What is Contemplative Christianity?

[Windwalker]

I had something I wanted to post about believing in scripture, and the role it plays in a contemplative life. I believe all scripture is inspired, or "God-breathed". I believe scripture, or the word of God, is being written every moment in everything that lives and breathes, and in every thing inanimate, in every moment. "The heavens declare the glory of God". I think to meditate upon this scripture, living scripture, that is seen in everything is to bring one into mindful awareness of the divine, to open oneself through their words, into the very Heart of the Divine. But these scriptures are not static words on a page, but life itself. To say the Bible is scripture and all knowledge of God must be limited to and fixed into this one object, is to limit the words of Spirit to a closed collection of individual expressions, as if they alone defined what God speaks.

God speaks his Word in the cries of the loon, in the breath of the breeze, in the color of the sky, in the sparkle of stars, in the dying of a man, in the birth of a child, in the hopes of the youth, in the wonder of all life. Each of these speak and teach from the very Heart of God. "Consider the lilies of the field, they neither toil nor spin [nor argue who's right about interpretations of Bible verses], but I tell you not even Solomon in all his splendor was arrayed like any one of these". Any "one", he says. Each one is a unique, living voice that speaks Logos into the world, that one can find the Heart and God through - if the eyes can see, and the ears can hear.

But we trample over these, crush them underfoot, ignore them, relegate them to mere "subjective experience" which we must measure against the authority of a book we have created and imbued with our ideas of the Absolute. All the while, the entire chorus of the world, singing God's praises, speaking Truth to the world, is given back seat, or treated as a pleasant distraction to be enjoyed on vacation, rather than studied with the heart and the soul in every moment. I do believe in the word of God. It is written on everything that exists, and through it all we are able to touch and to know and to live the divine. To meditate upon your word day and night, is to be open and receptive to the Spirit in all that expresses God, all that speaks God. And this is Logos, the Word of God.

 

[Yoshua]

Just a heads up. Be very careful clicking on links/pictures/articles you are referred to. These forums are full of hackers that like to "mess" with the heads of anyone that disagrees with them! Proceed with caution!

Hi Sassysam,

Thanks for the reminder. I may find their links or posted articles by not clicking on them, or just wait for them to explain their posted links.

 

[Windwalker]

Utter paranoia. Did you know right clicking on a mouse could give you leprosy?

 

[Yoshua]

Quite a list of credentials for a chat room moderator very sorry if you took personal offense. Was not intended as a personal attack, simply a VERY validated warning to those who seem relatively naive to the possibilities. So, I am sorry if I offended

Hi sassysam,

Thanks for being part in the discussion. I suggest we go back to discuss about the thread subject. Let us enjoy RF privilege to share our thoughts. Set aside things that may bring conflict with the participant on this thread. Please.

 

[Yoshua]

Yoshua, I'm not going to derail this thread by turning it into a discussion of Mormonism, but a number of your "facts" about Mormonism are flat out incorrect, and suggest that your source of information is both unreliable and intentionally misleading.

Hi Katzpur,

We may discuss this in another thread (some other time) though this will take a long discussion to prove of what I stated here.

Thanks for your comment.

 

[Katzpur]

Out of curiosity, the original story I relayed about the golden tablets, the stones to translate it projected on the wall, the rug, and Brigham Young on the other side writing down the translation as Smith read it aloud to him, is that fairly accurate in what is taught? That was my understanding of it from a professor in college who taught it to us, (if I am recalling correctly myself even). If I'm off in that, please let me know and I'll self-correct the story. I do like to be accurate, and I could have some things understood incorrectly. You can just confirm, or point me to another resource about it, rather the discussion becoming about Mormon history. Thanks.

I haven't really been following this thread that closely, and it's pretty long, so I'm not sure exactly how far into the thread your original post on the subject was. Rather than read through the entire thread looking for it, I'll just say that while seer stones were apparently used, nothing was ever projected on a wall or other surface. Joseph did use two or three different scribes during the translation process, but Brigham Young was among them. As a matter of fact, Brigham Young would not even meet Joseph Smith for the first time until more than two years after the Book of Mormon was published. The Book of Mormon Translation page on the Church's official website contains quite a bit of pertinent information on the subject.

 

[Katzpur]

We may discuss this in another thread (some other time) though this will take a long discussion to prove of what I stated here.

