the foolishness of God: the radical and contrary nature of love
View related threads:
(in this forum
| in all forums)
|
Logged in as: Guest
|
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
the foolishness of God: the radical and contrary nature... - 7/8/2009 5:56:31 PM
|
|
|
agapist
Posts: 657
Joined: 6/13/2009
Status: offline
|
What Christ gave us with his life, death, and resurrection was a SPIRIT OF ACTION and not a SYSTEM OF BELIEF. His message was about what we ought TO BE and not what we ought TO DO.
The most vital quality of faith is found here: how you believe. The character of how you believe determines the truth of what you believe.
Codifying our beliefs into Creeds, articles of faith, and so forth is a divisive--and worldly--practice; it is the same mistake the Pharisees made. We do not convert to Christianity, to a set of beliefs we must follow, we revert to what God intended us TO BE: His spitting image and likeness.
The Law was there as tutor, to demonstrate the need of salvation by grace; our beliefs are intended to do the same: to bring us to Christ ready to fully surrender to BEING as Christ, to live and move and have our BEING in him...and not bond to written ordinances (col2:14).
There are NO Christian standards, ethics, or morals--there is only Christ, the Standard-bearer, "and as he was, so are we in the world." Life is to be found only IN Christ and then the Father does the work directly. Any standard, ethic, or moral cannot be removed from his person to live by.
Do you see the distinction?
To realize you are "the light of the world" is perfect humility.
(This is somewhat shaking introduction. I have yet to touch specifically on the radical and contrary nature of love but the above is decent groundwork.)
yours in Christ, agapist
|
|
|
|
|
RE: the foolishness of God: the radical and contrary na... - 7/8/2009 7:41:00 PM
|
|
|
agapist
Posts: 657
Joined: 6/13/2009
Status: offline
|
The Bible is a chidlren's book. Each chapter and verse, every joy and tittle gently urges us to Grow Down, to BECOME as little children, for it is only through the eyes of a little child that we have a vision of truth.
To be as a little child is not an attitude we take; it is a total state of being.
The little child does not contemplate or adjust itself to acting innocently. Innocence is not a standard for the little child; the little child IS innocence; action and being are inseparable. This is how we are in Christ.
The little child is the next page of our wisdom and the final word on love.
I could say, to look more broad-minded, that no knows God BETTER than the little child, yet that is not quite right. In truth, no one knows God BUT the little child.
There is no firmer grasp of truth to be found than in the little child's open hand.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: the foolishness of God: the radical and contrary na... - 7/8/2009 8:35:48 PM
|
|
|
agapist
Posts: 657
Joined: 6/13/2009
Status: offline
|
Love, truth, and humility are so intricately interwoven that you cannot remove one without unraveling and destroying the fabric of the other two. Whenever I mention one of these and I am also speaking of the other two.
The first quality of love is this: it has no hierarchy of endearment. Mother or brother, child or neighbor, friend or enemy are all equals in the eyes of love.
When we speak of Christ being the fulfillment of the law and prophets, we are saying that truth, as presented in the Bible, has an end, both in its purpose and its demise, in Christ. Life is only in the being of Christ. Christ is truth. Christ is The Word.
Love has nothing to do with how we think or feel. God is love. Love is the presence and activity of God through the open channel of our will. There is only one true action we can ever take: surrender.
Seek only surrender as the way, complete abandonment to divine providence, and do not engage in the folly of striving for perfection or self-improvement.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: the foolishness of God: the radical and contrary na... - 7/8/2009 9:48:42 PM
|
|
|
agapist
Posts: 657
Joined: 6/13/2009
Status: offline
|
It is popular today, and deemed enlightened, to say to our children (and in the mirror, to ourselves), "Create your own reality...you can be anything you want to be."
I admit that does sound enlightened, but as far as I can see who you are as you are in essence is far, far greater than anything you could ever make of yourself or even dream to be. In fact, making something of yourself is a symptom of humanity's Fatal Flaw.
That last statement will not hurt in a minute, if you read on.
You are an alien. Your are not of this world. Your ancestry cannot be traced to some Alphebet Primordial Soup of genetic possibilities; you go back mush further than that.
You are not the subject of any realm or citizen of any country by birth: you are a naturalized earthling.
