Hey Christians, do my views make me not one of you in your eyes?

Originally posted by dominicus
12. The teachings of Jesus were dumbed down to the masses because what he had to say was completely over their heads. Therefor our versions of Christianity since then has been based on dumbed down teachings.

You should be burned at the stake!!!

Just kidding!

I tell you a really funny story with my Christian life. I've been a Christian for all my life. Some time ago, my parents were complaining how un-Christian I am like I don't honor them, I am not humble enough, I don't suck up to people for opportunities, I don't suck up/grovel to my boss, etc..

At that point, I fully agreed with them. Also for many years, they kept pushing me to read the Bible cover-to-cover which I didn't.

Finally, I did read the Bible whole. Then found out the teachings of Jesus, they were radical!! Also found that only very few % of Christians I know follow the literal teachings of Jesus - those who belong to a very poor mountain tribe. All the Christians I know who had a house and a car, could not follow these teachings.

Then I came back to my parents, telling them that I've finally studied the Bible. Told them about Jesus, in the literal context. They went a bit mad and were quick to quote verses in the Old Testament. They also told that only FEW people were called/chosen to do such extreme acts for God. But Jesus said otherwise, and ALL were called/chosen but only FEW will find it. Finally, they said I need someone else 'more mature' to guide me in the Bible. But didn't Jesus say, the 'Spirit of Truth' will guide us to the truth? Jesus didn't say another person. Man or woman's responsibility is only to preach the gospel and cause people to repent, after which the Spirit of Truth will be assigned to them.

Doesn't sound really funny ain't it? First they thought I'm not Christian enough and I agreed. They pushed me to read the Bible and I did. After studying the Bible, I told them, something is wrong with how we live Christianity. I've changed since then, I no longer desire to be wealthy - it's evil, it's killing our planet. Then my parents seemed to have regretted the change I've undergone when it's their 'fault' why I changed!!

That's the irony. I keep praying to God to release them from the bondage of wealth. We are not rich, we live in a 3rd country - Philippines! But they worship money and worldly opportunities so much they don't realize it. They were brainwashed on the importance of money (money is god) as children as they were poorer back then. They were severely punished for breaking things. They will do anything for worldly opportunities, grovel, beg, suck up, etc. and they are pushing me to do the same, and I no longer agree with them.

Jesus was right to hate father and mother. I don't hate my parents, but they are starting to hate me!

Although my parents justify pursuit of wealth to help the poor and I believe them, they were really generous to the poor. But I can see their motives are wrong, I can analyze them psychologically somehow and their real motives is to be ahead of our neighbors, relatives, to get their praises, to be esteemed, and not loving God above all. But this is not the intent of Jesus and warns against the pursuit of wealth for any reasons, even for the missions, the work for God. It's our job to preach the Gospel, do missions etc. It's entirely NOT our responsibility to financially support our work for God. "Anything the righteous asks will be given to them" Miracles do happen a lot and very often to those who truly obey this principle.

The greatest pitfall of many Christians is their love for the 'good things' in this world. I have to be very concise now, I'm running out of space...

If you say you are a Christian and eating 3 meals a day, or 2 meals, whatever suits you, has clothing, and possible, a house, car, a few gadgets. But then, there are a billion who is hungry, 16,000 children dying of hunger per day on other parts of the world. And guess what, these are your neighbors!! Would you let yourself starve to death?? Jesus doesn't limit distance, or ethnicity, race, etc as your neighbors, "Parable of the good Samaritan"

reply to post by dominicus

Wildtimes, thanks for the acknowledgement and respect. I have Love for all and try my darnest not to distinguish between folks and judge, the way evangelicals do. Love all and the golden rule and such. I do believe only the Christian Mystics will be the only surviving actual Christians in the midst of all the changes that are upon the horizon and the rapid growth of militant atheism

Totally agree with you, dominicus.
Thanks for being on ATS!

Originally posted by windword

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by wildtimes
Who decides it's "bad teaching"?

Why wouldn't orthodox Christians be able to define something as being unorthodox?

Why would "unorthodox" be considered "bad teaching?"

It's always the unorthodox who provide us with new and cutting edge thinking. What used to be unorthodox is now common knowledge, like the earth's orbit around the sun, not the other way around.

