On Jan 10, 2010, Josh wrote:
Thank you, prayer is one of the most important aspects of my spirituality. I have noticed that prayer is unimportant to many Christians, but there are a great many who hold it very close. I tried to keep that message short, so I did not go into it in detail, hopefully this will help.
The first time I was hospitalized, I was having an incredible experience with God as well as having a psychological break down, or perhaps experiencing part of God through a psychological break. It was as if I was experiencing everything for the first time, music had a new vividness and meaning. I was in a new state of consciousness that I had never been in before. I felt like I was communicating with God, but in many ways I was not.
Showing posts with label apologetic. Show all posts
Showing posts with label apologetic. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Friday, December 18, 2009
christianity-New Age dialogue #5
On Dec 1, 2009, at 9:53 PM, Joshua Williams wrote:
I thought of some things. I remember seeing you mention that you were trying to see if there were some "self-help" value in some of the new age stuff. While my lines may be blurry in my beliefs between Christianity and my adapted beliefs, I am still fairly clear on the line from the Christian perspective. I may be able to help you use some of the findings in a Christian way.
The most powerful form of prayer is gratitude from my perspective. This is not to say that one should nor could trick God into giving them what they want by being grateful (Dude is way too smart for that :)
I thought of some things. I remember seeing you mention that you were trying to see if there were some "self-help" value in some of the new age stuff. While my lines may be blurry in my beliefs between Christianity and my adapted beliefs, I am still fairly clear on the line from the Christian perspective. I may be able to help you use some of the findings in a Christian way.
The most powerful form of prayer is gratitude from my perspective. This is not to say that one should nor could trick God into giving them what they want by being grateful (Dude is way too smart for that :)
Monday, December 14, 2009
Christianity-New Age dialogue #4
On Nov 30, 2009, Josh wrote:
Scott,
My relationship with God has been first in my spirituality since I was young. I was devout in prayer, and still am today. I will say that today I am more thankful to God than I was in the past.
I was Christian when I was young, and just felt the presence of God and that was enough for me. In high school I remember hating Christians because I had seen many ugly things that disgraced the God I knew. I set out to know the one true God. I felt that God was telling me, "If you want to know me then pray everyday and I will show you." (Something along those lines, it was more felt than dictated.) I prayed everyday for a year.
Scott,
My relationship with God has been first in my spirituality since I was young. I was devout in prayer, and still am today. I will say that today I am more thankful to God than I was in the past.
I was Christian when I was young, and just felt the presence of God and that was enough for me. In high school I remember hating Christians because I had seen many ugly things that disgraced the God I knew. I set out to know the one true God. I felt that God was telling me, "If you want to know me then pray everyday and I will show you." (Something along those lines, it was more felt than dictated.) I prayed everyday for a year.
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Christianity-New Age dialogue #3
On Nov 17, 2009, Joshua wrote:
Hello Scott,
Sorry it has taken me so long to respond to you, I will try to be more timely in the future.
Here is my theory on how the universe began. This is not based in scripture but rather various sources and personal feeling/experience. Sometimes I will look to scripture for wisdom and understanding, but my interpretation comes from a perspective of God being everything in existence. In the beginning there was the void, out of which came God. God was a kind of energy with no physical form.
Hello Scott,
Sorry it has taken me so long to respond to you, I will try to be more timely in the future.
Here is my theory on how the universe began. This is not based in scripture but rather various sources and personal feeling/experience. Sometimes I will look to scripture for wisdom and understanding, but my interpretation comes from a perspective of God being everything in existence. In the beginning there was the void, out of which came God. God was a kind of energy with no physical form.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Christianity-New Age dialogue #2
On Sept 24, 2009, Josh wrote:
Scott,
Sure you can use this dialogue in your blog, you don’t have to make me anonymous if you don’t want to. I believe that God is literally everything that exists and the nothingness, God is the only thing that exists and there is nothing else. God created us in his own image, making us creators with body, mind, and spirit. The mind being a microcosm of the father, the soul being the microcosm of the holy ghost, and the body being a microcosm of the body of god (or the son). I think that God created everything through a process of evolution. I also believe in reincarnation. I’m not really familiar with what the new age ‘doctrine’ is if there even is a doctrine. I’m just an honest seeker of God.
Scott,
Sure you can use this dialogue in your blog, you don’t have to make me anonymous if you don’t want to. I believe that God is literally everything that exists and the nothingness, God is the only thing that exists and there is nothing else. God created us in his own image, making us creators with body, mind, and spirit. The mind being a microcosm of the father, the soul being the microcosm of the holy ghost, and the body being a microcosm of the body of god (or the son). I think that God created everything through a process of evolution. I also believe in reincarnation. I’m not really familiar with what the new age ‘doctrine’ is if there even is a doctrine. I’m just an honest seeker of God.
Christianity-New Age dialogue #1
A few months ago, i entered into a dialogue with a friend who was questioning classic Christianity. Currently, I am engaged in a discussion with a former student from when I was on staff with InterVarsity. He has agreed to allow me to post our discussion. His name will be Josh for these postings.
On Sep 8, 2009, Josh wrote:
Hey man! How are things going? I hope well. Still having those moments with God when you wonder off by yourself to be silent? That was some good stuff. I'm not sure if I ever thanked you, but I would like to now.
Thank you for being one of my spiritual mentors. You taught me a lot (I think so anyway) at a time when I thought I knew it all. You showed me patience, wisdom, understanding, humility, friendship, a greater knowing of God, and I like to think much more. For that I will always be grateful.
New age is the closest thing that comes to describing my belief system currently, but I don't resonate with some of the things I have heard they teach.
On Sep 8, 2009, Josh wrote:
Hey man! How are things going? I hope well. Still having those moments with God when you wonder off by yourself to be silent? That was some good stuff. I'm not sure if I ever thanked you, but I would like to now.
Thank you for being one of my spiritual mentors. You taught me a lot (I think so anyway) at a time when I thought I knew it all. You showed me patience, wisdom, understanding, humility, friendship, a greater knowing of God, and I like to think much more. For that I will always be grateful.
New age is the closest thing that comes to describing my belief system currently, but I don't resonate with some of the things I have heard they teach.
Friday, August 7, 2009
Questioning Classic Christianity #4
Here is our fourth round of emails. the format is the same, my friend's email and my response:
Friend wrote on July 14, 2009
Scott,
Ah summer. So many mountains to climb and so little time to engage in lengthy e-dialogue on matters of theological concern...
In brief, some thoughts on each of your main points.
First off, I have to say I do take scripture seriously and think on one level I approach it similarly to you. I believe that many of the stories in the Bible are powerful and useful for understanding the character of God, the complexity of the human condition, and the difficulty and beauty of our journeys of faith. I try to read it similar to how you describe, with an open mind to how God might be speaking to me in my present situation. That said, on another level, I apply a rigorous and critical eye to scripture and to text in general be it Christian, Muslim, Hindu, secular or whatever. I am an equal opportunity believer and an equal opportunity skeptic.
As far as absolute truths are concerned, I am more convinced of absolute truth than at any point in my life previous. I view faith as a constantly deepening friendship, and as I have befriended God more deeply with the years, I am more convinced of God's reality. And it's not something that I simply hold intellectually in my mind, it's something I know in my heart, and have experienced in my body! I view this knowing as a friendship that grows more and more deeply as God reveals more and more of himself to me daily.
At the same time, I'm skeptical of the vast majority of bullshit that masquerades as truth from all quadrants of society and which comes out of certain sectors of every religious traditions. I believe that the journey of faith requires both a childlike simplicity and a mature skepticism. I will happily claim the name of doubting Thomas. I need to feel the holes in Christ's hands, and the sensation of his skin for me to be convinced. My measure for accepting truth is whether I can experience it personally and directly, and not have merely to only take another's word for it.
As far as the issue of textual transmission and accuracy is concerned, I certainly have heard and am impressed by the wide proliferation of the Christian scriptures. I would just say that I have no doubt in my mind that the other historical and mythic texts you refer to have drifted far astray from their original textual or oral form. I'd also be interested to compare the numbers on copies of religious texts from the other major religions and see if they in any way compare to those of Christianity.
