quote:

---

I knew that he prayed a great deal, of course for help in the examinations. But subsequent clinical experience has convinced me that God is not particularly interested in examinations, just as he won't be dragged into the Stock Market, or being a backer in show business.

---

I agree with Mr. Davies. And would go further, that we who have been raised with such ideas of "a personal relationship with Jesus Christ" and God's personal interest sparrows etc have been sorely led astray.

In this view, church becomes - if it works for you - a chance to connect with the divine. The prayers, while often selfishly focussed, have the potential to connect us with God, but don't channel anything our way.

We're more part of a worldly an universal play, not the stars of the drama, and individually matter far less than we think and wish. I think God doesn't much notice our individual sufferings and sorrows, wishes and dreams much or at all, and we're part of a larger mystery and whole.


** The Cunning Man. A doctor has an office and residence beside a painfully high Anglican church in Toronto, and practices a philosophical medicine inspired by "Anatomy of Melancholy" (1621) by Robert Burton, and ideas of Jung. Davies is IMHO the best Canadian author of the 20th century, and I'd also recommend "The Manticore" (~1970) which provides an account of Jungian analysis.
 

---

Posted by Raptor Eye (# 16649) on :
 
As ever, it's both imv. Like King David, whose Psalms we still sing, we have a one to one with God as well as one based on membership of the whole human family, to whom God is as the parent in spiritual terms and other people are our brothers and sisters.

I agree that God isn't particularly interested in the minutiae of our lives, but I sincerely believe that if we invite God to be a part of it, God's guidance will be forthcoming. I believe it because I've experienced it.

We do matter, God does want us to respond to the love that is on offer, both individually and collectively. We're led astray if we think it's all about us, I agree with you there. It's all about God. But we are fully ourselves when we do respond.

God does notice, God suffers with us, and we're part of the greater mystery too.
 

---

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 
By that token I can say it's not true because I've not experienced it.

Then we go through the "did you really invite God to be part of it" etc. etc. and disappear up our own arses.

I have to agree with the OP. God's not our mate.
 

---

Posted by anteater (# 11435) on :
 
No p <snip>.:
I was put on to Robertson Davies by someone on the Ship and it may have been you. If so Thanks are due.

He is the best writer I've been introduced to in quite a time. Really.
 

---

Posted by Darllenwr (# 14520) on :
 
I find I have to ask, if there is no personal relationship with God, if God really doesn't care about you or me, why bother being a Christian? What on earth is the point?
 

---

Posted by Fr Weber (# 13472) on :
 
Ah, Moral Therapeutic Deism.
 

---

Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Darllenwr:
I find I have to ask, if there is no personal relationship with God, if God really doesn't care about you or me, why bother being a Christian? What on earth is the point?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fr Weber:
Ah, Moral Therapeutic Deism.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fr Weber:
Ah, Moral Therapeutic Deism.

---

I find responses like this rather annoying, particularly with the "ah", which I no doubt repeat in my mind's ear as dismissive. Yes once you've labelled something, you may haughtily dismiss it and render it unworthy of your further consideration.

---

I suppose that I would respond that, just because many Christians get it wrong, what makes you suppose that their whole basic premise is wrong? What is it that makes you suppose that, in fact, we are actually insignificant creatures in the eyes of God? If that were the case, why would He have bothered with the rescue mission in the first place?

Edited to add that the system seems to have picked up the wrong posting to reply to. I actually clicked on your reply to me.

[ 03. February 2015, 18:37: Message edited by: Darllenwr ]
 

---

Posted by Paul. (# 37) on :
 
I believe that God is big enough to be "interested" in things far more minute than individual human lives. If the universe is in fact "sustained by his powerful word" then everything from sub-atomic particles to galaxies has his direct involvement.

None of which is to say you shouldn't, on occasion, for the novelty, try to find your own parking space
 

---

Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on :
 
Or maybe God *is* interested in exams and other "little details" but not in the way or order of priority we do?

If the guy who said "seek ye first the kingdom of God, and all this stuff will not be an issue for you" was telling the truth, aren't most of our prayers backwards? We say "provide me with good grades and food and then I'll believe in God" while God says "seek the Kingdom [whatever that means!] and as a result the grades and food you need will be there."
 

---

Posted by Raptor Eye (# 16649) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:


More seriously, the point is to become a fully realized human being. In Tolstoy's approximate words 'the only life worth living is the life that is lived for others'. With the typical Christian focus on 'one's own salvation is misfocussed.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fr Weber:
Ah, Moral Therapeutic Deism.

---

I find responses like this rather annoying, particularly with the "ah", which I no doubt repeat in my mind's ear as dismissive. Yes once you've labelled something, you may haughtily dismiss it and render it unworthy of your further consideration.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Why not live and let live?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
If you don't care to discuss things, why are you here?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Darllenwr:
I find I have to ask, if there is no personal relationship with God, if God really doesn't care about you or me, why bother being a Christian? What on earth is the point?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Why is it necessary to dismiss the experiences of others? Maybe the personal relationship thing doesn't work for you (general value of you), but it does for some folks. That's just the way they are built. Let them get on with it, then. There's no necessity for everyone to deal with God in exactly the same way.

Similarly, we are invited to pray about everything, even silly little annoying things (yes, even freaking parking spots). If you choose not to, that's certainly your right. But why look down on the people who do?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
The problem with that is swinging entirely in the other direction, into determinism or something of the sort. And it leaves no room for thankfulness, if I'm afraid to thank God for some little blessing of life, lest I imply that somebody else isn't blessed. I'd better not thank God for bringing my boy home safe from Iraq because somebody else's boy didn't come home, and that would be implying that God plays favorites. I don't see how to go down that path without totally making thankfulness not just impossible but evil.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by itsarumdo:
Since threads on this particular topic tend to get quite bad tempered, although it's a very important topic - probably the most important - I'm not going to say anything at all other than imo we all have a personal relationship with God. And all prayers are heard and answered.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
The problem with that is swinging entirely in the other direction, into determinism or something of the sort. And it leaves no room for thankfulness, if I'm afraid to thank God for some little blessing of life, lest I imply that somebody else isn't blessed. I'd better not thank God for bringing my boy home safe from Iraq because somebody else's boy didn't come home, and that would be implying that God plays favorites. I don't see how to go down that path without totally making thankfulness not just impossible but evil.

---

But Mousie, that problem exists with God being personally involved. Was the reason that he ignores prayers for cancer so that people die within weeks of their well earned retirement, utterly destroying their family's faith and blighting their family life with depression thereafter, that he was busy finding some charismatic a parking space at the time?

Fatuous comment, yes, but I am sure you get the point.

---

quote:

---

The other reason it does matter to me is that if God is into entering these personal relationships, why does he seem to have steadfastly excluded me from this arrangement for thirty years of belief?

---

quote:

---

What would it even mean? Does he ring up on the phone? Does he join you down the pub? In what sense is this a relationship, or personal? In what way is it analogous to the other personal relationships I have with my friends, my family, even people I come across at work?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I'm a person, the bloke next door is a person, we interact, he seems a lot more real than God tbh, but I wouldn't dream of saying I have a "personal relationship" with him - that implies something much more intimate and intense to me.

Perhaps it's semantics. Perhaps I mean a lot more by the term "personal relationship" than other people do. By the definition offered, ISTM I have a "personal relationship" with the Queen. I'm not sure how useful such a vague and loose definition of the term is.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Adeodatus:
The language of 'relationship' doesn't work for me at all. Relationships have to be about mutuality and reciprocity. But with God, all I do is talk to a silent, unresponsive absence. How is that a relationship?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
But Paul. do I interact with God? It seems one way; I do X, Y, Z, but I'm not conscious of reciprocation from God.

---

quote:

---

He may reciprocate in some way of which I'm not conscious, but if relationships aren't about what we are conscious of I don't quite know what they're about.

That's why relationship seems the wrong word.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by hatless:
The parking place thing is bizarre in several ways, but worrying in that unlike cancer, plane crashes and having lovely, healthy kids, getting a parking space is always and only about beating someone else to it. We are in competition for those limited spaces. So it reveals a God who advantages his own prayerful people over the rest. Members benefits.

You would at least hope that people would think better of God than that.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
I don't know why, if someone is guided toward a parking space by God, or if someone simply finds a convenient parking space and thanks God for it, that this implies that God doesn't care as there is sickness in the world and people suffer and die.

---

quote:

---

I don't know why some find it such a terrible thing that God might be so very close, to live intimately with us, if we invite Christ into our lives and welcome the Holy Spirit's guidance.

---

quote:

---

I too don't know why some people are never aware of God in a personal, conscious way. Some see God in nature, in creation, in other people, in the Church, in the Bible, in the saints, in good works, in music, in thought, etc instead.

---

quote:

---

The first steps of faith found me asking questions of Jesus in prayer, and finding them addressed in what became more than coincidental ways, to the point where I became convinced that guidance is given if I ask for it. There are all manner of pitfalls of our own making, but in the end we either accept or deny the source of any experience we do have of God.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
If you don't care to discuss things, why are you here?

---

If you equate discussing with belittling and attacking, then is the Ship the place for you?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
If you don't care to discuss things, why are you here?

---

If you equate discussing with belittling and attacking, then is the Ship the place for you?

---

Not sure what you're on about. I am the one cursed.

I would so much love to have the personal relationship again. But I can't. I am not allowed any more. This morning, I began to wonder if I was able to thank God for suffering, for punishment, if I might again. I yearn for something now denied.

---

And right here is where we reach holy ground, and I'm scared to say a word.

I do think that in spiritual things, ultimately, those who want, get. But the key is in the word "ultimately." There are some hellishly long and horrible spiritual deserts out there, and we all have to walk through them at some point. I've spent years in those places--when God seems to have disappeared or turned his back, when everything is flat or excruciating or both at once. They taught me endurance, I think. They also scared the hell out of me. Lately I've been wondering if I'm being sent out for another few laps in the desert. God would be quite capable of it.

