I spent many years trying to experience a “personal” God. The one who communicated with “His people” threw angels, voices, miracles, nature etc. I went to church. I led worship. I read the Bible. I practiced Lectio Divina. Liturgy. I was more orthodox. Tried charismatic emotional outbursts. I had some altered state experiences as a result (in fact, looking back, that is how we used to tell if we had a good worship service or not.) But, a “personal” relationship. No, not really. Maybe I should pray harder, be quieter, act more loving, read more, pay better attention to the sermon, use more emotion, tithe more, understand more….a personal relationship? No, not really.
.
I read The Shack and desired this personal, intimate relationship described, but when life didn’t work out, and when I was depressed, down and confused, when I needed a personal God the most….silence. The problem couldn’t be with God, could it? No. It couldn’t, because he was apparently communicating in a way that was perfectly suited to me because he was perfect and knew me perfectly well…..blah, blah, blah. I was faced with a dilemma. Was the issue me? Was I not really God’s child? Was I really not trying hard enough. Was the issue the Bible? Was it true? Perhaps misinterpreted? Was the problem God? I had asked, sought and knocked and received no answer. I had done everything that I could…it was up to God to communicate or not. Silence.
.
So I had to ask myself. If I was God, and I had a human whom I loved, and that human really desired to commune with me, why would I remain “silent”. Why would I not communicate “clearly”, audibly, visibly? I know. God’s ways are not our ways etc. etc., but isn’t that really used as a copout for when God doesn’t live up to our expectations, or the Bible’s for that matter?
.
Whether the problem was with God, or my understanding of God, or my experience of God or whatever, really didn’t matter. That fact was it was filled with unrealistic, perhaps unreal, expectations that simply did not take place. God seemed fine with it, but I was a wreck.
.
That last few years of my life have been spent “unplugging” from this view of God. Both going “inward” (thought life, meditation, etc) and “outward” (the sciences) to experience God for who he is, not who a particular religion says he is, or just in ways that are “appropriate” for Sundays. My definition of God is far more nebulous than it was years ago. I am comfortable with that. The concept of a personal God simply did not work for me. I had no “proof” of it in my life experience for all my striving, and guilt. I can only say that my life is fuller. I am more able to see beauty all around me. I experience more peace. I see changes in my life. I no longer feel guilty, fearful, anxious.
.
Do I think there is a God? I don’t know, but the something, or someone who created all that we know in our Universe is completely awesome, creative, and seems to never tire of giving. I think this is the “Father” that Jesus was talking about anyway. I can strip away all of the religiousness and LIVE with that.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
39 comments:
Once again, I see a lot of parallels between your journey and my own. I especially relate to the fact that unplugging from rigid definitions seems to yield more--beauty, life, whatever. (And this is coming from someone who struggles with clinical depression.) I have read that the Navajo concept of harmony or contentment or enlightenment is "walking in beauty". Here is a translation of a Navajo chant about that. I can't personally vouch for it's accuracy, but it is as close to how I experience "god" as anything else I've come across.
Beauty before me.
Beauty behind me.
Beauty below me.
Beauty above me.
Beauty beside me.
Beauty within me.
I see beauty all around.
In beauty may I walk.
In beauty may I see.
In beauty may we all be.
That is beautiful bro!
"I am more able to see beauty all around me. I experience more peace. I see changes in my life. I no longer feel guilty, fearful, anxious."
To me this is what Christianity,(Christ taking away all the consequences of our sins in spite of our behaviors) allows to happen. So to me coming to an understanding of the Bible did the opposite of what it has done to you.
I got peace and you lost it when reading the Bible and conversely you got peace from moving away from the Bible and I had less of it when I was throwing it away.
Steve,
I think part of it is "different strokes for different folks". We are all wired differently, have different experiences etc. So, spirituality is not "one size fits all".
I don't look at what I'm doing as "moving away from the Bible" or "throwing it away". I would say that I have thrown away the Fundamentalist interpretation though.
Roger I've been following on Jim's blog recently. I've just been struck by your thought of can a fish see water for what it really is.
This ties in with the opening paragraph of my blog:
For nearly 40 years my journey has taken me outside the walls of traditional Christianity. To put it another way, I have spent a lot of time looking at the goldfish bowl from the outside.
Maybe we should share a few thoughts - but I don't know where to start!
