Ruminator's question https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/108102/117426 prompted me to compile a list of [Biblical passages](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/a/108109/117426) that discuss mysteries, hidden knowledge, secrets of the Kingdom, and related themes, as well as God's willingness to invite seekers to search these things out. Ruminator also assembled an extensive collection of passages in his own [answer](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/a/108106/117426) on the theme of mystery in the Bible. Interestingly, some of the answers and comments in the linked question appear to advocate a kind of cessationist position, suggesting that everything has already been revealed in the Bible, and therefore no mysteries remain to be disclosed (or so they seem to argue). With this in mind, I am interested in an overview of doctrines from various denominations—including Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and Protestantism—regarding the possibility of God revealing mysteries to spiritual seekers today. It is evident from the Bible that God has certainly revealed mysteries to individuals in the past—for example, Paul's experience of the third heaven in 2 Corinthians 12:2-4, where he received revelations not recorded in Scripture. The question, however, is whether this possibility is still considered viable today, doctrinally speaking, and what conditions, if any, are believed to govern access to such mysteries. Would it be reasonable for a spiritual seeker to earnestly desire the revelation of mysteries today, according to different denominations?

The GotQuestions article, [What is Hesychasm?](https://www.gotquestions.org/Hesychasm.html) , offers one Protestant perspective on the Eastern Orthodox practice: >Hesychasm is a form of [Christian mysticism](https://www.gotquestions.org/Christian-mysticism.html) found almost exclusively in [Eastern Orthodoxy](https://www.gotquestions.org/Eastern-Orthodox-church.html) , rising to popularity in Greece in the 1300s. Roman Catholicism and Protestant denominations have no meaningful equivalents to it. Hesychasm has many similarities to Buddhist concepts of meditation, but it maintains a Judeo-Christian framework, rather than a pantheistic one. The general idea in Hesychasm is to use contemplative prayer, particularly the repetition of “[the Jesus Prayer](https://www.gotquestions.org/Jesus-Prayer.html),” as a means to **experience union with God**. This requires the Hesychast to block out all his senses and eliminate all his thoughts. > > Hesychasm is, supposedly, grounded in Jesus’ command in Matthew 6:6. There, Jesus refutes the ostentatious prayers of hypocrites who want to be seen praying in public. Instead, Jesus says, “Go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.” Hesychasts take Jesus’ reference to secret praying in an extreme and absolute sense. In particular, they believe that Jesus intended His followers to separate themselves from all sensory and intellectual inputs. In other words, “go into your room,” really means “go into yourself.” > > This withdrawal into oneself is accomplished by a form of repetitive [contemplative prayer](https://www.gotquestions.org/contemplative-prayer.html) . The Jesus Prayer is a short, liturgical chant very popular in Eastern Orthodoxy: Κύριε Ἰησοῦ Χριστέ, Υἱὲ τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἐλέησόν με τὸν ἁμαρτωλόν (“Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner”). Hesychasts will repeat this prayer over and over, seeking to invoke the power of the name of God. As they do so, practitioners gradually cut off their perception of external stimuli and eliminate all stray thoughts. **The ultimate goal of this process is [theosis](https://www.gotquestions.org/theosis.html) , a personal unity with God**. > > ... > > Mysticism is based on the quest to “experience” God through the use of rituals or other techniques. All forms of mysticism are rooted in an assumption that God can only truly be “known” in some subjective or personal way. **Contrary to mysticism in general, and Hesychasm in particular, the Bible commands us to pray with a purpose and intent, not with a goal of washing out our own thoughts** (Philippians 4:6; John 16:23–24). Scripture also indicates that God can be known objectively—or else it would not be possible to “examine” or “test” our own faith (1 John 4:1; 2 Corinthians 13:5). > > **Jesus’ comment in Matthew 6:6 was never meant to be taken as a command to go “within ourselves.” It was and is simply a refutation of hypocritical and showy religious antics. While Hesychasm is not quite the same as Eastern meditative practices, it is neither biblical nor beneficial**. Does GotQuestions reflect the mainstream Protestant view on Hesychasm and the pursuit of union with God (theosis)? Is the idea of "experiencing" union with God, as understood in Eastern Orthodoxy, generally rejected by most Protestants? Are there branches of Protestantism that are more open to similar concepts of theosis or experiential union with God? Do any Protestant traditions embrace spiritual disciplines aimed at deepening one's experiential relationship with God?

