Showing posts with label Spiritualism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Spiritualism. Show all posts

Saturday, May 04, 2013

The Barriers of a Christian Worldview - Are All Spiritual Standards Equal?


Has man's involvement with the Bible rendered it untrustworthy?
In this day and age of breaking down ancient barriers and traditions, the idea of Christians depending upon a written standard for the conduct of their life is fast becoming unpopular. Instead, the idea of following the Spirit or seeking spiritual experiences that are not to be argued with or against has become dominant. The Bible is considered archaic and unreliable, since it was fashioned by man and has been tainted and changed by man through the centuries. The Holy Spirit or the spiritual realm is considered the arbiter of all things new, including a new way of living spiritually, and receives the approval of Jesus.
Do we question the Source of spiritual light?
So, if a person has a spiritual experience and receives some type of guidance or direction, it must be followed and trusted. It can't be questioned. To do so is considered being judgmental and contrary to Jesus and his unconditional love and acceptance.

The only problem with this is that this idea behind the New Spirituality is not new in this World. Solomon said that there's nothing new under the sun.

God addressed this type of situation in the Old Testament and in the New Testament, also. The New Testament phraseology is a little different, but just as applicable as the OT. The Apostle John said to "test the spirits, to see whether they are from God or not."

It was a known and accepted fact not all spirits were of the same character and origin, thus their purposes and methodologies were different. So, when encountering spiritual activity, blind faith was to not to be exercised.
There are various avenues of Spirituality - not all are equal.
The ignorance of this Truth from the Bible has lead many astray and down destructive paths not intended by The Father, His Son and the Holy Spirit. May we be more careful about the Way we choose.

Saturday, March 23, 2013

Christian Worldview - Contemplative Spirituality for the World

In this age of instant everything, any process that promises anything other than instantaneous delivery is looked on with an ample amount of negativity. Waiting is undesirable and, essentially, not an option in the lives of most.
Looking inward and beyond
This fact is becoming more evident in the spiritual activities and desires of many. In the quest to become one with the cosmos and self (considered by many to be one and the same), all things that promise instant spiritual transformation, experiences and and altered reality are considered legitimate prospects for incorporating into daily life.

Contemplative spirituality and it's related practices have become the spirituality of choice for many. The adherents to these disciplines cross denominational, religious, cultural and national barriers, and even include those who have previously warned about them. The proponents specifically point out their applicability to all religious faiths and mindsets.

While many of the tenets sound great, especially to the uninitiated, the true seeker of Truth will find the Bible lacking in its agreement with many, probably most, of its teachings and practices. Of course, to know this requires a certain amount of time in study of the Bible in order to arrive at some basic conclusions, which is a negative for the instant guru at heart.
God's Ways for Man are different than man's way for man.
Rather than seek the mind of God on any subject, many tend to find the mind that agrees with their own mind and ideas. So tenets, practices and teachings that make sense to the common man are chosen to pursue.
So, instead of pursuing and adopting God's Ways and Thoughts for our life, many are putting into practice ways and thoughts that God doesn't agree with. They are, many times, those of their own heart or the Enemy of God, Satan. They usually are in agreement with each other in their opposition to God and his thoughts and ways. Unfortunately, as popular as they are, they ultimately lead to spiritual death. Many are headed down this path.



Saturday, October 27, 2012

Know Your Teachers – Beth Moore, Brennan Manning & Others



In this age of having overwhelming amounts of information available at the click of a mouse, it’s easy to be presented quotes of popular personalities without knowing their underlying context. While sounding great on the surface and accepted easily by most, the reality of unseen origins lurks for only the dedicated seeker of Truth to discern.

This is the case for almost all of the currently popular Christian teachers and ministers of today. Interestingly, they all seem to promote practices using traditional Christian terminology and even Bible verses. A closer look, however, finds these ideas and practices cannot be supported by the totality of Scripture. In fact, Scripture specifically warns against them. Yet, these practices continue to be embraced and promoted.

