 |
| 1 John 4: 1 Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out. |
One thing which has caught attention for the past few months has been "Kundalini," which apparently is (as best my very limited understanding presently extends, and perhaps yet mistaken) a form of mystical, Hindi yoga which does often entail spiritual manifestations. Such manifestations as convulsing, twitching, writhing on the floor, falling to the ground in a state of semi-conscious euphoria (unable to get back up, for varied spans of time), uncontrollable laughter or weeping, acting as and making noises of animals, shaking uncontrollably, and...well, seemingly everything that characterizes modern charismatic "revivals."
And it's "transmitted"/ brought about by either a) being in the presence of someone who has had that "awakening experience" within themselves and who practices the form of it regularly or b) the laying on of hands, by a person who has had such an "awakening experience."
Indistinguishable from modern charismatic revival experiences, if only at extreme:
There's no conviction of sin. There's no reverence for God. There's no concern for sinners. It's all about manifestation of supernatural experience, unto a spiritual "high." And healing: spiritual, mental, and emotional. And apparently, there are even those who seek this sort of awakening which attribute the potential for physical healing to the experience.
So, yeah. I don't know.
And reading through 1 Samuel today, reading commentary in my study Bible...going through the story of Saul tracking David and Samuel: coming to the school of prophets, those Saul had sent and even Saul, himself, were overcome and began to prophecy.
Scripture records Saul as being so overcome that he apparently ended up exposing himself (to some extent) publicly, falling to the ground, and being in some state of semi-conscious incapacitation overnight, under the spirit of prophecy.
The commentary made a point of highlighting this as an example of the Lord sending the Holy Spirit in judgment. The fellow noted that the Holy Spirit can come in blessing or in judgment, but in instances such as Saul's--where he was incapacitated and entirely overwhelmed, and unfortunately without repentance--the Holy Spirit was making a display of judgment (even as, prior, he was driven mad, in ways, by the spirit which was vexing him).
The judgment seemed discernible in that there was no increased fellowship with nor reverence for the Lord, no repentance. Just incapacitation, as being entire overwhelmed by God.
Made me wonder, though, in terms of much of what's going on in charismatic circles.
As a testament to how seductive and insidious are the sorts of spiritual manifestations which come, but not of God:
What little I've read of Kundalini "awakening" makes it sound as though it's an entirely pleasant experience which fills people with a sense of connectedness with all things and of "love" (for most people--some apparently lose their minds, however), And some folks apparently make it a lifelong pursuit to further awaken, to reach higher pinnacles of the experience. It's a natural spiritual high, in other words (unless you're one of those who end up with a broken mind, because of it).
And apparently people do reverence the danger of it, still--acknowledging that it is a force beyond themselves (even if originating within self, according to tradition) and that it must be approached with reverence, for the fear of knowing it can break one's mind.
But, yeah. There are apparently bits and pieces out there of people who equate the Holy Spirit with Kundalini awakening, because of how "good" it seems. Which, there's no point of getting into any sort of breakdown on that, right now.
Seriously.
Just...not everything which is supernatural is of God. Period. So, without discernment--discernment which accords wholly with Scripture, according to interpretation given by the Holy Spirit...
...how to tell?
All I know is that Christ came to make a way for us to be reconciled with the Father, with God. Because our sins prevent us approaching Him, otherwise. It's just not possible to fellowship with Him, to know Him face-to-face, except that sin is done away with.
Because serving self goes entirely against serving God. Just as esteeming self contradicts esteeming God. It's definitively impossible for a heart to love God (as to know Him) and esteem self highly, as independent of Him. This, because to esteem self highly ultimately equates to refutation of who God is. Lowliness of spirit, in other words, comes even by way of beginning to revere God, to know truth. Meekness, also. And humility. Even unto brokenness, of sorts.
Those are the only ways to be capable of coming to Him, even as they are the result of having experienced His glorious presence, in truth and spirit.
