Superiority Complex.

[Eudaimonist]

Kind of like the 12 Steps for drunks--you prayerfully take them in order.

That's not such a great analogy. There are methods for dealing with one's alcohol addiction that don't involve the 12 Step method.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[razeontherock]

I chose seeker because I no longer wish to identify myself in terms of an -ism.

I don't identify with an ism either. But you dodged the question; do you know Jesus?

 

[razeontherock]

What has religion got to do with reality? what is real about a religion? they are all beliefs.

Dude, you're a broken record. You sound just like UKGrace. Where has she been lately? Hhmmm ...

All you're saying is your experience is religion holds nothing for you, based on your total lack of relevant info. We know that by your icon. Fact is, religion holds nothing for me either but you haven't managed to wrap your head around that yet so you're in no position to condescend on the basis of intellect.

It's old. Think just a little harder?

 

[razeontherock]

Not to suggest that I believe that I am Christian, but why does #3 depend on #2 and #1, instead of #2 and #1 simply being a recommended method for reaching or preparing oneself for #3? Isn't #3 really the heart of it all, in the Christian view? If someone has achieved #3, but not #1 or #2, wouldn't that be all that is required for "Kingdom admission"?

I've asked essentially this same question to a believer in another thread, to let him see if he does know Scripture or not as he claims. I thoroughly understand where you're coming from and offer no opinion of my own as I don't 'sit that high,' so to speak. I can and will give you the Bible's perspective on it:

in this life, the kingdom that is within reach suffers violence, and the violent take it by force. This is not only advocated, but is the definition of meekness. (As in the meek shall inherit the Earth.) People typically confuse this with weakness. You may do this (not confuse it but arrive at the goal) well and it seems you do from where I sit. It would be hard to classify this as meekness though, because there's no aspect of submission specifically to G-d. OTOH, you may actually be submitting to ancient philosphers, and it would be a hard case to make that they had no inspiration. So I'm not about to enter an opinion on that one ...

Entering eternal life, (notice I refrain from the term "going to heaven" since I see no justification for it's use and to me it smacks of religiosity, meaning false man-made notions)

the applicable term becomes whoever doesn't go the prescribed way (back to Ephraim's post, 1, 2, 3) is the same as a thief, or a robber. Again, I won't pretend to announce the outcome, but it doesn't sound good. The "bending the knee" thing seems to be a big thing, and I share your disdain for it. I literally lost everything I had including my ability, and was on my death bed before I actually would submit. At our age now, there's much more to lose.

And just like in the OT, the expected cycle is to prosper after the Lord delivers us out of our troubles, then we forget the Lord, suffer, cry out for deliverance, he delivers, we forget the Lord ... rinse and repeat. He desires us to get off that treadmill and mature. Which brings us full circle in the conversation to where you came in!

I don't think He'd mind being considered as a life insurance policy, but Pascal's wager doesn't cut it. Basis? Job did the life insurance thing. Worked for him.

 

[Catherineanne]

The criteria for Kingdom admission is: #1. Do you believe Jesus is Who He claims to be?; #2. Do you believe that he did for you all His Abba commissioned Him to do for all?; #3. Are you allowing yourself to be transformed into His image and likeness by your complete surrender to His indwelling Holy Spirit?

Where does the Bible say this?

This is modern interpretation, but it is not Scripture. It contains some truth, but not enough. Not least because Christ was not 'commissioned' by God, like some kind of travelling salesman.

Good luck with that.

 

[hikersong]

Late response to these earlier comments:

Wait WHAT??? You can't be "scared into Faith." MODS: please take note this is why it's vital to be able to speak freely!

Sure you can. I would agree with you that anything that is entered because of fear doesn't have the value that something entered with free will. But there are plenty of people (millions if not billions), myself included, who have grown up with the teaching that if you don't believe in Christ you will go to hell. Many will be brought up being told they are sinners. You saying that doesn't influence many kids to "pray the prayer"? Even subconsciously? I know for a fact it does. And once in the club it's not an easy one to get out of...in other words, a lot of those who entered through fear will stay for the ride. It can be a nice, friendly, caring club to be in. The singing and emotional charge can be wonderful too. I'm not knocking it or them per se. And I'm not saying that a faith chosen freely can't exist. I'm simply saying that it can't truly be chosen freely in that context.

(PS...yes, I know none of this is what you would call true christianity. I'm talking about the reality of how faith starts off for many).

I guarantee you if this is how I viewed Faith I would NOT be a Christian! So much like my statement to B&W, (one of our very few Jews here) if that's all you encountered of Christianity, you made a good choice by getting away from it.