The main area of concern is found within the teaching regarding Spiritual Transformation and Spiritual Formation and their emphasis on Contemplative Spiritually in the form of  contemplative or meditative prayer. 
Popular Southern Baptist Teacher - Beth Moore

 One of the more popular and widely known of these promoters among women is Beth Moore. In her book from 2002, When Godly People Do Ungodly Things, In a section about "Unceasing Prayer" Moore states: "I have picked up on the terminology of Brother Lawrence, who called praying unceasingly practicing God's presence. In fact, practicing God's presence has been my number one goal for the last year" (p. 109). In the DVD, Be Still,  Beth Moore states "If we are not still before Him, we will never truly know to the depths of the marrow of our bones that He is God. There's got to be a stillness."


While there are many other supporting and related statements that could be provided, we will focus on the origins of these statements and practices, which are openly mentioned in her writings and speeches. Probably the person most promoted by Beth Moore is Brennan Manning. Moore builds her case for contemplative practices in her frequent references to Manning in her book, suggesting that his contribution to "our generation of believers may be a gift without parallel" (p. 72).
Renegade Catholic Priest - Brennan Manning

Regarding prayer, Manning believes, “The first step in faith is to stop thinking about God at the time of prayer. Choose a single, sacred word or phrase that captures something of the flavor of your intimate relationship with God. A word such as Jesus, Abba, Peace, God or a phrase such as "Abba, I belong to you." ... Without moving your lips, repeat the sacred word inwardly, slowly, and often. When distractions come, ... simply return to listening to your sacred word.... [G]ently return [your mind] to your sacred word. (Brennan Manning)

The Biblically literate student quickly ascertains that this advice flies directly in the face of Jesus’ warning and instruction on prayer in Matthew 6:7, “But when ye pray, use not vain repetition as the heathen do:”

In Brennan Manning's 2003 book, Above All (foreword written by Michael W. Smith), Manning says the following: “The god whose moods alternate between graciousness and fierce anger ...the god who exacts the last drop of blood from his Son so that his just anger, evoked by sin, may be appeased, is not the God revealed by and in Jesus Christ. And if he is not the God of Jesus, he does not exist.” (p. 58-59) 

In case you didn’t catch that, the Gospel of Jesus Christ, specifically, the literal blood atonement by the literal sacrifice of Christ’s literal body for the literal sins of mankind, is specifically denied by Brennan Manning. Unfortunately, he is not alone among the proponents of Contemplative Spirituality in this belief.



Beth Moore also quotes Manning from his book Ragamuffin Gospel calling the book "one of the most remarkable books" (p. 290) she has ever read. But it is this very book that reveals Manning's true affinity with contemplative spirituality. In the back of the book, Manning makes reference to Basil Pennington saying that Pennington's methods will provide us with "a way of praying that leads to a deep living relationship with God." However, Pennington's methods of prayer draw from Eastern religions. In his book, Finding Grace at the Center, Pennington says: “We should not hesitate to take the fruit of the age-old wisdom of the East and "capture" it for Christ. Indeed, those of us who are in ministry should make the necessary effort to acquaint ourselves with as many of these Eastern techniques as possible. Many Christians who take their prayer life seriously have been greatly helped by Yoga, Zen, TM and similar practices.” 

In his book, Abba's Child, Manning says that Beatrice Bruteau is a "trustworthy guide to contemplative consciousness. Bruteau believes that God lives in all creation, stating: "We have realized ourselves as the Self that says only I AM, with no predicate following, not "I am a this" or "I have that quality." Only unlimited, absolute I AM.”

Do you remember the words of Jesus about the latter days saying that many would come in His name saying "I AM"? We are not to be deceived.

As stated earlier, this only begins to deal with the huge errors of belief and practice being currently taught by most ministers today. Unfortunately, their origin is not with God. It would be worth the time and effort for us to continually undertake the command of the Bible for those professing a genuine relationship with God through the Jesus described in Scripture to “examine yourself, whether you be in the faith.” II Corinthians 13:5

Saturday, January 26, 2008

Jesus Creed & Truth Intolerance

Months ago, I was blocked from posting of the blog site of Scot McKnight, Jesus Creed. I returned yesterday to see if my blogging presence remained unwelcomed. I am sad to report that nothing has changed.