Yoshua, if you're suggesting that it will require a lot of talking for you to prove your information about Mormonism to be accurate, I'd say that would be an understatement.

 

[Yoshua]

Yoshua, if you're suggesting that it will require a lot of talking for you to prove your information about Mormonism to be accurate, I'd say that would be an understatement.

Hi Katzpur,

You misinterpreted me, what I mean is this will not take one to five discussions only. I already planned to discuss those things in the RF.

Thanks

 

[Yoshua]

I believe all scripture is inspired, or "God-breathed".

Amen to that.

I do believe in the word of God.

Amen to that.

 

[Yoshua]

Even reading is a subjective process. There is no objectivity in reading the bible.

Hello,

If there is objectivity in reading the Bible, that would come out that there is no truth in the Bible.
I would like to take this question as an example:
In the winter days at the park, you are standing wearing a thick coat with your family, then suddenly your mom approach you and said: Oh, Son, the cold wind makes me shaking. Will you answer her "No, it’s not cold because it’s subjective."

How does reality correspond to the truth? Is it always subjective or there is objectivity exists?

If grace and love are "unmerited," how can a condition for our action be placed upon them before they're given? That would make them "merited" by our actions. See? You're not making sense.

We are talking about works here; We are looking at the grace of God. The Bible stated that we are all sinners, and no one Rom. 3:23-24 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,

What I mean with “unmerited love and favor” is the love and favor from God given to us even when we are undeserved.
Example:
A man who steal money in the bank, standing in the court. The judge release him (set him free), and give him the money that he stole. This is Grace.

The man gets what he did not deserve. Same thing as a sinner like us; we are fall short of the glory of God. No one passed or qualified as righteous in the sight of God. Rom. 6:23 23 say, For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Any action (works/good works) that people seemed they can appease God’s wrath for sin is no value to Him. It is through Christ only that we can appease with God. That's makes sense.

Do you know what "Allah"means? "God!" It a difference of language. Concepts remain largely the same. Jesus wasn't really "Jesus" in his native language. Yet, you call him that, even though he said to call upon his name, which "Jesus" clearly isn't.

Oh. Sojourner, I know what Allah means. Do Christians call their God ‘Allah’? Of course not. If you will standardized all those terms from Hindu, Buddhist, Muslims etc…that will become a contradictory faiths.

Seeing God at work in the world in different languages, cultures, and religious systems isn't "preaching a contrary gospel."

How do you set God in different religious system? Are Hindu, Muslim and Buddhist principles and teachings are the same with Christianity? Can you prove that?

What is not contrary to you, and what is not contrary to you? How do you divide that with beliefs?

I've spoken with a Rabbi about this. I know why and how they do what they do.

Then they still reading it. The book is not for display and fashioned for beauty

then you're doing what we do. Just using different tools. But that's not what you've been saying that you do. You're changing your story here.

No. not changing. It is clarifying, it is getting much clearer now.

No, it comes straight out of Christian Tradition.

Hmm. Do you consider the Hindu, and Buddhist practices as part of a Christian Tradition?

Thanks

 

[Yoshua]

You don't "exegete" actions. You exegete texts.

Ok. That quite a terminology issue? I think it is not. Still, we will use the Scripture to test and check those things. We are talking about spiritual practices and not a social action.
Example :If someone claimed that He is Jesus, and pulling you to join with him in the forest? Would you go?

How is your checking? Still, it boils down to Scriptures as to what Jesus reminded us about false Jesus. This makes sense.

Oral tradition, etra-biblical writings of church leaders and saints of the Faith, the explicit and implicit curricula of the faith community, etc. the bible isn't the only transmission of God's actions in the world.

What is oral tradition? Can you enumerate all of those, or if not, some of those?

Thanks

 

[Brickjectivity]

If there is objectivity in reading the Bible, that would come out that there is no truth in the Bible.
I would like to take this question as an example:
In the winter days at the park, you are standing wearing a thick coat with your family, then suddenly your mom approach you and said: Oh, Son, the cold wind makes me shaking. Will you answer her "No, it’s not cold because it’s subjective."

How does reality correspond to the truth? Is it always subjective or there is objectivity exists?