Thinking outside the box is all well and good, and if you come up with some new insights into Christianity that don't conflict with it, great, that would not be unorthodox or heretical. But if your insights are contrary to Christian teaching, such as supporting reincarnation, they are heretical.

Consider a maths teacher. For some reason, they have come to the conclusion that 2 + 2 does not equal four, but rather equals five, and they insist on teaching their pupils this view. What would happen then? Most likely, the principal would sit them down, tell them that they are wrong and need to stop misleading people, and if they refused, they would be fired.

That is what the early church did, and it's described by both Jesus and Paul. If someone was a heretic, you went and tried to get them back on track, and if they refused, you kicked them out of the church.

It is unreasonable to say that Christians cannot standards for themselves, and the majority of those standards were set over 1,500 years ago. If someone wants to hold contrarian views, why would they want to be called a Christian anyway? We're not well liked.

Originally posted by adjensen

Thinking outside the box is all well and good, and if you come up with some new insights into Christianity that don't conflict with it, great, that would not be unorthodox or heretical. But if your insights are contrary to Christian teaching, such as supporting reincarnation, they are heretical.

The Christ is androgynous. Male and female. To follow Christ, male Christians need to get in touch with their inner feminine, as Jesus did, and female Christians need to get in touch with their inner masculine. A mystical unity between pairs of opposites must take place in the soul of Christians. A 'Hieros Gamos'.

Instead, Christians are repressing aspects of themselves...and when you repress a part of the soul it surfaces elsewhere as a 'demon'. Thus, the unnessesary conflict between uninitiated, judgmental, ignorant Christian 'babes' and the homosexual community. If Christians had an androgynous spirit as Christ, if they were mystics...this conflict would not be taking place. It is entirely due to the immaturity, foolishness, and mystical inadequacy of 'orthodox' Christians. The mainstream orthodox Christian community needs to be severely rebuked for this by Christians outside the mainstream.

Heretical or not in your opinion? Contrary?

reply to post by BlueMule


Just heretical, because it goes against both OT and NT scripture. Are you gnostic?

Originally posted by BlueMule

Originally posted by adjensen

Thinking outside the box is all well and good, and if you come up with some new insights into Christianity that don't conflict with it, great, that would not be unorthodox or heretical. But if your insights are contrary to Christian teaching, such as supporting reincarnation, they are heretical.

The Christ is androgynous. Male and female. To follow Christ, male Christians need to get in touch with their inner feminine, as Jesus did, and female Christians need to get in touch with their inner masculine. A mystical unity between pairs of opposites must take place in the soul of Christians. A 'Hieros Gamos'.

Heretical or not in your opinion? Contrary? Unorthodox? What?

Well, I think it is a good idea to become a well rounded person through introspection, but Christ never said anything about male Christians needing to get in touch with their inner feminine in order to follow him, so to say that it is required for salvation is an invalid claim.

reply to post by adjensen


There was a lot Jesus didn't say. But he did say to pick up your cross and follow him, didn't he? Do you suppose that means heading to the Holy land and retracing his footsteps?

Of course not...it means becoming a mystic. Not sitting in a pew once in a while, or going through the motions of rituals that were once animated by mystical understanding, or donating to a particular political party.

Part of becoming a mystic is ego-death & resurrection, and part of it is inner unity of opposites. That is how a Christian is to become born again, and how the Sacred Marriage is consummated.

www.amazon.com...

But Christians aren't following Jesus example to become mystics...they are staying as children on a diet of milk...and that is why there is a 'great falling away' and why many who think they are Christians will cry 'Lord, lord...'

Originally posted by BlueMule
reply to post by adjensen

 

There was a lot Jesus didn't say. But he did say to pick up your cross and follow him, didn't he? Do you suppose that means heading to the Holy land and retracing his footsteps?

Of course not...it means becoming a mystic.

And where do you find the basis for that belief?

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by BlueMule
reply to post by adjensen

 

There was a lot Jesus didn't say. But he did say to pick up your cross and follow him, didn't he? Do you suppose that means heading to the Holy land and retracing his footsteps?

Of course not...it means becoming a mystic.

