Would you agree that stillness through meditation, theological reflection, compassion and creativity form the spiritual foundation for church leadership? 

Do you think a comprehensive training program for lay leaders, such as the one Bruce outlines, would be feasible for your congregation?

P3

I would certainly agree that one requires stillness, but then I get that from Arminius  Hard to hear incoming messages if your lips are constantly flapping.

I would be very interested in finding out the demographics in Bruce's church.  We are alive, healthy and holding our own, but if our recent Worship survey was any indication, rather heavy at the older end.  This type of study and committment may be more than many of our bunch could tolerate.  In addition, I don't know, but it sounds a little too overstuctured for me.

IT

Russ

Hi paradox3: O yes, I couldn't agree more! The four basic spiritual capacities necessary for leadership are stillness, theological reflection, compassion, and creativity.

Even the order is important. Stillness comes first, because once we still the incessant chatter of our thoughts, we experience God, which leads to theological reflection and also triggers our compassion, because we experience God as Cosmic Unity and Unitive Love. Creativity is the least valued but most valuable outcome of the cosmic communion, because we realize that we are as creative, or nearly so, as our ultimate Creator, and that further evolution of ourselves, our species and our world requires our active cooperation and co-creation.

Stillness of mind can be brought about by means other than meditation, as bygraceiam pointed out before. It  can be prayer, meditative prayer, an attitude of wonder or awe, singing, drumming, chanting, dancing, making music, or any other contemplative, meditative or worshipful activity. Stillness triggers our intuition, and enables us to act directly and intuitively from the feeling of the universal at-one-ment we experience in stillness. In terms of the Spiral Dynamics, stillness enables us to act directly from the Turquoise level, without intervention from our faculty of logic, which may operate on the Yellow, Green, Orange or Blue level.

Theological reflection depends very much on our pre-conceived concepts about God, but the Experience of Cosmic Unity and Unitive Love, which overcomes us in stillness, is a universal feeling that transcends traditional, doctrinal boundaries.

Compassion similarly is a result of the Unitive Experience, because along with the Unitive Experience goes a feeling of Unitive Love. We literally feel at-one with everyone and everything, including God, and feel an overwhelming love for everyone and everything, including God.

Creativity is our primary, god-given gift. We are as creative, or nearly so, as our ultimate Creator. The post-modern insight is that there is no absolute truth, that we are the creators of truths and meanings. And if we create our truths and meanings from the level of our Unitive Experience, then our creations will be in the Unitive Spirt of God.

We, the book study group of our congregation, are thinking about a lay leaderhip workshop for interested members of our congregation sometime early next year.

In Unitive Consciousness,

Arminius

Arminius, 

Great to see you again!  Bruce should hire you to promote his book, LOL. 

Hi Russ:

Bruce's congregation in North Vancouver likely is quite New-Agey and "West cost hip," with the predominant age at the level of the hippy or baby-boomer generation, that is people born in the late forties and fifties who are now in their fifties and early sixties. But I don't know the demographics of Bruce's congregation for certain. LoveJoy could answer your question better, or perhaps Bruce himself will drop in again one day and answer.

Arminius

My computer seems to hate me this afternoon.

Then there is hope, that is our situation as well.

Maybe I'll waddle over to their website and ask the question.

IT

Russ

Hi RussP, 

Let us know what you find out.  I just went over to Canadianmemorial.org to take a peek.  It is a very impressive church website...P3

Bruce's congregation is in Vancouver in a wealthy area. There are "newlyweds and nearlydeads" in that area. So his church has a lot of senior citizens, but also a healthy group of young couples and young singles. (20-45) . Unfortunately, when couples have children they usually move to the suburbs - like Richmond where I minister! So there is a "transient" problem in his church. There are baby boomers there as well, but I think the majority of the congregation is seniors.

In contrast, my congregation is quite young. We have very few seniors. This is actually a problem! Seniors are usually faithful attenders and faithful financial supporters. Our congregation's website is www.gilmoreparkunited.org if you want to check it out. Bruce's site is based on ours.

Hi LoveJoy: I just looked up your Gilmore Park website and found your demographics. Yes, unusual indeed! Our small Lumby congregation is about one tenth the size of yours, and is mostly senoirs, with the second largest group being baby boomers. Very few under 40!

Appearantly, Bruce or his Webmaster don't value stating the demographics of their congregation. I found them nowhere on the Canadian Memorial website.

Lovejoy

I checked out your church link. Wonderful sermons. I'm sure you spent plenty of time preparing them. I read the first three and emailed the third to a friend. I'll read one a day. You can be my daily inspiration. I do hope your health will be back on track real soon.

Hi LoveJoy, 

Just went over to GP's website to take a look.  It is so nicely done!

Hey Arminius, 

It looks like we exhausted the topics of church leadership and training for lay leaders back on the chapter eight thread.  If there is no more conversation today about the spiritual foundations of leadership, I will move on to the next chapter (The Too Heavy Task: The Perils of Pastoral Visitation).

Well, paradox3, we have not quite yet exhausted the topic of Church leadership.

I would like to repeat one point which my fellow congregant, soul friend, and professional psychologist, LumbyLad, never fails to point out.

Psycho-spiritual development, too, proceeds in stages, he says, and no stage can be jumped. The psychological foundation of leadership is precisely that, the foundation. The spiritual aspects of leadership are the temple we build upon that foundation. It makes no sense to build a glorious temple on a shaky foundation!

He and I profoundly disagree when it comes to the resolution of psychological issues. I, in my usual, overly simplistic approach, insist that truth is relative, and that we merely have to become the ultimate creators that we innately are, invalidate our old sob-stories, and tell ourselves new, different and better stories. He, however, insists that the psychological issues and traumas, particularly those going back to our childhood, need to be resolved by psychotherapy.

To paraphrase Shakespeare, life doesn't not have to be a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. It can be an epic, told by a divine creator, full joyful noise, signifying everything! Although LumbyLad acknowledges that it can be so for some people, he insists that the vast majority need psychotherapy. Well, if he and they think they need it, then they obviously do!  Even I, as one who prides himself as being the ultimate creator of his fate, could benefit from some shadow work.

Arminius, 

When it comes to psychotherapy, there are many different views and a variety of definitions. 

Here in Ontario, psychotherapy will soon be governed by the Regulated Health Professionals Act, and its definition will be very broad.  Psychotherapy will fall within the scope of practice of occupational therapy, psychology and nursing.  (Social work is regulated under another piece of legislation in this province.) 

There will be a new college (regulatory body) for those individuals practicing psychotherapy who do not belong to one of the currently regulated professions.

By the way, I think that LumbyLad is a social worker, from what he has said on some of the threads.  Does he also have qualifications as a psychologist?  It is possible that he has both, but they are different professional classifications.

not to hijack the conversation (and sorry if I did that!) but just another note that if anyone wants to take any ideas or even verbatim stuff from our website you're most welcome to do so. Langley United borrowed heavily from us as did Canadian Memorial. They both talked to us and asked, of course - but nobody should have to reinvent the wheel in a concilliar church!

