Split from "Will the Real Holy Spirit Please Stand Up"

[Vivian]

You have brought excellent points, Karen, ones which I believe are explicitly taught in scripture, to the chagrin of the spiritually arrogant – those who assume a righteousness based on an assumption of election or justification before God, just as we saw displayed by the Pharisees in the face of the Light and Truth in Jesus.

The Pharisees thought that Jews alone were of God and alone could do good, or produce good fruit, because they had Moses, and their righteousness was assumed to be founded in being the elect or chosen of God. God magically imputing righteousness on those he chooses. [The Jewish form of imputed righteousness was based on a feigned obedience to the law, but at its essence was the same fallacy as that of the traditional Christian - I don't have to repent/change, all I have to do is this and this (obey the Torah for the Jew, believe in a historical Jesus for the Christian), and God will perceive me as righteous.]

The idea of imputed righteousness is totally demolished under the teachings of blamelessness.

And for those who are shaking their heads in disagreement just do a Bible search on the term and let the scriptures speak to you.

We are called to be blameless – obedient to the measure of Spirit that we have been allotted. And this very much ties into the topic of this thread.

Those who are producing good fruit are blameless before God – they display the fruits of the Spirit in accordance with the measure of Spirit with which they have been allotted.

And so Ghandi was indeed blameless before God. No matter what one thinks of his theology, it is obvious that he produced good fruit. And if you think his theology wrong, and thus he was not gifted with much of the Holy Spirit, then wow. Are we a bunch of laggards. Just look at what he did with so little!

God gave him 1 talent and he produced millions!

Instead of judging him, as has been displayed on this thread (he does not believe as I do therefore his fruit can’t be good), we ought to be embarrassed, we who have been given so much yet produce so little.

And if your arrogance prevents you from humbly approaching God in repentance for your attitudes towards one such as Ghandi, fear not, for I will be praying fervently for you tonight.

Shalom. And may we all attain to even the tiniest bit of blamelessness achieved by Ghandi.



Viv

[karen22]

You have brought excellent points, Karen, ones which I believe are explicitly taught in scripture, to the chagrin of the spiritually arrogant – those who assume a righteous based on an assumption of election or justification before God, just as we saw displayed by the Pharisees in the face of the Light and Truth in Jesus.

The Pharisees thought that Jews alone were of God and alone could do good because they had Moses, and their righteousness was founded in being the elect or chosen of God.

What is totally missing from such an idea, as you have been alluding to Karen, is blamelessness. For those who are shaking their heads in disagreement just do a Bible search on the term and let the scriptures speak to you.

We are called to be blameless – obedient to the measure of Spirit that we have been allotted. And this very much ties into the topic of this thread.

Those who are producing good fruit are blameless before God – they display the fruits of the Spirit in accordance with the measure of Spirit with which they have been allotted.

And so Ghandi was indeed blameless before God. No matter what one thinks of his theology, he certainly produced fruits according to what he has been given and then some. And if you think his theology wrong, and thus he was not gifted with much of the Holy Spirit, then wow. Are we a bunch of laggards. Just look at what he did with so little!

God gave him 1 talent and he produced millions!

Instead of judging him, as has been displayed on this thread (he does not believe as I do therefore his fruit can’t be good), we ought to be embarrassed, we who have been given so much yet produce so little fruit.

And if your arrogance prevents you from humbly approaching God in repentance for your attitudes towards the likes of Ghandi, fear not, for I will be praying fervently for you tonight.

Shalom. And may we all attain to even the tiniest bit of blamelessness achieved by Ghandi.



Viv Thank you Vivian, it warms my heart to see that someone understands what I am saying and that "good fruit" is not so hard to discern. I think Christ made an excellent example teaching about the Good Samaritan--the cast out, tainted member of society in that the Samaritan was able to show good fruit---obviously he acted well on the portion of the spirit he was given.

I agree with you on Ghandi. As I stated before, I believe God places certain places at certain times because He knows they can fulfill His purpose. The fighting and deaths needed to stop. Ghandi gave himself up for a sacrifce to promote love---what more Christlike behavior can you display even if one does not understand it is a truth from God that to sacrifice oneself for the love of a brother is the highest degree of love or Christlikeness one can show.

[Vivian]

Then it seems the fruit test is irrelevant for determining truth so why bother bringing it up?





No where in scripture is it said that Truth is right doctrine! This is where the fallacy begins - thinking one has Truth because of correct mental ideas!

Truth is right action, right embodiment.

Truth is right response to Holy Spirit. This is blamelessness - this is living a blameless life: right action or response to the Holy Spirit.

This is the whole problem of this thread - assuming that Truth is an idea or a doctrine. And good fruit is suppose to prove that one has the right ideas about God.

Having the right ideas about God is NOT abiding in Christ. Being obedient to the Holy Spirit is abiding in Christ.

