Do we have an objective view of Christ in the Bible?

I strive to have an objective view of Christ and the Bible with the knowledge that this is impossible and that my views of these things will always include the subjectivity of my personal context.

With that in mind, I am not afraid of subjective understandings of Christ, recognizing that the Holy Spirit works uniquely and intimately in different individuals. I encourage Christians not simply to have "objective" head knowledge about Christ and the Bible but also to "subjectively" experience and see Christ working in their lives in very real and powerful ways.

 

One of the problems I have seen with such "subjective" understandings is that they can be contrary to the clear teaching of scripture. Scripture must remain our only infallible guide as the Holy Spirit illumines our minds with understanding. God will not be the author of confusion in our lives.

 

I didn't read the article, so I'm just going by the quote. It sounds like Mr Campolo is suggesting some sort of meditation/visualization exercise. I don't think this is what Paul was talking about. Being 'in Christ' is something that requires effort on our part, it is not just a feeling that we get when we think about Jesus. The revolution that is needed in Baptist churches is a revival, not a new way of doing things. We need Christians that are going to stand up for what is right and against what is wrong and be salt and light in the world.

John 15:10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.

The idea that the number of bottoms in the pews is an indicator of the spiritual health of a church has got to be re-examined. If the people are not being discipled to live godly lives, and are just showing up because they like the music style or the positive message, what profit is it? You just have a building full of salt that has lost it's saltness.

 

God makes us accepted in Christ, that is, in the beloved.

If it takes effort on man’s part to be in Christ, how do you say we get in Christ?

Ephesians 1:6 (KJV) To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.

What of the Scripture that speaks of having begun in the Spirit?

Galatians 3:3 (KJV) Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?

References to “in Christ”

Romans 8:1 (KJV) There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

Romans 12:5 (KJV) So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.

Romans 16:3 (KJV) Greet Priscilla and Aquila my helpers in Christ Jesus:

Romans 16:7 (KJV) Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.

1 Corinthians 1:2 (KJV) Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours:

1 Corinthians 1:30 (KJV) But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:

1 Peter 5:14 (KJV) Greet ye one another with a kiss of charity. Peace be with you all that are in Christ Jesus. Amen.

By grace,
Bob Krajcik
Mansfield, Ohio
June 7, 2005

 

Don't misunderstand me Bob, I believe that we are all 'in Christ' in one sense (believers that is). I don't believe that there is any work that is required to be saved, just simple belief in the finished work. But once we are saved, we are told to abide in Him. It is not the one time event that occurs when we are born again, but it is our daily walk, abiding in Him.

 

How can I stop saying "AMEN!!!" to this post!!!???

The Holy Spirit will never teach us anything about Holy Jesus that is outside the realm of Holy Scripture!!!


Bro. David

 

EXPERIENCE NEVER OVERRIDES SCRIPTURE PERIOD!

We have been discussing this matter on another thread concerning Tony C. and his "subjective understanding". We know as much about Jesus as we need to do from the Bible.
Liberals, or those with liberal tendencies always want to bring God or Christ down to man's level. This is just form, way of trying to do that.

This idea of subjective understanding just gives me the vibe that we need to get an understanding of Jesus in such a way that we can minipulate our opinion of Christ to our own discretion. Regardless of what Scripture says. It is not what do I "feel" God is saying to me. It is "What has the Holy Spirit said to me in light of Scripture.

When Paul was in prison he was so concerned about having an experience. He was very concerned that somebody "bring him the parchments" They seemed sufficent for Paul.

I guess today we need a "signs and wonders" Scripture is not deep enough!

 

Paul was NOT so concerned. Excuse my error.

 

TC nor anyone else has suggested otherwise.

 

How can I stop saying "AMEN!!!" to this post!!!???

The Holy Spirit will never teach us anything about Holy Jesus that is outside the realm of Holy Scripture!!!


Bro. David </font>[/QUOTE]I’ll second that AMEN!!! and add:

I could go along with that statement until the teacher starts teaching “his” people that the biblical description of the Cross is less important than what they can imagine up while joining into spiritual formation tapping into things which the Word clearly teaches they ought not. Good way to find yourself recruited into the wrong army.

