As I promised, I have studied and prepared
a response to both of your last emails. I have also reviewed
any statements in my correspondence to you as to what I did or
did not say. My responses are in blue below your statements (except
for the links which are already in blue). I will also send
this as a file attachment in the event that there are formatting
problems.
In some cases I formatted your statements
in bold to better help identify what statement upon which I am
focusing. I will respond separately to your email of September
23rd in a day or two. Since your emails contain
all of my emails to you, I can search and verify if I have stated
what you say I state.
The
thing I found most notable in your September 15 email was not
so much what you said or responded to, but what you did not
respond to. I devoted a great deal of the initial part of my
letter attempting to determine whether or not you are a Christian,
according to the Scriptures which I supplied to you. I already
know that Richard Foster calls himself a brother in Christ.
You
did make some references to Christ's teachings. But in your September
15 letter, I did not get the impression that you are claiming
to be a born again Christian, again according to the Scriptures
I submitted. Now you very well could be. Would you kindly respond: Are you a
Christian....redeemed by the Blood of the Lamb?
The
answer is important, because there are a number of Scriptures
that deal with how we are to respond to people who call themselves
a brother or sister in Christ vs. how we are to deal with a person
who is an unbeliever. Just because you have an association with
Richard Foster, who claims to be a Christian, does not necessarily
mean that you are one....though you could be. But because by
your own declaration you are identified with him, I would be
properly grounded to exercise the appropriate Scriptures in responding
to you.
Sincerely,
James Sundquist
President
Rock Salt Publishing
****************
15 September 2003
Dear James,
Thank you
for answering my question about your motivation for making the comments
and asking the questions that you do about Richard Foster. Taking
your statement that "Only
a fool makes up his mind without hearing both sides of a story"
(Letter from James Sundquist to Mary Fairchild posted
at http://www.cephas-library.com/discernment/discernment_2_false_accusations_fairchild.html) at face value, here are my answers,
first to the factual errors that you repeat, errors
in logic that you and web sites like Lighthouse Trails make, a
theological issue, and exegetical issues.
RESPONSE:
I am not sure why you are
quoting me here. So I would like to clarify that I had already
heard Richard Foster's side of the story by virtue of all of
his published materials and website and his own quotes. Now it
is possible that someone could simply make up a quote and say
he said it. But this is a question of fact, and can easily be
verified by going right to the source, such as his book Celebration of Discipline.
You even quote from this book, so it is not as though Richard
Foster's story is not known. So I never made up my mind before
hearing (reading) his side of the story.
FACTUAL
ERRORS
1. Your
statement: Vaswig is co-founder of RENOVARE. The facts: Richard
Foster founded RENOVARE in 1988, and the incorporation papers
are signed by himself and his wife with myself and
a friend as witnesses. Vaswig was not involved in founding RENOVARE
and has been involved in RENOVARE only because he has
been on our Board of Trustees since 1989.
RESPONSE:
If Lighthouse or other links
I supplied made this statement and it is not correct, I am glad
to know this. So, who originally did make it? You should confront
this person. However, the fact remains that William L. Vaswig
is still very much identified with Richard Foster, given that
he has been on the Board of Trustees since 1989? If William L.
Vaswig's teachings do not line up with the Scriptures wouldn't
you disavow him and remove him from your Board of Trustees?
Your letter to me conveys the idea you are trying to distance
yourself from William L. Vaswig. If that is so, why do you offer
and recommend his books on your Renovare website? You may be
"technically" correct about Vaswig's title, but it
still creates the appearance of evil to the multitudes of outsiders
who are attempting to discern Renovare's position(s), before
they import its teachings or one of its teachers.
Later in your September 15,
2003 letter to me you state that simply quoting a person does
not mean you agree with everything else they say or publish.
