ChristGreater Things > Essays > The Pure Love of God and the Pseudo Love of New Age Self-worship |
The Pure Love of God and the Pseudo Love of New Age Self-worship
| TABLE
OF CONTENTS • Pure Love of
Jesus Christ versus Pseudo Love of New Age Self-worship |
|
Pure Love of Jesus Christ versus Pseudo Love
of New Age Self-worship
by Sterling D. Allan; Dec. 16, 1997
The following originally began as a letter to a friend, but as I proceeded, I realized that I wished for all my friends..., for all the world to hear. At this point, the essay is still incomplete, for I do not address here the factor of how truth may be gleaned from all quarters, and people who adhere to the New Age philosophy have been instrumental in bringing forth and propagating many wonderful understandings, even though this sometimes takes the form of presenting the counterfeit so that we might contemplate the truth. Christianity, in its extremes of orthodoxy is as far removed from truth as is the New Age philosophy in its extremes. Indeed, when we arrive at truth, we will be pleasantly surprised at how much it resembles the disparate religions of the world in their most pure expression. But of this one thing, I am sure: Jesus Christ will be at the center.
Hello,
So much has happened in the last week! With these events have come some very important lessons for me.
They culminated Sunday evening, when I listened to a tape by a Tony Stubbs called "How to Ascend." He articulated plainly some of the new phraseology that I have been hearing lately by various people: "Light Workers," "Twin Flames," "Ascension," "Planetary," "Incarnation," "the powers of the Universe," among other phrases.
Some of these I have heard before. Some have been new to me.
When I heard them spoken clearly on this taped presentation, I was deeply disturbed, for there was no doubt in my mind that these things were not simply "new truths" to be fit into the whole of truth. They are very craftily orchestrated lies originating from the master of all lies, designed especially for the most elect.
Laid out plainly, these were very obvious to me; whereas, when they had come piece by piece, I had a more difficult time recognizing them, especially since they were being mentioned by people whom I love and respect.
I realize that in coming right out and saying this, I risk having you erect a wall between yourself and me, for you have already received very much persecution for your beliefs. It would be easy for you to view this as another test of your conviction, and put on your defensive shield against me.
However, the peace I feel inside tells me that you will be receptive to at least hear me out before dismissing what I say as being adversarial. You know me well enough to know that we are on much the same path, seeking to come into a fulness and to be instruments in the hands of God, being called after the holy order of God: to be princes(&princesses) of peace and preachers of righteousness.
Before I say any more, I would like to express what I believe to be core. These are convictions that have been burned into my being through a lifetime of searching, believing, doing and becoming. Furthermore, I am quite confident that you share these convictions with me. So in setting forth these premises, I am also setting forth a common ground from which we can agree.
First, there is a God who rules in heaven, whose spirit children we are, and who is intimate with our lives, noting even the falling of a sparrow. Second, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, came down as God in the flesh, was crucified and rejected by men. He is our savior; and beside him their is no other name, nor way, nor means whereby man might be saved. Third, Satan is very real; and he, along with his minions, seeks to take the kingdom of our God and His Christ. To him is given power to snatch any whose hearts are not set on God -- to try men and women of every walk of life and level of spirituality. Fourth, the Book of Mormon is the word of God, foreordained to come forth as a primary witness along with the Bible, to testify the truth of these things. Fifth, the way we come to Christ is to acknowledge our own nothingness, and call upon his name; and in thus bringing forth a broken heart and contrite spirit before God, He then changes our heart through the Holy Ghost, which subsequent gift then enables us to work righteousness -- God's righteousness. Sixth, the way we progress on the path toward a fulness is to continually humble ourselves before the Lord, calling upon His name, whereby we become steadfast and immovable, always abounding in good works, through the indwelling of the Holy Ghost, which is the Spirit of God abiding with us. Seventh, those who overcome will be joint-heirs with Christ, and will have fulfilled in themselves all the attributes of godliness in their fulness. In short, as exalted, glorified beings, they eventually become Gods.
