|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Personal Relationship with Christ? Huh?
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LynnMagdalenCollege:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
[tangent]
Technically, ice should float, and it does. It's intrinsic in the shape and polarity of the water molecule that ice will be less dense than cold water.
[/tangent]
YES, but why? Why does *water* behave that way, have an adiabatic reaction and expand its molecules at a certain temperature? I think the "why does it do that?" question (and lack of an adequate *purely scientific* answer) was what delighted him, in that situation.
Because it's a polar molecule, and as the temperature decreases the stability of the hydrogen bonds increases to the point where they form a regular expanded lattice.
I just don't see anything in that that says "Hey, look, there's a God!". There's a perfectly good answer to "why" within physics.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nicodemia
WYSIWYG
# 4756
|
Posted
I'm a very strong INTJ - which I am sure goes a long way to explain why I don't have a PRWG/J.
Now, if we could just get those touchy-feely types to realise that they may hog most of the spectrum, but there is a little corner that is us, and that's OK by God, then we could all be happy!!!
Sorry, you will have to go back a page to see what I am on about - floating ice pushed in!!! ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
Posts: 4544 | From: not too far from Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
INTP registering in here. What a surprise, eh?
I've changed since last I did it, though. I'm only moderately expressed I, strongly N, and moderate P. I used to be strongly I, and only weakly expressed on the others, which would sometimes vary.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Teufelchen
Shipmate
# 10158
|
Posted
Can I stick my head above the parapet and say I don't believe in Myers-Briggs categories? Y'all can put me in a box when I'm dead, but not before.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
T.
--------------------
Little devil
Posts: 3894 | From: London area | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Feel free. When they're a box, becoming prescriptive rather than descriptive, they're not helpful.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Astro
Shipmate
# 84
|
Posted
Having just come back from a communion service I am aware that one of the times when I am most aware of my personal relationship with Christ is when I meet, eat and drink (with) him at his table.
I accept that for some people there is nothing personal about Communion but for me it is very personal.
--------------------
if you look around the world today – whether you're an atheist or a believer – and think that the greatest problem facing us is other people's theologies, you are yourself part of the problem. - Andrew Brown (The Guardian)
Posts: 2723 | From: Chiltern Hills | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dobbo
Shipmate
# 5850
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by The Wanderer:
The leap from: "Prayer for me is like talking to a wall" to: "Aha! It's clear you don't pray" is not an obvious one to me.
Same here. Like you, I found this to be not a little condescending and in the "you must have experiences like mine to be a genuine Christian" vein. ![[brick wall]](graemlins/brick_wall.gif)
Do Orthodox not advocate experiences as well
I am thinking of the idea of experiencing "theoria" (vision of God)
Are these experiences of theoria on a personal level per chance?
I think (as I hear many people pray - as our faces so do our needs) so I do not think God gives everyone the same experience but He meets with us as individuals.
I accept the problem is that it is not Orthodox people that shove their experiences down peoples throats as a requirement to be a "genuine" Christian
Perhaps if we used the term do you have a Personal Experience With/Of God - everyone would be in agreement?
--------------------
I'm holding out for Grace......, because I know who I am, and I hope I don't have to depend on my own religiosity
Bono
Posts: 395 | From: Scotland | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
Depends on what you mean, I think.
Experience with/of God as a finite event which has happened a certain number of times in the past or present,
or
Experience with/of God that is ongoing as a continual event.
I think the second one is somewhat implied with how people would use it, but it would provide the same problem as PRWG. The first one may be somewhat more acceptable to all, since a belief in God is typically derived from some sort of experience of him (contrary to the belief that it is an intellectual assent made from the collection of convincing facts...).
-Digory
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
PerkyEars
slightly distracted
# 9577
|
Posted
I think a lot of people that claim a PRWG are really thinking about discrete events, or periods that have given them a sense of being interacted with over and above talking to a wall. I know other people who have what appears to be a much more consistent awareness of God but wouldn't use the PRWG phrase.
