Physics, Metaphysics, & Apologetics

How shall we rightly divide the word of God on any particular topic?
Rob

Physics, Metaphysics, & Apologetics

Post by Rob »

Note: this topic was moved from "Unity vs. Separation"
--------------------------------------------
Unity vs. Separation

Who is Jesus?

By Robert S. Lockett

Genesis 1: 3-4 And God said, "Let there be light." And there was light. God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness...

It has long been recognized that the quantum realm reveals the possibilities (duality) of light in relationship to the observer. This denotes the observer’s ability to affect reality. It is a reasonable proof that we certainly do affect reality, and in some minds, quantum potential suggests that we create it. I personally do not suppose that manipulation is equal to creation. Either way, as the philosophically sound cliché says; no man is an island.

I am going to keep this as simple as I am able, so let us explore the implications by first recognizing that a photon exists both as a wave and a particle. However, once observed, a photon can no longer be both a particle and wave and looses it's 'duality', in one sense, becoming 'real' in relationship to the observer. This either / or relationship bears a striking resemblance to the either / or relationship in the fundamental principle of logic. In the same way, ‘truth’, once observed and therefore affirmed, becomes real in relationship to the observer. As a result, the alternative potentials are excluded.

I would like to assert that we cannot have it both ways either in the case of light (in the physical sense) or, logic (in the metaphysical sense). If we choose to observe reality, be it physical or metaphysical, we will inherit the consequences of that decision. The consequences of manipulating physical light do not contain any discernible tragic ramifications. On the other hand, the consequences of observing truth as a light and thereby defining ‘reality’ in the metaphysical realm, carries some enormous implications for all of mankind. In the metaphysical sense, if we conform to reality as it is, we will by definition get the 'objective' reality. One of my assumptions is that the original purpose or design, the ‘objective reality’, is what we are all seeking. We may only differ on 'the way' to get there. In any case, every assumption of justice or morality; and every affirmation of truth necessarily implies an objective reality and therefore an absolute reality. If we make absolute statements such as, ‘all is one’, ‘there are no absolutes’, ‘truth is relative’ , or ‘I am the truth’ (notice the affirming words ‘is’, ‘are’, and ‘am’) without the knowledge that we are in fact making an absolute statement, then we are undermining our own minds.

When one ponders the concept of 'truth' from an ambivalent vantage point, it seems the possibilities defy observation, for once observed and affirmed, the realm of possibilities is then reduced to mere perspective. Or is it? It is true that once truth is affirmed, the observer excludes it’s opposite, effectively closing the door on other alternatives. Let there be no deception that the decisive metaphysical observer is 'all inclusive' in his/her affirmation. However, just because every affirmation excludes its opposite, this does not mean that such a conclusion is always subjective. For example, 1+1 only equals 2. Once we use reason to establish that objective and universal reality, we have ourselves conformed to reality and have moved beyond open mindedness, yet we remain objective.

If we choose to believe that we are God, we should not deceive ourselves that we have remained open-minded. Open-mindedness would not allow such a conclusion. This works as well with any affirmation that we are not God. Neither worldview can ultimately claim an unbiased vantage point. They are both fundamentalist positions; quite black and white. As stated in the last paragraph, this does not necessarily mean that we are being subjective. Open-mindedness and objectivity are two distinct entities even though they do overlap at times. Objectivity and open-mindedness will lead to the conclusion that 1+1=2, but once affirmed we are rightly no longer open-minded and move forward with the ‘objective’ of finding more of reality. It is a logical necessity to reject the alternative answers such as 1+1=3. The practical implication is that the truth (the objective) precedes us, and we must conform to it. At the beginning of our journey, objectivity and open-mindedness overlap. Once the objective is reached, all opposites are excluded.

Jesus claimed to be the wholeness of absolute reality and promised that if we give up our own subjective and relative ‘realities’, we could exchange them for the absolute and ‘objective’ reality. Mathew 10: 39 "He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for My sake will find it." John 14: 6 'I am the way, the truth, and the life, no one comes to the father except through me.'


It occurs to me that the will of the individual is given enormous latitude and power to interpret the duality of the information and make an affirmation. Another way to put it is that the observer is faced with an enormous test of his heart. It does appear that this test is of the observer’s deepest intentions. It is inevitable that ‘truth’ is defined within the heart of the observer. The observer may perceive reality in any fashion he/she chooses (2+2=9), but to be certain, creating reality would involve more than believing he/she has the power to do so by shear will and subjection. One must be able to explain (logically show, or ‘shed light’ on) why they believe that what may only begin in the heart, is indeed the objective reality. If the heart and mind do not converge into a coherent fabric, then he/she must attempt to achieve the presumed end in spite of reason. I assume we all believe that the end does not justify the means.

