Sensual Faith.

aiki

Regular Member
Feb 16, 2007
10,874
4,348
Winnipeg
✟236,528.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
I rarely start threads but I was so...perturbed by another thread recently posted in this forum that I wrote a long blog post in response. I don't name any names but I do challenge from Scripture the ultimately destructive sensual experience of God the popular teacher/leaders of the NAR (New Apostolic Reformation)* movement are promoting especially among younger believers. Check it out:

Sensual Faith: Oh, God, You Make Me Feel Sooo Good! | Christian Forums



*(Okay, well, I will name a few more prominent names: Todd White, Mike Bickles, Steve Furtick, Bill Johnson, Cindy Jacobs, Leroy Jenkins, John Crowder, and on, and on.)
 
Last edited:

PollyJetix

Well-Known Member
Feb 15, 2017
1,128
1,241
Virginia
✟35,433.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Well... God does make me feel soooo good!
I suspect God enjoys hearing that we enjoy His presence.
But, of course, that isn't all that He enjoys hearing from us.
Things like repentance, and intercession, and praise, and worship, etc. come to mind.
We need to be balanced.

Sometimes, we are raised unbalanced... and the things we didn't grow up with seem "wrong" to us.
And then... sometimes we try to correct the imbalance... and end up jumping on the other end of the seesaw, just as imbalanced as our original position.

I suspect the NAR focus on how God makes us feel good might be a reaction against the opposite approach to God: the stoic, "God-isn't-about-making-us-feel-good" approach. I was raised in such a setting. It was considered irreverent to do anything emotional in church. I remember how if a preacher dared to be humorous in a sermon, Papa told us afterward that the preacher was out of line!
 
Upvote 0

aiki

Regular Member
Feb 16, 2007
10,874
4,348
Winnipeg
✟236,528.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Well... God does make me feel soooo good!
I suspect God enjoys hearing that we enjoy His presence.
But, of course, that isn't all that He enjoys hearing from us.
Things like repentance, and intercession, and praise, and worship, etc. come to mind.
We need to be balanced.

Yes, indeed. It is very human, though, to make the enjoyment of God, the sense of peace, and contentment, and joy that we feel in knowing and relating with Him, rather than God Himself the object or aim of our Christian living. Doing so is just another subtle intrusion of sensuality upon our walk with God.

Sometimes, we are raised unbalanced... and the things we didn't grow up with seem "wrong" to us.
And then... sometimes we try to correct the imbalance... and end up jumping on the other end of the seesaw, just as imbalanced as our original position.

I agree. I have seen this wide pendulum swing from one extreme to the other in many arenas of human thought and behaviour.

I suspect the NAR focus on how God makes us feel good might be a reaction against the opposite approach to God: the stoic, "God-isn't-about-making-us-feel-good" approach.

I'm sure this is in some measure true. I think, too, that the evangelical Church in the West has over the last fifty to sixty years grown massively juvenile in its approach to Christian thought and practice. And as it has, the sensuality of much of modern Christianity has developed. It seems the less thoughtful and careful believers are about their faith and its doctrines, the more the flesh has room in the Church in which to flex its muscles.

I don't want folks to think I'm urging them toward an emotionally flat and purely intellectual spiritual life. I'm not. Quite clearly, there is in Scripture much ground upon which to contend for taking joy and delight in walking with God. But given how easily we migrate toward sensuality in our faith, and how destructive to true spirituality such sensuality is, guarding against this migration is very important.

I was raised in such a setting. It was considered irreverent to do anything emotional in church. I remember how if a preacher dared to be humorous in a sermon, Papa told us afterward that the preacher was out of line!

Yikes! My childhood experience in the Church wasn't quite that...severe. But it was, in comparison to the carrying on in many modern churches, pretty staid and restrained. As I look at Scripture, though, this restrained side of the spectrum of spiritual living is closer to what believers are called to than the current fleshly mayhem going in many churches today. A quick search on YouTube of "toking in the spirit" or "word of faith teachers" or "Jesus culture heresy" can give you some grotesque examples of what I mean.

Thanks for your comments!

Selah.
 
