CLARITY

[look2jesus]

Greetings to all,

RV,
In reading the posts between kaufmannphillips and yourself I'm getting the sense that you have some important disagreement with what he has written while failing to elaborate, except in a most surreptitious manner, what it is that you disagree with. Instead of continuing to act befuddled by his statements and asking more and more questions, perhaps it would be helpful if you would be more specific about what it is--regarding what he has already posted--that you have a problem with. As a christian, I find that what he has written has wisdom in it, and I can't find a single thing in these postings that I would disagree with and, furthermore, I think the church would do well to seek a more "mystical" relationship with God, if that means approaching Him in the way that kauffmannphillips has here described. I apologize if I seem rude in jumping into the mix in this way but I find your method disturbing. So please, could you elaborate on what it is you see wrong with this "mystical" approach to God? Thanks.

l2j

[RV]

RV,
In reading the posts between kaufmannphillips and yourself I'm getting the sense that you have some important disagreement with what he has written while failing to elaborate, except in a most surreptitious manner, what it is that you disagree with. Instead of continuing to act befuddled by his statements and asking more and more questions, perhaps it would be helpful if you would be more specific about what it is--regarding what he has already posted--that you have a problem with. As a christian, I find that what he has written has wisdom in it, and I can't find a single thing in these postings that I would disagree with and, furthermore, I think the church would do well to seek a more "mystical" relationship with God, if that means approaching Him in the way that kauffmannphillips has here described. I apologize if I seem rude in jumping into the mix in this way but I find your method disturbing. So please, could you elaborate on what it is you see wrong with this "mystical" approach to God? Thanks.

Well "as a Christian", I find it disturbing that so many in the faith are willing to except whatever comes their way without taking a moment to examine it.

I don't think there is anything stealthy about my approach, I'm simply asking questions to discover more about his position.

Your befuddled comment was pretty rude, but whatever...It's not befuddled, it called skepticism.

Kaufmannphillips hasn't really said much, I summed up what he said on my last post.

What in the world is so disturbing about me asking him questions about his experience? This attitude you have about questioning seems to becoming more and more prominent in the church.

I don't remember me saying anything about mystical experiences being wrong. I'm simply trying to discover why kaufmannphillips mystical experiences are any different than those outside of the faith claiming to have the same thing. I'm pretty sure I made that clear early on.

I get the sense that you only seek to justify what you already believe. I also get the sense that if something comes across your path that may contradict that or challenge that belief, you get offended and seek to discredit the source rather than seeking truth.

Look… I have not arrive yet. I'm still learning and still seeking truth. I believe Jesus died for my sins, but there are still many things that I'm discovering about God. There was a time that I believed I had it all nailed down, only to later discover that I had very little nailed down. When you go through something like that, it turns your world upside down. Thus my skepticism. I'm slow these days to just except anything.

And while you believe the church should seek more mystical experiences, I believe the church should start asking questions.

[look2jesus]

Hello RV,

My "befuddled" comment was based on these statements of yours in your dialog with kauffmannphillips.

Not sure what you're trying to say...

Where do you come up with this kaufmannphillips?

Well, to be honest, I'm not sure where you're trying to go with this.

I apologize if you think my comment was rude but, what you called skepticism seemed to me to be antagonism. I'm sorry if I misunderstood. By the way, I wouldn't presume to speak for kauffmannphillips; he is quite able to speak for himself. But let me address some of your response to me.

Well "as a Christian", I find it disturbing that so many in the faith are willing to [accept] whatever comes their way without taking a moment to examine it.

I agree with you that it would be unwise to behave in such a way, but would it not be just as disturbing to find those in the faith rejecting whatever comes their way without taking a moment to examine it?

I don't think there is anything stealthy about my approach, I'm simply asking questions to discover more about his position.

I was trying to encourage you to interact with what kp had already posted, which seemed to me to be extensive enough to have commented on without his having to write a book on the subject. It could be beneficial to hear an opposing point of view (if, in fact, you hold an opposing view), and I would like to hear what your objections might be so that they might be considered.

Kaufmannphillips hasn't really said much, I summed up what he said on my last post.

