What is Contemplative Christianity?

[sojourner]

The problem with defining love through human relationships is that although we can see glimpses of God through them, we are so limited in understanding perfect love. Love requires trust. My intuition can fail me because it's imperfect also and because emotions do factor in. I can believe my intuition is telling me xyz, but my human emotions can weigh heavily on my interpretation of those notions. There is an element of trust involved in love.

Yes there is. But if love isn't perfectly displayed in human relationships, we're sunk, because that's all we've got.. Oh, Wait! We have the relationship that's formed when we open ourselves to the Spirit within!

If intuition can fail us, then cognition can certainly fail us. Reading about love is inferior to experiencing love. Ask any poet.

 

[sojourner]

My point was not a self absolved faith, my point was, not pushing or applying my own personal relationship or standards onto others that dont believe

But you're doing so by claiming that meditation is "dangerous" and "unnecessary."

 

[sassysam29]

But you're doing so by claiming that meditation is "dangerous" and "unnecessary."

I said that meditation is prayer and pondering the scriptures, and for MYSELF, I define it very literally and apply it according to the scriptures

 

[sassysam29]

I said that meditation is prayer and pondering the scriptures, and for MYSELF, I define it very literally and apply it according to the scriptures

That does not mean I am better, above or self righteous in my approch. It simply means IF I am interpreting scripture wrong or different than you that God knows my intentions and my heart and your heart and we will be judged accordingly.....

 

[sassysam29]

Approach *

 

[Yoshua]

I didn't say the definition was wrong. It's your interpretation that's lacking. That has nothing to do with exegesis, and everything to do with hermeneutics. If you've studied hermeneutics, you should know this.

Hi Sojourner,

Ok. If the definition's meaning was not wrong, why add another meaning? My study of hermeneutics is to stick to true meaning and its context. Maybe you can share how you come up with quieting our mind where no hint of any term of the mind.

So... what would you call "one meal, spread out over time and space?" What would you call "bread being Jesus' body?"

For Roman Catholicism, they believed that the wafer is the real body of Christ same as the wine as His blood. The truth is when we do the communion, we do this in remembrance of Him and nothing more.

Luke 22:19
And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me."

Huh. More than I can count.

Can you name some of same beliefs (well-known) pastors or preachers?

And you took a hermeneutics class? Judging by this post, it was more of a "lame excuse" class. Spiritual fruit is spiritual fruit. An apple is still an apple, whether it's grown in Missouri or Washington. Similarly, Spirit is Spirit, no matter how it's identified.

Could an apple be an orange? This is what I mean.

If apple is still an apple or Spirit is Spirit, then can you prove how the Muslim, Buddhist and Hindu filled by the Holy Spirit?

How do you know it's "in line with scripture" in any objective way, though? We've already shown that there is no objective interpretation.

Then check with the Scriptures, if those experiences was happened or warned in the Bible. One example is like this one; God said "Do not turn to mediums or seek out spiritists, for you will be defiled by them. I am the LORD your God.” Then, a person seek to a medium and practice séances, do you think his experience is not detestable to God?

Now this makes sense -- but probably not in the way you think. Yes, "kind" of experience is what concerns us here. But the kind of experience you cite is an experience highly colored by egotistical thinking. contemplation seeks to take the ego out of the equation.

It is not, let’s face it; this is the truth and some group prophesied the end of the world; more than that, others claimed he is Jesus Christ. Some claimed he is the appointed Son of God.

You can't fly a fighter jet by merely reading the owner's manual.

How about the student from grade school to college; he should not need any books or anything that will give him a knowledge about his subjects. Is this valid to you?

How does one renew the mind? We might ask, "How does one renew the body?" Do you, after a hard day's work, do more work? No! You sleep. You rest. You quiet your body. Don't you think the mind works the same way? After thinking, and stewing, and stressing, and worrying all day, how do you renew the mind? By resting it.

Hey. I think you misinterpret it. It says not to conform to the pattern of this world, what is the pattern of this world? What the world can give that will hinder knowing God’s will in our life?

