More thoughts on `Authentic Faith` and Church 'n' That
More thoughts on `Authentic Faith` and Church
I started this blog on a very negative note adopting the approach of St. Augustine's being the lone acceptible church in the world. But in praying about it, that was all deleted and this was written in stead...
Disclaimer
I don't think my blog is has the existential monopoly of defining a picture of the ideal church or Christian heart. And in fairness, I think a good disclaimer would be to say I honestly believe church as both a concept and a practise is an impossibilism. But to be bold, I do think I have perhaps some insight into what church should genericly be before it adapts itself to the individuals and culture.
Fin.
It sounds cliche, but I think my time as a Christian would be best described as a journey. A journey through many phases, realisations, mistakes and eventually, the ultimate revelation that comes through physical death. The first draft of this post was almost an account of each of these milestones so far and how they've hindered my connection with God, but in reconsideration, if my life is indeed a journey, then it's almost like Pilgrim's Progress whereby every step is just taking me closer to God - even if it meanderes away to do so. Also, if my journey is in God's hands then with the lazy testimony of hindsight, I can say that each step tessolates perfectly into His plan - the extrapolative truth being I think I'm writing this blog because I want to record and perhaps share my musings (and perhaps inspired musings) on church. In short - this post is just a single step on a wider journey towards God, and even if it's theologicly further from God than I was yesterday, I have faith it's still being used to teach me.
In much the same way that earlier this year I went on my `journey in search of authentic faith`, I think the same proess of learning can be said for my recent thoughts on church. The outcome of my search of authentic faith was I learned that Christianity in every form can be regressed back to Matthew 22:37-40
Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."
If there's one single axiom to describe the manifestation of authentic church (to speak in my own vernacular) then I've yet to find it. But I certainly think that just like finding the individual's authentic faith in the muddle of Christian looking things - one similarly needs to regress everything superphelous from the church to find out its own point and beauty.
In contemporary church, its ongoing persuit of perfection seems like an ameliorative process of including flags, bigger bands, bigger choirs, more CDs, more books and more shops to sell them in, more histrionical speakers, more festivals, and of course the aggressive microphone chanting of: ``MORE LORD! MORE LORD! MORE LORD!``... Perhaps this can't be blamed when you compare geographical, sociolical, intellectual, cultural gulfs between St Paul and St Hinn but that's a different story.
Here's a Novel Concept...
Buddhist enlightenment is a fascinating area, mostly because it's surprisingly true (on the main) and resonates throughout Christian teaching. To outline the principle of enlightenment (to the best of my limited knowledge) is this: One sells all posessions and gives the money to charity and adopts uniform orange clothes then shaves ones head to rid the self of identity. After the passion for inherited physical and identity-affirming virtues is overcome the Buddhist will remove themselves from what Christians might call `the world`, and further this denial of self by vows of chastity and silence... and with prolongued meditation and the lack of desire to follow `the world`, one comes to inner enlightenment. (Of course, there are many contemporary Buddhists who try and fit enlightenment and meditation in with work etc).
The idea of the Bodhisattva* is to reach a state called non-retrogression where they basicly go from learning to love living without posessions and the world to a state of mind where they can never backslide and never fall to a lower state of Bodhisattva practise.
Oh, before we go any further to all the readers who are thinking `Pfft, what has Bodhisattva/Buddhism ever done for us!`, here's an extract from the internet:
The Bodhisattva Ideal is not a new idea; it is an ancient method of transformation that leads to enlightenment. Brought to this world by the Buddha over 2,500 years ago, it is as powerful today as it was then.
It offers a path of benevolent action that transforms the world through the eyes of compassion, and lays out an ethical plan of caring for all beings. It is nothing less than revolutionary. It is nothing less than the powerful face of our primordial wisdom nature emerging triumphant in a difficult world.
I wouldn't insult our oblivious allies: the Buddhists by saying that my mini-journey has lead me to a state of non-retrogression, but I do believe I've touched the realm of minamilst church and the novelty of worship zero (ie: worship nes pas de mode ... all the worship with none of the sugar guitars or cholestrol flag waving) and loved it, but I think I wont go back to the Hillsong view of worship. Not because I happen to prefer an almost armish approach to asthetic worship, but because I believe I've found a deeper beauty in a church singing with no accompanyment - just their hearts unified by God rather than everyone in their own worship bubbles furtivly girning to look as worshipful as they can in a room unified only by the words they sing.