That is true enough, and it would certainly be even rare where
one agreed 100% with another authors' quoted sources, unless
they quote accurately and directly from the Bible. But if you
are going to claim this priviledge regarding Richard Foster quoting
Merton or Jung, then you must accord to me the same priviledge
when I quote someone who has either misquoted or incorrectly
quoted another author or link. If we were accountable for every
single quote or misquote, there would be no end in sight because...one
way or the other....virtually every book ever written that quotes
another author eventually ends up having quoted a large percentage
of every book ever written. Same applies to links. If you kept
clinking links on someone's site, eventually you would land on
every website there is....that is if you have a million years.
2. Your statement: Foster and
Vaswig have "held
many conferences". The facts: The only RENOVARE
conferences that Vaswig has spoken at were held in Wichita,
Kansas, in 1989; in Pasadena, California, in 1991; and in
Houston, Texas, in 1999. In my opinion, three does not constitute
"many". You probably learned about the "National
Conference on Spiritual Renewal" held in Pasadena
from other web sites who have picked up their information from
MEDIA SPOTLIGHT written by Al Dager, a distorted
and skewed account of what happened.
RESPONSE:
If as
you claim and can prove that Al Dagers statements are incorrect,
distorted, or skewed, have you confronted him directly? If you
have the concern you have expressed in your September 15 letter,
wouldn't you need to exercise Matthew 18 that you told me I should
do? If you are so concerned that I talked to Lighthouse Trails
about your statements, then why are you talking about Al Dager
to me? And after all, you had no
problem discussing the people at Lighthouse Trails Publishing
with me. So turnaround is not fair play? You have accused them
of bearing false witness, yet you indicated that you don't think
I should tell them.
3. Your
statement: Karen Mains .
. . who sits on your RENOVARE
Board. The facts: Karen Mains is not nor ever has
been a member of our governing body, the Board of Trustees. She
was on a Board of Reference along with many other Christian leaders
who agreed to say a good word for RENOVARE if asked. At no time
did the Board of Reference have any governance duties or responsibilities.
This is another factual error
promulgated by Al Dager in MEDIA SPOTLIGHT.
RESPONSE:
I never stated that
Karen Mains sat on your Board of Trustees. I simply said "Board."
But, as in the case of my response above about William L. Vaswig,
regardless of which type of Board Karen Mains sits on at Renovare,
this nevertheless gives a clear unimpeachable impression that
she is identified with Renovare; likewise Renovare with
Karen Mains. In both cases (Karen Mains and William L. Vaswig)
you are now giving the distinct impression of trying to distance
yourselves from each of them. Why would you do that? But
it did not surprise me at all to see Karen Mains name on your
board, as her own teaching is replete with ideas drawn in parallel
to Richard Foster's teachings.
Once again you are using
ad hominem adjectives to describe Al Dager while you simultaneously
proclaim Matthew 18 and it is OK for you to talk about Lighthouse
Trails. There is a word for this in Scripture. I will let you
say it.
Other factual
errors that have proliferated on numerous web sites:
RESPONSE:
If as you state to me, there
are particularly substantial errors.... versus splitting hairs...wherein
the claimed teachings of Richard Foster, are, not in fact,
I am very glad to know this!
4. Richard
Foster is a psychologist. The fact: He holds a doctorate of pastoral
theology.
RESPONSE:
If a person with a Doctorate
in Pastoral Theology invokes unbiblical psychology to counsel
a Christian, this is a worse indictment. Richard Foster praises
psychology. Are you trying to distance yourself from psychology?
If so, then why do you promote Dr. Siang-Yang Tan, Professor
of Psychology at Fuller Theological Seminary as a speaker for
Renovare, as well as his books on your website? If you are not
praising psychology then why does the Renovare website promote
the occultic pagan rooted Enneagram Personality Profile* on Renovare
website? One can get a degree in Science to learn what the Theory
of Evolution teaches, but it is quite another thing to go out
and then recruit adherants to Evolution. True believers should
be using the knowledge they've acquired to expose Darwin and
Jung, not promote them.
