I recently read an argument which was basically 'Paul against Jesus' type and was something like this: Jesus said that He didn't come to abolish the Jewish laws but to fulfill them: > Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have not come to abolish these things but to fulfill them. ([Matthew 5:17](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+5:17&version=NET) , NET) And we have this verse in OT: > Any uncircumcised male who has not been circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin will be cut off from his people – he has failed to carry out my requirement. ([Genesis 17:14](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+17:14&version=NET) , NET) It is argued that even though Jesus was circumcised, it is not a requirement now for Christians because Paul preached so. What is the Biblical basis for not making circumcision a requirement for Christians?

In 1 John 5:16–17, John distinguishes between “sin that leads to death” and “sin that does not lead to death”: >If you see any brother or sister commit a sin that does not lead to death, you should pray and God will give them life. I refer to those whose sin does not lead to death. There is a sin that leads to death. I am not saying that you should pray about that. All wrongdoing is sin, and there is sin that does not lead to death. (NIV) What are some biblical or practical examples of sins that would fall under the category of “sin that does not lead to death,” and how should Christians approach them in prayer and fellowship?

Everything in the NT is addressed to people living in the first century, about past, present or an imminent fulfillment. So why do people read it as if God wrote all that stuff to them? For example, is this a command and promise for the disciples or for the disciples and every generation since?: >[Mat 4:19 NIV] "Come, follow me," Jesus said, "and I will send you out to fish for people."

I was reading about Renovaré and came across the "twelve spiritual disciplines": meditation, prayer, fasting, study, simplicity, solitude, submission, service, confession, worship, guidance, and celebration My first thought is that the list almost sounds contrived (being exactly 12). However, when I look at each one, I can see how each of these things *might* be able to help us grow spiritually. Is this list found in the Bible somewhere or was a contrived list? Is this the only twelve items that can help you grow (or even the "top twelve")? Are there any one of the twelve items that may be contentious or can they all truly be ways to grow in faith? [More info at their website](http://www.renovare.us/SPIRITUALRENEWAL/PracticingLikeJesus/WhyPracticeLikeJesus/tabid/2518/Default.aspx)

## Overview Question ## **When a truth in the various fields of human knowledge contradicts or appear to contradict Divine Revelation, what is an overview of what various Christian religious traditions say is incumbent upon a Christian when their religious tradition hasn't said a thing one way or the other about the contradictory truth?** Science says > *"Science is not the only way of acquiring knowledge about ourselves and the world around us."* - WMAP Site FAQs Q9. Here are some fields of human knowledge (of course not exhaustive): *Mathematics, Astronomy & Cosmology, Natural Sciences, Human Sciences, History, The Arts, and Indigenous Knowledge Systems*. If a truth in these appears to contradict or directly contradicts Divine Revelation [= Sacred Scripture and Holy Tradition for the Church], what is an overview of what various Christian religious tradition teach a Christian ought to do, when their religious tradition hasn't said anything as yet on the truth in question? The best answer will also have Scriptural support and include a Catholic Perspective. Some examples: - *Current Cosmological model.* Outer Space, shape of the earth, that the earth moves and rotates, etc. - Darwin's *"Descent with modification"*. The above appear to contradict Genesis. - This one was big with me: that *that SARS-CoV-2 - a **"novel virus"** that is supposed to cause CoViD-19 disease - could have been created in a lab* when both Scripture and my Catholic Church says only God is Creator Please note that the answer can use an example for illustrative purposes, but not labor in trying to prove or debunk a truth in human knowledge field. Finally, it appears we are in the End-Times, and if the devil is the deceiver of the whole world, and in the End-Time he will be most active, one would expect to find his lies pervasive in ALL human fields of knowledge.

Jesus said in Matthew 7:16, "You will know them by their fruits." This verse is often cited to identify genuine believers based on their actions and character. However, a recent incident in Minnesota where a self-professed evangelical Christian—who had even received an appointment—was involved in the shooting of a congresswoman raises questions. How should this verse be understood in light of such events? Can we truly and reliably know a believer by their fruits, especially when someone outwardly identified with Christianity ends up acting in a way that seems so contrary to Christ’s teachings? How do different theological traditions interpret this principle when actions contradict profession of faith?