The right ideas about God are NOT God. And right ideas about God are not proof of the Holy Spirit. Right action is proof of the Holy Spirit.

And so if we see others who profess different ideas than the ideas to which we hold, manifesting good fruit or works, then the right response is to question our assumption that good fruit can only come from those who have the same ideas as we. That some how there are right ideas which justify us in the presence of God, making us appear righteous, or do righteousness, no matter the state of our heart.

And I betcha a couple of talents that the Mormons have a lot more who are blameless before God than do the fundamental Christians!



Shalom.

Viv

[Vivian]

Hi LDSTrue and all!

I just wanted to add to your interpretation of John 15 that while it is true that Jesus is speaking here to a certain collective of individuals - to his disciples right there with him, he is also speaking universally.

Jesus, in other words, was a single personality with a single mission in this world as that personality, but he was unique from other Prophets in that he was also a mouthpiece for the Spiritual Christ. And so his words are specific and universal at the same time.

We find this same sort of dialoging in the Old Testament, where the words spoken by the Angels of YHWH were both specific and universal.

It becomes easier to discern this when we understand that the children of Israel, as were the disciples of Christ, were set up as a model for all of humanity. What God worked to make of them, he is also working in this world to make of each us - the terms 'Israel' and 'Jerusalem', 'Jacob', etc having a specific and a universal meaning. In that all of humanity is Jerusalem or the unfaithful wife as all of humanity can become the New Jerusalem.

Jesus was doing the same in John15 - he was speaking specifically to the potential in the disciples there before him, and to the universal potential in all of humanity, both at the same time. This is why it is sometimes difficult to understand what any Holy person is saying if we only listen with our mundane ears and not with our spiritual ears.

And what this has to do with the topic the OP - is that yes, Jesus is speaking specifically about his disciples and the fruit that they can bear, but he is also speaking universally about any potential disciples and the fruit that they can bear.

And if I might offer, by looking at the functioning of fruit in nature, we can only conclude that by fruit Jesus and Paul do not mean the bodies themselves or members of a church.

Fruit is the natural product or offshoot of health, of wholeness or completeness, of growth and development, by design. And so for man, fruit, by design, is spiritually developed or developing souls. To understand God's plans for us, all we have to do is look to fruit bearing plants.

He has given us this world and all the things in it to reveal Himself and His Plan for humanity.

All these things have spiritual significance: seed, soil, water, sun, growth, maturity, blossoming, ripening, fruit, seed, sowing, reaping, etc etc. But on this thread we are only considering fruit.

So what is fruit to a plant? It is something that can feed other beings, yes? Providing them with the nourishment they need to grow to maturity, and perhaps someday themselves producing fruit. So it is not the bodies or persons themselves (fruit thus is not church membership) but the spiritual ripening of each, making them useful to Christ, in his work to feed his sheep, to bring them to maturity as well. It is an ongoing cycle just like we experience in all the nature around us.

So fruit in the Biblical sense is both the spiritual development, and that which causes the spiritual development. Fruit is both produced and is consumed.

This is the Father's Work - not raising the body count of any specific church, but the spiritual growth and development of his creatures, growing them into sons and daughters of God.

Fruit then is evidence of the workings of the Holy Spirit, whether we are consuming the fruit for our own development or we are producing the fruit for others' development. And we can measure or discern when this spiritual fruit is present by the words given to us by Paul in all the verses shared above.

So I offer Sparko, that all your queries have been answered. But I also expect that you will not accept them, for to do so, you would have to see that the issue is not which religion is right or which one has the REAL Holy Spirit, but the growth and spiritual maturity, or potential for growth and maturity, of all humanity.

The evidence of fruit is the spiritual development of humanity, as seen by the presence and development of the attributes listed already in this thread.

There is no biblical evidence nor any evidence in creation that fruit is right doctrines or church membership.

The usefulness of any religion, then, not being their doctrine, nor the count of their membership, but the transformation of its members, or any who come in contact or fed by the fruit of the church. By this definition, many Christian denominations, and many non- Christian religions are useful to God - working to turn his creatures into Sons and Daughters. And likewise many Christian denominations and many non-Christian religions are not useful to God, not producing Good fruit. And as Jesus said this is the discernment, the measurement, not the doctrine that is preached but the fruit that is produced.

That which produces good fruit will be nourished and sustained by God, and that which is producing bad fruit will be thrown into the fires.

And honestly, it would take a really dull person to accept the premise being offered that only those who believe a certain way about Christ, can produce good fruit, and that only those who believe this certain way can discern what is and what isn't good fruit.

We are not stupid. We know good fruit, and what is and what isn't good fruit. And we cannot hide our fruit from each other, and we cannot hide it from God. It is by our fruit that we are known.

We can say whatever we want on any thread, forum, meeting, etc, but Jesus has laid down the law and we all know it. We feel it in our gut, in our inner turmoil and struggles.