"It would be better
that a millstone were tied around his neck and he be tossed into
the deepest ocean" than to stumble the least one of these
my children..." e.g., with occultic and antichrist teachers
such as Carl Jung. The guilt remains whether or not Richard Foster
is technically a licensed psychologist**, or merely uses psychology
while pastoring or counseling people with psychology, as these
counselees have put their trust in a man (Richard Foster) whom
they think to be a pastor. A pastor quoting Carl Jung in his
counseling? That is even more frightening, to say nothing of
being an abomination to the Lord Himself!! For truly, what fellowship does light have
with darkness, or the cup of the Lord with Belial? And if there
was every a person who walked in darkness and was demon-possessed,
it was Carl Jung!
*ENNEAGRAM
PERSONALITY PROFILE:
SOURCE: Robert Innes, Personality Indicators
and The Spiritual Life, Grove Books Ltd., Cambridge,
1996, p.3; The Ennegram is significantly occultic in nature and
origin, coming from Sufi, numerology, and Africa New-Age sources.
George Gurideff, Oscar Ichazo of Esalen Institute, and Claudio
Naranjo are the prominent New Agers who have popularized it,
and then introduced it, through Fr. Bob Oschs SJ, into the Christian
Church. For more information, I recommend Robert Innes' booklet
and Mitchell Pacwa SJ article's "Tell Me Who I Am, O Ennegram"
Christian Research Journal, Fall 1991, pp. 14ff.
If there is any doubt that
Enneagram Personality Profile, or Meyers-Briggs Temperament Sorter
(Carl Jung) is unbiblical and pagan-based, I invite you to read
the following documents:
http://www3.bc.sympatico.ca/st_simons/arm03.htm
&
http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/Psychology/temper.htm
**PSYCHOLOGY
VS. THE BIBLE:
Psychology counsels no fear
of the Lord at anytime in any of its therapies, let alone
at the beginning. So there is no wisdom in it. The Bible teaches
that there is body, soul, and spirit; psychology says there is
only the body and the soul. The Bible teaches us that it is Holy
Spirit that will lead us in all truth and that it is sharper
than a two-edged sword, dividing even the soul from spirit. Psychology
doesn't even believe in the Holy Spirit. The Bible teaches us
about our eternal destiny. Psychology offers no hope for eternity.
The Bible teaches us to lay up for our selves treasures in heaven.
Psychology offers no concept of heaven to lay up your treasures
for. The Bible says seek ye first the kingdom of God and all
these things (our needs) will be added unto us. Psychology doesn't
seek first the Kingdom of God, in fact it never
seeks the Kingdom of God. The Bible teaches that our help comes
from the Lord. Psychology tells us our help comes from one or
more of unproven theories and tens of thousands of psychotherapists
whose ideas were drawn from paganism, divination, astrology,
humanism, and evolution. The Bible teaches that being lovers
of selves is mankind's problem. Psychology teaches that being
lovers of selves is the solution. Bible teaches that we can come
freely to drink the waters of life. Psychology charges for it.
The Bible offers the opportunity of becoming a new man in Christ.
Psychology offers an improved or even damaged version of the
old man. The Bible teaches that our strength is perfected in
weakness and that in suffering, sin loses its power. Psychology
teaches us how to balance our strengths and weaknesses with personality
profiles derived from paganism and divination. The Bible esteems
the contrite and broken spirit. Psychology esteems self-esteem.
The Bible teaches us to rejoice in the suffering or being persecuted
with Christ to produce character and overcome the world. Psychology
has no interest in Christ's suffering, our suffering with Christ,
or sees any redemptive value in his shed blood. The Bible teaches
that Jesus Christ believed in demon possession and delivered
those possessed. Psychology teaches that there is no such thing
as demon possession...so there is nothing to be delivered from.
Psychology does not believe we are in a spiritual war, because
it does not believe there is any such thing as Satan or his demons.
The Bible tells us that we war against principalities in heavenly
places. The Bible tells us how to be blessed in the Beatitudes.