His holiness the 13th Dali Lama (aka, a good chap) says this about Bodhisattva; my enlightened metonymy for the Gospel Christian:
"The Bodhisattva is like the mightiest of warriors; But his enemies are not common flesh and bone. His fight is with inner delusions, the afflictions of self-cherishing and ego-grasping, those most terrible of demons That catch living beings in the snare of confusion And cause them forever to wander in pain, frustration and sorrow. His mission is to harm ignorance and delusion, never living beings. These he looks upon with kindness, patience and empathy Cherishing them like a mother cherishes her only child. He is a real hero, calmly facing any hardship In order to bring happiness and liberation to the world."
So a novel idea?
Well, I don't think an *idea* is the right word... in fact `authentic faith` as a practise bases itself on the reality of honest appraisal which (to me) looks like a mindset and outlook of Christian living as outlined in Matthew 22:27-30 (above) rather than ideas and adage built to look Christian enough to evoke sincerirty.
Similarly Buddhists would describe their path to enlightenment as `the wisdom of emptyness` - again, not a tangeble principle or maxim, but a mindset you have to earn and want. Like revelation vs lesson. Or epiphany vs memory-verse. Even Holy Spirit vs sermon.
So how does `auhentic faith` or emerging church (from the Latin Emerinim meaning, giving at least half a thought to what the hec they're doing) relate to the Bodhisattva , Nirvana and enlightenment? The principle of regression, and realising that getting to the root of something is very rarely an amelorative process.
If you go to a church it may well be worth asking these questions (and trying the `authentic` approach of honesty)
- Do your songs change and if so, why? Why can some worshippers still thrive to Charles Wesley when others snigger at Kendrick? Is music a fashion as much as it is an aid to worship.
- Can you see worship in your church? Do flags or banners or dancers make worship tangeable? Conversly what worship is happening that's not observable. Is your personal worship a spectacle? Do you need to conform to extrovertism or feign enthusiasm to have a sincerity of heart? Or do you only look happy when your heart is lit?
- Do you get excited when someone says into a microphone ``there's a real presence of God here``? If so why is it that God doens't have a very real presence at work or on the bus?
- Have you actually thought about any of those questions? If so why not? (that's the most important question and embodies `Authentic Faith`)
The novel idea isn't to battle orthodoxy or even deny the Holy Spirit - it's kind of like a boat on the River Nile when the Egyptians were building the pyramids...
In the Nile River, for boats to travel up and down: to travel North up the river,the sailors would rig the sail to catch the wind, but when they needed to go Southwards, they'd drop the sail and let the boat be taken by the currant of the river.
For me, I had a sail in church that was propelled by big meetings, powerful songs, and things that just looked churchlike, but when I took my sail down worship suddenly became cathartic not passive and personal not emulative. The sail always made me move but it would depend entirely on the wind and more often than not took me away from God, but the currant is a safe path that always trickles and always knows where it's headed.
Those few questions above aren't new, I think I've blogged something similar a while ago, but they never get less relevant and the more you value your walk with God, it seems the more willing you are to actually think them over rather than dismissing them as pessimism.
But the moral of the story is this: You can't superimpose Christianity on a person and they can't adopt a veneer of Christian sincerity hoping it will evolve into actual sincerity. But through regressing your walk to nothing but the feet-washing servility that comes with loving the Lord your God with all your Heart mind and soul and loving your neighbour as you love yourself, non-retrogression is as inevertable as the boat's passage on the currant.
* Someone who aspires to the philosophy of: enlightenment under the principles of Buddhism. Some 13th century Lama said there were 52 stages to Prajna (enlightenment) and a Bodhisattva is someone who's well on their way to Nirvana, or someone who chooses to delay their ascent to help others get to their level.
I started this blog on a very negative note adopting the approach of St. Augustine's being the lone acceptible church in the world. But in praying about it, that was all deleted and this was written in stead...
Disclaimer
I don't think my blog is has the existential monopoly of defining a picture of the ideal church or Christian heart. And in fairness, I think a good disclaimer would be to say I honestly believe church as both a concept and a practise is an impossibilism. But to be bold, I do think I have perhaps some insight into what church should genericly be before it adapts itself to the individuals and culture.
Fin.