I figured in heaven it’s a totally different reality than the life we have here on earth. So, I believe in heaven race, color, creed, nationality, and ethnicity will not exist in heaven. Plus, it’s heaven—-paradise—-a place of bliss for believers of Christ. Plus, we get new heavenly, immortal bodies. I don’t want them to be subject to race and color or nationality again in heaven. God forbid. So I am hoping that in heaven I will not be black ever again. Don’t ask why I just want this. I know marriage isn’t in heaven, but if romantic love or divine love for people in heaven which includes romantic love is in heaven then I am all for it. I want to see my crush in heaven with me even if he did marry in this earth. I know in heaven he will love me too. I just hope heaven won’t be disappointing lol. Other than that I hope I won’t be black in heaven, because it just doesn’t define me as a soul or person.

> For as many as are **led by the Spirit of God**, they are the sons of God. [Romans 8:14 KJV] > 16 This I say then, **Walk in the Spirit**, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh. 17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would. 18 But if ye **be led of the Spirit**, ye are not under the law. [Galatians 5:16-18 KJV] How are Christians led by the Holy Spirit according to Cessationism? For instance, when a Christian has to make an important life decision in which he/she would really like to hear God's opinion on the matter through the direct lead of the Holy Spirit, what should such a Christian do and possibly expect to receive according to the Cessationist view? Some concrete real life situations that come to mind where the lead of the Holy Spirit would be quite helpful include: - Knowing one's calling (*should I be a pastor, teacher, evangelist, missionary, etc.?*) - Deciding what career to pursue. - Choosing one's spouse (or whether to remain celibate for the sake of the gospel). - In the case of a pastor or another church leader, the discernment to decide who will join them in positions of leadership in the church (ideally, one would like that these people were directly chosen by the Holy Spirit Himself, because He has the perfect discernment). - Avoiding dangerous situations, especially when they are unpredictable (not for the Holy Spirit, of course). - Being led by the Holy Spirit, possibly in supernatural ways, to approach and share the gospel with specific individuals, especially at the right place and time when they are ready to receive it. ___ Related questions: - https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/9120/50422 - https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/80658/50422 - https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/84215/50422 - https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/83881/50422

Do you know for sure you are going to Heaven. https://marymargretsamerica.blogspot.com/2024/11/the-christ-child_69.html

Many Christians say that a couple shouldn't live together before they get married, even if they are not having sex with each other. What is the Biblical basis for this position? Are there certain passages of Scripture that speak against it? Or are there aspects of Church tradition that speaks against it? Or is there something else that has prompted Christians to view this as wrong?

This is probably a loaded question but I'm happy to learn of what you'll bring to the table if you think of some good input regardless of how you interpret the question. I've noticed an mostly 'unspoken' discrepancy between Christian communities which leads to substantial differences in outcomes regarding them living out their faith (I'm in USA mostly around protestant circles for reference but I wouldn't be surprised if this conversation happens (maybe implicitly as well) in other places) I am trying to wrap my mind around this and so far have only heard 'lessons' regarding these things which assume the audience to know/believe something about their lives and God which is never fully fleshed out. Recently I heard John Mark Comer say something like [It's about the switch from decision making to discernment, or full surrender]. This is just the most recent example of such an idea that I've heard. Frequently I've heard teachers explain away over-analyzing things through this lens like "what t-shirt you wear, what to eat for lunch etc. is not important in the grand scheme" but I've yet to hear a rigorous system of understanding these things. As an ideology it is captivating as one can believe themselves to be behaving under the direction of God and making personal 'sacrifices' in offering up the outcome of decision to God, 'neglecting their personal desires and honoring more holy ways of being'. But this same ideology can inspire guilt, as one could ask themselves "am I listening for/to God well enough, and not doing my best as a Christian?". When they are potentially expecting something of themselves that isn't actually expected (or desired) of us by God. So that's where I'm at, I'm familiar with Proverbs 3:5-6, John 10: 27-28 and probably some other relevant verses I'm forgetting now, but I believe these things in layman circles get misconstrued and I'm looking for ways to understand how to apply these things in my own life (and maybe hopefully clear up confusion regarding these teachings for others if they've suffered in similar bouts of confusion/guilt). To steal a quote from Dallas Willard "I don't have the [characters] to explain everything I don't mean" by this question so I hope I've done a decent enough job. Let me know if you think edits would be helpful. I imagine it possible some early church father has some highly fleshed out discussion about internally walking through these things, but maybe I'm looking towards the past with too much of an enchanted lens. I just don't know of how to search for this concept in few words. Thanks!

I have come across this phrase "***A born-again Christian has a new nature that cannot sin***" (or other versions written differently but carrying the same implication). Here is one example from this site and here is another more fulsome treatment from an evangelical perspective. Does this mean a born-again Christian can not sin? If we can still sin, then what is the purpose of that nature if it can not shield us from sin? ***How would/does a nature like this make us different from Abraham, Noah, Job, David or Moses?***

> **[Exodus 20:9–11](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+20%3A9%E2%80%9311&version=ESV)** (ESV)
> Six days you shall labor, and do all your work, but the seventh day is > a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, you, > or your son, or your daughter, your male servant, or your female > servant, or your livestock, or the sojourner who is within your gates. > For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that > is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed > the Sabbath day and made it holy. What is an **overview of Protestant views on the Sabbath**? (Caveat: I'm not interested in the Seventh Day Adventist position.)

I know the Seventh Day Adventist church is known for following certain Old Testament laws found in Leviticus such as the food/dietary laws. However I'm also under the impression that they don't follow all 600+ Levitical laws either. Is there a reason why they follow certain Levitical laws like food/dietary but don't follow others, such as wearing clothing made of two different materials (Lev 19:19) or cutting the hair at the sides (Lev 19:17)? To what extent do they keep the laws?

Christians, when our brain goes into "fight or flight" mode are we held to the same accountability for our actions as when we are in our normal meditative state?

To explain what I mean by "very interactive, intimate, and personal friend", let me quote some excerpts from T.M. Luhrmann's book *[When God Talks Back: Understanding the American Evangelical Relationship with God](https://www.amazon.com/When-God-Talks-Back-Understanding/dp/0307277275)* . From the book's synopsis: > Combined with scientific research that studies the effect that intensely practiced prayer can have on the mind, ***When God Talks Back* examines how normal, sensible people—from college students to accountants to housewives, all functioning perfectly well within our society—can attest to having the signs and wonders of the supernatural become as quotidian and as ordinary as laundry**. From the book itself: > I set out many years ago to understand how God becomes real for modern people. I chose an example of the style of Christianity that would seem to make the cognitive burden of belief most difficult: **the evangelical Christianity in which God is thought to be present as a person in someone’s everyday life, and in which God’s supernatural power is thought to be immediately accessible by that person**. The Vineyard Christian Fellowship is a new denomination, a few decades old, and it represents this shift in the American imagination of God. **These Christians speak as if God interacts with them like a friend. He speaks to them. He listens to them. He acts when they pray to him about little mundane things, because he cares**. This kind of Christianity seems almost absurdly vivid to someone who grew up in a mainstream Protestant church; when I first encountered it, I imagined that people thought of God as if he were a supernatural buddy with a thunderbolt. > The Americans in this church are ordinary Americans. They are typically middle class, but one finds very wealthy and very poor people in the congregations. They are typically white, but the congregations include many minorities. Most participants are college-educated. The church took form in California, but there are now more than six hundred churches across the country and as many as fifteen hundred around the world. **The Vineyard is arguably the most successful example of what one sociologist has called new paradigm Protestantism, the infusion of a more intensely expressive spirituality into white, middle-class Christianity.** **This style of spirituality has also been called neo-Pentecostal because it represents the adoption of a Pentecostal ethos, and its flamboyant emphasis on the direct experience of God, into a form acceptable to the white mainstream**. Another name is *renewalist*. According to a recent survey, **nearly one-quarter of all Americans embrace a Christian spirituality in which congregants experience God immediately, directly, and personally**. The Vineyard typifies this powerful new impulse in American spirituality. > The reason people have their notebooks out during sermons isn’t because the sermon is about God, the way a college lecture is about the American Revolution or the poems of Emily Dickinson. Rather, the pastor’s sermon teaches the congregation to use the Bible to relate to God, **both as a God of power and as a best friend**. **Church is a class in which you learn how to hear what God has to say. The pastor teaches that when you are intimate and personal with a supernatural being, God speaks to you. Not all the time and usually not audibly, but in as real and as practical a way as if you were sitting down to coffee with a puzzle you had to solve.** > **Elaine told me that she was trying to hear God speak in the little things, so that she could hear his voice when it really counted. She began to ask him what she should wear every morning. The Sunday we spoke, God told her—as she experienced it—to wear the blue shirt**. But when she put it on, her bra showed, so she took off the blue shirt and put on a black one. When she arrived at church, she was standing around with the worship team. The pastor walked by, smiled, and said (she reported), “I see you are all wearing blue today.” Elaine told me this story to illustrate how mortified she was at having not taken God seriously. The real point, of course, was that Elaine—a deeply committed Christian who had repeatedly explained to me that every word of the Bible was accurate—did not, as she stared at her closet, treat her inference about what God was thinking (“wear the blue shirt”) as an actual insight into divine intention. She thought she had just imagined it. > **The evangelical interest in the direct personal experience of God exploded in the 1960s**. Americans have always been religious, but every so often our religious enthusiasm seems to crest. **Historians have called these periods of religious excitement “great awakenings.”** They appear (more or less) from 1730 to 1760, 1800 to 1840, 1890 to 1930, and 1965 to the present. **During these decades, Americans were more likely to have had unusual spiritual experiences in which they fainted, spoke in tongues, saw visions, and so forth, and they were more likely to seek out and publicly celebrate these changes in consciousness as proof of God’s living presence in their lives**. These are not, of course, the only times when God has inflamed the American senses. Throughout the twentieth century, there were American churches that encouraged and even relied on unusual spiritual phenomena. Pentecostalism was born in Los Angeles in the early twentieth century and continued to grow over the decades. Southern Baptist churches encouraged richly spiritual experience well before the late twentieth century. Nevertheless, America does seem to have periods when great spiritual passion enters many humble homes. We are, scholars suggest, in such a period now. --- What is an overview of Christian views on the practice of relating to God as a very interactive, intimate, and personal friend?