Psychology doesn't even comprehend blessing, so it can not offer
anyone a blessing because it omits the person required to administer
these blessings, that is Jesus Christ. The Bible tells us we
can't produce the fruit of the spirit which is love, joy, peace,
patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control
without abiding in the vine which is Jesus Christ himself. Psychology
attempts to bear this fruit by abiding in the teaching of such
founders as Carl Jung and Sigmund Freud who opposed Christianity!
5. He
is a disciple of Thomas Merton (Lighthouse Trails). First,
to be a disciple of a person, one has to be with that person
while they are alive and learn from them. Historically,
numerous people have had disciples--Socrates, Jesus, Calvin, Freud--but
always during their lifetime while they were able to
teach their disciples face-to-face. Merton died
when Foster was a teenager. This is the first time I have
ever heard of one person being described as a disciple
of another when all they do is quote from a book.
RESPONSE:
First of all you don't have
the definition of "disciple" right in English. Check
Webster's Dictionary. But equally important is what the word
disciple is in Greek (that is the context of disciples of Jesus),
from which the word was translated.
The teacher does NOT have
to be alive and the student does not need to have known the teacher
in person. In fact, Jesus had died already (though he rose
again in a glorified body) when he gave the Great Commission
of Matthew 28:19:
"Go therefore
and make disciples of all the nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the
Holy Spirit,
NASB copyright 1995 Lockman Foundation |
The Greek word for "disciple"
used is:
matheteuo
{math-ayt-yoo'-o} The KJV uses the word
teach, but that is an understated word in English, though one
certainly does teach one's disciples. And note further
the Disciples are not making the whole world disciples of themselves
(the Disciples), but rather they are making the world disciples
of Jesus Christ, a third party.
If Lynda Graybeal's definition
is correct, and a true disciple must have have met Jesus in person
and known him while he was still alive, then no one in most of
Israel and everywhere outside of Judea, Galilee or Samaria could
truly be called a disciple of Jesus Christ even during the Apostolic
Age, let alone everyone who calls themselves a Christian today
or the last 2,000 years. I am most curious where you found your
definition.
Whether or not Richard Foster
fashions himself as a disciple of Thomas Merton, it is not a
matter of a single quote but many. Also, Richard Foster recommends
several of Thomas Merton's books in his Celebration
of Discipline book. Wouldn't this demonstrate
that a fair interpretation by any reader would be that Richard
Foster is a follower of Thomas Merton? Even if there was only
one quote such as, "Well, Thomas Merton tried to awaken
God's people," that single quote should be sufficient for
us to take warning. Here is another quote in which Richard Foster
embraces Thomas Merton's teaching:
On Thomas Merton's writings:
"This brief book (What is Contemplation?) is an excellent
introduction to contemplative prayer for everyone." (Source:
Richard Foster, Spiritual Classics, p. 21)
Why would you be so sensitive
about calling Richard Foster a disciple of Thomas Merton? Since
Richard Foster raves about Merton with thirteen quotes in his
book, why would he not be proud to be identified with Merton?
But it is not just Thomas Merton, but all of the people Foster
quotes or mimics, including Thomas Keating and Carl Jung, who
share the same or similar false teachings, that magnifies Richard
Foster's culpability and reasonable perception by the reader
or hearer that he is a disciple of Thomas Merton. In and of itself
it is not even wrong to quote a false teacher and properly cite
them. It is not the use
of quotations that is the problem, whether by Richard Foster
or others. Rather, the problem lies in the inherent promotion...by
using these quotations...of false teaching, ideas and techniques.
In fact, one could even quote Hitler or document some good
things he did, such as petting his dog, or requesting that a
"people's car" be invented! But such quotes would be
extremely dangerous and misleading without simultaneously identifying
him as the monster he was.
Quote from Susan Anderson
regarding Richard Foster quoting Carl Jung:
"Well, hey, Richard
Foster quoted Jung, so there must be something to Jung's writings,
teachings, etc., that are of value to me, to the church."