Those are the standards of this world, the carnality, lust, philosophy of this age, cultic teachings, pleasures…..The context of resting has nothing to do with Rom. 12:2. It does not say you must rest to know God’s will. Renewing is change of one’s heart.

anakainósis: renewal

Original Word: ἀνακαίνωσις, εως, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: anakainósis
Phonetic Spelling: (an-ak-ah'-ee-no-sis)
Short Definition: renewing
Definition: renewing; a renewal or change of heart and life.

Rom.12:2
Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God's will is--his good, pleasing and perfect will.

The Word resides within you -- not on the pages of a book. "God's word will I hide in my heart..." Can you implant a bible in your peritoneal cavity???

How will the word of God resides in you, if you did not even lift a page to read and listen to his word? Paul once said that faith comes from hearing the word of God (Rom. 10:17).

So... the whole biblical, "I am the light of the world" thing is ... deceptive?
The whole biblical, "Let your light shine for all to see" thing is ... really Satan??

I’m familiar with the usage by the new Age like the word “illumination,’’ sorry to comment on that with you and windwalker. This is not personal, but I’m focusing to the deception of the New Age.

God is love. Perfect love casts out fear. You seem to be clinging to the fear.

Eph. 6:10-17
The Armor of God
10. Finally, be strong in the Lord, and in the strength of His might.
11. Put on the full armor of God, that you may be able to stand firm against the schemes of the devil.

You mean to say Paul is also clinging to fear , or I’m in right track because we both consistent to be aware with the devil’s arrow?

And Spirit cannot be fed wholly through cognition of words on a page.

The Bible is our guide; and that guide is the result of our spiritual experience. If a person don’t have that guide, and cling to his experience, he get lost and absorbs what the world may offer. Simple.

Yes. It does. Much as experiencing my wife stroke my face assure me of her love.

Then how?

Thanks

 

[sojourner]

If the definition's meaning was not wrong, why add another meaning?

It's not "another meaning." Those are the usual actions inherent in the definition.

For Roman Catholicism, they believed that the wafer is the real body of Christ same as the wine as His blood. The truth is when we do the communion, we do this in remembrance of Him and nothing more.

Luke 22:19
And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me."

This is where exegesis happens (or not, in your case). The Greek term is anamnesis. It doesn't mean "remembering" in the way we normally mean "remembering." The literal translation is "not forgetting," and the context is that a past event is brought into the present moment for us to participate in. IOW, in the Eucharist, the past event of the meal they shared is brought through time into our present, and it is that meal -- not some subsequent, "representative meal" -- in which we are participating. That's a mystical occurrence. Your interpretation is misplaced, because it doesn't take under consideration the original intent of the text in question. IOW, it means everything more than you're giving it credit for.

Can you name some of same beliefs (well-known) pastors or preachers?

No, I'm not going there. This really isn't about a popularity contest of "more people believe me than believe you."

Could an apple be an orange? This is what I mean.

If apple is still an apple or Spirit is Spirit, then can you prove how the Muslim, Buddhist and Hindu filled by the Holy Spirit?

You're mistaking Holy Spirit for something else, just because someone else conceptualizes it differently and calls it by a different name.

Then check with the Scriptures, if those experiences was happened or warned in the Bible. One example is like this one; God said "Do not turn to mediums or seek out spiritists, for you will be defiled by them. I am the LORD your God.” Then, a person seek to a medium and practice séances, do you think his experience is not detestable to God?

Do you know why the bible says that, though? Until you do, you don't really know what it's saying. I know you'll dismiss this, but I'm going to tell you anyway for the benefit of others who may read this. In that time and place, people who were dead, but in some sort of afterlife were equated with gods. Since the Hebraic religious system, by the time the bible was written, was staunchly monotheistic, there could be no "afterlife," out of which a medium or spiritist could call and communicate with the dead, for that would be tantamount to admitting that these dead spirits existed, which would undermine the whole monotheism thing. Therefore, "don't bother with these people -- it's dangerous to our way of thinking."

It is not, let’s face it; this is the truth and some group prophesied the end of the world; more than that, others claimed he is Jesus Christ. Some claimed he is the appointed Son of God.