Assuming the power to create reality ultimately involves changing the cosmological constants and laws of physics. In the very least, such power should demonstrate mastery over them by essentially manifesting God Himself. Jesus is reliably documented to have done just this when He demonstrated the miraculous and these feats ended with the grandest of all conceivable miracles when He ultimately rose from the dead. If we are God (as some claim), then it is true that we should lay hold of our destiny even without the ability to reasonably explain our position and vigorously pursue our ends. If we are not God, then we are underestimating the consequences of our actions in the most dangerous and subjective fashion. We should have no ambivalence about making or denying such an utterly profound affirmation. Jesus made it plain when He said, "I came into this world, to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me" (John 18:37-38) His bold affirmation makes a black and white claim that if we are honest in our hearts, we will listen to Him and that our search is inevitably found in Him. The Bible says that in Him, all of reality consists. Colossians 1:17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.



To be more specific, when contemplating the nature of divinity, only two possibilities exist. One of these is the possibility that ‘all is one’, the classic pantheist philosophy of monism in which we and all of creation are God (Hinduism, Buddhism, New Age, etc.). The other is a very different divinity in the form of the Biblical all powerful and infinite God and His sovereignty over all his creatures and creation. One view defines man as divine, and the other acknowledges a separation from divinity as a result of man seeking divine power for himself (pride/ego). The attitude of the observer to the either / or decision in this regard, most assuredly hinges on the moral implications of the two views.

They are not compatible. Notice that the monistic worldview exists to separate itself from the ‘narrow’ Christian orthodoxy, whereas the Christian exists to unite Himself with God within the narrow framework of truth. For the 'monistic' worldview to survive, they will inevitably have to argue against a part 'of the all' (Christians) who disagree. This is self defeating and exposes a contradiction in their presupposition that 'all is one'. The Christian is consistent, acknowledging the necessity of exclusivity in the nature of an objective reality. Matthew 7:13 "Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it.

It is a difficult concept to differentiate by any measure. It is like an optical illusion that shifts perspective as we look longer at its qualities. The temptations of Monism are intense and easy to believe; yet, the veracity and logic of Dualism demands consideration by the honest thinker because of its overwhelming conviction and the shear power of its coherence.

It is interesting that the classical concept of ‘free will’, in the Biblical sense, is confirmed by the discovery of potential in quantum physics. As a follower of Christ, my observation of this connection is given as a means of illustrating the incredible coherence of a Biblical worldview. It is my opinion that such a connection is no mere coincidence. It is simply true. Conscious free will + potential = God given dignity. Have it your way or God's way. God does not impose Himself on us. For Him to do so would make Him a fascist. He would have to create a perfect world containing nothing but unthinking, uncaring, yet undeniably perfect nonliving robots. In a Monistic reality, we would have no power at all and would only do what is inevitable by evolution, chance and necessity. Ironically, it is the Monist that claims to create reality, which is the most powerful position one could have.

Truth remains undefined and unobserved until the potential observer makes a conscious decision to seek and observe it. Not seeking truth is inevitably a conscious decision as well. In this arena, remaining open-minded is really a decision to not make a decision and is therefore illogical. In regard to the two contradictory views of divinity, once defined by an act of the will, the implications of the affirmation into reality (even if only subjective) become immediate and apparent. One can choose to believe all is well and thereby attempt to keep his life by subjectively interpreting it as ‘part of the evolving all’, or conform to the implication of his separation from divinity by seeking the help of the divine in order to become a person in the objective reality.

We are manipulating reality in a sense, as the quantum sciences prove, or rather, making real by way of consequences in the material, our decision to observe reality the way we choose. One should not confuse the reality that is perceived within, thereby confined to perception, with the reality that exists before and after the observer exists. Individually, we are not the only observers. Self can only define reality by the self’s DNA and experience (heart). But by the rejection of self and a repositioning into relationship with the divine, one can experience a new birth that transcends DNA and experience (subjection). Only the latter allows the self to exist in both states; as an individual (' I '), in relationship with the divine who is also a distinct being. Though some suggest that to call ones self ' I ' is an egoist response to the dilemma, it is interesting to note, that this negative (black and white) view is held as a way of avoiding conformity for the sake of the divine, and maintains the ego. It is the acknowledgement of the ' I ' that reveals the individuals responsibility to the whole and recognizes the power to alter reality. This sheds light on the need for individual rehabilitation if one is out of sorts with the objective (reality).