Spiritual Leadership

To become a "non-anxious presence" as Edwin Friedman suggested over 20 years ago....you have to go on a spiritual journey. You actually have to continually be on such a journey. There's no way to fake "non-anxious". Anxiety is felt deep within the body and it is emitted to others in a non-verbal way. It is also contageous. When one person is anxious, others will become anxious. But the Holy Spirit has been traditionally called "The Comforter" - way back in church history. I see the Holy Spirit as the route to true calm. Now granted, some folks have issues lurking in their background that need the help of a psychologist or some-such to overcome. That is part of healing and becoming whole. But without God's very real presence in your life, I don't think it is enough.

Stardust - I'm glad my sermons are helpful. I rarely preach from a manuscript, so there aren't many posted on there. Not like Bruce, anyway - who posts every sermon weekly. But as you can see the sermons are written for special occasions when I want to carefully write every word.

Hi LoveJoy, 

No, I don't think you are hijacking things at all. 

On GP's website, I especially enjoyed looking at your order of service and powerpoint slides.

I agree with you completely...P3

Hi paradox3: Yes, LumbyLad is not only a sociologist but also a psychologist. He even studied for some time at the Vancouver School of Theology. I'm the opposite: Grade 8 in a one-room schoolhouse in rural Bavaria.

That's why I oversimplify; I just haven't learend as much as all of you highly and extensively educated people. So, when the insight that ALL is in a relativistic state of synthesis hit me, I was lucky: I didn't have much to unlearn.

The more we know, the more we have to unlearn when we realize that we are the creators of our reality. Unlearning can be more difficult than learning.

Of course, it may not be quite as simple as that. But Arminius the Simpleton thinks it is.

paradox3 and LoveJoy:

Yes, God's very real presence in one's life keeps one calm. I always say to everyone: "There is nothing to fear; there is nothing to worry about. We are safely in God's hands, at all times."

God, to me, is the self-creative Kosmos in a state of synthesis, but other definitions of God work just as well. The main thing is to feel God's very real presence in life, not merely believe in it. In other words, the mystical feeling of the presence of God, or, even better, of at-one-ment with God, keeps us truly calm. Doctrinal belief alone is not enough.

That's why I've been preaching mysticism and advocating a return to the mystical roots of our faith ever since I joined wondercafe one-and-a half years ago.

Hi Arminius, 

Bruce is pretty much advocating the same thing in Emerging Church, I would say, with his emphasis on meditation and other spiritual practices.

Hi paradox3:

From reading the book, I have the impression that Bruce came into the United Church through mystical, evangelical Christianity.

Mysticism can be the disaster aspect of every stage, but it can also be its blessing. It ultimately is a blessing, of course, but the blessing can turn to disaster if we believe that the Spirit has sanctioned our particular stage as absolutely true. The absolutist zeal with which many religions and sects of the Blue and Green stage practice and prosletyze their faith is due to exactly that!

When our mystical experience is of the Turquoise kind, however, then it is so totally all-inclusive that exclusivity is no longer possible. Then All are the Holy One, and the Holy One is All.

I myself jumped from Orange/Green to Turquoise, and then backtracked to Yellow. Bruce may have made the even bigger leap from Blue to Turquoise, and then backtracked to Orange, Green, and Yellow. This is, of course, only my personal impression, and may not be so.

If one has jumped to a Turquoise experience, it is relatively easy to backtrack and include the stages one has jumped. Some evangelical Christians have jumped from Blue directly to Turquoise, and then found it necessary to discover and traverse Orange, Green, and Yellow.

I'll be off to church, and to discussing the last chapter. Next Sunday we'll review the entire book. Our next book may be "Evoking Change" by Anne Christie. If found it a particularly valuable, psycho-spiritual self help book because its "evocative" language speaks to intellectuals and non-intellectuals alike.

I, of course, never know which of the two I am.

All I can say is that a Turquoise type experience can make a non-intellectual into an intellectual. I often say jokingly that I got my degree from the university of universities: The Universe!

SONNET LXXVIII

So oft have I invoked thee for my muse,

And found such fair assistance in my verse,

As every alien pen hath got my use,

And under thee thy poesy disperse.

Thine eyes, that taught the dumb on high to sing,

And heavy ignorance aloft to fly,

Have added feathers to the learned's wing,

And given grace a double majesty.

Yet be most proud of that which I compile,

Whose influence is thine, and born of thee:

In others' works thou dost but mend the style,

And arts with thy sweet graces graced be;

But thou art all my art, and dost advance

As high as learning my rude ignorance.

-William Shakespeare

Hello paradox3 ...........God bless you......

I believe that Bruce is still teaching the journey of Jesus...just in a different way.....as Arm said the first step in knowing God is stillness...a lot of people want to skip this stage, saying their lives are to busy to sit down for an hour a day and just listen...when we pray...or meditate..it takes time and effort....we all can control the thoughts in our minds ....renewing of the mind Christ calls it.....

Stillness does not come unless we take the time....but if we skip this very important first step...we will never know the Lord as Our Personal Savior...for it is these quiet times that God speaks to us..scriptures say.....be quick to listen...slow to speak....

We can not have the Glory of the Lord upon us without the stillness of our hearts minds and souls....it is in the silence that we grow towards the other steps .......I believe.....

IJL:bg

Agreed, Arminius.  I think this is why Bruce talks about both Turquoise states and the Turquoise stage.  He emphasizes that there is no skipping over any stage of spiritual development. 

Like yourself, I have found this concept of Spiral Dynamics extremely interesting, and it has helped me to make sense of certain aspects of my faith journey. 

I am glad we decided to devote time and effort to this wondercafe book study.  You are a great co-host!

God bless you, too, ByGraceIAm, 

Thanks for your post.  You have a lovely, gentle way of expressing your thoughts.  I agree with you 100% that Bruce is still teaching the journey of Jesus.

... P3

Arminius

All Right ! All Right ! I'm the crazy one on this thread. There's got to be one in every crowd....lol. I think LumbyLad is right on target re the posts above. I think you have to proceed very carefully and cautiously in your efforts to bring the Holy Spirit or the Universal Spirit into the church.

I forget how many older people there are in your congregation but what if they go right off the rails as in my thread on the Laughing Church ? These people believe the Holy Spirit has come to them. Do you have a patent on what the Holy Spirit should look like and  how it should behave?  If you drive people nuts in Lumby you will be hung up and burned at the stake! 

What if you do have some people who aren't emotionally stable or enjoying the best of mental health ?  We have many in the apt. building where I live. I'm speaking personally and seriously . I'm not mentally ill  but were I to have a mystic experience such as you've described it wouldn't benefit me. I'd be horrified and probably scarred for life.

