Strong Delusion!

[Raven]

If you have been around "church" most of your life, you have heard it said many times that, if you don't have a love for the truth that you will eventually believe a lie and be damned. When missing the "mark", it is but a click or two on your rifle scope, or maybe a single word in your understanding of Scripture.
In truth, it is not having a love for the truth but receiving the love of the truth. Look it up! II Thessalonians 2:10-11
It is the love that God has for us that saves us and without that love or the "receiving" of that love, one cannot be reconciled to God. Again this is just a small but vital bit of information about our understanding that we have mindlessly repeated by rote that needs some serious examination. I, at times, become a little dismayed at our ineptitude in the study of scripture. It's a serious offense when any of us take a stand for or against some dress code not even found in the Word and then hopelessly stumble over the Word that we do have. Pardon my little "rant" but God help us, in the future, not to handle the Word of God deceitfully! For upon these misunderstandings has come some of the "doctrines" that lead to delusion.
Raven

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by Raven

If you have been around "church" most of your life, you have heard it said many times that, if you don't have a love for the truth that you will eventually believe a lie and be damned. When missing the "mark", it is but a click or two on your rifle scope, or maybe a single word in your understanding of Scripture.
In truth, it is not having a love for the truth but receiving the love of the truth. Look it up! II Thessalonians 2:10-11
It is the love that God has for us that saves us and without that love or the "receiving" of that love, one cannot be reconciled to God. Again this is just a small but vital bit of information about our understanding that we have mindlessly repeated by rote that needs some serious examination. I, at times, become a little dismayed at our ineptitude in the study of scripture. It's a serious offense when any of us take a stand for or against some dress code not even found in the Word and then hopelessly stumble over the Word that we do have. Pardon my little "rant" but God help us, in the future, not to handle the Word of God deceitfully! For upon these misunderstandings has come some of the "doctrines" that lead to delusion.
Raven

Oh, but for powerful expository preaching of the Word of God. Preach on!! There is nothing more powerful, but care must me taken not to handle it dishonestly. Thanks, Raven, well said.

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Raven

If you have been around "church" most of your life, you have heard it said many times that, if you don't have a love for the truth that you will eventually believe a lie and be damned. When missing the "mark", it is but a click or two on your rifle scope, or maybe a single word in your understanding of Scripture.
In truth, it is not having a love for the truth but receiving the love of the truth. Look it up! II Thessalonians 2:10-11
It is the love that God has for us that saves us and without that love or the "receiving" of that love, one cannot be reconciled to God. Again this is just a small but vital bit of information about our understanding that we have mindlessly repeated by rote that needs some serious examination. I, at times, become a little dismayed at our ineptitude in the study of scripture. It's a serious offense when any of us take a stand for or against some dress code not even found in the Word and then hopelessly stumble over the Word that we do have. Pardon my little "rant" but God help us, in the future, not to handle the Word of God deceitfully! For upon these misunderstandings has come some of the "doctrines" that lead to delusion.
Raven

This is so great! Again, it wrests the enabling from our might and places it in His ability to impart... Thank You Jesus!

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Raven

If you have been around "church" most of your life, you have heard it said many times that, if you don't have a love for the truth that you will eventually believe a lie and be damned. When missing the "mark", it is but a click or two on your rifle scope, or maybe a single word in your understanding of Scripture.
In truth, it is not having a love for the truth but receiving the love of the truth. Look it up! II Thessalonians 2:10-11
It is the love that God has for us that saves us and without that love or the "receiving" of that love, one cannot be reconciled to God. Again this is just a small but vital bit of information about our understanding that we have mindlessly repeated by rote that needs some serious examination. I, at times, become a little dismayed at our ineptitude in the study of scripture. It's a serious offense when any of us take a stand for or against some dress code not even found in the Word and then hopelessly stumble over the Word that we do have. Pardon my little "rant" but God help us, in the future, not to handle the Word of God deceitfully! For upon these misunderstandings has come some of the "doctrines" that lead to delusion.
Raven

It's funny; I read this post a while ago - right after I finished reading an analysis of Martin Buber's I and Thou. I didn't want to post because, well... who reads an analysis of Buber?

But the point was rather compelling. Buber breaks down human awareness into two types of relationships; "I and It" and "I and You." (The "Thou" comes from the German translation of the original).

When we perceive an "It" we do not expect any reciprocal relationship. When I handle a pencil I may be fond of the fact that it is the required #2 lead pencil, but my emotions are not really engaged with the object itself. It's an "It."

But when I perceive a "You" there is reciprocity. There is a two way channel that opens up. Emotions flow. They may be emotions of hate or love, but there is a feeling with the "You" that does not exist with the "It."

Buber and others have offered the idea that it is this reciprocity that gives evidence of a personal God. If my mind had merely encountered an "It" then I would objectify "It" and either use it or discard it. However, when I encounter a "You" I sense the reciprocity. There is a channel that is opened.

Perhaps this is the essence of salvation? When we find a "god" (God?) who reciprocates we are then in a relationship. We have to receive, not just seek. We must knock until the door (an "It") is replaced by a "You."

[Raven]

Originally Posted by pelathais

It's funny; I read this post a while ago - right after I finished reading an analysis of Martin Buber's I and Thou. I didn't want to post because, well... who reads an analysis of Buber?

But the point was rather compelling. Buber breaks down human awareness into two types of relationships; "I and It" and "I and You." (The "Thou" comes from the German translation of the original).

When we perceive an "It" we do not expect any reciprocal relationship. When I handle a pencil I may be fond of the fact that it is the required #2 lead pencil, but my emotions are not really engaged with the object itself. It's an "It."