Upvote 0

GandalfTheWise

In search of lost causes and hopeless battles
May 27, 2012
357
535
Wisconsin
✟71,403.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I think care must be taken to have a scriptural view of the material world. The old gnostic heresy arose largely because they had this dichotomy of the physical world being evil and the spiritual world being good. They ended up at the point of denying Christ had come in the flesh because there was no way (to their way of thinking) that a holy God could ever become sinful flesh.

I think a more scriptural view of the material world is that it is corrupted and marred. It was originally created good, but is now fallen. It still contains some aspects of the original goodness, but is now tainted. This is very different than saying it is completely evil.

I see most scriptures dealing with the flesh fitting into two general categories. The first is the impossibility of reconciliation with God through good works. No amount of animal sacrifices, acts of service, giving, etc. are adequate. Hence, many of Paul's admonitions not to fall back into trying to serve God in those old ways that didn't work. The second category is not being enslaved to material things whereby they control us. Hence many of the admonitions to flee sin and live a life of freedom and liberty in Christ. I think people very often get very sloppy with these types of verses. For example, in John where Jesus is talking to the Samaritan woman there is the oft-quoted verse about worshipping in spirit and truth. Anyone discussing this verse without at least noting the possibility that the worship she was asking about included animal sacrifices as per the Mosaic Law (and the question of whether or not it could be done anywhere except the Temple), potentially misses the point that Jesus may have primarily have been referring to the coming time when animal sacrifices would no longer be necessary. To extrapolate that verse (and others like it) as defining a dichotomy between the spiritual world being good and the material world being evil is treading near the edge of the old gnostic error.

Personally, I am uncomfortable with some the stuff I've seen in the NAR movement, but I do think some of it is a overreaction from other things. I think that the key to restoring balance is not to over-react, but rather to strive for an understanding of what role our God-given identity, interests, emotions, passions, and personalities should play in our interacting with Him.

Going into the realm of personal conjecture in this paragraph... I think the balance is to be found in being who God meant us each to be as individuals and relating to Him on that basis. Some of us are more reserved, some more expressive, some more emotional, some more thoughtful, and with different mixes of this at different times in our lives. I think that forms of expression that are a natural outflow of our heart toward God are key. It's when we try to stoke up emotions or suppress them to fit into cookie-cutter notions of what worship is "supposed to be" that we lose our ability to worship. I think worship should flow from us as our normal and natural reaction to God and what He had done. This will vary as we walk along with Him. I think we too often make it into a recipe and obligation rather than a "WOW Was THAT COOL! Did you See what God just Did?!? type of natural reaction.
 
Upvote 0

aiki

Regular Member
Feb 16, 2007
10,874
4,348
Winnipeg
✟236,528.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
I think care must be taken to have a scriptural view of the material world. The old gnostic heresy arose largely because they had this dichotomy of the physical world being evil and the spiritual world being good. They ended up at the point of denying Christ had come in the flesh because there was no way (to their way of thinking) that a holy God could ever become sinful flesh.

Humans are prone to extremes whatever the issue might be. This is why I take my cue entirely from Scripture, and not the fanciful extrapolations of many modern preachers. I think the more biblical I am in my approach to walking with God, the more sure I can be that whatever radicality in my living others might observe is exactly what God intends.

I think a more scriptural view of the material world is that it is corrupted and marred. It was originally created good, but is now fallen. It still contains some aspects of the original goodness, but is now tainted. This is very different than saying it is completely evil.

I agree. As I said in my blog post, humans are fundamentally sensual creatures. It is how God made us to be and therefore our sensuality is not in-and-of-itself evil. But, you're right: we are corrupted in our sensuality. We pursue it inordinately, beyond the constraints God puts upon us, and so enter into sin. When I surrender my pursuit of the sensual in the realm of the spiritual to God, when I yield to His way of fellowship with Him, it is only then I find the means of bringing my flesh and its incorrigible and inordinate sensuality fully under God's control. Under such a condition, I discover that the natural sensuality God has given to me is not intrinsically evil. Instead, I see that my sensuality under the control of Self rather than Christ is made to serve evil ends.

To extrapolate that verse (and others like it) as defining a dichotomy between the spiritual world being good and the material world being evil is treading near the edge of the old gnostic error.

I think there are just too many verses (several of them offered in my blog post) that delineate a clear antithetical relationship between the spiritual and the sensual (aka the flesh) to assert that saying so approaches gnosticism. I don't think, though, that I ever did say that the material world was evil. I hope this wasn't something you thought you saw plainly in my words. I need to communicate better if this is so!