Just as He didn't come to heal those who are well, because those who are well refuse to acknowledge any need of healing, thus refuse healing.
He came to give sight to the blind, not the seeing. For those who know themselves blind know their need of sight, while those who believe themselves able to see are effectively blind to their need for revelation.
In terms of Kundalini, I know it's only by grace that I'd not heard of it prior to these past few months. If I'd wandered across it, years prior, I'd have certainly embarked upon that course. Because it promises spiritual/mental/emotion healing. It promises growth. It promises sight to the spiritually blind. It promises enlightenment. Without requiring any sort of compromise. Without requiring anything except self-sufficiency, and I used to have that in abundance. Even as I sought all those other things, before and unto Christ.
But that's the distinction. He gives sight to those who know they are blind. Not to those who believe themselves capable of attaining sight.
He heals those who are aware of their desperate need of a physician. Not those who believe themselves capable of securing healing on their own terms, by their own efforts.
He does not force Himself upon anyone, is how it seems.
And it then goes back to who Christ said He was (i.e., who He is): He did make plain His claim to be God. He told some folks, "...before Abraham was, I am." And made it very plain to the Pharisees that He could forgive sins--something well-known as an attribute of God, alone (not even the priests could forgive sins, such that the sacrificial system of atonement was part of their carriage of office), as "which is easier to say, 'Your sins are forgiven?' or 'Get up and walk,'" before then telling the man to get up and walk, as an evidence that He could forgive sin.
They crucified Him for what they believed was blasphemy, is all, and He didn't argue the point--He was equating Himself with God (as with telling the disciples that "I and the Father are one"), and that was absolutely infuriating to those in power, given that He was capable of performing such signs and wonders as justified the claim per observable phenomena. The folks in religious authority (in a theocracy, God-ruled, those closest to God were the highly esteemed figures of authority) were being threatened, and they couldn't see a way of reconciling what they knew of Scripture with what they were seeing, in Jesus. So, He had to go.
But in doing so, in crucifying Him, they ended up ratifying the new covenant through Christ's blood. The covenant which allows us to be reconciled to God, drawn miraculously out of rebellion. Unto His love. Into His grace. Under His authority, gladly.
Knowing He is sovereign and we are not was something which was utterly detestable a thought, prior to conversion. It was, at the very least, an idea which was discarded as a relic--discarded as something which certainly couldn't hold weight, in a world-system which makes it possible for nearly anyone to do nearly anything they desire, at nearly any time (within reason of accessible means, granted, even as such means are variably accessible according to effort and design). At the very least, the idea of God as sovereign was held at arm's length, in terms of acknowledging the co-equal sort of self-sovereignty perceived per my own prior irreverent desires and designs upon life, flagrantly sought and enacted.
I never knew I was even at odds with God, for all those many years. I thought we were...somehow, in some strange way...on some sort of weird equal turf, just because I wanted to love people and wanted the best for them, even at my own expense.
And with Kundalini-sort of practices, that's an especially seductive line of reasoning. Believing one's spiritual efforts bring one to a higher state of awareness of the universal all allows for the deepening of a misconception of one's own inherent goodness, entirely independent of God. Unto erroneous sense of either co-equality or eventual belief that all is innately intertwined, thus it must be ultimately irrelevant if there are varying shades of difference in expression: As all things have a common denominator, then the assumption comes that they will all have equivalent finality.
Spirits such as Kundalini seek to make all things equal. They seek to bring God to our level, so as to esteem ourselves to His.
Which, according to some of what I'd perused by a Justin Peters, this past week...is entirely what certain of the most influential, wide-reaching "ministries" are also doing, nowadays, explicitly.
There's apparently a "Little gods doctrine" that is prevalent in mainstream "Christianity" (in quotations, as such a doctrine effectively identifies the movement as inherently anti-Christian, thus not Christian), nowadays. Where folks like Creflo Dollar are saying that we're created according to the same "kind" as God is, such that the direct implication is that we are, in ourselves, "little gods," of some sort.