And where do you find the basis for that belief?

Oh, is this the part where you try to root out 'the basis' and hand-wave it away because it isn't preached from an approved pulpit every Sunday? Or because Jesus didn't actually spell out the basis himself in red-letter?

"Oh, that's your basis? It's just a trick of the Devil!"

I linked you to a book in my last post. I recommend you read it before you play that old trump card, if that was your intent. And if it wasn't, then I'm sure you'll want to read it out of an open-minded thirst for knowledge.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by windword

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by wildtimes
Who decides it's "bad teaching"?

Why wouldn't orthodox Christians be able to define something as being unorthodox?

Why would "unorthodox" be considered "bad teaching?"

It's always the unorthodox who provide us with new and cutting edge thinking. What used to be unorthodox is now common knowledge, like the earth's orbit around the sun, not the other way around.

Thinking outside the box is all well and good, and if you come up with some new insights into Christianity that don't conflict with it, great, that would not be unorthodox or heretical. But if your insights are contrary to Christian teaching, such as supporting reincarnation, they are heretical.

Consider a maths teacher. For some reason, they have come to the conclusion that 2 + 2 does not equal four, but rather equals five, and they insist on teaching their pupils this view. What would happen then? Most likely, the principal would sit them down, tell them that they are wrong and need to stop misleading people, and if they refused, they would be fired.

That is what the early church did, and it's described by both Jesus and Paul. If someone was a heretic, you went and tried to get them back on track, and if they refused, you kicked them out of the church.

It is unreasonable to say that Christians cannot standards for themselves, and the majority of those standards were set over 1,500 years ago. If someone wants to hold contrarian views, why would they want to be called a Christian anyway? We're not well liked.

Christianity is as diverse as the world is small. There are about 8,000 sects of Buddhism and about 80,000 sects of Christianity. There are Christians who deny the divinity of Jesus, those who don't believe in the trinty, those that don't believe in special days, those who makes "saints" of people and those who say that is blasphemy.

You have a very narrow and limited view that you ascribe to your own contrite view of what Christianity is and is not. But truly, a Christian is a person who tries to follow the teachings of a man called Jesus, as best as they personally understand them. Not necessarily the way you, or anybody else, understands them.

Jesus said "I am the way." Not, my preachers will tell you the way later.

There are Christians who only follow the "Gospels" and deny Pauline doctrine, and, there are Gnostic Christians. There are Christians who believe that Jesus taught reincarnation. You might not call them Christians, but they think of themselves as such. This is the common ground that OP is trying to find, the chasm he is trying to bridge.

It's unfortunate, because fundamental types always chase these kinds of people away, Rather than embracing them as brothers and sisters in "Christ," you say, "No, you're not a Christian, you need to change to be called a Christian.

reply to post by adjensen

There was a lot Jesus didn't say. But he did say to pick up your cross and follow him, didn't he? Do you suppose that means heading to the Holy land and retracing his footsteps? Of course not...it means becoming a mystic.

And where do you find the basis for that belief?

for me, I was a status quo evangelical chugging along happily in my pew, when eventually it was recommended I get rebaptized. So I did. 2-3weeks later after the rebaptizm is when all the fireworks began.

The Holy Spirit descended on me and it was ego death, I was like a new born baby, I could see into the afterlife, my third eye became illuminated and I could see things I won't even speak of here, added to me was transcendence, timelessness, divine Love. I had to quit my job and be a hermit for a year just to relearn how to function in life because I was literally like a new born with a blank slate.

I go back to the evangelical leaders to ask them about my mystical experiences, and they stood there with these blank faces not having a clue what to say. A famous published theologian even asked me if perhaps the devil is in my life !!! Imagine that!!! Here I am in complete LOVE with strangers and directly experiencing Infinity, and this supposed expert church scholar and leader has no idea about these experiences.

Eventually someone told me to call an Orthodox monastery. I called and spoke with the Abbott, and he basically says, "Welcome to the Divine Mysteries my son.... welcome to the club of real Christianity" and goes on to point me towards books on Meister Eckhart, Teresa of Avila, St. John of the Cross, the CLoud of Unknowing,and especially the Desert Fathers(philokalia).

