I see no contradictions at all, though plenty of paradox. If all I needed to do was make sense, I would simply echo the works of some apologist far wiser than me, say, Josh McDowell. He it was who taught me winning the debate intellectually isn’t really the point. He has done so repeatedly in times past, compelling atheists and other kinds of believers to admit his arguments won. They had no answer. But it did not make them believers. His first two seminal books provide all the documentary evidence anyone needs to accept belief in Jesus (Evidence that Demands a Verdict) and belief in the Bible (More Evidence that Demands a Verdict) are reasonable. Some have found new arguments, and he continues writing to address them, and it goes back and forth.

I no longer bother with that. I answer questions put to me, but the reason I answer them, or write about such things at all, is that love. All the proof in the world pale in comparison to the unquenchable drive to pour myself out for others. This has been enhanced by mysticism, which I seem to recall has been the common thread which began this discussion, but it does nothing to change the fundamental nature of what was already inside me. You were counted from the first comment as a friend, and have proven yourself willing to accept that offer, regardless of the lack of overt negotiations of such a thing. I will continue to hold you as a friend, and I pray for you as often as I see another post, at the minimum. I do not pretend to make you a “notch on my Gospel Gun” because I left such things behind long ago. Sadly, that still characterizes most of what I see among the church folks who decided I was too radical for their tastes. And I still love them, too, and answer the questions they may bring.

You are in good company, Emmanuel, if you don’t quite understand what holds it all together inside me. But every time you come here, you will find that same warm embrace, provided you see past the weaknesses. Convincing you I am right is not the most important thing I can do, not by a long shot. My only real task is transparency. There is nothing else I can offer in virtual space. What I have to share is so compelling to me, I am willing to make myself a target for just about anything others may wish to pin on me. That’s okay, because as soon as things change just a little in this world, I will be forgotten, lost in the sea of humanity. The thread running through all my religious posts is: Don’t remember my name; remember Whom I serve and to what I am committed.

Faith does look weak from the outside. The greatest sadness I face within religious circles are the vast number of people who build faith on some inferior alternative to logic. Faith is indeed belief which cannot be proven. The Hellenist epistemology typically ascribed to Aristotle, but certainly in evidence before him, assumes a belief which cannot be proven is baseless. The ANE epistemology assumes the mystical approach is the other source.

Human nature is body, mind and spirit. Men are born with dead spirits. The highest faculty of such men is intellect, the rational logical mind. Should God choose, He can bring life to the human spirit, and there plants His own Holy Spirit. But all is not suddenly resolved. The mind is not prepared for input from that direction, which for so long had been dead. It takes a lot of time to teach the mind to accept input from that source. Mysticism prepares us to understand that faculty of Spirit-spirit communion. Most Christians reject mysticism as a suspicious flirtation with paganism. However, it is the proper means to knowing in the spirit, because logic cannot reach the level of truth for which there are no words.

I remain uncertain in the mind of my flesh, knowing I am surely getting some things wrong. I know that I do not know it all, but I also am entirely certain my mind can never rise to truth. My spirit knows the higher truth, but that is not the same kind of “knowing.” By long effort, prayer, contemplation, and other spiritual exercises, the mind learns to accept input, but it comes always in the form of imperatives. Never in forms of intellectual knowledge, the entire range of spiritual activity is confined to imperatives. Not specific actions, but commitments which result in actions which must match the context. My mind must learn to differentiate between emotions, mere wishful thinking, and all sorts of other stuff, and recognize the imperatives of the Spirit.

As you might surmise, I am acquainted with logic and knowledge of the Hellenistic epistemology. I teach computers, for goodness sakes, along with the Social Sciences, some limited civil engineering, etc. I understand the historian’s approach to the record of Scripture, and related materials outside the Bible. Rational reason rejects many claims. But my living spirit, hearing from God’s Spirit, demands I hold myself accountable for what I understand the Bible demands of me. This is what I teach as Christian Faith. That so very many people are suckers for the Jim Jones brand of unreason is a shame to the church, but not to me. I reject their witness. While Jim Jones is an extreme example, a byword (“he drinks the coolade”), the vast majority of those who share some portion of my faith get theirs from somewhere else than I do. They still insist faith must be reasonable. I insist faith is completely unreasonable, but it’s because genuine faith is above reason. Faith is an input into the decision process which overrules and overpowers reason. It makes demands without reference to logic of that sort, but by its own peculiar logic.

This permits me to sacrifice myself against all self interest. My sinful nature fights that sacrifice, so I don’t always achieve. But holiness God seeks is neither mere conduct nor success. He grants the power to success, but what he permits me to do is maintain the desire for His approval. That desire alone is what God seeks from me, and calls that holiness.

I wrote an article about this very question. Jesus could not have been born this time of year. I find sufficient evidence to believe the date had something to do with Constantine’s pernicious influence over the church. So I don’t bristle at the commercialism, but do like to remind those who have time to listen that ancient Hebrews didn’t celebrate birthdays much, but many pagan religions make much of them. It’s not a crusade convince folks to lighten up about Christmas, but I don’t always let it pass silently. So I would say the cultural drift around Christmas is meaningless, in that sense.

So you might guess I have no great reverence for tradition, and certainly not for what passes as Church History traditions. I’m not hostile to Catholics or the Orthodox branches, just not interested. Protestants tolerate me to varying degrees, and that tiny handful of folks who pay attention to what I teach can belong to any church they like, because the question is who will tolerate those who agree with me. Around here, I’ve not found an organized church which can put up with me, so I leave them in peace.

But returning to the original question, I do like to celebrate Advent, though I do so with an entirely different emphasis. I’ve been writing a series of mediations for the 25 days of Advent on yet another blog.