I think I've changed my mind about it during the course of this thread. I started out ready to defend the idea of a PRWG because to me saying the idea was a myth sounded like saying any two-way interaction with God was a myth. Now I'm starting to think it's a cringeworthy phrase that doesn't do justice to the range and subtlety of Christian experience and which alientates more people than it enlightens.
Posts: 532 | From: Bristol | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Teufelchen:
Can I stick my head above the parapet and say I don't believe in Myers-Briggs categories? Y'all can put me in a box when I'm dead, but not before.
T.
That's o.k. You have good company. We INTPs are such a skeptical lot that we're not even sure that there are INTPs.
But my point doesn't really depend on a particular scheme for analysis and classification of personality types, merely in different personality types. The subject has fascinated too many thinkers for too long to be dismisses as a figment of the imagination.
--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.
Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992
|
Posted
Just for the record ...
Another INTP (borderline P/J, which adds no end of confusion) who doesn't get the whole "personal relationship with <enter deity of choice>" thing.
You're right, Myers-Briggs is nonsense. So all these INTx folk saying they don't know what's going on is just a coincidence. Or a conspiracy.
--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."
Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
Its crap. Its crap because there are no distinct personality types. And because their categories are a rather bad taxonomy of the actual variation in personalities. And because its all based on odd tech Jungian ideas of mental development. But its persuasive crap because the potted descriptions look true because they are your own self-descriptions reformatted and sent back to you.
And because everyone likes talking about themselves.
At least us ENFPs do.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lynn MagdalenCollege
Shipmate
# 10651
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Because it's a polar molecule, and as the temperature decreases the stability of the hydrogen bonds increases to the point where they form a regular expanded lattice.
I just don't see anything in that that says "Hey, look, there's a God!". There's a perfectly good answer to "why" within physics.
works for you - but for him, he did see God in it - clearly, "ymmv"
quote:
posted by ken:
Its crap. Its crap because there are no distinct personality types. And because their categories are a rather bad taxonomy of the actual variation in personalities. And because its all based on odd tech Jungian ideas of mental development. But its persuasive crap because the potted descriptions look true because they are your own self-descriptions reformatted and sent back to you.
And because everyone likes talking about themselves.
At least us ENFPs do.
GUFFAWING! *bwahahahahaha* indeed. I've known people who found astrology very helpful (I'm not talking simple sunsigns here, but full on charts) and others who argued against it for the same reasons as above (well, not the Jungian thing) - but I find *astrology* gets lumped into that whole divination thing in the OT, so after being seriously burned I learned to avoid it (I am sometimes slow but I am teachable...). Myers-Briggs, however, isn't divination. Unless you use it to decide who to marry. Or what job to take. or... hmmmm...
--------------------
Erin & Friend; Been there, done that; Ruth musical
Posts: 6263 | From: California | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Robert Armin
All licens'd fool
# 182
|
Posted
I dislike Myers Briggs because it end up saying there are 16 types of humans - which isn't nearly subtle enough for the range of people who exist. On that basis astrology is preferable. When done properly it goes beyond the 12 signs of the zodiac and factors in where the sun, moon and planets were at the time and place of your birth. As a system it is far more flexible and less deterministic than dear old MB.
--------------------
Keeping fit was an obsession with Fr Moity .... He did chin ups in the vestry, calisthenics in the pulpit, and had developed a series of Tai-Chi exercises to correspond with ritual movements of the Mass. The Antipope Robert Rankin
Posts: 8927 | From: In the pack | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Misuse of MB says there are 16 types of humans. When you factor in the degree to which each preference is expressed, there is a massive spectrum of personality types where one bleeds into another.
Using it as "I am an INTP therefore I can't be a company director" is misuse.
"I am an INTP and therefore I am more likely to work best on my own contributions rather than pushing everything forward as a group" gives a valid basis for discovering how one can be most effective and work in the way that gives least stress - as long as you test that the MB prediction really does work for you - it might not.
