"Are You Happy?"

 "Are you happy?"
Honestly, this is a question I don't like to be asked because, at least for me, it's always a complicated answer no matter what my circumstances. There are things I enjoy doing. There are quiet moments when I look around at where I'm at, I listen to the waterfall on the lake, I smell the fragrance of the trees, the grasses, and yes, even the animals and I take it all in, and I feel... somewhat at peace or at least restored to it. When I interact with or play with the animals, the dogs, the goats, and even the chickens I feel a sense of... what? Joy, happiness, pleasure?
     But am I "happy"? The truth is, I don't know that I really know what that means. The older I get, the more I realize that there is a depression at the center of my psyche that has been there for as long as I can remember. When I was younger, it was broken up occasionally with short highs that I wouldn't necessarily call "mania" but they got to the point where I became incredibly uncomfortable with the swings, and so I intentionally tried to force myself onto an even keel emotionally. I would say this was right around mid to late High School for me. I became sort of afraid to express too much "happiness" or reveal that I really liked something because of how it was expressed when I was younger, and the older I got, the more that was ingrained into my behavior.
     Now, I am pushing fifty and middle age is upon me, and more recently I have been confronted with this question as someone else pointed out that I am going through my own version of a mid-life crisis. And the truth is that I had kind of given up on achieving "happiness" a long time ago. Instead, I think I tried to replace it with just trying to do the right thing, to be the right kind of person, and so on, just waiting until my time here on Earth was done. Ironically, that usually didn't go as planned either, as my intentions to do and be the "right thing" to do and be almost always went sideways on me.
      Emotions come and go. Happiness and sadness are like the tides that come in on the beach and go back out again because they are emotions. But there is a deeper thing here than just momentary happiness or sadness. The depression that lies at the heart or core of my psyche has made me so worn out, so tired, and this accompanied by the various stressors which I have had in my life have taken their physical toll on me too, more so that they probably should have for a man my age.
      I've never considered happiness to be a necessary thing, but I think I'm coming to learn that it is a part of my own mind's health which I have neglected for far too long. There is an idea in Buddhism that the body must not be catered to, but it must be cared for like an injured limb. It must be fed, clothed, washed, and generally taken care of or else, like the injured limb, it will not heal properly. In neglecting the necessity of this deeper happiness, my own mental health has not healed properly either, and at time it is showing.
      I need to do a better job of caring for my own mental health, or else it will continue to impact, not only myself, but those around me negatively. By caring for my own mental health, I am also caring for those around me who love me, and even those with whom I interact even if they don't know me, and even those with whom I have no interaction but those who know me interact with.

Why Am I So Critical of Sola Scriptura?

  Why do I get so critical of Sola Scriptura? It is because of the extreme to which many churches and individual "Christians" take it, often with a view to a particular translation of the Scriptures. It becomes so entrenched that the Bible itself becomes an idol. The thing which was meant for our good becomes an instrument of our downfall because of our inherent human malfunction.
The real problem comes when these churches and individuals put the Scriptures on such a pedestal to where it becomes "adoration," that is, worship ascribed only to God Himself, in the same way they accuse Catholics and Orthodox of the "adoration" of Mary, something which Catholic doctrine explicitly forbids. While both sides would deny any such thing, "Bible Christians" do not worship the Bible, and Roman Catholics do not "worship" Mary, nevertheless from all appearances of liturgy, worship music, and arrangement of their sanctuaries, they certainly both give the appearance of it. And so the Bible Christian accuses the RC Christian of Maryolatry, and the RC Christian accuses the Bible Christian of Bibliolatry.
Here's the thing as well, I accept the authority of the Scriptures, but in their proper contexts. I personally hold the Scriptures in a high enough regard to where I have made it a point to seek them out in their own languages and to understand what they are saying on their terms, and not anachronistically on mine. I honestly don't understand why, if someone holds the opinion of Sola Scriptura, they wouldn't do the same. If this book is that important to you, why wouldn't you engage with it in its own tongues and on its own temporal and cultural terms? Why wouldn't you pore over it again and again and again in those languages to understand what is actually being said? If this book is that important, and if it contains the message of deliverance and salvation, why would anyone do anything else?
And yet frequently those who claim Sola Scriptura adhere to one particular translation in their own language, and it's usually the one which supports their own particular systematic theology, or their church's. Yes, I'm looking at you, KJV. NASB and ESV, don't go anywhere. And what really happens is that it is their own systematic theology, supported by this preferred translation out of which they are really making an idol and lifting high, symbolized by their preferred edition of the Holy Scriptures. Much like the Pharisees made an idol out of their own interpretations of the Torah, symbolized by the Torah itself, and something which Paul wrote copiously about trying to untangle and expose.
The first authority for the disciple of Jesus Christ needs to be the Spirit of Jesus Christ with whom they have been made one. It is Jesus Christ Himself, grafted together with the disciple, who must first instruct and interpret everything for the disciple. But the problem which comes in is that many claim to be following His Spirit and yet clearly act according to their own malfunctioning fear, aggression, and bodily cravings. It takes time, practice, and a sincere humility to learn to "hear" and cooperate with His control. Yes, we have the writings of the Prophets and Apostles, but the Apostles in particular were assuming that their readers already knew what they were talking about, and they were as much relying on the Spirit of Christ interpreting what they wrote for their intended audience as they relied on Him for writing it. It was always meant to be about the Spirit of Christ, and not the letters on the page. This was true for the Torah as much as it was true for the New Testament. Those writings in particular were meant to provide guidelines for disciples to know when they were operating from the Spirit and when they were operating from their own flesh, and the importance of understanding the consequences of both. The Spirit of Christ Himself however was meant to be the first authority, the first canon, the first rule.
Of course Scripture has an authoritative place, but the first and most importance authority and source of action, word, and thought for the disciple is the Spirit of Jesus Christ Himself.