And the truth of the matter is, so long as we're outside of Christ--unreconciled to God, unregenerate, unrepentant beings...we do act as though we are "little gods," because we effectively ignore (at best) and maliciously rebel against (at worst?) God's sovereignty, in favor of preferring to believe ourselves capable of effecting rightful, good direction for ourselves (and perhaps even those within scope of our "realm of influence") in imitation of the same form as that which is actually solely God's domain. Which is wherein those who are unregenerate are "children of Satan," for behaving in much the same manner as he did, has, and does. He attempted/attempts the same sort of lifestyle unto a perception (delusion) of action and effect "independent of God."
God allows that delusion, though. I don't understand it, honestly, as to why: I wouldn't have the patience. I wouldn't have the long-suffering. I wouldn't have love sufficient to even allow such a brief span of so blatant and vociferous disregard and blatant contempt to go unchecked and without much all remark. There's no joy in knowing the pain to come for those who live as such, though. Seriously.
Even as I still really wonder whether the reality of hell may be very much a matter of having to endure the all-consuming love of someone utterly and wholly despised: without end, without exception, without abatement, without mitigation, without reply, without being able to either move away or be shielded from it...for all eternity. The loathing against Him is so intrinsic, so deep-set, so beyond mitigation (even if largely unexpressed or wholly unrecognized, as mine was: as all ours usually is)...enduring His unwavering love--so powerful and overwhelming and all-consuming a force as it is--then and forevermore, unmitigated and unending...? ...that would be like being in a lake of fire which never extinguishes.
I don't know what it is about passing from the physical to the spiritual realm which cements our being, forevermore. But that's how He's designed things, it seems. That's how He's made them, according to the Bible, from what I read. Such that our spiritual state, upon physical demise, will be eternally augmented into its natural state of completion, there cemented.
But that's all the more reason why stuff like Kundalini and modern "Christianity" are all the more insidious and thus destructive: They yield a modicum of what seems to the unregenerate spirit to be refinement and increase and power, unto attainments of a higher state of "good." "Good," as judged solely by personally observed, personally experienced, personally remarked fulfillment of desires (whether financial, emotional, mental, physical, spiritual, or social): no objective basis of justification sought, ultimately: anything of external justification is largely conceived as a positive experience, only, per seeking means to a greater fulfillment of desires, higher plains of observable personal achievement, a more complete enlightenment. Unto some manner of experientially observable successes.
It's all about self, in other words. With God...at best...perceived as some sort of a "cohort" or "accessory." And...at worst...entirely discounted, disregarded, and maligned (as with forms of humanism such as militant athiesm).
Look to Christ, though. He was (is) God in flesh. And He acknowledged that, openly. He didn't force that upon people, though. He was (is) who He was (is), and people were given to either accept, reject, or ignore--same as they are, still, and ever were.
His hope perhaps has always been for fellowship, though, according to proper order. We've never been co-equals with Him, as we weren't designed to be (established authority, per the edict regarding the tree of knowledge, entirely proves our position of subjugation--the requisite nature of obedience unto Him wasn't questioned but accepted as due Him, only we disobeyed). Yet, He has sought to reconcile, in Christ, even as we rebelled and have continued to rebel, since our very beginning.
Christ was (is) God as man, though. The only incarnation of God.
Whereas sometimes God has used various men as His spokespersons (Moses, all the prophets, prophets still), they were merely representatives, acting on His behalf. Just as God told Moses, since he refused to speak to Pharaoh but asked for a spokesperson, then Moses would be to Aaron as God was to Moses: meaning only that God wouldn't deal directly with Aaron, but with Moses. So, Moses was "as god" to Aaron on in terms of relating God's edicts to Aaron, rather than Aaron having opportunity to hear directly from God: this, and not that Moses had any authority inherent himself, to make him equal to God in any way--merely, Moses directly communicated with God, was directly accountable to Him (consciously, continually, to a higher degree than Aaron), directly reported to God, received direct communication and orders from God, and was responsible for directly, faithfully communicating those messages from the mouth of God unto Aaron, and ultimately unto the people.