Personally, I am uncomfortable with some the stuff I've seen in the NAR movement, but I do think some of it is a overreaction from other things. I think that the key to restoring balance is not to over-react, but rather to strive for an understanding of what role our God-given identity, interests, emotions, passions, and personalities should play in our interacting with Him.

I agree: over-reaction is not a good solution to most things. That's why I made all of my points from God's word. I'm confident He never over-reacts.

I think the balance is to be found in being who God meant us each to be as individuals and relating to Him on that basis. Some of us are more reserved, some more expressive, some more emotional, some more thoughtful, and with different mixes of this at different times in our lives.

Sure. I wonder, though, about the individuality thing. From what I can see in Scripture, whatever our various skills, and personality traits, and gifting might be, God is aiming us all at the same basic thing: being like Christ. (Ro. 8:29) There should be a kind of general homogeneity among believers, then, a uniformity of character and behaviour. I realize this runs right up against highly individualistic western culture, but conformity to Christ, rather than to ourselves, seems pretty evident to me in Scripture.

It's when we try to stoke up emotions or suppress them to fit into cookie-cutter notions of what worship is "supposed to be" that we lose our ability to worship. I think worship should flow from us as our normal and natural reaction to God and what He had done. This will vary as we walk along with Him. I think we too often make it into a recipe and obligation rather than a "WOW Was THAT COOL! Did you See what God just Did?!? type of natural reaction.

Can you make a case for any of this from Scripture?

Thanks for your comments!

Selah.
 
Upvote 0

GandalfTheWise

In search of lost causes and hopeless battles
May 27, 2012
357
535
Wisconsin
✟71,403.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
There should be a kind of general homogeneity among believers, then, a uniformity of character and behaviour. I realize this runs right up against highly individualistic western culture, but conformity to Christ, rather than to ourselves, seems pretty evident to me in Scripture.
I fully agree with a uniformity of Christ-like character that guides our choices and how we treat others and live our lives. The question to me is at what point does uniform behavior become legalism or acting the part rather than living our lives according to our unique callings and unique God-intended and God-given differences? Or what the real question is: Who decides which interpretation of various scripture verses constitutes the proper behavior of all Christians in all situations? As PollyJetix mentioned, jokes from the pulpit are taboo in some circles. Who decides what uniform behavior is the "scriptural" behavior?


Can you make a case for any of this from Scripture?

I think that the concept that at least some forms are worship are spontaneous heartfelt natural reactions to God and His acts is a well-established scriptural principle.

Acts 3 with the healing of the lame man in the Temple. "He jumped to his feet and began to walk. Then he went with them into the temple courts, walking and jumping, and praising God." Acts 3:8 NIV. This appears to be much more of a reaction of excitement, amazement, and thanksgiving being expressed in a unique manner than in a formal temple ritual "to be done in case of miraculous healing."

In addition, these passages seem to contain examples where praise is the natural reaction to God and what He does.
Matt 9:8, Matt 14:33, Matt 15:31, Mark 2:12, Luke 2:28, Luke 5:26, Luke 7:16, Luke 13:13, Luke 18:43, Luke 19:37, I Cor 14:25, Gal 1:24, James 5:13,

I think there are just too many verses (several of them offered in my blog post) that delineate a clear antithetical relationship between the spiritual and the sensual (aka the flesh) to assert that saying so approaches gnosticism. I don't think, though, that I ever did say that the material world was evil. I hope this wasn't something you thought you saw plainly in my words. I need to communicate better if this is so!
What I was understanding as the gist of your point was that any involvement of our human nature with worship or service of God is a bad thing. While this is certainly not gnosticism, it starts to have a similar effect if there ends up being nothing in our human selves that can be used in worship or service to God and if it ends up that real spirituality consists of suppression of everything that arises inside of us for fear it might be sin. I think the point that needs to be cleared defined is the difference between "old man"/sin-nature/flesh (which cannot please God) and what unique human parts of us are there because God wants them to be there and should be used in worship and service.

(This is a nice thread. It's forcing me to clarify my thoughts on a few points.)
 
