Why Don't Some Christians Accept That "Personal Experience of God" Differs?

Great Debates
1

I suppose by now I’m a veteran of the religious wars we have around here, especially the ones between Christians, and I’m tired. Still, I’ve been thinking about this question for a few days, so I thought it was about time I kicked it out there, even though two of the people I’ve disagreed with most are no longer posting.

I am a Christian. I’m Episcopalian, not Baptist, Pentecostalist, or Fundamentalist, but my faith in Christ’s Divinity, including His resurrection, is absolute, as is my (possibly deluded) belief that God is an active presence in my life. The thing is, the way my life has worked out, I differ from Conservative Christians in that I have no problem with homosexuals or people who follow other religions. Indeed, the two people I turn to most for trouble and comfort are Wiccans (HJay and his wife to name names), followed by a childhood friend and his husband. As it happens, I believe that I was led and encouraged to seek out HJay and his wife, not to convert them, but because they would be and have been people who have been wonderful presences in my life and helped my own spiritual growth. (Of course, hanging out in their hot tub wasn’t exactly bad, either.) I also accept evolution in that it makes far more sense to my mind than the creationist model.

My question to Svt4Him, johnny miles, and anyone else who wants to join in is this: if my personal experience with God leads me to conclusions which differ from yours, do you consider me a Christian? If not, why?

I’ve come to realize that in many ways my faith follows the conservative Christian model in that it is at least as rooted in personal experience and reading of Scripture as it is in tradition. For me to decide homosexuality is sinful simply because another Christian tells me to is as dishonest as it would be for me to accept the Pope’s authority. I’ve been told I’ve been deluded and deceived. I don’t believe that, obviously, and I wonder how someone who knows little of me, my life, my deeds and my needs can say that of me. I’ve been accused of seeking popularity, which is about the most likely accusation a person who knows me can make. I am sincere in my belief, and I believe it quite literally sustains my life. While I may regret that my beliefs differ from others in the name of Christian unity, I’m not about to refute them on the say-so of some person I’ve never even met.

Out of respect, and curiosity,
CJ

2

I do, but then I’m easy.

3

A lot of people simply can’t imagine that their beliefs are wrong. This is a particular instance of that phenomenon.

4

Mostly because the majority of people use the concept of the “personal experience of God” to deflect skepticism and inquiry. They’re absolutely certain that what they’ve “personally” experienced is absolute, universal, and eternally true.

Essentially, it’s a cop-out.

5

The icepack for your poor head is in the mail, Ceej.

6

Could it be…Satan?

Sorry!

I encounter a lot of people in life who feel that their experience just has to be universal, and if someone else’s epiphanies or awakenings doesn’t reflect their own, then they are just not valid. It is usually a waste of time to try to convince them that their way is not the only way.

Frankly it doesn’t help having Jesus quoted in the bible as saying things like “I am the way” and “only through me” etc. etc.

7

Speaking as someone who is constantly labelled “cafeteria christian”, “compromised christian”, and I suppose the equiviliant to Satan himself; religious beliefs are (IMO) supposed to be personal and I have absolutely zero right to claim that my religious beliefs are somehow better (what’s better anyway?) then anyone elses-unless of course God comes down, in front of everyone (so I know that I’m not crazy) and says “you know what good citizens of earth, Meatros’s opinions are the only ones that matter, heck I had some misconceptions, but thanks to good ole’ Meatros, my misconceptions are gone…”

But then again, that’s something that I’m fairly certain will never happen.

In my experience, certain groups of christians feel that I’m worse then the evil satanic atheist conspiracy group (note, I’m being overly sarcastic), just because…and this is the kicker…I disagree with them. You see, atheists are evil and corrupted by Satan (or at least this is the feeling that I get from them)-but fellow christians…why…they can’t disagree can they? I’ve heard that “catholics aren’t christians”, that “christians can’t accept evolution”, for godsake, I’ve even heard the equivilant of “christians have to be geocentric”.

:rolleyes:

It’s madness and I’m to the point that if someone wants to get on the ground and worship and egg roll, who am I to tell them that my beliefs are superior?