I posted a comment under the blog post, "White House God 2," which was removed before too long. The comment was in the vein of finding it very interesting that someone who would profess a belief in Christ would, in the name of serving that same Christ in public office, disobey a direct command of Christ by swearing an oath of office.

Being dismissed is really not too surprising in this day of intolerance. I find that the most intolerant people in America are those usually espousing their tolerance of all things, even those things they may disagree with. I have consistently found these people to be disingenuous at best. All piety and platitudes aside, Truth doesn't seem to be the topic of choice, nor do they want to entertain the rigors of examination.

In the case of Scot McKnight and Jesus Creed, I'm not surprised. If you were to begin to join in the dialogue on Jesus Creed, you will find that most of the regular commentors don't desire to contemplate the words of someone who readily works his way through the rhetoric of analysis and gets to the core of an issue. That's too divisive and doesn't tend to unify the readers. So, attempts are regularly made to keep the conversation away from Truth and the consistently logical analysis of that same Truth.

Instead, new thinking is encouraged. New paradigms are sought in order to encourage the faithful rebellion toward most things established. Of course, the aim is a new consensus which does away with old norms by establishing new boundaries through the collective energy and input of everyone.........everyone except those who do not agree with the majority consensus. Those dissenters are not allowed to establish any disagreement. Either they will conform to the consensus or they will be discharged from participation within the consensus. This assures order within the group, or I should say, it assures disorder.......consistent, persistent chaos.

That which has been the same in the past and will continue to remain so in the future are, ultimately, not welcome. Truth is cast out. Lies are welcomed and embraced. Such is the tolerant world of Jesus Creed and the Emerging Brethren.

Wednesday, April 11, 2007

Jesus Creed, Dialogue & Emerging Submerging

On an earlier post, I mentioned that I have been part of the online conversation at Jesus Creed, the blog for The Emerging Church, The Emerging Movement or Emerging. It is the creation of Scot McKnight, Karl A. Olsson Professor in Religious Studies of North Park University in Chicago, Illinois.

I have found a very interesting phenomenon while participating in the conversation at Jesus Creed. Yes, it is true that eveyone is encouraged to particpate in the online dialogue. But there are limits to this open conversation. It has nothing to do with crossing the boundaries of decorum as in vulgar speech or personal attack. It has to to with the tenor and breadth of conversation actively encouraged and advertised.

No topic is considered taboo and questions are almost considered mandatory. This is because of the supposed openness of questioning anything and everything historically traditional within the realm of Christendom. Biblical texts and all related issues as well as historical settings, subsequent epochs and all recorded actions of personalities of note are fair game.

But their appears to be a few unspoken caveats. Certain conclusions deemed unsuitable to the Emerging modus operandi are not acceptable. However, the only way of ascertaining these boundaries is through the experience of asking questions, participating in the dialogue and, then, drawing conclusions. And certain conclusions are not agreeable to Emerging conclusions. This is true in spite of any claims to the contrary.

One caveat can be found when scrutinizing certain Emerging conclusions. Questions and dialogue are OK as long as absolutes are not taken only from Scripture or from an historically traditional view of Scripture. In some areas, it seems that absolutes are not welcome at all. The area in question remains open to individual thoughts and conclusions.

Another unspoken caveat is ascertained by taking a consistent stand regarding a particular issue and not backing down. This is not respected. To think you are right about that particular issue is unacceptable. You may have others challenge you on various points about that issue, yet, if you remain steadfast, you are considered to be arrogant. This is viewed as an attempt to impose your will on the others in the conversation.

Another Emerging caveat is unveiled more quickly by any thought deemed to put The Emerging Movement in a negative light or to identify Emerging with certain movements outside of Traditional Christianity. For example, if Emerging practices or teachings are said to be the same as those in Eastern Religious practices such as Mysticism, Transcendental Meditation, Spiritism, Spiritualism, etc., the one intimating such thoughts is instantly challenged, if not outright called out on the blog. Receiving rebukes and reprovals by certain ones in the conversation can accumulate quickly.

Of course, the particulars of the dialogue are not put to the strict scrutiny of Scripture. There may be lame attempts of using Scripture outside of context or literal meaning, but strict scrutiny consistently using Scripture is not allowed.

Eventually, the caveats become unashamedly overt. You will be warned and if you do not abide by their strict standards of conduct on the blog, your posts will be removed and your IRL temporarily blocked from further participation in the conversation. Failure to heed the Emerging caveats results in a permanent block. I

have nothing of a personal nature to say against Scot McKnight except to say that there are certain topics he will not allow to be discussed on his blog. This is perfectly fine because, after all, it is his blog. And he is allowed to determine the parameters of conversation; but not when the idea promoted is that the conversation is open.

So, it seems that Emerging is really all about Submerging, submerging Truth, submerging certain Truth. Believe it or not, Emerging types are being led down a path containing the aromatic tinge from below.

Emerging Vacuum

When is Black not black? When is up not up? When is good not good?..........................................................................................................Give Up?

Well, silly you,..............when its Emerging! Anybody should know that!

Please, doubting me about this will do you no amount of good............not that good is really good..........and who are you to determine such things? If I say good is bad, then that's good!

Of course, the most important part of good not being good is the fact that the truth of good being good was questioned. Truth not questioned cannot be truth can it? So we question. And truth begins to take on the bright luster of darkness. Isn't it amazing?

Imagine the new twists and turns available to the one who questions. What you thought to be true is pregnant with the possiblity of falsity. And what you thought to be false blossoms into absolute truth. Reality takes on any number of different dimensions only limited by the amount of questions posed.

Just think. All that past asurance and confidence carries a high probability of being chaos and confusion. How could you have missed the obvious, chaos and confusion being the place of security and vitality?

All I can say is that I am so happy for you and your newfound understanding of Life. Emerging fits you very nicely. You look good! You look confident! You look as if you have everything figured out..........finally! The real you has finally Emerged!

Welcome to a new existence, where everything is exactly as it appears not to be. Otherwise, there's no confidence in your knowledge of nothing. No problem as long as you know the difference betwen nothing in its appearance and nothing in its reality, the essence of Emerging.

Sunday, March 25, 2007

The Roman Catholic Church, Church Growth & The Papacy

In this account of the reunification of the Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches, an Austrian Priest gives some insight to the real reason that this unforseen possibility is actually in the process of becoming reality. The World Catholic News reports that Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, Archbishop of Vienna, is optimistic that this reunification will overcome the lone obstacle, the role of the Papacy. Other than that, the Catholic and Orthodox beliefs are in accord “on almost every theological issue.”

While many have thought for centuries that the two Churches have distinct theological differences, this quote by the Archbishop is quite revealing. It lets us know that Protestants, as a whole, have the same underlying beliefs as The Roman Catholic Church. After all, Protestants were originally Roman Catholics. They are simply coming back home to Mama, the Mother Church.

By the way, this process is not limited to Orthodox Churches. In fact, according to official Roman Catholic Policy, all Protestants will one day soon be covered by the power of the Pope. It's only a matter of time.

And for those who are not considered Protestants, the same is planned for you and your groups also. The plan is already coming to fruition as we speak. Doctrinal diminuation has occured to the extent that many are truly illiterate when it comes to core Bible Doctrines concerning Jesus Christ and His salvation. Teachings of Mysticism and Spiritualism have pervasively intruded standard teachings of most churches to the extent that these ungodly doctrines and practices are thought to be espoused by Jesus and His Apostles in Scripture.