Which is all egotistical thinking.

How about the student from grade school to college; he should not need any books or anything that will give him a knowledge about his subjects. Is this valid to you?

How do people in illiterate cultures learn? Though guidance and example. is this valid to you?

Hey. I think you misinterpret it. It says not to conform to the pattern of this world, what is the pattern of this world? What the world can give that will hinder knowing God’s will in our life?

Jesus also uses extremely worldly examples. Bread. Wine. Feeding. Sowing, Reaping. Shepherding. Sun rising. Thieves breaking in. Women making bread, cleaning the house, etc. A man selling a field. The "pattern of this world" is a metaphorical statement, not a literal statement. We live where we live and we know what we know. Just because gravity is "of this world" doesn't mean that it doesn't govern our actions.

Those are the standards of this world, the carnality, lust, philosophy of this age, cultic teachings, pleasures…..The context of resting has nothing to do with Rom. 12:2. It does not say you must rest to know God’s will. Renewing is change of one’s heart.

Sure! When one rests, one's body is renewed. When one is quiet, one's mind is renewed. IOW, they're remade from tiredness and exhaustion into a rejuvenated state.

How will the word of God resides in you, if you did not even lift a page to read and listen to his word?

Through experience.

Paul once said that faith comes from hearing the word of God (Rom. 10:17).

Jesus once said, "Come to me all who are heavy-laden, and I will refresh you."

I’m familiar with the usage by the new Age like the word “illumination,’’ sorry to comment on that with you and windwalker. This is not personal, but I’m focusing to the deception of the New Age.

So, you're claiming that the bible is New Age, now, just to prove your point???

You mean to say Paul is also clinging to fear , or I’m in right track because we both consistent to be aware with the devil’s arrow?

First, Paul didn't write Ephesians.
Second, the whole armor thing is a metaphor. But you're using it out of a sense of fear, or defense, rather from the intended meaning of offense.

The Bible is our guide; and that guide is the result of our spiritual experience. If a person don’t have that guide, and cling to his experience, he get lost and absorbs what the world may offer. Simple.

The bible is partly our guide.

Then how?

Through one's intuition. When someone loves you -- you know.

 

[Brickjectivity]

This is where exegesis happens (or not, in your case). The Greek term is anamnesis. It doesn't mean "remembering" in the way we normally mean "remembering." The literal translation is "not forgetting," and the context is that a past event is brought into the present moment for us to participate in. IOW, in the Eucharist, the past event of the meal they shared is brought through time into our present, and it is that meal -- not some subsequent, "representative meal" -- in which we are participating. That's a mystical occurrence. Your interpretation is misplaced, because it doesn't take under consideration the original intent of the text in question. IOW, it means everything more than you're giving it credit for.

Wow I never knew that. Geek out!

 

[Windwalker]

New Agers use the word "illumination". Therefore, don't seek Illumination. New Agers use the word "food". Therefore don't eat food. New Agers use the word "breath". Therefore, don't breathe. I think this discussion will lose one very literal participant in a matter of a few minutes from now.... *looks down at watch and listens for a 'thud' in the distance*

 

[sojourner]

New Agers use the word "illumination". Therefore, don't seek Illumination. New Agers use the word "food". Therefore don't eat food. New Agers use the word "breath". Therefore, don't breathe. I think this discussion will lose one very literal participant in a matter of a few minutes from now.... *looks down at watch and listens for a 'thud' in the distance*

Everything you know is wrong.

 

[sassysam29]

It's not "another meaning." Those are the usual actions inherent in the definition.

This is where exegesis happens (or not, in your case). The Greek term is anamnesis. It doesn't mean "remembering" in the way we normally mean "remembering." The literal translation is "not forgetting," and the context is that a past event is brought into the present moment for us to participate in. IOW, in the Eucharist, the past event of the meal they shared is brought through time into our present, and it is that meal -- not some subsequent, "representative meal" -- in which we are participating. That's a mystical occurrence. Your interpretation is misplaced, because it doesn't take under consideration the original intent of the text in question. IOW, it means everything more than you're giving it credit for.