I have to disagree with Ken. I've found that the MB type indicator does accurately describe aspects of my personality and way of working which are not directly asked in the questions.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
kempis3
Shipmate
# 9792
|
Posted
If this thread was about personal relationship with Christ, it might have got lost a little on the way.
I also do not understand what we mean by having a personal relationship with Christ. It all sounds a bit like an Us-and-Them exercise in non-communication. Dogma I find is not a useful thing in a religious life -- much better is to see who in your church is a loving and accepting person to anyone, especially those the rest of us think as unlovable. Then to say, "I wish I was like that. I will try to be more like that."
Maybe this is similar to having a "personal relationship with Christ" which may be only a piece of jargon.
--------------------
Man plots -- God laughs.
Posts: 148 | From: UK | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
whitelaughter
Shipmate
# 10611
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Nicodemia:
I'm a very strong INTJ - which I am sure goes a long way to explain why I don't have a PRWG/J.
Is my being an INTP supposed to explain why I do?
Good to see fellow NTs bagging the many weaknesses of Myer-Briggs. That said, if you haven't looked at the stuff it's based on (your Primary/Secondary/tertiary/Inferior)I'd recommend doing so - you may still think it's rubbish, but it's more interesting (and more useful) rubbish.
Posts: 114 | From: Australia | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nicodemia
WYSIWYG
# 4756
|
Posted
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Nicodemia:
I'm a very strong INTJ - which I am sure goes a long way to explain why I don't have a PRWG/J.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is my being an INTP supposed to explain why I do?
Good to see fellow NTs bagging the many weaknesses of Myer-Briggs. That said, if you haven't looked at the stuff it's based on (your Primary/Secondary/tertiary/Inferior)I'd recommend doing so - you may still think it's rubbish, but it's more interesting (and more useful) rubbish.
Whitelaughter - I think its the TJ combination which is supposed to be so "non-feely" and therefore likely NOT to have a PRWJ!
And yes, I have gone into all the nuamces and strengths of the various aspects of MB - fascinating, and I must say, enormously helpful to me at the time I did it.
It may be rubbish (though I don't think so!) but if it is, its very entertaining rubbish! ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
Posts: 4544 | From: not too far from Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Psyduck
Ship's vacant look
# 2270
|
Posted
Ken: quote:
But its persuasive crap because the potted descriptions look true because they are your own self-descriptions reformatted and sent back to you.
Hmm. Well, as a diehard Freudian, I don't hold any brief for Jung. But it is an interesting experience to get your own self-description reformatted and sent back to you, not least because it can be very deconstructive of the barriers we usually put between ourselves and - well, our selves...
This: quote:
Its crap because there are no distinct personality types
is intriguing. Care to expand?
--------------------
The opposite of faith is not doubt. The opposite of faith is certainty.
"Lle rhyfedd i falchedd fod/Yw teiau ar y tywod." (Ieuan Brydydd Hir)
Posts: 5433 | From: pOsTmOdErN dYsToPiA | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
kempis3
Shipmate
# 9792
|
Posted
Thank you, St. Sebastian for asking a very important question. What I'm trying to say is that how you behave (kindly) is much better than what you say. What you believe is only valuable if it motivates you to be kindly to all, especially the marginalised.
"Having a relationship with Christ" is meaningless jargon if it comes from a tyrant. On a personal level, I wish I was kindly to all and I will work towards this end.
I've read this thread and it's a pity that we have moved away from St.Sebastian's important question.
--------------------
Man plots -- God laughs.
Posts: 148 | From: UK | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
A noble effort, kempis, but in my experience once the Myers-Briggs lot take over a thread there's no going back.
Shame, really. I was enjoying reading it as well...
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Teufelchen
Shipmate
# 10158
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LynnMagdalenCollege:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Because it's a polar molecule, and as the temperature decreases the stability of the hydrogen bonds increases to the point where they form a regular expanded lattice.