That's not all I encountered. As I grew and explored I discovered, I searched for, more mature versions of what faith could be and could become. But many don't. Many get "saved" and see that as the end goal. Which is why I think the doctrine of hell, even if it were a Truth, is a counter- productive, or at least inefficient way of producing all the good "fruits" (love, patience, kindness etc) which God is allegedly in the business of growing in people.

I'll respond to the rest in another post.

 

[Wicked Willow]

Where does the Bible say this?

This is modern interpretation, but it is not Scripture. It contains some truth, but not enough. Not least because Christ was not 'commissioned' by God, like some kind of travelling salesman.

Good luck with that.

Aye. Listening to present-day christians often sounds as if the Good News is an insurance deal, or a legal loophole within the Celestial administration.

 

[hikersong]

There are some things we can know:

The fear of G-d is the beginning of wisdom.

This isn't something we know. This is something that we are told if we grow up in some Christian settings. And even then the emphasis can vary tremendously. Some places emphasise the "FEAR" in fear. Some say that the word "fear" mean something more like our word "respect". Remember, I'm not personally looking for an exegesis because I don't accept the Bible as God's word anyway.

Faith and fear are opposites.

And though I don't believe in the bible as God's word, I would observe that in at least one place the bible says that it is love and fear which are opposites ("perfect love casts out fear"). As I said in my post above, fear can lead to a faith of sorts...even if it isn't what we might call true faith.

Perfect love casts out fear.

There you go. I wrote the above before even noticing this comment. I think these are wise words that hold relevant truth, and which many could understand or identify with. If you get hugged at the right moments, it's a lot harder to be frightened!

Salvation is put in us by G-d, and to be worked out by us. With fear and trembling.

Again, teaching that come across to me as man-made dogma rather than universal truth. I would say that there is an equivalent to this that people like Mark express without ever needing to reference God and faith. It is the idea of challenging ourselves, and allowing ourselves to be challenged, to change with an integrity that will sometimes take us to uncomfortable places.

So the fear of the Lord endures.

Certainly fear is enduring, and encouraged to grow in many human contexts. Shame.

Is that paradoxical? YUP. Yet I have no problem reconciling all that.

I do.

Again, the train of thought (whatever thread that's in) that it takes the Holy Spirit to understand this comes into play here. This is intentional! G-d actually enjoys our company, and won't allow us to explain certain things to others, reserving that for Himself BECAUSE HE LIKE IT.

I'm surprised that you resort to this Ray. It's a cop out. But just for the record, I'm all ears.

 

[Wicked Willow]

It may be a small detour from the OP, but... is "fear" really the best translation for the Hebrew term used in that context? I'd go for something more akin to "awe" or "respect" - the kind of feeling you get when faced with something that is so vast and powerful that you seem little more than a speck of dust by comparison.

 

[razeontherock]

Sure you can. [be scared into Faith]

You can be scared into trying to keep the law. And that can be a learning experience while we mature, until we're ready to receive Faith.

Which is why I think the doctrine of hell, even if it were a Truth, is a counter- productive, or at least inefficient way of producing all the good "fruits" (love, patience, kindness etc) which God is allegedly in the business of growing in people.

Agreed heartily. The only problem? Jesus taught on hell. Quite a bit. I don't like it any more than any of the rest of you, believe that! He didn't like going there either.

 

[razeontherock]

Aye. Listening to present-day christians often sounds as if the Good News is an insurance deal, or a legal loophole within the Celestial administration.

The post this is in response to was actually on solid ground. Perhaps lost in translation across the pond, but "commissioned" is a synonym of Anointed or sent. Jesus was both. Analogy fits.

 

[Wicked Willow]

Agreed heartily. The only problem? Jesus taught on hell. Quite a bit. I don't like it any more than any of the rest of you, believe that! He didn't like going there either.

Well, the gospels are a condensed (and not very literal) version of what the authors considered important or memorable. If hell had become a focal point of Christian theology by the second half of the 1st century (as the differences between the synoptics and the gospel of John might suggest), then chances are that they put quite a lot of emphasis on that aspect.

 

[razeontherock]

I would observe that in at least one place the bible says that it is love and fear which are opposites ("perfect love casts out fear"). If you get hugged at the right moments, it's a lot harder to be frightened!

Being hugged at the right moment is not perfect love, even though it can feel like it. Perfect Love casting out fear doesn't make them opposites, although Faith and Love are repeatedly entangled so trying to separate them can be like trying to separate soul and spirit. (We're not so good at it)

Faith "feeds" light, while fear feeds darkness. If you can contact Love in the midst of darkness, I want whatever you're on.

Again, teaching that come across to me as man-made dogma rather than universal truth. I would say that there is an equivalent to this that people like Mark express without ever needing to reference God and faith. It is the idea of challenging ourselves, and allowing ourselves to be challenged, to change with an integrity that will sometimes take us to uncomfortable places.