Yet I am not pointing to some far, far distant galaxy as the place of your origin; I am pointing at you.
Within you is the place of your actual birth, the kingdom of God. This is your home, your true ground of existence. Your family tree is rooted in heaven.
Long before the foundations of the world were laid you existed as a brilliant spark of divine potential in the mind of God. In fact, you were there for the "Big Bang" (the singularity of Christ's creativity), the very thought of you enough for its explosive charge.
As you are of the mind of God and as God is love, the DNA of your soul is love. Love is who you are in essence, a unique and precise expression of his likeness, love.
Thus it is safe for you to declare, Amo ergo sum...I love, therefore I am.
Love is the I am both of God and man.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: the foolishness of God: the radical and contrary na... - 7/8/2009 9:57:36 PM
|
|
|
slushie
Posts: 2205
Joined: 4/30/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
Love is the I am both of God and man.
Is that sentence right? Should it be "Love is the I am, both of God and man"?
Last post, there are some errors in spelling. Alphabet instead of Alphebet, much instead of mush.
Go easy on the semicolons. I notice that you use a lot. Be careful not to overuse them. In some spots it would be better to separate them into two different sentences rather than add yet another semicolon.
Quotations around "Amo ergo sum" as it is something that you're saying.
That's only punctuation/capitalization/grammar wise. Will wait for Elena to come back... did you read what we said in the other thread?
_____________________________
Testify to Love
|
|
|
|
|
RE: the foolishness of God: the radical and contrary na... - 7/9/2009 8:05:19 PM
|
|
|
Mark0
Posts: 107
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline
|
I like your writings, Agapist. They are bold. However, I would post them separately for effect. It helps to solidify thought, or to centralize the subject at hand, Thanks,
Mark
_____________________________
I'm on Facebook at mark0
http://theessentialpart.blogspot.com
|
|
|
|
|
RE: the foolishness of God: the radical and contrary na... - 7/10/2009 9:51:29 AM
|
|
|
Mark0
Posts: 107
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline
|
Ah so. Thanks Elena. I'm hip.
Mark
_____________________________
I'm on Facebook at mark0
http://theessentialpart.blogspot.com
|
|
|
|
|
RE: the foolishness of God: the radical and contrary na... - 7/18/2009 9:34:42 PM
|
|
|
agapist
Posts: 657
Joined: 6/13/2009
Status: offline
|
Thank you Marko, I appreciate your comments. And I apologize for the delay in responding. I must confess to feeling somewhat defeated over the dearth of responses. My comments usually evoke very lively and sometimes intense discussions. The boldness you mentioned sometimes puts people off and seems to lead to misunderstandings about what I am saying. When I say these things in Bible Study or in conversations, there is the opportunity to delve more deeply; just laying them out there without backup is difficult.
I guess what I was looking for were comments that reflected an in-depth look at what I was saying, letting me know their understanding of these snippets I am writing and the import as it pertains to faith in Christ.
I will have some more on the radical nature of love tomorrow.
yours in Christ,
Agapist
|
|
|
|
|
RE: the foolishness of God: the radical and contrary na... - 7/20/2009 3:37:35 PM
|
|
|
Elena1030
Posts: 2104
Joined: 6/21/2006
From: Music City, USA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: agapist
I guess what I was looking for were comments that reflected an in-depth look at what I was saying, letting me know their understanding of these snippets I am writing and the import as it pertains to faith in Christ.
As far as I know, the purpose of this particular area of the forums -- Writers Roundtable -- is not to debate/discuss the validity of the content offered, other than as it is presented and supported in the writing. Here we discuss the composition and structure of the writing... and its quality. Not so much the concepts, theses, arguments themselves.
That doesn't mean that someone wouldn't include that aspect in his/her critique. Just that it's not the usual modus operandae around here... especially of those of us who regularly post more in-depth critiques.
If you want the concepts themselves to be discussed, perhaps posting them in General Faith (or other appropriate area) and frame the posting in such a way that it elicits discussion (usually by asking a question of your readers). (What gets spiritual writings moved over here to Writers Roundtable is the lack of a "hook" to elicit discussion.)