The New Age philosophy is contrary and counterfeit to each one of these premises. The first of their lies is that instead of God ruling in heaven, god is innately in each one of us, for we are gods -- already. And as for a God that rules in heaven, a singular Divine godhead is replaced by the "powers of the universe." Second, Jesus Christ is just another ascended master, and the true and only power of salvation lies within each of us. Third, there is no such thing as a devil, nor sin. "I am no devil, for there is none." It is up to us to build the kingdom of god (universe) on earth. The false mind sets, such as are extant in Christianity, need to be overturned. Fourth, the Book of Mormon, Bible, etc... are samples among millions of "channeled" writings from which we can pick and choose to support whatever we want. Fifth, since we all are gods already, and have always been, what we are to do is to begin affirming how wonderful we are and to step into our innate godliness. The power is within. There is no such thing as "natural man," nor "original sin." Whatever you do is okay. It is all part of a plan laid out by your higher self -- the god that is you. Sixth, "the path," therefore, is one of continual affirmation of one's greatness and gaining a oneness with one's higher self, (which is actually a separate spirit, not of God, which we give power to possess us indefinitely, providing it with yet another incarnation). Seventh, those who thus transcend this third dimension supposedly ascend.
What that New Age ascension is about, I don't know, but I have had some impressions just now while writing this. UFO's come to mind. Other planets come to mind. An eventual shedding of the fleshly tabernacle and joining of the ranks of those who seek possession of other souls also comes to mind. These things constitute, therefore, an actual physical/spiritual counterfeit to the New Jerusalem, the heavenly city of Enoch.
What demarcates these two divergent paths boils down to essentially one thing: the focus of worship and salvation. Who is God? Us, or God? Is Jesus Christ our Savior, or are we our own saviors?
These are not two expressions for the same thing. They are diametrically opposed, even though they use much of the same vernacular. One is of God (who rules in heaven) and leads to true joy, true love, true peace, true ecstacy, true fulness. The other is of Satan (who is allowed to reign in one's heart when one worships himself) and leads to false joy, false love, false peace, false ecstacy, false fulness. His program is a facade, having all the appearances, all the trappings of goodness, but is rotten at the core.
Man cannot exalt himself. To attempt to do so is the most horrendous blasphemy. No matter how hard he may try, he is inept. He may come close, so it may seem. He may begin to appear as a very gentlemanly person, but so is Lucifer. Lucifer has a very friendly smile. He gives lots of hugs. He is very charming. A dear friend of mine saw him recently, and this is how she described him. She recognized him instantly, and said, "You're still the same charmer you always were." He nodded and confirmed her assessment with great satisfaction.
The great irony that causes so many people to become allured by the New Age philosophy is that, like Christianity, it poses love as its guiding principle. Love, love, love, love. That is nearly all you ever hear in the New Age circles. Love. The objective is the same for both: Love.
Christ sets forth Love as the focal principle.
The New Agers set forth Love as the focal principle. What is so bad about that, then?
The difference is that Christ is the only one who can deliver. Though Satan promises love, he will never, worlds without end, be able to deliver on that promise.
In and of ourselves, we are nothing. No matter how hard we try, no matter how innately capable we are, we are incapable of coming to true love on our own. After all we can do, it is still not enough. We are saved by grace. (2 Ne. 25:23.) It is a gift. Charity is the pure love of God, which he bestows upon all who are humble followers of his Son, Jesus Christ. (Moroni 7:47,48.)
Until we recognize our nothingness, we will never be able to attain true charity. Only when we yield our hearts to God, will we be able to receive a new heart, the changed heart. It is a gift, which comes through the baptism of fire -- the fire of the Holy Ghost. That is the only power to transform. The power is not "within," but comes from above, though it penetrates within.
There is a huge difference between these philosophies. One is based on truth, for it is founded on the rock of Jesus Christ. The other is based on lies, and is a sandy foundation, which will fall. All things shall fail that are not charity. Charity is only possible through Jesus Christ.