BTW, Is it TC that is calling himself a prophet or just others? He obviously allows it! There is a test for that and the results aren’t looking good.

 

"tapping into the ancient techniques of prayer"
is promoting that idea when coupled with the subjective understanding of Christ. In my opinion those ideas leaves one with the notion that there is more to be learned than what is revealed for us in Scripture.
Alot of ancient techniques of prayer were mystical in their nature. If you want to know how to pray read the Lord's prayer in the Gospels and take it from there. His instructions are sufficent. I don't need to consult the "ancients".
Furthermore, alot of the ancient prayer techniques by these folk from way back then were Catholics in doctrine. I don't personally consider they're thoughts or methods to be a viable option for me as a evangelical, baptist.
You may not agree but hey its a free country.

There are a band of folk out there right now in evangelical circles that are passing off early "classic" christian literature to the evangelical masses without being forthright in sharing with them that alot of the stuff has its roots in catholic mysticism. I think that is a little bit slight of hand.

 

By the way, Everybody is free to delve into whatever reading they choose. I have no interest personally in wanting to learn prayer techniques from anything that stems from RCC doctrine.

I get sick to my stomach as I see this growing love affair between evangelicals and Rome.
I could care less what some fruit loop monk in a monastary trying to work his way to heaven has to say about prayer.

If you want to learn about prayer read about Hudson Taylor, George Mueller, William Cary
Adoniam Judson, David Livingston. Read about John Huss, John Bunyan I could go on and on and on listing names of great men and women of faith who had tremendous prayer lives. We have a rich heritage of Godly people to get examples from without having to go hocus-pocus with a bunch of imput from poor souls who were decieved in days gone by by the RCC false doctrine.

 

Amen!

 

Thanks for the reply and clarification. Reading your post, as I understand what you have said, I agree with you. Salvation, our coming to Christ, is all of grace. When we are in Christ, we are to actively go about to serve the Lord Jesus.

To my way of thinking, these things are important to the question of the thread, regarding if it is a subjective view or objective view. Myself, I think a new view of Christ is needed, and continues to be needed (Heb 13:15; James 1:25).

Thinking this is important to the question of the need of the church, I have drawn these comments from my web site:

The grace of God actually brings salvation to the sheep, and does not merely try to bring salvation. The one that is saved is not given license for sloth, and when we are saved we are not to be passive recipients of salvation, but are to be active in serving our Lord. Each is to be actively about doing those things they learn from the Bible.

God is not passive in our coming to faith. The unsaved man, the natural man is active in rejecting our Lord , and would not come to the Lord (John 3:3, 5; 6:44), but our Lord is active in salvation (John 6:37-39, 44; 15:5). One must become a new creature (Jer 13:23). The one given new life, the Christian, is to be an active participant in living for the One that has died for us. The saved man is to be active in serving God (Ephesians 2:10; Hebrews 12:25; Romans 8:8-14), our being active in showing our faith, being a new creation, old things passed away (2 Corinthians 5:17-18), and kept, our enduring to the end according to the power of God (1Peter 1:5). With this being said, I reject tests that are designed to show exclusively those that are not saved because of their works. Nevertheless, the walk in the Spirit is not passive, but involves an intentional fighting of the desires of the flesh and a yielding to and performing of the desires of the Spirit according to the Word's of the Bible, by the believer (Rom. 7:22-23; 8:11-17; 2 Cor. 5:17; Eph. 4:24; Col. 3:1-10). The promise is not that we will have no evil desires, but rather that by the Spirit we will not be at ease by the desires of the flesh. Thus the active warfare (Rom. 6:1-23). We are to be actively resisting temptation and with our strength giving ourselves to the performing of the will of God for our lives (1Th. 4:3-8; Jas. 1:12-16; 4:7; 1Pe. 2:15).

We should not forget we are called to the battle of, and not to the enjoyment of that which is forbidden by the law of Christ. There is a very real battle, that many show they do not care about. Our foot is ready to slip and then we are taken "away by our own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death"" (James 1:1415). When Paul wrote in the seventh chapter of Romans he wrote about his own present experience, being a saved man.