As for learning Greek, how I would love to if I had a few hundred hours to spare, but don't realistically see it as a priority at the present time.
A few questions for you, since I fear our conversation is really little more than two occasionally bisecting monologues.
By what authority do you accept the Bible as true? So far you've based the authority of scripture on certain scriptures. If memory serves me correctly, that's internal logic, which doesn't go too far with me since I don't accept the veracity of those texts you base your claims off of.
I've been impressed to hear of your cross-church collaborations, which sound like they're bringing a lot of new energy and insight to Hope in Christ. I'm curious what your connections look like across faith lines and whether you're engaged in dialogue and learning with people of other religions?
And I'm interested to learn more about your faith journey in general. What was the turning point in your questioning and searching that led you to the place where you're now at? And what are the faith questions you are still asking and wrestling with today?
I fear we could go on lobbing theological arguments at one another indefinitely and do little more than wear our keyboards out in the process. But to hear about your present journey with God, now there is something refreshing and vital I am interested to hear.
As always, thanks for your patience as I am a great procrastinator when it comes to my email, especially when the temperature reaches about 70. And yes, feel free to post on your blog, and as I come to think about it, feel free to include my name as well if you wish.
Best,
Friend
My reply dated July 28, 2009
Friend,
I appreciate your honesty and your willingness to dialog. Also accept my apologies for anything which comes across as an attack on your struggle with he faith, or a demeaning of your reading of the Scriptures. That said, there is a fundamental difference in your approach and mine. You used the phrase I try to read it to see "how God might be speaking to me." And then you go on to discuss your critical eye of any and all Scriptures. Therein lies, the difference. I come with a fundamentally different belief than you. I do believe this is the word of God and so I also believe that God is speaking to me through the text. This isn't an anthropological text, it is a divinely sanctioned theological text. Sure it describes the complexities of the human condition, and the beauty and difficulty of the life of faith, as you mention, but it is not "useful for understanding the character of God" it is the very revelation of how God has chosen to be revealed. This is fundamentally different.
As you describe your life with God, i am encouraged, but I am also reflective that Jesus said, John 20:29 “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” You draw an unnecessary distinction between faith and experience. For you, as I understand your letter, experience is the final arbiter, but Jesus had a different way of seeing it. He validated the realm of faith without experience, trust without reason. That said, I believe every true believer has both at work in their life.
Which is the set of questions you are asking me. What is the experience I have had to justify my belief. Let me outline it for you, but first a bit of history. I wasn't raised in the church, but came to Christ in late Jr. High after watching my parents accept Christ. There life was radically changed and so I entered in simply with the thought, "I'll give it a try." I began studying the Bible and took it as a self help book able to make me acceptable to God. That turned me into a class A hypocrite. I judged others who didn't make the grade and was lenient on myself. Classic phariseeism. Then in my freshman year of college, while studying and praying I asked God what he wanted me to do with my life. The response was audible and startling, "If you will follow me I will take you to the seven continents and you will have a tough life but you will enjoy it. If you don't follow me, you will just have a tough life."
I choose the former, not knowing what that meant but thinking I did. That led me to train to become a missionary in Africa. During that training I had a crisis of faith, and began questioning everything about the faith, including whether it was true or not. Here I was, preparing to go and teach people about Jesus and at the same time wondering if the Christian Gospel was true. I began exploring Orthodox Judaism and Buddhism. Both seemed more "achievable" for the disciplined soul and the adherents of each faith were far more moral and enjoyable a people to be around than most Christians. One day I cried out to God in the shower and said, "If I am to be a Christian, you better reveal to me what is true about Christianity before I finish my shower."
Now, I don't advise that line of interaction with the Almighty God, but He was gracious and in that moment I heard His voice again as He expounded the grace of the Gospel and the Love of the Father for me. He revealed how Christ completely atoned for all my sin past, present and future and made me full acceptable in His sight. That revelation, which is entirely consistent with the Bible, changed my person and freed me from having to be something to others. I was free in Christ to be whom God made me to be. I went and spent the year in Africa working with Animists and exploring their teachings and sharing Christ with them. The message is fundamentally different, as any animist will attest and as many did attest to me in the bush of Zambia.
Upon returning to the USA, I had another crisis of faith, mostly because I anticipated staying in Africa for 10 years but due to a variety of circumstances we were only there for 1 year. Sitting in the desert, I cried to God for direction and a future. This time, no voice, but a vision of stained glass which I recognized as my life falling to the ground and shattering, then a hand reaching in and picking up pieces of my life and remaking it into a new stained glass of His making. Not all the pieces were taken, many were left on the ground, but it was a comfort that my ways and picture of life was crashing in order for God's way and picture of life to be born.
Fast forward to the present. What am I learning? I am learning about a heart of thankfulness and seeing all the good that God has made available to us. I am also learning what it is to have God be silent. More than ever I know he is present, but more than ever he has quit answering my questions and is leaving me to simply enjoy his presence. To take direction from his word, for most of my questions can be answered from a study of the Bible. In fact, most of my questions about how to live, what to do or not to do are already expounded upon. Take for instance adoption. We are adopting, but i am questioning whether now is the right time. Truth be told, there is never a right time. But God has called his people to care for those at risk. You can read more about this in my earlier posting on Saul's rejection.
Or take my pride, my struggle with generosity. All of these I know the answer, deference to others and liberality with the gifts God has given. I don't need God to tell me what to do, I need to do it. Or maybe the next great question I have is how to raise my children to love the Lord. How to model a life of prayer to them, when I struggle with praying. These are all the questions I am struggling with. Totally different from you as a single person, I fear, but they are mine.
You ask by what authority I accept it as true. I accept it based on its own authority. Does it claim to be the word of God? Is it able to effect its claims? Yes to both. You may call it internal logic, but the simple truth is we always determine our authorities. One who doesn't claim it as authoritative does so on his own footing, with no more valid reason than his arrogance or intelligence or lack thereof. By what authority does anyone accept any authority as legitimate? It is by internal choice. For you to choose not to accept it means that you have set yourself up as the final arbiter of truth, a dangerous position since the human heart is easily swayed by our own desires, whims and fancies.
As far as current interfaith connections, I must admit that I am currently not involved in any people interactions with others of varying faiths. That is not to say that I have not been in the past. Before moving to Bellingham, I regularly met with 2 New Agers, 1 ex-catholic, and 2 agnostics. We had great friendship and discussion but frankly, we had very little in common related to spiritual faith. It looked like it on the surface, as far as hopes for peace, justice, etc. But the practice of these was vastly different. Peace is very different depending on the faith, and so is justice. Currently I read widely and am getting ready to start reading the Koran which I haven't read before.
As far as the textual history of other faith documents, I haven't done alot of reading myself on this. And I will now that you have raised the point. But my initial search for websites has led me to the following:
Related to the Koran
John Gilchrist's Jam' Al'Qur'an: the codification of the Qur'an Text ...Read more
Friend wrote on July 14, 2009
Scott,
Ah summer. So many mountains to climb and so little time to engage in lengthy e-dialogue on matters of theological concern...
In brief, some thoughts on each of your main points.
First off, I have to say I do take scripture seriously and think on one level I approach it similarly to you. I believe that many of the stories in the Bible are powerful and useful for understanding the character of God, the complexity of the human condition, and the difficulty and beauty of our journeys of faith. I try to read it similar to how you describe, with an open mind to how God might be speaking to me in my present situation. That said, on another level, I apply a rigorous and critical eye to scripture and to text in general be it Christian, Muslim, Hindu, secular or whatever. I am an equal opportunity believer and an equal opportunity skeptic.
As far as absolute truths are concerned, I am more convinced of absolute truth than at any point in my life previous. I view faith as a constantly deepening friendship, and as I have befriended God more deeply with the years, I am more convinced of God's reality. And it's not something that I simply hold intellectually in my mind, it's something I know in my heart, and have experienced in my body! I view this knowing as a friendship that grows more and more deeply as God reveals more and more of himself to me daily.