Stating fact or arguing with reason is not, by any means, necessarily egoic or fear based in nature. However, the denial of fact, or the inability to accept a reasonable and logical argument is always motivated by ego and fear. Some claims demand serious attention because the implications are so inescapably enormous.

That being said, the most offensive thing anyone could say to the fear and ego driven heart is, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except by me."

That is the ultimate, staggering, and exclusive claim to sovereignty. It is also a completely reasonable statement. Even so, such a statement is either motivated by the purest form of ego, and/or, it intends to manipulate by the most blatant use of fear, or such a statement is the most selfless expression and profound truth that any man will ever hear. It is a claim that only God can make consistently.

I believe that is why C.S. Lewis wrote the following:

“I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: ‘I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept His claim to be God.’ That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic—on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg—or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”

The monistic worldview is nothing more than an attempt to escape from individual responsibility and the only way to maintain such a position consistently, albeit an obstinate and rebellious posture, is to declare 'one’s self' as God. For most monists, it is far less confrontational to speak without such clarity. They like to avoid the necessity and inevitability of the conflict. The monist prefers to say that we are evolving into the divine. But by implication this is a theology of default divinity be it evolving or not. As in the disagreement over Jesus Christ’s claims, this claim is either the greatest blasphemy, or the greatest truth. The stakes are enormous.


Since much of the quantum’s incredible properties involve light and the difficulty of putting a finger on its true nature, it is exceptionally noteworthy that Jesus said the following: 'I am the light of the world' (John 9; 5) ‘I have come into the world as a light’ (John 12; 46). ‘This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God (John 3; 19).


Monism can explain our unity but not our diversity. Evolution can explain our diversity but not our unity. We seek unity in diversity (University, Quintessence, E Pluribus Unum), and the only way to have unity in diversity in the effect (creation) is to have unity in diversity in the first cause (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). Only Christianity offers that. The Creator, the triune God, is a being that is also an eternal relationship. He is one though making up three distinct forms of Himself. With God’s plan, we are allowed to become sons of God, by denying ourselves as God, and accepting the wisdom of the only God. It is there that we awake and begin to understand the hymnist when he wrote, “I once was lost, but now I’m found, was blind, but now I see”.

According to Christ, there is unity in Him and Him alone. All is not unity, only that which is in Christ. Christ forces us to either accept Him, or reject Him. If we accept, then that begins with careful consideration of his words and their implications. He did not ask us to jump in blindly. Rather He warns us to weigh the issue with intensity and actually seems to attempt to talk us out of following Him by making it so clear. Luke 14: 27-33 And anyone who does not carry his cross and follow me cannot be my disciple. "Suppose one of you wants to build a tower. Will he not first sit down and estimate the cost to see if he has enough money to complete it? For if he lays the foundation and is not able to finish it, everyone who sees it will ridicule him, saying, 'This fellow began to build and was not able to finish.' "Or suppose a king is about to go to war against another king. Will he not first sit down and consider whether he is able with ten thousand men to oppose the one coming against him with twenty thousand? If he is not able, he will send a delegation while the other is still a long way off and will ask for terms of peace. In the same way, any of you who does not give up everything he has cannot be my disciple. "Salt is good, but if it loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is fit neither for the soil nor for the manure pile; it is thrown out. "He who has ears to hear, let him hear."

If we reject Him, the only alternative is for man to claim himself and all of his conflicting and chaotic ambitions to be his and his life alone. Either Jesus is God, or we are. Matthew 12; 30 " He who is not with Me is against Me, and he who does not gather with Me, scatters abroad." A monist cannot say this either because there is no ‘against’, there are only different sides of the same one, and therefore Jesus was not a monist.



Look at the following verse and see how Jesus describes the Spirit that created all things coming to make His home in the heart of a mortal, thereby making known to him the immortal and eternal God. This is the 'real', personal, and daily relationship with divinity (Christ). John 14; 23 "If anyone loves Me, he will keep My words; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him."