I think you are headed in a good direction. I have been praying for a few years now that God would show me how God wants to relate to me, not how some church or system of theology told me God wanted to relate to me. The quest that I am on I believe is God doing that. Traditional Christianity is all about the individual and his or her relationship to God. But I think what is more important is how we as humanity are working to bring heaven to earth instead of hell to earth. If you read much of NT Wright he describes this as God's kingdom coming to earth. I like what you are saying here and will be checking back often.
Old Pete,
You are welcome here anytime. Just chime in and we'll start the discussion. Occasionally my time is limited so don't be offended if it takes a little bit to reply.
Freestyle,
If you read back in my blog you will find that I was asking the same questions a few years ago. You may wind up in a different place (for instance my fundamentalist brothers probably call me a heretic), but it will be YOUR place. Keep asking until you get to the end of it and don't be afraid of what might await. It may not always be pretty, but its far better than living in the illusion.
Here is a thought about "bringing heaven to earth": Jesus said the Kingdom of heaven is "at hand". I believe that implies immediate access. So we don't have to "bring" heaven anywhere, just access it. How would that change "evangelism" or "ministry" or "teaching" or "faith" or "waiting"...?
I wonder if what we often call "spiritual" is really describing what our thoughts about the unseen world has upon our EMOTIONS.
If something does not make sense to our mind (thoughts) then of course we will not have peace in our emotions about it.
When I was "striving to please God" then I was at odds with even myself. When I realized that Christ took care of that (and this is similar to Luther's experience) then I was able to rest. Theology (dirty word as it seemed to be at times) was (and is) having an effect upon feelings.
To be able to look at my "crappy self" in the mirror of God's Law and yet realize that He still holds me as dear due to His Son's work really brings a peace.
Roger-
I don't have an account so I posted under annonymous.
It's been a long time since we've talked. The Lord has been putting you on my mind for awhile now and after reading some of this I think I understand.
Before coming to seminary, I had to be willing to give up control. I think I was trying to put on a good face and make it look like I trusted God, but inside I still wanted to control my situation and then ask God to do what I wanted. It is very freeing/a constant struggle to move away from that.
In your search for "truth"- don't be afraid to ask the hard questions (I know you're not), don't be afraid of the struggle with realizing a personal relationship with God. Mother Teresa wrote about questioning for many years (the Catholic Church almost didn't cannonize her for it- which is dumb!).
From my point of view, if you are still questioning things, the Holy Spirit is still trying to burn in your life or you wouldn't care. You have a special gift and a special passion. I hope you can settle your anxieities and allow the Grace of God to lead your life again.
By the way if you enjoy meditation have you looked at any of the Eastern Orthodox writings? They have a lot to say about using icons to channel our meditation toward an understanding of God which many have found useful instead of TM or some other avenue.
Just a thought.
Hang in there brother. If you have any questions my email is lance.whorton@asburyseminary.edu.
Thanks for the encouragement Lance, however my struggle is over for the moment. I think if you read a few of my posts you will find that I've asked the hard questions (What is Church? What is the Bible? How does it make the most sense to use it? Who or what is Jesus? What is the Universe? Who or what am I?). I've just found answers that make more sense to me than fundamentalist Christianity's small worldview would allow.
If you remember our conversation about Creationism and Evolution, I would bet you are able to see different points of view now. Fundamentalist answers to those types of questions don't cut it for someone who knows even a shred of science or has looked at pictures of the Universe through Hubble. Perhaps you will find that your worldview continues to expand, or maybe you will find that you are comfortable with the "truth" you are taught in seminary. Either way it is your journey and your truth. Peace as you find it...
P.S. I think fundamentalism makes it is easy to assume that someone doesn't have the "grace of God" if their answers are not "our" answers, or if their experience is different from ours, which is another reason I had to rethink where I was at.
Roger,
I'll continue to pray for you and that you soften your heart to allow the Holy Spirit to lead you in your journey.
After reading a few of your posts, one of the things that seems to jump out is that all of the emphsis is on you to make the right decision, work hard enough, etc. and you have rightly discerned that there is no possible way for you to do it on your own. That is where the grace of God and the leading of the Spirit come into play.
One other thought occured to me, have you read any of Mother Theresa's writings? She went through a period of questioning similar to yours which lasted many years. In fact the Catholic Church almost refused to canonize her becuase of it (that's a whole other can of worms!)! It might help, it might not.
We have had our differences in the past, but I always respected your passion. If I have had any part in turning you away from God, then please accept my apology and know it was not intentional.