And so the only logical conclusion one can reach is that Christ is not a respecter of religious beliefs, but looks to the heart for His true believers - for those who trust, believing that they can be healed, made whole, perfect, complete, by the Power and Authority of God.

This is the Name of God through which all are saved.


Shalom.

Viv

[Shadow Phoenix]

No where in scripture is it said that Truth is right doctrine! This is where the fallacy begins - thinking one has Truth because of correct mental ideas!

Is that true?

Truth is right action, right embodiment.

Please show where that is stated in Scripture.

Truth is right response to Holy Spirit. This is blamelessness - this is living a blameless life: right action or response to the Holy Spirit.

2 + 2 = 4. Is that true? Also, please show where the above is stated in Scripture.

This is the whole problem of this thread - assuming that Truth is an idea or a doctrine. And good fruit is suppose to prove that one has the right ideas about God.

I agree with the latter if good fruit is the way Karen is describing it. I disagree with the former entirely.

Having the right ideas about God is NOT abiding in Christ. Being obedient to the Holy Spirit is abiding in Christ.

Which Holy Spirit? The one that is fully God or the one that is an impersonal force or what? Isn't that an aspect of our idea of God?

The right ideas about God are NOT God. And right ideas about God are not proof of the Holy Spirit. Right action is proof of the Holy Spirit.

I agree the right ideas about God are not God. I agree the right ideas about God are not proof of the Holy Spirit s even demons have right ideas. I do not agree with the latter though that right actions are proof of the Holy Spirit.

And so if we see others who profess different ideas than the ideas to which we hold, manifesting good fruit or works, then the right response is to question our assumption that good fruit can only come from those who have the same ideas as we.

Good thing I never made that assumption.

That some how there are right ideas which justify us in the presence of God, making us appear righteous, or do righteousness, no matter the state of our heart.

False. Right ideas in themselves do not result in orthopraxy but when acted on, they will result in orthopraxy.

And I betcha a couple of talents that the Mormons have a lot more who are blameless before God than do the fundamental Christians!

I bet you they don't based on the words of Christ. "Unless you believe I am who I claim to be, you will die in your sins." God's standard is complete perfection. How are you doing on that?

[Vivian]

Hello AP!

Thank you for this opportunity to respond to your thoughts-

Is that true?

What you are asking me to prove as true is the contention that No where in scripture is it said that Truth is right doctrine!

And here is my proof:





See, nada.
If you have proof to the contrary, I would be happy to discuss it with you.



Please show where that is stated in Scripture.I am the Truth. In saying I am the Truth, Jesus is saying he is the embodiment of Truth.

John 3:16-21

I know these things are not easily discernible in the English language, without the mystical guidance of the Risen Christ (as Jesus told Peter, we are blessed when we learn this way instead of learning via the means of flesh and blood.)

But Truth is not something that is learned the way that we go to school and learn facts, but something that we find and embody. You will find the Truth and the Truth will make you free.

I often ask people are you free? If not then you have not yet found the Truth and so you better keep searching.

And so if you are free AP, if you do not think you are in need of the healing and redeeming Power and Authority of God, then you're done! Might as well sit back and enjoy the fruits of freedom.


2 + 2 = 4. Is that true? If you thought the Bible said 2+2=5, would you believe it? If your interpretation of scripture did not match your personal experience which would you doubt?

Also, please show where the above is stated in Scripture.You might be able to see if you read for yourself:

http://www.biblegateway.com/keyword/?search=blameless&version1=31&searchtype=all

Psalm 15

Luke 1:6

Ephesians 1:4



I agree with the latter if good fruit is the way Karen is describing it. I disagree with the former entirely.If you do a word search on Truth, you will find that when Jesus says I tell you the truth, he is speaking almost always about action, and not action and consequences, about the world around us, and in some cases about heaven. When one finds the Truth that makes them free, they find that Truth is not something that is presented in a lecture from a podium. Truth is the reality about us and the worlds we find ourselves. Truth is about the intent of creation, what God is trying to accomplish in us and through us. Truth is the Father's work in this world.

We find the Truth when we believe in that which can transform - the Truth being both the transforming Power and Authority and the act of transformation. This is the fulfillment of our purpose, the fulfillment of the Law - that which governs and compels creation towards its certain end. The Law being the mystery of God's Will and how it is being manifested in and through creation, even as we speak now.

All the verses in the Bible that begin I tell you the Truth are speaking about this process, the fulfillment of our purpose, or about hindrances to this process.

I tell you the Truth phrases are predominately about right doing or action, not about right doctrine.

Check out the link above, AP, with an open heart and let God reveal His Truth to you, via your heart - which requires us to quiet the mind. The mind thinks it knows everything, but it knows nothing.


Which Holy Spirit? The one that is fully God or the one that is an impersonal force or what? Isn't that an aspect of our idea of God?No one can be in the presence of the Holy Spirit that is fully God, except the Son. But you know that. Whatever measure of Holy Spirit we know in this world is dependent on the purity of our hearts.