He often expands on the depth of the spiritual rebirth and further confirms the differential between powers and perceptions. John 14;17-20 " The Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you." "I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you. A little while longer and the world will see me no more, but you will see me. Because I live, you also will live. At that day you will know that I Am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you."

The monist proclaims that we cannot 'know' that these things are true lest we risk being controlled by the ego (because all is individually subjective); but, if you did not notice in these verses before, see that Jesus proclaims that ‘you will know, or see’. "You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8; 32) It is just the same way as mentioned in the beginning of this article, that we may close our minds to alternatives while remaining objective, since what we have found is the objective reality.

The monist is forced to accept all that is as part of the evolving divine oneness. This allows them to see themselves as divine yet in a state not yet fully realized (and keep their sin without the internal conflict). Genesis 3; 5 Then Satan said, "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God…"

Only God can be God by logical necessity, even if we disagree as to who He is. That is one reason I put my life and faith in Jesus Christ, for He spoke plainly and in truth. Even the monist knows and is forced to say that God is one, they just misunderstand the implications of their philosophy. Many of them do so intentionally, constantly seeking to find a way out of the inevitable trap of logic.

Mark 12: 28-34 One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, "Of all the commandments, which is the most important?" "The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: ‘Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no commandment greater than these." "Well said, teacher," the man replied. "You are right in saying that God is one and there is no other but him. To love him with all your heart, with all your understanding and with all your strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself is more important than all burnt offerings and sacrifices." When Jesus saw that he had answered wisely, he said to him, "You are not far from the kingdom of God." And from then on no one dared ask him any more questions.

Christ spoke no doubletalk about being all inclusive. We cannot have it both ways. 1+1 cannot = both 2 and 3 and 5 and 8 etc. To attempt such is to eat the fruit of ‘the tree of knowledge of good and evil’. Jesus said, ‘Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division’ (Luke 12:51). A monist cannot say this for their concept of deity only works to unite. The truth always divides and separates reality from subjection, which is why Monism cannot be true.

John 9:16 Some of the Pharisees said, "This man is not from God, for he does not keep the Sabbath." But others asked, "How can a sinner do such miraculous signs?" So they were divided.

Acts 23:7 When he said this, a dispute broke out between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, and the assembly was divided.

Psalm 78:13 He divided the sea and led them through; he made the water stand firm like a wall.

Matthew 25: 31 "When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. 34 "Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world.

John 8:43-45 Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me!

In conclusion, I wish to point out that in the Biblical sense, Jesus was most assuredly not a monist. Now, many claim and make an interesting point now and then that Jesus’ words were manipulated and mistranslated. I disagree, for no texts have been protected like the Cannon of scripture. I believe that He did in fact say all of these outrageous and incredible things. It is why He was crucified and tortured more than any man who ever lived. You can believe all you want that He was a monist. You can even believe that he was a form of both. I am not the type who will tell you what you should believe. I think the evidence speaks for itself. I suppose I can agree with any philosopher that Jesus was a dualist, but more importantly, that He is God. He is good, and evil is evil. That is either true, or it isn’t. But we can’t have it both ways because in the very beginning God said, "Let there be light." And there was light. God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness (Genesis 1: 3-4)

roblocketteka@aol.com
wackzingo
Posts: 170
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2005 12:23 am
Contact:

Post by wackzingo »

Robert,

First, what do you actually hope to accomplish in writing all this. You have copied the same stuff all over the Internet without really changing the wording much, only the length and detail. Is there any reason for posting this other than trying to prove your point?

Second, you were a philosophy major, right? Philosophy, although man enjoys discussing philosophical points of view there is little or no value in it. At least in the traditional sense of philosophy as you have used in much of what you wrote. I'm not trying to be rude but the "true perceived reality" is that 99.99% of the people in the world can't understand what you wrote.

Truth is revealed to men not through wise sounding arguments but through the power and working of the Holy Spirit. We can talk all day about quantum science/mechanic/physics and philosophical view points but at the end of the day we will be no farther along than when we first begun. If you hope for people to see the truth, it will only be accomplished through the foolishness of preaching the word and the power of the Holy Spirit.

Like I said, most people including myself cannot understand most of what you wrote. But there were a few things I thought I would comment on.



And, just for the sake of discussion, do you agree to the Nicene creed? Do you believe the bible is the absolute truth?

zach
Guest

Post by Guest »

wackzingo wrote:Robert,

First, what do you actually hope to accomplish in writing all this. You have copied the same stuff all over the Internet without really changing the wording much, only the length and detail. Is there any reason for posting this other than trying to prove your point?