It sounds cliche, but I think my time as a Christian would be best described as a journey. A journey through many phases, realisations, mistakes and eventually, the ultimate revelation that comes through physical death. The first draft of this post was almost an account of each of these milestones so far and how they've hindered my connection with God, but in reconsideration, if my life is indeed a journey, then it's almost like Pilgrim's Progress whereby every step is just taking me closer to God - even if it meanderes away to do so. Also, if my journey is in God's hands then with the lazy testimony of hindsight, I can say that each step tessolates perfectly into His plan - the extrapolative truth being I think I'm writing this blog because I want to record and perhaps share my musings (and perhaps inspired musings) on church. In short - this post is just a single step on a wider journey towards God, and even if it's theologicly further from God than I was yesterday, I have faith it's still being used to teach me.
In much the same way that earlier this year I went on my `journey in search of authentic faith`, I think the same proess of learning can be said for my recent thoughts on church. The outcome of my search of authentic faith was I learned that Christianity in every form can be regressed back to Matthew 22:37-40
Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."
If there's one single axiom to describe the manifestation of authentic church (to speak in my own vernacular) then I've yet to find it. But I certainly think that just like finding the individual's authentic faith in the muddle of Christian looking things - one similarly needs to regress everything superphelous from the church to find out its own point and beauty.
In contemporary church, its ongoing persuit of perfection seems like an ameliorative process of including flags, bigger bands, bigger choirs, more CDs, more books and more shops to sell them in, more histrionical speakers, more festivals, and of course the aggressive microphone chanting of: ``MORE LORD! MORE LORD! MORE LORD!``... Perhaps this can't be blamed when you compare geographical, sociolical, intellectual, cultural gulfs between St Paul and St Hinn but that's a different story.
Here's a Novel Concept...
Buddhist enlightenment is a fascinating area, mostly because it's surprisingly true (on the main) and resonates throughout Christian teaching. To outline the principle of enlightenment (to the best of my limited knowledge) is this: One sells all posessions and gives the money to charity and adopts uniform orange clothes then shaves ones head to rid the self of identity. After the passion for inherited physical and identity-affirming virtues is overcome the Buddhist will remove themselves from what Christians might call `the world`, and further this denial of self by vows of chastity and silence... and with prolongued meditation and the lack of desire to follow `the world`, one comes to inner enlightenment. (Of course, there are many contemporary Buddhists who try and fit enlightenment and meditation in with work etc).
The idea of the Bodhisattva* is to reach a state called non-retrogression where they basicly go from learning to love living without posessions and the world to a state of mind where they can never backslide and never fall to a lower state of Bodhisattva practise.
Oh, before we go any further to all the readers who are thinking `Pfft, what has Bodhisattva/Buddhism ever done for us!`, here's an extract from the internet:
The Bodhisattva Ideal is not a new idea; it is an ancient method of transformation that leads to enlightenment. Brought to this world by the Buddha over 2,500 years ago, it is as powerful today as it was then.
It offers a path of benevolent action that transforms the world through the eyes of compassion, and lays out an ethical plan of caring for all beings. It is nothing less than revolutionary. It is nothing less than the powerful face of our primordial wisdom nature emerging triumphant in a difficult world.
I wouldn't insult our oblivious allies: the Buddhists by saying that my mini-journey has lead me to a state of non-retrogression, but I do believe I've touched the realm of minamilst church and the novelty of worship zero (ie: worship nes pas de mode ... all the worship with none of the sugar guitars or cholestrol flag waving) and loved it, but I think I wont go back to the Hillsong view of worship. Not because I happen to prefer an almost armish approach to asthetic worship, but because I believe I've found a deeper beauty in a church singing with no accompanyment - just their hearts unified by God rather than everyone in their own worship bubbles furtivly girning to look as worshipful as they can in a room unified only by the words they sing.
His holiness the 13th Dali Lama (aka, a good chap) says this about Bodhisattva; my enlightened metonymy for the Gospel Christian:
"The Bodhisattva is like the mightiest of warriors; But his enemies are not common flesh and bone. His fight is with inner delusions, the afflictions of self-cherishing and ego-grasping, those most terrible of demons That catch living beings in the snare of confusion And cause them forever to wander in pain, frustration and sorrow. His mission is to harm ignorance and delusion, never living beings. These he looks upon with kindness, patience and empathy Cherishing them like a mother cherishes her only child. He is a real hero, calmly facing any hardship In order to bring happiness and liberation to the world."