I just don't see anything in that that says "Hey, look, there's a God!". There's a perfectly good answer to "why" within physics.
works for you - but for him, he did see God in it - clearly, "ymmv"
To argue a middle ground here, I think Karl is right - there's nothing in the remarkable properties of water to demonstrate that God exists - but as I believe that the whole universe is God's creation, this and many other fascinating and useful aspects of physics and chemistry are expressions of the glory of God. So I can see God at work there. I just don't think the behaviour of water is some kind of neat exception which shows God is giving us a hand up. After all, the Titanic sank because water doesn't have a normal temperature/density profile.
T.
--------------------
Little devil
Posts: 3894 | From: London area | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lynn MagdalenCollege
Shipmate
# 10651
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by kempis3:
Thank you, St. Sebastian for asking a very important question. What I'm trying to say is that how you behave (kindly) is much better than what you say. What you believe is only valuable if it motivates you to be kindly to all, especially the marginalised.
"Having a relationship with Christ" is meaningless jargon if it comes from a tyrant. On a personal level, I wish I was kindly to all and I will work towards this end.
I've read this thread and it's a pity that we have moved away from St.Sebastian's important question.
I think the vast majority of the seven pages of this thread stay pretty close to the question. Relatively few people have been as blatant as I am
and come right out and said, "this is what MY personal relationship with Christ looks like" and lots of people have echoed the "huh?" back and then discussed *why* there's a "huh?" and tried to clarify that it isn't deficient Christianity if one doesn't have a sense of a "PRWG." I'll qualify that: it *can be* deficient Christianity because the person isn't putting time into the relationship - just as their work and their marriage would suffer from insufficient time & energy invested - but there ARE people who earnestly seek after God's face and only sense "the wall."
We devolved to ice and Myers Briggs in the last page, and may yet recover~~
I suspect a tyrant who had a "PRWG" would not long remain a tyrant - but I think that would be true of any tyrant who became a committed, practicing Christian - I don't see how the tyrant could remain tyrannical under the influence of Christ.
--------------------
Erin & Friend; Been there, done that; Ruth musical
Posts: 6263 | From: California | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ophelia's Opera Therapist
Shipmate
# 4081
|
Posted
This was a big issue for me a while back, and I am interested in Myers Briggs (ENFP). However, over the years I have stayed an ENFP (roughly) while my belief in the necessity and accessibility of a personal relationship with God or Christ has changed.
Lutheranchik wrote: (back on p3)
quote:
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.
I'm not convinced by this view. I am sure God could reach me better by other ways. But for some reason he chooses not to do so. It's a mystery, but since it's not just a mystery to me I'm finding some comfort in the way I can be a comfort to others by being real about my struggles.
To sidetrack the thread in another direction, maybe one's idea about the need for a PRWG is related to one's stage of faith, as defined by Fowler and others. Though I still have some trouble with this model as it seems that once I get past my total-confusedness and am at peace with the mystery I may have reached nirvana and/or be clearly superior to other beings.
Hmm.
Very puzzled but still hanging on to some faith,
OOT
--------------------
Though the bleak sky is burdened I'll pray anyway,
And though irony's drained me I'll now try sincere,
And whoever it was that brought me here
Will have to take me home. Martyn Joseph
Posts: 979 | From: Birmingham, UK | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
PerkyEars
slightly distracted
# 9577
|
Posted
Fowler's stages of faith
I think Fowler is on to something in regards to people's psychological development. But I don't see what that has to do with people's belief in a PRWG. What stages do you think this might correspond to?
I think it's a mistake to get too hung up on personality types and faith stages and such like in this - as they are all characteristics of us - i.e. only one side of the relationship. The real determining factor in whether we perceive God or not is what God wants to do. He seems to to make himself present to people (in assorted ways, and usually in one encounter or for a brief period) for reasons of His own, and then dissapear just out of sight. Or not appear at all.
I think part of God being 'a person' is that He choses whether He's interacted with or not. As soon as we locate the reasons for people's different experiences 'entirely' in their own makeup, we are downgrading God to a sort of force, that some people are better at picking up on than others.