This, just as the judges, the kings (again, in a theocracy, where God was known as the ultimate authority in the nation then anyone beneath Him who held authority was viewed as His representative before the nation), the Old Testament prophets were all "acting as a representative of God" to the nation, to the people.
This is the only sense in which people have ever been called "gods," in the Bible. Not in the sense that they/we were/are somehow, in and of themselves/ourselves, co-equal in any capacity with God. Not in regard to His holy nature, transcendence, or sovereignty, and especially not in terms of possessing creative power in and of themselves/ourselves (like with the aberrant "Word of Faith" stuff).
We don't create ex nihilo. We can't create something from nothing, as God does. Because we're not God. Nor are we gods. And as with things such as "Word of Faith" manifestations, it's practicing witchcraft, using the Bible as the source-book for "incantations." Which...is it really necessary to even go further with exposition of how utterly horrendous that is, how completely, irreconcilably depraved?
Please, just pray to be delivered, if you're involved in that sort of mentality (do you feel you have to be careful what you say, for reasons other than desire to please God?, for instance), pray for deliverance for those who are trapped thereabouts. The Lord had mercy on me, and I did blatantly, flagrantly practice witchcraft. Witchcraft which wasn't based in ritual (although I did periodically dabble in that bit), but in exercise of will. Through speech. Through thought. But largely through intent--through even spoken words of affirmation. Which is precisely the way in which "Word of Faith" is practiced, or I'd likely not recognize it as occult.
I was probably drawn in by "Word of Faith" preaching--as in the church where I began attending, 2012 and again last year (upon moving back to WV/VA)--because it was familiar territory. Where words hold weight, per faith in them--distinct from submission to the will of God and seeking Him in all things, first--there's self-idolatry involved, at the very least. But where such words and "intent" are used with the design of "holding God to His promises" as a means of personal gratification, satisfaction, or glorification?...it's witchcraft, y'all.
Per wiki:
Witchcraft (also called witchery or spellcraft) broadly means the practice of, and belief in, magical skills and abilities that are able to be exercised individually, by designated social groups, or by persons with the necessary esoteric secret knowledge.Again, this wherein the Bible is used as a book of incantations, such that the "esoteric knowledge" involves a searching for "promises" to invoke. Because, you know..."words have power in and of themselves, when used properly" (i.e., "spoken in faith"). Because, according to that mentality, we are sovereign in our own right: so long as we attain to the right knowledge then God is obligated to us, rather than the other way around, is what that ends up equating to. Believing oneself thus co-equal with (actually, moreso practically dominant of) God--even if unconsciously--is the most presently pervasive, insidious, and blasphemous bit of practice thus far witnessed and borne revelation of...as being witchcraft in the church, under the guise of Christianity. To such extent that some, such as Kenneth Copeland, have been vocal about making such claims--even as direct implication--of being equal with Christ, with God.
But, again--believing you're somehow presently co-equal with Christ, yet claiming "faith" or "knowledge of the promises of God" somehow empowers you to "hold God to His promises" effects a position of dominance over God. Practically speaking. All this, using Scripture to contrive justifications for such things is absolute blasphemy.
Much the same as those who once called Christ possessed of demons, an agent of the devil. And of those who accused Him of blasphemy, who themselves were fine with expressly practicing belief in their own divinity, per misinterpretation/misapplication of Scripture, as evidenced by the fact that they had the audacity to accuse God incarnate of blasphemy. This, as so finely outlined through Christ's answer of a charge of blasphemy (recorded by Luke) by referring to the Psalm which makes remark "ye are gods:" attempting to make evident the depths of such hypocrisy inherent charging blasphemy against God incarnate, per unmasking the assumption that they, themselves, were somehow more divinely oriented than He, as to be in position to condemn Him: this, despite that He had not prior even made remark upon their pervasive blasphemy, which could only have been completely apparent to Him all the while.