Don't take me wrong. This doesn't mean I'm not interested in progressing spiritually and I have progressed over the past four years . I do understand the Oneness you speak of. I'm  not sure its necessary to have a deep revelation or mystic experience to understand it ?

No, stardust, it is not necessary to have a deep revelatory experience to understand the Spirit. Spiritual enlightenment can be purely intellectual, as it is in the Yellow stage. The Yellow stage can be accompanied by mystical experiences of various degrees and kinds, but doesn't have to. Spiritual enlightenment can be purely intellectual. Or, if it is also mystical, it can occur in many small glimpses rather than one, single, mind-blowing mystical peak experience. These peaks are a quite rare.

Actually, all experience is mystical. We experience the reality which is God all the time, but this reality is a state of synthesis. The analysis or conceptualization thereof is only what we think we experience, it is not what we really experience! What we really experience when we cease conceptualization is the unfathomable reality which is God.

When we still the incessant chatter of our thoughts, and experience the unconceptualized reality as it really is--as a synthesis--then we experience the mystical reality which is God. Thus, everyday experience can be, and innately is, mystical!

I have preached a sermon on God as the self-creative universe to our largely conservative congregation. It was well received, and our most conservative congregant was the first to congratulate me.

Of course I agree with you, and LumbyLad, that most people with mental problems benefit from conventional therapy. Mystical experience as therapy can work, but it can also backfire severely. "Meditation is better than medication" is advisable only in rare instances. Most mentally troubled people benefit from a balanced approach between psychotherapy, medication, and meditation.

I see I am referred to above and not even in the discussion (maybe pages back) so I had better get with it. I do not agree that "all experience is mystical"  (did you mean spiritual?). nor is all reality God. Have you (Arminius) become frozen into a turquoise STATE of being? This is only one perspective in using the language of being. I could just as easily say that all experience is psychological and all reality is personal. I could say that the 8 spiral stages that Bruce Sanguin is referring to are just equal to Erik Eriksons "8 Stages of Man" (in psychosocial development). It all depends upon your perspective. As we move around an object or idea and change our perspective, the "reality" or our "truth" of the object or idea must certainly be modified. Indeed the more flexible we are in seeing our ideas through various perspectives (psychological, spiritual, scientific, etc), the wiser we should become. Also the more tolerant we should become of the perspectives of others. So, Arminius, although I understand your perspective, I find you somewhat fixated on ONE way of viewing your reality and expressing it to us. You are obviously a very intelligent person and add a system that is new and complex; yet you have been unable to make parallel connections to any other perspectives that are open to you. I might say you cannot see the forest for your TREE. Sometimes it seems like this anyway.

Before we go blathering off on these kinds of truth statements (and I know you well enough to be this rude, Arminius), we need to define the context through which we are talking. I do agree that the only realitiy we can accurately KNOW is from our own experience. We call this experience TRUE because we have it, but to say it is TRUTH is another thing. This does not follow. One speaks to relativism and the other to absolutism. You say that you have less education and therefore have less to unlearn, but perhaps it is rather that your consequence is that you have fewer points of reference through which to frame your ideas. There is a danger that can lurk in such a belief system. You may indeed be in the "honeymoon" stage of your relationship to the conservative people in our congregation. You speak eloquently and with a monotone sincerity. It comes across with authority. Yet, all relationships have stages and before you know it, you may slip and actually come out with the passion that is lurking behind your hermit self, and be labelled a "radical". There are few people who have heard you speak who even understand the idea of "synthesis" of which you speak, which is central to your whole thesis. They are, rather, caught up in you unique SELFhood, in my opinion.

From my personal experience, as you know, when there is enough trust developed so that you are not some kind of alien amidst us, you will be challenged more. You can only say the same thing about 4-5 times before people get bored from hearing it and want another perspective. This is not my personal opinion about you, for I do trust you, but only from my experience throughout the years of believing that MY answers were the same as God's answers. On another thread I have written more extensively about how the psychological crosses over into the spiritual. I have spoken here and to you about how I had "visions" for a period of 6 months, when I was deciding between a vocation of social work or theology, and how I ended up realizing that I had "created my own reality" of God through my own need. I had produced visions that were "real" but were not "authentic". They did not come from a healthy self, but from a lonely and needy self. Fortunately, when it came time to evaluate it all, I decided that it was all a psychological creation, bordering on a pre-psychotic state, and I am sure glad I discovered this.

When you (the Royal YOU) say "God", you are not talking about the God of some of the other participants in this discussion. Perhaps you should be clearer on just what God is to you. I try to use the word Creator as much a possible, because I do not believe in the traditional God or the traditional Jesus. If you were clearer about your definition of "God" it is less likely that the listener might misunderstand  what you are REALLY saying. We throw around the word God very carelessly and those who listen to our great homilies THINK that we are talking about their God, when in fact we are not. Our God may just not have a beard and sit on a throne.

For me, the Creator created the Universe and the forward direction it was to take. Not being in time, this is a constant happening. All of creation mirrors a part of the Creator - in Nature; even the single-celled amoeba. We have NO concept of what this GOD is like, but only can conceptualize from what we experience within and around us. This God is not personal in the sense that prayers get considered and answered, but IS personal in that it resides within what we call the "Soul". In addition the concept that we are stewards of these lands (earth) and are co-creators just makes sense. We see through Nature the idea that life goes on endlessly, but not that WE as individuals are eternal. This is based on religion and a religious belief system, quite different from a spiritual belief system at times. Can I pray? Yes. I turn inward to the part of God that lies within. I do not ASK for anything. I TELL mySELF what I need to do. I meditate mindfully on what problems need solving. Sometimes I just contemplate. All of this is a spiritual practice, but not necessarily in tune with my church's religious practice. It seems not to matter. Neither should it.

Paradoxically, as I have said on another thread, the closest I likely am to my Spirit is when I am safely tucked into bed and asleep (unconscious). My dreams are shadows of the truth of mySELF. I truly believe this. My dreams bring me closest to another plane of "existence". Are my dreams real or imagined? Is there any difference? Was the God I created psychologically in my visions less REAL than the "real" God? I don't think so. There is an expression, "We create our own reality". There is a saying, "It's all in your head". There is a psychology called the POWER OF INTENTION. We say, "You can be anything you want to be". All of this is valuable stuff. It has nothing much to do with science or those dry pragmatic truths and a whole lot to do with what we do with our creative selves. Spirituality has to do with what we do with our creative selves in relationship with what we call the Creator (or God). BUT do we need to know about spiral dynamics, synthesis or the color we are on the charts? No. This is conceptual language that sometimes is a way to avoid dealing with our "real selves". What is more real to most of us is the day-to-day problem solving of relationships, discovering meaning in our lives, and overcoming depression, poverty anger and fear. This is the stuff of psychology.