Second, you were a philosophy major, right?

And, just for the sake of discussion, do you agree to the Nicene creed? Do you believe the bible is the absolute truth?

zach
Zach, first I want to thank you for your candor. I have been trying to get some feedback for a long time, hence the postings all over the net. Thank you, I see where you are going with your question and am going to have to deal with some things.

I am a truck driver. A philosopher only in an amatuer sense and no Major. I was inspired to write (even with only a High School degree) after being born again and was just naturally (scarry way to put it) inclined to reach folks in this way. In the vein of Francis Schafer and Ravi Zacharius as I have learned from other Christians who are familliar with some of the more 'complicated' apologetics.

You are correct in that it appears that very few understand. However, many of the pantheists (new agers, buhdists, etc) that live in my area are taken aback and confronted mightily by the reasoning. I am doing the best I can working with some very lost individuals.

Yes, I believe that the Bible is absolute truth... 'period', but I have been a Christian for a relatively short time and am learning the hard way.

I believe that all of this questioning and philosophizing is useful at the right time (and audience) and I can't help but believe that it is the Lord Himself who has inspired me upon this path. Even if this 'current path' is a side track and a result of my pride, I must work out my salvation with fear and trembling.

Just feel fortunate that you are not burdened with whatever 'qualities' cause me to stumble along in this way...

I'm not sure where I am at the moment, perhaps I am pushing past my own abilities. Perhaps I am just too eager to share with everyone gifts that are specifically for a smaller audience. I suspect that I, like all of us, am avoiding things that in my mind are far more difficult to surrender. May I be shattered as I fall upon the stone in defeat...

Rob
jimbaum
Site Admin
Posts: 298
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 6:07 pm
Location: Port Orchard, WA, USA
Contact:

Post by jimbaum »

Zach, you raise good questions!

Rob, I appreciate your response!

There are some good things here for us to discuss.

Jesus loves us!

Jim B.
Guest

Post by Guest »

Thank you Jim, and no offense taken Zach. it is sometimes difficult for brothers to understand each other. I don't fully understand you either, but I could easily envy your stability, strength, and compassion. My valleys are deep and dark, my mountaintops reveal vistas that many men can never know. I try not to wish for other than what has been given me. I am stretched farther than I can bear at times, but He always provides an escape.

Let me bring to my defense, two of the greatest Christian philosophers and theologians that these last days have known.

To be ignorant and simple now- not to be able to meet the enemies on their own ground-would be to throw down our weapons, and to betray our uneducated brethren who have, under God, no defense but us against the intellectual attacks of the heathen. Good philosophy must exist for no other reason, because bad philosophy needs to be answered.” C.S. Lewis

I wish I was called to a less formidable calling, and was better understood by the rank and file saint (though there is none that is not utterly unique). All of us are needed to wage this battle against the enemy. You are able to reach those that I am not capable of relating to, and vice versa.

Ours is not a blind faith... quite the contrary, it is all about 'seeing'. That sight, I think, is a little different for all of us, but for all it is quite luminous within our own gifts. I personally am very weak in certain areas. It is almost as though I am a retard. Yet mysteriously, philosophy comes quite naturally to me. There is no better than... so I do hope that I am not appearing to simply 'show off'.

I confess that my pride is still very much an issue, so pray for me on that count so that these apologetic visions are balanced by the knowledge of their revelation in Christ and not on any obscure genius on my part.

...philosophy is either eternal or it is not philosophy. The modern habit of saying"This is my opinion, but I may be wrong" is entirely irrational. If I say that it may be wrong, I say that is not my opinion. The modern habit of saying "Every man has a different philosophy; this is my philosophy and it suits me" - the habit of saying this is mere weak-mindedness. A cosmic philosophy is not constructed to fit a man; a cosmic philosophy is constructed to fit a cosmos. A man can no more possess a private religion than he can possess a private sun and moon. -G.K. Chesterton 'introduction to the book of Job'-

There are those out there (many more of them than will respond) that are more than gifted enough to understand the infinite depths of God (to a degree). And they assume that our faith has no such depth. They are wrong and blinded by their sin. I am not at my level of education, really writ and studied enough to be qualified to engage them effectively. I still take things too personally when I am rejected. However, I keep getting back up after every failure, and try... I did not qualify myself. If Christ does not bless my work, and if He has not qualified me -then it will be burned in the fire.