But when I perceive a "You" there is reciprocity. There is a two way channel that opens up. Emotions flow. They may be emotions of hate or love, but there is a feeling with the "You" that does not exist with the "It."

Buber and others have offered the idea that it is this reciprocity that gives evidence of a personal God. If my mind had merely encountered an "It" then I would objectify "It" and either use it or discard it. However, when I encounter a "You" I sense the reciprocity. There is a channel that is opened.

Perhaps this is the essence of salvation? When we find a "god" (God?) who reciprocates we are then in a relationship. We have to receive, not just seek. We must knock until the door (an "It") is replaced by a "You."

Ich Du -vs- Ich Es!!!

Pelathais, my friend, you have elevated the forum to a new level again! I only hope that all our discussions here can attain such challenging heights.
Raven

[Scott Hutchinson]

Originally Posted by pelathais

It's funny; I read this post a while ago - right after I finished reading an analysis of Martin Buber's I and Thou. I didn't want to post because, well... who reads an analysis of Buber?

But the point was rather compelling. Buber breaks down human awareness into two types of relationships; "I and It" and "I and You." (The "Thou" comes from the German translation of the original).

When we perceive an "It" we do not expect any reciprocal relationship. When I handle a pencil I may be fond of the fact that it is the required #2 lead pencil, but my emotions are not really engaged with the object itself. It's an "It."

But when I perceive a "You" there is reciprocity. There is a two way channel that opens up. Emotions flow. They may be emotions of hate or love, but there is a feeling with the "You" that does not exist with the "It."

Buber and others have offered the idea that it is this reciprocity that gives evidence of a personal God. If my mind had merely encountered an "It" then I would objectify "It" and either use it or discard it. However, when I encounter a "You" I sense the reciprocity. There is a channel that is opened.

Perhaps this is the essence of salvation? When we find a "god" (God?) who reciprocates we are then in a relationship. We have to receive, not just seek. We must knock until the door (an "It") is replaced by a "You."

Who is Martin Buber and where can one read his work, it does seem interesting to me ?

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Scott Hutchinson

Who is Martin Buber and where can one read his work, it does seem interesting to me ?

Buber was a Jewish philosopher and linguist of Austrian/German nationality who settled in Israel after WW2.

I am currently reading Christian Theology by Alister McGrath. This is readily available on Amazon and is used as a textbook in many seminaries.

McGrath is a molecular biologist turned theologian who teaches at Oxford in England. He recently published a book that answers Richard Dawkins "God Delusion" rather well. I like to read Dawkins, but he has grown more and more acerbic over the years. McGrath gives him a good natured scolding pointing out that Dawkins may be coming more like the religious demagogues that he so famously scorns.

Of course, you could just jump right into the source if you are stout hearted enough. It's not that difficult of a read but you have to pay attention to the translator's notes. The English language kind of comes off as a shorthand of German. We've dropped some of the pronouns, hence the "I and Thou" and so forth.

[Scott Hutchinson]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Buber was a Jewish philosopher and linguist of Austrian/German nationality who settled in Israel after WW2.

I am currently reading Christian Theology by Alister McGrath. This is readily available on Amazon and is used as a textbook in many seminaries.

McGrath is a molecular biologist turned theologian who teaches at Oxford in England. He recently published a book that answers Richard Dawkins "God Delusion" rather well. I like to read Dawkins, but he has grown more and more acerbic over the years. McGrath gives him a good natured scolding pointing out that Dawkins may be coming more like the religious demagogues that he so famously scorns.

Of course, you could just jump right into the source if you are stout hearted enough. It's not that difficult of a read but you have to pay attention to the translator's notes. The English language kind of comes off as a shorthand of German. We've dropped some of the pronouns, hence the "I and Thou" and so forth.

I'm game I read alot of material that would be considered different for a Pentecostal to read.

[staysharp]

Originally Posted by pelathais

It's funny; I read this post a while ago - right after I finished reading an analysis of Martin Buber's I and Thou. I didn't want to post because, well... who reads an analysis of Buber?

But the point was rather compelling. Buber breaks down human awareness into two types of relationships; "I and It" and "I and You." (The "Thou" comes from the German translation of the original).

When we perceive an "It" we do not expect any reciprocal relationship. When I handle a pencil I may be fond of the fact that it is the required #2 lead pencil, but my emotions are not really engaged with the object itself. It's an "It."

But when I perceive a "You" there is reciprocity. There is a two way channel that opens up. Emotions flow. They may be emotions of hate or love, but there is a feeling with the "You" that does not exist with the "It."

Buber and others have offered the idea that it is this reciprocity that gives evidence of a personal God. If my mind had merely encountered an "It" then I would objectify "It" and either use it or discard it. However, when I encounter a "You" I sense the reciprocity. There is a channel that is opened.

Perhaps this is the essence of salvation? When we find a "god" (God?) who reciprocates we are then in a relationship. We have to receive, not just seek. We must knock until the door (an "It") is replaced by a "You."

This is the very essence of faith and why its imperative to communicate with God.

This is what the author of Hebrews tells us; He that cometh to God must believe that He is and He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him.

Faith creates relationship with the unknown. You have to believe its reciprocal for it to work.

Once you establish reciprocity, you then must believe He will reward you for your search. Again, faith is the key that opens the door to all that God has for us. This is the life of Christ indwelling in us. A rewarder living in me or one who is always lifting me up above myself.

God is awesome when you get to know Him!

[ManOfWord]

This reciprocity is at the heart of soteriology. Without it, there is simply a "code" or religion, if you will. This reciprocity makes it a relationship with a "living" give and take. That is why religion will NEVER change the heart of mankind. It only kills and causes harm and justifies behavior which is antithetical to righteousness.