Hi Kaufmannphillips,

Well, to be honest, I'm not sure where you're trying to go with this. Other than I gather that God is more than just a book and that often times people go to the bible as though the bible is God.

I'm not sure that is a fair summation. Though he can be verbose, at times (no offense to kp ), surely you realize he said more than you're giving him credit for?

What in the world is so disturbing about me asking him questions about his experience? This attitude you have about questioning seems to becoming more and more prominent in the church.

You misunderstand my objection in this area. It seemed to me that, instead of honestly engaging his statements, you were being critical of his statements without stating why, as if by prompting him with more questions he would eventually give you enough rope to hang himself with, so to speak. Perhaps it would be more beneficial if you could share a little more the reasoning behind your questions in prefacing them. This is only a suggestion.

I don't remember me saying anything about mystical experiences being wrong. I'm simply trying to discover why kaufmannphillips mystical experiences are any different than those outside of the faith claiming to have the same thing. I'm pretty sure I made that clear early on.

Sorry, I must have missed that.

I get the sense that you only seek to justify what you already believe.

And what, exactly, is this belief that I'm trying to justify?

I also get the sense that if something comes across your path that may contradict that or challenge that belief, you get offended and seek to discredit the source rather than seeking truth.

And you sensed all this from reading my one previous post? Where did I intimate that I was offended? What I said was that your method was disturbing, though you did clear some of that up. To impugn my motives like you have here is unfair. Where did I discredit anyone? Especially at the expense of seeking the truth? I'd be interested to find that out.

l2j

[RV]

Well L2J, lets move forward with this. You may have a better handle on what Kaufmannphillips is trying to say.

Beyond what I've already stated, what do you see?

There is nothing to oppose at this point. Simply stating that you have mystical experiences doesn't prove anything.

You have mystical experiences... so. A lot of people outside of the church walls have mystical experiences.

How can we know these experiences are any different than those outside of the church? That's the reason I keep asking questions.

Why should I have faith that kaufmannphillips' experiences are from God? What would give me the indication that these are genuine?

And if we can't in some way validate these experiences from him, you, me or anyone, what's the point?

[look2jesus]

Hello RV,

I was going to try and respond to you tonight but I'm too tired. Lord willing, I'll try and get a response to you soon. Thanks.

l2j

[kaufmannphillips]

Hello, RV,

I have no problem with being a skeptic. As I have written elsewhere, "skepticism" derives from the Greek term skeptomai - to look about carefully, to consider. Accordingly, every person who cares for the truth should be committed to a stance of skepticism - of carefully observing and evaluating, and then carefully continuing to observe and to re-evaluate.

But an ambitious observer will not merely set themselves outside a phenomenon and peer at it from a distance. In order to make a well-informed observation, they will step into the midst of things.

Now, you recurringly ask about my personal mystical experience. But I am not trying to sell you on my mystical experience. I am trying to sell you on your mystical experience.

It is like being a couples therapist: the aim is not to convince clients that one has a stellar marriage; the aim is to facilitate the positive development of their relationship.

The best way that you can observe and evaluate the significance of mystical engagement is to explore it for yourself. As I have mentioned previously, with some information about your personal background (religious, educational, domestic), I might be able to suggest some techniques for you.

Having pursued your own exploration, then you can reflect upon it and evaluate its worth.

[look2jesus]

RV,

Well L2J, lets move forward with this. You may have a better handle on what Kaufmannphillips is trying to say.
Beyond what I've already stated, what do you see?

On page 2 of this “Clarity” forum, kaufmannphillips wrote,

I think G-d wants us to seek intimate companionship with him in prayer, and not just do literary research.

"Biblical" Christianity has too often made scripture not only a beginning to understanding G-d, but also the end of it. When there is a topic under debate in such circles, notice how many persons will argue from elements in the text, and how few will testify about what G-d has weighed upon or quickened within their hearts and minds.

Bibliocentric Christianity should repent and become theocentric.