Off they go, marching straight ahead to their nearest bookstore
or library, to read Jung's writings, as their sinful human natures
have now had their appetites whetted for Satan's lies.
And, of course, he is most obliging and will help them open those
doors wide.
THAT'S the danger.
Among so many other dangers. I know more Christians (so-called,
anyway) who don't know which way is up, than I do Christians
who can readily discern truth from error. And I firmly
believe that NO person, calling themselves by our Lord's Name,
has any right...whatsoever...to use quotes from any unrighteous,
ungodly source, in order to bolster God's Word, Christ's teachings,
or any part of Scripture.
GOD'S WORD DOESN'T NEED
TO BE BOLSTERED BY ANYTHING JUNG HAD TO SAY." SOURCE: Susan Anderson September 25, 2003
Email to James Sundquist
I don't
know who the Morrison you quote (op. cit., p
432) is but can guarantee you he has never contacted
Richard Foster to see if what he says and/or writes about
Richard is accurate.
RESPONSE:
I am happy to supply you
with the source:
Alan Morrison
is a foremost Biblical Scholar in the United Kingdom. Here is
his website and one of his many articles exposing Richard Foster
and teachers like him: The Sorcerer's Apprentice
Website: http://www.diakrisis.org
Your statement
about Alan Morrison not contacting Richard Foster to determine
whether what he wrote (published) or said is accurate is nothing
short of astonishing to me! Short of plaigerizing, imagine having
millions of readers of various books having to contact the writer
to see if he wrote what he wrote. This is absurd. You are not
supposed to have to contact the author, that is why they published
it. How are we to ever know what he really meant? Does Richard
Foster know the contents of the emails you are sending to me
and other people?
ERRORS IN LOGIC (commonly know as fallacies in logic
or logical fallacies).
RESPONSE:
I am not
sure how far along I can go with you on this. Aristotle is considered
the Father of Logic, and he had a worldview completely antithetical
to Biblical Christianity, as did the rest of the Greek philosophers.
Scriptures tell us these are those whom the Apostle Paul opposed
and tore his clothes over people following after these philosophers/
1. Guilt by association. To
say that a person ascribes to everything that the person being
quoted believes is guilt by association. A particular quote is
used because the writer believes that the point that
the person makes is valid in the context of a proposition. And a
quote always has to be read in the context of the proposition
or argument.
RESPONSE:
You appear
to be appealing to a hermeneutic principle rather than a logic
principle "a text out of context is a pretext." Of
course I agree with this hermeneutic principle.
For example,
the entire paragraph that contains one of the Jung quotes you
cite reads: "In contemporary society our Adversary majors
in three things: noise, hurry, and crowds. If he can keep us
engaged in 'muchness' and 'manyness,' he will rest satisfied.
Psychiatrist C. G. Jung once remarked, 'Hurry is not of the
Devil; it is the Devil'" (CELEBRATION
OF DISCIPLINE, 1st edition, p. 13). To say that Richard ascribes
to everything that Carl Jung believed or taught just because
Foster quotes him is ridiculous.
RESPONSE:
Where
did I ever state or imply that Richard Foster ascribes to everything
Carl Jung believed or taught? Where did anyone say this? Please
cite this for me. One does not need to ascribe to everything
a false teacher teaches, only one thing...a little leaven leaveneth
the ENTIRE lump, not part of it! Secondly, the quote you supply
(where Foster quotes Jung) is in itself Biblically (Doctrinally)
unsound. In short, even this quote is a false teaching. Hurry
is not the Devil. The Devil
is the fallen Archangel Lucifer, who tempted Jesus Christ. Once
again, it is astonishing to me once again that you or Richard
Foster, who claims to be a Christian would believe this! And
because Richard Foster believes this and teaches it by quoting
Jung, many more continue to be led astray into unblical teachings.
Consequently,
there is a point where you and Richard Foster do become guilty
by association.
"Bad
company corrupts good morals" I Corinthians 15:33
Was Paul
addressing only the Corinthians? Was the intended audience only
the First Century, or does this apply to us today too? The Biblical
term "morals" refers to both physical and spiritual
practices, as the Book of Proverbs and the Whore of Babylon confirms
in both the Old and New Testaments.
Quoting
from numerous sources to support a position has a long academic
history. In The City of God Augustine quotes
Cicero, Plato, Marcus Varro Apuleius, and others.
John Calvin quotes a wide range of people including Cicero, Homer,
Herodotus, Ovid, Plutarch, Pliny, and Seneca in his Institutes
of the Christian Religion. Even the Apostle Paul
quotes a pagan Greek poet to make a point (Acts
17:28)!
RESPONSE:
And what exactly was the
Apostle Paul's point in quoting a pagan Greek poet? Was it to
applaud them and affirm them to continue in idolotry? Was it
to tell them they could integrate their wonderful philosophy
with Christ? Or, was it not in order to evangelize his audience
and convert them from their pagan Greek philosophies to Christ alone? Obviously,
that was Paul's reason. And even a casual reading of the
Book of Acts would reveal this to you! None of the men you name
above could even contribute one thing to the sanctification of
a Christian for the perfecting of the saints. The Word of God
is clear when it says only the Word of God can do that!
I understand
that you also have been the victim of guilt by association when
your music CDs were distributed and sold in New Age bookstores.
I quote from one of your letters to Mary Fairchild, "You
would not accuse Ken Ham of being in an unholy alliance with
the New Age because New Age outlets sell Ken Ham books. I know
I certainly would not! So
why do you accuse me of being a New Ager for doing precisely
the same thing?"
RESPONSE:
None of my lyrics are New
Age, but either direct Scripture and/or poems which reflect straight
Biblical teachings...not New Age Ideas... and they certainly
were not conceived by Eastern Meditation. Richard Foster's are!
Paul was not "associating" with the Greeks when preaching
in the Forum, HE WAS OPPOSING THEM! (See above my commentary
on William L. Vaswig and Karen Mains.)
And Richard Foster's teachings
are not merely placed on the shelves next
to New Age books, but rather they are contained and
promoted within
his books.
2. Argument from silence. Your statement
that Jesus didn't teach us to appeal to the imagination and senses
is a classic example of an argument from silence and is very
weak. Let me ask you a few questions about the way Jesus taught.
What do you think Jesus is appealing to when he draws word pictures in parables?
Our senses? No, Jesus uses the age-old rhetorical device
of parables over and over and over in which word pictures
dominate. Parables force the hearers to use their
imaginations to make sense of the story. For example, who can
understand the parable of the sower and the seed if they can't
see it in their imaginations? Or the parable of the woman searching
for the lost coin? I could cite as many examples of Jesus' appeal
to the imagination as there are parables in the New Testament.
RESPONSE:
Your contention that my arguing
from Scripture regarding what it says about imagination is very
dangerous waters for you to be treading. What
Scripture says about imagination is what Scripture says about
imagination! This is not an argument from silence
if the Scripture is not silent on the matter, because the Scriptures
are not silent on the matter. Besides this, if you concede Scripture
is silent on the matter of imagination, then why do you give
all of the Scriptural examples of the absence of silence regarding
imagination? I hope you did not get the impression that I think
that ALL imagination is evil....though at the time of Noah's
Flood, EVERY imagination of their heart was only evil continually.
If you re-read all of the
Scriptures that I sent to you, you will see that I am speaking
about vain imaginations or dreams or visions that promote or
teach ideas strictly forbidden in the Bible. Example of such
are: divination, astrology, sorcery, necromancy, pagan ideas,
conjuring up another Jesus, magic arts, imagining evolution.
ALL of which Carl Jung promoted, and he himself was demon-possessed!