At the same time, I'm skeptical of the vast majority of bullshit that masquerades as truth from all quadrants of society and which comes out of certain sectors of every religious traditions. I believe that the journey of faith requires both a childlike simplicity and a mature skepticism. I will happily claim the name of doubting Thomas. I need to feel the holes in Christ's hands, and the sensation of his skin for me to be convinced. My measure for accepting truth is whether I can experience it personally and directly, and not have merely to only take another's word for it.
As far as the issue of textual transmission and accuracy is concerned, I certainly have heard and am impressed by the wide proliferation of the Christian scriptures. I would just say that I have no doubt in my mind that the other historical and mythic texts you refer to have drifted far astray from their original textual or oral form. I'd also be interested to compare the numbers on copies of religious texts from the other major religions and see if they in any way compare to those of Christianity.
As for learning Greek, how I would love to if I had a few hundred hours to spare, but don't realistically see it as a priority at the present time.
A few questions for you, since I fear our conversation is really little more than two occasionally bisecting monologues.
By what authority do you accept the Bible as true? So far you've based the authority of scripture on certain scriptures. If memory serves me correctly, that's internal logic, which doesn't go too far with me since I don't accept the veracity of those texts you base your claims off of.
I've been impressed to hear of your cross-church collaborations, which sound like they're bringing a lot of new energy and insight to Hope in Christ. I'm curious what your connections look like across faith lines and whether you're engaged in dialogue and learning with people of other religions?
And I'm interested to learn more about your faith journey in general. What was the turning point in your questioning and searching that led you to the place where you're now at? And what are the faith questions you are still asking and wrestling with today?
I fear we could go on lobbing theological arguments at one another indefinitely and do little more than wear our keyboards out in the process. But to hear about your present journey with God, now there is something refreshing and vital I am interested to hear.
As always, thanks for your patience as I am a great procrastinator when it comes to my email, especially when the temperature reaches about 70. And yes, feel free to post on your blog, and as I come to think about it, feel free to include my name as well if you wish.
Best,
Friend
My reply dated July 28, 2009
Friend,
I appreciate your honesty and your willingness to dialog. Also accept my apologies for anything which comes across as an attack on your struggle with he faith, or a demeaning of your reading of the Scriptures. That said, there is a fundamental difference in your approach and mine. You used the phrase I try to read it to see "how God might be speaking to me." And then you go on to discuss your critical eye of any and all Scriptures. Therein lies, the difference. I come with a fundamentally different belief than you. I do believe this is the word of God and so I also believe that God is speaking to me through the text. This isn't an anthropological text, it is a divinely sanctioned theological text. Sure it describes the complexities of the human condition, and the beauty and difficulty of the life of faith, as you mention, but it is not "useful for understanding the character of God" it is the very revelation of how God has chosen to be revealed. This is fundamentally different.
As you describe your life with God, i am encouraged, but I am also reflective that Jesus said, John 20:29 “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” You draw an unnecessary distinction between faith and experience. For you, as I understand your letter, experience is the final arbiter, but Jesus had a different way of seeing it. He validated the realm of faith without experience, trust without reason. That said, I believe every true believer has both at work in their life.
Which is the set of questions you are asking me. What is the experience I have had to justify my belief. Let me outline it for you, but first a bit of history. I wasn't raised in the church, but came to Christ in late Jr. High after watching my parents accept Christ. There life was radically changed and so I entered in simply with the thought, "I'll give it a try." I began studying the Bible and took it as a self help book able to make me acceptable to God. That turned me into a class A hypocrite. I judged others who didn't make the grade and was lenient on myself. Classic phariseeism. Then in my freshman year of college, while studying and praying I asked God what he wanted me to do with my life. The response was audible and startling, "If you will follow me I will take you to the seven continents and you will have a tough life but you will enjoy it. If you don't follow me, you will just have a tough life."
I choose the former, not knowing what that meant but thinking I did. That led me to train to become a missionary in Africa. During that training I had a crisis of faith, and began questioning everything about the faith, including whether it was true or not. Here I was, preparing to go and teach people about Jesus and at the same time wondering if the Christian Gospel was true. I began exploring Orthodox Judaism and Buddhism. Both seemed more "achievable" for the disciplined soul and the adherents of each faith were far more moral and enjoyable a people to be around than most Christians. One day I cried out to God in the shower and said, "If I am to be a Christian, you better reveal to me what is true about Christianity before I finish my shower."
Now, I don't advise that line of interaction with the Almighty God, but He was gracious and in that moment I heard His voice again as He expounded the grace of the Gospel and the Love of the Father for me. He revealed how Christ completely atoned for all my sin past, present and future and made me full acceptable in His sight. That revelation, which is entirely consistent with the Bible, changed my person and freed me from having to be something to others. I was free in Christ to be whom God made me to be. I went and spent the year in Africa working with Animists and exploring their teachings and sharing Christ with them. The message is fundamentally different, as any animist will attest and as many did attest to me in the bush of Zambia.
Upon returning to the USA, I had another crisis of faith, mostly because I anticipated staying in Africa for 10 years but due to a variety of circumstances we were only there for 1 year. Sitting in the desert, I cried to God for direction and a future. This time, no voice, but a vision of stained glass which I recognized as my life falling to the ground and shattering, then a hand reaching in and picking up pieces of my life and remaking it into a new stained glass of His making. Not all the pieces were taken, many were left on the ground, but it was a comfort that my ways and picture of life was crashing in order for God's way and picture of life to be born.
Fast forward to the present. What am I learning? I am learning about a heart of thankfulness and seeing all the good that God has made available to us. I am also learning what it is to have God be silent. More than ever I know he is present, but more than ever he has quit answering my questions and is leaving me to simply enjoy his presence. To take direction from his word, for most of my questions can be answered from a study of the Bible. In fact, most of my questions about how to live, what to do or not to do are already expounded upon. Take for instance adoption. We are adopting, but i am questioning whether now is the right time. Truth be told, there is never a right time. But God has called his people to care for those at risk. You can read more about this in my earlier posting on Saul's rejection.
Or take my pride, my struggle with generosity. All of these I know the answer, deference to others and liberality with the gifts God has given. I don't need God to tell me what to do, I need to do it. Or maybe the next great question I have is how to raise my children to love the Lord. How to model a life of prayer to them, when I struggle with praying. These are all the questions I am struggling with. Totally different from you as a single person, I fear, but they are mine.
You ask by what authority I accept it as true. I accept it based on its own authority. Does it claim to be the word of God? Is it able to effect its claims? Yes to both. You may call it internal logic, but the simple truth is we always determine our authorities. One who doesn't claim it as authoritative does so on his own footing, with no more valid reason than his arrogance or intelligence or lack thereof. By what authority does anyone accept any authority as legitimate? It is by internal choice. For you to choose not to accept it means that you have set yourself up as the final arbiter of truth, a dangerous position since the human heart is easily swayed by our own desires, whims and fancies.
As far as current interfaith connections, I must admit that I am currently not involved in any people interactions with others of varying faiths. That is not to say that I have not been in the past. Before moving to Bellingham, I regularly met with 2 New Agers, 1 ex-catholic, and 2 agnostics. We had great friendship and discussion but frankly, we had very little in common related to spiritual faith. It looked like it on the surface, as far as hopes for peace, justice, etc. But the practice of these was vastly different. Peace is very different depending on the faith, and so is justice. Currently I read widely and am getting ready to start reading the Koran which I haven't read before.
As far as the textual history of other faith documents, I haven't done alot of reading myself on this. And I will now that you have raised the point. But my initial search for websites has led me to the following:
Related to the Koran
John Gilchrist's Jam' Al'Qur'an: the codification of the Qur'an Text ...Read more
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Questioning Classic Christianity #3
Here is our third round of emails. My friend's post first, then my response.