For some whose purity is null, they have only their mind with which to seek. For those with a bit of purity, they might sense an inner nudging that cannot be explained. A sense of intuition. For those whose purity is maturing, they might 'hear' actual voices, or see Light or presences around them, guiding them. For those who have reached a certain level of maturity, they will have dreams and visions, and for those reaching maximum maturity, they might find themselves being taken places into the various heavens and seeing things there, such as happened with many Bible figures.

And those who disagree with this are doing nothing more than revealing the state of their own heart, for they themselves have not yet tasted of any degree of the Holy Spirit - or better put, they have not yet recognized the works of the Holy Spirit in them and around them, for their heart has blinded them.


I agree the right ideas about God are not God. I agree the right ideas about God are not proof of the Holy Spirit s even demons have right ideas. I do not agree with the latter though that right actions are proof of the Holy Spirit.Those who do not have the Holy Spirit, yet try to act as though they are righteous, are easily discernible. These are the hypocrites, and include the likes of those who are self-convinced that they have the right ideas or right doctrines about God but do not display the Power of God in and through them, by the workings of his Holy Spirit.

If the Holy Spirit is working in us, we will exhibit the Power of God - in bringing change or transformation to ourselves, and to those with whom we make contact. If those around you are finding transformation - peace and healing and joy, the fruits of the Spirit, then you know that the Holy Spirit is doing its job!



Good thing I never made that assumption.Never said who did, just that it was made on this thread.



False. Right ideas in themselves do not result in orthopraxy but when acted on, they will result in orthopraxy.Ah new word! Orthopraxy: is a term derived from Greek (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_language) (ὀρθοπραξις) meaning "correct action/activity", and is a religion that places emphasis on conduct, both ethical (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics) and liturgical (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liturgy), as opposed to faith (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faith) or grace (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_grace) etc.This contrasts with orthodoxy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthodoxy), emphasizing a correct belief, and ritualism (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ritualism), the use of rituals.

Using these definitions I would say that orthodoxy without the Holy Spirit is orthodoxy or belief and ritual without the Power or God. But orthodoxy with the Holy Spirit, with the presence of the Power of God is orthopraxy. And since orthodoxy without the Holy Spirit is useless, I would say the word orthodoxy is worthless too. And so when we speak of the real things of God the proper word to use is orthopraxy.

When we are speaking of things without the Power of God, useless things, or ideas or doctrines of men, we can use orthodoxy.

Thanks AP!

So I would say then that orthopraxy is proof of the presence of the REAL Holy Spirit, and not orthodoxy.

Orthopraxy is the fruit of the Spirit.



I bet you they don't based on the words of Christ. "Unless you believe I am who I claim to be, you will die in your sins." God's standard is complete perfection. How are you doing on that?Good one! I love it when the posters make me look!

Here is what Jesus claims he is, just a few verses before the one your quote...

12When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, "I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life."

So if we combine the two statements we get...

Unless you believe that I am the Light of the world and follow me, you will die in your sins.

And if we add to this what he says in chapter 3:

18 “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. 21 But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly seen, that they have been done in God.”

We discover that he who does the Truth comes to the Light. And what happens in the Light? Our sins are revealed allowing Grace to heal us and make us whole, perfect.

So using your words, AP, when Jesus talks about belief, he is not talking about orthodoxy is he? He is talking about orthopraxy! Truth is orthopraxy!

When I first read your response, I had the impression that perhaps to you, or to some of the posters on this thread, Jesus is a lecturer standing at a podium rattling off ideas and doctrines for you to memorize. This is not the Jesus that I know. The Jesus that I know approached me and shined his Light on me, revealing that I was actually sitting in a gutter - instead of a throne as I supposed! And seeing that I was sitting in a gutter, he then reached his hand out to me and said, I am the Light of the world who has come to heal you, to make you perfect. Believe in me, believe that I am the one who can heal you, that I can rescue you from your pit. Take my hand and follow me to Life!

My Jesus is orthopaxy.


Shalom.

Viv

[Bill the Cat]

And so Ghandi was indeed blameless before God.

Sorry Viv, but Ghandi's "righteousness is but filthy rags before Christ. Ghandi did not follow Christ, nor did he abide in Christ. Therefore, he is damned.

[Vivian]

Sorry Viv, but Ghandi's "righteousness is but filthy rags before Christ. Ghandi did not follow Christ, nor did he abide in Christ. Therefore, he is damned.

Have you ever considered, Bill, that the tradition you adhere to is wrong?

I too thought the same way you do, and I too would not listen to anything else, until Christ grabbed me and personally taught me otherwise.

If you only knew, you would regret so much of what you post here.

Ghandi knew God. He knew Christ. He abided in Him. And no one is damned the way you are using the term.

But I would not have thought so either until I learned that abiding in Bible study is not abiding in Christ. But it takes the latter to truly See.