Though the New Age philosophy talks about love constantly, they will never achieve the true love of God, for their philosophy can not, and therefore will not deliver it. That is how Satan could be at the heart of something that sounds so good on the surface. He is at the heart of this counterfeit. He is the father of lies. He is the king of diversions. He knows that one of the best ways to hinder God's children from attaining to their birthright of obtaining salvation through Jesus Christ is to present a convincing counterfeit.
Because the New Age philosophy is so focused on self-elevation, it is also ripe for perpetuating unbreakable delusions, for pride is the father of self-deception. He is never so blind as who thinks he sees.
Only those who come to terms with the folly of the flesh, the sinfulness of human nature, and come before God with a broken heart and contrite spirit, will be able to overcome; for on them will God bestow the gift of charity, which is the pure love of Jesus Christ, the savior of the world.
This new heart will be the foundation of the new heaven and the new earth that is coming. And the new agers will have no part in it, for all the proud, and they that do wickedly, shall be burnt as stubble. Their proud hearts will never abide the day. All soothsayers and witchcrafts shall be done away.
I weep at the thought, but the ways of God are just; and when mercy can have no sway because it is rejected, the full weight of justice must come to bear. It is an eternal decree of heaven that cannot be done away, or God would cease to be God.
We will reap what we sow. And if we sow the arm of the flesh, we shall be consumed by the arm of the flesh. To attempt to attain true love by the arm of flesh is probably the most ironic and alluring folly of all.
Come down to the depths of humility. Come unto Christ, be perfected in Him. There is no other way nor means whereby man might be saved and exalted to a fulness. Let us rejoice together in the New Jerusalem, the city of peace, where God will dwell with all his holy saints who have overcome the world.
This is my prayer, my conviction, and my burden to witness, which I do in the name of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior. Amen.
Sterling D. Allan
Pillars of Jesus Christ the Lord often Set Aside
by New Age Religion
Christ in the garden -- what was that about?
From: Sterling D. Allan <sterlingda@greaterthings.com>
To: David's Outcasts <davids_outcasts@listbot.com>; SDA Friends list <SDA_friends@listbot.com>
Date: Saturday, October 23, 1999 6:36 PM
Subject: Christ in the garden -- what was that about?David's Outcasts - http://www.GreaterThings.com/OpenForum/Davids_Outcasts.htm
To New Age-leaning Christian/Mormon friends,
I enjoy your insights, but must say that I would appreciate a bit of clarification regarding your belief about Jesus Christ.
You say that there is a Christ essence in all of us, and to this I agree.
The question is whether that Christ essence in us is capable of saving us or if there is need for us to look to Jesus Christ our Lord (as so eloquently expounded by Lynn Ridenhour) as a step in our overcoming the world and coming into our true Christ nature?
I believe strongly that there are things very unusual about Jesus Christ our Lord, which point to him as not just a way shower, but as Savior and
Redeemer.
I would like to ask you to respond to each of the following planks of
Christianity/Mormonism.
(1) He was born of a mortal woman but was sired (however that happened) by God immortal.
(2) being half mortal and half immortal he could (a) be subject to the flesh so as to relate to us and vise versa, as well as (b) overcome the flesh perfectly, (i) spiritually as pertaining to sin and (ii) physically as pertaining to death.
(3) He suffered for our sins so as to answer the demands of justice, whereby we may have access to grace and forgiveness through adherence to the gospel. Hence he is our Savior.
(4) He was crucified and arose the third day triumphant from the tomb, overcoming the effects of the fall as it pertains to our physical body, so that we too will be resurrected at some point.
I believe these things set him apart as a Savior and Redeemer and not just a brother way-shower.
Yes everyone has God in them -- that element of literal spiritual offspringness from God -- but we cannot become as God without accessing the grace made available to us through Jesus Christ.
Please explain where you are coming from on this.
To me, the great travesty and deception of the New Age philosophy is that it removes these elements.
I just want to know where you are coming from.