Here's what I found in General Faith... posted by one of our moderators, ta_mosquito, that helps explain Writers Roundtable's purpose:
quote:
ORIGINAL: ta_mosquito
It has come to our attention that General Faith is not the place to publish Bible studies, devotionals, etc. due to copyright issues. (Salem Web Network is allowed to use anything you write in the forums for whatever purpose it sees fit - please see TOS 8 on this.)
That type of thread/topic should be posted in Writers Roundtable, where original works like that are allowed.
Please refrain from beginning new threads or making posts of this nature. Consider General Faith a place for discussion, not a place to publish your writings or meditations.
I realize this is a fine line to walk, since a lot of times OP's are meditative or the poster's thoughts. Here's a good rule of thumb: if your OP asks a question or gives a thought that others can answer, it's OK for this folder. It's a discussion starter. If your OP is a thought/meditation that others can read and maybe comment on but not answer or really discuss, it goes in Writers Roundtable.
Hope that helps -- so that you can get the most out of your experiences here in the forums. 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Will be back later with suggestions about the writings themselves.
_____________________________
Prayer thread for singles who desire to marry someday
|
|
|
|
|
RE: the foolishness of God: the radical and contrary na... - 7/28/2009 12:09:17 AM
|
|
|
agapist
Posts: 657
Joined: 6/13/2009
Status: offline
|
The beach as a fun place to be was beyond the seven year old mechanics of my brain, housed in its highly combustible fair-skinned suit. What was the sense of it? Just passing an exposed 90 watt lightbulb I was reddened--and they expected me to romp in the surf!
And what was the reward?
Trudge across an old wooden boardwalk with a kazillion splinters that had homing devices, and then over 100 yards of blistering sand with hidden shards of broken seashells (also armed with homing devices) to arrive at an eye-stinging body of water that had slimy green things floating on it ready to strangle you or turn you to mulch, that is, if the jellyfish, sharks, or undertow did not kill you first. Fun? Was the whole of Queens palying a joke on me?
My extended family would rent this sprawling wooden mansion by the ocean in Rockaway Beach, Queens. It was this late 1800s hotel a drinking buddy of my uncle Jimmy had inherited and let fall apart. The "rent" was a case of Jack Daniels and seventeen young cousins doing repairs, all of us housed in the "dungeon"; a wonderfully dank and salty cool maze of cubbyholes for the "slaves," who barely lefted a hammer all summer.
I loved all my cousins, aunts, uncles, and my family...but they all loved the beach so I did not see them much. I would go down 113th working the shaded porches where the sensible old people sat drinking iced drinks and waiting for someone just like to tell a story to and see the awe. "Really!" was the one word they seemed to truly love.
This was not completely done to avoid the sun and listen to great stories about "the good old days." I was excruciatingly shy and introverted. It was common to find me at family gatherings or parties sitting in a closet, reading a book by this pen-flashlight I carried everywhere. This is yet another area in which I was unlike my entire, and I mean that literally, family, who were all fun-loving, easy-going, and quick-witted. My foibles provided much fodder for kind-hearted jokes meant to lighten my mood and get a chuckle from those present. It did not help.
As you may have guessed, I had a rich (substitute) fantasy life, my own little world that I treasured. And I had wanderlust bad, traveling subways and buses, following roads and rivers just to see new places and find the source, where each began. I did not understand that, not then, but it was compelling.
My dreams were extraordinary affairs, rich with symbology, vibrant characters, and majestic scenary; something I am still amazed at. Of course, the "symbology" part I was not aware of as a child; that came in college, in a Psychology class entitled "Dream Interpretation."
I had shared my dreams exactly twice before this class. The first time was at nine with my older brother, who in the end only shook his head and said, "Oh, boy." The second time was with my closest buddy in high school; he just commented "Uh-huh." But those memories of "are-you-some-kinda-nut" reviews were unfortunately absent when I blithely related the same sequential dream I had in the earlier two instances.
In the middle of my unguarded and exuberant recitation, a student said, "Get outta here. No kid never mind no adult could have a dream like that." I recall thinking, "I bet he's from Brooklyn." The Porfessor, however, was totally enchanted and begged me to continue. He was astonished but not incredulous. He asked, "Have you always dreamed like that?" "Well," I started, glancing around to see if anyone had a ripe tomato, "they started just after I...met God when I was seven."
<To be continued>
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