If just one soul was to be saved because they are on the same wavelength as I; and the power of truth can chip away at their walls, and they begin to question their assumptions, then God will have a chance of speaking to them. First, they must repent in their hearts and question the 'rightness of themselves'. That is the goal of such work as mine. though it can be harsh... so is many a soul in this evil world that needs to be broken.


If I am simply in the wrong forum, I apologize...

Your brother in Christ, Rob
wackzingo
Posts: 170
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2005 12:23 am
Contact:

Post by wackzingo »

Robert,

How many Robert S. Lockett's can there be? After doing a google search on your name you are the only Robert S. Lockett that comes up in search results. Other than this one and it can be found here (It's in order from a-z) http://harvardmitjustice.thomer.com/cgi ... ?type=Alum

Anyways, that Robert S. Lockett was a philosophy major and since you have been writing so much about philosophy and by your age which is around 40, I figured that was you. That's the only reason I asked, sorry for the mistake.

The real reason I asked what you hoped to accomplish by writing all this is because I haven't seen any questions or something to imply you were asking for discussion or others opinions. What exactly are you asking, I'm ready to discuss something. And, please forgive me if I have come across as rude. That is not my intent, I just like to get all this stuff out in the open before discussing anything.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Zach
jimbaum
Site Admin
Posts: 298
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 6:07 pm
Location: Port Orchard, WA, USA
Contact:

Post by jimbaum »

Rob,

You're in the right forum. This discussion board is for people to discuss important things, so you are most welcome. If our discussion is more about other issues than "Unity vs. Separation", then I may create a separate topic, but that's ok!

Among the issues I see you have brought up or you have provoked with me are:

How the Lord uses different people to witness to different types of people.

Issues of pride and motivation and sincerity. We all wrestle with these things.

Using examples from the physical world to illustrate Biblical truths.

Trying to read into physical world phenomena to derive spiritual understanding.

There's not a whole lot of action on this discussion board, so I pray there can be some edifying discussion!

Jim B.
Guest

I'm flattered!

Post by Guest »

I was unaware that there was another Robert S. Lockett, but I am flattered that the article appeared that good. I wish it were better. It is intended as an evangelical apologetic. There has been little response from the intended targets, and knowing how eager most of them are to attack a Christian, I find it encouraging. It tells me that if they are actually reading the piece (and I try very hard to lure them in innocently, but with the cunning of a serpent) that they are unable to disagree. You may not see yourself, but if they do argue, they will only prove the point I was making in the article. I guess many don't really want to play reality! Those that do but are taken aback by the power of it, may begin to ask the same questions that led me to the Lord. I once thought as many of them do in the 'new age'.

The whole 'new age' movement has as it's foundation, the interpretation of the quantum realm that I only eluded to in passing. I am not really knowledgeable in any technical way in quantum physics, and I don't believe we need to be. I read some on it years ago, and the arguments I heard were philosophical arguments for the unity of all things. Good and evil are not united, and that is the whole point of the piece.

Jesus words speak right into the heart of every man. My hope is that in dealing with the subject in the manner I did, that His words would be put into proper context by a certain group of people who typically have little knowledge of what He said and misconstrue what little they are familiar with.

Your right Zach, I really did not ask a question, I was simply preaching. I confess that I really did not read all of the discussion ongoing beforehand, but just sent it kind of blind. No apologies needed, we're all doing the best we can.

Those that are seeking the truth will find it. Fortunately, we have all of reality; the empirical, the rational, the experiential, and most importantly God Himself on our side. As Christians we need not run from the idea of 'proof', though I agree with you Zach that ultimately it is the Spirit that speaks to us. Who can forget how that feels? The point is, that through the goggles of the 'right' philosophy (worldview) everything starts to make sense. In that light, it is not philosophy per se, but simply the truth. Perhaps I overate the carnal minds ability to perceive these things. I confess I did not understand myself until I was born of the Spirit. So right there, your original point holds considerable weight.

Not everyone is going to respond to us, but I do pray that all of us will reach some by God's grace, and that He will forgive and save them as He has done for us.

Rob
Guest

Post by Guest »

Rob, Thanks for the reply, I don't have a lot of time because I'm on my way to work, but exactly what were you saying in the first post? I didn't understand any of it. Actually, the only thing I understood was you think Jesus was a dualist and not monist. Please try to summarize things for me.

Zach
Guest

The point...

