Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's hard to understand how someone could have a close encounter with God, several close encounters actually, almost supernatural, and daily walks and talks with God for decades and then not identify as a Christian down the road. Unless you have walked that walk and experienced it, it boggles the mind. Yet this is what happened in my life. It's best to not even try to figure it out from an outside vantage point, as whatever could be said would be off the mark. It's easy to speculate and say they didn't really "walk" with God or really "experience" God or the Holy Spirit or any of those other things that make for a devout Christian life. That speculation could not be more wrong.
My vantage point is as an adoptee of Christianity who was NOT indoctrinated with the dominant dogma but discovered it due to my encounter with God. I see the problem as the dogma has misrepresented and misunderstood Jesus and God for millennia. Our ancestors' primitive and barbaric beliefs about God as wrathful and vengeful is the problem.
The God I encountered and the one revealed by Jesus, is none of those things and NEVER could be! He is the exact opposite and always has been. It should not be at all surprising that our primitive ancestors simply got it wrong. The one essential of CHRISTianity is the True Nature of God's Holy Spirit of agape love and forgiveness as revealed by Jesus Christ on the Cross!
An atheist poster who had previously been a Christian described years of praying, fasting, church-going, witnessing and doing all the things a devout Christian is supposed to do. Alas, it all collapsed and he’s now an atheist. I remarked that this isn’t an uncommon path – i.e., when you scratch the surface of a gung-ho atheist, it’s not uncommon to find he was once equally gung-ho about Christianity.
Another poster, a believer, stated that Christian faith is no different from the everyday sort of “faith” we exercise when we trust a ladder that seems to be sturdy enough to hold us. I remarked that Christian faith is very different – ontologically different, meaning “a completely different animal.”
Throughout many threads on these forums, it seems to me that atheists and believers alike often miss or misunderstand the one genuine Christian essential, the sine qua non of Christianity.
Participating in all the rituals of Christianity, even with complete sincerity, is no guarantee. In the 18th century Denmark of famed philosopher/theologian Soren Kierkegaard, the Evangelical-Lutheran Church was the official state church. Everyone was ostensibly a Christian, knee-deep in the trappings of the religion. Kierkegaard questioned whether it was even possible to become a Christian in such an environment. He described faith as "a leap into 70,000 fathoms of water."
Nor is being a Christian mere intellectual assent to the doctrines of Christianity. As the Letter of James states, even the demons believe. When I regularly attended Southern Baptist churches, one of the most common admonitions was against mere intellectual assent to the Gospel. One doesn’t "prepare" until the Gospel seems more "reasonable" than "unreasonable," then step onto the ladder of “faith.”
The one Christian essential is a genuine encounter with God. The Christian model is that God calls the individual, the Holy Spirit convicts the individual of the truth of the Gospel, and the individual with the grace of God and the assistance of the Holy Spirit responds in faith.
The faith response is all-consuming. It involves the entire being of the individual. It’s a response that is possible only with the participation of the Holy Spirit. It’s truly nothing like trusting a ladder not to break.
When this encounter occurs, the Christian journey begins. The truths of Christianity unfold and blossom – intellectually, yes, but much more than intellectually because the individual has literally been born anew. He sees with different eyes, hears with different ears.
Ostensible Christians who’ve never had genuine encounters with God will always occupy a house of cards. Their Christianity will always be weak and fragile, no matter how sincere or devout it may seem to them and others. They are the most prone to rigidity, to debating the fine points of doctrine and insisting they are correct.
Unbelievers will never grasp the effect of a genuine encounter with God. They simply can’t. Those who have had such an encounter are literally different animals. What seems irrational or foolish to the unbeliever is now Truth to the believer. It’s Truth at a much deeper level than mere intellectual assent.
I don’t believe those who have had such an encounter are ever in real danger of falling away. As Jesus said, “I give them eternal life, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of my hand.” I also believe a correct understanding of the genuine essentials of doctrine - which are pretty basic and largely uncontroversial across the entire spectrum of Orthodoxy, Catholicism and Protestantism - flows from a genuine encounter.
