Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Personal Relationship with Christ? Huh?
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider: I always find it difficult to distinguish between a statement I'd like to be true and one that is on these tests
The key to happiness is to decide that there is no difference, and live accordingly.
--Tom Clune
-------------------- This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
quantpole
Shipmate
# 8401
|
Posted
Well I'm one of those Baptist types that LutheranChik referred to earlier. At churches and youth groups when I was growing up there was quite an (over)emphasis on the PWRG. Looking back on it I do think it was overplayed, and there wasn't enough talk about corporate aspects of faith. Incidentally, when discussing PWRG it was never really in relation to a warm fuzzy feeling, but the churches I went to didn't really do Jesus is my BF type songs either.
My take on PWRG: God has acted to save the world, yes, but also and in a very real way to save me personally. I know that some people see that as a bit 'I'centric but i do believe it to be true nevertheless.
Posts: 885 | From: Leeds | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
St. Sebastian
 Staggering ever onward
# 312
|
Posted
I don't mean to interrupt the impending outbreak of hostilities, but I interrupted my labors in the bowels of hell to see where the thread was going (and boy is it going!) and want to post while I'm able to keep my mind wrapped around it a little.
I'm with the the people who have a hard time with relationship with Someone who doesn't have skin. During the Eucharist, I feel His Presence. But it's sort of like having someone I respect a great deal, have heard a lot about (and who has heard about me, say via mutual friends) notice me in a crowd and stop briefly to give me a smile and a quick hug as he bustles by. The rest of the time, my "relationship" is pretty much intellectual and a faith-choice. Life would be a shrieking obscenity without God and the promises of Christianity (to me, of course). But, as others have said, I've always felt my faith deficient to the point of not being valid because I don't seem to have what others do in their PRWG. Nor do I understand how they derive so much help and comfort from it. Is it just the comfort of knowing God's in control and all shall be well? That doesn't work well for me because (a)I'm afraid I'll bollocks up His best-laid plans for me and (b)I still have to wade through the shit. This isn't the attitude I see in the PRWG contingent, and many of them have all but said I'm not a Christian because of it. I just can't see how that works (not that I begrudge them that it works for them). Maybe I just haven't gotten from my head to my heart, and that's what you have to do for a PRWG.
-------------------- St. Seb
In Spite of Everything: Yes.
Posts: 962 | From: Burlington, North Carolina | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
 Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by PerkyEars: For me a 'personal relationship' means a perceptable interactivity between me and a non-theoretical God who is a) really out there and b) actually interested in me.
I think this is if not a good definition, at least a sine qua non of PR: it must at the very least be a perceptable interactivity.
I perceive myself doing a lot toward God. I don't perceive God doing a lot back.
-------------------- This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cocktailgirl
 mixer of the drinks
# 8684
|
Posted
Mousethief, why do you keep on doing it then? (I don't mean that in a confrontational way; I'm interested in why you keep on with God when you don't perceive God 'doing a lot back').
FWIW, I think pursuit of a warm fuzzy feeling can be a false idol. Christianity is about seeking God, not some emotional state.
Posts: 841 | From: in hac lacrimarum valle, propping up the bar | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
 Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by cocktailgirl: Mousethief, why do you keep on doing it then? (I don't mean that in a confrontational way; I'm interested in why you keep on with God when you don't perceive God 'doing a lot back').
Faith.
-------------------- This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
PerkyEars
 slightly distracted
# 9577
|
Posted
This thread is starting to depress me!
I think the PRWC is leaned on far too heavily by evangelical theology, and I think the reason is this. Christians like to have some way to provisionally sort out the 'properly' converted from the 'need preaching to'. With sacramental styles its easy enough, once they sign up to the rituals you can relax and let God sort em out from there. But if you don't believe in sacramental initiation, then you need to measure something else, and evangelicals have ended up trying to label the inner states of people coming to faith. To understand why evangelicals get so het up when you challenge the idea that the PRWC is neccessary, you have to understand that they don't have anything else with which to tell if someone is in or out. If you can be ok with God 'without' certain subjective experiences, then where do you draw the line? Are people who seem to enjoy the ritual but not appear so emotionally commited 'real Christians'? Are the people who seem to vaguely think it's a good idea 'real Christians'? The scarey idea that God is ok with a 'much' broader set of people than you like to think he is soon raises it's head. I can see why Evo1 doesn't want to let it go, because I'm afraid I've experienced feeling defensive, deflated and dissilusioned at finding out that some of my experiences are not some sort of blueprint for how it should be. I can also imagine how infuriating it must be for people who genuinely don't feel these things to be told they are not proper Christians.
I enjoy my evangelical church because I am pretty emotional about it and understand where people are coming from when they talk about definite conversion experiences and so on - it's nice to be among people who don't think I'm nuts. But I really worry about nailing my colours to the mast as an 'evangelical' in the long run - because I see this preaching of the 'neccessary' PRWC is alienating many people in the long run.
quote: Can I get an agreement from the others here assembled that by PRWG we, here in this conversation about our own faith walks, do not mean My Boyfriend/My Buddy/My Pal Jesus, "under the blanket with a flashlight"? That our relationship with Jesus is something much more complex and not exclusively or even primarily referencing warm and fuzzy feelings about the Lord and Savior? Right? Can I get a witness?
I think we're on the same page LC.
But what *is* this 'Jesus is my boyfriend' mentality people all refer to?? I don't think I've ever come across it. Could I be an unwitting sufferer! I find the phrase icky in the extreme, but I definately have a lot of warm fuzzy feelings and I'm getting paranoid *I'm* doing it wrong and enjoying myself too much.
Posts: 532 | From: Bristol | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
 Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by PerkyEars: I can also imagine how infuriating it must be for people who genuinely don't feel these things to be told they are not proper Christians.
Thank you!
-------------------- This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by PerkyEars: But what *is* this 'Jesus is my boyfriend' mentality people all refer to?? I don't think I've ever come across it. Could I be an unwitting sufferer! I find the phrase icky in the extreme, but I definately have a lot of warm fuzzy feelings and I'm getting paranoid *I'm* doing it wrong and enjoying myself too much.
I can relate to that phrase in particular in my response to praise music. I confess to having a negative reaction to it. I don't see it as particularly new -- one of my mother's favorite hymns is "In the garden," which is pretty solidly in the "Jesus is my boyfriend" camp to my way of thinking.
I guess I'm suspended between the two poles of this thread -- I would not consider my faith real if it lacked a strong emotional element, and yet I find the "Nobody does it better" swoon songs, or being slain in the spirit, etc., highly suspect. I guess it's awfully hard to rise above one's own limitations on these things, and realize that other people may have a deep and abiding faith life that simply manifests itself differently from mine...
--Tom Clune
-------------------- This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
adamant azzy
Shipmate
# 10636
|
Posted
quote: What are ....to have a personal....relationship etc etc
Forgive me for interrupting into this rather interesting exchange. Assuming that all the rumours are true. There can be all kinds of relationships,like with ....janitor...Payroll.. neighbour upstairs (no pun intended... )etc. Even an atheist can have a relation with a "nonGod". It depends on 1. The nature of relation s/he has with his/her church. 2. The effect of cultural inputs etc. 2. His/her personality etc. Could range from the king whose letter I received to that of mother/child. Every one can answer for himself. I cannot judge for you. And personally cannot conceive of it but one may very well have very warm personal feelings for "Jesus". Obviously there is no substance to this kind or relation. It is unilateral. If "Jesus" will save, He will do so on the basis of my actions and not whether I felt distant or woozy. It is interesting to hear about others feeling/experience. Bannerlady, Whitelaughter, Mudfrog et.al. have it. Why did I not have what they have? Reckon like I missed that boat some place. Or could it be that the styling preferances might change next year and the whole idea looks old fashioned and crappy, just like the Corvette of '65 vintage, and so passe, and therefore not to worry but to just wait it out. But if anything, this vaporous personal relation, if it exists, should very soon condense into love (and a willingnes to sacrifice) for other human beings, ( or else is fake) for He only provides its rubric. Pax vobiscum
-------------------- ....and I came back empty handed
Posts: 84 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
LutheranChik
Shipmate
# 9826
|
Posted
quote: If "Jesus" will save, He will do so on the basis of my actions and not whether I felt distant or woozy.