Hi again. Parts of the Bible teach not to view Bible scriptures in that way. It is only the insistence of particular people, some very famous, that the Bible has come to be described as literal and rational and that Bible truth has been redefined (and limited) to what you are calling it. The main reason this was done at the Reformation was to solidify separation from the Roman Catholic church and to interpret Revelation as a story in which the Roman Catholic church was the beast. Reformers thought they were going to put an end to the Roman Catholic church altogether, but they miscalculated. They also caused problems, because they acted in anger and did lots of harm to more than just their enemy the Roman Catholic Church. They harmed us along with it.

Plain examples of truth that is not objectively obtained in the Bible:

• John the Baptist is called 'Elijah' by Jesus, yet Jesus simultaneously acknowledges that he isn't unless you accept that he is. So is he or isn't he?
• Jesus says his disciples are his brothers, sisters, mother; yet his mother is still alive. Is she his mother or not?
• The LORD sends a lying spirit to some prophets. How can that be?
• The LORD warns Israel that some prophets will lie. How can prophets lie?
• Jesus warns his disciples that prophets lie and they can only tell who by fruits. What do fruits have to do with prophecy? Why can't we just test what prophets say against the standards of truth?
• Jesus tells his disciples that he has eaten when literally he hasn't. Objectively he was lying, but you might say it was in order to teach them truth. So was Jesus lying or not?
• The LORD sends a powerful delusion. Does this not imply that the LORD can deceive? Yet we are told in the Bible that the LORD always keeps his word! Does he deceive or not?
• Jesus speaks in parables, and people don't grasp what he means. He does it in person and only explains things later to his disciples, but the only way to know who his disciples are is by their love for one another. How could he be so thick as to not understand that his words will be misunderstood?
• He says "Let the little children come unto me." Yet children have no more ability to understand what he is saying than his idiot followers.
• Paul says "Where is the wise man and the scribe? Where is the disputer...?" (1 Cor 1) (I'm Right here, you idiot! You wrote me a letter!)
• "Brothers and sisters, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. God chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things—and the things that are not—to nullify the things that are, so that no one may boast before him." (1 Cor 1:26-29)

Paul in 1 Corinthians (those last two bits) is specifically targeting the divisions created by the arguments that leaders bring to the table. So all the 'Smart people' like Chuck this and Charles that...their stature and their opinions are one of the sources of divisions. At the Reformation it was Martin Luther, the Pope, the cardinals, the governors and many others. One thing they all had in common was to take a Bible and use it to divvy up followers. "Everybody follow me, because the Bible says this and those guys are evil!" So the people were divided, forgetting to care for each other and getting wrapped up in particular interpretations which were ephemeral and impermanent. They went to war against each other. Their divisive propaganda is still around. Its everywhere in all the churches, and people still listen to it.

 

[sojourner]

If there is objectivity in reading the Bible, that would come out that there is no truth in the Bible.

This doesn't make sense. Don't you mean "if there is NO objectivity?" Even so, that's why the exegetical process is crucial -- in order to do our best to "get out of our own heads" and "turn off our own filters." Even at that, there is still the capability of our own understanding and the way in which that understanding is impacted by our own selves.

In the winter days at the park, you are standing wearing a thick coat with your family, then suddenly your mom approach you and said: Oh, Son, the cold wind makes me shaking. Will you answer her "No, it’s not cold because it’s subjective."

Yes, if I'm not cold. Often at night, my wife is burning up and I'm freezing. Yet the ambient temperature is the same on both sides of the bed. "Hot" and "cold" are subjective. "45 degrees" is objective. Unfortunately for you, what's in the bible isn't mostly fact (i.e., "45 degrees"). What's mostly in the bible is "hot" or "cold" (i.e., "perception of the writer").

How does reality correspond to the truth? Is it always subjective or there is objectivity exists?

How does fact relate to the truth? Facts are parts of truth, but not the whole of truth. Truth includes meaning and perspective, as well as fact.

What I mean with “unmerited love and favor” is the love and favor from God given to us even when we are undeserved.

Yet, if we don't do something, that love is withheld, in your world. There's a disconnect between what you're calling "unmerited love" and "we need to obey and repent." If "we need to obey and repent," then the love is "merited," rather than "unmerited."

It is through Christ only that we can appease with God. That's makes sense.

I agree. It is (as Romans says) the faith of Christ through which we are saved. And that faith has already been demonstrated by Christ for humanity.

Oh. Sojourner, I know what Allah means. Do Christians call their God ‘Allah’? Of course not.