Post by Guest »

The fact that I have to explain, does not bode well for the piece. I have been thinking quite a bit the last couple of days, and Zach, I think your original point was very accurate. Whatever point I was making is unclear.

There are a lot of folks who try to say that Jesus is like the prophets of other religions. I don't think that is new to you. The Gnostic's, and new agers, Buddhists and Hindus often try to incorporate 'some' of Christ's words to prove their own point. I was simply trying to bring to their attention that Jesus spoke with fire and authority, condemning such a notion. It is best summed up by His remarks in Luke 12:51 "Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division."

And again in Matthew 10:34
"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword."

That was the main point. I think I just got way too carried away in trying to bring it all together. Only 2 individuals that I know of, got the point...

The fact is, I am writing over my own head as far as it being effective. The point is valid of course... I was simply being far to creative. I understand all of the links between the different factors in the article, but you are right in that they are spiritually discerned.

Most of the targets of the piece as it turns out, do not even really understand what they believe, so when I define them, they reject it because they think I'm putting them in a box.

Frankly, I'm pretty embarrassed about it all...

I'm sorry for wasting any of your time, but this has been a good and humbling experience for me. In my spiritual youth, I am still trying to do the Spirits work.

Our adversary does a tremendous job in leading us astray. I look forward to seeing clearly again.

Sincerely, Rob
jimbaum
Site Admin
Posts: 298
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 6:07 pm
Location: Port Orchard, WA, USA
Contact:

Post by jimbaum »

Rob!

Don't give up...

Reasoning with the pagans and proclaiming the Gospel.

Reasoning with fellow Christians to edify one another.

Ok?!

Jim B.
Guest

Post by Guest »

Thanks again Jim. No, I will never give up. I just get so down, and would love to quit, but can't. I am compelled...

And there was much more to that article... I just have to put it down for a while... get some air, go fishing!

We really are slaves to righteousness, and it's not all fun and games... I am a wretch and would prefer not to see that right now.

One thing I'll never comprehend is how He can Love us so much. His Agape... it's utterly incomprehensible!

Rob
jimbaum
Site Admin
Posts: 298
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 6:07 pm
Location: Port Orchard, WA, USA
Contact:

Post by jimbaum »

Glory to God! Thank you, Jesus!
wackzingo
Posts: 170
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2005 12:23 am
Contact:

Post by wackzingo »

Rob,

It is true that many people believe Jesus was just a good moral teacher or prophet but not God. They obviously haven't thought that through because common sense would show how dumb that really is. Jim was right that its never a wast of time witnessing to un-believers. I used to spend a lot of time working with teens trying to get them to believe in Jesus buy trying to relate to them or discuss with them things from their world. It wasn't until I heard a teaching by Jon Courson where he pointed out that Paul's most un-successful sermon/message was when he tried to reason with the Jews from their own gods. He tried to use their unknown gods and the things of their culture and make it relate to Jesus. Jon Courson pointed out that every other place in the book of Acts where Paul was successful was where it say he did nothing else but preach Jesus Christ and him crucified. My favorite line to quote from Jon Courson "Jesus Christ and Him crucified, nothing more, nothing less, and nothing else."

It is through the foolishness of preaching Jesus Christ and Him crucified that convicts men of sin and changes hearts in a way that is supernatural.

I look forward to hearing from you again.

zach
Guest

Post by Guest »

My sister agrees with you, and so do others. The Spirit is speaking clearly to me on this. All of the issues I understand have a place and time, I have yet to dial it all in. I want so badly to preach, but I am sorry, I have allowed some of my insecurities to make me ineffective.

Even my favorite evangelist, Ravi Zacharius says clearly, that there is no point in giving a man a rose to smell after you cut off his nose.

I want to preach the good news but unfortunately in this culture, we sometimes have to preach the bad news first, because people refuse to see their sin. It is a delicate balance that I have tremendous difficulty with.

Please check out the link below to a different forum. It should take you to page 7, where you can read posts 103 through 121 (there may be a couple more when you get there). You will have to click to page 8 and 9 respectively.

If you can follow the discourse (it is pretty 'heavy') please feel free to Exhort to me anything laid upon your heart. Do you think my responses to these gentlemen are from God or my own pride? maybe a little both... I really want to face this squarely.

Our discussion has ultimately been very uplifting. I hope it continues...

May God continue to bless you, as He has blessed me through you, Rob

http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi? ... =1373&m=91
Locked