Actually, Jesus has already saved you independently of any presumed "good conduct points" on your part. The question is whether you're yet aware of that.
[tangent alert off] Carry on!
Posts: 6462 | From: rural Michigan, USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leprechaun
 Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Mousethief: quote: Originally posted by cocktailgirl: Mousethief, why do you keep on doing it then? (I don't mean that in a confrontational way; I'm interested in why you keep on with God when you don't perceive God 'doing a lot back').
Faith.
Ok. ISTM that if you have faith in God, then you have a personal relationship with him. If he is a "person" and you trust/rely on/have faith in him then that is a personal relationship.
We seem to have got into a circular discussion here about faith feeling different to different people. I don't think that's any biggy.
But when I say PRWG I mean faith.
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
 Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
I have faith that the police department will respond if I dial 911 but I wouldn't call that a personal relationship, even though every officer on the force is a person. You're bending the definition of "personal relationship" beyond all reasonable limits.
-------------------- This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
 Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by adamant azzy: Or could it be that the styling preferances might change next year and the whole idea looks old fashioned and crappy, just like the Corvette of '65 vintage, and so passe, and therefore not to worry but to just wait it out.
If you have one you just can't stand anymore ('65 Corvette, that is), I'd be happy to take it off your hands.
-------------------- This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
I think we're arguing about whether we can say that the expression 'Personal relationship' adequately describes what is going on here. One lot are saying: I am a person, God is a person, I have faith in God, ergo I have a personal relationship with God. Another lot are saying personal relationship implies a degree of affective closeness that cannot really exist in this situation.
I think personal commitment might be a better expression because it signals something relational inasmuch as it implies that this stuff matters but doesn't have the affective baggage of PRWG.
-------------------- How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
adamant azzy
Shipmate
# 10636
|
Posted
quote: OP'd by Lutheranchick...Jesus has already saved you independently of any presumed.....
Thank You. Thank You indeed. What a great relief! Now I can go back to my philandering ways.
Pax vobiscum
-------------------- ....and I came back empty handed
Posts: 84 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Josephine
 Orthodox Belle
# 3899
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Leprechaun: We seem to have got into a circular discussion here about faith feeling different to different people. I don't think that's any biggy.
But the language we use to express or describe our faith in Christ is a biggy. It's a biggy because St. Sebastian and Karl aren't the only people who have ever felt that their faith was deficient or non-existent because everyone around them was saying they had this "personal relationship with Jesus," and made to feel that, if they were a Christian, they had to have one, too, and in their minds and hearts, they couldn't find anything that felt like a personal relationship with Jesus.
I think that kind of language drives people out of the Church and away from God. Not everyone, of course. But those who don't naturally have and can't manufacture the feelings that everyone else seems to have. I think it's both hurtful and harmful. In short, I think it is a big deal.
-------------------- I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!
Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
adamant azzy
Shipmate
# 10636
|
Posted
quote: OP'd by Callan... I think personal commitment might be a better expression
Are the goal posts being changed?
Pax vobiscum
-------------------- ....and I came back empty handed
Posts: 84 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nicodemia
WYSIWYG
# 4756
|
Posted
quote: But what *is* this 'Jesus is my boyfriend' mentality people all refer to?? I don't think I've ever come across it.
Perky Ears, try a heavily Charismatic church!
The "song" that made me heave every time it came along, about every other week it seemed, is
"By your side I would stay; In your arms I would lay. Jesus, lover of my soul, Nothing from you would I withhold.
Lord, I love you, and adore you; what more can I say? You cause my love to grow stronger With every passing day."
None of it was true. So I didn't sing it. Trouble was, there were those who would come and "minister" to me if they saw me sitting there, not singing!