I know that the new emerging Church is going the way of spiral dynamics but I hope it pauses for a bit to bring along some of what Dr. Wayne W. Dyer has to say in his latest series called "The Secrets of the Power of Intention". I have these on 6 tapes. He has always included spirituality in his view of man's purpose. IF we see that how we ACT and BEHAVE is more important than what we actually believe, we may avoid where Bruce Sanguin ends up in his book THE EMERGING CHURCH. Just wait until the last chapter folks. You will see just where he is heading. It is all about a model of governance, a kind of celebration of HIS church and how it embraced HIS ego and his intentions. Valuable as a good read? Yes. Important for the emerging of the UCC? Doubtful. In my opinion, if we want to emerge as a larger Church, we must focus more on the psychology of the Self and the sociology of the Group and relate this to the spiritual quest we undertake.

If religion and belonging to a Church is about our IDENTITY as a group of Christians, who we are in relationship to a God, a Community and a World, and how we are to ACT or behave from within this relationship (our moral behavior), then we cannot leave out what we know (so far) about basic psychology and sociology. Learning to love oneself is a tremendous challenge; then learning to love others (with health) follows. Learning to love our enemy is then within reach, if we discern upon the teachings of Jesus, and learning to love a "God" is the most difficult of all. How do you love a CONCEPT? How do you love the idea of a Creator? It usually is only possible if we recycle back WITHIN ourselves and learn to love ourSELVES in a whole new way, for we are God's creation and we are the only experiential point of reference from which to love God. So this, perhaps, is the starting point for emergence. Revisiting the Self and learning to love ourSELVES in a whole new way. Then the cycle starts again. We have to learn to see our world and relate to our world in a whole new way. As we emerge, it is not that we know a new Truth, but that our own truth becomes more authentic. So I have learned, through reading Bruce's book, how we can stray far off the base of real emergence if we are not careful. His section on Leadership touches some of what we need to do (thanks to Anna Christie??). The rest of the book is his own Ego-journey disguised as a model for emergence for all. Not for ME. Nope. At least this is my opinion, folks.

Hi LumbyLad:

Well, we finally got you to reply!

God, to me, is the unltimate reality, the self-creative cosmic totality in a state of synthesis. The less is said about IT, the better, because IT can only be truthfully experienced. IT can't be truthfully verbalized.

This state of experiencing God is also the Turquoise state, to use the language we use on this thread. The Turquoise state, however, is not the same as the Turquoise stage, as paradox3 never fails to point out. One can have a Turquoise state experience at any stage, and explain it in the terms of that stage, but unless one has genuinely arrived at the Turquoise stage, one is unable to explain the Turquoise state in terms of the Turquoise stage.

My explanations are attempts to define the Turquoise state in terms of the Turquoise stage. The Turquoise state, of course, is always an experience of total inclusivity, of utter unity and synthesis (and has been so since the time of Jesus), but the explanations thereof evolve continuously, and are individually unique. I, for instance, lacking the terms of professional psychology and sociology, and having no professional scientific training, necessarily have to resort to the terms available to me, the terms of general, spiritual philosophy. Sociologically and psychologically trained people such as you bring their particular professional terms and outlook into their explanations, and scientifically trained people use theirs. Ultimately, the cosmic synthesis which is God is something to be experienced. To experience IT beats talking about IT, and the best course of action is always to act intuitively directly from the experience of IT.

I am, of course, able to define the Turquoise state in the concepts of the Blue, Orange, Green, and Yellow stages, and do so frequently, but only from my own, limited, personal perspective. As I said, I lack the professional terms of Orange, and can explain Turquoise to those implicated in Orange only in terms of general, spiritual philosophy. And I lack some of the traditional terms of Blue, and can therefore only inadequately explain Turquoise in terms of Blue.

Ultimate truth, to me, is only in the experience. Nothing I write or say is ultimately or absolutely true. I offer my words to others only for consideration and contemplation, not as something they should believe in!

Linguistic statements sound absolute, this is in the nature of language. But I don't consider my statements absolutely true. Moreover, I consider all linguistic expressions as literary, even if they sound literal. To me, all conceptual and linguistic expressions are metaphorical--and art!

In other words, don't believe anything I say!

In the Unitive Consciousness of The Cosmic Synthesis,

Arminius

Hi Arminius:

You say, "God, to me, is the unltimate reality, the self-creative cosmic totality in a state of synthesis. The less is said about IT, the better, because IT can only be truthfully experienced. IT can't be truthfully verbalized."

I am not much interested in ultimate truth or absolute truth, as you know. We fairly agree that our truths come from the experiential and the meanings that are left we try to put into words. My question, however is about core beliefs. Do you believe that God, whatever It's nature, created YOU through this constant state of synthesis? Does this constant relationship of synthesis cause you to be constantly in a state of being created and co-creating with It? What I am getting to is do you think that God somehow has programmed us to go through each psychosocial stage or developmental stage or is this something that It is constantly involved in with you? If you, as a teenager, are more "in touch" with this Godhead as you grow, do you think that it will make a difference in your development?

You also say, "The Turquoise state, of course, is always an experience of total inclusivity, of utter unity and synthesis (and has been so since the time of Jesus)...". Are you saying that Jesus was somehow Divine? Or was he just a man at the top of his game (most of the time)? Does his turquoise state then allow him to walk on water, heal the sick and raise the dead? If not, what makes him stand out with a Mystical Value System (turquuoise)  rather than the Traditional Value System (blue) into which he was born? It seems to me that from a biblical point of view, he was still speaking of right and wrong, good and evil, as well as law and order. Why would you find any evidence otherwise unless you see him as the "son of God" or God in the flesh.  The latter viewpoint conflicts, of course with you definition of the Godhead, so is unlikely.

I do not believe that you need to throw away your mystical system as unable to be known except to the one who experiences it. Although I agree that most linguistic and conceptual expressions are metaphoric and even art, I think that as people in relationships in the NOW, need to TRY to take our truths and apply it to real life. You cannot RELATE to people without sliding down the spiral to the green or yellow states. So what GOOD comes from being in the turquoise state?

During normal development, you have already gone through all of the stages from Beige to Green. In your adolescence you experienced the Red state and moved through to the Blue state. Early adulthood found you mainly acting in the Orange stage. Most middle aged and older adults move variously between Green and Yellow. Of course when we fail to achieve a stage of development, we retain a bit of that color, so nothing is so "pure". So you are no stranger to any of these stages. It seems to me that turquoise is reserved for those exceptional people who have broken out of any clear stage and have perhaps moved on to another plane (eg. The Nutty Professor). The tendency would be to become secluded from people, society and any traditional core values. Some might indeed end up in a psych ward from the disconnect that happens in this stage or from experiencing this state. You seem to WANT to be in this state, at least part of the time, because of your mystical vision; do you think that this STAGE is one that you would aspire to? Why is that? What I may be getting at is that the turquoise SPHERE appears to be leading to another range of colors that are likely ethereal and moving into another stage that is beyond our present human development. Perhaps it is the stage where we all become angels. Perhaps, if Bruce Sanguin has arrived there, it is a state of simply STRIVING to create a reality that is just an excuse for being all-powerful, and God-like to others.