I described my own born-again experience at 20, which was so unanticipated that I began to question it almost immediately. It launched me on a long and twisting quest. Decades later, I realized it had been the encounter with God it had seemed at the time. My faith arose in a flash, a mystery to me even as it was occurring and certainly nothing like intellectual assent. I had never really been in danger of falling away.
God calls people at all ages and in all sorts of circumstances. I don’t know of any way to induce such an encounter, other perhaps than through prayer. It does seem to me that God calls whom he will when he will, which makes me sound like a Calvinist. I only know it isn’t a matter of “trying to act like a Christian,” no matter how sincere one may be, or trying to “convince myself that belief is reasonable enough for me to respond favorably.” Both of these approaches are fundamentally misguided.
one day i asked and received answer...
"God
In the ancient days, when the first quiver of speech came to my lips, I ascended the holy mountain and spoke unto God, saying, "Master, I am thy slave. Thy hidden will is my law and I shall obey thee for ever more."
But God made no answer, and like a mighty tempest passed away.
And after a thousand years I ascended the holy mountain and again spoke unto God, saying, "Creator, I am thy creation. Out of clay hast thou fashioned me and to thee I owe mine all."
And God made no answer, but like a thousand swift wings passed away.
And after a thousand years I climbed the holy mountain and spoke unto God again, saying, "Father, I am thy son. In pity and love thou hast given me birth, and through love and worship I shall inherit thy kingdom."
And God made no answer, and like the mist that veils the distant hills he passed away.
And after a thousand years I climbed the sacred mountain and again spoke unto God, saying, "My God, my aim and my fulfilment; I am thy yesterday and thou art my tomorrow. I am thy root in the earth and thou art my flower in the sky, and together we grow before the face of the sun."
Then God leaned over me, and in my ears whispered words of sweetness, and even as the sea that enfoldeth a brook that runneth down to her, he enfolded me.
And when I descended to the valleys and the plains, God was there also."
From - "The Madman" Khalil Gibran
I see some confusion about what I was suggesting. My point was simply that the one Christian essential is a genuine encounter with God that is initiated by and facilitated by God. It is a call by God and a response by the individual that is much deeper than the intellect and is assisted by the Holy Spirit. It is a mysterious process by which God reaches down and claims an individual as his own. It is what brings an individual into the body of Christ.
What I'm talking about has nothing to do with the mechanics of the process - what the encounter looks like or feels like to the individual. What I'm talking about likewise has little to do with what the individual's subsequent Christian walk looks like - or even with whether the individual appears to have fallen away or actually thinks he has.
I am talking about ontology - i.e., what actually occurs when an individual becomes part of the body of Christ. As stated in my original post, I don't believe it has anything whatsoever to do with "trying to be a Christian," "acting like a Christian" or convincing oneself of the reasonableness or plausibility of the Christian claims. It is an ontologically real event that occurs at a specific moment in time when God claims an individual as his own.
As suggested in my original post, I am increasingly persuaded by experience and observation that the Calvinistic notion of "the elect" is basically correct, unappealing as it may seem. I don't claim to understand exactly how it works, and I am by no means a five-point TULIP Calvinist, but I am increasingly persuaded that the plan of salvation is not for everyone but rather for those whom God elects. I believe the New Age sort of universalistic or quasi-universalistic Christianity is far, far off the mark.
I see some confusion about what I was suggesting. My point was simply that the one Christian essential is a genuine encounter with God that is initiated by and facilitated by God. It is a call by God and a response by the individual that is much deeper than the intellect and is assisted by the Holy Spirit. It is a mysterious process by which God reaches down and claims an individual as his own. It is what brings an individual into the body of Christ.
What I'm talking about has nothing to do with the mechanics of the process - what the encounter looks like or feels like to the individual. What I'm talking about likewise has little to do with what the individual's subsequent Christian walk looks like - or even with whether the individual appears to have fallen away or actually thinks he has.
I am talking about ontology - i.e., what actually occurs when an individual becomes part of the body of Christ. As stated in my original post, I don't believe it has anything whatsoever to do with "trying to be a Christian," "acting like a Christian" or convincing oneself of the reasonableness or plausibility of the Christian claims. It is an ontologically real event that occurs at a specific moment in time when God claims an individual as his own.