So a novel idea?
Well, I don't think an *idea* is the right word... in fact `authentic faith` as a practise bases itself on the reality of honest appraisal which (to me) looks like a mindset and outlook of Christian living as outlined in Matthew 22:27-30 (above) rather than ideas and adage built to look Christian enough to evoke sincerirty.
Similarly Buddhists would describe their path to enlightenment as `the wisdom of emptyness` - again, not a tangeble principle or maxim, but a mindset you have to earn and want. Like revelation vs lesson. Or epiphany vs memory-verse. Even Holy Spirit vs sermon.
So how does `auhentic faith` or emerging church (from the Latin Emerinim meaning, giving at least half a thought to what the hec they're doing) relate to the Bodhisattva , Nirvana and enlightenment? The principle of regression, and realising that getting to the root of something is very rarely an amelorative process.
If you go to a church it may well be worth asking these questions (and trying the `authentic` approach of honesty)
- Do your songs change and if so, why? Why can some worshippers still thrive to Charles Wesley when others snigger at Kendrick? Is music a fashion as much as it is an aid to worship.
- Can you see worship in your church? Do flags or banners or dancers make worship tangeable? Conversly what worship is happening that's not observable. Is your personal worship a spectacle? Do you need to conform to extrovertism or feign enthusiasm to have a sincerity of heart? Or do you only look happy when your heart is lit?
- Do you get excited when someone says into a microphone ``there's a real presence of God here``? If so why is it that God doens't have a very real presence at work or on the bus?
- Have you actually thought about any of those questions? If so why not? (that's the most important question and embodies `Authentic Faith`)
The novel idea isn't to battle orthodoxy or even deny the Holy Spirit - it's kind of like a boat on the River Nile when the Egyptians were building the pyramids...
In the Nile River, for boats to travel up and down: to travel North up the river,the sailors would rig the sail to catch the wind, but when they needed to go Southwards, they'd drop the sail and let the boat be taken by the currant of the river.
For me, I had a sail in church that was propelled by big meetings, powerful songs, and things that just looked churchlike, but when I took my sail down worship suddenly became cathartic not passive and personal not emulative. The sail always made me move but it would depend entirely on the wind and more often than not took me away from God, but the currant is a safe path that always trickles and always knows where it's headed.
Those few questions above aren't new, I think I've blogged something similar a while ago, but they never get less relevant and the more you value your walk with God, it seems the more willing you are to actually think them over rather than dismissing them as pessimism.
But the moral of the story is this: You can't superimpose Christianity on a person and they can't adopt a veneer of Christian sincerity hoping it will evolve into actual sincerity. But through regressing your walk to nothing but the feet-washing servility that comes with loving the Lord your God with all your Heart mind and soul and loving your neighbour as you love yourself, non-retrogression is as inevertable as the boat's passage on the currant.
* Someone who aspires to the philosophy of: enlightenment under the principles of Buddhism. Some 13th century Lama said there were 52 stages to Prajna (enlightenment) and a Bodhisattva is someone who's well on their way to Nirvana, or someone who chooses to delay their ascent to help others get to their level.
posted by Ben F. Foster Esq. (c) @ 10:13 PM
5 Comments:
At 12:13 AM,
monty said…
I lead worship at Norwich Vineyard and here are my honest responses to your questions:
- Do your songs change and if so, why? Why can some worshippers still thrive to Charles Wesley when others snigger at Kendrick? Is music a fashion as much as it is an aid to worship.
- Can you see worship in your church? Yes, by people's response
Do flags or banners or dancers make worship tangeable?
Yes, mainly dancing, can be powerful image
Conversly what worship is happening that's not observable. Is your personal worship a spectacle?
Yes when I lead worship obviously, no if I am in the congregation as people don't take much notice of others generally.
Do you need to conform to extrovertism or feign enthusiasm to have a sincerity of heart?
No - no enthusiasm needed
Or do you only look happy when your heart is lit?
No, sometimes worship can be lamentation which doesn't particularly light up my heart
- Do you get excited when someone says into a microphone ``there's a real presence of God here``? If so why is it that God doens't have a very real presence at work or on the bus?