That's because most Christians don't speak Arabic. We also don't generally call our God YHWH, yet both names carry the same meaning.

If you will standardized all those terms from Hindu, Buddhist, Muslims etc…that will become a contradictory faiths.

Faith doesn't really exist in plurality. There are not "many faiths." There is only faith.

How do you set God in different religious system? Are Hindu, Muslim and Buddhist principles and teachings are the same with Christianity?

They are different perspectives of how different people intersect with spiritual formation.

What is not contrary to you, and what is not contrary to you? How do you divide that with beliefs?

I don't seek to "divide." I seek unity, because reality is that we are all supposed to be one. The word "sin" means, at its root, "to sunder," or "to divide." When we seek to divide ourselves and our world, we sin.

Then they still reading it. The book is not for display and fashioned for beauty

No, they're not "reading it." They're "praying it." There's a difference. The first seeks information. The second seeks integration and intuition.

Hmm. Do you consider the Hindu, and Buddhist practices as part of a Christian Tradition?

No, but I consider Christian, Hindi, and Buddhist traditions as parts of the same spiritual connectedness. That's why there's a similarity between traditions with regard to spiritually-formative practices, such as meditation and contemplation, posture, and movement.

 

[sojourner]

Still, we will use the Scripture to test and check those things.

Only when the texts, themselves have been adequately exegeted.

We are talking about spiritual practices and not a social action.

There's no difference between the two, in that regard.

:If someone claimed that He is Jesus, and pulling you to join with him in the forest? Would you go?

I don't make that determination of truth based upon a reading of the bible. I make that determination of truth based upon my intuition and knowledge of the application of religious avatars.

What is oral tradition? Can you enumerate all of those, or if not, some of those?

Oral tradition is stuff that's spread by word-of-mouth (which, BTW, is the method regularly used in the early church -- most people were illiterate, and the gospels were probably spread orally before they were ever written down). Extra-biblical content is content that does not appear in the accepted canon of one's particular faith-tradition (such as Thomas, the apocryphal writings, and other inter-testamental writings), as well as letters (such as the epistles that, only later, became canonized) written by church leaders, papal encyclicals, statements formulated in the great councils, etc. The curricula of the church are those things that are demonstrated by how we act individually and collectively, how we state our faith to each other and to the world, and what we teach to children and newcomers.

 

[Windwalker]

Hi Sassysam,

Thanks for the reminder. I may find their links or posted articles by not clicking on them, or just wait for them to explain their posted links.

It occurred to me that this is the core reason why you are afraid of meditation and imagine such things as this as demonic. You see the world you do not understand as a place full of demons and devils, and when you don't understand the technology, you imagine it to be full of risks and perils, seizing up fear as the go-to position. This is an expression of paranoia, not reason and sensibility. "Better not click on a link posted by someone who is out to get you! He could take control of your computer and your mind and open you to evil demonic influences".

I think this sums up why your argument against meditation practice is completely paranoid and uninformed. It is a symptom of paranoid thought. Again, I've asked four times now for the external source of authority you cite that explicitly teaches meditation practice is dangerous, putting you at risk for demonic possession. Obviously it isn't the Bible, since you claim the meditation we are describing isn't in there. So where's your objectives source of authority? You must have one since you say we can't do or think anything that isn't supported by an external authority. Where's yours, exactly?

If none is forthcoming, then you have forfeited your entire position.

P.S. In an episode of MASH, Frank Burns stated, "You'd be paranoid too if everyone was out to get you!"

 

[Yoshua]

Hi again. Parts of the Bible teach not to view Bible scriptures in that way. It is only the insistence of particular people, some very famous, that the Bible has come to be described as literal and rational and that Bible truth has been redefined (and limited) to what you are calling it. The main reason this was done at the Reformation was to solidify separation from the Roman Catholic church and to interpret Revelation as a story in which the Roman Catholic church was the beast. Reformers thought they were going to put an end to the Roman Catholic church altogether, but they miscalculated. They also caused problems, because they acted in anger and did lots of harm to more than just their enemy the Roman Catholic Church. They harmed us along with it.