More Thoughts on Sola Scriptura

      The doctrine of Sola Scriptura, which originated with the Reformation in the 1500s, says that all one needs for correct theology and Christian practice is the Holy Scriptures, that is, the Holy Bible. There are so many churches and denominations that claim Sola Scriptura as a part of their fundamental creed that it can be said that it is the prevalent or dominant teaching of doctrinal authority among the Christian churches today.
     The problem with it is that, while it sounds great in theory, it doesn't work in actual practice. In virtually every church and denomination which holds to Sola Scriptura in their statements of faith, in practice, there is always Scripture "and" commentaries, Scripture "and" the works of Luther, Scripture "and" the works of John Calvin, Scripture "and" [fill in the blank] in order to bring the preaching of those Scriptures in line with the doctrinal stance of that church, pastor, or denomination.
     Why is this? If the Scriptures alone were sufficient, then there would be no need for any extraneous sources.
     The answer is that Sola Scriptura assumes something about the Scriptures which simply isn't true, as any cursory reading or perusal will attest. Sola Scriptura assumes that the Scriptures are written like an instruction manual, a systematic theology, or some other work where the theological doctrines of faith are clearly laid out and said plainly. This is just not the case at all.
     The Holy Scriptures are 66 (72 if you're Catholic or Orthodox) individual works representing over forty different authors, three languages, a fifteen hundred year time span, and multiple genres of literature such as history, poetry, private letters, prophecies, proverbs and anecdotes, and so on. It gets even more complicated when you realize that the very first five were likely translations from an older language into Hebrew and heavily redacted or even paraphrased. They were all written from the worldview of the authors at the time, which meant some of them honestly thought the Earth was flat, while other later authors understood it to be at least round or a sphere. None of them were ever meant to be taken as a systematic theology, and in many cases (especially the N.T. letters), the authors assumed the reader would know what they were talking about to begin with.
      The truth is that when taking the Scriptures on their own, without any theological presumptions, they reveal a progression of theological thought interspersed among their narratives, prophecies, and personal writings. There is in fact a single narrative which emerges, but it is a narrative, not a systematic theology. It is a story, not a doctrinal outline. It was meant to exist as special revelation within the general revelation of the natural world, and to work set in the context of history, culture, societies, worldviews, and what we can deduce from what the natural world tries to tell us. It was never meant to "operate" apart from them or ripped from their contexts. It was certainly never meant to be confined to this or that theologian's ideas about what God should look like.
       I personally have come to the conclusion of "Prima Scriptura" where Scripture is the primary authority, set in its proper contexts, but not the only authority divorced from them. And my thought is that interpretation must remain fluid and dynamic, not because the Scriptures change, but because our understanding does.

On Self-Righteousness

     Self-righteousness helps no one, least of all the person who is self-righteous. Why? Because it's a lie the ego/mind/identity tells itself in order to stay relatively sane in its malfunctioning state.
     The EMI is driven to attachment to that which is likes, agrees with, and thus accepts as "good." It is also driven to aversion to that which it dislikes, disagrees with, and thus rejects as "evil." It treats these things as either survival necessities or survival threats and the brain responds accordingly. Self-righteousness reassures the EMI that "I am 'good'" and thus not to be rejected as "evil." When the EMI registers the self as "bad" or "evil," it registers itself as a threat and therefore to be rejected, feared, driven away, or destroyed. This causes a "panic" in the system because of the contradiction which must be resolved. The like/dislike or "good/bad" must be adjusted to compensate, which we call "justifying oneself." It is this panic and the complex difficulty in resolution which is the source of many if not most psychological disorders.
     Self-righteousness is the lie the EMI tells itself that, if you follow these rules or this code of conduct that you agree with, then you will be "good" and thus a survival necessity to be protected and/or hoarded. Self-righteousness is a lie because it does not actually fix the underlying error and cannot. It is literally the error trying to compensate for itself and failing miserably. It is also harmful because it cannot easily take into account moral contradictions where following the rule or code of conduct results in harm to someone or an undesirable outcome which is deemed a threat to the EMI. It produces a nonsensical result to the EMI which then triggers that same existential panic which must be resolved in order to maintain relatively normal operations.
     This is why where Paul writes that "The Torah is good," he is absolutely correct. There is nothing wrong with the codes of conduct laid out in the Torah (at least in the society of the ancient world). Not murdering people, not stealing, not craving what isn't yours, and loving your neighbor as yourself are in fact good things to practice. If there was a code of conduct which could have delivered someone from their malfunction, then it would have been the Torah, as Paul writes. The problem isn't the Torah. The problem is the malfunctioning EMI that takes the code of conduct, agrees with it, and then decides that there's nothing wrong with itself as long as it keeps those rules. But because it is not actually governed by those rules, but by its own like/dislike, that is what it considers to be a survival necessity or a survival threat and either craving or aversion in reaction, it cannot hold. "Because the Torah is 'spiritual,' but I am fleshly, sold as a slave subject to the malfunction." Attempting to define your goodness, your own personal right state of being, by keeping the Torah, the instructions of the New Testament, or any moral code of conduct only triggers the malfunctioning EMI to more malfunctioning responses whether in compliance with that code of conduct or defiance of it. The moral code of conduct can do nothing, absolutely nothing, about the hardwired human malfunction which afflicts each one of us.
     Thus, self-righteousness from rule-keeping of any kind, or anything which allows the EMI to place itself in the category of "good," is a self-deception produced by the malfunctioning EMI in order to maintain its own relative sanity (in the programming sense).
     In order to actually deal with the malfunctioning EMI, it has to be bypassed altogether, and a new origin or source of responses and behaviors inserted. Thus the cross, the union with the Spirit of Christ, and the voluntary ability to submit to and cooperate with the Spirit of Christ so that it is He who acts and speaks through us, thus giving those words and actions a genuinely, correctly functioning source from His genuine right state of being.

A Response from the Lord to a Comment About an Attack on "Christian Values"

    Friend, being a disciple of Jesus Christ has nothing to do with defending "western values" or even "Christian values." Being a disciple of Jesus Christ is about one thing, Jesus Christ and the continued practice of imitating Him, that is, submitting to and cooperating with the Spirit of Christ with whom we are one just like He submitted to and cooperated with the Father with whom He was One. It isn't about enforcing a moral code or "values" on everyone else or even ourselves. Paul is very explicit when it comes to this. 

     It's about disengaging from our own devices, our own moral codes, our own flesh originated fear, aggression, and bodily cravings; it's about learning to not submit to our own malfunctioning physical minds, and to engage with and submit to the Spirit of Christ, operating from Him as the source of our words, actions, and so on so that, just as Jesus Christ didn't say or do anything that the Father didn't say or do through Him, so neither we say or do anything that Jesus Christ doesn't say or do through us. All those functioning in this way, thay are not subject to any law, any moral codes, any set of "values" because it is Jesus Christ who acts and speaks and is the origin of their responses and He does not error. He does not sin. That which is born of God does not sin. 

     By focusing on "values", you distract from the whole method, practice, and purpose of discipleship, coming into full synchronization with Jesus Christ. Would Jesus Christ practice witchcraft? Would He consort with demons? If He is acting through you, neither will you and it doesn't matter what stories you enjoy or media you consume. All is permitted, because Jesus Christ acting through you does not and cannot sin, if you are submitting to and cooperating with the Spirit of Christ with whom you are one. If you are not, then you are trying to keep rules, regulations, moral codes, and "values" in order to do what is right, and failing miserably because without Him we can do nothing but "sin". 

     You are focusing on the wrong thing and defending the path of the Pharisee trying to invoke fear of breaking a rule or moral code instead of invoking the Spirit of Christ to act and speak through the person, which is marked, not by fear, but by love, peace, patience, trust, kindness, courtesy, self-control, forgiveness, and so on. If you're going to be a disciple of Jesus Christ, then be a disciple of Jesus Christ and not a disciple of conservatism. That was the path of the Pharisee.

     Friend, re-read what I just wrote. 

     If it is Jesus Christ acting and speaking through you then He is not going to "sin" through you. Herein lies the difference, neither laws nor moral codes nor values have any ability to actually change behavior because the source of that behavior, the malfunctioning human brain/mind remains the same. The only thing they can do is make you feel guilty and afraid as they trigger that very same malfunctioning mind. The only way for behavior to actually change, the only way for correct or "right" behavior to happen is if it is Jesus Christ doing it through you, and the Father, the ultimate source, through Him. 

     For the record, He ate with prostitutes and other "sinful" outcasts and still didn't sin. Pretty sure He could walk into a strip club and come out without sinning either. If He is the one in control, then Scripture is clear, what is born of God does not sin.

Writing What I Have Seen and Heard

 "...what we had heard, what we had seen with our eyes, what we watched happen and our hands felt..."

When I talk about submitting to and cooperating with the Spirit of Christ, and my inability to do anything else but error or malfunction when operating from my own devices, I am not writing from theological theory or hypothesis. I am not just rehashing what some other spiritual writer or theologian has said. While I may occasionally quote others, when I speak about these things, I am speaking from experience. I am talking about "...what I have heard, what I have seen with my own eyes, what I watched happen, and my hands have felt..." I think this needs to be made clear if it hasn't already. I am speaking about what I myself have experienced, and what others have commented on when they have seen me in both states, functioning from the Spirit of Christ and functioning from my own malfunctioning flesh, both before and after my neurofeedback treatments. I am writing from my own observations as well as the observations of others.

     When I am operating from the malfunctioning flesh (which is far more often than I like or want, but I too am still working towards staying put in the Spirit of Christ on a constant basis; I'm not there yet, it's still more intermittent then I want), I am operating from my own fear, and the personal traumas, cravings, likes or dislikes which trigger that fear. I get angry, jealous, offended, judgmental; I can start yelling, I can even become physically violent, though thankfully that is generally directed towards inanimate objects like walls. I can get resentful. I can get argumentative, factious, depressed, scared, and all of this comes out to affect those around me negatively, triggering their own flesh responses of fear, anger, and bodily cravings. I am neither a nice or sometimes even safe person to be around when I am operating from my own malfunctioning survival responses. From my own devices, I still have a lot of difficulty reading others, or socializing, and get overwhelmed way too quickly thus also feeding into the fear, frustration, and anger. Put simply, I cannot do anything else but error or malfunctioning responses when I am operating from my own malfunctioning brain or mind.

     When I am operating from the Spirit of Christ, my thoughts may still be rampaging, but as long as I do not engage with them, my responses are kind, patient, self-controlled, loving, giving, self-sacrificing, forgiving, trusting, and so on. When I am submitting to and cooperating with the Spirit of Christ, what people see is Jesus Christ with my face. What people hear is Jesus Christ with my voice. As long as I do not re-engage with my own fear, aggression, or bodily cravings, and continue to be engaged with the Spirit of Christ, it is Christ who acts and speaks through me, and not my malfunctioning ego/mind/identity.