Tell your family Hi for us and know that you all remain in our prayers.
Shalom,
Lance
Lance,
Hello! So, let me ask you this: Does it mean to you that we've turned away from God because our walk doesn't resemble yours?
Sincerely!
Trish
Thanks for the prayers Lance!
I'm sorry you think that I've turned away from God, my experience is anything but that. I'm not sure it is possible to turn away from God anyway. It would be like trying to turn away from oxygen.
I know your heart and know you would never want to offend, but can you see at all how your comment could come off as really judgmental? Like your right, and I'm wrong, so God must no longer be leading me?
I do thank you for the concern. I'm more than happy to discuss further if you wish.
Roger
I'm not used to sharing my thoughts at this level, so let me try.
I would suggest that you have spent the last few years unplugging from the religion often referred to as Christendom - a religion that is built on fear and guilt - a religion whose emphasis is on keeping people out of hell!
I would then suggest that you have latched on to some of the ideas of the emerging church and the emphasis on living for today.
When you read The Shack you had a desire for the personal intimate relationship described there.
I had always had a hang up caused by the teaching of the trinity I received when I was 14 - my reaction after reading The Shack was, "At last I've seen an explanation of the trinity that BEGINS to make sense". It was at that point (almost 2 years ago now)that I really began the next stage of the journey from HEAD KNOWLEDGE to the beginnings of HEART AWARENESS (which is very difficult for someone living with Aspergers Syndrome - or High Functioning Autism).
Maybe it is the AS that has enabled me to have this rather analytical view of what for most people would be quite an emotional picture.
Does this make any sense?
Pete
Trish/Roger:
I understood your comments to mean you were not only done with organized Christianity, but that you were turned off to the God of Christianity. If that is not the case, that's great and it is my mistake.
I've got no problem with people experiencing God in different ways, I think that is the beauty of who God is. Differences are great, we learn and grow through them. Christianity should not/is not scared of people who explore these other avenues to find God, I believe eventually they will find these other paths to be false. (I'm not saying the organized church is the correct path for everyone either- there are certainly a plethera of problems with the church).
Ultimately I think we are all messed up humans, broken by the stain of sin. It is by the Grace of God through his Son, and being led by the Spirit that any of us are able to break that yoke on our lives. I believe God's truth is the ultimate truth and it can withstand any questions that you want to ask. It may take time to clarify the answers, but that is my belief.
Like I said, know that you are in my prayers for guidance. I hope that clarifies what I was thinking and I am sorry I miss read what you were.
Lance
Lance,
We probably define many of the terms you are using differently. Words like "Christianity", "sin", "grace of God", "ultimate truth" etc. come loaded with lots of religious baggage (a lot of which you receive in seminary I'm sure). This baggage creates a particular worldview which you may or may not be aware of. I've chosen to unplug from that worldview and take a look around.
I would respectfully disagree with you though that Christianity (I'll use that term to mean the organized system of thought and the institution that exists from it) is not scared of people who explore different avenues to find God. It is terrified of people who "deviate". It uses guilt, fear, and emotional and psychological pressure to keep people "thinking rightly" and "behaving rightly". It may be hard to see when you are in the middle of it and learning to "swim in those waters".
For instance, many people have found ways to live happy, healthy lives full of wonder and awe of God, truly loving their neighbors etc., outside of fundamentalist versions of Christianity. It's a BIG world out there! Yet, it seems you are making the assumption that these other paths are "false". What would be the "true" one? And what assumptions are you making when you judge those other avenues as "false"?
Respectfully,
Roger
Pete,
I used to work in a classroom as a teachers aid with student who had AS. I don't think he will ever be able to string thoughts together they way you are able. In some ways I am sure it is both a blessing and a curse. In the end we all do the best we can with what we have. For instance, I stuttered so badly as a kid I couldn't get a word out. I'm not so bad now, but it still bothers me at times.
I was interested in "emerging church" for awhile, but in the end found it had some of the same issues as any other "organized" form of religion, it just had different "clothes" on.
Could it be that the concept of the Trinity is just a way to say that we experience God in 1st-person, 2nd-person, and 3rd-person, as an "I", "You" and "It"? Which incidentally is the way we experience all of reality.
I think we will have to agree to disagree.
Lance
Lance,
I thought it might come to that. I'm curious though, what are we disagreeing about?