So I dug into these books and found the same experiences in them that I was now going through. This was real, this was beyond faith and reading a book. This was direct knowing and experiencing of the spiritual realms and things of God.

I looked back on the Evangelicals and found that they had created a Westernized watered down version of Christianity. The music evokes emotion and the sermons stimulate the mind and tho Soul ...but underneath it all we are all called for a total ego death and transformation.

I had no choice to become a Christian Mystic. I was thrust into it completely unknowest and blindly, and can never look back since then. ANd find the NT alive and breathing when I read the words of Christ, I feel the Mystical nature and transcendence oozing from every word.

In Paul, I find a work in progress. Someone not yet complete in his spiritual journey. When I read the NT, I hold the words in red in the highest esteem and everything takes a back seat to what he says

Originally posted by BlueMule

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by BlueMule
reply to post by adjensen

 

There was a lot Jesus didn't say. But he did say to pick up your cross and follow him, didn't he? Do you suppose that means heading to the Holy land and retracing his footsteps?

Of course not...it means becoming a mystic.

And where do you find the basis for that belief?

Oh, is this the part where you try to root out 'the basis' and hand-wave it away because it isn't preached from an approved pulpit every Sunday? Or because Jesus didn't actually spell out the basis himself in red-letter?

No, this is the part where I ask what your basis is for something that you claimed, which I disagree with, but could be convinced to change my mind, if the basis is reasonable.

"Oh, that's your basis? It's just a trick of the Devil!"

I am pretty sure that I've never said that in my life.

I linked you to a book in my last post. I recommend you read it before you play that old trump card, if that was your intent. And if it wasn't, then I'm sure you'll want to read it out of an open-minded thirst for knowledge.

Telling me to go read a book, instead of just telling me yourself, is kind of inane. Not only do I have to buy a book, but I guess the discourse is on hold until they ship it to me, I finish the other books I'm reading right now, and then go through it?

No. If you have a point of basis to relate, just say what it is.

reply to post by windword


I am really tired of arguing this point, so I'm just going to let it go. Call whoever you want Christians.

Originally posted by dominicus
for me, I was a status quo evangelical chugging along happily in my pew, when eventually it was recommended I get rebaptized. So I did. 2-3weeks later after the rebaptizm is when all the fireworks began.

Just a point of question -- why did they recommend that you be "re-baptized"? Did you convert to a church that believes in adult baptism?

As for your story, I think I better understand it now, thank you. I have done some reading on John of the Cross and Teresa of Ávila, and yes, you will find acceptance of Christian Mysticism a lot more forthcoming from Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox than you will with any Protestant denomination. But I'm still pretty sure that reincarnation is not orthodox, even within mysticism, though the pre-existence of the soul might be, as it is a Jewish belief.

reply to post by adjensen


It's not about me, or who I want to call a Christian or not. It's about people who are following the teachings of Jesus, as they understand them, as you, and people like you, methodically dissect their beliefs, beating them down with semantics, diversion and feigned ignorance.

You minimize other's spirituality and hold your dogma and doctrine above their experience. You dismiss them with your pragmatism.

Do you love God with all your heart, all your mind and every essence of your being or not?

If yes, then:

Do you love your neighbor as you love yourself?

If yes to both, that is excellent.

I can say nothing more. I will not judge you. but I will share the words of St. Augustine:

To fall in love with God is the greatest of all romances; to seek Him, the greatest adventure; to find Him, the greatest human achievement.

Kind regards,

sad eyed lady

reply to post by sad_eyed_lady

Do you love God with all your heart, all your mind and every essence of your being or not?

Yes, God/Absolute Truth, the Source of all is the Love of my life. Not a day goes by that I don't think about being One with the Father .... Permanent Union w/ God being my biggest goal in life.

If yes, then: Do you love your neighbor as you love yourself?

Yes. It's a detached Love, but I know that people do evil and stupid things due to the ego/mind/programming complex ...but the real them is their soul. I Love the Soul of each person, but not the Ego part which is very ugly.

I can say nothing more. I will not judge you. but I will share the words of St. Augustine: To fall in love with God is the greatest of all romances; to seek Him, the greatest adventure; to find Him, the greatest human achievement.

funny u say that. My mind/ego has goals and aspirations of a worldly nature ....save more $, get off the grid, maybe a wife w a kid one day, maybe some other successes...etc.