As suggested in my original post, I am increasingly persuaded by experience and observation that the Calvinistic notion of "the elect" is basically correct, unappealing as it may seem. I don't claim to understand exactly how it works, and I am by no means a five-point TULIP Calvinist, but I am increasingly persuaded that the plan of salvation is not for everyone but rather for those whom God elects. I believe the New Age sort of universalistic or quasi-universalistic Christianity is far, far off the mark.
You have completely swallowed the Kool-Aid of our ancestors' primitive and barbaric beliefs about a wrathful and vengeful God which is why you do not find such selectivity in God as abominable as I do! The God I encountered would never even entertain such selectivity toward us.
I see some confusion about what I was suggesting. My point was simply that the one Christian essential is a genuine encounter with God that is initiated by and facilitated by God.It is a call by God and a response by the individual that is much deeper than the intellect and is assisted by the Holy Spirit. It is a mysterious process by which God reaches down and claims an individual as his own. It is what brings an individual into the body of Christ.
What I'm talking about has nothing to do with the mechanics of the process - what the encounter looks like or feels like to the individual. What I'm talking about likewise has little to do with what the individual's subsequent Christian walk looks like - or even with whether the individual appears to have fallen away or actually thinks he has.
I am talking about ontology - i.e., what actually occurs when an individual becomes part of the body of Christ. As stated in my original post, I don't believe it has anything whatsoever to do with "trying to be a Christian," "acting like a Christian" or convincing oneself of the reasonableness or plausibility of the Christian claims. It is an ontologically real event that occurs at a specific moment in time when God claims an individual as his own.
As suggested in my original post, I am increasingly persuaded by experience and observation that the Calvinistic notion of "the elect" is basically correct, unappealing as it may seem. I don't claim to understand exactly how it works, and I am by no means a five-point TULIP Calvinist, but I am increasingly persuaded that the plan of salvation is not for everyone but rather for those whom God elects. I believe the New Age sort of universalistic or quasi-universalistic Christianity is far, far off the mark.
I basically agree with you
However it is not just about the UR misunderstanding, it is also about the ET misunderstanding of what is happening as well - both of them are flawed as they do not take into account the dimensionality, symbolism, metaphoric, etc
there are different layers, levels, administrations happening
And the basic principle is that there is a ‘switch’ that happens which is paradoxical
And the more humble, giving, and willing you are to mediate here on earth, the higher up you are in Gods kingdom which is not part of any physical place/time/location
Mat 20:16**So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen.
G2078***(Strong)
ἔσχατος
eschatos
es'-khat-os
A superlative probably from G2192 (in the sense of contiguity); farthest, final (of place or time): - ends of, last, latter end, lowest, uttermost.
G4413***(Strong)
πρῶτος
prōtos
pro'-tos
Contracted superlative of G4253; foremost (in time, place, order or importance): - before, beginning, best, chief (-est), first (of all), former.
G2822***(Strong)
κλητός
klētos
klay-tos'
From the same as G2821; invited, that is, appointed, or (specifically) a saint: - called.
G1588***(Strong)
ἐκλεκτός
eklektos
ek-lek-tos'
From G1586; select; by implication favorite: - chosen, elect.
Unbelievers will never grasp the effect of a genuine encounter with God. They simply can’t. Those who have had such an encounter are literally different animals. What seems irrational or foolish to the unbeliever is now Truth to the believer. It’s Truth at a much deeper level than mere intellectual assent.