But they do come to an end. The wanting is incredibly painful, and there's nothing to do but keep crying out. But God does answer, in the end. How I wish I could force him to do it earlier!
 

---

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
my two cents:

I don't experience God as absent-- at least not currently. I don't experience prayer as one-sided; I believe God is speaking to me in ways that obviously would not be apparent to an outside observer but are nonetheless quite real (or at least I believe them to be).

I recognize that not everyone has that sort of experience of God. And, like most people, I haven't always had that experience. I was a Christian a long, long time before I ever had any sort of sense of God "speaking to me". Other Christians who are more faithful and obedient than I could ever hope to be aren't having those sorts of experiences now or perhaps ever. And of course, the Psalms are full of the laments of those who are feeling that absence.

And yet, the times when I do feel the presence of God, when I do hear his voice-- those markers of a "personal" relationship-- are so sweet, so powerful, so wonderful, that I can't let go of the hope, even in those dry spells when the memory fades. I can't stop yearning for it. I don't know why some people seem to have that experience frequently/ regularly and others (like me) infrequently or not at all. I know from observation it doesn't seem to have much to do with desire or faithfulness. I want to assume it's available to everyone, but don't have any way to know that for sure. But I cannot stop yearning for it.

Much of the quite valid oncerns raised here (why does God give you a parking space/ healing/ protection and not me/ my neighbor/ etc?) go back to the problem of theodicy. Which of course is a whole 'nother long discussion (I'm sure no one wants to hear me go into another one of my long pedantic explanations of Open Theism) but so intimately wedded to this one we can't avoid it. The reason we sometimes react so negatively to the notion of a "personal relationship with God" is because we have so often been disappointed-- sometimes horrifically so-- by God. For many of us, it's an open, raw wound that's always there, and the closer you get to it, the more we're going to react by pushing the topic (and, arguably, God) away.

The Psalms also I think speak to this. And sometimes that's all we can do-- just recite the Psalms to give us words to express either a pain or a longing that's too deep and raw to speak extemporaneously.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
As ever, I am cursed with the ability to see both sides of this one ...

I don't have an issue with the idea of God being 'relational' - after all, the Bible is full of that. Ok, we have to understand a lot of this stuff metaphorically - 'The LORD used to speak to Moses face to face, just a man speaks to his friend' ...

Exodus 33:11 http://biblehub.com/exodus/33-11.htm

Are we to believe that God has a 'face'?

Well, in a sense ... otherwise what is the Incarnation all about?

Surely that's relational?

I do have an issue with some of the 'parking place' stuff - be it in its evangelical form or in the more popular forms of Catholic piety, 'Holy Mother, full of grace, please find me a parking place ...'

Why?

Because it can lead to the kind of Oliver Cromwell thing, 'God made them as stubble to our swords.'

You know, the idea that God is somehow intrinsically on our side and stuff everyone else ...

I will admit that I do sometimes have a sense of God's presence and guidance - or what I take to be such a thing ... but equally, as with anyone else who has sought to articulate or explore these things, 'the heavens are as brass' at times.

No, I don't go in for the idea of direct impressions and illuminations these days - it's more a sense of God being 'there' but not necessarily with any 'tangible' tokens - beyond the good things around us in creation and the elements we all appreciate - food, music, landscapes, relationships with other people etc.

This is where it can get tricky - as Eliot has it in 'The Four Quartets' when he lists things that can give us a sense of illumination or well-being ... 'or even a very good dinner'.

All that said, I'm reluctant to eschew 'relationship' type language altogether - although I recognise its jejune aspects and that it can too often be used as form of short-hand ie. I'm a real Christian but that person over there who doesn't 'get it' in the way that I do, clearly isn't ...

Which is how it tends to be bandied about in some circles.

I once heard a Benedictine monk allude to the sense of what we might call a 'personal relationship' - but he didn't use those terms - in a way that would have passed muster in any evangelical setting ... but without in any way sounding crass.

I think that's the issue.

It's an area where it's easy to sound crass or simplistic and put people's backs up.
 

---

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
Yep. As always, what Gamaliel said.
 

---

Posted by Ikkyu (# 15207) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
If you don't care to discuss things, why are you here?

---

If you equate discussing with belittling and attacking, then is the Ship the place for you?

---

Not sure what you're on about. I am the one cursed.

I would so much love to have the personal relationship again. But I can't. I am not allowed any more. This morning, I began to wonder if I was able to thank God for suffering, for punishment, if I might again. I yearn for something now denied.

---

And right here is where we reach holy ground, and I'm scared to say a word.

I do think that in spiritual things, ultimately, those who want, get. But the key is in the word "ultimately." There are some hellishly long and horrible spiritual deserts out there, and we all have to walk through them at some point. I've spent years in those places--when God seems to have disappeared or turned his back, when everything is flat or excruciating or both at once. They taught me endurance, I think. They also scared the hell out of me. Lately I've been wondering if I'm being sent out for another few laps in the desert. God would be quite capable of it.

But they do come to an end. The wanting is incredibly painful, and there's nothing to do but keep crying out. But God does answer, in the end. How I wish I could force him to do it earlier!

---

Those who want get? Tell this to my mother a lifelong churchgoer with a lot of faith who has always put other people's needs before hers. And then explain to her why her Husband of 50 years Alzheimer's does not get any better no matter how much she prays.
 

---

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :
 
At the moment, there's nothing I can add to this thread that Gamaliel hasn't just said, better than I could.
 

---

Posted by Jengie jon (# 273) on :
 
What Lamb Chopped means is those that want intimacy with God eventually get that, not that they get all their other desires answered as well. God if anything seems to send more troubles on those who get that intimacy. Alternatively maybe places them in situations where they more clearly can shine his grace. Yet again, because the dessert is the great teacher of grace, maybe God gives them more dessert experiences so that they might have more opportunities to learn of the motions of grace. Honestly, I cannot tell how God decides but being close to God does not shield you from lives ills.

We all know there are requests for God to step in when he does not. Otherwise, there would be no child dying of cancer for starters! The other odd thing is on occasions he does step in. I cannot shape any rhyme or reason for his choosing and I am suspicious of those that can.

That does not make God less a person, in some ways it makes him more because he makes his own decisions about when he is going to do things and he moves to his own rhythms. In other words, we can not determine what he will do when. He will weigh our requests in the great consciousness that weighs all things but what he decides, he decides.

I say this with a mother who has dementia and a father who has served the Lord for decades including being a missionary. Dad would love for Mum to be well again. I do not see it happening. If God wanted to he could but we have had enough miracles in the family to know even when they do happen they bring their own pain. Instead, there is a holiness in the care my father gives my mother. Does Dad meet God there? I do not know, he would never let me that close to his mystical experiences.

Jengie
 

---

Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
The trouble with phrases like 'whose who want, get' is that they seem infinitely elastic. They can be morphed into any situation to show that yes, God did come to you, even though you were suffering, or you were bereaved, or in despair, or you didn't think he was there. It's a bit like the old saw that in his absence, God is present.

Well, yes, maybe, but I can't help a touch of cynicism about this. It's unfalsifiable, because it works even when it doesn't.
 

---

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
The trouble with phrases like 'whose who want, get' is that they seem infinitely elastic. They can be morphed into any situation to show that yes, God did come to you, even though you were suffering, or you were bereaved, or in despair, or you didn't think he was there. It's a bit like the old saw that in his absence, God is present.

Well, yes, maybe, but I can't help a touch of cynicism about this. It's unfalsifiable, because it works even when it doesn't.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
The trouble with phrases like 'whose who want, get' is that they seem infinitely elastic. They can be morphed into any situation to show that yes, God did come to you, even though you were suffering, or you were bereaved, or in despair, or you didn't think he was there. It's a bit like the old saw that in his absence, God is present.

Well, yes, maybe, but I can't help a touch of cynicism about this. It's unfalsifiable, because it works even when it doesn't.

---

No argument there.

Perhaps it is wishful thinking on our part, or correlation error, or just helpless, deluded, horrible trust in pure smoke & mirrors flim-flam.

Yet, for those of us who have experienced it and trust/believe in it, even as rare and hard and messy as it may be, it is immensely precious.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jengie jon:

We all know there are requests for God to step in when he does not. Otherwise, there would be no child dying of cancer for starters! The other odd thing is on occasions he does step in. I cannot shape any rhyme or reason for his choosing and I am suspicious of those that can.

That does not make God less a person, in some ways it makes him more because he makes his own decisions about when he is going to do things and he moves to his own rhythms. In other words, we can not determine what he will do when. He will weigh our requests in the great consciousness that weighs all things but what he decides, he decides.

Jengie

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Well, Ikkyu has put his finger on something that has bugged me for decades - arbitrariness. I suppose saying that 'those who want, get' is saying that it's not arbitrary - it depends on how much one wants God. I'm not sure that that is any improvement though!

I recall my parents and grandparents who were dyed in the wool atheists, and thought that God-talk was abysmal and weak-minded, and I confounded them by being interested in it. But this also seems arbitrary to me, and therefore senseless. I am not better than they were, I am not more intelligent or sensitive, nor a better person. My life is not better.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ikkyu:


That being said, in my personal point of view a God that is arbitrary in just this manner is nothing but a monster. Did Shoah victims have a personal relationship with God? Did it help?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Well, Ikkyu has put his finger on something that has bugged me for decades - arbitrariness. I suppose saying that 'those who want, get' is saying that it's not arbitrary - it depends on how much one wants God. I'm not sure that that is any improvement though!

I recall my parents and grandparents who were dyed in the wool atheists, and thought that God-talk was abysmal and weak-minded, and I confounded them by being interested in it. But this also seems arbitrary to me, and therefore senseless. I am not better than they were, I am not more intelligent or sensitive, nor a better person. My life is not better.

