OK, I need to rant. I have a dear friend, whom I truly love very deeply, recently send me the book "Conscious Language(TM) The Logos of Now" by Robert Tennyson Stevens as a "thank you" for something I had done for her and her husband. She then made the mistake of asking me what I thought of the book. I delayed as long as I could, but I finally could delay no longer. Here was my book report to her... "The book addresses… or attempts to address... a societal issue, namely, the fact that as a society, people have lost the ability to use language meaningfully. As a result, many people… including people who claim to know Jesus… are trapped in cycles of defeat and personal anarchy as they lack the ability to use reason and to control their minds – they have no ability to “take every thought captive,” as Paul directs us to do. As a result, many are trapped by their own self-talk, their “feels,” their own inability to perceive reality properly – they are blinded by Satan, unable to see truth, and they feed the lie every day. Satan doesn’t have to attack them, or bind them, or oppress them… they keep themselves in chains of their own making. Yes, it is an issue of words, but not words like spells or buying magic beans or using “logos” as some mystical power. Words, as in a road map; words, as in determining the path that leads to destruction, no matter how gentle the slope or how pleasant the scenery. So, here’s the harsh part. And as you know, you should never ask me what I think if you don’t want to know! From my perspective, the book is nothing more than a redux of Norman Vincent Peale, Napoleon Hill, EST, or any of the other language of the mystics – both ancient and modern -- that have attempted to replace Jesus with Man as God. In the Harry Potter series, Arthur Weasley infamously says “Never trust anything that can think for itself, if you can’t see where it keeps its brain.” I have a personally corollary that says, “Never trust anyone that says anything about spiritual issues if they won't tell you about Jesus.” The author of this book equivocates; he sees many paths to God™; he is a believer in personal subjective truth, i.e., Oprah’s biggest fan. The world doesn’t need Conscious Language… the world needs an intimate, personal relationship with the resurrected Messiah. It needs the Living Word, not words for living. Self-help or self-talking is not the answer. Even the more suspect arms of the Word of Faith movement have bastardized the truth at this point. The Bible is not a book of magic words and phrases that must be repeated as a mantra in order to achieve a desired outcome, no matter how desirable the outcome may be. This is the greater good argument, the “ends justifies the means", the philosophy of John Stuart Mill that has so infiltrated every aspect of our society, including the Church. Words are powerful, but they have no inherent power. Words are tools, but they are not the Toolmaker. Words are active in creation and re-creation, but they are neither faith nor inherently creative. Words are ( although very important), nothing more than symbols of ideas, and ideas are the means of establishing and communicating relationship between people and relationship between God and people. Words are no more meaningful than the relationships being established, so if you pick the wrong building, it doesn’t matter how pretty the ladder is that you lean up against it. The Bible is a book that reveals the nature and person of God to us without varnish, without manipulation, and without error. It needs no substitute. My read on the book? It’s likely very popular, because it feeds into the narcissism of our current generation, including the narcissism of the 21st century North American church. “It’s all about me. What I can do. How I can fix me. How I can re-write my code. How I can use magic spells to fix me. Look at me God… haven’t I used a cool fog machine and pretty lights and repeated the chorus eight times and rewritten my logos code for my conscious human operating system… God, ain’t I just the bomb?” The subtle, deadly, enslaving message is the false hope that “I can do this”, while turning the Bible into a book of spells and wholly ignoring the God who loved us so much that He sacrificed himself in order to have a relationship with us. I know that I can be harsh, and I don’t intend to be hurtful, but my primary reaction to the book was, “Excellent. It is always good to read the Enemy’s playbook so that I can be prepared to rescue those enslaved by his snare.” I also thought of something my father told me and my older brother, when we were in high school and he saw us one night watching an absolute heretic “preaching” on TV and laughing and mocking about it. He said, “Fellas, I don’t want you watching that. It’s a lie dressed up in a Jesus costume. It