On May 30, 2009, at 2:49 PM, Friend wrote:
Scott,
Let me kick off with the issue of scriptural corruption since I think that may be the crux of things at hand and the place where you're seeking more clarification of my views. I believe that much of the Bible is inspired text, composed by people who were in connection with the Holy Spirit. Who can read the words of Jesus in the gospel or Paul's passage on the primacy of love and not be convicted that this comes from something greater than the rational mind?
That said, many Biblical scholars (and not just ultra-liberal ones) will flatly tell you that some of the New Testament letters are frauds. 2nd Peter for example wasn't written by Peter, but by a later author who employed Peter's name to give the text an additional sense of authority. This was a common practice in the ancient world and wouldn't have necessarily been viewed as a deception (though I think the author's intent might be dubious). Several of Paul's letters are the same way.
Similarly, over the course of thousands of years of history, every single book in the Bible has gone through a process of editing and revision. If memory recalls, we don't have a single original text. They are all copies of copies of copies and many of which prior to being written down were preserved in the oral tradition for decades and even centuries. Through this process, the original wording and narrative has changed considerably in some cases. Numerous different communities with their own spiritual perspectives and agendas have handled these texts. I imagine many were sincere and handled the texts with the utmost veneration. Some were not so, and bended the text to serve their own political and spiritual interests.
Comparing the Books of Kings to Chronicles is one of the most poignant examples of this revision at play. Both pairs of books track roughly the same history of Israel, but in places provide very different descriptions and interpretations of events. I wish I could recall the exact verses, but in one place, Kings talks about how God sends a plague upon the Israelites for their sins. In Chronicles, recounting the exact same episode, it is Satan who perpetrates the action. How do you reconcile these differences, and other variations in the two accounts of Israel's history? The scholars I tend to trust say that the books were written at different times and reflect different perspectives on Israel's purpose and legacy. Kings is the earlier and more authentic text, and reflects a more critical and prophetic voice. Chronicles was written much later after the Babylonian exile, when Israel needed to renew a strong sense of national identity. Thus, it is a simplified and more patriotic account if you will.
You could apply a similar eye to the gospels. Four different accounts from four different communities. The gospels are in harmony in a number of places, but each has its own, voice, style, depiction, and interpretation of certain events in Jesus' life. Each reflects differing aspects of Jesus' life the authors deemed most important to understanding his nature and purpose.
Personally, I am no longer able to affirm that scripture as it is rendered in the NIV possesses absolute authority. The more I have learned about the process of authorship and transmission from generation to generation--about the politics often involved, and the differing theologies and world-views of revising communities--the less I can believe that all of these twists and turns have been guided by divine inspiration.
Thus the importance of experience in the mystical traditions. Again, according to the mystics, God is continually speaking--as powerfully today as God did 2,000 years ago in the time of Jesus, and 5,000 years ago in the time of Moses. There is no golden era of revelation, God is manifest in all times equally. Scripture reflects words written by people in touch with this inspiration, but then over the years, through the process of revision and political mangling, the text degrades. This is the nature of spiritual movements and human institutions in general. They rise, grow, stagnate, and then eventually crumble. And then from their ashes emerge new vital movements that are once again in touch with the spirit.
As far as experience goes, I agree with you that one has to be scrupulous. Spiritual experience can not simply be judged by the positive or negative feelings that arise from it. Rather, I find the test lies in how much the experience challenges me to grow and produces the spiritual fruit of love, patience, humility, perseverance, etc...
Yes, I believe that human efforts are futile if God is not at their center. And yes, I believe that Christianity is a vital faith that connects people with God. But I can't affirm that Christianity is the exclusive mediating faith for approaching the divine. Not all paths are the same, and certainly in my mind not all expressions of spirituality are authentic and beneficial. But fortunately there exists a wonderful spiritual plurality in this world that allows different individuals and communities to experience God in different ways.
Just as the strength and vitality of a forest is due to its ecological diversity, so to is our world sustained by its spiritual diversity. Frankly, I am skeptical of the line, "there is only one way" when it is spoken about any sphere of life, be it the environment, politics, culture, or religion, because I simply do not see this as in touch with the most fundamental principles of our world. I ask you to seriously consider if there's any other place besides in your life besides religion where, "there is only one way" actually reflects reality.
So there it is, I tried not to sugar coat anything for you, but let you know as plainly and authentically how I have come to view my faith and spirituality. I don't perceive my formation in the church as negative or harmful, but rather as an essential part of my spiritual growth and development. That said, I no longer find Evangelical Christianity and its model of discipleship as the vehicle for bringing me close to God and have embraced new channels for sustaining this connection.
Thanks for your patience waiting for my reply. I continue to enjoy this dialogue and look forward to your response when the opportunity presents itself.
Warmly,
Friend
Here is my response June 15, 2009:
Friend,
Starting from the end of your letter and working back, we share some commonality. I too believe that 'Evangelical Christianity and its model of discipleship' are woefully lacking and frankly distorted the message of Jesus. That said, I am not prepared to throw out the text of Scripture, or turn it into a buffet where I can pick and choose what is true, real, or unedited and ignore the rest. Instead, I have opted for a totally different path than you. I read it and take it seriously, instead of allowing one doctrine or dogma to trump everything else (which is what much of protestant Christianity has done. In the case of the liberal churches, love trumps holiness and social justice trumps piety, while in the conservative churches knowledge trumps lifestyle and one is saved even if their life bears not fruit.) I have sought to read the Bible and allow God to rigorously apply it to my life. Where sound thinking and good doctrine are called for (epistles), I ask God to reveal it and to transform my mind. Where lifestyle and action are demanded (read the prophets, sermon on the mount, end of most of the epistles) then I seek to live life accordingly by the empowerment of the Spirit, and when I fail, which is often, I repent and believe the good news that Christ came to forgive sinners and my actions don't make me acceptable to God, but are the fruit of a relationship grounded in Christ.
While I believe we share many things, the difference as I see it is the issue of truth. You are skeptical of it, an understandable thing for the average person raised in the late 20th century at the dawn of the cultural postmodern shift. However, there are absolutes in the universe, there are truths and a good lifestyle will not save anyone, as much as proper knowledge will not save anyone either. God, in his Scriptural Word and through the life of Christ, the living Word, has shown us that knowledge and action rightly joined together are the requirement for holiness and Christ alone, in all of human history, as the God-man, the incarnate Deity, as Emmanuel. He alone was able to perfectly wed the two, and we are invited to become part of that life, his life and share in his perfect union of proper doctrine and proper life. So, abandoning sound doctrine in order to get sound practice, is as fatal as abandoning sound practice in order to get sound doctrine. The two cannot be unjoined, and when they are then we can easily say that Christ is on the same plane as the Buddha or Muhammad or the Scriptures are on the same plane as the Koran, the Tibetan book of the Dead, the Bhagavad-Gita, etc. But when they are joined, as they were in the life of Christ, then he alone stands distinct and different from all others and his claims to authority and pre-eminence must be viewed as wholly different and distinctly unique. Christ is the only way unto God, as he says, "I am the way, the truth and the life, No one comes to the Father except through me."
As for some of the side issues you raise about transmission, textual copies, not trusting the translation of the NIV, etc. These are valid thoughts Your search for truth has led you farther than most in a critical appraisal of the evidence. It is true that their are variations in the texts, however, when one looks at and studies them, it becomes quickly apparent that the differences are miniscule in the vast majority of them and sure, there are some out there texts like the Gospel of Thomas, etc... but these are aberrations in their own right and were never widely accepted by the churches across the geographic spectrum in the first place. Let's take for instance, Homer's Iliad, there are 643 known copies of the Iliad with the earliest ones from 400BC or roughly 400 years after the text was originally written, or Herodotus' History which has 8 copies the earliest at 900 AD some 1350 years after the original, then one could also look at Plato's works, 7 copies, 1300 years after the original. The list goes on with Demosthenes, Caesar's Gallic Wars, Livy's History of Rome, Tacitus' Annals, etc. The gaps are huge, and yet we read and trust them as sources of History, etc. Now the New Testament, has 5366+ copies, fragments, books, etc. with the earliest fragments coming from 50 years post writing, the earliest complete books, 100 years post. The scale of preservation of the text is incomparable. That doesn't even take into account the Syriac, Latin, Coptic, Gothic, Georgian, Ethiopic and Nubian texts, then there is all the early patristic quotations in their writings. The textual witness is greater than any other book in history. Are there differences, sure, do they change the message of the text - Christ is the God Incarnate, he alone satisfies God's demand for a sinless, holy life and he alone died as a substitution for your sin and mine, he alone was raised from the dead and is now seated at the right hand of God...No. None of these texts negate this message, the differences come in words that are reversed, or in some slight things church teachings like baptismal practice, church organization, etc. But these things don't save anyways. Should we strive for solid understanding of them, yes, but should we allow these to determine our trust in the organic message of the text? No.