[ 23. November 2005, 22:36: Message edited by: PerkyEars ]
Posts: 532 | From: Bristol | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lynn MagdalenCollege
Shipmate
# 10651
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ophelia's Opera Therapist:
Lutheranchik wrote: (back on p3)
quote:
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.
I'm not convinced by this view. I am sure God could reach me better by other ways. But for some reason he chooses not to do so. It's a mystery, but since it's not just a mystery to me I'm finding some comfort in the way I can be a comfort to others by being real about my struggles.
Yes - and then Perky Ears wrote:
quote:
The real determining factor in whether we perceive God or not is what God wants to do. <snip>
I think part of God being 'a person' is that He choses whether He's interacted with or not. As soon as we locate the reasons for people's different experiences 'entirely' in their own makeup, we are downgrading God to a sort of force, that some people are better at picking up on than others.
So yes, there is God's side of the equation (which, by definition, must be bigger than ours, because He's God and we're not) - but then it's easy for people to feel like "second class Christians" because God isn't "choosing" to interact with them, or not the same way as He is with XYZ. I think perhaps it's more of a dance than that. Scripture indicatess "Draw near to Me and I will draw near to you" and I think it speaks of God's unwillingness to overwhelm our sense of self, our very being, and it would be so easy for Him to do that.
It may be that *this* is the only way God can interact with you (OOT) without overwhelming you. We cannot know His reasons, but He must have them.
I wonder if this is one of the errors of our age, this emphasis on "relationship" with God ("it's not religion, it's relationship") and we have mistaken what would have been called "mysticism" in the past as normative today?
--------------------
Erin & Friend; Been there, done that; Ruth musical
Posts: 6263 | From: California | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by kempis3:
Thank you, St. Sebastian for asking a very important question. What I'm trying to say is that how you behave (kindly) is much better than what you say. What you believe is only valuable if it motivates you to be kindly to all, especially the marginalised.
"Having a relationship with Christ" is meaningless jargon if it comes from a tyrant. On a personal level, I wish I was kindly to all and I will work towards this end.
I've read this thread and it's a pity that we have moved away from St.Sebastian's important question.
I am having trouble understanding exactly where you've drawn the connection with explaining yourself as having a PRWG/C and then wanting to act kindly to all.
In fact, wouldn't the very idea of a PRWG/C somewhat dictate that I could very well hear him say almost anything to me, even perhaps a command to treat others with contempt, etc? You could say that Jesus wouldn't command that, but who are you to interpret MY personal relationship with him?
And on the other hand, couldn't I desire strongly to act kindly to all because I believe strongly that it is what Jesus taught and what God wants, even if I do not feel any personal connection to them? I want to very much to not jump off of a building because I believe what Newton taught about gravity, but I have no PRWIN.
-Digory
PS Or do I not want to jump because I am thoroughly terrified of being hurt, and really I care nothing for what Newton taught? Interesting side-thought...
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
kempis3
Shipmate
# 9792
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by professorkirke:
I am having trouble understanding exactly where you've drawn the connection with explaining yourself as having a PRWG/C and then wanting to act kindly to all.
In fact, wouldn't the very idea of a PRWG/C somewhat dictate that I could very well hear him say almost anything to me, even perhaps a command to treat others with contempt, etc? You could say that Jesus wouldn't command that, but who are you to interpret MY personal relationship with him?
And on the other hand, couldn't I desire strongly to act kindly to all because I believe strongly that it is what Jesus taught and what God wants, even if I do not feel any personal connection to them? I want to very much to not jump off of a building because I believe what Newton taught about gravity, but I have no PRWIN.
There may be no connection. I myself probably have no relationship with Christ and yet I'm trying to work out a better way to lead my life. I'm sure there are many people who have a PRWC and this motivates them to be kind to all -- they are probably lucky to have this encouragement and consolation. I do not have this and yet I wish to lead a more empathetic life -- obviously failing by the look of things.
--------------------
Man plots -- God laughs.