I reached out to you in a spirit of Love by the prompting of the Holy Spirit. I did not contact you to argue or re-hash old wounds. My heart truly aches for who when I read the anger (even hatred?) in your posts (not responses to me, but the other postings I have read).
As far as what we disagree on; I would suspect we give different levels of authority to scripture, use a different definition of God, and I disagree with your response: "It is terrified of people who "deviate". It uses guilt, fear, and emotional and psychological pressure to keep people "thinking rightly" and "behaving rightly"."
I'm not sure you can define all "fundamentalists" in this way; although I do acknowledge there are many that act like that.
Lance,
I am sorry you are reading hatred into any of my comments. I don't doubt your intentions and I don't have any old wounds. I am always interested in another point of view, but I am just pointed, and sometimes sarcastic, in how I see and explain things and I'm sorry that is offensive to you. I am still a work in progress, thanks for pointing that out.
As far as my quote that you disagree with. (I'm stating this with no hatred. Read it like Mr. Rogers was saying it.)I can only say that there are many examples of how organized religion uses pressure and manipulation to get people to respond. However, I think that one would have to look at the church from a 3rd-person, detached point of view to see the patterns and systems in place. At least that is my personal experience.
Some examples could be the concept of tithing, to manipulating people to emotional states (I'm guilty!), to guilting people to do work around the church etc. Much of this done and said with the fear of hell always over our shoulder. If you have never read the "Jake Colson" book it might give some food for thought here. http://www.jakecolsen.com/
I'm not trying to be offensive. Just straight to the point without the flowery language. Again, sorry to offend.
No offense taken here, it just sounded like you have some bitterness in there somewhere. It's pretty hard to offend me!
Lance
I'm sure I do Lance. It's another layer of the onion to look at and unravel.
There are many levels of AS - I dislike the way in which people are labelled - but it was the discovery of this 'personality type' and the recognition of "that's the way I'm made" that I found so exciting. It just reinforced a belief that nothing in life is wasted. I have travelled down many blind alleys - why? For me it has all been part of learning why other people believe what they believe as a result of divisive theology.
It must be hard for younger people who have had so many educational opportunities to appreciate that that has really been the extent of my "Christian education". I have always been a workaholic - often spending 10 hrs a day gardening when I was younger. I have also been a computer programmer who would thing nothing of working 55 hrs in a week when involved with a specific project.
It's only in the last few months that I've reached a point where I feel I have something to share - without knowing how, where or why!
I found some of the material of the emerging church interesting and helpful but the major observation I had was that those involved with the emerging church scene were almost entirely leaders within the system who knew that there was something wrong and wanted to change things - but they just couldn't consider the possibility that their whole foundation could be distorted. They had their seminary qualifications and they felt that this qualified them to change the system that they had been taught.
Sorry if this sounds cynical but I did experience a few rebuffs because I wasn't 'qualified' to argue with theologians!
I also remember meeting the leaders of a well known American Christian organisation in London who had said that they had been praying for ten years for God to allow them to do what they had in mind - how's that for putting the cart before the horse?
I hate the teaching of the trinity - it is recognised that it took some 350 years for the Christian community to come up with this 'theory'. What I hate about it is that it limits God to Father , Jesus and the Holy Spirit which in my mind negates the whole purpose of life - that we were created to become part of the family!
I've quoted a missionary friend in Central Asia on my blog who said that he recognises that I am being led by Father to focus on helping others who are new to the room of grace rather than taking the message out to the rest of the world.
I suppose I also have in mind the thought of, "How can anyone take the message out if the message they have is built on a faulty foundation?"
Just expressing a few thoughts!
Pete,
Thanks for sharing. It was my experience that the "emerging movement" just placed an emphasis on community instead of the other areas that organized religion focuses on. In the end, it was just another system of thought and action based on fear and guilt. Perhaps just "less organized religion". IMO, God is bigger than any system of thought. This is why I am not impressed with theological education (I attended a Bible College for awhile, so I know a little about it.)
I think Jim mentioned one time that a friend had challenged him to describe God without using any religious language from the Bible. I think that would be a great exercise for those interested in "evangelism". I have had the pleasure of truly getting to know my neighbors, none of which are Christian. I can tell you for a fact that they could care less about anything a "theologically trained" person would have to say about God. They love the life they lead and are not ashamed of it. However, Trish and I are always bringing up spiritual topics in a non-religious way that get us all thinking about God. I have no goal or particular motivation other than for them to be happy and free.