Apostacy is rampant and many are completely unaware. They are under the delusion that good is evil, right is wrong, black is white, up is down, etc. Power foreign to the Holy Spirit are accepted without so much as a thought that this power could possibly be from anyone other that God. Testing the Spirits according to Scripture is not considered as viable. That would offend certain individuals. Meanwhile shipwrecked lives continue to accumulate on the reef of shallow spirituality.

And the Papacy grows.

Saturday, March 24, 2007

Christianity & The Real Jesus

When it comes to what we believe about the historical figure Jesus, is our image of this controversail figure accurate? Or do we embrace a caricature? Is the Jesus we allow to be presented to us really the One described for us in the Bible?

For many, to consider this question is deemed ridiculous. To some, it approaches blasphemy. Yet, are we not responsible for the substance of our belief? Is it not our duty to make sure that our beliefs are accurate and not mistaken and misdirected?

Paul tells us to make sure that the Jesus we preach is not "another Jesus", thus "another gospel."

So, regardless of the tenets of any religion or Denomination, we are to study the bible to make sure that our words about the Son of God don't paint a picture of Jesus foreign to what the Bible actually says. The only way to do that is to get into the Word of God. Reading books about the subject may sound like a good idea, but how else are you to know whether the books you read are truthful or not except by comparing it to the Word of God?

It's simple for anyone desiring to know the Truth about the historical Jesus. The only accurate portrayal of God in the flesh is the Bible. We need to make sure we are following the genuine Messiah, not a wolf in sheep's clothing!

Tuesday, March 20, 2007

Jesus & The Secret: Fulfilling The Law

Well.........now we know. If only Jesus had known! If only Jesus would have, somehow, become privy to this universal Law. Just imagine what Jesus could have accomplished. Just think of how much of His potential, as God, He could have performed for the benefit of mankind. Just think of how much more the Creator could have created.................if only He had known.

What a waste! Just think of all the things in His life that could have been different..........from the very beginning. Why, even as a baby, this law of attraction could have been implemented to, not only secure the positive political affirmation of Herod, but prevent the useless slaughter of innocent babies in Bethlehem. The eternal destiny of Judas could have been altered had He approached the traitor, Judas, differently with the sop. The remainder of His Apostles could have escaped martyrdom, yes, ruled Israel as Jesus had promised. Had this law been aimed toward the religious leaders of His day, they would have realized the attractive nature of His persona and presented Him to the people as the Messiah, instead of trying Him as a criminal. Furthermore, the Roman power despised by many could have been used for the glory of God if He had only woven His tapestral attraction within the mind and heart of Pilate. The guards would have refused to mutilate and mock him. Why, Satan Himself could have been converted back to the eternal fold, forever abandoing personal delusions of deity.

More desperate people could have been fed, healed, clothed, set free, mended, unified...............if only............if only.............Jesus could have been more attractive.

But, alas, we are left with a Savior who was defeated on the cross in death. Yes, There is the issue of raising from the dead. It does have a certain quality about it that speaks of a certain amount of uniqueness, but attractive? No, at least, not to enough people of the World. For those to whom it is attractive, like President Bush, the attraction lies in the fact that Jesus makes one feel loved, not guilty. Factor in the fact that the guilt of mankind's sin was the reason for His death and one might understand how this feature of the Gospel of Repentance and Faith, is not viewed as attractive enough as "The Secret."

No, in hindsight it must be admitted. Christ had no idea of what He was doing. As God in human flesh, He had the right motives in trying to elevate the status of man, but His omniscient methodology, while crude and accomplishing far more than most would have thought possible, was lacking in its political adaptability to the current demands of the World.

No, it's time to admit that, had Jesus known this secret, life as we know it would be completely different. It's time that Jesus found out what He's been missing all this time. If you see Him, please bring Him up to date.

God will be so glad you did!

Thursday, March 08, 2007

Emerging Conversation: Rifles Not Allowed

I mentioned on an earlier post that I had been involved in the conversation on Jesus Creed, an Emerging Church website moderated by Scot McKnight. I also mentioned that


Emerging is publicly against much of, what they consider to be, the negative aspects of Traditional Christianity. If you listen for awhile, you begin to realize that what they are really upset about is not being allowed to participate in Traditional Christianity. They have been marginalized. Why? Because they are new, innovative, hip, tolerant and outside the Evangelical Box. In other words, they are modern hippies (not always in looks) who don't fit in and don't really want to fit in. They don't want to conform to the standards of worship and ministry tradition handed down within their respective faith families because, many times, those standards require one to look, be and act different from the world.

So, in the spirit of the age, they have rebelled and launched out into the deep on their own in order to create their own autonomous bodies, usually in the most unexpected places. That way they can be close to the ones they are attempting to minister to, which means that they get to create an atmosphere which makes them feel comfortable as well as those they are attempting to reach with the good news of Jesus. And did I mention they get to have fun at the same time? That may not be the most important aspect, but is surely mentioned alot.

As stated before, one of the hallmarks of Emerging is Conversation. By encouraging participation in conversation by as many as possible, all are included to the best extent possible. Inclusiveness within Community is also another major hallmark of Emerging.

One problem with this conversation emerges, though. Addressing particulars within a conversation tends to exclude a certain number of participants because of the various levels of expertise and experience within the body of available conversants. Another problem emerges when there are so many opinions and thoughts about a given particular that the only conclusion among the conversants is that there are many opinions among the various conversants. That's because arriving at objective truth is not the aim of conversation, conversation is the aim of conversation.

So when somone attempts to focus on a particular and refuses to let it go, this is not considered a positive within the immediate conversant community. After all, a person who refuses to let go of a particular point is considered to view himself as right about that point. That is not a positive either, especially if it conflicts with the consensus of the conversant community.

It's rather amusing to watch members of Emerging react to people in the same manner with which they have been treated in the past. You would think that they would be a little more sensitive to someone in a similar plight as their own, that of not being accepted by the group.

But when you bring a rifle to an outing when everyone else has brought shotguns, the disparity is obvious. And so is the discomfort.

Do the Heathen "Trust in God?"

"In God We Trust." The official National Motto of the United States is an anchor which many in this country rely on, at least partially, as proof that America is a Christian nation uniquely founded for the benefit of Christians. And with the constant barrage of legal and moral attacks upon foundations once thought impregnable over the past five decades, more and more people resort to its religious foundation in the hopes of stemming the tide of cultural changes seen during that time.

In light of that special place, many consider it a secondary blessing to the enemies of liberty that they also get to enjoy the benefits of freedom under God. So, if you hate certain things about this country, your freedom under God allows you to voice your concerns publicly, if need be. Many other freedoms similar to this are also enjoyed by those not agreeing with official U.S. Policy.

But have you ever considered the other side of that "Trust in God" coin? The other side? "What other side," you may be asking.

Have you ever considered the possibility that the motto "Trust in God" is primarily for the benefit of those who have specifically chosen to remain outside the eternal blessing of God in a redemptive relationship with Him through faith in Jesus Christ. In other words, they have chosen to officially reject God while acknowledging Him, His attributes and creative works. And at the same time, they exercise delegated authority from that same God they eternally reject. And if, during the exercise of that authority, they are molested, they have God's permission to act in retribution seven fold.

If that's the deal with God, would you not "Trust in God," also?

Here's an example from the Bible. God, because of the wickedness of the His People, Israel, was going to bring judgment on them using a powerful pagan nation. Through His Prophet, God says, "have I not ordained them [heathen nation] to execute judgment?" It is significant that God Himself says that He "ordained" this pagan nation to carry out God's orders, to execute God's judgment. He says exactly the same thing in Romans chapter 13.

So, if you knew that God had ordained you to execute certain authority on His behalf, wouldn't you also "trust God" to back you up when exercising such authority, even if you hated that same God? Would this not add a completely new dimension to the notion of Trusting God?

So, what does one have to do to be odained by God into this elite group? Ahh, that's another topic for another post!!!!!