I grew up in a Roman Catholic family. But, I have to admit, that Roman Catholicism never made that much sense to me. But I did very much like the New Testament. The Person of our Saviour was beautiful, in every way. But it seemed I could not find Him, here on earth, a living icon of Him. I didn't even understand that that's what I was looking for, but in retrospect it really was the beauty of the Gospels, along with my own experience, that taught me that the things of this earth are not permanent and are not fulfilling. I was looking for people who were living what I had learned in the Gospels--love for God and neighbor, non-possessiveness, peace, integrity, Truth. Something you can really hold on to and trust.
During the time I was at the experimental college, which was really a very experimental time, there were many times I would not have identified myself as a Christian. I would have had to say I wasn't sure of anything at that point. I even got annoyed at one Christian girl in our Religion Class, because when I wanted to argue with her after class (who knows where I was in my winding road at that point and what I was defending), she was so incredibly nice. "Ugh", I thought at the time. It sort of infuriated me, but I knew that she had shown in action what I could not have, and what I was not seeing alot of. I knew she had something, not because of what she was saying, but because of who she was being. She was being loving, patient and kind, even with someone who was being antagonistic and who was wrong. Apparently I had drifted so far at that point that I wasn't able to accept it when I saw it, but I definitely did register it. I often think about "the ripple effect" and how our actions, both good and bad, have far reaching ramifications, many of which we will never know. To that young lady, I say thank you.
There were other moments of clarity that helped as well.
The school was part of a five college consortium, so "college towns" were easy to get to and within walking distance. One day I went into town to enjoy a little lunch, and then visited the bookstore. I would say that what happened that day was a visitation from God. That is, one of those moments when something happens, and you know that the really grounded and logical thought you just had was not of your own making. I find that moments like these leave a deep impression on the soul. I was looking at the many book covers, on several shelves, almost all speaking to some sort of spirituality. (It would not be surprising to find a bookstore focusing on that in this town, and it would not be surprising that I would be in it.) As I scanned the shelves, "looking for enlightenment", it became apparent to me that many of these gurus and "ways" were claiming that Christ was part of their movement. It actually became startlingly obvious that everyone seemed to want to lend credence to their philosophy by claiming that Christ was one of their own. That really struck me. Christ must be very important if, in general, so many want to claim Him, as if He is the test of credibility. As that began to dawn on me, and I probably started to wonder, "But who is right?", the thought gently came into my mind "You can see that everyone wants to claim Christ and they all say something different; believe Him for who HE said He Is."
Now, that is logical. And I have to say that I probably would have never thought of it on my own. After all, it's so obvious, but why had I never thought it before? That sent me back again to one of the most important books of my life, and certainly of that time period. I had read Mere Christianity by C. S. Lewis earlier, and been positively influenced by it, but then got pulled astray by my many interests, friends and explorations leading down other paths. Now I went back and reread it. And that was it. I knew his arguments were true. I knew I was going to accept Christ for Who He said He Is. Lewis makes a very good point. (And I am quoting from decades ago, so this will not be word for word.) He said that Christ was one of two things. He was either God, come down to earth, or He was a person derailed in his mind. Lewis wrote this because it is clear from the Gospels that Christ said in many ways that He is God. He said that that He came down from Heaven, that He is one with the Father, that His Kingdom is not of this world, that He is the awaited Messiah, and that He is the great I Am of the Old Testament. "Before Abraham was, I Am." (Gospel of St. John 8:58)
C.S. Lewis is being simply logical in pointing out that there are only two possible scenarios. He either IS God, as He said in so many ways, or He is one of the many who are deluded into thinking they are God and go around saying that. If you add to the pile of evidence, not only what Christ said, but that He cured illnesses, raised the dead, Himself triumphed over death, and His disciples who were formerly cowards then became lions after His Resurrection, then we have not only words, but also very unusual and strong evidence.