8

Christianity, more than any other religion, tends to be exclusivist in its doctrine. It’s really the only major world religion in which specificity of faith is a criterion for salvation (there are some elements of this in Islam too, but not to the extent of Christianity). Since this specificity is part and parcel of the belief for many Christians, they feel that they cannot let go of that specificity without letting go of their faith. They feel that Jesus has saved them, and if a Hindu has a theophanic experience with Vishnu that either the experience of the Hindu or of the Christian must be false. They know that their own experience is not false because they experienced it, therefore the Hindu must be wrong, or hallucinating, or lying or misinterpreting.

Hindus don’t have this issue since the believe that all Gods are aspects of the same ultimate Brahman and that Jesus is just one of the ways that he appears to people. This interpretation is simply not tenable for many Christians because it would contradict their doctrine. I think their mistake is in identifying their doctrine as synonomous with their experience and not seeing that the truth is bigger than, and cannot be contained by, simple doctrine.

9

I suppose that a lot of people feel (rather naturally) that if God is going to communicate with people, he’s going to be consistent and tell them all pretty much the same thing. It just turns out that that is not the case. (Also, I think that everyone filters their experiences through the lens of their own expectations and prejudices, rejecting some of what they don’t want to hear and glomming on to ideas they like.)

The way (IME) God seems to deal with us is to treat us all individually and tell us what we need and what we can handle. What we need at one point in our lives may lead us down a very different path than we or anyone else expects.

Now, I have an odd little idea: that a lot of the people who feel that God ought to treat us all the same overlap with the growing number of people who belong to organizations that encourage homeschooling, or at least someone staying home with the children. One of the major ideas behind homeschooling is that each child is an individual with his own learning needs and styles, and that that individuality ought to be honored. The education of each child should be personally tailored, instead of all kids being treated according to an idea of the ‘average child.’ This, of course, is exactly how God treats us. I wonder if it could be explained in that way?

10

genie, AFAIAC that post wins the all-time award for “most wisdom expressed in the fewest words of any GD religion post.” Thanks!

11

Let me try to explain my understanding of why many of the conservative Christians (i.e. experiential based not tradition based awareness of God) would find your theology troublesome.

**

This one comes down to the inerrancy of scripture. For many of the denominations you list one of the main tenets is that scripture is inerrant. If scripture is inerrant your views are in direct opposition ‘revealed truth’. Acts 4:12 says that ONLY those who follow Jesus will be saved. Romans 1:26-27 says that homosexuality for either males or females is sin.

**

If you don’t accept the inerrancy of scripture, that this is just another Christian – Paul or Luke – telling you something fine well and good. However, for those who do accept the inerrancy of scripture this is not just another Christian telling them something – it is God Himself.

12

I think it is the difference between seeing things in a rigidly objective fashion instead of realizing that there is subjectivity to religious experience, belief, and practice even within their own faith.

13

And you are a great example for the post I had just made.

Rigid thinking which without proof, will force their beliefs and tell someone else not only that they are wrong, but has to bring up sin, and play what looks like a moral superiority card.

14

Inerrancy of scripture is grounded in tradition, not experience.

15

It’s amazing to me how “inerrantists” can carefully ignore the heart and core of Scripture: the teachings of Jesus, in favor of what supports their particular cultural mindset.

Stuff like:

If you are an inerrantist (or even a non-inerrantist believer in Jesus’s Divinity), you are saying:

[ul][li]“Jesus was a liar when he said that the bread he blessed and broke was his body” because our church doesn’t believe in the real presence.[/li][li]“Jesus would not be welcome in my church until he repented of his sins. And I’m prepared to call him an abomination until he does.”[/li][li]“The proper way to show love for someone is to insist that they are evil and vile, and will justly be tortured for eternity for not believing as I and my righteous brothers and sisters do.”[/ul][/li]
Have fun with your leatherbound god, and when the real God judges you as you chose to judge others, don’t say I didn’t warn you.

16

Sorry, reepicheep, as a translator and an Anglo-American, I don’t believe in the inerrancy of scripture. The former makes it difficult because I know full well translators make mistakes and the nuances which can be lost when switching between languages, especially over nearly two thousand years; the latter makes it difficult because it is a concept which is quite literally to my native English culture.