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)

I know that all Protestants consider prayer and Bible study to be important, but what about other spiritual disciplines, such as fasting, participating in an all-night vigil, practicing silence and solitude, or engaging in ascetic practices like giving up certain foods, refraining from entertainment, living simply, or voluntarily limiting material possessions, as is often seen in monastic life? For example, Jesus fasted for 40 days and often withdrew to solitary places to pray, such as when He spent the whole night in prayer on a mountain (Luke 6:12). Related to this, this question discusses the biblical basis of twelve spiritual disciplines: https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/3469/117426 Do Protestants believe in spiritual principles or laws that make some or all spiritual disciplines effective or beneficial? I understand that Protestants value prayer as a way to communicate with God, and Bible study as a way to receive guidance from God (while not necessarily excluding the possibility of extra-biblical communication). This clearly explains the centrality of prayer and Bible study in Protestant practice. But do Protestants also have a theological or spiritual framework that sees fasting or other ascetic practices as spiritually useful? If someone does not practice fasting, for example, are they missing out on something important? Do Protestants believe that certain spiritual disciplines—beyond prayer and Bible study—can have specific spiritual effects, such as aiding in spiritual warfare or bringing about other spiritual benefits? I recognize that Protestantism encompasses a wide range of perspectives, so I am interested in an overview of them.

Having sang [What a friend we have in Jesus](https://hymnary.org/text/what_a_friend_we_have_in_jesus_all_our_s) since childhood, sharing with Jesus my griefs (verse 1), my struggle with temptation (verse 2), and my toiling in life (verse 3) is natural for me. But when I encourage a lapsed Catholic friend (who grew up in pre-Vatican II era) to do the same with Jesus, I received a strong pushback, saying he is extremely uncomfortable seeing Jesus that way, how what he most appreciated about the Tridentine Mass is the **utmost respect** that everyone shows to God and to Christ, which is another reason he doesn't like to go to church anymore. I happened to hear him talking to his old high school friend, who to this day remains a devoted Catholic (and who also is a catechist at his parish), telling my friend that **for him missing daily mass feels like not visiting a "friend"** (he meant Jesus who is present bodily in the Eucharist). He then tried to disabuse my friend of his misconceptions of the *Novus Ordo* mass, how it's essentially unchanged doctrinally from the *Tridentine* mass, and encouraged my friend to resume his sacramental life. I don't plan to convert my friend to Protestantism but I am trying to **share the Gospel in Catholic terms**. I would be happy if my friend is willing to go to church again and to have a good relationship with Jesus, even in Catholic terms, like how his high school friend is doing. My friend is fine praying the Rosary, which is [in the same spirit](https://udayton.edu/imri/mary/h/hail-holy-queen-prayer.php) as *Salve Regina*. The *Salve Regina* text (see [here](https://www.preces-latinae.org/thesaurus/BVM/SalveRegina.html) , along with the history and the liturgical use of the prayer) **contains similar language with *What a friend we have in Jesus* hymn but directed to Mary** > To thee do we cry, poor banished children of Eve To thee do we send up our sighs, mourning and weeping in this valley of tears. followed by a request for Mary to "see" us with compassion and to "show" us Jesus: > Turn then, most gracious Advocate, thine eyes of mercy toward us. And after this our exile show unto us the blessed fruit of thy womb, Jesus. While I personally do not have a problem with praying to Mary as an individual believer's 1. **spiritual mother** who as the second Eve has *compassion* for us, casualties of the original sin of the first Eve, who like an earthly mother *embraces* and *comforts* a crying child 2. **intercessor**, praying for our salvation, along with the angels and the saints 3. **advocate**, who points us to the One who can help us: God the Father who ***only*** through Jesus Christ His Son takes away our pain, sin, and suffering by our participating in the sacraments, I do wonder whether there is some truth in the Protestant's objection of how prayers to Mary **redirect some aspects** of a believer's relationship with Jesus. It seems to me that Catholic spirituality takes a **BOTH-AND** approach with regards to Jesus and Mary, **dividing the affections** that Protestants direct solely to Jesus. This division of affection by a Catholic seems to match the two main Catholic prayers: - **relating to Mary in the Marian prayers (Rosary, *Salve Regina*):** - as someone who understands us in our weakness like a close friend - as someone whom we are not afraid to approach, because she is "one of us" - as someone who loves us and comforts us like our earthly mother and who wants the best for us - **relating to Jesus as celebrated in the Mass:** - who is the awesome standard of holiness, thus reminds us of our sinfulness (*Kyrie Eleison*) - who is sent by the awesome glorious ruler of heaven and earth (*Sanctus*) - who is also the means of grace through His sacrifice (*Agnus Dei*, the Lamb "who takes away the sins of the world") which then explains perfectly my friend's reticence to relate to Jesus like how the hymn suggests (as a friend). This also explains his preferred attitude when going to mass (utmost respect). Given the above analysis, it now makes sense to me how Eleonore Stump labels her new Atonement Theory described in his 2018 book [*Atonement*](https://www.amazon.com/dp/0198813864) **Marian Interpretation** because her theory cannot be easily subsumed under any previous theories in history, though she relies heavily on Thomas Aquinas. In her account Jesus is portrayed as highly compassionate and as having complete solidarity with us in our weaknesses through complete **mind reading** in compassion & solidarity, hence the Marian aspects in *Salve Regina* ("see" and "show"). Believers no longer need to feel distant to God nor afraid of God's justice and holiness, but are instead motivated to lay our burdens to Jesus, receiving his love for us, being united with Him in the Eucharist, and agreeing to be molded to Jesus's image by being yoked with him. I try to understand a theological tradition and a spirituality in their own terms, so I want to understand the Catholic logic of the devotion to both Mary and Jesus **as Catholics understand it**. So, seeing how Catholics seem to relate to Mary as mother and "friend" but to Jesus mostly as Lord, Savior, and Exemplar, although both are united in love toward us (sojourners in exile, striving in the Church Militant), **can you help me understand the role of "friendship with Jesus" in Catholic spirituality**?

From my reading of the following passages, it seems that Christianity does recognize at least two distinct types of knowledge of God: > [Romans 1:18-23 ESV] 18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be **known about God** is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21 For although **they knew God**, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. > [John 17:3 ESV] 3 And this is eternal life, that **they know you**, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent. The passage from Romans 1 describes a knowledge of God that does not lead to salvation. In contrast, John 17 presents Jesus declaring that eternal life *is* the knowledge of God (and Jesus), a knowledge that clearly brings salvation. What kind of knowledge is Jesus referring to? Am I correct in concluding that the knowledge of God Jesus speaks of is fundamentally different from the knowledge described in Romans 1? Does Christianity indeed recognize different kinds of "knowledge of God"? If so, what are the various ways in which God can be *known* according to Christian teaching? Is there a type of "knowledge of God" that transcends merely acquiring information from books or making intellectual inferences from creation (as in Romans 1)? Is there a "spiritual" kind of knowledge of God, and how is this understood within Christian spirituality?

I was looking at this question: https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/16918/is-there-any-protestant-method-how-to-deal-spiritual-dryness . In it, the OP describes "spiritual dryness" as when a person doesn't feel the 'presence of God'. Let's pause and think about this. Feeling something entails perception—sensing something. In other words, it involves the senses: mechanisms that take in signals and convert them into conscious experience. But if we are talking about "feeling the presence of God," and if God is supposed to be a spiritual being, then unless God chooses to perform a miracle by intervening in the physical world and making his presence physically evident—by impacting our senses of sight, hearing, touch, smell, or taste—the only other alternatives I can think of are: 1. God making his presence known through emotions (which makes me wonder: do we perceive emotions through our five senses—although [some estimate up to 33 senses!](https://www.senseationalspaces.com/blogs-1/re7az3aj7icnauvk324h5l5o0du6vz)—or are emotions perceived through a different sense in the brain?). 2. God making his presence known through our thoughts (perhaps by implanting spontaneous thoughts in our minds?). 3. We actually have a spiritual sense or senses, but these are dormant in most people. For example, an atheist, naturalist, or physicalist who denies the existence of the spiritual might be "spiritually blind" because their spiritual senses are inactive. However, if their spiritual senses were activated, they would be able to have spiritual experiences, just as most people are able to have auditory, visual, tactile, mental, or emotional experiences through the conventional senses. A whole new category of experience would be unlocked through the activation of spiritual senses. The third option reminds me a bit of the concept of the [third eye](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_eye) , though that's an Eastern religious concept rather than a strictly Christian idea. Still, I wonder if Christianity teaches—perhaps with different terminology and nuances—about the existence of some kind of spiritual sense or senses, whether these can be activated (and if so, how), and whether, through them, we can perceive the presence of God (as a spiritual being), or even the presence of angels, demons, or the spiritual world in general. Given these considerations, I’m interested in how different Christian denominations and traditions address the idea of "spiritual senses." Do various branches of Christianity teach that humans have spiritual senses through which they can perceive God or spiritual realities? If so, how are these senses understood, and how do they relate to experiences like "spiritual dryness," the "dark night of the soul," or "feeling the presence of God"? I would appreciate an overview of how major Christian traditions—such as Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and Protestantism—approach this concept.

I was reading this question: https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/14143/117426 . Contemplation is defined by [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contemplation) as follows: > In a religious context, the practice of contemplation seeks a direct awareness of the divine which transcends the intellect, often in accordance with religious practices such as meditation or prayer. > > ### Christianity > > In Eastern Christianity, **contemplation (theoria) literally means to see** > **God or to have the Vision of God**. The state of beholding God, > or union with God, is known as theoria. The process of Theosis which > leads to that state of union with God known as theoria is practiced in > the ascetic tradition of Hesychasm. Hesychasm is to reconcile the > heart and the mind into one thing (see nous). > > Contemplation in Eastern Orthodoxy is expressed in degrees as those > covered in St John Climacus' Ladder of Divine Ascent. The process of > changing from the old man of sin into the newborn child of God and > into our true nature as good and divine is called Theosis. > > This is to say that once someone is in the presence of God, deified > with him, then they can begin to properly understand, and there > "contemplate" God. This form of contemplation is to have and pass > through an actual experience rather than a rational or reasoned > understanding of theory (see Gnosis). Whereas with rational thought > one uses logic to understand, one does the opposite with God (see also > Apophatic theology). > > The anonymously authored 14th century English contemplative work The > Cloud of Unknowing makes clear that its form of practice is not an act > of the intellect, but a kind of transcendent 'seeing,' beyond the > usual activities of the mind - "The first time you practice > contemplation, you'll experience a darkness, like a cloud of > unknowing. You won't know what this is... this darkness and this cloud > will always be between you and your God... they will always keep you > from seeing him clearly by the light of understanding in your > intellect and will block you from feeling Him fully in the sweetness > of love in your emotions. So be sure to make your home in this > darkness... We can't think our way to God... that's why I'm willing to > abandon everything I know, to love the one thing I cannot think. He > can be loved, but not thought." > > Within Western Christianity contemplation is often related to > mysticism as expressed in the works of mystical theologians such as > Teresa of Avila and John of the Cross as well as the writings of > Margery Kempe, Augustine Baker and Thomas Merton. > > Dom Cuthbert Butler notes that contemplation was the term used in the > Latin Church to refer to mysticism, and "'mysticism' is a quite modern > word". This [article](https://conversatio.org/being-with-god-the-practice-of-contemplative-prayer/) presents contemplative prayer as the fourth stage of the *Lectio divina*: > *Contemplatio* is prayer as being. In *contemplatio*, we rest in the presence of the One whose word and presence have invited us to transforming embrace. That word, having touched both our minds and our hearts, now leads us into quiet rest in the Beloved. This is a prayer of presence—the gift of consciousness that is transformed by and infused with God’s presence. It is prayer as being—a gift of being in and with God that allows all my doing to flow from this center. It is, as described by Thomas Keating, the movement from conversation to communion. GotQuestions features an [article](https://www.gotquestions.org/contemplative-prayer.html) on contemplative prayer that outright claims it has no biblical support whatsoever: > Contemplative prayer begins with “centering prayer,” a meditative practice where the practitioner focuses on a word and repeats that word over and over for the duration of the exercise. The purpose is to clear one’s mind of outside concerns so that God’s voice may be more easily heard. After the centering prayer, the practitioner is to sit still, listen for direct guidance from God, and feel His presence. > > **Although this might sound like an innocent exercise, this type of prayer has no scriptural support whatsoever. In fact, it is just the opposite of how prayer is defined in the Bible**. “Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God.” (Philippians 4:6). “In that day you will no longer ask me anything. I tell you the truth, my Father will give you whatever you ask in my name. Until now you have not asked for anything in my name. Ask and you will receive, and your joy will be complete” (John 16:23-24). These verses and others clearly portray prayer as being comprehendible communication with God, not an esoteric, mystical meditation. Do Christian practitioners of contemplative prayer believe it is based on the Bible? If so, what is the scriptural support for contemplative prayer?

Below are several excerpts from Christian websites that discuss the idea of "paying the price" in a spiritual context: > God is a God of process. The major problem with this generation is that men are not ready to **pay the price** to have spiritual power and experiences. But the truth is, if it is genuine, there will be **a price attached to it**. Jesus told the disciples in Luke 24:49 to tarry in Jerusalem until they were endued with power from on high. So, where did you get the version of your divine power without divine process? **Anything valuable always has a price tag**. If you see anything that is valuable, that is cheap, it is either somebody paid for it, or it is stolen. **Authentic power has a price tag**. > > There is a **price you will have to pay** to walk in the authentic power of God. If you see a man that works in supposed power and you don’t see a price in his life, it’s false power he’s working with. The man that God will work with must **pay the price** for spiritual experiences. Specific callings and specific anointing call for specific **prices that we must constantly be paying**. May the Lord find you dependable to carry His power these last days. > > https://spiritmeat.net/2024/06/22/22-june-2024-the-price-for-spiritual-power-and-spiritual-experiences-pay-it-mark-314/ > Every day we need to be watchful by **paying the price to buy the Spirit as the golden oil** so that we may supply the churches with the Spirit for the testimony of Jesus and be rewarded by the Lord to participate in the marriage dinner of the Lamb. > > Our urgent need today is to gain more of the Spirit; we need to live a life of **buying** an extra portion of the Spirit to saturate our entire being. > > Day by day we need to live such a life, a life of **paying the price** to gain the Spirit not only in our spirit but also in our soul, being saturated with the Spirit in our vessel. If we have a day when we don’t **pay the price** to gain the saturating Spirit, that is a wasted day; we do not want to have any wasted days! > > For us to gain more of the Spirit in our soul we need to **pay a price**; we need to **pay the price** of giving up the world, dealing with the self, loving the Lord above all things, and counting all things loss for Christ. > > Day by day we need to **pay the price** of losing our soul life and denying the things that we want to do so that we may pray more, even persevere in prayer and watch unto prayer, so that we may gain more of the Spirit. > > If we don’t **pay the price to buy the oil today**, we will have to pay it after we are resurrected; sooner or later, we will have to **pay the price** – so why not today, why not in this age? > > https://agodman.com/paying-price-buy-spirit-oil-vessel-word-prayer/ > The wise virgins told the foolish virgins to go buy their own oil. When the Bible speaks of the oil, it refers to the Holy Spirit. You may ask, “But, how is it possible to buy the Holy Spirit?” > > Jesus is referring to a person having to **pay the price**, which means denying their will, obeying the Word of God, being faithful, sacrificing and keeping constant watch. > > All those who truly want the presence of God should be aware that **there is a price to pay**. The wise virgins, certainly, **paid the price** (sacrificed) with the time they waited for the bridegroom. Surely, they prepared themselves by investing in their spiritual lives through prayer, fasts, consecration and surrender, not allowing the light of the Spirit to burn out. > > On the other hand, there are those who aren’t willing to **pay that price**. They live according to their fleshly desires, refuse to stop living in sin, are in the church but far from God, have the lamp, which is faith, but don’t have the oil, which is the Holy Spirit. > > https://www.universal.org/en/bispo-macedo/pay-the-price/ Is the idea of "paying the price" for greater spiritual power, anointing, or a deeper experience of God a common teaching across all Christian denominations, or is it emphasized primarily within certain groups? For example, is it widely taught that Christians must *pay a price* to receive more of the Spirit, more anointing, or greater spiritual authority? What is the biblical basis for this teaching?

If there are unmistakable events or experiences that prove "true" salvation, how would we then be able to discern a deceptive event or experience that was administered by Satan? Isn't this why faith is required instead of visible proof? I believe it protects us from the power of Satan, "the god of this world" and master of deception, along with his false "ministers of righteousness". **2 Corinthians 4:3-4** >But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: 4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them. **2 Corinthians 11:13-15** >For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. 14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. 15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works. Please provide actual scripture from our apostle Paul's epistles (Romans through Philemon) that states where we will experience an immediate event or experience that would confirm our eternal salvation aside from having faith alone in Jesus Christ and the work that He completed on the cross on our behalf.

In the Introduction to the devout life by St Francis de Sales we find ten meditations. In the first meditation we read: > Considerations. > > 1. Consider that but a few years since you were not born into the world, and your soul was as yet non-existent. Where wert thou then, O my soul? the world was already old, and yet of thee there was no sign. > > 2. God brought you out of this nothingness, in order to make you what you are, not because He had any need of you, but solely out of His Goodness. > > 3. Consider the being which God has given you; for it is the foremost being of this visible world, adapted to live eternally, and to be perfectly united to God’s Divine Majesty." - [Meditations From The Introduction To The Devout Life By St. Francis De Sales](https://www.discerninghearts.com/catholic-podcasts/meditations-for-the-introduction-to-the-devout-life-by-st-francis-de-sales/) This consideration (whatever that term means) sounds very academic to me and I often have to tell myself to stop trying to do them before I have done more studying on these subjects. I am not sure they are intended to be academic but to me they sound academic. It might be that he wrote his book for people with good education in philosophy and theology. Many writers in what is called the French school of spirituality can sound like they want us to do academic meditations. What does the term "consideration" refers to and is it something academic?

Is acting as if God exist while not actually believing that God exists is functionally identical or is that a sacrilege? To rephrase: is it feasible/possible/morally right to stick one finger in to test the waters or you accept Christianity in it's entirety and there is no middle ground? The reason I'm asking is that from the agnostic fence I've been sitting for the last 20-30 years of my life it seems that the satanic crowd have become increasingly active in the last decade or so and I want to have nothing in common with the Anton le Vei wannabees so am pondering my options spiritually-wise.

Many Christians encourage people to "seek" God. Similarly, many Christians claim that God can be "found". I'm also well aware of the existence of many passages in the Bible that talk about the possibility of "seeking" and "finding" God (see for example https://dailyverses.net/seeking/niv/kjv) . In concrete and practical terms (for the lay reader): - What does it mean to "seek" God? - What does it mean to "find" God? - How can a person know for sure that they have finally "found" God after a long process of "seeking" Him (whatever that means)? [Given the controversial nature of spirituality questions](https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/7168/how-do-we-ask-spirituality-questions) , I'd like to narrow the scope to the **Protestant** perspective. ____ For those interested in the Catholic perspective: https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/86589/50422

Many Christians emphasize the importance of having an actual *relationship with God/Jesus* as opposed to merely being *religious*. The previously asked question https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/69228/50422 attests very well to this fact. But what about when people from other religions claim to have similar personal relationship experiences with their deities? For example, a Muslim claiming to have a personal relationship with Allah, a Hindu claiming to have a personal relationship with Brahman, a Hare Krishna claiming to have a personal relationship with Lord Krishna, a New Ager claiming to have a personal relationship with the Universe, their spirit guides, their higher self, etc. Qualitatively speaking, what sets the Christian *relationship with God* apart from *relationship* experiences that people claim to have in other religions? What makes the Christian *relationship with God* special and unique? Are people in other religions just having counterfeit, deceitful experiences? ____ Related: - https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/84362/50422 - https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/86124/50422