I would encourage you not to read the english texts. They are all translations and any translation is fraught with difficulty and bias as the translators seek to render the meaning into a target language. Learn Koine Greek and start reading the text in the original. Get a copy of the Nestle-Aland 27 or the UBS 4 with the critical apparatus that shows the textual variants and start reading as close to the originals as you can. Grab a copy of the Bruce Metzger's The Text of the New Testament: It's transmission, corruption and restoration, 3rd ed. It was published in 1992, and Metzger's text is the standard for introducing people to textual criticism, etc. He reviews the various manuscripts, papyri, etc and is a well grounded academic. You can take Greek at a number of the schools there in Seattle. I would recommend looking into Fuller Theological Seminary's campus in Seattle and taking the 5 greek courses they offer. The questions you are asking are the same ones I was asking 7 years ago. I started taking the Greek sequence in order to struggle through my thoughts, questions, etc. on the text. I wouldn't trade it for anything.
Enough for now. I look forward to your reply.
p.s. I am really enjoying our conversation via email and was wondering how you would feel about me posting them on my blog. I would make you anonymous and erase any refs to your location, but the questions you are asking and raising are great and I think they would help many people in there own walk with Christ. if you are opposed, no problem, I wont put them up, if its ok, then thanks. ...Read more
On May 30, 2009, at 2:49 PM, Friend wrote:
Scott,
Let me kick off with the issue of scriptural corruption since I think that may be the crux of things at hand and the place where you're seeking more clarification of my views. I believe that much of the Bible is inspired text, composed by people who were in connection with the Holy Spirit. Who can read the words of Jesus in the gospel or Paul's passage on the primacy of love and not be convicted that this comes from something greater than the rational mind?
That said, many Biblical scholars (and not just ultra-liberal ones) will flatly tell you that some of the New Testament letters are frauds. 2nd Peter for example wasn't written by Peter, but by a later author who employed Peter's name to give the text an additional sense of authority. This was a common practice in the ancient world and wouldn't have necessarily been viewed as a deception (though I think the author's intent might be dubious). Several of Paul's letters are the same way.
Similarly, over the course of thousands of years of history, every single book in the Bible has gone through a process of editing and revision. If memory recalls, we don't have a single original text. They are all copies of copies of copies and many of which prior to being written down were preserved in the oral tradition for decades and even centuries. Through this process, the original wording and narrative has changed considerably in some cases. Numerous different communities with their own spiritual perspectives and agendas have handled these texts. I imagine many were sincere and handled the texts with the utmost veneration. Some were not so, and bended the text to serve their own political and spiritual interests.
Comparing the Books of Kings to Chronicles is one of the most poignant examples of this revision at play. Both pairs of books track roughly the same history of Israel, but in places provide very different descriptions and interpretations of events. I wish I could recall the exact verses, but in one place, Kings talks about how God sends a plague upon the Israelites for their sins. In Chronicles, recounting the exact same episode, it is Satan who perpetrates the action. How do you reconcile these differences, and other variations in the two accounts of Israel's history? The scholars I tend to trust say that the books were written at different times and reflect different perspectives on Israel's purpose and legacy. Kings is the earlier and more authentic text, and reflects a more critical and prophetic voice. Chronicles was written much later after the Babylonian exile, when Israel needed to renew a strong sense of national identity. Thus, it is a simplified and more patriotic account if you will.
You could apply a similar eye to the gospels. Four different accounts from four different communities. The gospels are in harmony in a number of places, but each has its own, voice, style, depiction, and interpretation of certain events in Jesus' life. Each reflects differing aspects of Jesus' life the authors deemed most important to understanding his nature and purpose.
Personally, I am no longer able to affirm that scripture as it is rendered in the NIV possesses absolute authority. The more I have learned about the process of authorship and transmission from generation to generation--about the politics often involved, and the differing theologies and world-views of revising communities--the less I can believe that all of these twists and turns have been guided by divine inspiration.
Thus the importance of experience in the mystical traditions. Again, according to the mystics, God is continually speaking--as powerfully today as God did 2,000 years ago in the time of Jesus, and 5,000 years ago in the time of Moses. There is no golden era of revelation, God is manifest in all times equally. Scripture reflects words written by people in touch with this inspiration, but then over the years, through the process of revision and political mangling, the text degrades. This is the nature of spiritual movements and human institutions in general. They rise, grow, stagnate, and then eventually crumble. And then from their ashes emerge new vital movements that are once again in touch with the spirit.
As far as experience goes, I agree with you that one has to be scrupulous. Spiritual experience can not simply be judged by the positive or negative feelings that arise from it. Rather, I find the test lies in how much the experience challenges me to grow and produces the spiritual fruit of love, patience, humility, perseverance, etc...
Yes, I believe that human efforts are futile if God is not at their center. And yes, I believe that Christianity is a vital faith that connects people with God. But I can't affirm that Christianity is the exclusive mediating faith for approaching the divine. Not all paths are the same, and certainly in my mind not all expressions of spirituality are authentic and beneficial. But fortunately there exists a wonderful spiritual plurality in this world that allows different individuals and communities to experience God in different ways.
Just as the strength and vitality of a forest is due to its ecological diversity, so to is our world sustained by its spiritual diversity. Frankly, I am skeptical of the line, "there is only one way" when it is spoken about any sphere of life, be it the environment, politics, culture, or religion, because I simply do not see this as in touch with the most fundamental principles of our world. I ask you to seriously consider if there's any other place besides in your life besides religion where, "there is only one way" actually reflects reality.
So there it is, I tried not to sugar coat anything for you, but let you know as plainly and authentically how I have come to view my faith and spirituality. I don't perceive my formation in the church as negative or harmful, but rather as an essential part of my spiritual growth and development. That said, I no longer find Evangelical Christianity and its model of discipleship as the vehicle for bringing me close to God and have embraced new channels for sustaining this connection.
Thanks for your patience waiting for my reply. I continue to enjoy this dialogue and look forward to your response when the opportunity presents itself.
Warmly,
Friend
Here is my response June 15, 2009:
Friend,
Starting from the end of your letter and working back, we share some commonality. I too believe that 'Evangelical Christianity and its model of discipleship' are woefully lacking and frankly distorted the message of Jesus. That said, I am not prepared to throw out the text of Scripture, or turn it into a buffet where I can pick and choose what is true, real, or unedited and ignore the rest. Instead, I have opted for a totally different path than you. I read it and take it seriously, instead of allowing one doctrine or dogma to trump everything else (which is what much of protestant Christianity has done. In the case of the liberal churches, love trumps holiness and social justice trumps piety, while in the conservative churches knowledge trumps lifestyle and one is saved even if their life bears not fruit.) I have sought to read the Bible and allow God to rigorously apply it to my life. Where sound thinking and good doctrine are called for (epistles), I ask God to reveal it and to transform my mind. Where lifestyle and action are demanded (read the prophets, sermon on the mount, end of most of the epistles) then I seek to live life accordingly by the empowerment of the Spirit, and when I fail, which is often, I repent and believe the good news that Christ came to forgive sinners and my actions don't make me acceptable to God, but are the fruit of a relationship grounded in Christ.