There is no evidence that He was a madman, because madmen come and go. We don't set time (we are now in the year 2018 after Christ) because of people who walk on the street claiming they are God; we usually don't even remember them past their own lives. To say Christ didn't exist at all, is just silly. So why don't we say Napoleon didn't exist? And Washington didn't exist? History records—even many non-Christian sources from that time, and not even sympathetic to Christianity—that Christ lived on this earth, and even that He was crucified under Pontius Pilate. Why don't we say that Pontius Pilate didn't exist? Or Nero? Or Caesar? Or Buddha? Or Confucius? Just the fact that we only say that about Christ, is sort of like a...big red flag that maybe we are not comfortable with something....(??). We need to be honest about these things. Because then we can start asking the questions, "Why aren't we comfortable?" and we may find some very surprising and wonderful answers.
Back to the day in the bookstore and what I came to understand pursuant to the idea that I should believe Christ for Who He said He is:
In these other philosophies, they want to claim that Christ is an enlightened person. A man who had reached a pinnacle of their understanding of enlightenment, or nirvana, and transcended normal human beings. Someone who they were trying to follow down this path of "self realization." The big problem with that is that Christ never taught that. In any way. People are always reading into the Scriptures what they want to see and interpret, but if one takes the Gospels as a whole, one cannot cherry pick that out, except by being pre-disposed to that idea, and using one's imagination. That Christ was a mere mortal who became "an enlightened being" is actually not an option. If someone wants to reject Christ as God, that is an option. Not a good one, but we all have free will. But to say He is not God, and use Him to somehow justify something He never taught, that is dishonest spirituality, what is called delusion.
I came to understand that I had many delusions. But I certainly did not want to be deluded. I wanted to find God. And now I understood that Christ is God. And I wasn't going to be pulled away from that again. I had tasted a bit of both. To believe and know that Christ is God brought stability and clarity into my floundering life. To walk with those who didn't accept Him, or who wanted to carry Him as a flag, down all sorts of paths that wreaked of a very different and darker spirituality, I knew from experience where that was leading as well. I had tasted of it, and it was not good, and leads to depression, at the very least.
I had a choice, and I chose to want to follow Life, not death. But I still had a very big unanswered problem. How do you do that?
Please continue to Introduction Part IV, I'll meet you there!
With love in our Saviour, Ahava
During the time I was at the experimental college, which was really a very experimental time, there were many times I would not have identified myself as a Christian. I would have had to say I wasn't sure of anything at that point. I even got annoyed at one Christian girl in our Religion Class, because when I wanted to argue with her after class (who knows where I was in my winding road at that point and what I was defending), she was so incredibly nice. "Ugh", I thought at the time. It sort of infuriated me, but I knew that she had shown in action what I could not have, and what I was not seeing alot of. I knew she had something, not because of what she was saying, but because of who she was being. She was being loving, patient and kind, even with someone who was being antagonistic and who was wrong. Apparently I had drifted so far at that point that I wasn't able to accept it when I saw it, but I definitely did register it. I often think about "the ripple effect" and how our actions, both good and bad, have far reaching ramifications, many of which we will never know. To that young lady, I say thank you.
There were other moments of clarity that helped as well.
The school was part of a five college consortium, so "college towns" were easy to get to and within walking distance. One day I went into town to enjoy a little lunch, and then visited the bookstore. I would say that what happened that day was a visitation from God. That is, one of those moments when something happens, and you know that the really grounded and logical thought you just had was not of your own making. I find that moments like these leave a deep impression on the soul. I was looking at the many book covers, on several shelves, almost all speaking to some sort of spirituality. (It would not be surprising to find a bookstore focusing on that in this town, and it would not be surprising that I would be in it.) As I scanned the shelves, "looking for enlightenment", it became apparent to me that many of these gurus and "ways" were claiming that Christ was part of their movement. It actually became startlingly obvious that everyone seemed to want to lend credence to their philosophy by claiming that Christ was one of their own. That really struck me. Christ must be very important if, in general, so many want to claim Him, as if He is the test of credibility. As that began to dawn on me, and I probably started to wonder, "But who is right?", the thought gently came into my mind "You can see that everyone wants to claim Christ and they all say something different; believe Him for who HE said He Is."