Meister Eckhart was a thirteenth-fourteenth century philosopher, theologian, and mystic who lived and worked in the Dominican Order. In later life, he was accused of heresy and brought up before the local Franciscan-led Inquisition, and tried as a heretic by Pope John XXII. He seems to have died before his verdict was received. What is the status now? Was he ever officially condemned by the Roman Catholic Church or are his teachings recommended like the teachings of St. Thomas Aquinas or other saints?

> 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

Are there Christian books for fence-sitter agnostics—those for whom spirituality and God feel as foreign as trying to explain colors to someone blind from birth or quantum mechanics to a 5-year-old? Such readers might be curious about what Christian spirituality actually entails: what it means, in practical terms, to have a "relationship" with an unseen, undetectable being who, if real, seems hidden in another dimension. How is this relationship supposed to work? How might such a being interact with you? Are there books that address these questions directly, making Christian spirituality concrete and relatable instead of abstract and vague? Ideally, these books would use down-to-earth examples and clear language, leaving readers with genuine insights instead of confusion. Additionally, the book should explore what readers might expect if they choose to engage more deeply in Christian spirituality. What does it mean to "go deep" in a spiritual context? What kinds of experiences or changes—emotional, mental, spiritual, or even supernatural—might they encounter? Clear explanations of this deepening process, with illustrative examples of what a genuine journey of faith might look like, would provide the reader with a clearer roadmap to understanding. Regarding denominations, I'm open to multiple perspectives, so it would be great to receive book recommendations representing the major branches of Christianity—namely, Catholicism, Orthodoxy, and the major subbranches of Protestantism, including Evangelicalism, Anglicanism, Lutheranism, and Pentecostalism/Charismatic traditions. This way, I can gain a well-rounded understanding of Christian spirituality as viewed through different theological lenses, practices, and traditions.

I recently [answered](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/a/103715) my own question https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/103704 , and I'm noticing that each tradition seems to emphasize different aspects of Christian spirituality. In fact, I shamelessly provided all of the book references in the aforementioned answer to ChatGPT and asked it to give me a brief summary of the spiritual emphases in each Christian tradition, and this is what I got: > ### Eastern Orthodox > 1. **Mystical Union with God**: The focus is on achieving a transformative communion with God, often through contemplative prayer > and ascetic practices. *Theosis*, or becoming partakers of the divine > nature, is a central theme. > 2. **Hesychasm**: Silent, meditative prayer, especially the *Jesus Prayer*, is emphasized as a way to achieve inner stillness and unity > with God. > 3. **Tradition and Liturgy**: The liturgy itself is seen as a mystical encounter with the divine, integrating believers into the life of the > Church. > > ### Catholic > 1. **Contemplative Prayer and Mysticism**: Catholic spirituality often emphasizes the practice of contemplative prayer, especially as seen in > the works of mystics like St. Teresa of Avila and St. John of the > Cross. > 2. **Sacraments as Means of Grace**: The sacraments are seen as primary means by which God’s grace is imparted, fostering a spiritual > connection to the divine. > 3. **Service and Community**: Catholic spirituality includes a strong focus on service and commitment to the community, aligning with the > Catholic social teaching of *caritas* (love). > > ### Protestant > 1. **Personal Relationship with God**: A central Protestant emphasis is on the personal, direct relationship with God, often nurtured > through Bible reading, prayer, and individual faith. > 2. **Sola Scriptura (Scripture Alone)**: Protestants view Scripture as the highest authority and often emphasize daily engagement with the > Bible as a means of spiritual growth. > 3. **Practical Discipleship**: A focus on living out one’s faith through spiritual disciplines, such as fasting, solitude, and service, > is common, as seen in works by authors like Richard Foster and Dallas > Willard. > > ### Pentecostal/Charismatic > 1. **Empowerment of the Holy Spirit**: There’s a strong emphasis on experiencing the power and presence of the Holy Spirit, often through > gifts like prophecy, speaking in tongues, and healing. > 2. **Miracles and Signs**: This tradition emphasizes the supernatural, viewing miracles and signs as evidence of God’s active presence in the > world. > 3. **Personal Revival and Witnessing**: Pentecostal spirituality focuses on personal revival, fostering a sense of urgency to spread > the Gospel and witness to others. I haven't fact-checked every detail, but overall the output appears consistent with the book titles. The main point, however, is that each Christian tradition emphasizes different aspects of Christian spirituality. My question, then, is: **would it make sense to attempt a synthesis of these spiritual insights from each tradition to create a "best of all worlds," so to speak? And if so, have there been any recent attempts within Christianity to propose a "hybrid" approach to spirituality that combines these insights?** For instance, could there be a theory of spirituality that integrates the Pentecostal emphasis on the Holy Spirit, the Eastern Orthodox focus on mystical union with God, and the Catholic emphasis on sacraments? Is such a synthesis even possible in principle, or are these perspectives fundamentally incompatible and irreconcilable? I'm asking this question because it seems to me that if each Christian tradition has developed unique practices and doctrinal emphases that nurture different aspects of an individual's relationship with God, then perhaps a more comprehensive theory of spirituality could emerge by integrating these insights. After all, it’s the same God, the same Holy Spirit, the same Jesus, the same spiritual laws, the same universe—so at first glance, I don’t see why a combination of insights wouldn’t be possible. To make an analogy, it would be like Google and Microsoft joining forces to combine their expertise rather than competing, or if Pepsi and Coca-Cola were to collaborate to create an even better drink.

**Scope: I'm seeking answers from Protestant denominations.** The concept of a "personal relationship" is fairly natural and intuitive when we think of the interactions between two human beings, like friends, spouses, or parents and children. However, attempting to extrapolate this intuition and understanding to a relationship between a human and God isn't immediately obvious. Let me explain why I think this. In human interactions, we can dissect a "personal relationship" into several core components: - **Awareness** or **Perception**: In a personal relationship between two individuals, each person must be *aware* of the other's *presence*. Put simply, they must be able to *perceive* each other's existence and acknowledge their presence. It doesn't seem logical to claim that A has a *personal relationship* with B if A isn't aware of B's existence or cannot perceive B's presence. There must be a means for both parties to perceive and be aware of each other's presence for a genuine personal relationship to exist. In human interpersonal relationships, this perception and awareness is possible through our natural senses and a well-functioning brain capable of sound cognitive processing. This combination enables us to decode and interpret sensory input into meaningful concepts, like perceiving another person's presence. - **Communication**: In a personal relationship between A and B, communication is essential. A should be able to convey coherent messages to B, and vice versa. Moreover, A must recognize when B initiates communication and vice versa, which ties closely to the previous point on awareness and perception. A needs to be able to distinguish between moments when B is speaking and moments when B is not, making it possible for A to have reactions such as "Ah, B is addressing me now" (and vice versa). - **Interactivity**: Beyond communication, it should be possible for A and B to engage in many other forms of interaction. While communication is crucial, human interaction can extend to many more activities. For instance, A and B can play a game of chess together, play table tennis together, practice synchronizing moves in a dance routine (like tango) together, take turns driving a car together, and so forth. Notice how these specific examples require fairly equal involvement from both parties. I might be overlooking some features, but the ones I've mentioned appear to be quite fundamental, particularly in human interpersonal relationships. Regarding the concept of a "personal relationship" between a human and God, do the features I outlined (*awareness* or *perception*, *communication*, *interactivity*) retain their importance? Are there additional crucial aspects? Are there interactions that are possible between two humans but are not possible between a human and God? Conversely, are there interactions that are possible between a human and God but that are not possible between two humans? In short, is there an established list of essential attributes in Protestant Christianity defining a "personal relationship" between a human and God? References to official or reputable Protestant sources are encouraged.

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?