Sorry, another addition to jon's thoughts on dualism. This is a good one! Talk about how we form ideas traditionally that are anti-holistic. We really have taken on this flesh v. spirit attitude/language that Paul speaks of. And as we all know from that lovable philosopher Wittgenstein (my personal favorite, and IMHO (<--in my humble opinion) the most relevant philosopher for understanding religion in postomdernity...talk about freeing your mind, he'll blow it away!), the language we use binds our thinking. That's because we are unable to think outside of our language barriers (according to Wittgenstein).
The Metaphorical language that Paul uses (and Christ to) about the flesh and the spirit shouldn't be taken literally. Why you ask? Well I could break down several of those texts for you, but that would be lengthy and you may find that boring. Also, it's METAPHORICAL! Back to Wittgenstein: we use Metaphorical language about God/religion/spirituality because it is hebel (Hebrew: found in Eccl.): vapor, mist, breath.... something we can't fully grasp, only catch fleeting glimpses of. This kind of language falls apart when interpreted literally!
Let's just say this: Christ came to unite us not divide. Christ came to help us to reinstate the original relationship that God had intended for us in his formation of humankind. (you can debate me on that, but if you really think about it, holistically (that's my new word!) that's exactly what we claim in "the gospel message").
So Christ was a uniter, and he was the example of what a holistic person (spiritually, mentally, physically) looked like! Isn't that part of what made him perfect (because his perfection is what we teach)? Otherwise he would be less than perfect. Flesh isn't sinful, and spirit pure. In the same way, the world isn't sinful, while the Church is pure. They are all at the same time tainted and holy. Why? Because God is in the midst of all things!
What would a holistic Christ-follower look like?
I really connect with that last line in the illistration... the idea of being disconnected because there is the need, "a bid" for freedom within me. Freedom that my experiences in traditional Christianity hasn't allowed. But what does it mean to be free in Christ? A topic I am (have been) working on for a future post!
Your thoughts on this Dualistic series?
I like how you wrote IMHO and then took the time to type it out anyway.
ReplyDeleteHa! yeah I wrote it, but am painfully aware of how some of my readers aren't used to the TXT or IM acronyms that We've become used to:) Mainly because my sister uses the ALL the time and sometimes it will take me forever to get what she's saying.
ReplyDeleteThis is the guy that took 2 months to figure out what mmk was. I knew it meant ok..but never sounded it out! so I take that back...It is being sensitive to my readers...but more so, it's painfully aware at how stupid I am when it comes to txt short-hand! :) so btw, lol, i'm AFK, and IMO this is Kewl! GTG b/c AFAIK BJJDI:)
BTW...I have to force myself not to short-hand X,Xn or Xnty for Christ, Christian(anity)...but i Def. want a key for the short-hand for God. 0 with a line thru the middle! thnk how mch shrtr my blgs wld b!
ReplyDeletehaha. You should teach middle school.
ReplyDeleteAre you sure Christ came to unite all? According to Matthew 10:
ReplyDelete34"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35For I have come to turn
" 'a man against his father,
a daughter against her mother,
a daughter-in-law against her motherinlaw—
36a man's enemies will be the members of his own household.'
Well, I never said that Christ came to unite us "all". I see where you are misreading a single sentence out of the context of my whole post. The point of the post is about becoming a holistic Christian. To be unified to GOD and CHRIST body, Mind, Heart, and Soul. Please reread with that idea in mind.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of context, I believe that passage is being implied out of context. I don't know what the purpose/agenda was in quoting Matthew 10, But in any case it doesn't apply to this topic. If you want to explain further, feel free...but in the framework of your wording it is both misrepresenting the passage and how it applies to the topic of this blog: being united holistically with who we were supposed to be. It's about putting ourselves back together. I'm sorry if you misunderstood the post's intent, but I hope it isn't trying to put words in my mouth. Feel free to continue this discussion but know that I won't be pulled into a scriptural/theological debate. That would do nothing but be disrespectful to both of our opinions. Please write back! I am willing to discuss the topic of the blog, even if one disagrees with the premise of the post!
I think the line you are refering to is, ..."Christ came to unite us, not divide." Perhaps it is better stated that, "Christ came to unite us to God and to ourselves (as we were meant to be), not to divide us from Himself or from ourselves."
sorry I thought that was all implied by the rest of the paragraph.
I think Matthew 10 tells us that we should go on a crusade and attack anyone who doesn't believe with us, especially the members of our own household.
ReplyDeleteWhere's my battle axe?