Lance,
In thinking about this conversation. I wonder if you are taking my criticism for the institutional church personally? I will admit that I do not have much mercy for the system and I call hypocrisy what it is when I see it. IMO, we have an example of calling it as we see it when Jesus overturned the money tables and called the Pharisees a "brood of vipers" etc. Am I wrong here?
I'm not taking any of it personally. It just sounds to me like you are making general overarching statements which may not necessarily be true in all cases.
I think you can call a spade a spade without falling into this trap. Jesus overturned tables and called the pharisees a brood of vipers; however, he still spoke with Nicodemus without pre-judging his motives (he wasn't easy on his lack of knowledge, but didn't question motive). It seems to me that in making generalities you become guilty of the same thing you accuse the institutional church of.
I agree Lance. There are always exceptions to the generalities we use to communicate. Everyone who tries to communicate about anything beyond their 1st-person experience would be guilty of this sometime or another. On the other hand once one has seen the same pattern over and again it seems appropriate to make at least some generalizations.
BTW, are you almost done with seminary?
That may well be true, but I never see you leave the door open for the possibility that your experience may not be the totality of the whole. If you want others to be open to your opinions, you can't shut the door on theirs.
Lance,
With all due respect. This is a blog that represents a very small portion of my life and thoughts. They are MY experiences and thoughts, experienced from my point of view. What else can one really share?
I'm under no illusion that my opinions and thoughts are just a small part of the whole. However, I've experienced fundamentalist religious life first hand, in a variety of forms, and found it wanting. So I critique from that point of view. I'm always open to different points of view and you are welcome to give me information you don't think I have.
IMO, I think the damage done by the church deserves to be brought to light because, largely those in the middle of it are blind to it. LOTS of people, in fact websites and blogs full of them, have experienced subtle and overt abuses from the church and see no way out. I'm sure you are aware of the numbers of those leaving institutional forms of church. To them the church that should provide love and transformation provided hurt and disillusionment by using a system of guilt, fear and obligation to keep the institutional wheels turning. Often sacrificing the individual for the sake of the institution. I think one could wonder if our current expression of church has anything to do at all with what Jesus taught.
I am not angry or bitter about it (I used to be, and probably still have issues I'm not aware of!), it was part of my journey that brought me where I am now, for which I am grateful.
Perhaps I am so hard on the church because from my point of view now I see it as a distraction to a genuine spiritual journey. I am aware that others may have different experiences and they probably would not agree with this assessment. Or, maybe they just don't see it yet. The Jake Colson book I mentioned earlier is free and may give you a different perspective on church. I think it should be a must read for future pastors to become aware of the issues inherent with institutional forms of Christianity. You may not agree with every assessment, but it brings to light some tough issues from a perspective many pastors and leaders seem to be blind to.
I don't mean this is in a disrespectful way, but I am going to turn your comment back around. When someone implies, even with good intentions, that God's grace is not leading them and that they will pray for them, in what way would that not be "shutting the door" on that person? What assumptions are we making?
I don't know if you ever heard of Spiral Dynamics? It does a pretty good job of explaining worldviews and why different altitudes of worldview have problems communicating about these issues. I've blogged about it in past posts.
This is another of those agree to disagree points
Can you explain what you are disagreeing about? I am curious.
Do you disagree that the church can, or should be, at least in part, viewed as a system or institution?
Or do you disagree that people are leaving institutional forms of church?
Or do you disagree that people have been hurt?
Or do you disagree that there are inherent problems with institutional forms of church?
I think a major point of disagreement lies in the purpose of worship. I think worship is more about praising God than it is about a particular way I may/may not feel during the worship experience. If people would take the focus off of themselves and put it where it belongs, then I think a lot of the piddly internal arguments would be taken care of.
I mean no disrespect, but I also disagree that the truths of God can be found in false religions (ie: Buddhism, etc.). I think the best one can hope for is to find the falsity of them which will point to the truth of God.
When one looks for the differences between religions one will find them. When one looks for the similarities, one will find them. It's all in what you choose to look for.
IMO, if ALL of the "truth of God" is found as expressed in the Bible and its expressions of institutional religion, He is a very small God indeed. The world and universe is much bigger, diverse and full of beauty than a "mythic" worldview can give credit for.