In short (am I ever?), Bruce says that we are "emerging" when we enter the turquoise stage. I personally feel we can emerge at ANY stage and that the concept is quite useless for a person who is a member of a religious community like the UCC. Mysticism and the goals of social justice, caring for the poor, aiding the homeless, and the like do not seem (to me) to have much harmony. This is why I do not believe Jesus was a mystic. Many of the old Testament prophets were, but not Jesus. Why do you hold Jesus up to be so "out of touch" with humanity and so focused on these other-worldly thoughts? Try to explain please.

Arminius and LumbyLad, 

Great conversation!  I can only imagine the talks you must have in RL .

LumbyLad wrote:  Bruce says that we are "emerging" when we enter the turquoise stage.  

Really?  I thought the concept of emergence applied to the whole spiral. 

LumbyLad wrote: I think that as people in relationships in the NOW, need to TRY to take our truths and apply it to real life. You cannot RELATE to people without sliding down the spiral to the green or yellow states. So what GOOD comes from being in the turquoise state?

Excellent point!   The spiral dynamics values system has Yellow on the individual side and Turquoise on the collective side.  This aspect of the model puzzles me. 

A few weeks ago in a study group at church, we were talking about the commandment to love God and to love others as ourselves.  My minister said that we need to do both, as Christians.  If you love others without loving God, you could be a humanist.  If you love God without loving othes you could be a mystic.   He was not being critical of humanism or mysticism, just saying that Christian faith involves both sides of the equation.

Arminius said that Jesus was a mystic, and I concur with him.   Jesus was more than a Jewish mystic, however.  He was also a teacher, a healer, a revolutionary, a social activist ... and so on.

P3

How true that you have to slide down the scale to communicate.    We are starting a revitilization of the CE hall and while the committee is standing around almost humming over the possibilities, the average church goer is looking at use like we are nuts.  Don't understand a thing we are proposing.  Lack of communication.  Step it down a level or two.

We have a picture of Jesus as a Fidel Castro leading the revolution kind of guy.  Very powerful image.

IT

Russ

Hi LumbyLad:

You were uncharacteristically brief and even made a few concise points one can reply to.

I think evolution has programmed us to go through certain, developmental stages; physically, biologically, psychologically, socially, intellectually, and spiritually. To be aware of this developmental process, and to consciously and co-creatively go with it, certainly makes a difference in our development.

Of course Jesus was Divine, but no more so than everything and everyone else. He was, however, more aware of his Divinity than his contemporaries, and attempted to bring us the awareness of our Divinty. Unfortunately, instead of heeding his message and rendering ourselves Divine, we made only him Divine and left ourselves mundane.

I believe that Jesus was at the Turquoise state and stage--relative to his time and culture! I do not believe in the supernatural but in the supernal. To me, nature is super, and the natural is miraculous!

We who have had a Turquoise state experience can express it only in the terms available to us. Jesus expressed his Turquoise experience in the terms of his time and place, I am limited to the concepts available to me, and Turquiose experiencers of the future will express their experiences in the more advanced terms of their culture and time.

The Turquoise experience is one of unity and synthesis. IT does not have to be "mystical." Because the Turquoise state is our innate state of being, we merely have to suspend conceptualization, as in meditation, and immediately are in IT. But once we have conceptualized IT well, we can be in IT even when conceptualizing! Then there is no more You and I; then there is only the all-encompassing, godly I, and one thinks and acts from the Unitive Awareness of the godly I. Then one acts compassionately because one feels compelled to, by an inner urge, by the Untive Love which the Unitive Awareness entails. This is the good that comes from the Turquoise stage!

The Turquoise stage is Unitive Awareness; IT does not propell us into the psych ward. And Unitive Awareness compels those who have attained IT to steer others toward IT. This is not being "out-of-touch" but very much "in-touch," because Unitive Awareness is the ultimate solace, the ultimate healing balm, "the kingdom of God." Steering others toward it is not mystical indifference but ultimate compassion. And this is what I think and feel Jesus was about.

"Rejoice, and be glad, blessed are you, holy are you,

Rejoice, and be glad, yours is the kingdom of God."

In Unitive Awareness,

Arminius  

Hi paradox3:

Yes, I agree; the concept of emerging applies to the whole spiral!

Of course one can't relate to people without being on their level. But one does not have to support the absolutism of their level! Being at the Turquoise level implies that one has internalized the entire Spiral, and is, or can be, on any level without supporting the "disaster aspect" of any.

I, for instance, do very much resonate with bygraceiam and her Turquoise state experience, which she so eloquently expresses in terms of Blue. Although her terminology is more emotionally evocative to me than the Turquoise state concepts of the farther evolved stages, I do not support the absolutism that is inherent in her Blue concepts. But, in all fairness, I must say that the absolutism is only in the traditional terminology she uses. Absolutism  has never been directly expressed by her. On the contrary, she appears to be open to the Green, Orange, and Yellow interpretations of the Turquoise state.

Hi Russ:

I too am a great fan of Fidel Castro. There must be a little bit of Jesus in him. After all, he let the Pope visit his country.

Yes, Jesus was more than just a Jewish mystic. To the Jewish orthodoxy of his day, he was a heretic. To the Romans, he was an agitator, a subversive, and a political and social activist. To the impoverished masses he was a preacher, healer, prophet and Messiah.

To me he is a foremost example.

Hello everyone God bless you.....

Arminius.....wow.....how can you talk to me this way........lol lol lol.....

Yes Arminius ....you seem to know me better than I do lol.....yes although I have had experiences in the Turquoise state...I am on the spiral of green, orange and yellow...with the experiences also in these stages...which all combined take me into the Turquoise state but not totally evolved at this stage, at this point...this is why I am searching and seeking God in all of unity that may be at the different levels in the spiral...I believe we must stop and do some deep thinking and use the different states to see just where it is we are....and continue from this point...

Learning and reading others and the path they are on I believe takes us through the different stages on the spiral....it is here I believe we are all on our own path with different forks in the road ...that lead to the end results of God  ( universal consiousness ) through their experiences...which I am always open and willing to observe to obtain more knowledge and wisdom from the path they choose to take....as we experience others we find that they also represent different colours on the spiral..and this is what we learn from...

I believe that the different states and stages orignated in a Divine Lord Jesus...and is the reason the bible tells us to always keep seeking and searching to have these things revealed to us...this is following in the footsteps of the Lord...do you believe that Jesus was always at the turquoise state......as Divine...meaning Holy...at all times....coming from the Kingdom of Heaven He would know this state quite well as the kingdom...is more than humanity can comprehend....but He would have to have the understanding of all of the others stages and states of the spiral...would He not ??