But no matter how wrapped up I get in any of that ...in my heart there is this painful yearning and want of God, of a close Union. It is impossible to ignore this yearning for God and Union

reply to post by adjensen


I have a better idea. Why don't you tell me if anything I have said in this thread directly conflicts with anything Jesus said. As opposed to merely conflicting with orthodox interpretations of anything Jesus said.

And if so, please point it out.

John Boruff has written an excellent book on this subject which I highly recommend:

New Age Spirituality vs. Evangelical Mysticism

"...beware of the demonic counterfeits of Christian mysticism. I prefer to refer to
myself as an “Evangelical mystic” instead of simply a “Christian mystic,” because New
Agers often hide behind the latter title. However, an Evangelical is a theologically con-
servative Christian that adheres to exclusive salvation through Jesus alone (John 14:6).

In the 1960s, 70s, and 80s, the Holy Spirit was manifesting great power in charismatic movements. But also during this time, satan was sending out legions of occult demons to deceive and lure hippies and others into Eastern meditation techniques (e.g., Transcendental Meditation, Yoga, and Zen). Whatever God does, satan responds with a counterfeit! God sent the Charismatic movement, but satan responded with the New Age movement.

And to this day, Charismatics need to protect themselves from the influence of New Age
teachings—which are the “doctrines of devils” (1 Tim. 4:1, KJV).

On the surface-level of things, an Evangelical mystic and a New Ager might look
the same: they both experience dreams, visions, voices, impressions, and signs from the
supernatural realm. They also both get quiet and still in order to practice meditation.
They also both experience spiritual ecstasies or “altered states of consciousness.” On the
physical level, Evangelical mystics and New Agers seem to be having the same spiritual
experiences and practicing the same thing: meditation.

However, I would say that the chief difference is that New Agers deny
Christ’s exclusive claim to God’s salvation in John 14:6.

HOW TO EXPERIENCE GOD:A HANDBOOK FOR EVANGELICAL MYSTICS - SCRIBD

PDF LINK

Authors Website

Another quote from John Boruff's book:

The Desert Fathers and Neoplatonism:The Final Word

I’ve made a lot of references to the Desert Fathers in this chapter. The reason for this is because they were the people that founded the Christian mystical tradition. While it is true that Jesus, the apostles, and the apostolic fathers probably practiced contemplation—it was the Desert Fathers in the third century that really left behind a legacy of teaching and example on how to be a Christian mystic.

The whole life of Christian mysticism is founded on the example of the Desert Fathers. Their reputation must be upheld as noble and holy and orthodox—for if it is not, then the whole foundation upon which Christian mysticism stands would be destroyed. When people like Evelyn Underhill and W. R. Inge make misleading claims about Christian mysticism being founded on Neoplatonism, it leads individuals to make one of two conclusions:

(1) Christian mysticism is pagan, but I will still practice it because I’m a New Ager.

(2) Christian mysticism is pagan, so I will resist it because I’m an Evangelical. But, as my research demonstrates, I hope that you would reach the third and true conclusion:

(3) Christian mysticism is not pagan, but is the purest and noblest form of orthodox Christianity, and it would do my soul well to contemplate Jesus on a regular basis—for if I do, I may attain the vision of God!

Finally, let me end this by noting that St. Antony, the “father” of the Desert Fathers, once got into an argument with some Neo-platonists. They mocked him for believing that God became a human in the form of Jesus.

St. Antony respond-ed by saying that nothing is impossible for God, but that it is rather absurd to believe in reincarnation like they did (Athanasius, The Life of Antony, Ch. 74).

The Desert Fathers were orthodox Christian mystics in every sense of the word. They did not fall into the New Age errors of Plotinus, Origen, Clement of Alexandria, and the Gnostics. And even though Augustine borrowed from Plotinus’ thought, he was careful to only refer to things agreeable with Scripture. These Christian mystics were not New Agers, but believed in fixing their eyes on Jesus,the author and perfecter of their faith (Heb. 12:2). Page 292

PDF LINK