---

IMHO some of the provisions of the Open view (i.e. that God never overrides human freedom, that there is a "cosmic battle" between good & evil which means that not everything that happens-- for now-- is according to God's will, although God is working in and thru everything) are helpful in explaining some of the arbitrariness. Although not fully satisfying, especially for someone on the receiving end of what looks an awful lot like arbitrary evil. In the end, I think you either decide to trust that there is some unseen rhythm or pattern behind what appears arbitrary, or you accept a more distant view of God which accommodates a God unmoved by human suffering.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jengie jon:
What Lamb Chopped means is those that want intimacy with God eventually get that, not that they get all their other desires answered as well. God if anything seems to send more troubles on those who get that intimacy. Alternatively maybe places them in situations where they more clearly can shine his grace. Yet again, because the dessert is the great teacher of grace, maybe God gives them more dessert experiences so that they might have more opportunities to learn of the motions of grace. Honestly, I cannot tell how God decides but being close to God does not shield you from lives ills.

We all know there are requests for God to step in when he does not. Otherwise, there would be no child dying of cancer for starters! The other odd thing is on occasions he does step in. I cannot shape any rhyme or reason for his choosing and I am suspicious of those that can.

That does not make God less a person, in some ways it makes him more because he makes his own decisions about when he is going to do things and he moves to his own rhythms. In other words, we can not determine what he will do when. He will weigh our requests in the great consciousness that weighs all things but what he decides, he decides.

I say this with a mother who has dementia and a father who has served the Lord for decades including being a missionary. Dad would love for Mum to be well again. I do not see it happening. If God wanted to he could but we have had enough miracles in the family to know even when they do happen they bring their own pain. Instead, there is a holiness in the care my father gives my mother. Does Dad meet God there? I do not know, he would never let me that close to his mystical experiences.

Jengie

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ikkyu:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jengie jon:

We all know there are requests for God to step in when he does not. Otherwise, there would be no child dying of cancer for starters! The other odd thing is on occasions he does step in. I cannot shape any rhyme or reason for his choosing and I am suspicious of those that can.

That does not make God less a person, in some ways it makes him more because he makes his own decisions about when he is going to do things and he moves to his own rhythms. In other words, we can not determine what he will do when. He will weigh our requests in the great consciousness that weighs all things but what he decides, he decides.

Jengie

---

Thanks for sharing your insight. I know how this feels.
Its interesting how different human reactions can be to very similar situations. I am not questioning your view and I respect it.

That being said, in my personal point of view a God that is arbitrary in just this manner is nothing but a monster. Did Shoah victims have a personal relationship with God? Did it help?

But the only heroic personal relationship I can see in your story is that of your Parents.

Am I blind? What am I missing?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:
And yet, the times when I do feel the presence of God, when I do hear his voice-- those markers of a "personal" relationship-- are so sweet, so powerful, so wonderful, that I can't let go of the hope, even in those dry spells when the memory fades. I can't stop yearning for it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Adeodatus:
The language of 'relationship' doesn't work for me at all. Relationships have to be about mutuality and reciprocity. But with God, all I do is talk to a silent, unresponsive absence. How is that a relationship?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by anoesis:

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:
And yet, the times when I do feel the presence of God, when I do hear his voice-- those markers of a "personal" relationship-- are so sweet, so powerful, so wonderful, that I can't let go of the hope, even in those dry spells when the memory fades. I can't stop yearning for it.

---

A disclaimer to begin with: I have full confidence that cliffdweller knows what makes a healthy relationship and what makes an unhealthy one. And yet - the above, the way it's phrased, it doesn't sound so great to me. Let's remember we're talking about a relationship where there is a massive power differential. We hear the party with the lesser share of power accepting that the party with the greater share of power will relate on his terms, which may include long periods of apparent indifference, or indeed suffering, interspersed with periods of dazzling brilliance, joy, euphoria, and so on.

It just sounds a little bit like "But he's so wonderful when he hasn't been drinking".

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by anoesis:

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:
And yet, the times when I do feel the presence of God, when I do hear his voice-- those markers of a "personal" relationship-- are so sweet, so powerful, so wonderful, that I can't let go of the hope, even in those dry spells when the memory fades. I can't stop yearning for it.

---

A disclaimer to begin with: I have full confidence that cliffdweller knows what makes a healthy relationship and what makes an unhealthy one. And yet - the above, the way it's phrased, it doesn't sound so great to me. Let's remember we're talking about a relationship where there is a massive power differential. We hear the party with the lesser share of power accepting that the party with the greater share of power will relate on his terms, which may include long periods of apparent indifference, or indeed suffering, interspersed with periods of dazzling brilliance, joy, euphoria, and so on.

It just sounds a little bit like "But he's so wonderful when he hasn't been drinking".

---

quote:

---

"Anyway, I'm not good at prayer, but before you think I was a little rough on God, there's another thing you need to know about my people. Our relationship with God was different from other people and their Gods. Sure there was fear and sacrifice and all, but essentially, we didn't go to him, he came to us. He told us we were the chosen, he told us he would help us to multiply to the ends of the earth, he told us he would give us a land of milk and honey. We didn't go to him. We didn't ask. And since he came to us, we figure we can hold him responsible for what he does and what happens to us. For it is written that 'he who can walk away, controls the deal.' And if there's anything you learn from reading the Bible, ti's that my people walked away a lot. You couldn't turn around that we weren't off in Babylon worshipping false gods, building false altars, or sleeping with unsuitable women. (Although the latter may be more of a guy thing than a Jewish thing.) And God pretty much didn't mind throwing us into slavery or simply massacring us when we did that. We have that kind of relationship with God. We're family."
-from Lamb: The Gospel According to Biff, Christ’s Childhood Pal, by Christopher Moore, p. 68

---

[ 04. February 2015, 19:14: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]
 

---

Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :
 


Okay, that quote cracks me up.
 

---

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :
 
Hello, I just arrived from 2006.

I think there are a lot of things to be said on this topic but two things spring to my mind:

First, I think we owe it to be honest with each other. Maybe saying that the idea of a 'relationship with God' is a load of old bunk sounds like a personal attack - but maybe it isn't if I actually believe that.

I do. I think this idea is a load of old bunk.

Second, I think the thing for me about the way that many talk about a 'relationship with God' which means that God helps them find a car space or lost keys is that is says something about them. It says 'God thinks I'm really special - look he is helping me with mundane things in my life'.

Lamb Chopped said (let's see if I can remember how to do the code)

quote:

---

Similarly, we are invited to pray about everything, even silly little annoying things (yes, even freaking parking spots). If you choose not to, that's certainly your right. But why look down on the people who do? The examples we're given in Scripture are some of them really quite petty, from a human point of view. "If your son asks for a piece of bread" and all that.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:


Okay, that quote cracks me up.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Hello, I just arrived from 2006.

---

quote:

---

First, I think we owe it to be honest with each other. Maybe saying that the idea of a 'relationship with God' is a load of old bunk sounds like a personal attack - but maybe it isn't if I actually believe that.

I do. I think this idea is a load of old bunk.

---

quote:

---

Second, I think the thing for me about the way that many talk about a 'relationship with God' which means that God helps them find a car space or lost keys is that is says something about them. It says 'God thinks I'm really special - look he is helping me with mundane things in my life'.

---

quote:

---

In my view it is not good enough to shrug and say that this is all an unknowable manifestation of the 'problem of pain' - because it seems to me that for some the problem is rather greater than for others.

---

quote:

---

I don't believe in this 'relationship with God' malarky because it just means that you have your private God who chooses to bless you in excess whilst others die.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jengie jon:
We all know there are requests for God to step in when he does not. Otherwise, there would be no child dying of cancer for starters! The other odd thing is on occasions he does step in. I cannot shape any rhyme or reason for his choosing and I am suspicious of those that can.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
The cancer death rate per 100,000 population USA has tripled since 1900. Today 43% of men and 37% of women get cancer, over half die of it (or of the chemo), including a lot of kids. Why such an increase in cancer? Maybe because we humans have poisoned our environment?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
No one really touched on the conundrum I introduced, viz., thankfulness.

If I get a parking space, can I be thankful? If my son comes home from the war, can I be thankful? If my wife's cancer goes into complete remission for 20 years, can I be thankful?

Are we as Christians to be a thankful people, or not?

Is being thankful tantamount to saying God is a monster because he doesn't bring every son back or heal every wife?

What about it, guys?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mr cheesy:
It therefore seems to me to follow that this implies God thinks rather more highly of me than these other Christians (and.. everyone else) who are unaccountably struggling with the big things of life rather than where I put my keys. I also think it implies there is a direct link between the kinds of communications we have with God and the kind of positive things that happen in our lives.

---

quote:

---

Generally speaking much of what we call prayer is actually either gossip or us telling ourselves how great we are.

---

I hope that's not true. It's certainly not generally true for the public prayer I'm aware of and of course I wouldn't know about people's personal prayer lives. My own consists largely of "Sorry", "I suck" and "Help".

I think Mousethief's focus on thankfulness is very important. I very consciously started thanking God for things in my life when I reached a low point a couple of years ago because I wanted to recognise that I had it pretty good in comparison to many. And because I knew that developing a right attitude about it was one of the few things I could actually do about the situation.

It's a cliche but true I think that prayer is as much about changing us as changing God's mind. That being the case, it's a good habit to get in to to pray as much as possible, about as many types of things as possible. I don't know if that's what "pray without ceasing" really means but I guess it's my interpretation. I can only speak for myself but if I am in the habit of praying about even the small things (or trying to be) then I'm more likely to pray about the important things, and therefore more likely to have a humble, less self-centred attitude. Far from guaranteed but a little more likely.

And in case it needs saying, I suck at putting this into practice.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
I think that hatless, among other pertinent points, has raised the issue of the part our emotions, 'passions' and subjective day to day responses play in all of this.