I probably explain my point of view better here. http://rogerhiduks.blogspot.com/2009/02/christianity-science-and-culture-man.html
I'm not sure how discounting how one feels during "worship" (another word that means different things to different people) plays into our different views, although I would agree that how we use our mind matters in spiritual transformation.
Just thinking about your last comment Lance and it just opens up a can of worms that I'm thinking about. So excuse me, I'm not piling on, just trying to think through what you wrote.
How do you define truth? How do you know what is true? What constitutes a "false religion"? In what position have you placed yourself to make that kind of judgment?
Would you know that Buddhism is "false", for instance, because you have researched it and/or experienced it and found it wanting? Or, have you accepted on faith what you have been told about it? Or, is it just that your particular worldview cannot accept that anything in it my be true? If you reject the religion as a whole, is it possible that it contains "partial truths"?
I've wrestled with these questions myself...I would think that being serious about evangelism, as I know you are, these would be good questions to address in our pluralistic society.
Most religions try to imply some sort of code which is similar to the Golden Rule of Christianity. The difference is that in all other religions this mandate is passive, not active. Don't do any harm to anyone else is far different than to love your neighbor. While there may be simblance of truth within these false religions, they fall short of Christianity's mandate.
In our pluralistic age, the problem often falls to the authority of scripture. Reason, tradition, experience are all vital components to our worldview, but if these are not filtered through the truth of scripture, they are wanting. If our knowledge of scripture is not sufficient to know the difference, then we are in danger of syncretism- which was the major sin of Judaism throughout the Old Testament.
That is why I mentioned things like looking at the Eastern meditation tradition instead of Buddhism, or TM, or whatever else is there.
For Example: Our present society is about showing how Christ fits into our box which leads to the false conclusion that all religions lead to heaven. Reason and experience may show that a good Buddhist has essentially the same life as a Christian, tradition says it is not the same. Ultimately we have to filter these opinions through scritpure. John 14:6 makes it clear that Christ is the only way to salvation.
What I define as "truth" is this combination of tradition, reason, adn experience filtered through scritpure and covered by prayer. I have found one or two areas to be false (which is where most of the problems within the "church" come from. A person could look to tradition and justify the crusades; however, they were a poor interpretation of scripture and a misuse of ecclesial power), but if scripture is held as the ultimate filter and guidance from the Holy Spirit is sought, it eliminates many of these problems. Now you still have to account for the fact that it is fallable humans looking into this, but that is where faith in the guidance of the spirit comes from.
If scritpure is not held in high authority this whole process falls apart. That is why I said earlier I don't think Christianity should be concerned about questions from these other religions, but I think is dangerous to experiement with other religions. The grass may look greener in other pastures, but what you will ultimately find is that these other relgiions are made of broken sinful people with no true God to lean on. Christians may not always make the proper decisions, but they have that avenue available to them.
Paul shows how this plays out in his speech to the men of Athens. He took what they were doing, used reason, tradition and experience to filter their beliefs through scritpure and then corrected their path with the aide of the Holy Spirit. I think as evangelists, we need to look to the early church's response in a Pagan society in order to correctly proceed in our current times.
Lance,
Just off the cuff here.
I understand where you are at. I've been there. I can only offer a different perspective. I can just say that your story seems very small. It is not inclusive and discounts everyone else's "tradition, reason and experience", and probably much of science too. It sounds like a "club of 'correct' thinking" to me.
IMO, to believe what you believe, one has to exalt and use the Bible in an over-intellectualized system of thought in ways it was never meant to be used. It reminds me of going to Bible College where they told us they worshiped God, but in reality they worshiped a book. Their system of thought would fall apart without the Bible. Honestly, I know you would disagree, but that's what I hear you saying.
I would suggest that your summary of other religions sounds naive and oversimplified. There is a lot of wisdom and truth in this world outside of the "Biblical box". Perhaps that is what I mean by your story being "small".
If you view our society as "pagan" you probably view its people as "pagans", and as such, you will never see the beauty in your neighbor, never be able to accept them for who they are, never truly, deeply love them as Jesus did IMO. (I can tell you for a fact that the "unchurched" people that we know would not feel loved by someone holding these beliefs.) I could not realize this until I left the organization to get a different perspective.
IMO This system of thought leads to a "circle the wagons" mentality. Us vs. Them. Which is just not helpful or healthy.
If you had to describe God without using the Bible or any Biblical terms, could you do it?
I gotta go take the kids swimming. Maybe more later. Thanks for the conversation!
Post a Comment