I’m sure that we can agree with his first statement. But here he has introduced what later he will develop as to what he means by a mystical engagement with God; a part of that being the seeking of “intimate companionship with [H]im in prayer”. The point of the rest of kp’s post here, I take in this way: God has given us the scriptures (both Old and New Testaments from my point of view) and from these we gain a great amount of information about God and His purposes and how he worked things out so far in redemptive history and some information about some things to expect in the future. It is in these (the scriptures) that we learn about the character of God; examples of God’s dealing with man in general and as individuals; other information relating to man’s responsibility towards God (and as Christians, to Jesus Christ). This is what kp is talking about when he says Christianity has made the scriptures a beginning to understanding God. These scriptures provide the template, so to speak, for us, but, ultimately, we don’t have a relationship with a book. And this, I think, is kp’s point. Our aim is to have a relationship with God Himself.

Your response to kp was,

With so many claiming to have that quickening of the heart and mind and so many coming to different conclusion[s]... what do we do?

To which he responded with,

We each cultivate our own intimate relationship with G-d. This is not a thing to be "outsourced," or subordinated to the claims of other people.

Which is not to say that we should not listen cautiously to the testimonies of others. Such testimonies may sensitize us in beneficial ways. But whether a thousand persons testify in harmony with you or a million testify in opposition to you - none of these trump the testimony of the one we must seek. Go to the divine source.

Now - many will feel daunted by this endeavor. But let me offer two points here:

Many people are uneasy about defining aspects of their life and faith through mystical intimacy with G-d, yet are quite willing to define such aspects through analysis of scripture. Why is this?

If there are many varying testimonies as to the quickening of hearts and minds, are there not also many conflicting analyses of scripture?

Or is it that the scriptures seem more tangible and more easily engaged? The more deeply one studies scriptures, the more one realizes how illusory such an impression is. These are documents from foreign worlds ... set in historical, social, and intellectual contexts that we have limited knowledge about ... and written in languages that are no longer known by any person with the fluency of a native speaker in their times.

Or is it that the activity of rational analysis seems so much more trustworthy than the activity of mystical engagement? But human reason can be fallible. And is it not the case that life in our contemporary culture has encouraged us to hone our rational faculties, while gravely neglecting our mystical capacities? So perhaps it is not that reason is more trustworthy than mysticism - but that most of us have developed our abilities inequitably. We reason with relative maturity; while our mystical activity is scarcely developed beyond infancy.

(What, then, is the solution? To remain lopsided; or to humbly, yet courageously, seek to nurture our mystical capacities beyond the cradle? Let us ask the question: is one more likely to to wander astray with a mature ability to reason, or with a mature ability to commune intimately with G-d?


We may be fearful in the face of mystical engagement, because we doubt that we can trust ourselves. That fear holds a measure of wisdom. (But are we correspondingly wise about trusting ourselves when we reason?)

Even so, we embark on the mystical journey, looking not to trust in ourselves, but to trust in G-d. Trust that G-d wants us to have intimate communion with him, and empathic understanding of his heart and mind. Trust that G-d can wisely and effectively nurture our maturation in the mystical sphere.

In the sphere of reason, we may have become accustomed to doing the heavy lifting ourselves, by dint of our own rational powers. But in the mystical sphere, though we may have little confidence in our ability to successfully labor of ourselves, we may trust G-d to do what is necessary for us to make the journey together.

Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary defines mystical: 1 a: having a spiritual meaning or reality that is neither apparent to the senses nor obvious to the intelligence b: involving or having the nature of an individual’s subjective communion with God or ultimate reality.

Mysticism is defined as: 2 the belief that direct knowledge of God, spiritual truth, or ultimate reality can be obtained through subjective experience (as intuition or insight).

In the context of Christianity, I understand this mystical relationship with God, or our communing with Him in this mystical way, as taking place through the mediation of God’s spirit, i.e., the spirit of Christ or the Holy Spirit. And it is in this sense I see in the scriptures numerous examples, both in the O.T. and the N.T., of this experience. Jesus told the woman at the well, “But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him. God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.” He also told His disciples in John 16, “I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you.”

Now to the question you raised, which is an important one, I have two things to say. First, as to whether the testimony of others can be trusted, we have to realize that what we are talking about is a subjective experience of someone else, which, in the nature of the case, could never be relied upon as fully as, say, a clear statement from the scriptures or even something we experience ourselves. However, we may still receive edification from someone, nonetheless, as long as we are careful to apply wisdom gained from the study of scripture and our own communion with God, to see if the testimony of the person aligns itself with the testimony of scripture. But, in my opinion, because of various factors that could cause us to doubt whether a testimony is true, e.g., whatever shortcomings we all share, whether spiritual or intellectual or whatever, it is evident that the possibility of error, in any case like this, forces us to be very discerning as to how much credence we could give to the testimony of someone else. The testimonies from scripture would be an exception to this but, in the church today, it would pay us to be cautious, thus, your scepticism is warranted.

This leads to my second point which is related but is concerning our own communion with God. Again, it must be admitted that what we are talking about is a subjective experience but it is one that we are called to maintain, nonetheless. “For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God.” Yes, we do and must use our rational abilities in all of our endeavors, but there is a spiritual (or mystical, if you will) side of our walk with God that is too often ignored or not put into practice. And this, I think, is what kp has pointed out. How often do we, as Christians, rush ahead in the power of our own strength (or rational abilities) rather than, through prayer and meditation on the scriptures, and other like activities, wait upon God and seek to understand what He would have us do? I am as guilty of this as anyone, and that is why I think kp’s call to repentance is very much in order.

You wrote,

There is nothing to oppose at this point. Simply stating that you have mystical experiences doesn't prove anything.

You have mystical experiences... so. A lot of people outside of the church walls have mystical experiences.

How can we know these experiences are any different than those outside of the church? That's the reason I keep asking questions.

Why should I have faith that kaufmannphillips' experiences are from God? What would give me the indication that these are genuine?

And if we can't in some way validate these experiences from him, you, me or anyone, what's the point?

As I’ve tried to point out, the subjective nature of a mystical experience precludes us, or anyone else for that matter, from being able to prove, in the sense you mean it, the validity of any such experience. However, in the case of Christianity, and that is my frame of reference, I do think that God has given those in the church, again, through the Spirit, a certain ability to discern some of these things accurately, due to the nature of our fellowship in and with Christ. I find this idea, as one example, encompassed in Paul’s prayer found in Ephesians chapter 3. “For this reason I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, from whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named, that He would grant you, according to the riches of His glory, to be strengthened with might through His Spirit in the inner man, that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith; that you, being rooted and grounded in love, may be able to comprehend with all the saints what is the width and length and depth and height--to know the love of Christ which passes knowledge; that you may be filled with all the fullness of God. Now to Him who is able to do exceedingly abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that works in us, to Him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus to all generations, forever and ever. Amen.”

[RV]

Hey look2jesus...

I haven't responded to this because I'm not really sure what to make of personal experiences. I've had them, you've had them, those outside of the faith have had them.

To me, they don't prove anything. I'm just not sure where you can go with experiences.

RV

[look2jesus]

Dear RV,

I'm not sure if we're supposed to go anywhere with the personal experiences of others, but, generally speaking, I think we could be edified by certain experiences that have been relayed to us as having happened to some fellow believer if that brother or sister shows evidence of a spirit filled life and they're sharing something that does not violate any scriptural principles, but certainly, we must always keep in mind the fact that these experiences, especially anything of a more mystical nature, should never be just automatically considered valid without some kind of judgment or discernment being applied to the situation. But every case is going to be different and, in my opinion, needs to be evaluated separately.

Going back to some of what kaufmannphillips had said, even though he admittedly is not a Christian, as I said before, I found there to be wisdom in it. I found nothing that would be displeasing to God--why would God be displeased if we were to attempt to interact with Him in a more intimate, personal way?

Anyway, those are my thoughts on the subject. I'm not sure I could add anything more. God bless.

l2j

[TK]

L2J wrote:

but certainly, we must always keep in mind the fact that these experiences, especially anything of a more mystical nature, should never be just automatically considered valid without some kind of judgment or discernment being applied to the situation. But every case is going to be different and, in my opinion, needs to be evaluated separately.

I certainly agree with this- for me, a lot depends on how well I know and how much i trust the person relaying the experience. we can never be 100% certain about someone else's experience-- but I have to trust what certain people tell me. I think we should expect the supernatural and not always be so skeptical. My default position is skepticism but I am not sure if that is pleasing to the Lord. I am getting a little better.

TK