Incidentally, I've been wondering whether his intriguing 'God of the gaps' take on the way he 'apprehends' God in the 'spaces' between the Persons of the Trinity (as it were) ie. in relationships, often messy, with others etc - relates to the distinction the Orthodox make between the Divine essence and Divine 'energies' ...

But I like what hatless said, and, dare I say it, for me it represents one of the best aspects of his particular congregational tradition ... that we find one another and find ourselves as we wrestle and work things out in community.

At its best, that can happen in congregational settings in a way that isn't immediately as apparent elsewhere ... but it needs to be balanced with other aspects, of course - as well as with our wider network of relationships within society as a whole - as I'm sure hatless would agree.

Anyhow ... the thankfulness thing needn't descend into a kind of 'I thank God I am not like other men ... I thank God that I am not that sinner over there ...' thing which Christ upbraided the Pharisees for.

Nor the 'I thank God I was not born a woman,' thing which I understand used to be one of the old Jewish prayers ...



It's a fine line, I think, among the finest of lines we have to tread ... or some kind of middle-way between the Scylla of full-on determinism and 'God in my pocket, he's my big buddy' on the one hand and the Charybdis of a rather cold, arid, 'unrelational' response on the other.

However we cut it, though, Christianity is relational. Whether we see it purely in 'love thy neighbour' (horizontal) terms or in vertical ('love the Lord thy God') terms - although the vertical should inform the horizontal and the horizontal 'work out' the vertical ...

As I once, young and rather clever-cloggedly, observed to a very liberal trainee Anglican ordinand who said he wanted to focus more on the 'horizontal' dimension rather than the pietistic (as he saw it) one, 'Put the two together and they make a cross.'

It's one of these both/and things again.

Whatever the case, I'm pleased that Cliffdweller and Enoch appreciated earlier posts.

Peace be to all. I've appreciated many of the posts on this thread, whether from those who use the more 'personal' language and so on and those who don't.
 

---

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Paul.:
Personally I don't think there is a direct link. As I said before personal experience disproves this rather quickly, at least in my case. And also it would seem for LC, Jengie Jon and others.

And I want to break the link because I want to defend the type of "relationship" I have with God, whilst still recognising the suffering in the world.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Generally speaking much of what we call prayer is actually either gossip or us telling ourselves how great we are.

---

I hope that's not true. It's certainly not generally true for the public prayer I'm aware of and of course I wouldn't know about people's personal prayer lives. My own consists largely of "Sorry", "I suck" and "Help".

---

quote:

---

I think Mousethief's focus on thankfulness is very important. I very consciously started thanking God for things in my life when I reached a low point a couple of years ago because I wanted to recognise that I had it pretty good in comparison to many. And because I knew that developing a right attitude about it was one of the few things I could actually do about the situation.

---

quote:

---

It's a cliche but true I think that prayer is as much about changing us as changing God's mind. That being the case, it's a good habit to get in to to pray as much as possible, about as many types of things as possible. I don't know if that's what "pray without ceasing" really means but I guess it's my interpretation. I can only speak for myself but if I am in the habit of praying about even the small things (or trying to be) then I'm more likely to pray about the important things, and therefore more likely to have a humble, less self-centred attitude. Far from guaranteed but a little more likely.

---

quote:

---

And in case it needs saying, I suck at putting this into practice.

---

Well, no qualifications really needed. I assumed you were human and so that you don't really live up to your professed ideals
 

---

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by anoesis:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Adeodatus:
The language of 'relationship' doesn't work for me at all. Relationships have to be about mutuality and reciprocity. But with God, all I do is talk to a silent, unresponsive absence. How is that a relationship?

---

See the Difficult Relatives* thread in Hell for evidence that sometimes relationships are just a fact, a thing that is there, rather than anything about mutuality and reciprocity. But of course these are all imposed relationships, rather than chosen ones.

*ok, I know you have actually seen it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mr cheesy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Paul.:
Personally I don't think there is a direct link. As I said before personal experience disproves this rather quickly, at least in my case. And also it would seem for LC, Jengie Jon and others.

And I want to break the link because I want to defend the type of "relationship" I have with God, whilst still recognising the suffering in the world.

---

I'm sorry, I don't understand. What type of relationship are you actually claiming to have with God?

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Generally speaking much of what we call prayer is actually either gossip or us telling ourselves how great we are.

---

I hope that's not true. It's certainly not generally true for the public prayer I'm aware of and of course I wouldn't know about people's personal prayer lives. My own consists largely of "Sorry", "I suck" and "Help".

---

In my getting on for 40 years of church prayer experience, a large proportion of prayer is about giving information - usually about illnesses in the congregation. There is a part which is about politics, there is some part which is about absolution, there is a part about praise and there is a significant part which reminds us about how great we are. But YMMV.

---

quote:

---

I don't really believe in private personal prayer in the way you seem to be indicating here.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

I think Mousethief's focus on thankfulness is very important. I very consciously started thanking God for things in my life when I reached a low point a couple of years ago because I wanted to recognise that I had it pretty good in comparison to many. And because I knew that developing a right attitude about it was one of the few things I could actually do about the situation.

---

That's great, I'm glad it helped you.

But I don't think it has anything to do with God.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

It's a cliche but true I think that prayer is as much about changing us as changing God's mind. That being the case, it's a good habit to get in to to pray as much as possible, about as many types of things as possible. I don't know if that's what "pray without ceasing" really means but I guess it's my interpretation. I can only speak for myself but if I am in the habit of praying about even the small things (or trying to be) then I'm more likely to pray about the important things, and therefore more likely to have a humble, less self-centred attitude. Far from guaranteed but a little more likely.

---

OK, that's nice. I don't believe that.

---

quote:

---

The prayers, as I said before, are always heard and answered.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mr cheesy:

quote:

---

The prayers, as I said before, are always heard and answered.

---

Herein lies the problem. Why are the prayers of those without sanitation not answered?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I am reminded of Lord Melchett complaining of Lord Blackadder that he "twists and turns like a ... twisty turny thing!"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mr cheesy:
I see. So when someone wants sanitation, God says no - but when someone in the UK wants help finding their keys, well God is all over it..

I don't think so.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by itsarumdo:
I don't think that the idea "I need sanitation" is there in the first place. If it were, maybe people would arrange their own sanitation.

---

quote:

---

If you are talking about slums, then that is clearly evil - extreme poverty of this kind exists because someone profits from it, in no matter how small a way.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Yeah, well sorry that's garbage too.

People living without sanitation are not more evil than those temporarily without keys. And they're not somehow missing obvious cues about how they could change their situation.

Of course evil exists, but that is no answer either. As we do not experience the full effects of evil - that others clearly do - that is still saying that God is somehow more in-tune with us and our tiny pointless needs than those with real life-or-death issues.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mr cheesy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by itsarumdo:
I don't think that the idea "I need sanitation" is there in the first place. If it were, maybe people would arrange their own sanitation.

---

You might want to use examples that you know about rather than ones that I know rather more about. This statement is gibberish.

quote:

---

If you are talking about slums, then that is clearly evil - extreme poverty of this kind exists because someone profits from it, in no matter how small a way.

---

Evil exists everywhere. You are prevented from feeling the full effects of it, others are not. Why?

---

quote:

---

Now this is one of the great contradictions of our age - if you are prepared to believe that evil exists everywhere, why are you not prepared to believe that God exists everywhere? Since it is belief that has a creative force, there is a certain importance in being careful what we wish for.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Who said I had stopped believing in God?

I do not believe that God acts in the way you appear to believe he does.

quote:

---

Now this is one of the great contradictions of our age - if you are prepared to believe that evil exists everywhere, why are you not prepared to believe that God exists everywhere? Since it is belief that has a creative force, there is a certain importance in being careful what we wish for.

---

I do believe that God exists everywhere. I do not believe he acts in tangible ways in the way that you appear to. He does not help us find keys, he does not help pray-ers with healing, he does not help those without sanitation get sanitation.

That we are obsessed with keys and parking spaces says rather more about us than it says about God.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Paul.:

quote:

---

Originally posted by mr cheesy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Paul.:
Personally I don't think there is a direct link. As I said before personal experience disproves this rather quickly, at least in my case. And also it would seem for LC, Jengie Jon and others.

And I want to break the link because I want to defend the type of "relationship" I have with God, whilst still recognising the suffering in the world.

---

I'm sorry, I don't understand. What type of relationship are you actually claiming to have with God?

---

Well a personal one, but with qualifications given that "personal relationship" seems to come with semantic baggage that I don't want to include. Refer to the OP for counter-example if it helps. I believe in a God who is a person, who I can engage with and who engages with me.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
But this stuff always comes back to anecdotes - I had a friend who had a friend, whose eyebrows were a bit twisty, but he woke up one morning and they were straight again! Praise Jesus!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by itsarumdo:
well - of course - it's a personal relationship, not a statistically defined one with inbuilt p-tests

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by itsarumdo:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
But this stuff always comes back to anecdotes - I had a friend who had a friend, whose eyebrows were a bit twisty, but he woke up one morning and they were straight again! Praise Jesus!

---

well - of course - it's a personal relationship, not a statistically defined one with inbuilt p-tests

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:

quote:

---

Originally posted by itsarumdo:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
But this stuff always comes back to anecdotes - I had a friend who had a friend, whose eyebrows were a bit twisty, but he woke up one morning and they were straight again! Praise Jesus!

---

well - of course - it's a personal relationship, not a statistically defined one with inbuilt p-tests

---

Well, if we are going all anecdotal, I had a Christian friend who had multiple miscarriages. People prayed for her, and so on.


So God finds car-keys, but doesn't help with miscarriages? Hmm.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by itsarumdo:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:

quote:

---

Originally posted by itsarumdo:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
But this stuff always comes back to anecdotes - I had a friend who had a friend, whose eyebrows were a bit twisty, but he woke up one morning and they were straight again! Praise Jesus!