While I believe we share many things, the difference as I see it is the issue of truth. You are skeptical of it, an understandable thing for the average person raised in the late 20th century at the dawn of the cultural postmodern shift. However, there are absolutes in the universe, there are truths and a good lifestyle will not save anyone, as much as proper knowledge will not save anyone either. God, in his Scriptural Word and through the life of Christ, the living Word, has shown us that knowledge and action rightly joined together are the requirement for holiness and Christ alone, in all of human history, as the God-man, the incarnate Deity, as Emmanuel. He alone was able to perfectly wed the two, and we are invited to become part of that life, his life and share in his perfect union of proper doctrine and proper life. So, abandoning sound doctrine in order to get sound practice, is as fatal as abandoning sound practice in order to get sound doctrine. The two cannot be unjoined, and when they are then we can easily say that Christ is on the same plane as the Buddha or Muhammad or the Scriptures are on the same plane as the Koran, the Tibetan book of the Dead, the Bhagavad-Gita, etc. But when they are joined, as they were in the life of Christ, then he alone stands distinct and different from all others and his claims to authority and pre-eminence must be viewed as wholly different and distinctly unique. Christ is the only way unto God, as he says, "I am the way, the truth and the life, No one comes to the Father except through me."
As for some of the side issues you raise about transmission, textual copies, not trusting the translation of the NIV, etc. These are valid thoughts Your search for truth has led you farther than most in a critical appraisal of the evidence. It is true that their are variations in the texts, however, when one looks at and studies them, it becomes quickly apparent that the differences are miniscule in the vast majority of them and sure, there are some out there texts like the Gospel of Thomas, etc... but these are aberrations in their own right and were never widely accepted by the churches across the geographic spectrum in the first place. Let's take for instance, Homer's Iliad, there are 643 known copies of the Iliad with the earliest ones from 400BC or roughly 400 years after the text was originally written, or Herodotus' History which has 8 copies the earliest at 900 AD some 1350 years after the original, then one could also look at Plato's works, 7 copies, 1300 years after the original. The list goes on with Demosthenes, Caesar's Gallic Wars, Livy's History of Rome, Tacitus' Annals, etc. The gaps are huge, and yet we read and trust them as sources of History, etc. Now the New Testament, has 5366+ copies, fragments, books, etc. with the earliest fragments coming from 50 years post writing, the earliest complete books, 100 years post. The scale of preservation of the text is incomparable. That doesn't even take into account the Syriac, Latin, Coptic, Gothic, Georgian, Ethiopic and Nubian texts, then there is all the early patristic quotations in their writings. The textual witness is greater than any other book in history. Are there differences, sure, do they change the message of the text - Christ is the God Incarnate, he alone satisfies God's demand for a sinless, holy life and he alone died as a substitution for your sin and mine, he alone was raised from the dead and is now seated at the right hand of God...No. None of these texts negate this message, the differences come in words that are reversed, or in some slight things church teachings like baptismal practice, church organization, etc. But these things don't save anyways. Should we strive for solid understanding of them, yes, but should we allow these to determine our trust in the organic message of the text? No.
I would encourage you not to read the english texts. They are all translations and any translation is fraught with difficulty and bias as the translators seek to render the meaning into a target language. Learn Koine Greek and start reading the text in the original. Get a copy of the Nestle-Aland 27 or the UBS 4 with the critical apparatus that shows the textual variants and start reading as close to the originals as you can. Grab a copy of the Bruce Metzger's The Text of the New Testament: It's transmission, corruption and restoration, 3rd ed. It was published in 1992, and Metzger's text is the standard for introducing people to textual criticism, etc. He reviews the various manuscripts, papyri, etc and is a well grounded academic. You can take Greek at a number of the schools there in Seattle. I would recommend looking into Fuller Theological Seminary's campus in Seattle and taking the 5 greek courses they offer. The questions you are asking are the same ones I was asking 7 years ago. I started taking the Greek sequence in order to struggle through my thoughts, questions, etc. on the text. I wouldn't trade it for anything.
Enough for now. I look forward to your reply.
p.s. I am really enjoying our conversation via email and was wondering how you would feel about me posting them on my blog. I would make you anonymous and erase any refs to your location, but the questions you are asking and raising are great and I think they would help many people in there own walk with Christ. if you are opposed, no problem, I wont put them up, if its ok, then thanks. ...Read more
Questioning Classic Christianity #2
If you followed my first post on Questioning Classic Christianity, what follows is my friend's response to that email and my response to his email.
On Apr 29, 2009, at 11:15 PM, Friend wrote:
Pastor Scott,
I'll just play my cards right off. Frankly, I have no problem with COL tapping into other religious traditions and being universalistic. I have found too much wisdom in some of these traditions and encountered too much love in people of other faiths to write them off as fruitless searches and seekers.
I have an incredible respect and love for Christianity and believe it is special amongst the world's faiths. That said, I can't affirm that Jesus Christ is the only way to God, though he may serve as a bridge that makes the path easier.
I understand that you place great emphasis upon the authority of scripture. I believe that many of the scriptures are inspired, but that some of them have also been corroded with time. Power corrupts, and sadly, I believe political authorities have all too often co-opted holy scriptures to serve their purposes and keep people from becoming truly free (this is an equally opportunity corruption, it seems that in time all religious traditions fall prey).
That's why I have been so enlivened by the mystical path. It exists as the spirit-filled core of spirituality which inspires scripture and from which religious life emanates. Scripture has a place in guiding spiritual practice, but to the mystic, direct experience of God trumps any written text or historical tradition. God lives in each moment equally and so we do not have to look back necessarily to ancient times for inspiration. Revelation is perpetual and immanent.
This hasn't just been what I've read and learned from hanging with mystical communities this past year, it's been what I've encountered these last years as I continue to be drawn into this story. Though I don't dismiss the authenticity of my religious upbringing, these past months I've encountered a power and love far greater than anything I've experienced while a member of orthodox Christianity. I can't deny this experience and so I continue to walk this path.
It's interesting that so many Christian mystics come to a point where their experience of God places them at odds with their orthodox convictions. I'm thinking of Meister Eckhart's famous, "I pray to God to rid me of God."
The mystical movement as I understand it is one towards an increasing sense of freedom and openness as prior boxes for God are bust open into greater and more wonderful realizations of the divine.
I will let you know that I'm in the process of moving on from the COL largely for the reasons I touched on above concerning power and authority. It appears that Father Peter Bowes is interested in manipulating mystical teachings in order to primarily draw his students towards himself. A true teacher points seekers back to the power and authority that resides within themselves.
I'll conclude with a poem by the sufi mystic, Hafiz, who I find a hell of a lot more poignant than my own feeble thoughts.
I HAVE LEARNED SO MUCH
I have learned so much from God
that I can no longer call myself
A Christian, a Hindu, a Muslim,
a Buddhist, a Jew
The truth has shared so much of Itself
with me
that I can no longer call myself
A man, a woman, an angel,
or even pure Soul.
Love has
befriended Hafiz so completely
it has turned to ash
and freed me
Of every concept and image
My mind has ever known
Look forward to continuing our conversation, and will pray that your ministry continues to bless Hope in Christ.
Friend
Here is my response:
May 13, 2009
Friend -
I have been reflecting on your letter for almost 2 weeks now and praying for wisdom as to how to respond. You state that you have "found too much wisdom...and encountered too much love in people of other faiths to write them off as fruitless searches and seekers." I believe this is the basic core which needs to be dealt with. No one is asking you to "write off" individual people; there is no doubt that humans are capable of great acts of compassion and justice simply because they are human. We are all created in the image of God as Gen. 1:27 tells us "God created humanity is his own image, in the image of God he created them, male and female he created them." Simply by being in God's image we are are loving and compassionate, capable of welcoming others and being welcomed, we are even capable of developing wonderful thoughts about the world and its workings and how to best live in it, "wisdom" as you call it.
