Christ or faith the Savior?

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Jo S

My argument isn't about testing other people, I'm asking how do you determine for yourself if through your mystical practices of "gaining Christ" you are experiencing the Holy Spirit and not a different spirit?

Well you've been testing me, and others in the recovery, and you have tested us, only according to your observation about the practice of calling on the Lord, relating that to chanting, and then further relating that to Eastern religions. This is not an effective method because we could find a false religion that relates to any Christian practice, even yours.

No where have you raised the matter of 1 John 4:2 and 1 Cor 12:3 which indicates to me you are unaware that these tests exist or can be applied to anyone. These are genuine tests because they are written for us, and were written for the churches at that time dealing with false converts in the church.

There are some more tests in Scripture:

We call God "Abba Father" as per Romans 8:15. Only those born of the Spirit can say that.

And there is also the guarantee of Matthew 7:9-11 that if we pray to God He won't give us a demon.

So far in this discussion you have not used or even proposed the tests of Scripture, rather only performed similarity comparisons in relation to your own observations and drawn conclusions based upon that.

Originally Posted by Jo S

In the case of the yogis of the SRF (Self-Realization Fellowship), the fact is they do pass the test as you argue. The mystic practice Yogananda's disciples use in gaining a subjective experience in Jesus' name is called "Jesus prayer meditation". It's also a chant using a short phrase similar to the LC's. The exception being the number of times the phrase is repeated. Instead of 5x as in "Oh, Lord Jesus" these yogis will chant, "Lord Jesus have mercy on me" 6x. The similarity however is the use of the title of "Lord Jesus".

These yogis also believe that Jesus came as an actual historical person. The difference between their beliefs and scriptural doctrine is that they teach Jesus became a spirit or "Christ consciousness" after his ascension into Heaven and that this consciousness is available to us on earth and gained through mystical practices. This is similar to the belief that's found in the LC's profession of faith that after Jesus' ascension, he became "a life giving spirit" and through "calling", Christ as a spirit can live in us. That's not scripture.

Everything you say about them makes them sound Christian to me. And if we believe a Mary-worshipping Catholic is a Christian then surely these people fit the bill as well. They may be like those in Acts 18:26 who needed explaining to them the way "more accurately". They probably could easily past the test of "belief" as well in any John 3:16-based gospel tract. I think they also believe that Jesus is the Son of God and they love Jesus. If they believe in and call on the name of the Lord then maybe they are saved. "Lord Jesus have mercy on me" sounds like the "kyrie eleison". The "Christ consciousness" may just be another name for the Holy Spirit. Compared to some Christians who say the Holy Spirit is merely a "power/force", they at least recognize that Christ left something of Himself on the Earth since he went to the Father.

Earlier in discussion of "brain dead" people you wrote:

Who's then to say in this physical state salvation is not a possibility when the mind's functionality is not confined to measurable brain activity as per NDE testimonies?

So you are open to the possibility of even a comatose person being saved. Why not Yogananda followers as well who, more obviously than a comatose person, display some sort of faith in Christ?

Originally Posted by Jo S

If as you argue, 1 John 4:2 and 1 Cor 12:3 was the absolute test in testing the spirits and not just "a" test, along with the argument that even demons believe, and the unsaved can confess Jesus as Lord (Matthew 7:21-23) then how would you test the validity of your own subjective mystical experiences through practices such as chanting when even non-Christian groups like the SRF do the same things and pass this test as well?

You seem to be doubting the tests of Scripture and leaning on your test which is to test genuine Christianity by comparing with other religions.

Originally Posted by Jo S

Should then the body of Christ accept all groups influenced by eastern mysticim that chant "Lord Jesus" and believe he came as a human being? If so, then I believe the papacy would have legitimate competition in Christian ecumenism.

You are asking whether or not the body of Christ should accept people who call the name of the Lord and believe He came as a human being, and I think the answer to that is yes because they sound like genuine Christians to me:

"Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours:" (1 Cor. 1:2).

I would say those who don't call upon the name of the Lord are the ones who are not Christians, if they cannot confess/call upon His name, they are not truly saved, because the expression follows the genuine faith.

[A little brother]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

No where have you raised the matter of 1 John 4:2 and 1 Cor 12:3 which indicates to me you are unaware that these tests exist or can be applied to anyone. These are genuine tests because they are written for us, and were written for the churches at that time dealing with false converts in the church.

There are some more tests in Scripture:

We call God "Abba Father" as per Romans 8:15. Only those born of the Spirit can say that.