Posts: 148 | From: UK | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
<tangent>
Gosh, there is some veritable nonsense in here about Myers Briggs. Type doesn't define you at all. It simply indicates that you may have some preferences. I prefer E but need reflective time on my own. I have a major preference for N but that doesn't mean I dont appreciate sensing and sensory input. I tend to give preference to values rather than logic, but I use the discipline of logic all the time, as best I can. And I tend, slightly, to be P, preferring flexible lifestyles, but appreciate the need for order. All of us can operate at any point on the scale of the 4 polarities and do.
The MB course I did years ago emphasised that Type isn't a label or a prison, its simply an indicator of certain general tendencies. And if you don't think the Type you came out as reflects your tendencies, either choose another one or bin the whole thing. Some folks (not all) find it helpful as a means of understanding themselves and others and their inter-relationships. My wife and I did. We spent most of the weekend on the course laughing at the way that Type (properly understood) illuminated our rubbing edges. We had a good relationship before, but MB actually helped us to make it better, and be mutually more understanding of our funny little ways.
<end tangent>
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
MSHB
Shipmate
# 9228
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
Just for the record ...
Another INTP (borderline P/J, which adds no end of confusion) who doesn't get the whole "personal relationship with <enter deity of choice>" thing.
You're right, Myers-Briggs is nonsense. So all these INTx folk saying they don't know what's going on is just a coincidence. Or a conspiracy.
Well, I'm another strong INT (with borderline J/P). I work as a systems analyst/programmer (and occasional consultant statistician), and majored in philosophy (Kant, Hegel, Marx, Buber - love that German NT culture, much more than the British and American ST culture).
And I confess to sometimes speaking in tongues (although I wouldn't describe it as central to my faith or a big part of my life). And contemplative prayer (as in "infused contemplation" or the "Prayer of Quiet") - which is a more significant feature of my life. I went through stridently fundamentalist Protestant and charismatic phases in my youth and early twenties, and also Anglo-Catholicism, Catholicism (e.g. Jean Vanier came to my fellowship once and mentioned us in one of his books). As a result I developed more ecumenical leanings, and recanted all the fundamentalism (stuff like "Isaiah the book must have been written entirely by the prophet Isaiah", "Job was a real person, not a character in a book of fiction", "The first chapters of Genesis are talking about science", etc - I am sure I once believed all that, but I don't now).
I tend to think of God as more than personal (C S Lewis spelt out this idea once: as a cube is more than a square, so the divine person is more than than the finite person). But God stoops down and becomes personal for our sakes. That gives him a lot of leeway for deciding exactly how to do it, how much, etc.
There are times when I do feel like there has been a very personal ("this is for you") moment between God and me, and other times when it is a long dry haul. Sometimes it may be related to how much (or little) I am putting into the relationship, and other times I suspect God is weaning me off needing so much "consolation" (warm fuzzy times). The point is, INTs aren't all the same.
I don't identify with "revival tent", "deep sighs of repentance" spirituality - nor does much of the emotional displays in charismatic churches attract me (give me solid classic liturgical worship!). I didn't become a Christian because I felt particularly sinful, I became a Christian because I (then an agnostic) felt God's presence (a definite sense of being addressed, and by a voice - not audibly, but felt - which was definitely not me: the Other). So I definitely identify with the mystical and "super-sensory" aspect of Christianity ... while still allowing for some considerable skepticism about "God told me....". I don't find God giving me personal messages everyday, but have found it happening at some major events in my life (e.g. marriage, big career changes).
So, I wouldn't be surpised to hear that many INTs veer to a more philosophical, rational and objective kind of spirituality, but I wouldn't rule out other varieties of spirituality either. Preference, upbringing, opportunity, experiences, luck will all play a role.
--------------------
MSHB: Member of the Shire Hobbit Brigade
Posts: 1522 | From: Dharawal Country | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
kempis3
Shipmate
# 9792
|
Posted
I've been looking up this Myers-Briggs stuff (I was totally ignorant about it) and found that I'm INTJ. I don't think it means much, but most people here seem to be INT if they have difficult with the PRWC -- or perhaps I'm talking nonsense.