Talking to you is like talking to a boy about childbirth. He can read and read and read and thinks he knows everything, but unless he enters a woman's body and actually gives birth, he knows nothing.

You know nothing about this, Bill.

May you in this life be blessed with one tiny glimpse of REAL knowing. Amen


Viv

[karen22]

Have you ever considered, Bill, that the tradition you adhere to is wrong?

I too thought the same way you do, and I too would not listen to anything else, until Christ grabbed me and personally taught me otherwise.

If you only knew, you would regret so much of what you post here.

Ghandi knew God. He knew Christ. He abided in Him. And no one is damned the way you are using the term.

But I would not have thought so either until I learned that abiding in Bible study is not abiding in Christ. But it takes the latter to truly See.

Talking to you is like talking to a boy about childbirth. He can read and read and read and thinks he knows everything, but unless he enters a woman's body and actually gives birth, he knows nothing.

You know nothing about this, Bill.

May you in this life be blessed with one tiny glimpse of REAL knowing. Amen


Viv

Good analogy Viv. Ghandi is condemned...the good Samaritan is condemned because Bill doesn't understand what it means to believe in Christ.

Sadly Viv, we are told that we will be judged as we judge others---Viv, you make good points---we need to forgive others their traspesses, so that we too share can in the mercy of Christ for our own. If all we can see is what Ghandi or the Samaritan lacked in knowledge and not for the good within them, then I suppose we will be judged for our lack of knowledge as well and our own goodness will be for nothing.

[Bill the Cat]

Have you ever considered, Bill, that the tradition you adhere to is wrong?

All the time. THat's why I study and pray that the Holy Spirit opens up the scriptures to me more fully.

I too thought the same way you do, and I too would not listen to anything else, until Christ grabbed me and personally taught me otherwise.

Ah, gnosticism... :no:

If you only knew, you would regret so much of what you post here.

Mighty judgemental, aren't we?

Ghandi knew God.

Gandhi was a Hindu :clueless:

http://www.kamat.com/indica/philosophy/gandhi_on_hinduism.htm

He knew Christ.

He knew OF Christ. He is quoted as saying "I like your Christ, but I don't like your Christians"

He abided in Him.

No he did not. He called Jesus "YOUR Christ". When one does not accept Jesus as their Lord, they are not abiding in Him and the Spirit is not dwelling in them.

And no one is damned the way you are using the term.

I forgot that you have a low view of the Bible too...

But I would not have thought so either until I learned that abiding in Bible study is not abiding in Christ. But it takes the latter to truly See.

That's called the fallacy of the excluded middle.

Talking to you is like talking to a boy about childbirth. He can read and read and read and thinks he knows everything, but unless he enters a woman's body and actually gives birth, he knows nothing.

And talking to you is like talking to an auto mechanic about computer theory. You just don't get it.

You know nothing about this, Bill.

Says the heretical gnostic...

May you in this life be blessed with one tiny glimpse of REAL knowing. Amen


Viv

I am already blessed, says my Lord Jesus.

Sorry Sparko. You can split this off into unorthodox if you wish.

[Shadow Phoenix]

Hello AP!

Thank you for this opportunity to respond to your thoughts-



What you are asking me to prove as true is the contention that No where in scripture is it said that Truth is right doctrine!

And here is my proof:





See, nada.
If you have proof to the contrary, I would be happy to discuss it with you.

No. I should have made it more clear, but I'm asking you to demonstrate the fallacy begins when one thinks they have truth because of correct ideas.



I am the Truth. In saying I am the Truth, Jesus is saying he is the embodiment of Truth.

Which doesn't demonstrate the point. I have no problem saying Jesus is the embodiment of truth because I do have a definition of what truth is.

John 3:16-21

I know these things are not easily discernible in the English language, without the mystical guidance of the Risen Christ (as Jesus told Peter, we are blessed when we learn this way instead of learning via the means of flesh and blood.)

But Truth is not something that is learned the way that we go to school and learn facts, but something that we find and embody. You will find the Truth and the Truth will make you free.

I often ask people are you free? If not then you have not yet found the Truth and so you better keep searching.

And so if you are free AP, if you do not think you are in need of the healing and redeeming Power and Authority of God, then you're done! Might as well sit back and enjoy the fruits of freedom.

Sounds really spiritual, but it doesn't explain the point at all. I do not see truth mentioned in John 3:16-21.


If you thought the Bible said 2+2=5, would you believe it? If your interpretation of scripture did not match your personal experience which would you doubt?

My personal experience. I tend to think God is right a whole lot more than I am. Also, is the proposition "2+2=4" true?

You might be able to see if you read for yourself:

http://www.biblegateway.com/keyword/?search=blameless&version1=31&searchtype=all

Psalm 15

Luke 1:6

Ephesians 1:4

Love the assumption that I haven't read the Scripture. Those passive-aggresive techniques kicking in eh? Sorry, but these passages tell me about righteous living, but they do not tell me about the nature of truth.



