the story of the Good Samaritan as an example, so I'm quite glad you pointed this out. Seriously this whole claim about being "supported by scripture" is exactly what Jesus showed can be done quite well by the highly religious, but that inside, they are full of rot despite the outside, the words they say being all white and clean, "supported by scripture". It is better to walk in the ways of the "impure" with a clean heart and mind, then in the ways of the "scripturally justified" while inside they judge others as 'false".

The whole situation is a clear as day to me. It the same thing then, as now. Instead of it being the religious Jews of Jesus' day straining at gnat while swallowing camels, it's the religious of today under the name of Christianity who do it. Change the religion all you want, what matters is who fulfills the law from the inside out, and who fails the whole by ignoring the inside? "Truly I tell you, Hindus and Buddhists, Pagans, and Atheists, shall enter into the kingdom of God before you!," to update the meaning of what Jesus said to today's contexts.

 

[sojourner]

That's a great reference! Yes, here you have those who are not the religious "in-group" being spoken of as fulfilling the law before those what claim the law and yet do not do it, because their hearts are full of religious conceit. "It can't be 'real fruit' because they are not Christians by name!". And I too had been thinking about the story of the Good Samaritan as an example, so I'm quite glad you pointed this out. Seriously this whole claim about being "supported by scripture" is exactly what Jesus showed can be done quite well by the highly religious, but that inside, they are full of rot despite the outside, the words they say being all white and clean, "supported by scripture". It is better to walk in the ways of the "impure" with a clean heart and mind, then in the ways of the "scripturally justified" while inside they judge others as 'false".

The whole situation is a clear as day to me. It the same thing then, as now. Instead of it being the religious Jews of Jesus' day straining at gnat while swallowing camels, it's the religious of today under the name of Christianity who do it. Change the religion all you want, what matters is who fulfills the law from the inside out, and who fails the whole by ignoring the inside? "Truly I tell you, Hindus and Buddhists, Pagans, and Atheists, shall enter into the kingdom of God before you!," to update the meaning of what Jesus said to today's contexts.

Many are Christian, not because it's "The Way," but because it works for them.

Others follow the path in a different way.

 

[Windwalker]

If that would be psychological in nature, it is like saying we should use our mind to cast out demons. We never do that kind of deceitful ideas and I'm very of that.

You apparently have no understanding of psychology as well. Here is yet another context I speak from you have no awareness of. This too is part of
Modernity where it understands and talks about these things in more scientific and rational contexts, as contrasted with mythological language. This does not suggest deceit on your part. I does however offer insights into how these things work with the mind. You can put the power of an idea into someone's head, creating these sorts of mass possessions you see in these modern "deliverance" churches, and people responding to them. There's lots of studies that look at these things, that I'm not going to go into here as this discussion is not about that.

In reality however, when someone is "delivered", it is in fact their own subconscious mind allowing them to let go of these things which torment them. They are interacting with the symbol of the "exorcist", and allowing themselves through the power of the symbol to release this. From a logical and rational point of view, that these are actual supernatural "possessions", does not hold up. Again, I don't want to get into all that here.

We applied the same as Paul did in casting demons.

Yes, Paul was part of a world that understood things in those frameworks, unlike us today who live in a modern, scientific and rational context. At least I do. I see nothing wrong with 'updating' Paul's understanding in a modern context, rather than us lobotomizing our intellect and throwing away knowledge in favor of ancient systems of thought regarding biology and psychology, where spirits and demons cause illness and symptoms of possession, instead of looking and germs and viruses and mental illness by psychological distresses as causes. Thinking in pre-rational terms is not a prerequisite to be a Christian. Unless you believe we should be anti-science and anti-reason in order to have faith? That's a discussion in itself!

If the external authority which is the Word of God should not dictate the truth, then who will dictate the truth?

No one! Why do you need someone to dictate truth? Do you think the Christ is a dictator? I don't. I believe the Christ encourage us to find the truth in ourselves. This is the complete opposite of how you see Christ.

Again, we live in different contexts, and you read the Bible as the words of a Dictator. I read it entirely different than that, as my context tells me otherwise about God.

I don’t have anything against the experience as long as it is in line with the scripture.

And once again, the question you never seem to be able to answer...... whose interpretation of scripture? The Bible does not interpret itself. In line with your reading of scripture? Well, clearly not! But then I don't see God as a Dictator. In line with my reading of scripture? Certainly!

If the Bible said that God is spirit, and I would interpreted it as other than the spirit, I’m obviously changing it with my own method of understanding.

Why yes you are. You have been doing that all along! Making up this stuff about it being "ego-fruits" and whatnot. That's purely you changing it with your own method of understanding. Exactly 100% what I have been saying all along.