An earlier post -- by Alogon, I think -- suggested that some churches were sending some types of personality to Hell. That seemed to make some sense.
Or perhaps my earlier thoughts that trying to lead a more kindly life was a better idea than PRWC/G whatever that means.
--------------------
Man plots -- God laughs.
Posts: 148 | From: UK | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
The M-B test says I'm an INTJ, and I have a personal relationship with God. Go figure. The M-B test might be a reasonable predictor for what kind of church (if any) you might prefer, since it asks all those questions about how you like to deal with people, things and ideas, but God is something else altogether, and I don't see how it can predict how you might like to approach God. From my memory of the questions, I'd say it doesn't seem to try to learn about how people approach the numinous.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
I am an INTP who used to be an INTJ*. I don't recognize myself as having a PRWG. But IMHO, YMMV as to whether a PRWG is possible for an INTP. OTOH, AFAIK, no INTP is really firmly sold on anything. But in the EOC I can both be grounded in something larger than myself, and yet not have to sacrifice my mind on the altar of conformity. Which WFM. YMMV. Not sold separately.
*more doubts and less cocksurety than in my younger days (believe it or not)
--------------------
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
![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.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
|
|
kempis3
Shipmate
# 9792
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mousethief:
I am an INTP who used to be an INTJ*. I don't recognize myself as having a PRWG. But IMHO, YMMV as to whether a PRWG is possible for an INTP. OTOH, AFAIK, no INTP is really firmly sold on anything. But in the EOC I can both be grounded in something larger than myself, and yet not have to sacrifice my mind on the altar of conformity. Which WFM. YMMV. Not sold separately.
*more doubts and less cocksurety than in my younger days (believe it or not)
I like it!
Biggest laugh of the day!
Laugh 'til I cried!
--------------------
Man plots -- God laughs.
Posts: 148 | From: UK | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
MT, that's priceless!
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
And THAT is why the Ship wouldn't be the Ship without Mousethief. (For me, anyway.) Hahahahaha.
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Caz...
Shipmate
# 3026
|
Posted
v good MT ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
--------------------
"What have you been reading? The Gospel according to St. Bastard?" - Eddie Izzard
Posts: 1888 | From: here to there | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
universalist
Shipmate
# 10318
|
Posted
How can we ever have a loving, feeling, connected relationship with Jesus until we grieve through all our anger for Him? I think that's what all that "weeping and gnashing of teeth" business is: people finally getting in touch with their God-anger, experiencing it and finally coming to "acceptance" that they may experience God in deeper ways.
What anger at God, you ask? That would be our "denial" stage. We also like to "bargain" with God and we feel "depression" over Him as well. After all, we live in a world full of evil and all its awful effects. God is fully sovereign over all, allowed evil to be here in the first place and is therefore ultimately somewhat responsible for it.
Jack Miles (A Crisis in the Life of God) sees the Cross as the answer to our God anger.
Posts: 66 | From: portland oregon | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
For me, as I've discovered since falling in to the abyss two months ago, I'm afraid there is NO substitute, no alternative, but to grabbing hold of Jesus all too personally. There again, only the sick need Yahweh Rapheka - that doctor.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
This is a copy of a comment I've just made on the Ranking Perversion thread.
Just an hour or so ago I realised for the first time that when we invoke the blood of Christ for our sins, no matter how depraved, how abnormal, paraphilic, sick, how vile and hurtful of others and self to this moment with seared, ashamed, obsessional, looping guilt, the flames still feeding on our still cooking, decomposing mental tissue, fanned by the oxygen of legally CORRECT Satanic accusation, though they be 'repented' of decades ago, He takes FULL responsibility for our sins.
Jesus TAKES our sins upon himself. He bought and paid for our SIN. Our lives without Him are nothing but SIN.
It's as if - and my head reels with this - He did them. Does them. The punishment for ALL sin and ALL of its consequences were meted out FULLY on Jesus, on God, within God by Himself to fulfill His absolute, pure, righteousness.