I do not have the book, that you are reading and teaching from Arminius and at first found things very confusing...but when I read the teachings over a few times began to understand where the emerging church is coming from...it takes a good teacher to explain the concepts of the dynamics of the emerging church ......and if a person was to miss even a small part of the teaching I feel they would miss out on much....but Bruces teachings to me made me better understand the Spiritual place that I am at...this point in my life...I am now seeking more in the stages of consiousness,  waking , dreaming, deep sleep and mystical/supernatural experiences....but I have the faith to know that I do not have the power inside of me..but it must come from walking with the Lord Jesus Christ in total faith in His power to keep me consious of the journey only He can lead me into.....it is His supernatural/mystical experiences that show me there is more to God then what the churches are teaching...His Earthly and Divine experiences show us we can attain all He is offering...

These are the experiences of the prophets of old that they  encountered with their walk with God..these are written down so we all can see that these are reachable by us the human race...no matter what stages we are at in our walk...there is always more and more to learn..God is never boring when we seek Him with our whole heart and He is found by us...

I want to thank you and parodox3 for opening this new door to me...I always know the doors are constantly open to all of us...we just need the faith to enter.....Praise the Lord...amen and amen........the journey just get more adventerous and exciting as we continue to travell with our fellow man...and of course Our Lord and Savior.....Awesome God we serve.....

IJL: bygraceiam.....

Hi bygraceiam:

My heart beats high with joy that you have not resented my bold assessment of you and your mystical states and stages! Prior to my most profound mystical experience, I was on my knees asking Jesus Christ for a revelation of God, and it was granted to me! The experience was as humbling as it was empowering, but by then I had dabbled in various religions and world-views and was well beyond the Blue stage of my childhood and youth, and had already traversed the Orange state and was right into Green. The Turquoise experience, however, propelled me beyond Green into Yellow, and ever since I can and do interpret God in the terms of any stage, but the terms of the Blue stage are still dearest to my heart because they are the beloved terms of my childhood and youth, when I was very much in love with the traditional God and Christ of Blue--and still am! That's why the language you use to express your Turquoise state speaks so deeply and evocatively to me.

I want everyone to know that my Turquoise state and experience is very similar to bygraceiams's! Because I use different words does not mean that my experience and state is different from hers! I merely use different words and concepts to explain the same thing!

Human consciousness will evolve further, and we will be able to explain God in much better terms than mine sometime in the future. The words I use are only the best available to me right now. I am sure there will be better ones in the future.

bygraceiam, you don't need the book to follow the Spiral Dynamics, you can download them from the publisher's website: www.woodlakebooks.com/emergingchurch

In Unitive Love,

Arminius

Gee, I am going quite silly with all of these colours swirling about me! So Jesus was Divine but NO MORE SO than we are? I tend to agree, but this is not consistent with the idea that Jesus came from the Kingdom of Heaven (as bygraceIam sees it). Or is it that we ALL came from Heaven and were born into the earth in the same way, with the same knowledge of unitive harmony, but just can't "get it" like Jesus did?

I would like to S-T-R-E-T-C-H myself to somehow believe this but I stumble over the word "Heaven" as somehow a "place" rather than a STATE - perhaps that Turquoise state that keeps coming up. Did God somehow live in Heaven as creation began? Was Heaven created first? Now I know this is far too literal to answer. What I like about what you said, Arminius, is that Jesus was in touch with the Spiritual unity/synthesis, etc. (without using these words) but the people around him (and us) would not listen to discover their own divinity. I tend to believe that Jesus was just an exceptional man who was misguided into thinking he was the much-needed Messiah, and I have admired his courage of faith for that. Seems I may have to give this more thought. I still find a clash between the tourquise state of being and social ACTION in the here and now. I can see the compassionate and loving link to God, but not much in the way of relating to the common man. I guess Jesus would have to spiral downward to give the Sermon on the Mount and spiral upward when he went into the wilderness to pray. To be very honest, I find some of this discussion, although intellectually stimulating, very far from helping me to be a leader to help our church be an emerging church.

When all is said and done, it is the passion of our relationship with our God that seems central. It doesn't much matter what colour we change in this relationship. From our personal passion comes "com-passion", which is an earthy form of this relationship or mystic mentoring. It seems so easy to "love thine enemy" when we have discovered what Love really is all about. It is really not very helpful to go around telling people that this relationship with God really has no words to describe it. I believe that it is our responsibility to find these words and to speak them to the best of our ability. As I have said, the mere seeing of a vision (from my experience) does not a divine experience make. Most often this is a figment of my psychological creation. Speaking in tongues was one way that the early Christians found to try to communicate the ecstacy of this relationship in words. Dancing and whirling around like dervishes is another way to express a union or sythesis with the holy Creator - trying to merge with IT.

So what do we really do? I guess we could write a book on spiral dynamics (stolen from another source) on Leadership (borrowed from a colleague) and wrap all of this around our own success in changing a traditional Canadian Memorial Church into a Church for Peace (I forget the name) as Bruce Sanguin has done. This somehow justifies selecting a group of chosen Leaders to determine a set of non-negotiables for the group and let those who disagree wander off to some other church. Yes, I can see the relationship between Fidel Castro, the Pope and Bruce Sanguin, but somehow NOT Jesus. Jesus was not about organized religion. I believe he was about personal emergence - discovering the divine in all humanity. When he saw how the people wanted to follow him, he went along with this because he believed in PROCESS. First, they will follow him and then they will follow his teachings. But it did not turn out this way. The people did not "get it" - even his disciples, so he sent them out into the world to face their own test of faith and took a walk to the cross. I am not sure that this was where he planned to go. It was certainly where he felt he had to go, perhaps to make a "big splash" or perhaps because he grew tired of the ignorance of those he was trying to teach and wanted to rest with his God (who certainly DID dwell in Heaven). One might say that Jesus was misguided, but no more so than we are. The difference is that he ACTED and REACTED to real circumstances, political, ethical and moral. He may have been tourquise much of the time, but his actions moved up and down the spiral depending on the needs of his people. So it is with us. If we are to be effective Leaders, we must know ourselves VERY well. We must know our authentic selves. This flies beyond being honest or well behaved. It strikes at our very center - the part of God that dwells, as a spiritual energy, within each and every one of us.

My efforts to bring this discussion back down to earth and to the here and now have somewhat failed. While we synthesize and unify and change colours, we are still left with our passions to help our congregations emerge, not just as a Church, but as individuals within a gathering. At the end of Bruce Sanguin's book, he has suceeded in what he strived for - to present a model for change. Just WHAT he ends up with is not a Teamwork Ministry but one very much led by a Minister who is accountable to the Board, but delegates his/her authority/power all over the place. This reminds me of the old Parish priest who "owned" the Church and ran the church, with a bunch of elders who had little understanding of governance. Such a Minister therefore HAS the power and authority to do pretty much what he/she wants as long as he/she knows some basic manipulation skills and has a solid vision that can be expressed as mission. As I once said, I strongly disagree with this model because it comes from the outside-in, not the inside-out. We need to start with what we have and slowly help the congregation (the top of the flow-chart) to tell us what THEY want. We need to LISTEN, not just actively, but with thoughtfulness, love and respect. We ALL are in a process of moving towards this "greater complexity". This means that if we unblock the barriers to ANY attempt to change, grow or "emerge", we, as divine beings, will tend to head off in the "right" direction. We must be spirit-led, from the inside-out, not led by some sort of model that we have studied that will tend to make us want to steer the ship too much. If we make too sharp a turn, we will find we end up going around in circles and return to where we were. In the end, this is EXACTLY where we want to end up -where we began (as we emerged from the womb), but the journey must be long and steered by many people, not just one "in charge". We need no captain but the Spirit within. It is about Teamwork and Process. It is about the Journey. The destination is always back to a new awareness of where we were and where we have come from, arriving eventually back at the same spot. How's that for metaphor?

So, as we finish this book, I hope we can gleen from it what was helpful for not just our own spritual journey, but for the growth of our church and the kind of Leaders we want to be. How did this read help us to ACT differently in the world? How does it help us to deal with the disconnect that the UCC seems to have had with those real people who are not in our Churches? How does it help us to bring OUR church out of its kind of navel-gazing into a meaningful relationship with the struggles and tragedies that surround us daily?

LumdyLad

No offence to Arminius but you make me laugh.....tears....I don't see too well .....those colours are absolutely blinding.......whatever you're seeing I'm seeing something along the same lines. I'm also a fan of Wayne Dyer ;  great stuff!

We all came down from heaven. Don't you remember ......?  Keep looking at the pretty colours and it will all come back to you ....lol...

:-)

Yes stardust. You must have been writing this while I was writing my long, long attempt to hold onto reality.  Actually, I wrote a Blog once about the possibility that only I really exist as the shadow of God and all of you are just my dream. We all relate to our outside world as if we were the center of this universe (and beyond) with our very private thoughts that likely only God (IT, I AM) really understands. These colours remind me of several hallucinagenically induced experiments from my past.

Yes, I am hoping to convince the next "book discussion" to be one of listening to Wayne Dyer's set of 6 Cds on INTENTION. This is a man who we have seen, over the years, truly emerge. I would be happy to walk with him a while. Indeed to be carried by the man, take a rest from all of these colours that have, it seems, blinded me to some of the value of THIS book.

BygraceIam, 

Your posts are very encouraging to me.  I am glad you are following the discussion and contributing your thoughts ... P3

LumbyLad, 

Thanks for sharing your ideas about Bruce's leadership style ... P3

Arminius, 

It seems you were right, and we are not quite ready to move on to the next chapter.  I am so pleased with the discussion on this thread (- - are you?)  I will give some thought to ByGrace and LumbyLad's comments, and respond in a day or two ... P3

LumbyLad, 

Hmmm ... Would you be interested in hosting the next wondercafe book study?  In my experience, these book studies are time-consuming but lots of fun and very satisfying. 

LumbyLad

I seriously suggest that a viewing of Monty Python's "Life of Brian" is in order.  In many ways I think this shows exactly what happened to Jesus, along the way.

He never claimed to be the Messiah or son of God.  The people called him that.

He never asked to be followed.  The people decided to focus on him rather than his message, that of follow your God, whatever that may be.

And yes, I think his disciples never really did get it, and the intervening years have turned a follower of God into this plastic action figure that you should pray too.  That wasn't exactly his idea.

God...God...

The colours do swirl around and while confusing , they are the world of Arminius.  This is how the universe is for him.  What is the universe and God for you?

I can tell you about my God, similar but different.  Will you understand and accept, maybe, maybe not.  You have to formulate your own image.  I don't think you can haul out the Old Testament, point at the sky and proclaim , Heaven is there, my son.    This worked in 1508, doesn't in 2008.

In the beginning there was nothing, then a singularity formed (science).  Energy appeared out of nothing (science). Matter formed from energy (science).  Matter became more complex and through evolution, us (science). 

Matter likes to form more complex organisms (Science? Faith? God?  Gaia? Nature?)  Is this God?  I think it is what I understand as God.  Doesn't grant wishes.  Doesn't answer prayers.  Dosn't punish little babies and homosexuals.  Isn't responsible for hurricanes.

Not personal, not impersonal.  Just there.  Everywhere.  Always with you.  Perhaps not as nice as the big guy with the beard, but always there.

Containing the entire universe and all that is in it.  Pretty powerful, I would say.

IT

Russ

Yes, Russ, I concur. Nicer than the old Zeus type God, I would say. And, best of all, very tangible. Everything we are and perceive--and don't perceive--EVERYTHING is IT!

This God is truly Unitive because it is the Universe. On the emotional level, IT manifests ITself in Unitive Love. This Unitive Love prompts us to love everyone and everything as our Godly Self because everyone and everything is our Godly Self! Love of God, Love of Self, and Love of our Fellow Beings become the same Godly Love. We feel moved to compassionate action from within.

In Zen Buddhism, Enlightenment is in the experience of Divine at-one-ment. Action arises directly from that experience. Iron-willed INTENT followed by IMMEDIATE DYNAMIC ACTION is all that is needed. Zen Buddhists don't need 6 CDs to conceptualize all this, they just act directly and intuitively from their experience of godly at-one-ment.

But perhaps we, in the overly intellectualized West, need 6 Yellow CDs to conceptualize all this. 

I, personally, have a hard time listening to CDs. I'd rather read what's on them.

Audio Book CDs can be nice on the bus

Action !!!  UCC action, form a committee.

IT

Russ

Hi paradox3:

I am very pleased with the way the discussion is going, even if I get bashed a little every now and then. This is very necessary! After all, this thread is not supposed to be an Arminius love-in. And I can take the bashing. Actually, I need it, and thrive on it. 

I agree with LumbyLad that Bruce may be too much of a self-styled Messiah. But then I'm accused of the same, so who's talking?

Leadership is a dicey topic. The egalitarianism of the Green stage, in which most of us here in this thread are implicated (whether we care to admit it or not), prompts us to act by teamwork and decide by consensus based on equality. After all, egalitarianism is one of our precious, hard-won freedoms, paid for with much blood during the revolutions and wars of 18th, 19th, and 20th century.

But the leadership style of Jesus and other Messiah-type individuals is not being at the top of a dominator hierarchy, but rather a natural hierarchy, as Bruce pointed out several times in his book. In a natural hierarchy, the leader is the foremost servant of the evolutionary ladder he or she heads.