If you do a word search on Truth, you will find that when Jesus says I tell you the truth, he is speaking almost always about action, and not action and consequences, about the world around us, and in some cases about heaven.

Actually, I find he's talking about doctrine. The great truth is who he is and what he came to do.

When one finds the Truth that makes them free, they find that Truth is not something that is presented in a lecture from a podium.

Interesting since Jesus was a preacher....

Truth is the reality about us and the worlds we find ourselves. Truth is about the intent of creation, what God is trying to accomplish in us and through us. Truth is the Father's work in this world.

Any real definitions of truth here or just talking trying to sound spiritual? Again, I come to a proposition like 2 + 2 = 4. True or not?

We find the Truth when we believe in that which can transform - the Truth being both the transforming Power and Authority and the act of transformation. This is the fulfillment of our purpose, the fulfillment of the Law - that which governs and compels creation towards its certain end. The Law being the mystery of God's Will and how it is being manifested in and through creation, even as we speak now.

Any reason I should believe this really?

All the verses in the Bible that begin I tell you the Truth are speaking about this process, the fulfillment of our purpose, or about hindrances to this process.

Not sure which Bible you're reading exactly....

I tell you the Truth phrases are predominately about right doing or action, not about right doctrine.

Not denying the importance of right living but saying right living will not save you if you do not believe truth. There are passages often in John where the term is about the identity of Christ such as John 8:58.

Check out the link above, AP, with an open heart and let God reveal His Truth to you, via your heart - which requires us to quiet the mind. The mind thinks it knows everything, but it knows nothing.

Does your mind know that the mind knows nothing?


No one can be in the presence of the Holy Spirit that is fully God, except the Son. But you know that. Whatever measure of Holy Spirit we know in this world is dependent on the purity of our hearts.

And do you consider it important that the Holy Spirit is fully God?

For some whose purity is null, they have only their mind with which to seek. For those with a bit of purity, they might sense an inner nudging that cannot be explained. A sense of intuition. For those whose purity is maturing, they might 'hear' actual voices, or see Light or presences around them, guiding them. For those who have reached a certain level of maturity, they will have dreams and visions, and for those reaching maximum maturity, they might find themselves being taken places into the various heavens and seeing things there, such as happened with many Bible figures.

And those who disagree with this are doing nothing more than revealing the state of their own heart, for they themselves have not yet tasted of any degree of the Holy Spirit - or better put, they have not yet recognized the works of the Holy Spirit in them and around them, for their heart has blinded them. [/QUOTE]

*Wonders the relevance of all this.*


Those who do not have the Holy Spirit, yet try to act as though they are righteous, are easily discernible. These are the hypocrites, and include the likes of those who are self-convinced that they have the right ideas or right doctrines about God but do not display the Power of God in and through them, by the workings of his Holy Spirit.

If the Holy Spirit is working in us, we will exhibit the Power of God - in bringing change or transformation to ourselves, and to those with whom we make contact. If those around you are finding transformation - peace and healing and joy, the fruits of the Spirit, then you know that the Holy Spirit is doing its job! [/QUOTE]

Which is just assuming what is to be proven. I see no reason to think that right actions are always the result of the work of the Holy Spirit in sanctification.







Ah new word! Orthopraxy: is a term derived from Greek (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_language) (ὀρθοπραξις) meaning "correct action/activity", and is a religion that places emphasis on conduct, both ethical (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics) and liturgical (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liturgy), as opposed to faith (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faith) or grace (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_grace) etc.This contrasts with orthodoxy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthodoxy), emphasizing a correct belief, and ritualism (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ritualism), the use of rituals.

Orthodoxy simply means right belief irregardless of so-called rituals.

Using these definitions I would say that orthodoxy without the Holy Spirit is orthodoxy or belief and ritual without the Power or God. But orthodoxy with the Holy Spirit, with the presence of the Power of God is orthopraxy. And since orthodoxy without the Holy Spirit is useless, I would say the word orthodoxy is worthless too. And so when we speak of the real things of God the proper word to use is orthopraxy.

It does not follow. Right ideas are not salvific, but if one has right ideas and acts on them, such as in repentance to the true God, then one is on the process of sanctification which results in orthopraxy. Orthopraxy without orthodoxy though is an insult to God.

When we are speaking of things without the Power of God, useless things, or ideas or doctrines of men, we can use orthodoxy.

Thanks AP!

So I would say then that orthopraxy is proof of the presence of the REAL Holy Spirit, and not orthodoxy.

Orthopraxy is the fruit of the Spirit.

Right living will result from the Holy Spirit's work, but right living of itself is not proof of the Holy Spirit working in sanctification. Also, right ideas is not proof either. The demons have a lot of right doctrine. It's both. The belief leads to repentance which justifies and the Holy Spirit works in sanctificaton then.