Plain examples of truth that is not objectively obtained in the Bible:

• John the Baptist is called 'Elijah' by Jesus, yet Jesus simultaneously acknowledges that he isn't unless you accept that he is. So is he or isn't he?
• Jesus says his disciples are his brothers, sisters, mother; yet his mother is still alive. Is she his mother or not?
• The LORD sends a lying spirit to some prophets. How can that be?
• The LORD warns Israel that some prophets will lie. How can prophets lie?
• Jesus warns his disciples that prophets lie and they can only tell who by fruits. What do fruits have to do with prophecy? Why can't we just test what prophets say against the standards of truth?
• Jesus tells his disciples that he has eaten when literally he hasn't. Objectively he was lying, but you might say it was in order to teach them truth. So was Jesus lying or not?
• The LORD sends a powerful delusion. Does this not imply that the LORD can deceive? Yet we are told in the Bible that the LORD always keeps his word! Does he deceive or not?
• Jesus speaks in parables, and people don't grasp what he means. He does it in person and only explains things later to his disciples, but the only way to know who his disciples are is by their love for one another. How could he be so thick as to not understand that his words will be misunderstood?
• He says "Let the little children come unto me." Yet children have no more ability to understand what he is saying than his idiot followers.
• Paul says "Where is the wise man and the scribe? Where is the disputer...?" (1 Cor 1) (I'm Right here, you idiot! You wrote me a letter!)
• "Brothers and sisters, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. God chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things—and the things that are not—to nullify the things that are, so that no one may boast before him." (1 Cor 1:26-29)

Paul in 1 Corinthians (those last two bits) is specifically targeting the divisions created by the arguments that leaders bring to the table. So all the 'Smart people' like Chuck this and Charles that...their stature and their opinions are one of the sources of divisions. At the Reformation it was Martin Luther, the Pope, the cardinals, the governors and many others. One thing they all had in common was to take a Bible and use it to divvy up followers. "Everybody follow me, because the Bible says this and those guys are evil!" So the people were divided, forgetting to care for each other and getting wrapped up in particular interpretations which were ephemeral and impermanent. They went to war against each other. Their divisive propaganda is still around. Its everywhere in all the churches, and people still listen to it.

Hi Brick,

Sorry for I quoted objectivity in the Bible (a correction), my position is I believe that there is objectivity in the Bible. Anyway, your message falsify the truth of the Bible. It seems that there is a big doubts with you, and you are saying that there is a contradiction with the Bible. I believed that those are not studied well and miss the real understanding of the Scriptures. As I noticed, the question is a wrong question. it should be asking the right question. There are varieties of reason that can be thrown as error of Scriptures, it's very easy to do, but without validation and justification, you may loose what the passages were really saying.

We may quoted the Reformers, war, propaganda, issues, etc....do we need to be surprise with what is happening, or we just heed the reminders and warnings of Jesus Christ for the days to come in the future?
Are we taking our faiths as we will live by faith in Christ, or concentrate on the things that hinders us to come to God?
If a person looks at the negative side of what the Reformers did with the Roman Catholics, truly your statement will come out negatively. Why don't we focus on the Reformers Statement of faith, do they adhere to the core doctrine of the Word of God, or are they contradicted with the Word of God?

This is what I usually telling to the other faith/beliefs, if their practices and doctrine does not live in accordance with the truth of the Word of God, there comes contradiction, and doubting with the Word of God.

If anybody says "follow me," we may better check why he is to be followed, or else the person who followed will end in the cult churches. Nobody hinders us to study and check the Scriptures like the bereans; it is up to us if we will wisely give time to research, study and analyze the Scripture. I believed that there are absolute truth, standards or basis. Without absolute truth, you reject the reality of truth, even yourself, you may deny who you are, and why you are here on this earth.

Thanks

 

[Yoshua]

This doesn't make sense. Don't you mean "if there is NO objectivity?" Even so, that's why the exegetical process is crucial -- in order to do our best to "get out of our own heads" and "turn off our own filters." Even at that, there is still the capability of our own understanding and the way in which that understanding is impacted by our own selves.

It's like you are saying that there is a truth, but not the real truth because you don't trust the reality that there is truth.

Yes, if I'm not cold. Often at night, my wife is burning up and I'm freezing. Yet the ambient temperature is the same on both sides of the bed. "Hot" and "cold" are subjective. "45 degrees" is objective. Unfortunately for you, what's in the bible isn't mostly fact (i.e., "45 degrees"). What's mostly in the bible is "hot" or "cold" (i.e., "perception of the writer").