That said, all our wisdom falls short and plays down the fundamental problems of humanity. We are sinners, the story of Adam and Eve bear witness to it along with countless other stories: Cain-Abel, Moses, Abraham the liar and one who can't trust God so he places his wife in danger not once but at least twice. In fact the entire Scripture records how the wisdom of men, continually corrupts true worship and trust in God and God alone. At some points it is money which is worshipped, at others it is national security, at times sexuality and countless other 'gods' and 'wisdom' are appealed to while the LORD is denied and refused. The LORD is placed on equal footing at times as in the case of the Samaritans, or the Israelites and Judahites and every time God chastises them and tells them he is a jealous God who refuses to share his name and his glory with any other would be gods. Isa 43:13 is one of many scriptures which state this, but it will suffice to quote only one or two "I am God, and also henceforth I am He; there is no one who can deliver from my hand; I work and who can reverse it." "Turn to me and be saved, all you ends of the earth" (Isaiah 45:22).
This is foundational to the Christian faith. A failure to recognize sin as it is and to admit that we are all sinners prone to seeking other gods and calling out to these gods and assuming they can save us is the human problem. To state that Christianity is special, but to deny Jesus Christ as the only way to God, as God incarnate, is to deny this fundamental, foundational truth and assume that you can be saved by turning to something other than God alone for your salvation. But again God is clear in Acts 4:12 "Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven, given to men by which we must be saved." Again, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved" (Acts 16:31). Or Jesus' own words, "I am the way, and the truth and the life, no one comes to the Father except through me." These words are not politically correct nor are they very palatable according to Pacific Northwest minds, but they are the truth, otherwise the entire Scripture must be thrown out for if they are not true in regard to their faith content, then they are lies and unfit for anything.
You mention the Bible as being inspired but corrupted. I would love to hear more of your thoughts on this and will not remark until I understand your concerns.
As I conclude, my thoughts continue to be drawn to your pursuit of experience in one place versus another. I would urge you not to set up experience as the standard by which you judge truth. It is enitrely possible for one to have a great experience and take in falsehood and false teaching - the Afrikaans and the Apartheid state had a "great experience" in their minds but were entirely deluded in their theology for example. Similarly it is possible to have a horrible experience but to know that what is said is true - the mother who must admit that her husband has sexually abused their children, for instance. But it is also possible to have a great experience and also be grounded in great truth - this I believe is what happens when one takes seriously the words of God in the Bible and also places them into practice. I may be wrong, but I believe what you are truly looking for is the experience of Christian discipleship to Jesus, not what you have seen or experienced in the past as "christianity" but what God truly desires for all who follow him.
Seek God but seek him on the firm foundation of His Word and his Son. I am praying for God to strengthen your faith in his Son and to draw you close through the Holy Scriptures.
Grace and Peace ...Read more
On Apr 29, 2009, at 11:15 PM, Friend wrote:
Pastor Scott,
I'll just play my cards right off. Frankly, I have no problem with COL tapping into other religious traditions and being universalistic. I have found too much wisdom in some of these traditions and encountered too much love in people of other faiths to write them off as fruitless searches and seekers.
I have an incredible respect and love for Christianity and believe it is special amongst the world's faiths. That said, I can't affirm that Jesus Christ is the only way to God, though he may serve as a bridge that makes the path easier.
I understand that you place great emphasis upon the authority of scripture. I believe that many of the scriptures are inspired, but that some of them have also been corroded with time. Power corrupts, and sadly, I believe political authorities have all too often co-opted holy scriptures to serve their purposes and keep people from becoming truly free (this is an equally opportunity corruption, it seems that in time all religious traditions fall prey).
That's why I have been so enlivened by the mystical path. It exists as the spirit-filled core of spirituality which inspires scripture and from which religious life emanates. Scripture has a place in guiding spiritual practice, but to the mystic, direct experience of God trumps any written text or historical tradition. God lives in each moment equally and so we do not have to look back necessarily to ancient times for inspiration. Revelation is perpetual and immanent.
This hasn't just been what I've read and learned from hanging with mystical communities this past year, it's been what I've encountered these last years as I continue to be drawn into this story. Though I don't dismiss the authenticity of my religious upbringing, these past months I've encountered a power and love far greater than anything I've experienced while a member of orthodox Christianity. I can't deny this experience and so I continue to walk this path.
It's interesting that so many Christian mystics come to a point where their experience of God places them at odds with their orthodox convictions. I'm thinking of Meister Eckhart's famous, "I pray to God to rid me of God."
The mystical movement as I understand it is one towards an increasing sense of freedom and openness as prior boxes for God are bust open into greater and more wonderful realizations of the divine.
I will let you know that I'm in the process of moving on from the COL largely for the reasons I touched on above concerning power and authority. It appears that Father Peter Bowes is interested in manipulating mystical teachings in order to primarily draw his students towards himself. A true teacher points seekers back to the power and authority that resides within themselves.
I'll conclude with a poem by the sufi mystic, Hafiz, who I find a hell of a lot more poignant than my own feeble thoughts.
I HAVE LEARNED SO MUCH
I have learned so much from God
that I can no longer call myself
A Christian, a Hindu, a Muslim,
a Buddhist, a Jew
The truth has shared so much of Itself
with me
that I can no longer call myself
A man, a woman, an angel,
or even pure Soul.
Love has
befriended Hafiz so completely
it has turned to ash
and freed me
Of every concept and image
My mind has ever known
Look forward to continuing our conversation, and will pray that your ministry continues to bless Hope in Christ.
Friend
Here is my response:
May 13, 2009
Friend -
I have been reflecting on your letter for almost 2 weeks now and praying for wisdom as to how to respond. You state that you have "found too much wisdom...and encountered too much love in people of other faiths to write them off as fruitless searches and seekers." I believe this is the basic core which needs to be dealt with. No one is asking you to "write off" individual people; there is no doubt that humans are capable of great acts of compassion and justice simply because they are human. We are all created in the image of God as Gen. 1:27 tells us "God created humanity is his own image, in the image of God he created them, male and female he created them." Simply by being in God's image we are are loving and compassionate, capable of welcoming others and being welcomed, we are even capable of developing wonderful thoughts about the world and its workings and how to best live in it, "wisdom" as you call it.
That said, all our wisdom falls short and plays down the fundamental problems of humanity. We are sinners, the story of Adam and Eve bear witness to it along with countless other stories: Cain-Abel, Moses, Abraham the liar and one who can't trust God so he places his wife in danger not once but at least twice. In fact the entire Scripture records how the wisdom of men, continually corrupts true worship and trust in God and God alone. At some points it is money which is worshipped, at others it is national security, at times sexuality and countless other 'gods' and 'wisdom' are appealed to while the LORD is denied and refused. The LORD is placed on equal footing at times as in the case of the Samaritans, or the Israelites and Judahites and every time God chastises them and tells them he is a jealous God who refuses to share his name and his glory with any other would be gods. Isa 43:13 is one of many scriptures which state this, but it will suffice to quote only one or two "I am God, and also henceforth I am He; there is no one who can deliver from my hand; I work and who can reverse it." "Turn to me and be saved, all you ends of the earth" (Isaiah 45:22).
This is foundational to the Christian faith. A failure to recognize sin as it is and to admit that we are all sinners prone to seeking other gods and calling out to these gods and assuming they can save us is the human problem. To state that Christianity is special, but to deny Jesus Christ as the only way to God, as God incarnate, is to deny this fundamental, foundational truth and assume that you can be saved by turning to something other than God alone for your salvation. But again God is clear in Acts 4:12 "Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven, given to men by which we must be saved." Again, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved" (Acts 16:31). Or Jesus' own words, "I am the way, and the truth and the life, no one comes to the Father except through me." These words are not politically correct nor are they very palatable according to Pacific Northwest minds, but they are the truth, otherwise the entire Scripture must be thrown out for if they are not true in regard to their faith content, then they are lies and unfit for anything.
You mention the Bible as being inspired but corrupted. I would love to hear more of your thoughts on this and will not remark until I understand your concerns.