Good one! I love it when the posters make me look!

Here is what Jesus claims he is, just a few verses before the one your quote...

12When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, "I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life."

This was spoken around a festival when lights were central and especially those of the temple. Jesus's claim was that he was the true light vis a vis the John 1 prologue.

So if we combine the two statements we get...

Unless you believe that I am the Light of the world and follow me, you will die in your sins.

Which I can see some truth to considering how Jesus is described in John 1.

And if we add to this what he says in chapter 3:

18 “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. 21 But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly seen, that they have been done in God.”

We discover that he who does the Truth comes to the Light. And what happens in the Light? Our sins are revealed allowing Grace to heal us and make us whole, perfect.

The revelation of sin is not enough. The repentance of it is necessary.

So using your words, AP, when Jesus talks about belief, he is not talking about orthodoxy is he? He is talking about orthopraxy! Truth is orthopraxy!

No. One does the orthopraxy because they have seen themselves in the light of Christ and repent for they see him as he is. They have the right beliefs about him resulting in orthopraxy.

When I first read your response, I had the impression that perhaps to you, or to some of the posters on this thread, Jesus is a lecturer standing at a podium rattling off ideas and doctrines for you to memorize. This is not the Jesus that I know. The Jesus that I know approached me and shined his Light on me, revealing that I was actually sitting in a gutter - instead of a throne as I supposed! And seeing that I was sitting in a gutter, he then reached his hand out to me and said, I am the Light of the world who has come to heal you, to make you perfect. Believe in me, believe that I am the one who can heal you, that I can rescue you from your pit. Take my hand and follow me to Life!

My Jesus is orthopaxy.


Shalom.

Viv

My Jesus is Lord and God, second person of the Trinity who will judge the world and cast out all who do evil on the last day. I try to live rightly not for his salvation but because of it. It is knowing who he is and trusting that that brings life.

[Vivian]

Hello AP!

Sparko has asked us to keep this on topic, so I will keep my response limited to that purpose...

No. I should have made it more clear, but I'm asking you to demonstrate the fallacy begins when one thinks they have truth because of correct ideas.

It is all over the Bible - those who consider themselves right or justified not because of any real knowing, but from assumptions based on their scriptures, or the birth-right or their belief right.

It is my opinion that the assumption being expressed on this thread - that only those who believe a certain way can have good fruit, and especially only those who believe this certain way can judge what is or is not good fruit (Wow I can't believe that some fall into the egocentric trap, for such an idea is certainly ego- or self- or my belief centric- and not Christ centered. If one makes Christ the center of creation, then all things revolve and relate to Christ whether they are aware of it or not. Meaning that nothing can occur without Christ. Meaning that we are all in the same boat, no matter what we think!) begins with the fallacy that Truth is right ideas.

(Sparko- I hope that is on topic!)

Which doesn't demonstrate the point. I have no problem saying Jesus is the embodiment of truth because I do have a definition of what truth is. I wonder if this is a circular logic situation?

Sounds really spiritual, but it doesn't explain the point at all. I do not see truth mentioned in John 3:16-21.I see what Jesus embodied in every word he spoke.

My personal experience. I tend to think God is right a whole lot more than I am. Also, is the proposition "2+2=4" true?The reality of the situation is that nothing in this world is actually True in and of itself. This world can only embody Truth, and so to me the real question is, is the proposition 2+2=4 useful in accomplishing God's Will for our world? If it is useful, then it is a good tree because it is producing good fruit, and God will let it stand. :smile:



Love the assumption that I haven't read the Scripture. Those passive-aggresive techniques kicking in eh? Sorry, but these passages tell me about righteous living, but they do not tell me about the nature of truth.That is the point of my post. Truth is being transformed into the image of Christ. Truth is living righteously. Truth is being blameless. Truth is walking in obedience. As Jesus said in John 3:21 Truth is something we do.

Actually, I find he's talking about doctrine. The great truth is who he is and what he came to do.Truth in this world is not ideas about Jesus, but what Jesus actually accomplishes. Truth is action, doing, fulfilling.

That is the point of my post. Truth is doing, as Jesus said. Truth is producing good fruit, being transformed into the image of Christ.



Interesting since Jesus was a preacher.... :huh:

You are kidding right? You think that is what he was doing?

Might I suggest that you read the Gospels again, imaging yourself there with him, receiving from him, watching him, and then come and tell me that he was a preacher. In every word that he spoke was the Power and Authority of God, to strip us completely naked, to heal us, to forgive our sins.

Jesus was not preaching. He was exercising the Power and Authority of God to heal and free the captives.

Any real definitions of truth here or just talking trying to sound spiritual? Again, I come to a proposition like 2 + 2 = 4. True or not?Again, nothing in this world is true in and of itself. It is either useful to Truth, or to God's Will or Work or it is not.