---

well - of course - it's a personal relationship, not a statistically defined one with inbuilt p-tests

---

Well, if we are going all anecdotal, I had a Christian friend who had multiple miscarriages. People prayed for her, and so on.


So God finds car-keys, but doesn't help with miscarriages? Hmm.

---

I'm not saying that everything is perpetually rosy. CS Lewis's depiction of Aslan is quite recognisable to me - God often appears to arrive at the last moment, possibly, amongst other things, so that faith is tested. I would also guess that we lose the big picture in our own personalisation, and maybe external factors have to also fall into place. Or we have to fall into step with a bigger roll of events of much greater significance, that we are largely unaware of. Divine order can occur round one person but that person is also part of a far bigger order. Most of us also have absolutely no idea what we have come here to experience and to overcome - more so for people around us, so judging ourselves and others is at best a future exercise.

I'd also ask whether the people praying asked for her perfect health, for protection, and for her to give birth to a healthy child - or whether they prayed for her not to have miscarriages. The end result is different.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mr cheesy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by itsarumdo:
well - of course - it's a personal relationship, not a statistically defined one with inbuilt p-tests

---

Right - so somehow you have a better relationship (God helps you with keys) than others (who God doesn't help with sanitation). Explain.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by itsarumdo:
]The keys were yours. I have explained, in quite a lot of detail.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by itsarumdo:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:

quote:

---

Originally posted by itsarumdo:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
But this stuff always comes back to anecdotes - I had a friend who had a friend, whose eyebrows were a bit twisty, but he woke up one morning and they were straight again! Praise Jesus!

---

well - of course - it's a personal relationship, not a statistically defined one with inbuilt p-tests

---

Well, if we are going all anecdotal, I had a Christian friend who had multiple miscarriages. People prayed for her, and so on.


So God finds car-keys, but doesn't help with miscarriages? Hmm.

---

I'm not saying that everything is perpetually rosy. CS Lewis's depiction of Aslan is quite recognisable to me - God often appears to arrive at the last moment, possibly, amongst other things, so that faith is tested. I would also guess that we lose the big picture in our own personalisation, and maybe external factors have to also fall into place. Or we have to fall into step with a bigger roll of events of much greater significance, that we are largely unaware of. Divine order can occur round one person but that person is also part of a far bigger order. Most of us also have absolutely no idea what we have come here to experience and to overcome - more so for people around us, so judging ourselves and others is at best a future exercise.

I'd also ask whether the people praying asked for her perfect health, for protection, and for her to give birth to a healthy child - or whether they prayed for her not to have miscarriages. The end result is different.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Oh I see. It's all their fault if they prayed for the wrong thing.

My God what a fucking train wreck of a philosophy.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by itsarumdo:
[QUOTE]

I'd also ask whether the people praying asked for her perfect health, for protection, and for her to give birth to a healthy child - or whether they prayed for her not to have miscarriages. The end result is different.

---

Why should asking God for someone to have perfect health (who has perfect health? It doesn't exist, or if it does, not for entire lifetimes), for protection and to give birth to a healthy child be more effective than praying for that person not ot have miscarriages?



I can see that, according to James 4:3 the aspect of motivation is an issue - http://biblehub.com/james/4-3.htm

But how does that apply in this particular case?

I might be getting the wrong end of the stick, but you seem to be suggesting, itsarumdo, that we'd see more apparent results to are prayers and direct divine interventions and so on if we used the right formularies or developed the knack of praying aptly and rightly in every situation.

How does that work?

Also, this thing about 'belief' being a creative force ... that sounds a bit 'health/wealth'-ish to me and, in which case ought to be rejected as heretical.

Unless I've got the wrong end of the stick with what you are trying to say ...
 

---

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Adeodatus:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Oh I see. It's all their fault if they prayed for the wrong thing.

My God what a fucking train wreck of a philosophy.

---

On the other hand, you could say that in cases like this, it's extremely clever of God to behave in a way that's entirely consonant with his not existing at all.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by itsarumdo:
[QUOTE]
I'd also ask whether the people praying asked for her perfect health, for protection, and for her to give birth to a healthy child - or whether they prayed for her not to have miscarriages. The end result is different.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:
It's all well and good to say let the people who have personal relationships with God get on with it. But they don't let those of us who don't experience a personal relationship with God alone in return. Instead we get told we're not open to God, we don't want the relationship enough, we have a wrong conception of God, we're not patient enough, we don't have enough faith, we pray for the wrong things.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Adeodatus:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Oh I see. It's all their fault if they prayed for the wrong thing.

My God what a fucking train wreck of a philosophy.

---

On the other hand, you could say that in cases like this, it's extremely clever of God to behave in a way that's entirely consonant with his not existing at all.

---

Aye, well there methinks thou does uncover the root of the problem.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:
But they don't let those of us who don't experience a personal relationship with God alone in return. Instead we get told we're not open to God, we don't want the relationship enough, we have a wrong conception of God, we're not patient enough, we don't have enough faith, we pray for the wrong things.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:
It's all well and good to say let the people who have personal relationships with God get on with it. But they don't let those of us who don't experience a personal relationship with God alone in return. Instead we get told we're not open to God, we don't want the relationship enough, we have a wrong conception of God, we're not patient enough, we don't have enough faith, we pray for the wrong things.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
But also, God deals with each person individually.

---

quote:

---

Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam (one quatrain, one translation)
It's early dawn, my love, open your eyes and arise
Gently imbibing and playing the lyre;
For those who are here will not tarry long,
And those who are gone will not return.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Paul.:

quote:

---

Originally posted by mr cheesy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Paul.:
Personally I don't think there is a direct link. As I said before personal experience disproves this rather quickly, at least in my case. And also it would seem for LC, Jengie Jon and others.

And I want to break the link because I want to defend the type of "relationship" I have with God, whilst still recognising the suffering in the world.

---

I'm sorry, I don't understand. What type of relationship are you actually claiming to have with God?

---

Well a personal one, but with qualifications given that "personal relationship" seems to come with semantic baggage that I don't want to include. Refer to the OP for counter-example if it helps. I believe in a God who is a person, who I can engage with and who engages with me.

---

At the risk of seeming to be trying to pin you down, in what way does God engage with you?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
You can give a psychological view of it - that people have a relationship with an internal image of Jesus. Whether or not that internal image is connected to the 'structure of reality' is anybody's guess, I suppose.

But I don't think that that relationship is inevitably a delusion, no more than any other 'inner' relationship, say, with an inner child or an inner bully.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
[QUOTE] I don't say much on the Ship about my interactions with God, God with me, because I am tired of the derision.

As to why? The only true answer is "no one knows."

And God said to me " .... "

Why does God often "talk" to me and not to you? There is no answer.

---

Really? I mean, really?

C'mon, Belle Ringer, of all the Shippies I can think of you are one of those who strikes me as talking the most often about spiritual experiences and how God says this, that and the other to you ...

And I'm sure you have faced some derision on account of it.

I hope I'm not one of those who has derided you, but derision is different from questioning and challenge.

Why does God speak to you and not to others here?

How do you know he doesn't?

And how do you know that what you take to be God speaking to you isn't wish fulfilment on your part or simply one way of articulating something - thoughts, impressions, intuitions - that people from other strands of spirituality and Christian traditions wouldn't describe in the same way?

In terms of my own background, I'm rather like Paul. here ... and I still have mildly charismatic sympathies despite my railings about the dafter aspects here aboard Ship ... although for me these days, this sort of thing is directed more in a more sacramental direction ...

It's interesting that Paul. has quite a 'developed' sacramental awareness too - if we can call it that - however reluctant he is to label it with 'Real Presence' definitions and terminology. I can relate to that.

As an aside, I do believe that non-sacramental or less-sacramental charismatics and full-on sacramentalists can meet around the back somewhere ... just as charismatics and contemplatives do ...

Howbeit, as has been said several times on this thread, we have to be careful and sensitive how we use language and how we talk to each other ... which might sound rich coming from me who isn't always adept at such things to say the least ...

Even saying, 'I don't know why God speaks to me and not to you ...' is a pretty loaded and potentially judgmental statement when you think about it.

For all I know, you could be some kind of mystic with a special hotline to heaven. But, equally, you might have a tendency to eat too much cheese before going to sleep at night ...



Don't get me wrong, I'm not writing off all claims of 'guidance' and divine intervention etc etc and I'm probably still quite 'conservative' compared to hatless and others here ... but at the same time I think they make good Bonhoeffer-eque points about a 'world that has come of age' and so on.

The problem I have with the car-parking space tendency is that doesn't help people to cope when shit happens, as happen it invariably will.
 

---

Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Paul.:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
You can give a psychological view of it - that people have a relationship with an internal image of Jesus. Whether or not that internal image is connected to the 'structure of reality' is anybody's guess, I suppose.

But I don't think that that relationship is inevitably a delusion, no more than any other 'inner' relationship, say, with an inner child or an inner bully.

---

Wouldn't it also be true to say that our ordinary human relationships are to some extent with internal images of each other? I guess the difference is we have more realtime data and quicker feedback loops to update those images, but we can still interpret it in ways each other is not expecting.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Paul.:
There's also Communion, which is very meaningful to me but in a way I find hard to articulate. I'm not really very sacramental, certainly not Real Presence or anything like that. But there is something that I believe is God interacting with me in that act.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mdijon:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:
But they don't let those of us who don't experience a personal relationship with God alone in return. Instead we get told we're not open to God, we don't want the relationship enough, we have a wrong conception of God, we're not patient enough, we don't have enough faith, we pray for the wrong things.

---

I believe in a personal relationship with God, perhaps not on the same lines as some in this thread, and I don't think I've ever told anyone any of those things. I don't think its helpful to turn this into a tribal battle of generalizations.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:
It's all well and good to say let the people who have personal relationships with God get on with it. But they don't let those of us who don't experience a personal relationship with God alone in return. Instead we get told we're not open to God, we don't want the relationship enough, we have a wrong conception of God, we're not patient enough, we don't have enough faith, we pray for the wrong things.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by hatless:
I think we have to relate to God personally. There is no other way. Parking spaces are horribly impersonal. What does it matter if I get a space in the multi-storey or have to go down the road behind the station? What sort of a trivial God could that be about? We have to relate to God from our depths, from the things we care most about, the places where we are most broken, the hungers we can't satisfy.