No - because I can usually tell and feel it. God does have a real presence at work or on the bus just sometimes my mind is not as focused on Him as it is when I am in church. If I am on the bus and choose to focus on him - sometimes its very real and speaks incredibly clearly.
- Have you actually thought about any of those questions? If so why not? (that's the most important question and embodies `Authentic Faith`)
Not really - I think they aren't particularly useful. I have just wrote and played a song called Here on this Journey - however each of us is called on a different journey. Some will like church life one way, others will like it another - in the end it comes down to the basic blocks of belief and a relationship with Jesus. The rest (Organ, or Choir, or Band, or Preacher, etc etc etc) are periphery items that we use to help us on our journey.
My concern is you think your on the only correct journey. Its naivety that comes across. How I and others respond to God in worship is my own choice, my own fashion and my own culture - like this is yours. But I don't criticise your choice of worship like you do with others. Let people be and do your own journey - God is God and he can sought out the wheat from the chaff, its not your job.
At 6:51 PM,
Timothy V Reeves said…
Hi Ben (& Monty)
Once again I love the shrewd comments (but not the spelling!), e.g.
“In contemporary church, its ongoing pursuit of perfection seems like an ameliorative process of including flags … (to paragraph end)”,
and questions like:
“Do you get excited when someone says into a microphone ‘there's a real presence of God here’? If so why is it that God doesn't have a very real presence at work or on the bus?”
I also agree with Monty’s general comment, which I interpret him to mean that outward modes of service are a non-mandated variable and what matters are the meaning and feelings behind them. Monty also suggests a core INVARIABLE, namely, the “Relationship with Jesus”.
But let me return to the variables:
VARIABLE 1: Forms of service. Yes, these are a non-mandated function of culture, but at times you could have fooled me (and I think Ben and I may be on a similar wavelength here). There are emotionally evasive forms of service out there that implicitly contradict this variability. Cries for “MORE, MORE MORE….” are implicitly understood to mean an upping of the ante via affectation and increasingly extreme expressional superlatives. The primitive instinct that “more equals more” alienates those who find (for them, at least) that there is more in worship when there is LESS, LESS, LESS. Now, I would be the last one to complain if some people find that piling on the expressional superlatives helps their worship. But I’m the first to complain when the quasi-sexual connotations of “MORE, MORE, MORE” is implicitly equated to one’s spirituality. In some circles one is only deemed to have had a valid encounter with the Divine unless one is seen to be having an almost orgasmic experience of God! The trouble is that expressional superlatives are a finite resource, and like a loud speaker that can only output to a maximum volume, going beyond the performance envelop causes distortions of quality, and degeneracy sets in.
VARIABLE 2: Gnostic Gnowledge: Now, I would be the first to allow that one may have some unusual “paranormal” experiences and altered states of consciousness as part of the one’s relationship with the Divine. Some of us have it and some of us don’t (like sex I suppose!). But related to the “orgasmic experience” comment I made above I believe it is wrong to equate “state of the art spirituality” with such experiences. Generalizing a little: let me express my opinion that the whole yearning for a consummation of the relationship with the Divine via some kind of “inner enlightenment” experience is NOT, repeat NOT, a necessary part of the faith. Like sex, some of us have it and some of us don’t.
****
What then is the NECESSARY component that brings us into that invariable core “Relationship with Jesus”? Frankly I wouldn’t go the Theravada/Zen Buddhist route which in essence is a Gnostic approach that seeks inner enlightenment/altered states of consciousness through anesthetization of the desires, dissolution of the personality, a self referencing disappearance up one’s intellectual rear-end etc. That’s cheating and tantamount to self-annihilation! The secret isn’t to give up your control of possessions and passions but to prevent them from controlling you.
The invariable and authentic core of Christianity is, for me, the covenant with God made possible through Christ - a covenant that can be expressed in every day language, everyday doings and without religious affectation. That covenant is that God has graciously forgiven sins through Christ and released resources and gifts enabling those who accept this Grace to go forward with new hope of a successful pilgrimage in this life. If knowing God is exclusively for some spiritual elite via mystical altered states of consciousness found in a nirvana/orgasmic like union with God, then forget it mate! You know where you can stuff your Christianity! I’m not interested! I’m off and out of here! I’m not a mystic or a desert rock pillar aesthetic, I’m a theorist who loves philosophy, physics and programming. If God, who surely inhabits the interstices of reality, can’t speak to me in the limited terms I have been created to understand then He isn’t God. What happened to the idea that God reaches down to meet us where we are? – After all we have no hope of reaching up to Him! He’s just as much with us on the No 13 bus for pilgrims like myself, as at some over the top religious swoon-in! And you don’t even have to “feel” His presence necessarily; you just need to know it!