Any reason I should believe this really?You are right. You can't believe what you do not know.



Not sure which Bible you're reading exactly....



Not denying the importance of right living but saying right living will not save you if you do not believe truth. There are passages often in John where the term is about the identity of Christ such as John 8:58.Truth is what compels us to live right. If we are not living right, then we certainly do not have the Truth.

John 8:58 Do you have understand what Jesus is saying here? The I AM is the Power and Authority of God to redeem the captives, to heal and set free. Jesus in John 8:58 is saying just this. I AM the Power and Authority of God that can set you free, redeem you, heal you, transform you. Believe that I am that Power and that I can make you free, and you will be made free.

(oops sorry sparko)



Does your mind know that the mind knows nothing?No but my heart does, and when it speaks up, my mind quiets.




And do you consider it important that the Holy Spirit is fully God?Methinks you have no idea what you are talking about.

Tell be about your experiencing of the Holy Spirit that is fully God compared to your experiencing of the Holy Spirit that is not fully God and I will tell you about mine. Or rather I will tell you about the Holy Spirit and the not so holy spirits.


*Wonders the relevance of all this.**wonders why humanity is so arrogant and speaks about things it has no REAL knowledge of*


Which is just assuming what is to be proven. I see no reason to think that right actions are always the result of the work of the Holy Spirit in sanctification. Those who are not responding to the Holy Spirit but to their own self centeredness and self seeking in their attempts to do things "right" are easily distinguishable. When the heart speaks, it cannot hide its true nature.

Even the dullest of us can see. We know in our gut what is good fruit and what is not. Bad fruit that tries to pretend to be good fruit will fall to the ground and shrivel and die, perhaps poisoning those who try to partake.

Good fruit will produce good fruit in those it touches. I keep repeating myself on this one! I know those posting on this thread are not dull - they in their hearts, in their own experiencing, know this is true. We cannot hide behind our fruit. Our fruit will reveal itself. This is why Jesus gave us 'good fruit' as the determining factor.

Orthodoxy simply means right belief irregardless of so-called rituals.



It does not follow. Right ideas are not salvific, but if one has right ideas and acts on them, such as in repentance to the true God, then one is on the process of sanctification which results in orthopraxy. Orthopraxy without orthodoxy though is an insult to God.Are you sure? Did he tell you this?

If we want to check out what scripture says, read Isaiah 1 and Jeremiah 7. Here YHWH condemns Israel, and truly acts very insulted, for their orthodoxy without orthopraxy.

Right living will result from the Holy Spirit's work, but right living of itself is not proof of the Holy Spirit working in sanctification. Also, right ideas is not proof either. The demons have a lot of right doctrine. It's both. The belief leads to repentance which justifies and the Holy Spirit works in sanctificaton then.

Then if one's belief leads to true repentance, it is right belief?

This is what I have been saying all along, without the assumption that true repentence can only come from a belief that looks like mine.

The gut knows, we are not stupid, whether or not someone has truly repented. And Ghandi truly repented. If you get rid of your faulty assumption regarding the supremacy of your own beliefs, you might just see this. And you might be humbled and learn something from this great servant of God's.

This is the tragedy, that you are not learning from the walk of this great man and men like him - that you just discard with one swipe, most of the Holy men of our time with your fallacious assumptions.


This was spoken around a festival when lights were central and especially those of the temple. Jesus's claim was that he was the true light vis a vis the John 1 prologue.



Which I can see some truth to considering how Jesus is described in John 1.



The revelation of sin is not enough. The repentance of it is necessary.Yes! I so agree. If one's beliefs lead them to true repentance, then they are godly beliefs.

No. One does the orthopraxy because they have seen themselves in the light of Christ and repent for they see him as he is. They have the right beliefs about him resulting in orthopraxy.Who Jesus truly is is what we experience of Him, in Him. It is the experience of Him, of His Light, that reveals our true nature. It is not an intellectual exercise, but a gut, a heart exercise, one filled with, first, a moment of the most horrendous grief and afterwards, well that depends on how we respond to Truth.

Check out the end of Job.



My Jesus is Lord and God, second person of the Trinity who will judge the world and cast out all who do evil on the last day. I try to live rightly not for his salvation but because of it. It is knowing who he is and trusting that that brings life.That is an intellectual Jesus. What has Jesus done for you? What is he to you? What is your personal experience of Him? This is Truth.


Shalom.

Viv

[rogue06]

I'm splitting several of these posts from the original thread at the thread-starters request

[Heterodoxus]

Compare, please:

MT 12:33; LK 6:44, indicating how to identify a (by implication) spiritual tree, and
an ancient Japanese proverb: "If you would know the character of a man, look at his friends."


Do not these scriptures and non-biblical proverb speak to an embodiment of "truth" in reality? That a person's spirit and character are demonstrated by/in the things s/he says and does? That the things said and done are indicators of that person's beliefs and thoughts? :huh: