The Reasons Why you wrote your book or books discussion
Why I wrote "Skinny Dipping with the Savior"
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Eric
(new)
Jul 08, 2008 07:22AM
I wrote "Skinny Dipping with the Savior" because I found myself as a Christian, more concerned with Church and not with having a true relationship with Jesus. I believe that the Church's focus is misdirected to selfish motives. I wrote a message and preached it, but had more information. I want people to read the book and examine thier relationship with Jesus. I also wrote the book for people who does not go to Church, so that everyone can pick up the book and get something out of it.
reply
|
flag
I was raised as an Episcopalian, married as a Lutheran, and find that I admire the Catholic Church most among all because of its discipline.However, I have not attended church, except for weddings and the occasional funeral since about 1970 when I discovered that the Episcopal Church (and others) were supporting groups that wanted to kill me because I was in law enforcement. There have been other things since then.
That one instance was infuriating, but the broader picture is this: I'm not certain my faith (which is deep and solidly-rooted) would survive the contact with the works and weaknesses of man.
Which, of course, leads me to a spiritual conundrum.
How can the knowledge of God and Christ and faith be carried forward without some sort of human organization to communicate it? If no such group exists then the knowledge will die. If there is, then it is subject to the inevitable corruption of human participation.
A conundrum, indeed.
Kent
Sorry for the delay in response. I just saw this. Very interesting question. God is perfect, yet when working through humans, you have to realize that he works through imperfect vessels. So, one of the questions that I pose in the book, is if I am a Christian and does something that is unchristian, is it proper to take this frustration on God himself? Should our relationship with Jesus depended on other people’s ability to display His character? I talk about this in Chapter 2 btw. :)www.SkinnyDippingWithTheSavior.com
Eric, you're right, but your response just misses the point, or rather, it misstates my position (not intentionally, I'm sure) and then responds to that misstatement.I discern between the church (generically) and God. I can have absolute faith in God, none whatsoever in churches, and not be taking out my frustrations on God by that dichotomy of feeling. IOW, I have faith in God but not in man - skepticism about religious messages does God no dishonor.
That skepticism, though, poses some "logistical", not theological, problems. How to carry the faith forward without corruption is the BIG one.
Only if one believes that each and every priest/pastor/minister/preacher/mullah/monk, etc. hears his message directly from God can one assume that what we get is the straight scoop - and we know from the broad spectrum of messages that it ain't so.
Therefore, we must assume that the message is corrupted by the translator. So, what to believe? To reach the conclusion that because nothing is from a credible source, all must be rejected is the moral coward's way out.
So I respond by looking for the overarching, persistent message, which is this: God loves us. He sacrifices and sometimes suffers for us. We owe him our love for it, and we honor him by showing that love as best we can.
Kent
Sorry once again for the delayed response. Kent, you have to have a base belief. Me personally I believe in Sola scriptura. This simply means that the bible is the only authority of all Christian matters. Because of this, everything that a person (preacher minister, whomever) says concerning Christian matters has to line up with the Bible. That is how truth is measured. What ever does not line up with the Bible 100% is when you start thinking about curruption. But The thing about curruption is that the person has to be doing it on purpose. There are people that say things oiut of context on purpose for thier own benefit and ther are some people that does not know the basics of Biblical heremenutics to interpret that Bible properly.Does that make sense?
Eric