Sincerely,
Sterling D. Allan
Replies, Feedback
From: ZionicThomase@cs.com <ZionicThomase@cs.com>
To: davids_outcasts@listbot.com <davids_outcasts@listbot.com>
Date: Saturday, October 23, 1999 9:43 AM
Subject: Re: testimony of Sethi/HinduDavid's Outcasts - http://www.GreaterThings.com/OpenForum/Davids_Outcasts.htm
Actually, Randall and others, I came to Christianity the first time at 17 as an agnostic who was diligently searching for the truth; I came to it the second time, just a few years ago, after a long search trying to determine if anyone else had the truth. Along the way, I studied Islam, several different versions of Buddhism and Hinduism, Shinto, and several tribal religion.
The bottom line is that I found a great deal of truth in them all, in the sense that CS Lewis talks about it in The Abolition of Man. There are universals, such as not killing, not committing adultery, honoring mother and father, etc, that are found in all religions worthy of the name.
But as to ultimate truth -- as when Jesus said "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life" -- comes only thru Him, Jesus. He made specific claims about his unique Godhood that are either true, or they are not. I found them to be verifiably true, and thus his claims are of a unique quality above and beyond all other world religions.
Muhammed claimed to be only a prophet, and even the Qur'an states that Jesus was a greater prophet. The Buddha claimed only to be an enlightened philosopher, and Mahayana Buddhism is based on texts that even Buddhist scholars acknowledge to be forgeries. Jesus claimed to be God. Not "a" God, but the God of the Universe, YHWH of the Hebrew Bible, in human form. To the Jews, this was shocking, blasphemous. Yet his Jewish followers picked up on the teaching and turned the world upside down with it -- when it would have been logical for them to have renounced Jesus or at least his claims to godhood, and reduced him to the status of merely a prophet, a Muhammad or a Buddha.
But the teachings of Jesus and his disciples do not allow us to do that. If we reject Jesus' as God, we cannot accept him as a prophet. That is the true blasphemy.
--Zionic Mark
From: Randall Shortridge <rds@acsu.buffalo.edu>
To: David's Outcasts <davids_outcasts@listbot.com>
Date: Sunday, October 24, 1999 10:08 AM
Subject: Re: Christ in the garden -- what was that about?David's Outcasts - http://www.GreaterThings.com/OpenForum/Davids_Outcasts.htm
Sterling. Well, I am reminded of the time I was pulled into the bishops office and he read me the questions from the recommend book to see where I was coming from. Unfortunately he was not satisfied with my answers, having understood none of what I was saying, but he indeed was successful in convincing himself that I was a very strange duck. Well, I wonder if that isn't already the case on this list too, but that doesn't bother me any more now than it did then. ;-)
I really don't care for this "new age", label, but that is also true with all labels. I think that they are the product of the carnal mind. I find the new age to encompass some things that are really phoney as well as things that cater to the outward sense-desires, just like found everywhere else. The new age seems about as bad as Mormonism in failing to encompass the truth of all, but that is also true of every other label that one can dream up. Personally, I find truth
and falsehood in everything and so leave all labels behind. Yet, I rely on nothing in particular (re: philosophy and religion) to teach me the truth except that light that is within all, but yet is a stranger to most. Yes, there are truths in mormonism, but there are also truths in new age, catholicism, buddism, etc., etc., as well as falsehood. But, in another vein, the end reality of it comes down to yourself, and how you understand the teachings.
Anyway, please realize that I've been trying to help others see a different point of view during the entire time I have been posting to this list. I keep nothing secret. It is difficult to return to all I've already said in an attempt to answer some narrowly-defined questions (at least how they've been written). The answers depend on ones perspective. Each of the questions have a yes and no answer, depending on the level you are speaking of. It is like the scriptural passages, each which has an many levels of meaning, the most obvious being the profane or carnal ones which lead one astray. If you are interested in what I mean, then take a look at my website. Each of the essays by Eleazar get to this point, albeit in a very superficial way (irony ;-) because it is speaking to a specific group (mormon minds). You might want to first take a look at the essay called "Spirital and Carnal Meanings". The url for the site is http://www.eagle-net.org/eleazar/temple.htm
As you know, I do not consider myself mormon in any way. Again, the labels are gone. About 28 years ago, I was introduced to the BoM and was taught to "search, ponder, and pray", as to the truthfulness of it. This I did, but then found that I needed to give this up in order to join the herd that was supposedly migrating to heaven. Rather, one was taught that others had already done the seaching for you and that one should look to the leaders for the answers. Eventually, I found the answers I received from them to be insufficient. Many times the answers seemed contradictory and simple-minded. In realizing this, I started searching on my own and when this was discovered, I was persecuted. Eventually I hit bottom, wondering as to the truth of anything. Ultimately, I was faced with the reality of standing before God naked, but unashamed, and asking him to clothe me in his glory (wisdom and knowledge). All of the old was left behind in this complete rebirth. Now, I look to nothing on earth to my source of truth, having found the real source of it all.
I think that every person must come to this hitting bottom. But, it has to be a complete baptism where all old things are left behind. Only then does one cast off all of the old. One must descend below all things in order to rise above all things. Each person will eventually be faced with the reality that all the things he chased outwardly were phantoms and illusions that gave back none of what is expected. Only then is the true source found.
These things are what is called the mysteries of heaven and cannot be imparted by law. It is because is it s personal journey and no one can do for another what one has to do for himself. No man can be saved on another mans wisdom. The best that one can do is to assist one in finding the right questions and seeing things differently than before. If one has the right questions, then one will eventually find the answers. All one can really do for another is to shine the light (example) that others might see it and then find the true light (within) themselves.
Well, the lengthyness of this post has already made it unwieldy. So, I will end there, and take it up in another post (laneshine-like ;-)
If you want to discuss these things further, give me a call at 716-798-1081 (evenings) or 716-645-3122 days. Some of these things cannot be captured in words. Discussing them face to face would be better, but still insufficient. ;-)
Randall
From: Randall Shortridge <rds@acsu.buffalo.edu>
To: David's Outcasts <davids_outcasts@listbot.com>
Date: Sunday, October 24, 1999 10:08 AM
Subject: Re: #2 Christ in the garden -- what was that about?David's Outcasts - http://www.GreaterThings.com/OpenForum/Davids_Outcasts.htm
Sterling.This is continued from the previous message. Now, I will get to your request... those awful questions. ;-)
Please realize that each of these questions have yes and no answers and they are everything but simple questions. Some of my answers will have to suffice as one liners and a series of more questions that may help to get at some deeper things that I refer to often in other posts. No, I won't pretend to answer the questions. Rather, I hope to add more. ;-)
Some of major differences between how I see these things vs how others see them lie in fundamental differences in perspective. For example, the key to the first question lies in understanding the nature of God, which I think is lost in mormonism. Mormons teach that God is a man, which I think is true, but it misses the bigger picture because it confines God to a man. Of course LDS scriptures are loaded with a very different view than this mainstream one, but most ignore them. For example, take a close look at, D&C 93 and the first part of D&C 88, which is all about what I am talking about. D&C 93 is all about the nature of
God, it speaks of the life of Jesus, then continues on to our own lives, and
tells us that they are the same. It tells us who we are. Generally speaking, man does not understand it. D&C 88 even brings up some important points regarding the widely-held idea of soul and ressurrection, but that is another (very long) discussion.
Anyway, on to the questions (before this message gets as long as the last ;-) I snipped them from the previous message and will follow each with my (insufficient ;-) comments.
> (1) He was born of a mortal woman but
> was sired (however that happened) by
> God immortal.
>
Well, the earthly father of Jesus is an interesting question. Isn't it interesting that was very important that Jesus be of the (patriarchal) lineage of David, yet it cannot be so if he was not sired by Joseph (his earthly father)? Also, what does that do to things like incest and adultery? Anyway, take a look at the genealogies in places like Matthew (chap 1). Ask why it was important that Matthew gave that genealogy if it was not even relevant? Why did Matthew even write it? Seems a bit stupid, doesn't it? Also, take a look at the fifth lecture on faith. Notice what it says about the Father.But, there is a more important point in all of this. It is that we are talking about the earthly body of Jesus. Inasmuch as the earthly body is merely a shell (a house for the spirit), why is it so important that Jesus's earthly house be made in a different way than our own temple (body)? Remember that the body has no life on its own. Without the spirit to animate it, the body is just dust. So, why is this dust so important in this discussion? That is what we are really talking about, isn't it.... this dust?
Now, if Jesus was born in the body of James or another of his brothers, would things have been different? Does one think that he could never have become the Christ if this was so?
There is even another point that is more important than these. But, that is a longer discussion.
>
> (2) being half mortal and half immortal he could (a) be subject to the flesh
> so as to relate to us and vise versa, as well as (b) overcome the flesh
> perfectly, (i) spiritually as pertaining to sin and (ii) physically as
> pertaining to death.
>
So, in saying that Jesus was already (half) immortal, is one really saying that Jesus' Spirit could not perfect his body? That is, he had to be given one that is immortal, cause he couldn't do it on his own?
>
> (3) He suffered for our sins so as to answer the demands of justice, whereby
> we may have access to grace and forgiveness through adherence to the gospel.
> Hence he is our Savior.
>
Christ suffers only for those who repent, right? Now, inasmuch as you live now and Jesus lived (and suffered) about 2K years ago, then how did he know for which sins of yours he was to suffer? Do you see the strange circumstance that the mainstream view puts forth? So, one does not have agency (because his sins are already done)? I submitt that there is something here much more complex than the smug answers one gets in church. I will submit that the suffering of Christ for our sins is not limited to the garden 2K years ago, but rather is even right now.
>
> (4) He was crucified and arose the third day triumphant from the tomb,
> overcoming the effects of the fall as it pertains to our physical body, so
> that we too will be resurrected at some point.
The crucifiction was an evil act by men who killed animals, thinking they were pleasing God. The act of being killed was perhaps not what was so important. Neither was it why the Father was "well pleased". Perhaps it was the submission of Jesus to the will of the Father that was the pleasing act.
Randall
Jesus the Mighty God as my Personal and Approachable Friend
From: ren and susan carter <crtrfam@manti.com>
To: David's Outcasts <davids_outcasts@listbot.com>
Date: Sunday, October 24, 1999 10:32 AM
Subject: Re: Christ in the garden -- what was that about?David's Outcasts - http://www.GreaterThings.com/OpenForum/Davids_Outcasts.htm
You asked me to respond to questions about Christ. Firstly was he born of a mortal woman and an immortal father? Don't know and I really don't worry about it. I don't think either way would be offensive to me for any reason. Furthermore I think to set in stone something I believe is to be close minded like the natural man and not open minded like a child. So the following is a work in progress. It may be true and it may not.
I am inclined to think he was born of mortal parents and it is another part of him "begotten of God" that is referred to. The reason I think this way is because if we are to follow Him and do works even greater than Him than we must have the same capabilities as Joshua Ben Joseph/Jesus the Christ. I believe it serves Satan more to have us feel removed from Jesus, that somehow He is far elevated above us because than we have this built in excuse going that there is no way we can attain what he did--he has better parentage etc. I don't think his intention was to be worshipped, he kept talking about giving all the glory to His Father. Again in whose paradigm was the Savior Son suppossed to get the glory? It wasn't Jesus'.
I do acknowledge that there has never been a higher expression of God as man. I know him to be a very intelligent, loving, humorous, good natured person and He was fully aware of his status as a co-creator of God. He was able to manifest his goodness, Godness while here. I do know that to DO what he DID is the goal of my life. The atonement is at-one-ment with God, with everyone. He knows me intimately because He has felt my every pain and joy. He knows me like no other and loves me anyway. What greater gift can a person be given? I need to acknowledge, like He did, the part of me that is part of God. To be a joint-heir with him is to be an equal. I cannot see it right now, but I have faith/hope that I will realize it. He holds up to me what truly I AM and tells me that he sees it and knows that it is there. Who else could do that for me?
I believe at a certain stage in our development we cannot accept the part of us that is God so we put it outside of ourselves and Jesus as the Savior is the first step to recognizing our own Godhood. In my toddling steps of growth I have reached many moments when I have had to call upon Him to fill the spaces between my current capabilities and what needed to happen. He has oblidged most lovingly.He is my mentor, my friend and my most revered teacher. I have seen Him with outstretched arms telling me that he loved me and believe me when he looks in your eyes you know you are loved. I paid no heed to whether or not there were nail marks in his outstretched hands. I was looking into His eyes. Does that then make him an imposter? Because I saw no marks? Because he did not mention how he saved me? I only know what He has asked me to do. I only know that when I read something and it has a certain flavor to it I recognize Him in it. He has a delightful sense of humor and a sweetness and love and adoration that is hard to describe but impossible to forget.
I would not presume to tell others how they "must" experience Jesus Christ for it to be really Him. He presents Himself as would serve the person best. He takes the person where they are and grows them from that. It would be impossible to impose a formula on Him that would be true in every case.He is my Redeemer in that he is redeeming me from my most limiting thoughts and helping me see who I really AM. I do not see how that negates Him in any way. A parents greatest joy is to see their children to be as successful and more so than they are. Why should he be any different? He doesn't want to feel apart from us, unattainable. We hedge up the way to Him with our requirements and expections given to us by the cultures we were raised in. He is not so far away and difficult to talk to as we have been led to believe.
I perceive in your questions and previous statements, Sterling, a judgement that if I don't believe as you do that somehow I am following a false Christ, that my New Age philisophy is highly deceived, that I negate Jesus Christ's true place by usurping it for myself. BY THEIR FRUITS YE SHALL KNOW THEM. I know what the fruits are and they are sweet to me and I have more love for me and my fellow man by the way I think now than when I could quote you scripture after scripture about what the Savior is.
In the doing and the being is the knowing of who you are dealing with. I asked what my greatest weakness was and was told it was my intellectualism. It is time to feel and do and quit thinking and figuring out. That is what I am emphasizing though I thrill to read of others who are doing and feeling too! I hope that you too will find the joy that I have for it is the most fun and the most sweet fruit I have ever had.Susan
From: RWBH <rwbh@telusplanet.net>
To: David's Outcasts <davids_outcasts@listbot.com>
Date: Sunday, October 24, 1999 3:55 PM
Subject: Re: Christ in the garden -- what was that about?
David's Outcasts -
http://www.GreaterThings.com/OpenForum/Davids_Outcasts.htm
The Book of Mormon states there are two categories of persons who are exempt from the requirements of baptism for remission of sins in Jesus' name:1) children
2)"all those without the law"..."those with no law".Who are these people with no law?
What is the law they do not have?
How is it those who DO require baptism come under this law?
Anyone with a good answer, fire away.
rwby
From: Sterling D. Allan <sterlingda@greaterthings.com>
Date: Sunday, October 24, 1999 4:36 PM
Subject: Re: Christ in the garden -- what was that about?David's Outcasts - http://www.GreaterThings.com/OpenForum/Davids_Outcasts.htm
Oh my gosh Brian, I think you have hit on a big one here. This is huge paradigm shift time. Maybe I'm just speaking for myself, and perhaps I'm putting into words what others have sensed intuitively.
The ground of my spirit was cultivated and prepared to receive this paradigm shift because of a post sent by Susan Carter (my mother-in-law) in response to my question about Christ in the garden.
The tradition in me tells me that everyone has to accept Jesus and receive the mercy he offers as a means to salvation.
Yet as I was voicing this to my wife today while going on a walk with her, somehow it did not sound quite right.
Here I've been taught and have believed all my life that a person has to believe in Jesus Christ in order to receive a remission of his sins and receive a new heart. I couldn't imagine any other way around this requirement. And that is where my aversion to the New Age philosophies came in is that it appears to me that they seek to remove Jesus Christ from the equation so far as our own salvation is concerned. They want to say that the power is within us. I know that this is not true in the extreme in which it is presented, for he certainly plays a crucial role.
However, your comment gave me a major "ah ha" flash.You commented that "all those without the law" are not under the need of baptism, and I would add that this extends to repentance and the grace offered by Jesus Christ.
Previous to this paradigm shift, I had supposed that this had reference to (1) children or (2) heathen who don't know any better.