Allow me to clearly illustrate the existence of controversy by way of examples. As a first example, consider the book [*Marvels & Miracles: God Wrought in the Ministry for Forty-Five Years*](https://www.amazon.com/Marvels-Miracles-Wrought-Ministry-Forty-Five/dp/1534965351/) , which includes a synopsis featuring an inspiring message for those seeking a deeper relationship with God (bolded): > Often described as the 'Grandmother of the Pentecostal Movement', Maria Woodworth Etter was a figurehead of the early Pentecostal and Charismatic Christian movement. Her ministry would touch hundreds of thousands and eventually through the power of her books, millions. Thousands more would attend her Holy Spirit-filled meetings, bringing the sick, the lame, the possessed and the lost. In those meetings the Holy Spirit would visit in such a powerful way that men and women would "lay like dead" while other would start trembling or speaking in tongues. Marvels and Miracles is Maria's accounts of the marvels and miracles that took place during her ministry. It speaks of her calling, her initial lack of self-belief in being able to follow that calling and the signs and wonders that followed once she had accepted it. **For anyone seeking a deeper relationship with God or for those who are yearning to read about what he is able to do through those who pick up the mantle of faith, Marvels and Miracles promises to show you**. As a second example, consider Jack S. Deere's teachings in his book [*Why I Am Still Surprised by the Voice of God: How God Speaks Today through Prophecies, Dreams, and Visions*](https://www.amazon.com/Surprised-Voice-God-Through-Prophecies-dp-0310108152/dp/0310108152/ref=dp_ob_title_bk) : > Not only does God still speak to us apart from the Scriptures—**we should expect Him to**. > > This is the story of how Jack Deere learned to hear the voice of God in his life **and how you can too**. It’s clear that the ideas promoted by these books would raise some eyebrows among critics like [Jordan Standridge](https://www.gracechurch.org/standridge) from Grace Community Church, who expressed his views at the Cripplegate, where he [wrote](https://thecripplegate.com/three-reasons-god-is-a-cessationist/) : > ### Three Reasons God is a Cessationist > > [...] > > God is not the author of chaos. And that’s the only way to describe what happened in 1914 at the Azusa street revival. For more than 1800 years of church history, God had stopped giving men sign gifts until supposedly He let man out of his box again. This produced speaking in unintelligible languages. It produced unconfirmed and unprovable healings, and, ultimately, turned prophecy into unreliable and fallible statements. It produced women preaching, and all kinds of ecclesiological problems. > > And as we look around today, so many questions arise. As we hear of all the miraculous gifts that are being claimed all over the world, we have to ask ourselves a simple question. Has God taken man out of his “can’t do miracles box” after 1800 years of church history and given them back the abilities that a few people at the beginning of the church age had? If he has, why has he entrusted these TBN money-hungry charlatans with these abilities? However, [J. P. Moreland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._P._Moreland)—an American philosopher, theologian, Christian apologist, and distinguished Professor of Philosophy at Talbot School of Theology at Biola University—would counter with his latest book, [*A Simple Guide to Experience Miracles: Instruction and Inspiration for Living Supernaturally in Christ*](https://www.amazon.com/Simple-Guide-Experience-Miracles-Supernaturally/dp/0310124190) , whose synopsis states: > Does God Still Do Miracles Today? *A Simple Guide to Experience Miracles* will give you confidence in and awareness of the supernatural realm as you learn how to flourish spiritually by experiencing more miraculous interventions in your life and ministry. Internationally renowned philosopher J. P. Moreland looks at the nature of miracles and explains **why bearing and receiving credible testimony to God's miraculous acts is a crucial feature of a mature Jesus-follower**. He also shows how to distinguish a real miracle from a mere coincidence. **Miracles bring comfort to believers, strengthening faith in God and creating boldness in our lives**. In other words, for J. P. Moreland, diving deep into one's relationship with God and maturing as a follower of Jesus means embracing the miraculous aspects of Christian living. However, let’s set aside the controversy surrounding the miraculous for now and let's focus instead on seeking God’s face—a central theme throughout the Bible. GotQuestions explores this in their article titled [*What does it mean to seek God’s face?*](https://www.gotquestions.org/seek-Gods-face.html) , which explains: > The true nature of worship is to seek God’s face. The Christian walk is a life devoted to seeking God’s presence and favor. The Lord wants us to humbly and trustingly seek His face in our prayers and in our times in His Word. It requires intimacy to look intently into someone’s face. **Pursuing God’s face is equivalent to developing an intimate relationship with Him**: “O God, you are my God; I earnestly search for you. My soul thirsts for you; my whole body longs for you in this parched and weary land where there is no water. I have seen you in your sanctuary and gazed upon your power and glory. Your unfailing love is better than life itself; how I praise you!” (Psalm 63:1–3, NLT). > > [...] > > Seeking God’s face means desiring to know His character and wanting Him—**His presence**—more than any other thing He can give us. According to GotQuestions, *seeking God’s face* involves developing an *intimate relationship with God* and pursuing *His presence*. Essentially, one mystery is explained with two mysteries. If we concentrate purely on the aspect of pursuing *God's presence*, one might consider the approach of [Brother Lawrence](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brother_Lawrence) , a 17th-century Carmelite friar, who authored the well-known classic of Christian mysticism, [*The Practice of the Presence of God*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Practice_of_the_Presence_of_God) : > The text attempts to explain Lawrence's method of acquiring the presence of God. A summary of his approach can be gleaned from the following passages. "That he had always been governed by love, without selfish views; and that having resolved to make the love of GOD the end of all his actions, he had found reasons to be well satisfied with his method. That he was pleased when he could take up a straw from the ground for the love of GOD, seeking Him only, and nothing else, not even His gifts." "That in order to form a habit of conversing with GOD continually, and referring all we do to Him; we must at first apply to Him with some diligence: but that after a little care we should find His love inwardly excite us to it without any difficulty." Lawrence pleads that all work is valuable to God and one need not accomplish great things to please Him. The labourer is as valuable to God as the priest. (Note: a comprehensive list of 17th-century Christian mystics is available [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:17th-century_Christian_mystics).) Yet again, someone like John MacArthur, in his sermon [*The Promise of the Holy Spirit, Part 2*](https://www.gty.org/library/sermons-library/43-75/the-promise-of-the-holy-spirit-part-2) , would offer a contrasting viewpoint: > It was a number of years ago now – it’s probably been 20 years or so ago – when I was surprised to see a wave coming into the church under the title *Experiencing* God, *Experiencing* God. If you go to any Christian bookstore over the last 20 years or more, you’re going to find books on experiencing God. There were a couple of Southern Baptist pastors who developed, not only the books, the perspective, but then began to develop curriculum, and more curriculum, and more books; and this literally became an all-encompassing, all-engulfing movement in the evangelical church experiencing God. > > [...] > > **Christian mysticism, through the Middle Ages, and even until now, has always sought to find God in some experience, some feeling, some emotion; some means by which the senses imminence is present. This has become a popular notion in evangelical churches that there are ways in which you can feel God, in which you can sense God’s presence**. > > Perhaps the most popular one is music. If you get the right music, if the music is sort of musically seductive enough and emotionally energized enough, people will say, “I just feel the presence of God. Don’t you feel the presence of God?” > > **Well, of course, that is absolute nonsense. You can’t feel the presence of God. You don’t have any mechanism to feel the presence of God. I’ve never felt the presence of God; I don’t even know what that means.** But I do know this: He’s here. And more than that, He not only inhabits the praise of His people; is joined to His people in union all the time so that the church itself literally is in constant communion with God collectively; it’s not only true that where two or three are gathered together, He is in the midst. But, this is true. --- Why is there such a controversy among Christians over defining core and fundamental aspects of Christian living, **particularly in regard to understanding the nature of a relationship with God and what it entails**, including what Christians can yearn for, aspire to, and expect from such a relationship?