And there is also the guarantee of Matthew 7:9-11 that if we pray to God He won't give us a demon.

You have added additional tests along this discussion. Does someone get a pass by meeting the requirement(s) of just one test or all of them?

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by A little brother

You have added additional tests along this discussion. Does someone get a pass by meeting the requirement(s) of just one test or all of them?

I only added the test of sonship. But the first two are the best I think as they test the spirit from God or not. Tests of fruit or behavior are no where near as reliable. Paul could easily have proposed these sorts of tests for the Corinthians but he didnt. In their case..the Jews appeared to prophesy by the Spirit but they reviled Jesus so it was prophesy by demons. Behavior wise..both false and genuine may have appeared similar so the only reliable test was whether they honored Christ.

[A little brother]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

I only added the test of sonship. But the first two are the best I think as they test the spirit from God or not. Tests of fruit or behavior are no where near as reliable. Paul could easily have proposed these sorts of tests for the Corinthians but he didnt. In their case..the Jews appeared to prophesy by the Spirit but they reviled Jesus so it was prophesy by demons. Behavior wise..both false and genuine may have appeared similar so the only reliable test was whether they honored Christ.

What exactly do the first two tests prove? Hypothetically, if I say "Jesus is Lord, Jesus came in the flesh and is God, WL/LSM's teachings are very wrong", does it mean what I say is from spirit of God?

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by A little brother

What exactly do the first two tests prove? Hypothetically, if I say "Jesus is Lord, Jesus came in the flesh and is God, WL/LSM's teachings are very wrong", does it mean what I say is from spirit of God?

The tests prove if someone has the Spirit of God. The tests are not a test of doctrine or teachings. If we meet those tests, we can be confident that we have God's Spirit, and we don't have to worry about attracting a demon that pretends to be Jesus or the Holy Spirit - we have God's protection and if we ask for the Spirit we won't get a stone. If we pray to and in the name of Jesus, God will not allow a demon to respond and pretend to be Jesus.

[Evangelical]

Jo S's teaching is misguided and wrong. So far they have claimed, corporate prayer is not allowed, cannot say the name of Jesus or same thing more than 3 times that is chanting= eastern religion, cannot sing or shout (what about worship?), short repetitious phrases not allowed, and be careful of doing that because you might get one of the many "other Jesus's" or "other spirits" if you do.

They wrote:
God is a person. Who in solemn communication between each other expresses thanks or requests help by the use of short repetitious phrases? What then makes you think God wants to be communicated to in such a strange manner?

When he demonstrated prayer in Matthew 6:9-13 and in John 17:20-23, it was not done in a repetitious manner. It was not sung nor was it shouted. Neither did he teach us that prayer should be preformed by crowds in unison.

In contradiction to the claims made, it is fairly easy to show from the bible various examples of corporate, short, and singing or shouting prayer:

Short prayer:

Acts 7:59 While they were stoning him, Stephen prayed, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit."

Loud prayer:

Acts 760 And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep.

Singing prayer:

Eph 5:19 Sing and make music from your heart to the Lord,

Corporate prayer:

Acts 4:24 And when they heard it, they lifted their voices together to God and said, “Sovereign Lord, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them, who through the mouth of our father David, your servant, said by the Holy Spiri

Matt 18:19-20
Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them.”

Acts 12:5
So Peter was kept in prison, but earnest prayer for him was made to God by the church.

Acts 1:14 All these with one accord were devoting themselves to prayer,

[A little brother]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

The tests prove if someone has the Spirit of God. The tests are not a test of doctrine or teachings. If we meet those tests, we can be confident that we have God's Spirit, and we don't have to worry about attracting a demon that pretends to be Jesus or the Holy Spirit - we have God's protection and if we ask for the Spirit we won't get a stone. If we pray to and in the name of Jesus, God will not allow a demon to respond and pretend to be Jesus.

Did you wonder why you couldn't give a simple yes or no answer to my question? Because those "tests" you mentioned are not what you think. They are very specific to the situation the apostles were facing at their time. You have over-generalized them as if they apply to all situations.

If the tests were really what you said, probably the LC should change saying 5 times "Oh Lord Jesus" to saying 5 times "Jesus is Lord" in order to be sure they are in the spirit.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by A little brother

Did you wonder why you couldn't give a simple yes or no answer to my question?

No, I didn't wonder. Your post had two questions. I was addressing your first "What exactly do the first two tests prove?" Your second question was rhetorical and was answered by my response to the first:

"The tests prove if someone has the Spirit of God. The tests are not a test of doctrine or teachings."