Yep; I definitely get what you wrote here. It happened to me when I lived in Pahrump, Nevada when I was 32 years old. I can only describe it that I "met Jesus" when reading the gospel of Matthew. It does seem irrational and/or foolish when I look at it from the atheistic perspective I held most of my life. But that really doesn't matter too much to me. I can try to explain it in a long, drawn out narrative (which I believe I've done more or less in various posts on this and other forums). But it basically comes down to that I had an encounter with the one true living God, the author of all life and my life was never the same. It has changed drastically since then and things I never understood or felt about Jesus was somehow there in my heart and mind. And that's about all I can write after a long week and a long 10-hour shift at work where I got to do another 10-hour one tomorrow! So way past bedtime for me : )
As suggested in my original post, I am increasingly persuaded by experience and observation that the Calvinistic notion of "the elect" is basically correct, unappealing as it may seem. I don't claim to understand exactly how it works, and I am by no means a five-point TULIP Calvinist, but I am increasingly persuaded that the plan of salvation is not for everyone but rather for those whom God elects. I believe the New Age sort of universalistic or quasi-universalistic Christianity is far, far off the mark.
I'm actually a five-point TULIP Calvinist, as distasteful to most it often is : / And though I love the idea of universalism it is just not what Jesus describes while he walked here on the earth. He made it very plain that not all will be saved. I have to stand by my Lord's words above all others.
However, the notion of justice is a very human one (and one which we share with the living God our creator). Nevertheless, our ideas of what needs to be justified and what is okay are not on the same page with God's idea. The idea that someone who tortured and raped my 5-year old daughter would be given a sentence of "let's just forgive one another" and be set free with no punishment is as abhorrent to me as I believe it would be to just about everyone (who has any empathy or who has a daughter). I think most people looking at that would want such a criminal to be tortured very cruelly in the same way; I know I've seen many responses to these types of crimes in which this kind of desire was expressed.
So we as humans obviously have a natural desire to see justice done to those who commit crimes. What we disagree on, us and God, is what is considered a crime and also what is a proper punishment. I personally, as I've described in various posts (and what I would have added on to last night if I hadn't been so tired!), am overwhelmingly disgusted with the idea of an eternal punishment (the proper punishment to me for the torturer and rapist would be to have pain inflicted for a finite amount of time--not forever! Even someone so abhorrent as that, it just sickens me to think of it as never-ending). However--what I do with that is to step back and say: I am not God. This is not my world that I created. This is God's world and we play by his rules and do not have the privilege of making our own. I also trust God to be just and merciful and leave the judgment and punishment to him.
I also feel it is extremely important to have the foundation of God's word as our faith. For Jesus is the word incarnate; yet we should have an understanding of what that word is. Someone on one of these forums asked how Christians know the Bible is the word of God. It's because God's word says it is. And that is circular reasoning. The Holy Spirit convinced me of this. I could give additional reasons as to why I understand it to be the word of God, but ultimately it is due to the Spirit's influence upon my understanding. If we make up what we want God to be, then he wouldn't really be God but an invention of our own imagination. The true God (for there are many false ones) NEEDS to be revealed to us, else we would not be able to comprehend him in a sufficient measure. In his word, God reveals what he wants us to understand about him (it is not an exhaustive explanation; enough for us to have the gift of salvation) and much of his revelation is anthropomorphisms.
When my husband passed away tragically and unexpectedly, it was my understanding of those doctrines which God used to make me cling to Jesus. If I did not understand God in the way as described in the Calvinistic Westminster Confessions of Faith, I would have left the faith understanding God to be some kind of cruel psychopath who enjoys seeing people suffer. There are no loose ends in the Confessions. The ties are not always things I enjoy understanding, but I imagine coming from my scientific and "rational" background my heart was not open to anything that just "didn't make any sense" as all my prior experience to the Christian faith had been.
But as Irkle acknowledged before, it is not just an intellectual understanding, but a relationship with Jesus that needs to be there. This as he explains will look different in everyone. Some people have a closer walk with God, some quite distant. Wanting to be with Jesus because you love him will go a long way in not falling away from the faith. It's similar to a relationship with one's spouse. Why do you love him/her? Sometimes you can't give a good explanation. Why do you want to be with this person? Sometimes it's just that feeling that you get by being with them that you just can't put a finger on. And it doesn't matter if people call you foolish or stupid. You just want to be with that person and everyone around you can think you're a big idiot. That just really doesn't matter anymore, because in being with that person you have everything you need.