Upvote 0

ezeric

HE loves me too.
Mar 2, 2010
2,262
166
Canada but really in JESUS! (in HIS Covenant)
Visit site
✟12,835.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Hey Aiki

If its your actual B-Day, then have a fun and blessed one. Its good to enjoy family and get-togethers, times of refreshing the Scripture says. And I sincerely hope you have birthday to remember.

And I guess that is the question I have regarding "senses" and "flesh" as your blog talks about. I don't think they are the same things, and I am not saying YOU are saying that they are the same either.

I think its important that folks know they are not the same.

Its just that simply the flesh is "selfishness" and that ruins our selves, and others, and affects our senses, (we can't even see straight when we are mad for example). It can destroy the mood of the room, or your birthday celebration for example.

We all know what self can do.

I think that is what "flesh" is, its bigger than our senses and takes over everything. But if we walk in the SPIRIT (which is walking in LOVE) then it destroys the flesh, it also changes the mood, it also makes us see but using SPIRIT eyes, or 'eyes of the heart'.

And its the greatest thing!!

-eric
 
Upvote 0

aiki

Regular Member
Feb 16, 2007
10,874
4,348
Winnipeg
✟236,528.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
I fully agree with a uniformity of Christ-like character that guides our choices and how we treat others and live our lives. The question to me is at what point does uniform behavior become legalism or acting the part rather than living our lives according to our unique callings and unique God-intended and God-given differences?

A great question! Can a uniformity of behaviour that is in conformity to Christ ever become legalistic? It seems to me the closer people come to full Christlikeness, the farther from legalism they would be in their thinking and behaviour. I'm not sure why you would think that as people converge upon Christ more and more in their living and being, their "unique callings" and character and personality distinctives would diminish. Can you explain a bit?

Who decides which interpretation of various scripture verses constitutes the proper behavior of all Christians in all situations?

So, are you thinking that all scripture is up for grabs as far as its interpretation is concerned? Do you believe there are no clear, unequivocal statements the Bible makes about Christian doctrine, practice and the will and nature of God?

Acts 3 with the healing of the lame man in the Temple. "He jumped to his feet and began to walk. Then he went with them into the temple courts, walking and jumping, and praising God." Acts 3:8 NIV. This appears to be much more of a reaction of excitement, amazement, and thanksgiving being expressed in a unique manner than in a formal temple ritual "to be done in case of miraculous healing."

In addition, these passages seem to contain examples where praise is the natural reaction to God and what He does.
Matt 9:8, Matt 14:33, Matt 15:31, Mark 2:12, Luke 2:28, Luke 5:26, Luke 7:16, Luke 13:13, Luke 18:43, Luke 19:37, I Cor 14:25, Gal 1:24, James 5:13,

Thanks for the scriptural leg work here! It's interesting that the passage from Acts 3 that you cited is merely descriptive, not prescriptive. The passage doesn't tell us to go and do likewise; it just records the formerly lame man's reaction to being healed. His is certainly a natural response to being healed. Walking and jumping would be things I would be doing, too, if I'd just been healed of lameness. But is this kind of behaviour what believers ought to aim for in their worship and praise of God? I'm not so sure...

I am absolutely for our worship and praise of God arising naturally from our recognition of His power, grace, holiness, and love. But is praise arising from this recognition the same thing as praise being expressed in a sensual, physical (aka "natural") way? Many of the verses you cited don't record anything but the fact that God was glorified. How, exactly, is not described in much detail or in most cases prescribed, either. What is common throughout all of the verses is the orientation of the person upon God; He is the focus, not the effect upon one's senses occasioned by God's activity. I don't see this going on within the NAR movement. It is the sensual experience of God that is the main thing, not God Himself.

What I was understanding as the gist of your point was that any involvement of our human nature with worship or service of God is a bad thing.

