honorentheos wrote:Nightlion,
Again, thank you for the lengthy post.
To be honest, that doesn't make sense.
You give us two options to consider. The first is, "inoperable spiritually (every false way)" which you tell us is a consensus view. "No direct response from God is required"
The second is "operable spirituality where God is directly involved".
Regarding the former, you tell us that the definition of worthiness is derived by some non-God "other" if I can reduce your point to a manageable size.
But regarding the second, you also say - "...an exact worthy set is required and is precisely standardized across the board of spiritual documentation. This standard for worthy is NOT the end in itself. It is rather the approach, the knock on the door, the seeking of the kingdom, the waiting upon the Lord, the coming unto Christ with full purpose of heart, repentance done right. Without a direct response from God it is vain and purposeless and counts for nothing."
My understanding is this - you differentiate between the two by saying the former lacks God while the later includes God. Both have worthiness requirements. You suggest that if God is directly involved this means the requirements aren't an end but really a means. You seem to imply that the reason this doesn't work for the former is that God, as you define him, isn't at the ends of the worthiness requirements of whatever form of inoperable spirituality a person happens to live by.
Which means, (take a breath) - we're all back to wondering how a person can prove or disprove God. Because if you can't prove you have God on YOUR side, you are just setting up another worthiness test. It's only if a person happens to have a true relationship with God as the ends of their process are they not following a worthiness test but are instead fostering a relationship. It's just a matter of perspective. It doesn't seem like any decernable difference is present. If I tell you my way IS resulting in a true relationship with God while yours is just something you do to make yourself feel like you are close to God, how would we end the stalemate?
In some ways, this "god" at the end of your particular worthiness test just sounds like an imaginary friend invented to make up for the lack of quality real-world relationships in a person's life.
How am I wrong in this assessment?
The kingdom of God hides in plain sight. Christ was not discerned.
The only way to know if my way is real is to do it. Everyone doing their way does imagine God is with them, after the fashion they accept. They figure that its okay to sin because the are just the natural man, or that each time that they do sin they lose the Spirit until they partake of the sacrament again.
They never received power over sin or had their natural carnal, sensual and devilish disposition changed by a new creation.
They are guessing. These manifest no power with God, no great insights, no new revelations, (real ones and not the ego driven drivel) and no clue about advanced degrees of righteousness......apostleship, special witness, their bodies renewed, calling and election made sure, to become a friend of Christ, power to overcome the world, biblical style miracles and callings to certain tasks of great significance in the development of the kingdom of God upon the earth.
I am only defining the difference. You will not see the difference looking at both together. People have acted the part as if scripture defined their existence rather that challenged it and guided it to a directed purposeful encounter with God.
The closest you could get objective observable proof without doing it yourself would be to witness others doing it my way. That alone would carry a great deal of evidence. Good luck setting something like that up. You can easily witness the lameness of the pretense versions. No change, nada, zippo, nothing. Just a new social construct and the joy of that. What great leap is it for a disbeliever in God to expect no great change in people who believe and figure that is all the delusion of God is good for. See?
Anyone who disbelieves in God has to level both as superficial. Doing it is the only way to know the reality of the difference. I think that in this present age of the world the only one who will forsake the world sufficiently to do it will be one who has within them, as it were, an unrequited love of God that seeks a response from God and to enter the kingdom at all costs.
You can hear this a million times from me and put it in the box of doubt each time. You will not wear me down, worlds without end. I have begun to think that you imagine that I really cannot know what I say I know and therefore it must be possible to save me from an obvious delusion caused by social trauma. Wrong.
I cannot share my proofs easily if you do not share my faith fully. EOS
If substantive fruit is truly what you would consider
really look at the depth and breadth of my web site Fireark.org.
Contrast that with any LDS leader, teacher, professor, artist, and point by point line up what I claim to have done and what I show to have done to see who has the abundance. If this were done honestly giving a value to what I originate against any other living person so far as something truly original I believe that there will not be found another comparable. That is evidence that God has been with me. Delusion social freaks only produce garbage.