So how can we possibly NOT have a Personal Relationship With God? The God in Jesus who takes FULL responsibility for OUR sins?
Some sins are more objectively dysfunctional than others, more personally and socially destructive, marring.
Again, He was MARRED more than any other human for those sins and all others. For paedophilia, bestiality and everything 'less'. Some of us have done a LOT less.
I'm going to take the liberty of adding this to the PRWG thread.
So here it is.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evo1
Shipmate
# 10249
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
It's as if - and my head reels with this - He did them.
Right on Evo0. I couldn't agree more, and conversely, as if we didn't. - So we appear (and are) washed as white as snow.
--------------------
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
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif) ![[Tear]](graemlins/tear.gif) ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif)
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Thank you Gordon, I thank God for it, it has been stunning me ever since. It came back anew as I walked back from town just now in the bracing evening air, having just bought Meltdown (Making Sense of a Culture in Crisis) by Marcus Honeysett and been distracted by all sorts. I'd mentioned it to my friend who runs the Christian bookshop. He layered it with a reinforcement of the concept I'd read recently of being found rightfully guilty in court and then the judge pays the fine. In fact He serves the sentence. For all my crimes past, present and future. Hence mercy is a matter of justice.
It came back just now as, 'Come to me all you who are heavy laden and I will give you rest.'.
I have NEVER before felt the sense, the impact of those word of Jesus that way before, that my scarlet sins and their ongoing consequences for others that I can do NOTHING about are His responsibility now.
I have never been so free.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Fine by me Gordon - thank you very much. If we can't share each others burdens, testify and praise here in public it would be a sad thing.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gordon Cheng
a child on sydney harbour
# 8895
|
Posted
Fair enough Martin. It seems to me that past the Bible's teaching that it is possible to be related to God as sons are related to their Father, the personal testimony of those so convicted is very powerful.
I know that for the most part, I don't reflect a lot one way or another on my personal experience of God because "now we see in a glass darkly, then we shall see face to face" (1 Cor 13:12). But I am always helped when people are kind enough to share their experience with me, and it makes me thankful to God for what he has done for us in Christ.
--------------------
Latest on blog: those were the days...; throwing up; clerical abuse; biddulph on child care
Posts: 4392 | From: Sydney, Australia | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
So how can we possibly NOT have a Personal Relationship With God? The God in Jesus who takes FULL responsibility for OUR sins?
Well, think of it this way, Martin. What if someone found out that you were in big trouble, and so they paid your bail, paid for your lawyer, and then arranged for the charges against you to be dropped. Perhaps he even took full responsibility for the crimes you had committed. But every time you tried to get in touch with the person, you never could--you never heard back from him, you never could actually see him face to face. You might have one rather lengthy letter sitting at home from him, but you've never really heard his voice.
That's not much of a personal relationship, is it? You'd be incredibly grateful, and you may even give him the benefit of the doubt that he has a good reason for not making himself more visible/audible, etc.
But I doubt you'd consider yourself to have a personal relationship with this person. At least I wouldn't.
I don't see the connection between "taking full responsibility for sins" and a necessary "personal relationship".
-Digory
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dave Marshall
Shipmate
# 7533
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by professorkirke:
I don't see the connection between "taking full responsibility for sins" and a necessary "personal relationship".
I've not read all of this thread, but as someone who does think of his relationship with God in personal terms I think the "necessary" bit is being blown out of all proportion.
A relationship is as personal as we perceive it to be. In a functional sense it's entirely what our imagination makes it. Our concept of God also is only given form by our imagination, based on the necessarily incomplete information we have about God. If we find that concept expands as Martin seems to have done into freedom from some of the consequences of guilt, that's also part of our personal connection with reality.
So I'm not sure how objecting to the PRWG idea is any different to placing limitations on how someone else should perceive reality.
[ 27. November 2005, 11:21: Message edited by: Dave Marshall ]
Posts: 4763 | From: Derbyshire Dales | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