Ah. I see. Well, I wasn't intending to go that far in my blog post. As I said a couple of times in it, we are inevitably sensual beings. It's how God has made us. We can't ever entirely free ourselves from this reality; nor, I think, should we. Our propensity to be sensual about everything, however, to want an experience that stimulates our physical senses, is a propensity that arises from our flesh, from our physical (and fallen) nature, and as such is extremely prone to Self-centeredness rather than God-centeredness. Inasmuch as this is so, we ought to work as much as possible to limit appeals to our fleshly, sensual nature in our worship and fellowship with God. We can't do so entirely, however, since we are fundamentally material beings. We sing songs of praise, we pray, we listen to sermons and talk about God's truth, we encourage each other and are the hands, and feet, and heart of Christ to a lost world. To one degree or another, doing these things involves our physical senses and our bodies. And that's all right. How else are we to do these things if not with our physical selves? But I must be very careful to remember that "the flesh lusts against the Spirit and the Spirit against the flesh, and these are contrary the one to the other" (Ga. 5:17) and that "he who sows to the flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption." (Ga. 6:7) In light of these truths, I must keep a tight rein on my flesh, on my inclination to reduce the spiritual to the physical, and center my focus upon Christ, not upon a sensual experience of him.

I think the point that needs to be cleared defined is the difference between "old man"/sin-nature/flesh (which cannot please God) and what unique human parts of us are there because God wants them to be there and should be used in worship and service.

(This is a nice thread. It's forcing me to clarify my thoughts on a few points.)

I agree. And, for me, making clear distinctions in this regard is a work in progress. How do you apply the verses I offered in my blog post about the contrariness of the spiritual to the physical to your own life? At this point, I look primarily at what my focus is as I worship, serve and fellowship with God. Anything (of the flesh in particular) that diverts my attention away from God, from Christ, from the Holy Spirit, is an enemy of my walk with Him. If, for instance, the songs of worship that I sing provoke my body, and appeal to a self-centered acknowledgement of God, or bring God down to my level rather than lifting me up to His, I ought to reject them. If the preacher I listen to is constantly urging me to sensual experiences of God (ie healing, tongues, being slain in the Spirit, energy play, etc) rather than "walking by faith, not by sight," I ought to find another preacher to listen to. If I am looking constantly for physical/emotional validation of my relationship with God via sensations of Him (tingles, electric shocks, warm oozies) or strong emotional activation (laughing, crying) then I've begun to go very awry in my walk with Him. What do you think? Do you have any concrete standards in this area?

I'm glad the thread is of benefit to you. It is to me, too. Your comments help me refine my thinking and my explanations of it. Thanks!

Aiki.
 
Upvote 0

aiki

Regular Member
Feb 16, 2007
10,874
4,348
Winnipeg
✟236,528.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Hey Aiki

If its your actual B-Day, then have a fun and blessed one. Its good to enjoy family and get-togethers, times of refreshing the Scripture says. And I sincerely hope you have birthday to remember.

Well, thank you for the kind birthday wishes, Ezeric. My B-Day was very fun! Lots of food, family, friends, and goofing off!

And I guess that is the question I have regarding "senses" and "flesh" as your blog talks about. I don't think they are the same things, and I am not saying YOU are saying that they are the same either.

Hmmm...Would you concede, at least, that they overlap each other? Let me give you an example: If, say, I was going to commit the fleshly sin of gluttony, would I be able to do so without being sensual about it? How could I overeat and not engage my sense of taste, and smell, and sight? Aren't these physical senses a big part of the provocation to overeat? You know, the smell of the thick crust all-meat pizza with double cheese and marinara sauce, the sour/sweet taste of strawberry-rhubarb pie with a dollop of ice cream, the sight of a medium-rare steak cooked to perfection. I don't know about you, but these smells, and tastes, and sights can lead me to an over-indulgence in food. Anyway, can you see the overlap I'm talking about?

Its just that simply the flesh is "selfishness" and that ruins our selves, and others, and affects our senses, (we can't even see straight when we are mad for example). It can destroy the mood of the room, or your birthday celebration for example.

I agree that selfishness really ruins things. That is certainly the case when I'm selfish. Can you make a case, though, from Scripture for your thinking here? I don't see the term "flesh" or "fleshly" limited in Scripture in the way you are proposing here. Why do think that it is?

I think that is what "flesh" is, its bigger than our senses and takes over everything.

Why, then, do you think Scripture uses words like "flesh" or "fleshly" or "carnal" to describe this part of us that is so very contrary to the spiritual things of God?

But if we walk in the SPIRIT (which is walking in LOVE) then it destroys the flesh, it also changes the mood, it also makes us see but using SPIRIT eyes, or 'eyes of the heart'.

And its the greatest thing!!

Can you describe to me what you mean, exactly, by "walk in the Spirit" or "walking in love"?

Thanks for your comments!
 
Upvote 0