I don't expect you to accept the word of G-d, but Mark is not a valid comparison here. (Mark can feel free to challenge me on this) I see no reason to think this discomfort involves "fear and trembling," in the very literal sense we are told to work out our Salvation here. The difference is impending Judgment, which he denies. Other than that detail (which is the whole point of that verse) the analogy holds, rather well I think.

Certainly fear is enduring, and encouraged to grow in many human contexts. Shame.

You say that only because you aren't able to harmonize those aspects from my post you responded to. (A better quote function would be really handy here)

I'm surprised that you resort to this Ray. It's a cop out.

No, it's valid experience. G-d personally retains the right of enjoying certain gifts. How would you like it if I got your kids up on Christmas morning and opened their presents with them without you? Have a heart man.

Took me quite a bit of time, effort and tears to gain this perspective.

 

[razeontherock]

Well, the gospels are a condensed (and not very literal) version of what the authors considered important or memorable.

QUITE right, on the condensed part. What makes you say they didn't write down what they felt was important? I think they literally did; also being careful to retain the figurative aspects of Jesus' teaching, as it pierces the veil of conception so well. I don't think any of the authors show any sign of being able to duplicate that skill.

If hell had become a focal point of Christian theology by the second half of the 1st century then chances are that they put quite a lot of emphasis on that aspect.

They did. An outrageously large amount of emphasis. And further research (by them, shortly thereafter) only increased both the emphasis and conviction on the topic. Doesn't mean I like it. I'd much prefer hell being a temporary thing, corrective or destructive. I'm not sure we can rule that out. I have done basically 0 research into the so-called "Church Fathers," basically due to my utter disdain of the dishonesty involved w/ pretending the organized Church has any actual connection to Peter and Paul. Hope I can grow past that someday.

In the meantime it doesn't do to make up what we don't know, and if you can't tell I do respect you unbelievers for being true to yourselves.

Beats a hypocritical Christian any day!

 

[razeontherock]

It may be a small detour from the OP, but... is "fear" really the best translation for the Hebrew term used in that context? I'd go for something more akin to "awe" or "respect" - the kind of feeling you get when faced with something that is so vast and powerful that you seem little more than a speck of dust by comparison.

This is very valid in at least some contexts, and my Sister the lightworker agrees with you. I say this element of reverential awe remains in the contexts where the concept is real FEAR as well. For example, EVERY time the risen Jesus appears to someone, they fall "at his feet as if dead." THAT, WW, is FEAR. There's also the element you describe so beautifully, of that you can be sure.

And I don't think this is a detour from the OP AT ALL! What's gone wrong w/ Christians not only being perceived as acting all superior, but also inwardly being corrupted by it? This element is missing, for sure. There may be a hideously long list to go along with it, but rest assured this one part is out of whack.

Brings to mind the phrase "there but for the Grace of G-d go I."

 

[Eudaimonist]

As I said in my post above, fear can lead to a faith of sorts...even if it isn't what we might call true faith.

I think we need to be clear on what we mean by faith here. Does it mean belief? Or trust?

I think that fear/awe/respect can lead to belief, or reinforce belief, but it can't lead to trust all by itself. It may be necessary, but not sufficient.

One might have awe of Cthulhu, but that doesn't mean one trusts Cthulhu.

It seems to me that a choice to trust is required in addition to awe-inspired belief.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Eudaimonist]

I see no reason to think this discomfort involves "fear and trembling," in the very literal sense we are told to work out our Salvation here.

True, there is no fear and trembling as if of the mysterium tremendum.

Perhaps at times there is some of the more usual sort of fear, such as that associated with stepping outside of one's comfort zone. But this is something vastly different.

I'd say that my usual attitude towards personal growth (the only equivalent I can think of to Salvation) is one of heroic engagement with life. Courage is one's sure footing, confidence is the wind at one's back, and one's daimon guides one's forward like the North Star.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[razeontherock]

It seems to me that a choice to trust is required in addition to awe-inspired belief.

Ok I've read enough people post they "can't choose faith," that I'll share I can't choose trust. This is why I've studied Scripture so much, with a keen eye to reconciling those difficult passages that lead others to dismiss "psycopath G-d."

 

[Eudaimonist]

I'll share I can't choose trust.

Can you choose to trust people? Or is it only God that you can't choose to trust?


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[ephraimanesti]

Can you choose to trust people? Or is it only God that you can't choose to trust?


eudaimonia,

Mark

MY BROTHER,

Given that "people" were created by God is His image and likeness, most--(at least in my opinion and experience)--can be trusted to varying degrees--the closer they are to a return to God's character, the higher the level of trust the engender.

ABBA'S FOOL,
ephraim