Enter Max Skousen and the concept of the tree of knowledge of good and evil versus the tree of life.
Is it not true that those who come to the tree are no longer under the law?
So now here is the question as we get on a roll here. Can one get to the tree without Jesus Christ? My understanding has been that the answer to this question is no.
He is the means by which we get to the tree; and once there we no longer are under the law, and hence the endless rules, doctrines, authorities, prerequisites become moot.
A person who has arrived at the tree has arrived at what all these rules, doctrines, authorities, prerequisites are all about and hence are no longer under the law.
Perhaps what is going on here is that the new age thinkers (generally speaking) sense this tree of life destination intuitively and have such an aversion to the tree of knowledge of good and evil approach of organized religion (where Christ is central) that they throw the baby out with the bath water.
Again, the ideal is not left brain (the law alone) nor is it right brain (intuition alone) but it is a synergism of both. Jesus Christ is the means to the tree of life, and the tree of life is Christ (in us).
Sterling
From: Randall Shortridge <rds@acsu.buffalo.edu>
To: David's Outcasts <davids_outcasts@listbot.com>
Date: Monday, October 25, 1999 8:35 AM
Subject: Re: all those without the lawDavid's Outcasts - http://www.GreaterThings.com/OpenForum/Davids_Outcasts.htm
Everyone has a law (light of Christ), we are born with it, and this is
why all are "left without excuse." So, it is not those on earth who
don't have the preparatory gospel as many claim.
Yet, Children are without law. Notice how Jesus is refered to as the
"Holy Child Jesus" in Moroni 8 (verse 3). When we are this Holy Child
(the only begotten), then we are without law. Doesn't have to do with
age. That is just symbolic.
Actually, there is only one law. It is to love God with all of ones
heart, might, mind and strength. This is the one law that is spoken of
in D&C 130 where it says... "there is A LAW irrevokably decreed in
heaven upon which ALL blessings are predicated... "
The numerous outer laws only apply to adults. ;-)
Randall
From: Sterling D. Allan <sterlingda@greaterthings.com>
To: David's Outcasts <davids_outcasts@listbot.com>; SDA Friends list <SDA_friends@listbot.com>
Date: Monday, October 25, 1999 9:17 AM
Subject: Re: all those without the lawDavid's Outcasts - http://www.GreaterThings.com/OpenForum/Davids_Outcasts.htm
Randall,
Your comments provide yet another "aha" to this marvelous unfolding.
Children are without law, as they are innocent.
What is the doctrine of Christ?
To become as a little child. (See III Nephi 11.)
Bingo.
Aren't the paradoxes of God marvelous!
Sterling
From: Jenkin <stardancer@sisna.com>
To: Sterling D. Allan's friends <SDA_friends@listbot.com>
Date: Monday, October 25, 1999 12:58 PM
Subject: Re: all those without the lawSterling D. Allan's friends - http://www.greaterthings.com/Newsletter/SDA_friends.htm
Sterling,I'm loving this course of discussion about 'children' and those 'without the law'. It's great to see the light come on in others heads and how it switches your own on too.
This whole question of what really happened in the garden of gethsemane has lead me to constant reflection and deep thought in regards to the atonement. Of late I have wondered about various versions of Christs gethsemane experience and the difference in them. Who was there besides the 3 friends of His who fell asleep just a stones throw away? Christ never recorded anything, never kept a journal and according to the Urantia records was instructed not to leave any written word from His own hand. If that's the case, then how do we really know what really happened in the garden? When he finished praying he was arrested and taken away and "according to the record" never had time to share his experience with anyone.
This discussion of the law and becoming as a little child has helped me to come to a personal understanding of what my relationship with Christ really is. Maybe its as simple as 'If you feel you need saving then come under the law and allow the effects of Christ's earthly mission to be yours'. And 'If you feel its as simple as faith, repentance, baptism and becoming as a little child outside of the law then the need for salvation doesn't exist in that realm.
Susan, I miss reading your postings and would love to hear what's going on in your heart and mind. Write sometime, okay?
Love Trish and Ray