tries to look like Jesus, it tries to sound like Jesus, but it’s evil at its core. I’d rather you watched pornography… At least there, you know exactly what you are getting and what the purpose is.” As I read it, I thought “This is the modern ’church.’” I. Me. Self-help. The betterment of man. Ascending to a higher place. The Ennegram and navel-gazing. Spiritual psychobabble dressed up in words with random Capital Letters™. Methadone instead of heroin, 20 year old scotch instead of Two Buck Chuck. But the same tragic end, just on a smoother, more gradual slope. Yes, our minds are broken. Our understanding and use of language is broken. The audacity to think that man can remedy the confusion that God unleashed at the Tower of Babel is sort of revealing. Do our minds need to be fixed? YES, and a thousand times, YES! Does our language – especially for Christians – need to be fixed? Absolutley. (Note: I don’t expect sinners to be fixed. They are sinners. They do what they are.) This book, however, it a false turn on a bad road. “Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind.” Romans 12:1-2; Ephesians 4:23; Phil. 4:6-7; 2 Cor. 10:4-5; 1 Peter 1:13; John 3:32; Joshua 1:8-9; Phil 2:5; 1 Cor 2:16. My brain definitely needs washing, but using the Word, not a substitute logos. So, I do thank you for the book, sincerely. It was quite enlightening, and it certainly helped me to have a fuller understanding of the subtle ways in which Satan continues to infiltrate our society and the church, appearing as an angel of light. Love you!" Thoughts, comments?
There is a weird phenomena going on where people want to be "spiritual" without being religious. By casting aside the framework of organized religion, they're essentially creating a new religion all their own. I think it's necessary for us to connect to something larger than ourselves, and without the framework of...well, something, they invent a new whatever. I mean, look at the far left in this country today. They have their own bible (Das Kapital), their own prophets (Marx, Engel, RBG, Malcolm X) their own holidays (Juneteenth, May Day), their own saints (George Floyd) and so on. All that's missing is some higher power, which as the good Rabbi points out is no longer necessary since man is now god.
There is actually no "spiritual" without the Spirit of God, though there are spirits that we are warned of.
Religeous isn't a subjective term Fenris. It's a definitive term in the New Testament scriptures sir... James 1:27 Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world. (KJV) No more, no less...
Rabbi, I found it interesting that your father said he'd rather you watch porn than twisted theological teaching. I've been saying for a while now that if a young Christian guy asked me for advice about groups like Bethel and IHOP I'd suggest he found himself some porn instead.
When my son was younger he liked to ask "Would you rather" questions. Like, would you rather be shot out of a cannon or fall from a plane. I choose neither, would be my answer.
Well, yes, neither would be a better option. Saying that A is more desirable than B doesn't inherently mean that A is actually desirable in any useful sense, merely that it is a better option than B. I'd rather have a broken leg than a myocardial infarction even if I would choose neither if that were an option.
Sure it is. You and I are both religious people and yet what the word means to each of us is something different.
I've seen too many men destroy their lives and families with porn addiction. It can't be done in moderation or in anyway that is not sinful in my opinion. I choose neither as acceptable. Does that make me a Sith?
I didn't mean it as a joke. I truly believe a young Christian man would be better off watching Debbie Does Dallas than anything put out by IHOP. As the good Rabbi mentioned, at least with a porn movie you're not getting anything that pretends to be spiritual. With the garbage put out by some of these so-called "churches" you're getting toxic waste wrapped up to look good. Better a wolf in wolf's clothing than a wolf in sheep's clothing. At least when you can see the threat you can prepare for it and defend against it.
It can be done in moderation. The untold numbers of people who consume porn in some capacity without getting addicted to it prove that. That doesn't mean it's healthy for a Christian, just that it doesn't have to lead to total life destruction. Just like most people can enjoy alcohol in moderation but some go off the rails and lose everything through addiction to it. Nobody said it was theologically acceptable, just that it's better than an alternative.
I guess I’m misunderstanding the intent. To say I’d rather you do this sin over that sin seems like horrible theology & advise. What am I missing? What's the intent?