There are also passages in Scripture which say all will be saved. Polycarp and I have certainly played enough rounds of dueling Bible verses with people who hold your view. If you don’t mind, though, I’ll sit this one out, since that’s not this thread’s primary focus. You say Paul condemns homosexuality. We’ve gone round and round that topic any number of times, too, and it’s nowhere near as clear cut as some make it out to be. Paul condemns a great many things, but when was the last time we heard about a family disowning someone for being a malicious gossip or saying drunkards should not be allowed to marry?

Meatros, you know me well enough to know I’ve heard similar accusations. genie, as usual, I agree with Polycarp. The form of Christianity that I see presented by people like reepicheep, johnny miles, and others still has the net effect of making me want to move away from Christianity. The form of Christianity I saw presented in my home church kept me close to it both as a teenager and an adult.

I believe Christ told us what is most important in the law. The two Commandments he pointed to are the ones which I try to live my life by, although I realize they set an unattainable standard. God gave me some rather precious gifts including, as Madelyne L’Engle put it in A Wrinkle In Time, “my faults.” My tendency to question everything in sight is not suited to unquestioning belief in what others tell me the Bible says. Romans 1:26-27 has been cited; anyone for 29-32? For that matter, carrying on in Chapter 2, Paul has some interesting things to say about those who sit in judgement. (Note to self – remember that passage for future arguments.)

I am what God has made me. I will not deny my Christianity, nor will I change it because of some words on a message board. You see, one of those faults is stubborness.

Now, if you’ll excuse me, this Anglo-American needs to take Japanese yakitori to a Pittsburgh Dopefest!

CJ

17

Please do not ascribe to me views that I have not stated I hold. I have tried to explain why the denominations that the OP listed could view his/her theology as wrong – which was the question in the title. I have not shared my own views on any of these subjects.

For the record my views are that each person is judged by the light/understanding that they personally have. This will mean that there will be many, many people who are not followers of Jesus will be in paradise. Probably more people who where not His followers than people who were. I view all sexual activity outside of marriage as wrong, however no activity is any more wrong than any other. So, to me homosexuality is no more or less wrong than sex before marriage. However, and here is where most of the denominations listed by the OP would kick me out, these rules/beliefs only apply to people who have personally accepted that Jesus is God and Lord. If a person does not accept that Jesus is God and Lord, to my way of thinking, they do not have enough inner light. My part is to pray that they are more enlighten, not try to change their actions. If said person does not have the enlightenment to accept that Jesus is Lord and God they, of course, will not be able to follow the teachings that He has given for His family and will not be held accountable for them.

18

I second what you said. Beautiful post by genie.

Love

19

The degree to which this is true does depend to a great extent on the variety of Christianity under discussion. For the Universalists, it’s not true at all (though some would argue that they’ve diverged so far as to be no longer Christian). For the Catholics, it’s partially true—you need to be baptised in the faith, preferably confirmed, and Be Good, but that’s really about the extent of it. Disagree with the Church on birth control? Not a problem wrt salvation. A lot of the so-called “low Protestant” denominations (e.g. Episcopalians, Lutherans) are similar. It’s primarily the “high Protestants” (e.g. Baptists, Evangelicals, especially Born Agains) that most require that you believe as they do in order to achieve salvation.

20

**

Don’t be sorry. I believe that all scripture is inspired – Godbreathed. I also believe that all scripture must be taken in context, looking at whom it was directed to and why. This last part is my major beef with many of the more conservative denominations. That and the fact that most of what I see is not love but trying to tell other people what to do. Love is what we, as Christians – and I do accept and acknowledge you as a Christian as I hope you will me, we may find out that we disagree on some points however that does not negate either of our Christianity – should be displaying in our lives both with other believers but more importantly with non-believers.

This is not my view - I was trying to answer your question in the title of this thread.

This is one, and not the only one, of the places where looking at who the letters were directed to and why is how scripture must be viewed. How do I take parts of several different letters written to people in a new sect of Judaism, in the first century and make these letters relevant to me and my understanding of how God wants me to live in America in the 21st century? What do these passages tell me about how I have to use self control (in both dealings with other people, believers and non-believers, and dealings with things), how others see me and judge the God I worship by me, how seriously God views His self stated representatives mistreating His creation both human and non-human.

And this is the greatest tragedy I can think of, that through my actions or my inactions (sins of omission instead of sins of commission) I would drive someone away from God.

Personally, my favorite is Romans 14 1-10. I, so fa,r have not lived up to it, but that is my goal.