For example, if someone asked two questions:

"How do I get to the park?" "don't you think parks are nice places?"

Obviously someone would answer the first question as that is what they really want to know. Why would I simply answer "yes" or "no" to the second question and not tell them how to get to the park?

Originally Posted by A little brother

Because those "tests" you mentioned are not what you think. They are very specific to the situation the apostles were facing at their time. You have over-generalized them as if they apply to all situations.

Nonsense. In that case we could say that Jesus's fruit test in Matthew was specific only to the Pharisees and Scribes he was speaking about. Cursing Jesus or not, is general, not specific. If it were specific, then it means that there are cases where a person can curse Jesus "by the Spirit". As this cannot be the case, it must be a general test.

Originally Posted by A little brother

If the tests were really what you said, probably the LC should change saying 5 times "Oh Lord Jesus" to saying 5 times "Jesus is Lord" in order to be sure they are in the spirit.

That's a good point. Sometimes we do say "Jesus is Lord" corporately and in unison and it's something a newcomer might be encouraged to say to see if they are a believer or not. But I think Lord Jesus means the same thing and part of it is in how you say it. If a person said the "Lord" part quickly or only mumbled it then it might indicate something. That is why there is an emphasis on the Lord, as in Loooooord Jesus.

[Jo S]

The answer I've been looking for is; spiritual discernment.

Fruits are spiritual so of course they have to be discerned spiritually. The testing of the fruits through spiritual discernment can be found in Matt. 7:15-20.

Paul's and James' tests are important yet Jesus' was not worth mentioning?

Since you've been arguing the false dichotomy of 1 John 4:2 and 1 Cor 12:3 as being the only tests to know the spirits, your argument is invalid.

The danger here is, being ignorant to this particular scripture and also personally lacking in this gift results in a Christian having to place their trust in a leader's judgment and consequently also their interpretation of scripture.

It also puts you in the place of being naive toward other sects that can and do confess Jesus as Lord and also believe he came in the flesh yet are wolves in sheep's clothing ready to take advantage of your lack of discernment.

Scripture says if anyone comes to you but brings not the whole of his teaching, do not receive him into your home or even greet him. That included the Yogi's from my previous example which preach a perverted gospel.

Tests of fruit or behavior are no where near as reliable

It's not your place to tell anyone that a gift from God is not reliable.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Jo S

The answer I've been looking for is; spiritual discernment.

Fruits are spiritual so of course they have to be discerned spiritually. The testing of the fruits through spiritual discernment can of course be found in Matt. 7:15-20.

Paul's and James' tests are important yet Jesus' was not worth mentioning?

Since you've been arguing the false dichotomy of 1 John 4:2 and 1 Cor 12:3 as being the only tests to know the spirits, your argument is invalid.

The danger here is, being ignorant to this particular scripture and also personally lacking in this gift results in a Christian having to place their trust in a leader's judgment and consequently also their interpretation of scripture.

It also puts you in the place of being naive toward other sects that can and do confess Jesus as Lord and also believe he came in the flesh yet are wolves in sheep's clothing ready to take advantage of your lack of discernment.

Scripture says if anyone comes to you but brings not the whole of his teaching, do not receive him into your home or even greet him. That included the Yogi's from my previous example which preach a perverted gospel.

It's not your place to tell anyone that a gift from God is not reliable.

We don't need a special "gift of spiritual discernment" to be able to discern spirits, we just need to apply the two tests in 1 John or Corinthians. John and Paul did not write "just use your special gift of discernment guys", he gave them a clear cut and simple way to test the spirit. Some Pentecostals claim a special "gift of spiritual discernment" or "word of knowledge" but it's more about spine tingles and superstition than real discernment I think. These same people who claim a gift of discernment or special spiritual knowledge also demand tongues as evidence of being filled with the Spirit.

I already gave the tests for "spiritual discernment". They are stated 1 John 4:

..., but test the spirits to see whether they are from God...

"test the spirit" means "discern the spirit". That's real spiritual discernment right there that doesn't depend upon subjective opinion.

Jesus's test cannot discern whether the spirit is of God or not. If it could, then don't you think John and Paul would have simply said "look at the fruit"? Jesus's test is designed, as He said, to discern false prophets. Discerning a false prophet is different from discerning the spirit of God.

Looking at the fruit is an outward test. The fruit of the Yogi's teaching - peace, love, happiness etc, could be considered good fruit. Therefore the "fruit test" alone could fail. Also, there were many good Pharisees who did many good works, their fruit could be seen as good, but they did not believe in Christ.