A God we approach without a sense of distress or joy or yearning, a God we just think about, is no God at all. We have to bring the whole of ourselves.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Misrepresenting. Hmm, well that sounds a bit harsh because I don't think it is (always) done to intimidate others.

But I don't think it is an authentic experience, so yes one way or the other it is a misrepresentation of the truth, in my opinion.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Not sure I'd go quite as far as that, but I'd say that God has very little interest/involvement in the lives of those who are self-obsessed and/or who have the resources to help themselves.

It seems to me that the very great majority of people who talk about their 'relationship with Jesus' are actually deluded.

Sometimes, as we've heard, it is a useful delusion - but I still say it is a delusion.

---

How would you know that? Do Belle and I strike you as "delusional people"? (hmmm... on 2nd thought, maybe I don't want you to answer that... ).

But seriously, wouldn't think be (literally) an argument from silence? Because you've never experienced God speaking to you personally, that means he has never spoken to anyone personally?

I like much of what has been said about God speaking through history, through people groups, through communities-- most of all because it cuts through our rampant individualism. And yes, the "personal relationship" thing does smack loudly of individualism. But I can't shake the truth that it has been and continues to be an important (but not the only) part of my spiritual life. At the same time, it needs testing-- and that testing is done best in the Christian community.

[ 06. February 2015, 00:04: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]
 

---

Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
I think these experiences are absolutely authentic. (Back to envy I am)

I suppose I just don't see to have the soul for them, much I guess as I don't have a taste for cilantro/coriander (actually, yuck) and no ear for Chinese. I wonder which this personal relationship thing is. Can I learn it like Chinese, or is in my genes to never develop the affinity nor ability like cilantro?
 

---

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
Gamaliel, I know your questions were directed at Belle specifically, but because I resonate with some of her testimonty, I'd like to jump in as well if I may:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:


Why does God speak to you and not to others here?

How do you know he doesn't?

...Howbeit, as has been said several times on this thread, we have to be careful and sensitive how we use language and how we talk to each other ... which might sound rich coming from me who isn't always adept at such things to say the least ...

Even saying, 'I don't know why God speaks to me and not to you ...' is a pretty loaded and potentially judgmental statement when you think about it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:

And how do you know that what you take to be God speaking to you isn't wish fulfilment on your part or simply one way of articulating something - thoughts, impressions, intuitions

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
And how do you know that what you take to be God speaking to you isn't ... simply one way of articulating something - thoughts, impressions, intuitions - that people from other strands of spirituality and Christian traditions wouldn't describe in the same way?/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
[QB]
...It's interesting that Paul. has quite a 'developed' sacramental awareness too - if we can call it that - however reluctant he is to label it with 'Real Presence' definitions and terminology. I can relate to that.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
As an aside, I do believe that non-sacramental or less-sacramental charismatics and full-on sacramentalists can meet around the back somewhere ... just as charismatics and contemplatives do ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:

...The problem I have with the car-parking space tendency is that doesn't help people to cope when shit happens, as happen it invariably will.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
So, then, thankfulness is out. With it, five parts of what Christianity is all about.

---

I think I missed a step. Was there a particular post you were responding to? Mine were the previous two but I'm not seeing how lack of thankfulness follows from my posts?

 

---

Posted by anoesis (# 14189) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:
It's all well and good to say let the people who have personal relationships with God get on with it. But they don't let those of us who don't experience a personal relationship with God alone in return. Instead we get told we're not open to God, we don't want the relationship enough, we have a wrong conception of God, we're not patient enough, we don't have enough faith, we pray for the wrong things.

---

I DO say, "Go ahead and get on with it," whether what you have is a PR with God or something else. Who am I to judge another of God's servants? However God deals with you, go ahead and get on with it.

But by lumping me together with those who have hurt you, well... it kind of stops the conversation. And I'm sure I'm not the only one who has a PR (loathe that term) and yet refrains from making a nuisance of myself toward those who don't.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
So, then, thankfulness is out. With it, five parts of what Christianity is all about.

---

I think I missed a step. Was there a particular post you were responding to? Mine were the previous two but I'm not seeing how lack of thankfulness follows from my posts?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
So, then, thankfulness is out. With it, five parts of what Christianity is all about.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
No one really touched on the conundrum I introduced, viz., thankfulness.

If I get a parking space, can I be thankful? If my son comes home from the war, can I be thankful? If my wife's cancer goes into complete remission for 20 years, can I be thankful?

Are we as Christians to be a thankful people, or not?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
Is being thankful tantamount to saying God is a monster because he doesn't bring every son back or heal every wife?

What about it, guys?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
So I take it you are calling me a liar, for claiming to have a personal relationship with God? Think, please.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Should have added--in case you think I'm implying something negative about a person who spends years in the "wanting not having" category--

I'm not. God is notoriously laggard about answering our prayers for some things. The wanting, for this person, is clearly there. Nothing more remains but for God to get a move on and answer it. In the meantime one must just be patient. Which is always the hardest bit.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mr cheesy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
So I take it you are calling me a liar, for claiming to have a personal relationship with God? Think, please.

---

No, because liar makes it sound like you are doing it deliberately and/or dishonestly reporting something you know to be untrue.

I don't know you, but I am going to assume you are an honest person. As far as I am concerned, you are deceiving yourself on this point.

As I already said, this might well be a very useful and helpful deceit, but in my view it has nothing to do with the truth or with God.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Well, in that case, we're down to plain assertion ("I experience X." ans. "No, you don't, you're deluded." "Yes, I do." "No, you don't." and so forth) and no further discussion is possible. Though you might consider that it would be just as easy to turn the tables on you and claim that you are deluded/misrepresenting your OWN experience! But that would be rude. As your own assertion is, but let that go.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Perhaps it bothers Mr Cheesy, and me, because we feel we've been sold a pup.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Perhaps it bothers Mr Cheesy, and me, because we feel we've been sold a pup.

---

Can you decode this? This is an idiom or saying I don't understand. Does it mean you feel you've been sold something that's of promised quality but is actually inferior?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by anoesis:
But although it doesn't make him a monster, if the spreading around of blessings and/or protection is apparently capricious, and those who benefit are allowed to be thankful, are those who don't benefit allowed to question/complain? Without there being something suspect about the quality of their devotion? I mean, if your friend could have helped you with something really important to you, but didn't, and never offered any sort explanation as to why, and indeed stonewalled any attempt by you to bring up the issue, would you still consider them a friend?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mr cheesy:

And another point I was just thinking about - surely there is actually something quote/unquote sinful about ascribing things to God that have not actually come from God.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gwai:
Why do those who are anti-charismatic here feel God must interact with everyone in the same way? I don't interact with my children the same way, and not just because of their age too. For instance, my daughter does not particularly like rough play, and my older son is not capable of complex discussion. I do not assume I am capable of interacting with God in the same ways Lamb Chopped or hatless does or that I should be doing so. Mind, maybe I would like to be doing so, but that is neither here nor there. I don't generally think I hear from God in my daily life. Maybe I have heard from Her occasionally since I grew up and maybe not, but I don't particularly think I'm ever likely to start hearing God in that sort of way. That doesn't mean they don't. I've known enough serious quiet charismatics to safely believe some of them at least probably do seriously hear from the divine. And I presume most people out on the street or in churches who say they have words from God don't. But because I don't believe <big name> doesn't mean I have to believe hatless.

Besides, from non-Evangelical Christianity, the church looks more like a million (grouped) splinters than a monolith. I've never in my life gone to a church that talked about a personal relationship with Jesus and I've gone to very liberal and very conservative churches.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
It's kind of confusing, isn't it? I'm not sure why you believe that X has heard from God, but Y hasn't. It also sounds very culturally bound to me - do you believe that Mohammed heard from the angel Gabriel? My old Sufi mate said that God was all around, closer than your jugular vein, and when he was really God-intoxicated, he would say that there was nowhere where God was not. It's all fun, innit?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by hatless:
People who talk about God speaking to them generally put "talk" in inverted commas, so I assume they mostly don't mean they hear a voice. Some people, I know, do hear voices, but interesting though that is, I think it's a separate subject.

I'm a little unclear what does seem, though, like the speaking of God. Is it just a question of labelling? I watch a powerful film and I am gripped by sense of the beauty and fragility of life and resolve to make more time for my family, especially my son who, it now occurs to me, I haven't spoken to for three weeks. I don't call that God speaking to me, but it has a Godly feel for me - it's about a deep truth, and I take it very seriously, and I'm glad to have had the experience of the film.

Is that the sort of thing some people here would describe as God speaking to them?

It's the sort of thing that happens to me all the time. I am always reading the events of my life, finding lessons in them, and being aware of my reaction to them, the disturbance and growth they potentially hold.

I also do label things, tentatively, as being of God - a conversation I overhear at the food bank, an act of affirmation free of contrivance, received with simple pleasure.

It's very often secular things I label like this. I am always aware that God is devilishly slippery, and we can be devastatingly wrong about God.

So how similar, how different is that from your experience, b-r, LC, Paul. and others?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Let me just say this - it would be marvellous if Christian faith really was the way it was portrayed...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I think the experiences being described also happen to non-religious people, (for example, the walking described by cliffdweller), and I tend towards a psychological view of them - that our unconscious Self will speak to us at times, will give us aid, or come up with suggestions, comfort, and so on. (It might also tell you something very uncomfortable or painful).