T.M. Luhrmann cites many instances of this practice in her book *[When God Talks Back: Understanding the American Evangelical Relationship with God](https://www.amazon.com/When-God-Talks-Back-Understanding/dp/0307277275)* . Below I share some quotes to illustrate this point: > **ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS a person must master at a church like the Vineyard is to recognize when God is present and when he responds.** **This can seem odd to someone raised in a mainstream church, where God is usually not imagined as a person with whom you have back-and-forth conversation throughout the day**. **At the Vineyard, people speak about recognizing God’s “voice.” They talk about things God has “said” to them about very specific topics—where they should go to school and whether they should volunteer in a day care—and newcomers are often confused by what they mean. Newcomers soon learn that God is understood to speak to congregants inside their own minds**. **They learn that someone who worships God at the Vineyard must develop the ability to recognize thoughts in their own mind that are not in fact their thoughts, but God’s**. **They learn that this is a skill they should master. At the beginning, they usually find both the skill and the very idea of the skill perplexing.** > It is indeed a striking God, this modern God imagined by so many American evangelicals. Each generation meets God in its own manner. Over the last few decades, this generation of Americans has sought out an intensely personal God, a God who not only cares about your welfare but worries with you about whether to paint the kitchen table. These Americans call themselves evangelical to assert that they are part of the conservative Christian tradition that understands the Bible to be literally or near literally true and that describes the relationship with Jesus as personal, and as being born again. But the feature that most deeply characterizes them is that the God they seek is more personally intimate, and more intimately experienced, than the God most Americans grew up with. **These evangelicals have sought out and cultivated concrete experiences of God’s realness. They have strained to hear the voice of God speaking outside their heads.** They have yearned to feel God clasp their hands and to sense the weight of his hands push against their shoulders. They have wanted the hot presence of the Holy Spirit to brush their cheeks and knock them sideways. > In effect, people train the mind in such a way that they experience part of their mind as the presence of God. They learn to reinterpret the familiar experiences of their own minds and bodies as not being their own at all—but God’s. **They learn to identify some thoughts as God’s voice, some images as God’s suggestions, some sensations as God’s touch or the response to his nearness**. They construct God’s interactions out of these personal mental events, mapping the abstract concept “God” out of their mental awareness into a being they imagine and reimagine in ways shaped by the Bible and encouraged by their church community. They learn to shift the way they scan their worlds, always searching for a mark of God’s presence, chastening the unruly mind if it stubbornly insists that there is nothing there. Then they turn around and allow this sense of God—an external being they find internally in their minds—to discipline their thoughts and emotions. **They allow the God they learn to experience in their minds to persuade them that an external God looks after them and loves them unconditionally**. > I call this point of view the anthropological attitude. Anthropologists are taught as students to seek to understand before we judge. We want to understand how people interpret their world before passing judgment on whether their interpretation is right or wrong. And so I will not presume to know ultimate reality. I will not judge whether God is or is not present to the people I came to know. **Yet I believe that if God speaks, God’s voice is heard through human minds constrained by their biology and shaped by their social community**, and I believe that as a psychologically trained anthropologist, I can say something about those constraints and their social shaping. The person who hears a voice when alone has a sensory perception without a material cause, whether its immaterial origin is the divine presence or the empty night. **Only some religious communities encourage people to pay attention to their subjective states with the suggestion that God may speak back to them in prayer. I will ask how a church teaches people to attend to their inner awareness and what training in prayer and practice they provide—and I can answer that question**. Only some people have those startling, unusual experiences (although more people, it happens, than most of us imagine). I will ask whether some people are more likely to have those experiences than others, and whether there are differences in temperament or training that might set those who are able to have such experiences apart from those who don’t—and again, I can answer that question. What is the Biblical basis for this practice? --- ### Similar questions I found on the site https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/85819/61679 - This question focuses on denominations that believe in hearing from God. Very insightful, but not exactly what I'm asking here. https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/16215/61679 - This question sounds like a question that someone who is joining the Vineyard for the first time would probably ask. Related but not exactly what I'm asking here. The question was also closed as opinion-based. https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/8564/61679 - This question captures the frustration of someone who would like to hear from God, but hasn't had the privilege yet. Interesting and related, but not exactly what I'm asking here. https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/80658/61679 - This question does provide examples of Biblical passages documenting cases in which the Holy Spirit spoke to certain individuals for specific purposes. However, I'm not entirely sure if those passages would constitute the entire Biblical basis that someone from the Vineyard or similar denominations would utilize to support their practices. In addition, that question is concerned with the cessationist perspective, so the focus is different.