Food for thought - to be found on a tomb in a Norwich church, this epitaph:
“He was… a scholar without pride, a Christian without bigotry, and devout without ostentation”
Question: Which church has that epitaph? (Post answers in the comments section of my latest physics blog entry)
At 10:00 PM,
Timothy V Reeves said…
PS erratum: "evasive" should read "invasive"
At 11:06 PM,
Ben F. Foster Esq. (c) said…
Wow, Tim! I think I counted more Amens than I could shake a flag at there! Only one exception though... you said that to seek Gnostic Gnowledge one doesn't need to sacrifice one's posessions and passions, just control the control they have over you - I disagree. To use your analagy of sex, then that would be like an orgasm without the prelude of the act of sex itself. I read Jesus' message as to deny one's identity and to be "born again" I think that's the first barrier to fall. I don't know anyone whose natural countenance portends Christ like life and love.
p.s, quit banging on about my spelling! Iye ah roit disleksik!
p.p.s, on that subject, you stretch my use of dictionary.com
Monty:
I think this is a novelty for me to respond to a comment on my blog in furthering a discussion, usually I just let comments slide illuding myself I'll eventually get round to replying to them!
I think you miss my point entirly again. We seem like the philosophical slapstick of the blog-o-sphere and it makes me laugh when i think of the way I write and the way you read leading to a complete mutual alienation!
I wont get too involved in replying to what you commented - alas - there never seems enough time to talk about things, even in cyberspace. you said this:
---
- Have you actually thought about any of those questions? If so why not? (that's the most important question and embodies `Authentic Faith`)
Not really - I think they aren't particularly useful. I have just wrote and played a song called Here on this Journey - however each of us is called on a different journey. Some will like church life one way, others will like it another - in the end it comes down to the basic blocks of belief and a relationship with Jesus. The rest (Organ, or Choir, or Band, or Preacher, etc etc etc) are periphery items that we use to help us on our journey.
My concern is you think your on the only correct journey. Its naivety that comes across. How I and others respond to God in worship is my own choice, my own fashion and my own culture - like this is yours. But I don't criticise your choice of worship like you do with others. Let people be and do your own journey - God is God and he can sought out the wheat from the chaff, its not your job.
---
I think, perhaps you see `authentic faith` as an embargo against Christians who perhaps have annoyed me or jsut things I don't like. I hope in future you can read and perhaps think about my ponderings without justifing your hangups by the implication of my pettymindedness.
You need to understand that the answers to those questions is as consequential as the colour of the flag you might choose to wave. I'm a great believer in pluralism of worship, so with that in mind - what reason do I have for asking questions like `what does worship look like?`? Answer: well the answers to the above questions are not important, but it's how you think about them and why you think about them.
If you haven't thought about anything else I've written, at least wonder at how your comment has routed you deeper in a way of worship - did you think or pray before you replied? Did you try `worship zero` before slating it? Or did you just disagree by default of our differing views and retort with your `if the hat fits` view of worship?
Now I'm begging you not to answer that, not because I don't care, but because it's thinking about these questions that make a faith authentic. Being orthodox isn't a bad thing - defaulting to it is. However, if your consideration of these fundimentals leads you to orthodox conclusions then I am glad and I encourage your choice of worship practise.
---
Food for thought: Is singing worship? Or is singing the manifestation of worship?
At 5:18 PM,
Timothy V Reeves said…
Yes your are right - gnostics, taken up as they are with the inner life, lose some focus on the input from the senses.
My reading of Jesus message is that we shouldn't so much deny our identity, but reprioritise just where that identity fits in the great scheme things - i.e. the great "I" is no longer in the middle - as they say "sin" is the word with "I" in the middle!
However, Jesus message is even more fundamental and basic than that: Namely, forgiveness, Grace and spiritual resources for those who wish to turn their back on "sIn", and thankfully accept God's grace. For without that Grace self-denial is futile: "For the good that I desire, I do not do. But the evil I do not desire, this I do"
Post a Comment
<< Home