An atheist poster who had previously been a Christian described years of praying, fasting, church-going, witnessing and doing all the things a devout Christian is supposed to do. Alas, it all collapsed and he’s now an atheist. I remarked that this isn’t an uncommon path – i.e., when you scratch the surface of a gung-ho atheist, it’s not uncommon to find he was once equally gung-ho about Christianity.
Another poster, a believer, stated that Christian faith is no different from the everyday sort of “faith” we exercise when we trust a ladder that seems to be sturdy enough to hold us. I remarked that Christian faith is very different – ontologically different, meaning “a completely different animal.”
Throughout many threads on these forums, it seems to me that atheists and believers alike often miss or misunderstand the one genuine Christian essential, the sine qua non of Christianity.
Participating in all the rituals of Christianity, even with complete sincerity, is no guarantee. In the 18th century Denmark of famed philosopher/theologian Soren Kierkegaard, the Evangelical-Lutheran Church was the official state church. Everyone was ostensibly a Christian, knee-deep in the trappings of the religion. Kierkegaard questioned whether it was even possible to become a Christian in such an environment. He described faith as "a leap into 70,000 fathoms of water."
Nor is being a Christian mere intellectual assent to the doctrines of Christianity. As the Letter of James states, even the demons believe. When I regularly attended Southern Baptist churches, one of the most common admonitions was against mere intellectual assent to the Gospel. One doesn’t "prepare" until the Gospel seems more "reasonable" than "unreasonable," then step onto the ladder of “faith.”
The one Christian essential is a genuine encounter with God. The Christian model is that God calls the individual, the Holy Spirit convicts the individual of the truth of the Gospel, and the individual with the grace of God and the assistance of the Holy Spirit responds in faith.
The faith response is all-consuming. It involves the entire being of the individual. It’s a response that is possible only with the participation of the Holy Spirit. It’s truly nothing like trusting a ladder not to break.
When this encounter occurs, the Christian journey begins. The truths of Christianity unfold and blossom – intellectually, yes, but much more than intellectually because the individual has literally been born anew. He sees with different eyes, hears with different ears.
Ostensible Christians who’ve never had genuine encounters with God will always occupy a house of cards. Their Christianity will always be weak and fragile, no matter how sincere or devout it may seem to them and others. They are the most prone to rigidity, to debating the fine points of doctrine and insisting they are correct.
Unbelievers will never grasp the effect of a genuine encounter with God. They simply can’t. Those who have had such an encounter are literally different animals. What seems irrational or foolish to the unbeliever is now Truth to the believer. It’s Truth at a much deeper level than mere intellectual assent.
I don’t believe those who have had such an encounter are ever in real danger of falling away. As Jesus said, “I give them eternal life, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of my hand.” I also believe a correct understanding of the genuine essentials of doctrine - which are pretty basic and largely uncontroversial across the entire spectrum of Orthodoxy, Catholicism and Protestantism - flows from a genuine encounter.
I described my own born-again experience at 20, which was so unanticipated that I began to question it almost immediately. It launched me on a long and twisting quest. Decades later, I realized it had been the encounter with God it had seemed at the time. My faith arose in a flash, a mystery to me even as it was occurring and certainly nothing like intellectual assent. I had never really been in danger of falling away.
God calls people at all ages and in all sorts of circumstances. I don’t know of any way to induce such an encounter, other perhaps than through prayer. It does seem to me that God calls whom he will when he will, which makes me sound like a Calvinist. I only know it isn’t a matter of “trying to act like a Christian,” no matter how sincere one may be, or trying to “convince myself that belief is reasonable enough for me to respond favorably.” Both of these approaches are fundamentally misguided.
What do you mean by “ a genuine encounter with God?”
Here's the deal though - people from all walks of life and religion describe "a genuine encounter with God" and I am not going to judge that - I'm busy enough making sure I'M right with God if that makes sense.
I mean, I will use my judgment to determine my interactions with other people, but thankfully I'm not in charge of their immortal soul. All I'm in charge of is how I behave and believe.
What do you mean by “ a genuine encounter with God?”
If you have to ask, it is NOT! It is unmistakable no matter how it manifests, IMO. Understandably, it will be tailored to each individual based on where they are spiritually.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
one day i asked and received answer...