I only heard this term a few days ago. Although I’ve had to go to various web-sites to try to find out about it, **I feel confusion growing and seek help from Reformed Protestants.** At first, I thought it was a more academic name for “Cultural Christianity” but apparently not – or is it? What gave rise to this phrase? Is there a specific year when it was written about, and was America the seed-bed for it (please don’t be offended at that question, all you Christian Americans on this site – it’s just that hundreds of ‘new’ religious movements all claiming to be Christian have sprung up there since the early 1800s to this very day.) ***So far, I gather that it teaches*** a god who created and watches over the earth and its people, wanting people to be nice to each other. But it is viewed as wrong to hold strong theological convictions (which are shunned and said to be harmful and judgemental, preventing equality amongst all religions, which seems to be its idea of a good thing). There is no repentance for sinning [which is an action of the will of the individual to go against God’s will], there is no idea of becoming a servant of Christ, or of devotion to prayer and Scripture reading. This leads to congregations where people do have a form of belief but do not have any understanding of their own religious traditions and what they are supposed to believe in order to be Christians. If they do understand their traditions, they simply don’t care to believe them and substitute whatever makes them feel good. ***Am I right with that brief summary?*** **The crucial matter for this analysis, though, is whether Moral Therapeutic Deism accords with orthodoxly Christian doctrine and practice.**

When Christians talk about having a "personal relationship with Jesus," what does this mean?