As I conclude, my thoughts continue to be drawn to your pursuit of experience in one place versus another. I would urge you not to set up experience as the standard by which you judge truth. It is enitrely possible for one to have a great experience and take in falsehood and false teaching - the Afrikaans and the Apartheid state had a "great experience" in their minds but were entirely deluded in their theology for example. Similarly it is possible to have a horrible experience but to know that what is said is true - the mother who must admit that her husband has sexually abused their children, for instance. But it is also possible to have a great experience and also be grounded in great truth - this I believe is what happens when one takes seriously the words of God in the Bible and also places them into practice. I may be wrong, but I believe what you are truly looking for is the experience of Christian discipleship to Jesus, not what you have seen or experienced in the past as "christianity" but what God truly desires for all who follow him.
Seek God but seek him on the firm foundation of His Word and his Son. I am praying for God to strengthen your faith in his Son and to draw you close through the Holy Scriptures.
Grace and Peace ...Read more
Questioning Classic Christianity #1
What follows are a series of emails between a friend of mine and myself. I think it is fair to say that he is questioning the classic formulation of Christianity and I am defending it. I have received his permission to post these email conversation but will protect his privacy, even though he has given me permission to use his first name. The first letter below was written by me in response to his request to visit the website of a church he had been attending.
14 April 2009
What I am going to write is probably not what you are going to want to hear. However, as a follower of Jesus Christ I am greatly distressed when I see wolves sneaking in and culling sheep with slick jargon and polished presentations, even using "christian" lingo but who deny the sole sufficiency of Christ and are intent on leading christ followers away into apostasy.
After reading all the links on the site www.centersoflight.org. I think this is a version of new age Hinduism mixed with universalism. These quotes from the website concern me significantly, for the word of God is placed as an equal to every other spiritual classic
All the teachings from all the world religions throughout time comprise the Ancient Wisdom Teachings. Those Master Teachers and Sages that have been sent by God to human beings over thousands of years have demonstrated and taught those who were open. These became the disciples of the Ancient Wise Ones and their lessons and teachings have been passed down through history. If you study these teachings from each of the world religions, you will note a common theme: love of God and love of neighbor.
Some Eastern religions do not have a direct conception of God, but do consider compassion and respect for all of life as very similar to the Western version of love of God. These teachings are universal and everyone who comes into a direct experience of the ONE understands anyone else who has this experience. In this unity of experience, we are all sisters and brothers in God.
While each religion shares something, since they are all the experiences of humans reaching out for God, Christianity is unique among them all for God in Christ reaches down to the world. This fundamental difference, sets Christ and all other teachers apart. They are not equals and while we can learn something about the spiritual quest from all people/faiths, it means nothing unless Christ's preeminence is maintained. I fear that the COL is not interested in such an endeavor. Here are some examples: The masculine/feminine emphasis appears to draw heavily from magik. While i believe God uses feminine language in the Scriptures to describe godself, the extreme the COL goes to make all feel ok, seems to border on what I have seen in Bahai. Or take this blatant violation of scripture: We know Jesus and Mary as co-mediators between God and human beings. The Bible teaches that there is only one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus.
Then there are the soteriological (salvation deficiencies) from the article on Suffering:
Jesus taught that suffering was caused by separating from the love of God, disconnecting through negative thoughts, actions, and emotions that take us away from God. Essentially, Jesus taught that falling away from our real nature, our true being, causes us to suffer. In order to connect again with our real nature, we have to love God first and love all of our brothers and sisters without exception. Jesus further elaborated the way to get back into oneness with God through the simple teachings of the Beatitudes. This isn't what scripture teaches, sin is what causes suffering and the way back into God's presence is through Christ and Christ alone via the sacrificial death of Jesus, not doing something that makes all religions equal.
Then the other anomalies, like Father Peter who writes on astrology and how it jives with Christ. It is condemned in scripture as a violation of trusting God alone. Humans are called to look to God not the stars for direction and security. [Friend], I really hope you take these critiques seriously, their is a bit of truth in everything the COL states but there are also lies mixed in with it all and all lies come from Satan, the father of lies. Don't be sidetracked, seek Christ and Christ alone. i know that the reformed tradition you were raised and which i pastor has a great hole in what you or I would call Spiritual Formation. This has not always been the case, but in the last hundred years or so it has been exaggerated greatly. I would urge you to seek what you are missing through men and women sincerely devoted to Christ and Christ alone. I think Dallas Willard's, The Divine Conspiracy would be a great place for you to start, it is a look at the Sermon on the Mount and its call to the Believer. Or Richard Foster's Celebration of the Disciplines is a great work on Spiritual formation.
I would love to dialog with you about this more. Keep the lines open. ...Read more
14 April 2009
What I am going to write is probably not what you are going to want to hear. However, as a follower of Jesus Christ I am greatly distressed when I see wolves sneaking in and culling sheep with slick jargon and polished presentations, even using "christian" lingo but who deny the sole sufficiency of Christ and are intent on leading christ followers away into apostasy.
After reading all the links on the site www.centersoflight.org. I think this is a version of new age Hinduism mixed with universalism. These quotes from the website concern me significantly, for the word of God is placed as an equal to every other spiritual classic
All the teachings from all the world religions throughout time comprise the Ancient Wisdom Teachings. Those Master Teachers and Sages that have been sent by God to human beings over thousands of years have demonstrated and taught those who were open. These became the disciples of the Ancient Wise Ones and their lessons and teachings have been passed down through history. If you study these teachings from each of the world religions, you will note a common theme: love of God and love of neighbor.
Some Eastern religions do not have a direct conception of God, but do consider compassion and respect for all of life as very similar to the Western version of love of God. These teachings are universal and everyone who comes into a direct experience of the ONE understands anyone else who has this experience. In this unity of experience, we are all sisters and brothers in God.
While each religion shares something, since they are all the experiences of humans reaching out for God, Christianity is unique among them all for God in Christ reaches down to the world. This fundamental difference, sets Christ and all other teachers apart. They are not equals and while we can learn something about the spiritual quest from all people/faiths, it means nothing unless Christ's preeminence is maintained. I fear that the COL is not interested in such an endeavor. Here are some examples: The masculine/feminine emphasis appears to draw heavily from magik. While i believe God uses feminine language in the Scriptures to describe godself, the extreme the COL goes to make all feel ok, seems to border on what I have seen in Bahai. Or take this blatant violation of scripture: We know Jesus and Mary as co-mediators between God and human beings. The Bible teaches that there is only one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus.
Then there are the soteriological (salvation deficiencies) from the article on Suffering:
Jesus taught that suffering was caused by separating from the love of God, disconnecting through negative thoughts, actions, and emotions that take us away from God. Essentially, Jesus taught that falling away from our real nature, our true being, causes us to suffer. In order to connect again with our real nature, we have to love God first and love all of our brothers and sisters without exception. Jesus further elaborated the way to get back into oneness with God through the simple teachings of the Beatitudes. This isn't what scripture teaches, sin is what causes suffering and the way back into God's presence is through Christ and Christ alone via the sacrificial death of Jesus, not doing something that makes all religions equal.
Then the other anomalies, like Father Peter who writes on astrology and how it jives with Christ. It is condemned in scripture as a violation of trusting God alone. Humans are called to look to God not the stars for direction and security. [Friend], I really hope you take these critiques seriously, their is a bit of truth in everything the COL states but there are also lies mixed in with it all and all lies come from Satan, the father of lies. Don't be sidetracked, seek Christ and Christ alone. i know that the reformed tradition you were raised and which i pastor has a great hole in what you or I would call Spiritual Formation. This has not always been the case, but in the last hundred years or so it has been exaggerated greatly. I would urge you to seek what you are missing through men and women sincerely devoted to Christ and Christ alone. I think Dallas Willard's, The Divine Conspiracy would be a great place for you to start, it is a look at the Sermon on the Mount and its call to the Believer. Or Richard Foster's Celebration of the Disciplines is a great work on Spiritual formation.
I would love to dialog with you about this more. Keep the lines open. ...Read more
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