This is not what I mean, It seems you diverted it and it's get complicated. If there is winter, could you say that it is not a winter, because every place is snowy? The objective truth is the reality that it is winter. How do you validate the objectivity even though you are not believing it as subjective? this is by opening your TV and watch the news forecast. That is the basis. But believe me, you will go this far, because if it is winter time, you know it and you cannot deny it, because that is reality. Same as the Scripture, you cannot change it nor add it. Standard exist, as well as truth exists.

How does fact relate to the truth? Facts are parts of truth, but not the whole of truth. Truth includes meaning and perspective, as well as fact.

Not fact. Sojourner. I used reality. Fact as you have said is not the whole truth. The reality that the Word of God is the Word of God. God does not make fact, he makes reality/truth.

Yet, if we don't do something, that love is withheld, in your world. There's a disconnect between what you're calling "unmerited love" and "we need to obey and repent." If "we need to obey and repent," then the love is "merited," rather than "unmerited."

This is what the usual understanding of people in regard with works. Absolutely, we should act, do good works, but the good works that we've done came from the outworking of the Spirit. This is why there are fruits of the Spirit. The grace that God gave for us is a universal thing. Obedience and repentance comes to the picture when a person surrendered his life (already) to God. The love that comes from us--as a Christian--is the love that comes from God, the fruit of the Spirit. If we will based our love as our own (effort) good works, but not came from God, what is the use of commanding us by Jesus to "love our enemies." It is hard to love our enemies, Isn't it? you cannot love your enemies by our own effort. It is not normal for us and impossible. Therefore, by the power of the Holy Spirit as the child of God, we could now have that power to love our enemies. The impossible becomes possible with us.

I don't seek to "divide." I seek unity, because reality is that we are all supposed to be one. The word "sin" means, at its root, "to sunder," or "to divide." When we seek to divide ourselves and our world, we sin.

We may see unity in physical and mental capacity, but not in spiritual. Did you know why? people don't have that power to unite the Spirit of God with other faiths unless they themselves are willing to accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour. I don't discriminate other faiths, and I have a lot of friends with different faiths, but when it comes to spiritual, It is God who govern us, we come to Him. We share the Word, and it is up to them if they will believe or not.

No, they're not "reading it." They're "praying it." There's a difference. The first seeks information. The second seeks integration and intuition.

Ok. let us not take this more farther. I asked two Jewish here, and I think we both have our own sources. They both say they reading it. aside from praying.

No, but I consider Christian, Hindi, and Buddhist traditions as parts of the same spiritual connectedness. That's why there's a similarity between traditions with regard to spiritually-formative practices, such as meditation and contemplation, posture, and movement.

Ok. let us put it this way. They do their own spiritual connection with the one they believe is their deity. Yes, as I said before, if you will agree, the meditation technique especially for centering and breathe prayer are similar with the eastern meditation practices.

Thanks

 

[Yoshua]

I don't make that determination of truth based upon a reading of the bible. I make that determination of truth based upon my intuition and knowledge of the application of religious avatars.

That is my point. Sojourner, the intuition term for me is the Holy Spirit. The discerning ability to know the truth and error from the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Thanks

 

[Yoshua]

It occurred to me that this is the core reason why you are afraid of meditation and imagine such things as this as demonic. You see the world you do not understand as a place full of demons and devils, and when you don't understand the technology, you imagine it to be full of risks and perils, seizing up fear as the go-to position. This is an expression of paranoia, not reason and sensibility. "Better not click on a link posted by someone who is out to get you! He could take control of your computer and your mind and open you to evil demonic influences".

Hi Windwalker,
"Thanks for the reminder. I may find their links or posted articles by not clicking on them, or just wait for them to explain their posted links."by Yoshua
Just to clarify to you that when Sassysam sent me the message about hacking, and clicking your link message/reference, I'm somewhat in a sort of doubt first because I have opened your links message before, and I don't have any experience about hacking nor corrupting RF. Since I'm still considered new here, I also use my judgment to check if this is valid. If you will notice my response to Sassysam (above), I thank him first, and I said that "I may" which means whether I click your links or not, I can have the links website by finding it by myself or just wait for explanation regarding their posted links. If I answered him, "Oh, yes thank you, I will not not click their links anymore for safety." This is conclusive in nature which I believe that anybody may hate me from saying this.