With that in mind, looking at Galatians 6:1 consider these comments of John Charles Ryle:

"...It would not be difficult to point out at least twenty-five or thirty distinct passages in the Epistles where believers are plainly taught to use active personal exertion, and are addressed as responsible for doing energetically what Christ would have them do, and are not told to "yield themselves" up as passive agents and sit still, but to arise and work. A holy violence, a conflict, a warfare, a fight, a soldier's life, a wrestling, are spoken of as characteristic of the true Christian. The account of "the armour of God" in the sixth chapter of Ephesians, one might think, settles the question. _Again, it would be easy to show that the doctrine of sanctification without personal exertion, by simply "yielding ourselves to God," is precisely the doctrine of the antinomian fanatics in the seventeenth century (to whom I have referred already, described in Rutherford's "Spiritual Antichrist), and that the tendency of it is evil in the extreme. _Again, it would be easy to show that the doctrine is utterly subversive of the whole teaching of such tried and approved books as "Pilgrim's Progress," and that if we receive it we cannot do better than put Bunyan's old book in the fire! If Christian in "Pilgrim's Progress" simply yielded himself to God, and never fought, or struggled, or wrestled, I have read the famous allegory in vain. But the plain truth is, that men will persist in confounding two things that differ that is, justification and sanctification. In justification the word to be addressed to man is believe only believe; in sanctification the word must be "watch, pray, and fight." What God has divided let us not mingle and confuse."


By grace,
Bob Krajcik
Mansfield, Ohio
June 7, 2005

 

shannonL, it is a shame that you feel this way about the writings of men like:

Polycarp
Justin Martyr
Irenaeus
John Chrysostom
Jerome
Augustine of Hippo
Thomas Aquinas
Erasmus
Francis of Assisi

But the folks you mention are great reads too.

 

IMO

We are to acquire our understand of Christ by understanding the meaning of the Written Word.

Bill G.

 

I think when Campolo and others says the "ancients" he means the mystics, not the early Church fathers. This is a movement coming into the evangelical church and it originated with 3 Trappist monks (Meninger, Thomas Keating, Basil Pennington). Richard Foster, Dallas Willard, and Brennan Manning have promoted this to evangelicals. I heard Keating at a conservative church not long ago present his teaching - it is not biblical.

You should read some of Foster and see how many times he quotes mystics, including Mmd. Guyone, who was excommunicated by the Catholic Church for pantheistic beliefs. He also heavily quotes Thomas Merton. Merton, whom I have read, believed that Buddhism had a lot of wisdom and he (Merton) himself sought to be initiated into an esoteric form of Tibetan Buddhist meditation. I can tell you that, having been involved in some Tibetan Buddhist beliefs and meditation myself (as well as Zen), it is very occultic.

In researching this for my article on Contemplative Prayer (and several years ago for another article), I have found that evangelicals are more and more quoting the mystics as though these mystics had a special relationship to God through experience, not through knowing God in His word. Experience is the key for the mystic. Julian(Juliana) of Norwich, quoted by many evangelicals promoting this stuff, had visions that she told someone and they were written down. That is her "wisdom." Part of these visions included a 'revelation' from Christ that the Fall was an accident and God did not hold it against man. You should read her revelations and get a sense of what these mystics said and believed.

I'm telling you, this stuff is not just unbiblical, it is evil and dangerous. New Agers love the mystics because mysticism is universal - it crosses all belief borders because it is based on experience. And you can get addicted to it.

Mysticism does not teach Jesus as the only way - it teaches that we all have a divine place in us that connects to God and we need only awaken it through meditation (contemplative prayer) and other mystical techniques. This is the teaching, though it is put into other formats and marketed as Christian.

As I did in the other thread, I'm posting the link to my article here for those interested:
http://cana.userworld.com/cana_ContemplativePrayer1.html

 

Another observation:
I think when people speak about having to know Christ subjectively, they are making a false dichotomy between the subjective and objective knowledge of God. I think we have both when we know Christ, together and at the same time.

I think that when we trust in Christ and are "in" Him, we have both the objective and subjective relationship we are supposed to. We get the truth from God's word objectively and the relationship with Christ subjectively (and objectively as well). Trying to divide those is what is leading to all this mystical stuff, as though the Bible is just the objective and we need to get the subjective through some kind of mystical experience based on, btw, techniques made up by men.