Let's face it, there are those who feel, and those who think; those who look for warm fuzzies and those that keep their emotions tucked under. But we are all Christians. Don't judge me on what I feel, or don't feel, or, more likely, what you think I should feel.
Posts: 4544 | From: not too far from Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
Not really, I'm just searching for an expression which suggests that St. Sebastian and Karl take their faith as seriously as Leprechaun or Lutheran Chik.
[ETA - In response to Adamant Azzy] [ 10. November 2005, 18:29: Message edited by: Callan ]
-------------------- How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LutheranChik
Shipmate
# 9826
|
Posted
Adamant: It's not about earning points by doing stuff. There is nothing you can do to earn points. Forget about the points. Jesus has earned them for you.
The question then becomes (and this is, really, slouching back toward the subject at hand...just work with me, people) how do I respond in love and gratitude to God's love for and graciousness toward me? I'm saved! Yes! But saved for what? THAT is where the good works come in. You've just put the cart before the horse.
And we do that because... we are now in a transformative relationship with Jesus Christ. A trust relationship , as one of my Presby pastor friends puts it.
For all of us here, however we feel about Jesus from day to day, we are in a trust relationship with him.
Relational . Thanks, Callan...that was a word I was searching for in the context of this conversation.
-------------------- Simul iustus et peccator http://www.lutheranchiklworddiary.blogspot.com
Posts: 6462 | From: rural Michigan, USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
 liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by josephine: I think that kind of language drives people out of the Church and away from God. Not everyone, of course. But those who don't naturally have and can't manufacture the feelings that everyone else seems to have. I think it's both hurtful and harmful. In short, I think it is a big deal.
I agree with you about the importance of language, and I agree with Callan that "personal commitment" might be a better term. But lots of things churches do are hurtful and harmful. I find closed communion hurtful and harmful, and it's one of the main reasons I won't be Roman Catholic or Orthodox. I'm sure there are things my church does that are hurtful or harmful that I wouldn't want to change. So if some churches want to insist on "personal relationship with Christ," it's hard to argue solely on "hurtful and harmful" grounds that they shouldn't; it might be as important to them as closed communion is to the ecclesiology of the Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evo1
Shipmate
# 10249
|
Posted
But then I've heard hurtful comments on here about my having a "personal relationship" as I recall, this was before I'd even declared the fact - it was just assumed of me. What's the difference?
Words are words. The political correctness I mentioned earlier seems to be coming out here. I am getting the feeling that some would prefer us not to use the term "personal relationship" because of the abuse of a minority.
[as an aside, I may have felt affronted at the comments against me had it not been for the fact that the person was suggesting that this was a new phenomenon and that members of Jesus' family would not have had a personal relationship with him - that was just too rib tickling an argument to get upset with]
Love,
Evo1
-------------------- Just think how horrid I would be if I didn't have a Personal Relationship with Jesus
Posts: 1058 | From: Hull, England | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
 Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
Evo1, I'm sorry if I gave that impression. I don't dislike the term primarily because of the way Aspies feel about it; I dislike the term because it is inaccurate.
-------------------- This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leprechaun
 Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Mousethief: I have faith that the police department will respond if I dial 911 but I wouldn't call that a personal relationship, even though every officer on the force is a person. You're bending the definition of "personal relationship" beyond all reasonable limits.
But the nature of faith in God is different from that in the fire department surely?
Sure, we may not FEEL it, and I'm more than happy to say you feel it differently from me. I'm not even particularly attached to the personal relationship language, for some it is an ill chosen idiom.
But the language the Bible/church has used to describe our "relationship" to Christ is intensely close - we are in union with him, our closeness to him is a reflection of the trinity's closeness to each other. These are part of faith. So you don't agree with one modern metaphor for it. I'm not bothered. But I don't think that metaphor stretches too far no matter what you feel about it. Like I say, ditch it if it doesn't work for you.
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Josephine
 Orthodox Belle
# 3899
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by RuthW: So if some churches want to insist on "personal relationship with Christ," it's hard to argue solely on "hurtful and harmful" grounds that they shouldn't; it might be as important to them as closed communion is to the ecclesiology of the Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches.