But there is a big crux here - is this Self part of God, or an image of God? Well, nobody can answer that really. Jung thought that it was, and I tend to agree, but obviously others disagree vehemently.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I think the experiences being described also happen to non-religious people, (for example, the walking described by cliffdweller), and I tend towards a psychological view of them - that our unconscious Self will speak to us at times, will give us aid, or come up with suggestions, comfort, and so on. (It might also tell you something very uncomfortable or painful).

But there is a big crux here - is this Self part of God, or an image of God? Well, nobody can answer that really. Jung thought that it was, and I tend to agree, but obviously others disagree vehemently.

---

Yes. That's the "neurological explanations" I referred to-- that relaxing and not focusing on the problem allows your brain to access other areas of memory, etc. in more creative ways. And I'm fine with that, and with the fact that it happens to nonbelievers as well.

But I would agree with your 2nd para as well-- that God is in this. Only because that's the way it feels (very subjectively) to me. It just doesn't feel like something I'm doing-- it feels so different from the other experiences I have where I have an insight/breakthrough that might seem brilliant (ha!) but "feels" like it comes from me-- I'm the one doing it. I'm so much more confident, so much more assured in the "God" experiences. I'm not worried about the outcome. If I have an insight that feels like "me" re: a sermon, or a relationship, or a problem, I'll be worried about the outcome-- will they like my sermon? Will this work to resolve the conflict? whatever. I'm a people pleaser/ conflict avoider, so ruminating about "what will they think?" and worrying about the endless "what ifs" is pretty much My Thing. But when I have these experiences that I attribute to God's leading I don't have any of that. I'm not worried about the outcome (but not in a "I'm doing God's will so screw you" sort of way, hopefully!). I am just fearless. I don't ruminate. I just move forward confidently.

God, I wish I could have that always.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by hatless:
Lamb Chopped, the day to day stuff interests me. Bible reading, prayer and communion are also part of my experience, and I get ideas during them. My mind might be distracted, or because I've been led to think about something or other I might come to a new understanding, or some problem I've been living with might resolve itself during prayer rather than while I'm cleaning my teeth. And these ideas might be rubbish or brilliant (in my opinion). They will sometimes feel very important personal turning points. During times of personal change and stress they have been much more common. But they still, as you say, need checking against the understanding of God we get from other people and from scripture.

Is you day to day contact with God anything more than that?

---

• receiving positive answers to prayer requests
• having an intimate relationship with God
• God as a person

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:

This is where churches are always going to fail, because they seem unable to encompass the experience and desires of every Christian who crosses their path.

---

Why should they? It would be profoundly silly of them to do so, and would in some cases be actually dangerous to their mission to proclaim and teach truth.
 

---

Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :
 
Dang, that's a dangerous sentence, depending on where you put the comma!

It's true that churches are never going to be all things to all people. But maybe that's the upside of having so many different flavors of church, so to speak.

At this point in time, my relationship with the church is pretty screwed up. I figure that is probably going to be useful to me some day in a backhanded way, because I'm getting all sorts of practice in loving the unlovable (yay ). And occasionally it reminds me of what I must look like to God and other people. Who was it who said "The church sucks, the church always has sucked, and the church always will suck"? Somebody on board...
 

---

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
I don't come from a faith tradition where people refer specifically to a 'personal relationship with God' or to a 'personal Jesus', although the nature of the 'relationship' might be alluded to in sermons and devotional readings. But it's apparently something that Christians from a certain sort of evangelical background have to deal with in a more fraught context.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
At this point in time, my relationship with the church is pretty screwed up. I figure that is probably going to be useful to me some day in a backhanded way, because I'm getting all sorts of practice in loving the unlovable (yay ). And occasionally it reminds me of what I must look like to God and other people. Who was it who said "The church sucks, the church always has sucked, and the church always will suck"? Somebody on board...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Although you will have those (as we've seen here) who don't hear from God, or think the "personal relationship" thing means God is supposed to answer all prayers/no suffering thing....

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ikkyu:

quote:

---

Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Although you will have those (as we've seen here) who don't hear from God, or think the "personal relationship" thing means God is supposed to answer all prayers/no suffering thing....

---

This thread has helped me to understand a bit better were people who claim a "personal relationship" are coming from.
But my problem with this is not Theodicy.
Its arbitrariness. I consider a non interventionist God much easier to swallow than
a God that heals the Arthritis of this person but
ignores that child's cancer. That talks to this person but ignores decades of faith from a different person.
That happens to talk to people in churches that preach that kind of thing but does not in churches that don't.
This reminds me that when UFO's were in fashion
some people claimed that people who used to see angels now were seeing Aliens. And the fact that after Close Encounters the Aliens that people saw started looking a lot like the ones in that movie.
There has been some very good posts on this thread about the fact that how we experience the world is a lot more subjective than we think.
I know this cuts both ways. If your starting assumption is skepticism it will color what you see as well.

---

I think what you're describing IS the problem of theodicy.

I would certainly not say-- nor would I think anyone here would say-- that those who speak of their faith in these particular terms ("having a personal relationship", "hearing from God") are more favored by God in any way. As you have seen from the testimonies here, there is certainly no indication that those who describe their experience in these terms have any greater likelihood of having their prayers answered favorably.

Again, my default assumption is that God is speaking to everyone in the world, and particularly to those who love and follow him. The way that happens is different for each of us (the "pathways" thing) and we use different words to describe/name those experiences, dividing us further. But I believe it is the same God speaking and moving thru us all.
 

---

Posted by hatless (# 3365) on :
 
Lamb Chopped, thanks for your thoughts and the sense of "otherness" that is important in your relating with God.

I have a sense in certain situations that who I am is at stake. That's a bit dramatic! But there is the manage the budget, change the car, deal with tax, get on with the nasty people stuff, and then there is the stuff that's about what I believe in, care about, build my life about. Change career, commit to support a project, move to another country, reshape your marriage. There are decisions that will affect who I am in ten years. There are things that I can only do if I am willing to develop, learn and change.

In these already personal decisions it feels to me that God is involved, and in a good way. It feels that when I am able to follow the thin strand of God through life I am in tune, able to become a person I like more, feel more at peace with my role in life. They are areas of life that are about who I am, how well I fit, what I believe in and want to put myself into. In them, when it goes well, I feel I am finding myself and coming closer to God by the same means. I wonder if that's anything like your sense of otherness. For me it's about a sense of fit with the world, risk, and an immense sense of privilege.

I have only found it at periods of my life. And I should say that I don't believe God is a person or has a will like ours or answers prayer requests or intervenes in the world. But at these times I do have a sense that I am in touch with a happy mystery that embraces me and all the world.
 

---

Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :
 
oh dear. It sounds lovely. But really all I meant was that the -- impressions -- seemed to be originating somewhere other than me! You know how there's a kind of taste to your own thoughts, writing, personality? A subtle but there flavor that allows me, at least, to identify a long-lost piece of my own writing before I check the name on it. As in, "hey, that sounds really familiar..." and it's not the subject matter.

Or maybe compare it to the smell of home, or your own car or clothing. If there was a change, you'd notice, though not always consciously.
 

---

Posted by hatless (# 3365) on :
 
I can't imagine thinking that an impression, which after all is in my mind, has come from anywhere else. Apart from the influences of others, which are always filtered through my own thinking.
 

---

Posted by Martin60 (# 368) on :
 
If God withdrew, how would we know?

I can't not believe in Him. He IS. I can have existential moments of blind terror where He isn't, but they aren't sustainable. The doubt isn't sustainable. I don't want it to be, but what's that got to do with anything? So I put that down to disposition. A neutral thing. I'm just lucky.

I find the afterlife utterly dis-believable. Meaningless. The physics of it. The biology. The psychology. But I just can't help believing that all will be well.

Is that Him or me?

Well, He is the ground of being. He does think me thinking. I like the idea of Him. But I existentially, dispositionally would. Who wouldn't? If you knew my God you'd like Him too. unless you were IngoB.

Doesn't everyone like their God? Their Jesus? I like mine more and more.

In my previous church the assistant vicar would talk about talking about her problems to God in which He answered her with answers to her problems. I envy that ... simplicity. And I have been EXTREMELY, ecstatically grateful for realizations. They've taken 60-odd years. They couldn't be rushed. I had to go through all the weakness and ignorance and suffering of causing suffering through them. Under the sun.

I know that He is helplessly kind, meaning kindly helpless and in that wants us to be the same. And we will be and are because we are made in His image.

Is He grateful?

Will we make a go of it in the next ten thousand years? Will we begin to take control of our evolution toward kindness?

But I digress. As in so many areas, we're all saying the same thing. God shines and we rise to Him from deep down where He isn't. Except as us. Just as He isn't in the car parking.

And is.

So it is with however we invoke Him. Whatever story we make up. He's there despite it.
 

---

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by anoesis:
I'm not explaining this very well, but basically, I'm meaning, surely what you're really meant to be thankful about with respect to God is the fact of your salvation.

---

quote:

---

this point of view doesn't require any sort of intense personal relationship with the Big Man Up There.

---

quote:

---

I have to report it hasn't turned out to be any sort of problem at all. You don't have to be thankful toward anything - you can just be thankful.

---

quote:

---

But although it doesn't make him a monster, if the spreading around of blessings and/or protection is apparently capricious, and those who benefit are allowed to be thankful, are those who don't benefit allowed to question/complain?

---

quote:

---

I mean, if your friend could have helped you with something really important to you, but didn't, and never offered any sort explanation as to why, and indeed stonewalled any attempt by you to bring up the issue, would you still consider them a friend?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:
For my money, Belle Ringer has said the most helpful thing in the entire thread. I don't take what she's said as gloating that she has an experience that I don't, or that she has more favor with God. I hear her as acknowledging that we don't all have the same experience -- and that that's OK, not a failing on the part of those of us who don't have the personal relationship experience.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jengie jon:
However to elide from the idea that God has communication with us therefore he must answer specific prayers affirmatively is as dangerous. It is no good saying "Because God did not answer this prayer affirmatively, he does not communicate with humans". Indeed it seems to me to maintain God must do that is to maintain God is not a person in the theological sense.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by hatless:
Do you think thankfulness can be overdone or of an unhealthy sort, Mousethief?