If His accusers knew God, they would have recognized Christ as God--they would not have maligned Him so readily, nor esteemed themselves so highly in being apt to malign Him. But they didn't know God, was the point--they thus readily denied Christ's divinity (same as these false prophets such as Copland are presently doing), because it blatantly made plain that their own "perceived divinity" was absolutely false, being self-referential, self-derived, and self-established, thus wholly unsubstantiated as existing entirely "separate from," thus opposed to, the one true God.
So, it makes sense that Christ attempted to open their eyes by confronting them with the reality of the situation, as to draw their attention to the fact they were acting as though they had right over Him to judge Him, despite that He was God, in truth, wholly opposed to the nature of their being capable of equating themselves co-equal with God, in theory alone. This attempt to bring truth to the fore was continually made throughout Christ's earthly ministry--in varying ways--given He desires that none would perish.
Asking those particular people to reconcile the hypocrisy inherent their then-immediate charge of blasphemy against reality was an attempt at mercy, is all, rather than solely confrontation of their attempt to deify humanity or undermine His existent divinity. Truth brings inherent conflict in logic to light, perforce its nature, and Christ was attempting to do so for them, even as He continues to do so in the world today.
Hypocrisy oft refuses to release the mask, though, reverting to rage upon being confronted with inherent flaws in logic (wherever there is falsity of any sort, logic is flawed; otherwise, falsity could not be held as true). Except by the grace of God, in instance as He so deigns, that rage will not naturally abate into a willingness to consider alternate viewpoints. That rage generally abates only per further self-justification and rationalizations away from whatever concept/s initially upset the flow of delusion. I know this intimately, for having been time and again delivered from hypocrisies, and for continuing to battle against temptation in that direction, regularly.
Christ was pointing out the inherent illogicality of their position, inherent that their general system of action and belief allowed that they act and believe (even unconsciously) as though they were gods, in their own right, yet when He presented Himself as God, in spirit and truth (for His signs and wonders attested to the truth of His claim), they became irate and accused Him, but never themselves, of blasphemy.
And these all other false religions, false gospels, false teachings...effectively do the very same.
Seeking to mitigate Christ's divinity in any way, as to make Him more human and less God, so as to make humans more God and less human...is blasphemy, going entirely against the spirit in which Christ came and by which He became our atonement for sin (for those who come to know Him, seeking Him and loving Him, striving evermore unto Him in love). He was (is) God, in flesh, and neither refused to acknowledge that fact nor made a big deal of it. He didn't make a humongous deal of who He was (is). He was (is) God, and didn't go around bragging about it, nor becoming indignant when people refused to accept truth. He remained always subject to the Father, to that which is spirit, rather than flesh. Not regarding the flesh, then, either to deny or indulge its whims, but always remaining wholly subject to the Holy Spirit.
Always keeping His thoughts on things eternal, then, rather than upon the world. This, even in acknowledging that He did nothing, in and of Himself, but only what He saw the Father do. He didn't speak on His own behalf, but only what the Father gave Him to say. Didn't act on His own behalf, but did only what the Father directed.
No planning, in other words.
How foreign an idea is that?
Can you comprehend it?
...not to plan. But not even to consciously choose not to plan...merely to be so wholly devoted to God that He was the only conceivable source of direction?
No "for" or "against," but only obedience to God, on a moment-by-moment basis.
Knowing God so plainly, so wholeheartedly, even if yet mysteriously somehow potentially restricted moment-by-moment to whatsoever mortal, finite restraints as we're all subject...yet so wholly God that it was as nothing, merely taken per course as flesh's innate restraint (without remark or thought), thus wholly submissive to spirit, as to accomplish the will of Father God.
In some really weird sort of back-ended way, when time ceases to be a concern, every moment is, in itself, without limit: without definition, except as to continue in obedience to the eternal, individual moments loses any inherent import, as being finite, for having been so completely ignored for the sake of eternal business.