Now, that is logical. And I have to say that I probably would have never thought of it on my own. After all, it's so obvious, but why had I never thought it before? That sent me back again to one of the most important books of my life, and certainly of that time period. I had read Mere Christianity by C. S. Lewis earlier, and been positively influenced by it, but then got pulled astray by my many interests, friends and explorations leading down other paths. Now I went back and reread it. And that was it. I knew his arguments were true. I knew I was going to accept Christ for Who He said He Is. Lewis makes a very good point. (And I am quoting from decades ago, so this will not be word for word.) He said that Christ was one of two things. He was either God, come down to earth, or He was a person derailed in his mind. Lewis wrote this because it is clear from the Gospels that Christ said in many ways that He is God. He said that that He came down from Heaven, that He is one with the Father, that His Kingdom is not of this world, that He is the awaited Messiah, and that He is the great I Am of the Old Testament. "Before Abraham was, I Am." (Gospel of St. John 8:58)
C.S. Lewis is being simply logical in pointing out that there are only two possible scenarios. He either IS God, as He said in so many ways, or He is one of the many who are deluded into thinking they are God and go around saying that. If you add to the pile of evidence, not only what Christ said, but that He cured illnesses, raised the dead, Himself triumphed over death, and His disciples who were formerly cowards then became lions after His Resurrection, then we have not only words, but also very unusual and strong evidence.
There is no evidence that He was a madman, because madmen come and go. We don't set time (we are now in the year 2018 after Christ) because of people who walk on the street claiming they are God; we usually don't even remember them past their own lives. To say Christ didn't exist at all, is just silly. So why don't we say Napoleon didn't exist? And Washington didn't exist? History records—even many non-Christian sources from that time, and not even sympathetic to Christianity—that Christ lived on this earth, and even that He was crucified under Pontius Pilate. Why don't we say that Pontius Pilate didn't exist? Or Nero? Or Caesar? Or Buddha? Or Confucius? Just the fact that we only say that about Christ, is sort of like a...big red flag that maybe we are not comfortable with something....(??). We need to be honest about these things. Because then we can start asking the questions, "Why aren't we comfortable?" and we may find some very surprising and wonderful answers.
Back to the day in the bookstore and what I came to understand pursuant to the idea that I should believe Christ for Who He said He is:
In these other philosophies, they want to claim that Christ is an enlightened person. A man who had reached a pinnacle of their understanding of enlightenment, or nirvana, and transcended normal human beings. Someone who they were trying to follow down this path of "self realization." The big problem with that is that Christ never taught that. In any way. People are always reading into the Scriptures what they want to see and interpret, but if one takes the Gospels as a whole, one cannot cherry pick that out, except by being pre-disposed to that idea, and using one's imagination. That Christ was a mere mortal who became "an enlightened being" is actually not an option. If someone wants to reject Christ as God, that is an option. Not a good one, but we all have free will. But to say He is not God, and use Him to somehow justify something He never taught, that is dishonest spirituality, what is called delusion.
I came to understand that I had many delusions. But I certainly did not want to be deluded. I wanted to find God. And now I understood that Christ is God. And I wasn't going to be pulled away from that again. I had tasted a bit of both. To believe and know that Christ is God brought stability and clarity into my floundering life. To walk with those who didn't accept Him, or who wanted to carry Him as a flag, down all sorts of paths that wreaked of a very different and darker spirituality, I knew from experience where that was leading as well. I had tasted of it, and it was not good, and leads to depression, at the very least.
I had a choice, and I chose to want to follow Life, not death. But I still had a very big unanswered problem. How do you do that?
Please continue to Introduction Part IV, I'll meet you there!
With love in our Saviour, Ahava
Comments
Post a Comment