Some Christian traditions have sometimes got down, rolled around and got all squelchy in a smothering sense of unworthiness. I am a worm, without merit, totally undeserving, nothing I can bring, loathsome sinner that I am.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:


So in answer, yes, we are quite capable of twisting things like humility and thankfulness. But that says nothing at all about humility and thankfulness or even the right proportions of either. It just says we humans are capable of twisting good things.

---

I'm of a mind to think that all sin is a result of our corrupting what's good.

And we can turn everything around to point at ourselves instead of God, whether it's the 'me me me' of look how well I can do humble, or the 'me, me, me' of look how close I am to God as I got this parking space, or the 'me, me, me' of how much I do in good works, etc etc.
 

---

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
I was joking with Josephine last night about writing a contemporary worship song that captures the true spirit of 21st century American Christianity. To a waltz tempo:

Jesus loves me, me, me
He died for me, me, me
On Calvary, ree, ree,
He died for me, me, me.

[ 07. February 2015, 15:54: Message edited by: mousethief ]
 

---

Posted by Martin60 (# 368) on :
 
it ain't just the You Ess of Ay.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
The trouble is, Mousethief, there are already worse ones than that in circulation.

Even the satirical talents of the man behind the Onion Dome couldn't come up with anything worse than some of the actual examples that are already out there ...


 

---

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
I was joking with Josephine last night about writing a contemporary worship song that captures the true spirit of 21st century American Christianity. To a waltz tempo:

Jesus loves me, me, me
He died for me, me, me
On Calvary, ree, ree,
He died for me, me, me.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
I am not getting the relational aspect per how we relate as humans. More like a point of contact. The body aspect is the eucharist is one of those "what you think it is" or decide to go for some authority's version. For me I can accept this is a point of contact, not a telationship.

---

quote:

---

1. Connection or association; the condition of being related.
 
2013 August 10, Schumpeter, “Cronies and capitols”, The Economist, volume 408, number 8848: 

Policing the relationship between government and business in a free society is difficult. Businesspeople have every right to lobby governments, and civil servants to take jobs in the private sector.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
I am considering relationship to contain interaction. Your technical definition is too broad.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
]So if my wife were, god forbid, to slide into a coma and not react in any way to outside stimuli, we would no longer have a relationship? If I went to the hospital every day and held her hand for six hours, that would be merely contact. According to your technical definition.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
Does my relationship with my wife cease to exist when she's asleep, and spring back into being when she's awake? This is all becoming rather surreal. It sounds like for you relationship isn't so much a noun as a verb. And when you're not doing it, currently, right now, in a two-way sort of manner, it doesn't exist.

---

quote:

---

If I'm on the phone with my mate and he puts it on speakerphone and then puts it on "mute" because there's noise in his office, but he's still listening to me rhapsodize about the movie I just saw, once he hits the "mute" button we cease to be in relationship, according to your definition.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
So if my wife were, god forbid, to slide into a coma and not react in any way to outside stimuli, we would no longer have a relationship? If I went to the hospital every day and held her hand for six hours, that would be merely contact. According to your technical definition.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Yes, but Mousethief is Orthodox, he won't be singing anything composed after 1,000 AD. The tunes will be more recent though. To the Orthodox most Western hymnody sounds too sentimental.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fr Weber:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Yes, but Mousethief is Orthodox, he won't be singing anything composed after 1,000 AD. The tunes will be more recent though. To the Orthodox most Western hymnody sounds too sentimental.

---

Someone please try to argue that the Kedrov Our Father is *not* sentimental.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Usually one can get over the very slight bump in a relationship when someone is awake when someone else is asleep, but that's quite different to relating to someone with memory loss or in a coma.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
So if my wife were, god forbid, to slide into a coma and not react in any way to outside stimuli, we would no longer have a relationship? If I went to the hospital every day and held her hand for six hours, that would be merely contact. According to your technical definition.

---

No, you're still in the relationship with her. You have an history of interaction and carry around in your memory and behaviour patterns little internalized bits of her voice, manner and influence. The direct experiences of her make these internalized bits resonate with the memory of her.

---

quote:

---

The same is supposed to hold true for the representation of God isn't it? That this heavenly father resembles, not himself, but the projection of generalized 'good fathers', except that there isn't direct experience to have an internalized representation of God as father, only supposition and projection of what God is supposed to be like.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mdijon:
I think it boils down to God isn't real. Having projected the idea of God all by ourselves we can't have a relationship with him/her/it.

My problem is that there's a premise I don't agree with in the reasoning. I think God is real.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
I am considering relationship to contain interaction. Your technical definition is too broad.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
...If I were no longer aware of God's presence for a long period of time...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Now imagine if you had never been aware of it, except perhaps for fleeting seconds long ago that might equally have been low blood sugar or mere excitement, and aren't exactly sure what being aware of it would feel like anyway...

You might see how bizarre this "personal relationship" stuff seems to some of us.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
Jesus said that such people are blessed.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
You would seem to be changing your definition. First it's not a relationship unless it's two way. Now it's not a relationship unless it's two way, or at least you can remember it once being two way.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by anoesis:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
Jesus said that such people are blessed.

---

Well, that's ok then. Kind of like how having someone say 'sorry' after crashing their car into yours fixes up all the dents and the broken glass and so on.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
There is an inter-active history for some people, though.....

quote:

---

Originally posted by anoesis:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
Jesus said that such people are blessed.

---

Well, that's ok then. Kind of like how having someone say 'sorry' after crashing their car into yours fixes up all the dents and the broken glass and so on.

---

I don't understand this comment, please explain.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
...If I were no longer aware of God's presence for a long period of time...

---

Now imagine if you had never been aware of it, except perhaps for fleeting seconds long ago that might equally have been low blood sugar or mere excitement, and aren't exactly sure what being aware of it would feel like anyway...

You might see how bizarre this "personal relationship" stuff seems to some of us.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
You would seem to be changing your definition. First it's not a relationship unless it's two way. Now it's not a relationship unless it's two way, or at least you can remember it once being two way.

---

No. You have a relationship with your wife with an history of interaction. If she were to be asleep or in a coma (God forbid): the history of interaction is not negated by her altered state. Nor even by death. Because the interactive history exists. With God, there isn't an interactive history.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by anoesis:
I guess where I was coming from was thinking of Karl: LB's expressed experience of not having any sort of sense at all that Jesus even exists - if you aren't convinced of his existence, how can something he is said to have said be of any comfort? If he doesn't exist, he by definition never said anything!

---

quote:

---

So you are only able to be comforted by his words if you have faith in the first place.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
Jesus said that such people are blessed.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by anoesis:
Well, that's ok then. Kind of like how having someone say 'sorry' after crashing their car into yours fixes up all the dents and the broken glass and so on.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mdijon:

quote:

---

Originally posted by anoesis:
Well, that's ok then. Kind of like how having someone say 'sorry' after crashing their car into yours fixes up all the dents and the broken glass and so on.

---

I wonder if this is a dimension of theodicy - that huge problem that many theists struggle with a theoretical answer to.

Many prayers are unanswered ranging from those to stop the holocaust through those for spiritual comfort or awakening through to those for lost car keys or parking spaces. It is claimed by some that some are answered, this can't be verified by outside observers. Why is God silent and unmoved? Or is he? He certainly isn't clear about it to most people.

That's the deal for most Christians as well. The decisions are whether we take it and live with it or reject it, and if we take it how do we cope - by dressing it up, tricking ourselves, by intellectual theological justifications of conservative or liberal flavours or some other trick. But there isn't a different deal on offer much as I wish there was.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mdijon:
Many prayers are unanswered ranging from those to stop the holocaust through those for spiritual comfort or awakening through to those for lost car keys or parking spaces. It is claimed by some that some are answered, this can't be verified by outside observers. Why is God silent and unmoved? Or is he? He certainly isn't clear about it to most people.

---

quote:

---

Jesus answered them and said, "Truly, truly, I say to you, you seek Me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves and were filled.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boogie:
I would say that this is the best world it could be, given the way it was created. That we have to have freedom or else we'd simply become demanding children.

So, with these two things, a 'relationship with God' is not particularly needed. But it isn't escaped either, as God is in and through all of creation.

So being alive is a relationship with God/The Christ, whether we acknowledge it or not.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
But you already are them.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by W Hyatt:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
But you already are them.

---

Re. churches and religions: doesn't it help to know that you already are? Why else would Buddha bother with the sermon?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:

quote:

---

Originally posted by W Hyatt:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
But you already are them.

---

Re. churches and religions: doesn't it help to know that you already are? Why else would Buddha bother with the sermon?

---

I find this one tricky. In one sense, yes, it's said that one person smiled, when Buddha held up the flower. But what about the others?

Are they worse off? Well, we are already making a comparison, which is itself a disservice to everyone, isn't it?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:

quote:

---

Originally posted by W Hyatt:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
But you already are them.

---

Re. churches and religions: doesn't it help to know that you already are? Why else would Buddha bother with the sermon?

---

I find this one tricky. In one sense, yes, it's said that one person smiled, when Buddha held up the flower. But what about the others?

Are they worse off? Well, we are already making a comparison, which is itself a disservice to everyone, isn't it?

---

Is it? Why?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Well, if I am comparing you to someone else, I don't think that I am really seeing you directly or relating to you directly. You have become something abstract in my mind.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Well, if I am comparing you to someone else, I don't think that I am really seeing you directly or relating to you directly. You have become something abstract in my mind.

---

I don't see why that should be the case. If I saw you standing next to somebody else, and said, "You're taller than he is," does that mean I'm not seeing you directly? That you have become abstract in my mind? Why should other comparisons be different?

---

© Ship of Fools 2016


UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0