I’m more concern on how and what kind of experience a person had. If somebody says he have seen Jesus and told him that by the end of this year, the end will come—the earth will be destroyed, will you readily believe his experience as valid in nature as the external authority?

No, I will not accept his claims. But not because I read and external authority, or rather those who claim to have that understanding, but my own internal witness will tell me what's off or not. I'm sorry this approach to living life is not as cut and dried, black and white, true or false as you may wish it were, but that thinking is pure myth. We gauge the veracity of claims on a whole list of criteria, such as what is the mental condition of this person, what is my gut telling me about them, how does this fit into other such claims, how does it match up with the evidence, and so forth. Sure, I can make an assessment, but it's not by some "external authority".

How can you operate a new machine (world view, experience, supernatural) without a manual, a guide or reference (Scripture)? It has nothing to do with experience. In case you know how to operate that machine, still, you will take your time to study the operation of the machine. This is the same thing with the Scripture, you will study on how to apply the Scripture in your spiritual walk. Without the Scripture, you may remain ignorant with the Word--lack of understanding on how to operate your life in the (right) path of righteousness.

I've already covered all this in the difference between a car manual versus a driving manual. You have to have actual experience on the road to learn how to drive. Reading about it does not make you a driver! Your analogy is fatally flawed.

Ohh. My standard is the Word of God; if your standard is the Spirit to be conform to the image of Christ. How come that you can say—that I'm conforming to the image of someone’s interpretation?

Because you are claiming the Word of God is the Bible. And you have to of necessity interpret that.

The Scripture tell us not to be conform to the pattern of this world, but by renewing of one’s mind. How can we renew our mind—if our mind is prohibited to absorb the truth—even the truth is already laid down to our very eyes?

Oh boy. You are actually making my argument against what you are doing. How can we renew our minds indeed if we block our receptivity by stuffing all our thoughts and ideas in the way of God communicating with us? You will never see what is right before your eyes unless you shut up and listen, be still and see, etc. Busy busy busy, rolling and thinking about these things, trying to figure them out, read, and think, study and think, think and think and think and think, and never see. All you see are your thoughts.

You may wish to give God a chance to talk in there and get a word in there edgewise.

Rom. 12:2. And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect.

Amen, and amen.

I’m reminded again by your phrase “Christ is not the Bible.” This is the same phrase that he uttered to me. This the friend whom I mentioned to you before; he believed and claimed that Jesus is talking with him, and always beside him. He is driven by signs and wonders to become an emerging church believer. He is also a non- scripture believer. I see the same spirit hovering around.

Oh, you see nothing but your own mind. Do you believe Christ is the Bible? I am reminded of The Man who Mistook His Wife for a Hat. I see the same dysfunction looming around. The Man Who Mistook the Christ for a Book.

You also make me smile on your message because that is the exact words of what I’m telling you about believing of a certain Jesus talking to him.

Well sometimes you say the exact word people who know what they are talking about say, but I don't make the mistake of taking that to mean you know what you are saying. Context tells the difference. I'm quite sure I do not mean the same things he does, just as you don't mean the same things others who are informed to when you use the right words.

Both of you pulling me away to the Word of God with this message “You have to let go of what you cling to for your sense of security, your "trust in the Bible", being one of them.” What illumination will I got if I remove the Word of God?

You are not removing the Word of God, you are removing your preconceptions about God. The Word of God is not the Bible. The Word of God is the Christ. Oh, Man who mistook the Christ for a book.

it is obviously my enemy—the devil.

Yes, you will meet your true enemy, and that enemy is yourself.

The illumination of Sprit is not the Spirit of God, it is the God of New Age.

Wow, really? I hear you right along side those in Jesus' day accusing him of casting out the devil by the prince of the devils. You are very careless and foolish in your accusations.

When I hear people pull out the "New Age" blanket statement, I hear their own ignorance on full parade.

He is truly the illumined one, the brightest angel who turned back against God.

You have no idea how offensive this is. Try this rather, that this attack of yours looks more like those who crucified the Christ. That fits much better that saying the Illumination of Spirit I am speaking of is Satan.

"There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens [illuminates] every man. He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him." They crucified him instead. And you call that Spirit of Illumination the devil. You and your Pharisees friends.

Why? Does your experience gives you assurance of salvation?

Does my experience give me assurance? Absolutely. Doesn't yours?

 

[sassysam29]

I think it's both. If my husband writes me a letter I intellectually comprehend it and my heart feels through my comprehension of those words. If it were a man I didn't know, my heart would not react, but I would read it academic/intellectually.

 

[sassysam29]

You are twisting my words but what I'm saying is true although you are twisting it [emoji14]