No, I'm not going there. This really isn't about a popularity contest of "more people believe me than believe you."

You're mistaking Holy Spirit for something else, just because someone else conceptualizes it differently and calls it by a different name.

Do you know why the bible says that, though? Until you do, you don't really know what it's saying. I know you'll dismiss this, but I'm going to tell you anyway for the benefit of others who may read this. In that time and place, people who were dead, but in some sort of afterlife were equated with gods. Since the Hebraic religious system, by the time the bible was written, was staunchly monotheistic, there could be no "afterlife," out of which a medium or spiritist could call and communicate with the dead, for that would be tantamount to admitting that these dead spirits existed, which would undermine the whole monotheism thing. Therefore, "don't bother with these people -- it's dangerous to our way of thinking."

Which is all egotistical thinking.

How do people in illiterate cultures learn? Though guidance and example. is this valid to you?

Jesus also uses extremely worldly examples. Bread. Wine. Feeding. Sowing, Reaping. Shepherding. Sun rising. Thieves breaking in. Women making bread, cleaning the house, etc. A man selling a field. The "pattern of this world" is a metaphorical statement, not a literal statement. We live where we live and we know what we know. Just because gravity is "of this world" doesn't mean that it doesn't govern our actions.

Sure! When one rests, one's body is renewed. When one is quiet, one's mind is renewed. IOW, they're remade from tiredness and exhaustion into a rejuvenated state.

Through experience.

Jesus once said, "Come to me all who are heavy-laden, and I will refresh you."

So, you're claiming that the bible is New Age, now, just to prove your point???

First, Paul didn't write Ephesians.
Second, the whole armor thing is a metaphor. But you're using it out of a sense of fear, or defense, rather from the intended meaning of offense.

The bible is partly our guide.

Through one's intuition. When someone loves you -- you know.

You cannot fully trust intuition. If you are willing to rely solely on intuition then your argument that God's word cannot be proven and thus cannot be our authority loses complete ground. Intuition vs. bible.....umm.....that's not even logical

 

[sassysam29]

Unless of course your intuition has 100 percent accuracy in prophecies

 

[sassysam29]

Reread my posts. I have said according to my life experiences, that I myself feel that they are dangerous and unbiblical. I myself would not trust anything outside the Bible in spiritual matters.

 

[sassysam29]

But you're doing so by claiming that meditation is "dangerous" and "unnecessary."

Reread my posts. I have said according to my life experiences, that I myself feel that they are dangerous and unbiblical. I myself would not trust anything outside the Bible in spiritual matters.

 

[sassysam29]

Yes there is. But if love isn't perfectly displayed in human relationships, we're sunk, because that's all we've got.. Oh, Wait! We have the relationship that's formed when we open ourselves to the Spirit within!

If intuition can fail us, then cognition can certainly fail us. Reading about love is inferior to experiencing love. Ask any poet.

Love is not perfectly displayed through human relations because we are human. God is Love and the only perfect love is recorded for us to intellectually read and Spiritually trust. A poets love is felt deeply but the words He writes are His treasure and when I read them my heart is moved greatly.

 

[sassysam29]

His experience is what causes him to write, but my heart is moved by reading his words

 

[sassysam29]

Love is not perfectly displayed through human relations because we are human. God is Love and the only perfect love is recorded for us to intellectually read and Spiritually trust. A poets love is felt deeply but the words He writes are His treasure and when I read them my heart is moved greatly.

And it is strange that you use this example because one of my greatest loves in life is writing, and one of the greatest pleasures in writing is to see another person respond or be moved by what you have written

 

[sojourner]

And it is strange that you use this example because one of my greatest loves in life is writing, and one of the greatest pleasures in writing is to see another person respond or be moved by what you have written

It's a matter, though, of depth. One can't love by reading about love.

 

[sassysam29]

It's a matter, though, of depth. One can't love by reading about love.

I agree, but when I read the words of a letter my child writes to me, there is an extremely deep transfer of love that happens. At least for me

 

[sassysam29]

If I didn't know my child the words would mean very little, but because I have a very deep personal relationship with them I hear, feel, and almost touch love through their words