You tagged me as paranoid is untrue. If I'm truly a paranoid, I should resign immediately and left the RF due to the fear of the given message (from her).

I think this sums up why your argument against meditation practice is completely paranoid and uninformed. It is a symptom of paranoid thought. Again, I've asked four times now for the external source of authority you cite that explicitly teaches meditation practice is dangerous, putting you at risk for demonic possession. Obviously it isn't the Bible, since you claim the meditation we are describing isn't in there. So where's your objectives source of authority? You must have one since you say we can't do or think anything that isn't supported by an external authority. Where's yours, exactly?

If none is forthcoming, then you have forfeited your entire position.

If we will look at the status of our discussion, what differ is your perspective toward the Scripture and the worldview. I posted you to cite the Breathe Prayer and Centering Prayer technique in order to start my evidence with the support of the Scriptures. Maybe, you missed reading it. Instead of I will be the one who post those prayer technique which seems unfair to your side to avoid misconception again. Everything may come if this comes from the Scriptures.

.S. In an episode of MASH, Frank Burns stated, "You'd be paranoid too if everyone was out to get you!"

We may consider your quotation here as true in spirituality, but not as paranoid. If we look at the meaning of it:
Paranoid is an adjective that means suffering from delusions of persecution or grandeur. Someone who is paranoid has an irrational and obsessive distrust of others, like your paranoid friend who worries that everyone from the principal to the neighborhood pre-schoolers are out to get him.

The Scripture reminded us to wear the armor of God; Jesus reminded us that there will be false prophets and false teachings. Truly there is a distrust, and that distrust is the evil one. Christians should be on-guard and stand firm. This is what the message of Paul is saying. We are not irrational and obsessive distrust of other people. We are on the side of spiritual, and not on the physical. The Bible said in Matt. 10:28, "And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell."
It is the awareness, and not fear. As a soldier and follower of Christ, we should be guarded and stand firm on His word.
Eph. 6:17
17. And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God;

Thanks

 

[Brickjectivity]

We may quoted the Reformers, war, propaganda, issues, etc....do we need to be surprise with what is happening, or we just heed the reminders and warnings of Jesus Christ for the days to come in the future?
Are we taking our faiths as we will live by faith in Christ, or concentrate on the things that hinders us to come to God?
If a person looks at the negative side of what the Reformers did with the Roman Catholics, truly your statement will come out negatively. Why don't we focus on the Reformers Statement of faith, do they adhere to the core doctrine of the Word of God, or are they contradicted with the Word of God?

This is what I usually telling to the other faith/beliefs, if their practices and doctrine does not live in accordance with the truth of the Word of God, there comes contradiction, and doubting with the Word of God.

If anybody says "follow me," we may better check why he is to be followed, or else the person who followed will end in the cult churches. Nobody hinders us to study and check the Scriptures like the bereans; it is up to if we will wisely give time to research, study and analyze the Scripture. I believed that there are absolute truth, standards or basis. Without absolute truth, you reject the reality of truth, even yourself, you may deny who you are, and why you are here on this earth.

I'm trying to explain this, that absolute truth is more than a person can have, except that it shines through our lives as if we are stained glass. The Bible teaches this, so you are contradicting the Bible. You would reject all truth instead of accepting mercy. You know the 3 ways that Christian are given to overcome? They are given in Revelation 12:11, and none of them is 'Absolute truth'. Christians do not overcome with 'Absolute truth' but by the blood of the Lamb, by their word and by not shrinking from death. It is by living right, not by knowing. The kingdom of God is composed of little children, not big strong adults. It is the Children of Israel, not the Grownups of Israel. As Adam and Eve's sin, so is yours that you want the fruit of the knowledge of good & evil and to be a god. This is entirely different from understanding Bible scriptures which are for your enlightenment, not to give you absolute truth. If you had absolute truth you wouldn't be human, and you wouldn't need a Bible or other believers. You would be like the angels, and this is the temptation which toppled not just Martin Luther but the Roman Catholic Church as well. All fell and all was nearly lost, grasping for absolute truth that is forbidden to human beings.

2 Chronicles 18:21 And he said, I will go out, and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And the LORD said, Thou shalt entice him, and thou shalt also prevail: go out, and do even so.

Matthew 7:16 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

Matthew 7:22-23 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.