The intelligence of the molecule includes and transcends the intelligence of the energy it contains; the intelligence of the cell includes and transcends the intelligence of the molecules it contains; the intelligence of the organism includes and transcends the intelligence of the cells it contains; the intelligence of Gaia includes and transcends the intelligence of the organisms it contains; and the intelligence of Kosmos transcends and includes the intelligence of the living planets IT contains: Parts become wholes, and wholes become parts of greater wholes: Wholes within greater wholes within ever greater wholes, each whole including all of its parts and being greater than the sum of its parts, with Kosmos, the greatest whole, closing the loop by being the singularity of energy which IT was (is) in the beginning, but having transcended ITself and rendered ITself more and more intelligent up the Evolutionary Ladder, Spiral, or Loop (as I prefer to see it): The sacred process of cosmic evolution in which we can be, and ought to be, co-creators.

Hello everyone ..........God bless you....

It seem everyone has their own way of living God...and it is so hard sometimes to put into words what our God means to us...but we can  find the words ...for God is a teacher ...teaching us the way is very important ...and as we all know He uses every source He can find to show us the way.....

lumbylad and stardust......I also have reseached Dyers way of teaching from His books and from the way he teaches on PBS...one of our local channels here....I find him quite interesting and he makes a lot of sense in his teachings...but I find what is missing not only with Dyer and even the teachings of the emerging church in this book discussion is God...you will hear Dyer say once and awhile the name of Jesus but mostly he refers to God as the source...source it sounds like something we need to look for ....he has a round sphere with light in it as the source....not God...but the source....

I would like to ask why God , Jesus , Holy Spirit and His angels who carry His will are off in the background somewhere as they teach....has the idea of God gotten old ...that He is referred too as a source....or not mentioned at all.....nowhere in the new age teachings have I heard the bible talked about at all......yes I know some people do not believe in the bible....but even if a person was to read the bible without believing  in God ....he/she would find principals, stories and experiences that lead to spiritual awareness in our walk with God....is it the fault of the churches who push God ?...repent or go to hell theory.....that scare people off....? ..are the teachings of new age leaving God and the bible out of spirituallity.....

I learned and researched the bible so much in the last few years and it never seems to amaze me what I find when I am least expecting it...when the bible got boring I would ask the Lord of the Universe to give me more wisdom and knowlede in my research and He always has..is this not how we learn to know God by faith and trust that His purpose is to love us and teach us the spiritual way on our journey....the examples of His people...prophets, judges, leaders and sharing the gospel way I found help me greatly in my spiritual walk....

Its ok to meditate on God ...but I believe without the faith and trust in Him to provide for us ...to give us what we require through prayers are things that are missing in the new age teachings...ok meditate...become peaceful, calm...clear your mind of what clutters things in your daily life......then what ...there is no where else to go ..if you dont put God into the equation....do we expect God to answer us when we dont believe we can have a personal relationship with Him...this is the whole point of being spiritual...I dont think a person can be spiritual without God...for it is another realm...it is not of this earth...it is more huge and awesome then any human can comprehend...salvation to me is saying, yes I believe in a God who walks with me..who talks with me...and with Faith and Trust...I will seek Him with my whole heart....and then He is found found by us...

Many times I have had to forgive someone for hurtiing me...I could do it once or twice but when the same sitution keeps happening my human power dwindled...but when by faith...I trust the Lord to always help me forgive it works....drawing strength, power, forgiveness, mercy, grace I believe all come from the Lord and it takes His mystical/supernatural abilities to keep giving us what we need in each situation.....all things in my life come from God and the bible being one of them.....

In the book discussions Bruce teaches ......I understand the states and stages in our spiritual growth...and find the levels of colour helped me to understand myself better as a whole..as a person of God who's love and purpose are to make us all one as the Body of Christ dictates to us......I firmly believe we all are one...but this concept has been lost over time...on how to accomplish such a task...it is a huge task to undertake to change ourselves and love our enemy as we want to be loved...but it cannot be done without Gods power in our lives...I have ask this quesion before about the new age teachings...I dont think they are wrong by no means they teach good and honourable ways to become spiritual but I believe that we must put God and the bible back into these teachings....

I always enjoy different points of view on our spiritual walk ...paradox3, amirius, lumbylad, stardust, russ and all others who posted in this thread......I try my best to look at them with an open mind and take from them..what each one of you are saying in the journey you are taking in God...that is why God puts others and other teachings into our lives....

But for me...I will stay firm...that with God, Jesus, Holy Spirit and His ministering angels work very well in my life and I really do Love to have the Glory of the Lord God upon me ...for it is the light on me of God ..in my teachings and my testiomies that others see and say...hey maybe I will try this it seems to work for  bygraceiam...or maybe they'll be coming to take me away...ha ha ha..............Awesome God We Serve...

Sorry I hope I didnt get to far of the subject......

IJL:bg

Yes, Russ, CDs are nice wherever or whenever reading is not possible or practical. I once listened to all of Shakespeare's Sonnets on a long drive. An amazing experience!

By the way, did you know that Shakespeare dedicated his Sonnets to: "The only begetter of these ensuing Sonnets, Mr. W. H. All"?

The WHole and All, eh?: IT!

Hi bygraceiam:

Traditional Christian language is often associated with the traditionalism and absolutism that all too frequently accompanies that language. This is why words like "God" and "Christ" have become almost dirty words, and progressive believers use "Source, Cosmos" or "Universe" instead. I myself do, but only to avoid the impression that I am an absolutist/fundamentalist.

But traditonal language need not be absolutist, as you yourself are a perfect example of. You use traditional Christian terminology, but are are open the progressive words and concepts that say the same thing in different words.

These progressive terms, however, don't pack the same punch as traditional language. If we only would only get rid of the absolutism behind traditional langauge, and regard it as artisitic and poetic rather than absolutely true, then we could retain our beloved, beautiful and evocative, traditional Christian metaphors.

grace

"there is no where else to go"

Try this.  One person thinks on a subject, it is but one person and the thoughts can be picked up as electrical signals and recorded, boring.  10 people think on the same subject, more can happen.  A million people think on a subject, wow.  I am sure that science has no explanation and may say something will or won't happen.  Where does that electrcial energy go, what does all of it do? 

It seems to me (faith) that if 1,000,00 people think about the same good thought, something has got to happen.  People will levitate, walk on water, turn water into wine.  If you believe hard enough, you CAN cure your cancer, so why not something really great if everyone gets involved.

So why is the idea that all the people thinking on IT becomes IT seem so strange.  To me it is an almost natural consequence.  It almost seems too logical.

IT

Russ

Hi Russ:

New ideas seem to have to sprung up in separate and disparate regions of our planet long before book publishing or the internet made the world-wide sharing of ideas possible.

It almost seems as if there were a "collective subconscious," or cosmic or planetary mind, to which we all are connected, and wherein great new ideas spread like wildfire when the time is ripe.

The burning bush, eh?

Perhaps the idea of IT is a burning idea? An idea whose time has come?