     This is what salvation and deliverance through Jesus Christ is all about. This is what it means. Not that somehow I become "holier than thou," not that somehow I myself do everything perfectly, but that I step back and work with Him so that it is He who is in control, and not me myself. It is a dichotomy of personality in some respects. There are two psychologies at work, one based in the neurological framework of the physical, fleshy brain, and one deeply rooted and originated in Jesus Christ, and through Him, God the Father.

     It is the fundamental purpose and goal of discipleship to practice staying put in the Spirit of Christ and disengaging from the malfunctioning flesh based mind in order to ultimately be able to remain there without breaking from it, just as Jesus remained in His Father without breaking from it. This is what we strive to do and to be. And this is why I harp on it all the time. Not because I found it in a book and thought it was cool, but because this is what I myself have experienced, seen, heard, and felt with my own senses.

A Rant about Forgiveness, License, and "Claiming the Blood of Jesus"

 The problem isn't God's forgiveness. He's more than willing to forgive when we come to our senses and turn around from the path we were on. He's practically begging us to. No, the problem is that people don't really want forgiveness, they want license. They want to be told they can act in any way they want, as selfishly as they want, be able to hurt anyone they want and still "go to heaven," or get a "get out of hell free card" because they profess to believe a certain theological teaching.

     God doesn't do that. The Israelites acted that way with the sacrifices according to the Prophets, especially Isaiah. They hurt anyone they pleased, acted as selfishly as they wanted to, and thought they were safe because they offered the sacrifices and kept the holidays of the Torah. According to Isaiah God couldn't stand it, and told them their observances were making Him sick to His stomach. Pretty sure that's how He feels about "Christians" who "claim the blood of Jesus" while lying, cheating, gossiping, and leaving the widow, the orphan, the foreigner, and the homeless out in the cold.

     The terms of the New Covenant were laid out at the Last Supper. Jesus was clear what was expected, and what would happen if the New Covenant wasn't kept on our part. It goes something like, "Make your home within Me and I within you. You're like a branch that makes its home in a grape vine. If you make your home within Me, you'll produce a lot of fruit. If you don't, then without Me you can't do anything at all. If you make your home in Me and my message makes its home in you, then you can ask whatever you want and it will be done for you. If you don't make your home in Me, you'll dry up like a branch cut from the plant, and then be collected to be tossed into a fire to be burned like a dried up branch." Making one's home within Him can is only done when a person comes to their senses and turns around. This is actually the way to turn around, recognizing that you can't do anything else but cause harm operating from your own devices. And God willingly and quickly forgives those who turn around.

     But this isn't what people want. They want to be the prodigal son who comes home, is welcomed with open arms by his father, and then continues to live his profligate lifestyle in his father's tent while his loving father pays for it all. They don't want a solution to their problem of not being able to do anything else but error, they just want to escape the potential consequences of their deranged, harmful actions. They claim the blood of Jesus while trodding on Him and everything He taught.

     That's not how this works. That's not what Jesus Himself taught. It's not what Paul, John, or Peter taught either, and James was explicit about having "faith" without the works to back up your supposed "faith."

     If you don't even try to follow what Jesus taught, then you don't believe Him, or even believe in Him. You might believe that He lived, died on the cross, and rose from the dead, but guess what, so do the demons. They were there. You can't say you believe someone or believe in someone and then blow them off. That's called "lying." It's one thing to make mistakes while you're learning to imitate Him and keep the covenant. It's another entirely to not even try and to actively do the opposite, encouraging others to do to opposite of what He taught.

     You can profess all the correct theology you want. You can go to church every Sunday. You can tithe. You can make yourself appear squeaky clean to the world. But if you're not making your home in Him, if who He is, the love that He is and taught, doesn't manifest itself through you, if you don't live as He taught and walk as He walk, then none of the theology you supposedly profess to believe matters in the slightest. All of it is absolutely worthless, and less than worthless, it is crap. Even Jesus said that you will be judged based on how you treated "the least of these." "I desire mercy, and not sacrifice." "Do to others what you want them to do to you." "Love your neighbor as yourself." These are what makes a disciple of Jesus Christ. These are what makes a genuine Christian in the eyes of God.

     Don't you dare "claim the blood of Jesus" if you're going to treat Him with such disrespect as to blow off everything He taught. Otherwise, you're going to be in for a cold, utterly dark, and deeply painful surprise. And you will have chosen it yourself.