And yet, even for concepts such as those, there are mockeries made by the dark one. Imitations. As to attempt to substitute for truth something which seems an approximation, for those unable or unwilling or consciously unaware as to discern.
There's so much of that, in everything.
Even as there's been an upsurge in those who have been attempting to preach the Gospel truth, as to save the unsaved who believe themselves saved (because of having said a prayer and continued attendance at church and attempts made to align life with "Christian values," thus never having reached a knowledge of Christ, in truth, for having always relied upon self-sufficiency as never to know a need of Him, thus never to come to Him broken, repenting, as to be able to know Him, in truth, even as He was humble)... ...even as there's been an increase in those who are attempting to reach that crowd, perhaps what are the first range of imitations have also begun to appear.
Perhaps.
When people have become numb even to Gospel truth preached in such a way as to've convicted into outright indignation and rage and wholescale rejection then begin to chortle at the absurdity of "others" for "believing something patently false," beginning to view the all as something akin to a joke, rather than the most serious of all matters: the Lord will have His portion, for which He made sacrifice, dying and suffering the wrath of God, that we who are His may be redeemed...
...when people begin to come to the message for the emotional force, rather than the spiritual impetus, seeking self-justification in what would otherwise convict...seeking to find means of condemning others, per what should be a dire warning to all of us...
...that is expression of the enemy's adopted response strategy--having further tempted those who were otherwise once convicted into further self-justification away from conviction of the Holy Spirit.
Seriously.
The thing is, though, it doesn't matter. So long as those who strive unto the Lord remain responsive to Him and accede to His directives, it doesn't matter. Because He does create ex nihilo, so He does and can at any time do a "new thing," even in presenting the message in such an entirely prior-inconceivable way as to allow no brook for refusal of the message to have been contrived in advance by the opposition.
If you can't anticipate your opponent's next move, in any degree, then there's no way to prepare for it, except to be ready to respond and "mitigate damage." And that seems to be what's happened. Always. Because the devil isn't in any way like God.
Nor are we.
Being made in His image is something I don't entirely comprehend, but I know it entails free will. And I know it's nothing to be taken lightly. Even as I know it's not something which puts us on the same level as God, in any way whatsoever. The angels are "nearer" to Him than we are, but even they are so much lesser than He is that it's back to the example of trying to make a case that Michael Jordan is significantly closer to the sun than a three-year-old: the difference in height is apparent, does exist, but for the sake of any practical effectiveness, it is an insignificant difference in "nearness."
Just...
...there's so much false teaching. So much false doctrine.
So much false Christianity, right now.
And maybe there has always been, from the beginning. Otherwise, why would Paul have written such strong letters, to some of the churches? And Peter and John, also?
They saw and knew there was falsity being spread and succumbed to, even then proliferate.
And with 2000 years to have further become magnified?
Yeah.
We must be discerning.
Period.
I'm striving for greater fear of the Lord, on that account. Greater love, greater fear, greater understanding, greater obedience.
Fearing Him, though, seems to help keep me safe from randomly indulging in stuff which is entirely irreconcilable with who He is, as far as teaching goes. Increasingly, as "alarm bells" go off, in regard to teaching which is primarily erroneous...there's less and less attempt or desire to rationalize indulging in further perusal. For fear of transgressing.
Heard someone talk about fear of the Lord in a way which made so much sense, lately. It's not random, mindless fear (unless you're in a situation like Isaiah was, perhaps), but fear as people have for parents (who bring them up rightly, at least). A reverential fear, which is not entirely disconnected from just as deep and abiding a love, for that same person. Unto a desire to please, a desire to do right by such person, and a desire to live up to the love lavished upon you.
Only, for those who haven't had that experience with an earthly parent, it's possible to do so with God. He's a wonderful teacher, as it goes. He is a Father who will never fail us nor forsake us. So, even with all the madness that's in the world, He makes the way plain. Just trust. Just ask Him.
Just one step at a time. One moment at a time.
No comments:
Post a Comment