[aron]

Originally Posted by Ohio

aron, you sure have taken a sour turn as of late. Sorry if I contributed in any way. I have tried to address your complaints about using the word "experience of Christ." I have chased down the rabbit holes of a lion fight, the Judas kiss, a yo-yo dieter, etc. and each time either misunderstanding or watching you move on. You seem to be so anti-Lee, that a basic statement of "experiencing Christ" causes you to suit up for battle.

Now you bash Igzy and I as being in a "faultless, untouched and untouchable, oblivious and exalted state." These comments really take this discussion outside the realm of meaningful discourse. From my distant vantage, it seems that ... once again ... poster bitterness against Lee is turned on those whose views may differ slightly. That's unfortunate, but just how it is sometimes, so I would like to end my thread discussion here. Can't see anything good coming out of it. Peace. Sorry.

To Ohio,

In my defense, you posted

Originally Posted by Ohio

You have been watching too many commercials on TV.

They used to say that "sex sells," but over the course of time, they have found that "stupid sells" even more.

Pay careful attention to what you see. And read on forums.

a long time ago and I didn't respond in kind. What is the "crazy eyes" or "nutty face" moniker supposed to represent? Me, or my ideas? What is the comment "stupid sells" supposed to represent: me or my ideas? I didn't get all in a huff about it. I carried on. Suddenly when the attention turns to the quality of your ideas, you get offended. Not only that, but you're perfectly happy to "bash" WL, WN, the Blendeds, or TC or whomever, but when the attention turns to the deficiencies of your ideas you get insulted. Think about that for a second... it looks like the argument is slipping away from you, and suddenly you don't want to be part of the conversation any more.

I have consistently carried one theme, and that is that trying to assess one's experiences while partway through them is vanity. So the existence of "the experience of Christ" is something that can be posited, ontologically, i.e. something that exists. Water exists, and water is "wet", therefore when I take a shower I get wet. Right? Christ exists, and we Christians hear and obey, therefore we experience Christ. Right? I simply said, So what? What if anything does it add? Zip. Does talking about "the experience of Christ" equal an additional experience of Christ? No, I say. So, what does it take away, to hold it up as a one-size-fits-all metric of the Christian journey? A lot, I say.

So I carried it through rabbit holes, eh? The story of a man fighting a lion was from the OT. That man was one of David's three "mighty men". He didn't get called mighty until the fight was over. The fight isn't over. The "food" analogy came from Igzy. I responded, arguing that by saying "food" (or writing it, or reading it) it's not the same thing as the object itself or the experience of consumption. One has positive caloric (nutritional) value, one has negative. And Jesus also said, "Don't be hearers of the word but doers" -- I had pointed out the difference between saying and doing, and Igzy replied that it was if I'd said that "food does not exist", when I never implied such a thing. I just said that ideas of fallen but redeemed sinners about God's word, and the divine reality the words present are not always synonymous. Ideas without action are vain. To say, today, "I experience Christ", to me, is like saying "I have laid hold", when Paul wisely said, "I have not yet laid hold" (Phil 3:12,13). Orson Welles (I'm dating myself) said, "We do not judge any wine before its time". Anyone who claims to "experience Christ" today is making judgments that belong to God, and made at the end of the race. To me it seems presumptuous, pure and simple.

The yo-yo dieter remark is likewise not a rabbit hole. I saw Oprah Winfrey trying to lose weight, and she had a big celebration on national tv on her show, when she could finally shoe-horn herself back into her slinky jeans. But 8 months later she was pudgy again. I realized that the very act of self-congratulation was indicative of instability (need for approval) which ultimately wouldn't work, and back to the binge eating again. Surprise, surprise. Someone so smart, talented, driven and successful as Oprah couldn't see this. And at the base of it, that's my critique: we simply can't see clearly enough to make true and valid assessments. So why waste our time doing so? Unless we want to sell books, and so forth. Today I know something of WL's motive, in it all. What is yours? I guess we won't find out.

What's my motive? I don't like the idea. Igzy had told OBW that he was in the minority and the burden of proof was on him. No, he'd said it was a bad idea and he didn't want to "eat the pudding", to use Igzy's phrase. Now Ohio and OBW are at least temporarily gone, and Igzy is on one side and I on the other. No more minority.

Igzy says that he can tell what is a genuine experience of Christ and what is illusion, that this comes with maturity. I say that circumspection comes with maturity, and we no longer presume to claim things that don't belong to us. In the LCs we would say, "In Christianity they believe into Jesus, and hope to go to heaven, but here we 'experience Christ'!" And we would all smile and nod and say, "amen". But looking back it was illusion. It was something WL taught, and WL was God's oracle so it was real, so we thought. I'm now out of the LC and still don't see any substance behind the expression. It's like saying that a tower, half-built, is a tower. No, it's half a tower. Jesus said that if you don't finish building it, people will come by and mock you. Don't give speeches about your tower-buiding prowess, half-way through building it.

I think that I've been consistent in my argument. If I've been insulting or belittling then I apologize. If I've projected my own failures and loss onto others, I'll admit that. It's entirely possible -- maybe I have a string of half-built towers behind me, and I'm blaming Igzy for his, when he doesn't have any! In fact, that is my point (yet again!): that we are incapable of making objective assessments of what is in front of us or around us or in us. Here on this thread, I simply react to Igzy and Ohio, and vice versa. But I don't presume that my reaction perforce equals objective reality. I'm still warped, or colored, by the fall of Adam, and my own unresolved issues. Those issues didn't vanish completely the day I said, "Lord Jesus". And there is no day here in the flesh of sin (so I argue) that we're so "mature" that our ideas, arguments, or assessments take on oracular status. Those who think that all their discernment issues are resolved and what they say equals truth (i.e. "today I am experiencing Christ!") may want to check scripture again. There are simply too many cautionary tales littering the Bible, for my comfort. Those are words of warning and OBW was pointing out something like this, and I agreed with him. I still agree with his point.

And I am not saying that confessing Jesus is vain. I have believed and confessed, and I try to obey. But I don't make value judgments about my progress, while on the way.