Granted. But we don't usually dismiss the objections of those who are hurt by our closed communion by saying, "It's no biggie." We recognize that it is a big deal, and while we can't change it, we can at least attempt to explain our position and to mitigate the hurt that arises from it.
I know that the people who find religious language puzzling or off-putting also have a responsibility to understand what is meant. Saying that Mary is the Mother of God doesn't mean that we think she is the source of the Godhead, and it would be nice if those who think that's what we mean would believe us when we say what we mean by it. So maybe people like Karl and St. Sebastian should accept that those who say "personal relationship" don't mean anything at all about intimacy and warmth and feelings, if that's not what the people who use that term mean by it.
The problem is, in my experience, that is what many people do mean by it. Not here, perhaps. But I had a friend who was subjected to an attempted exorcism because he didn't get emotional and he said he never felt the presence of God.
-------------------- I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!
Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
adamant azzy
Shipmate
# 10636
|
Posted
Lutheranchick. ...This is from your website...... quote: primary goal in being the Church is to proclaim the very good news of God's unconditional, no-strings-attached Yes! to a loving relationship
If that was so, there would be no point in Heaven and Hell and the day of judgement. And. Everybody is saved ( except I hope Satan) And having complete, seamless and water proof arguments which still does not mean that they are correct.
Pax vobiscum
-------------------- ....and I came back empty handed
Posts: 84 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leprechaun
 Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by josephine: Granted. But we don't usually dismiss the objections of those who are hurt by our closed communion by saying, "It's no biggie."
Josephine, I apologise as you obviously found this offensive.
It is no biggy to me that people's emotional experiences of faith are different. Honestly.
But I did not mean to dismiss your objections as no big deal so I apologise.
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
adamant azzy
Shipmate
# 10636
|
Posted
quote: OP'd by Josephine.... I know that the people who find religious language puzzling or off-putting also have a responsibility to understand what is meant.
But why should the burden lie on those who are put off by the language. Isnt it right that the speaker should say what he means and keep it simple?
pax vobiscum
-------------------- ....and I came back empty handed
Posts: 84 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Josephine
 Orthodox Belle
# 3899
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Leprechaun: Josephine, I apologise as you obviously found this offensive.
It is no biggy to me that people's emotional experiences of faith are different. Honestly.
But I did not mean to dismiss your objections as no big deal so I apologise.
Thank you, Leprechaun. I misunderstood what you meant by "it's no biggie." I see now what you meant. Thank you for the clarification, and for the apology.
-------------------- I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!
Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
LutheranChik
Shipmate
# 9826
|
Posted
Adamant (good handle, BTW, it would seem): I'm sorry that you seem to envision salvation as a zero-sum proposition where extending God's grace to the "unworthier" somehow devalues your own, and that you seem to want to send other people to The Bad Place...but since this isn't really the appropriate time or place for a short course in Lutheran theology, I'll direct you to Luther's "Bondage of the Will" -- an oldie but goodie about why we can't lift ourselves up by our bootstraps -- or "Baptized, We Live: Lutheranism as a Way of Life" by Daniel Erlander (Augsburg Fortress), or "Reclaiming the 'L' Word": Renewing the Church From Its Lutheran Core" by Kelly Fryer (Augsburg Fortress). Just for starters.
Posts: 6462 | From: rural Michigan, USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
LutheranChik
Shipmate
# 9826
|
Posted
Getting back to the topic at hand: I can't help but observe that this conversation sounds like a group of adult children at one of those infamous family gatherings where frictions arise, starting to argue about their relationship with their parents: "Mom always liked you best!"
I think God meets us where we are, and God relates to us in the way that God can best reach us. And that relationship is going to look different for each person. And I think that the Church, throughout history, has helped us in this relationship by providing so many important relational touchstones: Word and Sacrament; the act of worship; Christian fellowship; our personal spiritual/devotional disciplines. These things are all conduits, if you will, of God's love and care, and I think that different parts of the puzzle will resonate in different ways with different people. And that is okay. So why are we ranking one another's set of touchpoints with God, if you will, or getting defensive about our own in relationship to other people's?
-------------------- Simul iustus et peccator http://www.lutheranchiklworddiary.blogspot.com
Posts: 6462 | From: rural Michigan, USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Ian Climacus: the Orthodox answer to "Do you have a personal relationship with Jesus?" is "Yes!" However, we do not have an "individual" relationship with Jesus: at least in Orthodox eyes, we meet him through the church (which Mousethief made reference to).
I think "personal" has now taken on the connotation of "individual" -- me and Jesus and we're alright. I don't subscribe to that interpretation; I am called to a relationship with the thrice-blessed Trinity however, and in that sense I see it as personal.
These are important points, and it speaks very well for Orthodoxy that we can expect Orthodox to be the first to make them.
In Being as Communion John Zizioulas goes even further. According to his thinking (which is the church's thinking as he understands it), the word "individual" (referring to you or me or someone else) should have no place in our spirituality, and is a dangerous concept in any context. The trouble with it is an implied solipsism: an assumption that any living entity exists in isolation, or that if it did, it would mean anything. To begin with, we worship the Holy Trinity, three persons in relationship.
-------------------- Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.
Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
LutheranChik
Shipmate
# 9826
|
Posted
And in my adventures elsewhere on the Internet, I find people with a really poor grasp on the nature of the Godhead, who try to separate the Persons in a way that is sometimes startling. Certainly Jesus Christ is, as an Orthodox friend of mine points out, "God with skin on" and is thus easier for us to wrap our heads around...but as you note, the PRWC language tends to ignore the rest of the Godhead. And I think this may be partly a function of worship and devotional styles in churches that may affirm the historic creeds in theory but who don't say them or talk about them or teach people what they mean.
-------------------- Simul iustus et peccator http://www.lutheranchiklworddiary.blogspot.com
Posts: 6462 | From: rural Michigan, USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
adamant azzy
Shipmate
# 10636
|
Posted
quote: OP'd by Luteranchick..... worship and devotional styles in churches that may affirm the historic creeds in theory but who don't say them or talk about them or teach people what they mean......
I fully agree. But they can't open their lips on the issue because it straight away clashes with their other teachings.
Pax vobiscum
-------------------- ....and I came back empty handed
Posts: 84 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
adamant azzy
Shipmate
# 10636
|
Posted
quote: OP'd by Lutheranchick..... Want to send other people to The Bad Place......
But if your daughter was raped and killed by a fiend you would not want the same? Right? Sorrowful.
-------------------- ....and I came back empty handed
Posts: 84 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
adamant azzy
Shipmate
# 10636
|
Posted
quote: OP'd by Alogon..... I think "personal" has now taken on the connotation of "individual
I agree with you here that Personal does not amount to a private relationship. I believe that the historic fathers of religion realised that we could easily fall into the trap of conceiving of an impersonal, cold God out there who merely judged and punished. A remote and fearful creature. They emphasized the personal in him as a way to emphasize his closeness to human affairs. That is, a "personal" vs. "Impersonal" I'm not sure if I have the language correct. So please interpret it as best as you can. I think it is a misconstruement of the concept to convert him into a "Pally Jees". And then by the way I could just as well have a personal relation with the Holy Mother.
pax vobiscum
-------------------- ....and I came back empty handed
Posts: 84 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
PerkyEars
 slightly distracted
# 9577
|
Posted
quote: I believe that the historic fathers of religion realised that we could easily fall into the trap of conceiving of an impersonal, cold God out there who merely judged and punished. A remote and fearful creature. They emphasized the personal in him as a way to emphasize his closeness to human affairs.
Who are these 'historic fathers of religion' of which you speak? And did they or did they not believe in God, as a real being, as something more than a concept? If they did not, then they can't have been very honest men, if instead of trying to disabuse people of the notion of the existence of God, they elaborated the concept even further! If they did believe in a God - do you not think they would be concerned with trying to find out what that being was actually like rather than what it might be a good idea to teach people? [ 10. November 2005, 20:26: Message edited by: PerkyEars ]
Posts: 532 | From: Bristol | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
 Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Mousethief: quote: Originally posted by cocktailgirl: Mousethief, why do you keep on doing it then? (I don't mean that in a confrontational way; I'm interested in why you keep on with God when you don't perceive God 'doing a lot back').
Faith.
I actually just said the word, "Amen" out loud while sitting here in my office.
And I never use that word.
-Digory
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
 Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by adamant azzy: quote: OP'd by Lutheranchick..... Want to send other people to The Bad Place......
But if your daughter was raped and killed by a fiend you would not want the same? Right?
Yes but that is because of the hardness of my heart and my own inability to forgive. God supposedly has no such inability.
-------------------- This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
 Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Leprechaun: But the nature of faith in God is different from that in the fire department surely?
Yes, of course. On the other hand, when I call the fire department, a human being on the other end of the line actually answers me and talks with me in a REAL two-way conversation. My faith in the fire department requires far less faith than my faith in God, if you get my drift.
-------------------- This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
 Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Evo1: But then I've heard hurtful comments on here about my having a "personal relationship" as I recall, this was before I'd even declared the fact - it was just assumed of me. What's the difference?
Words are words. The political correctness I mentioned earlier seems to be coming out here. I am getting the feeling that some would prefer us not to use the term "personal relationship" because of the abuse of a minority.
[as an aside, I may have felt affronted at the comments against me had it not been for the fact that the person was suggesting that this was a new phenomenon and that members of Jesus' family would not have had a personal relationship with him - that was just too rib tickling an argument to get upset with]
Love,
Evo1
It's ironic to think that people are trying to force their personal understandings of a phrase onto others, explaining to them that their relationships are indeed very personal even if they don't admit it.
The Eucharist is not a personal relationship. I don't even know what that would mean. I don't typically eat any of my friends on a regular basis. And if a friend of mine has died, I don't eat them either, nor do I still consider myself to have a personal relationship with their spirit even if I do spend some time, as often as I do it, in remembering that friend.
One and only criteria for having a personal relationship with Christ: saying so.
If someone says they don't, they don't. And neither statement ("I do" or "I don't") should carry any implications from others. (Hahahahaha yeah right I know.)
-Digory
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niënna
 Ship's Lotus Blossom
# 4652
|
Posted
I really sympathesize with those that don't like it when people use the term "personal relationship" to infer that when others don't feel warm and fuzzy feelings that they are some how inadaquate or inferior [Christians™]. I think it has been used (and is being used) to suggest that those people are lacking as a Christian and I don't think this is biblical or what Jesus was about either.
Personally, if I used the term "personal relationship" to describe what is between me and another person - well, it really sounds strange to me. And I know I'm a little bizarre myself because I talk to God while driving but I still know that S/He is really Holy and Big but still I would feel a little arrogant to claim a "personal relationship" with Jesus - as if I have him in my pocket or I figured everything out about God or something.
<tangent> Earlier this year, before I <hem> stopped going to church - I really wanted to get more involved and learn how to serve in the church. So I was given a couple of papers to fill out about "my faith in Christ" or something like that. I think the first question was "When did you start having a personal relationship with Jesus and were born again?" It took me a month to figure out that question. I really gave a lot of thought. I couldn't answer it because I just don't see my faith that way. For me, its not all clinical like "When was last doctor's exam and check-up?"
I know that other people explore and explain their faith differently. And that's okay because every human being is different and that's cool and I really learn from the way people experience their faith in different ways.<end tangent>
quote: Originally posted by LutheranChik: quote: If "Jesus" will save, He will do so on the basis of my actions and not whether I felt distant or woozy.
Actually, Jesus has already saved you independently of any presumed "good conduct points" on your part. The question is whether you're yet aware of that.
[tangent alert off] Carry on!
See, I find this attitude completely arrogant (I don't mean that LutheranChik is arrogant at all - I mean the idea expressed). I just find the idea that God will save me without considering my choice flat out arrogant and disrespectful. Frankly, I don't want to be with a god that doesn't offer me a choice whether to be with him in eternity or not. [ 10. November 2005, 21:26: Message edited by: Joyfulsoul ]
-------------------- [Nino points a gun at Chiki] Nino: Now... tell me. Who started the war? Chiki: [long pause] We did. ~No Man's Land
Posts: 2298 | From: Purgatory | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
 Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Joyfulsoul: Frankly, I don't want to be with a god that doesn't offer me a choice whether to be with him in eternity or not.
Don't be put off. The Lutheran God isn't the only one on the market.
-------------------- This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
AdamPater
Sacristan of the LavaLamp
# 4431
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Joyfulsoul: ... I was given a couple of papers to fill out about "my faith in Christ" or something like that. I think the first question was "When did you start having a personal relationship with Jesus and were born again?" It took me a month to figure out that question.
<oh-I'm-clever-tangent>Some years ago, while looking for a church in a new town, I was left unable to respond when I was asked over coffee "So, Mr Pater, when did you come to know the Lord?" It was only the next day that I figured out that my response should have been "Brother, the Psalmist suggests to me that the good Lord knew me in my mother's womb, and I've found my acquaintance with him has grown since then." </oh-I'm-clever-tangent> [ 10. November 2005, 21:42: Message edited by: AdamPater ]
-------------------- Put not your trust in princes.
Posts: 4894 | From: On the left of the big pink bit. | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niënna
 Ship's Lotus Blossom
# 4652
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by AdamPater: <oh-I'm-clever-tangent>Some years ago, while looking for a church in a new town, I was left unable to respond when I was asked over coffee "So, Mr Pater, when did you come to know the Lord?" It was only the next day that I figured out that my response should have been "Brother, the Psalmist suggests to me that the good Lord knew me in my mother's womb, and I've found our acquaintance has grown from there."</oh-I'm-clever-tangent>
![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
-------------------- [Nino points a gun at Chiki] Nino: Now... tell me. Who started the war? Chiki: [long pause] We did. ~No Man's Land
Posts: 2298 | From: Purgatory | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
 Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Joyfulsoul: I just find the idea that God will save me without considering my choice flat out arrogant and disrespectful. Frankly, I don't want to be with a god that doesn't offer me a choice whether to be with him in eternity or not.
If I see you drowning in a lake, and happen to be riding in a helicopter, would you like me to phone down to you first and give you a choice about being saved before I lower down the rope ladder?
Better yet, if you ever happen to be unconscious, should I attempt to get your permission before attempting CPR? If you don't respond, should I leave you under the argument that I did not want to arrogantly violate your sense of free will, and therefore left you there to die?
No offense meant, and not trying to derail the thread's aim, but I wanted to respond to your tangent.
-Digory
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
 Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
That might be a good analogy, Professorkirke, if I were drowning and unconscious.
I believe God provides salvation to all, but it requires us to accept it to be saved. There is no salvation without God's work (it's not Pelagianism) but there is also no salvation without our voluntary acceptance (it's not Calvinism).
-------------------- This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niënna
 Ship's Lotus Blossom
# 4652
|
Posted
Professor Kirke,
I think this is a great tangent. Should we start another thread about it?
-------------------- [Nino points a gun at Chiki] Nino: Now... tell me. Who started the war? Chiki: [long pause] We did. ~No Man's Land
Posts: 2298 | From: Purgatory | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by professorkirke: Better yet, if you ever happen to be unconscious, should I attempt to get your permission before attempting CPR? If you don't respond, should I leave you under the argument that I did not want to arrogantly violate your sense of free will, and therefore left you there to die? ... -Digory
<first aid tangent> According to my first aid training, an unconscious victim gives implied consent. <end first aid tangent>
I do honestly believe that if there is a big salvation-fest at the end of time, not only will there be some surprises at who is there, but some of those folks will be surprised themselves. I don't think it's safe to assume that if you don't feel you have a relationship with God, that means God doesn't have a relationship with you. Your God's mileage may vary. OliviaG
-------------------- "You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|