And yet, this is the very man whose ideas, practices and teachings
Richard Foster promotes IN OUR CHURCHES. Additionally, Richard
Foster promotes Eastern Mysticism Meditation which a host of
people Richard Foster quotes, practice, and which Richard Foster
practices and promotes. Even if he were not a direct disciple
of any one of the men he quotes, he is a desciple of their very
same practices!
So, my answer to you is really
quite simple. As true believers...as Christian... we are forbidden
from even touching these teachings, let alone practicing or promoting
them in any form of imagination that invokes any of the practices
or techniques that the Bible condemns, whether they be Ouija
Boards, crystal balls, palm reading, astrological chart reading,
pagan based personality profiling, or Eastern Meditation, etc..
With regard to Parables to
mention, are you aware that one of the central themes in Christ's
parables is God's Judgment? Does Comtemplative Prayer, as offered
in your Spiritual Formation Classes or Tilden Edward's Shalem
Institute where William Vaswig that you tout on your website
was trained, warn about the Judgment of God coming upon the earth?
About Jesus'
appealing to the senses, why do you think Jesus used unleavened
bread and wine at The Last Supper? To appeal to our imaginations? No,
it was an act rooted in the body's senses--hearing, smell, touch,
taste, and sight--as were the many times he laid hands on
people to heal them, put mud on the blind man's eyes,
etc.. There are many other examples: "salt of the earth"
appeals to taste, "light of the world" appeals to sight,
"unleavened bread" appeals to taste, Thomas touching
Jesus' wounds appeals to touch, and so on. If you deny
that Jesus taught by appealing to the imagination and senses,
then you discard most of the four Gospels, keeping
only his replies to the questions of the Pharisees and the historical
narratives. As a musician, how do you teach a person to play
the guitar? By describing in words how to strum the
guitar and wrap his fingers around the neck and move his
fingers up and down the fret while pressing on the strings? Or
by having the student feel, see, and hear the instrument
as he is learning to play it? Jesus taught, and continues to
teach through the biblical accounts and his Spirit, the
same way.
RESPONSE:
For you to suggest or imply
that Christ's mission or teaching was to appeal to all of the
human senses and imagination, so as to maximize pleasure and
minimize pain, meet all of the felt needs of the people, is to
deny not just the Four Gospels but the entire New Testament,
as well the Book of Job, and further denies the Apostle Paul's
own words (if you are right) to eat drink and be merry, for tomorrow
we die (assuming you are right that Christ was appealing to and
satisfying our senses). God forbid! Jesus Christ's own words
regarding seeing does not sound anything like what you have in
mind for the senses:
"For all that [is] in
the world, the lust of the flesh, and the
lust of the eyes, and the pride of life,
is not of the Father,
but is of the world." I John 2:16
Regarding your reference
to the Lord healing the man's blindness, would you like to talk
about "context" one more time? The main thrust of that
passage was to reveal that it was those who think they can see
that are the ones who are really blind. But seeing the truth
is the opposite of what Eastern mediation will bring you, which
is spiritual blindness!
Your version of the Gospel
(which is really "another gospel" and "another
Jesus") does violence to the Book of James, Hebrews 11:36-38,
by insulting every present and past persecuted and martyred saint,
of whom this world was not worthy. Your touchy feely gospel is
exactly what doubting Thomas required vs. Christ blessing those
who had faith who NEVER saw, felt, tasted, smelled, or had their
senses appealed to. Yes they did hear, but that is what the Scripture
teaches is necessary for conversion (faith cometh by hearing).
But your gospel is the tickling of the ears kind of hearing by
those with itchy ears, and this all promotes mysticism, gnosticism,
and the occult ideas of Carl Jung that Second Timothy warns against.
And by the way, unleavened
bread was not used to enhance taste. (If anything it did not
taste as good.) The use of unleavened bread was to remind them
of the slavery they came out of in Egypt. Even the Manna in the
Wilderness did not have the taste the Israelites were accustomed
to in Egypt. As you may recall, this was one of the reasons they
murmured in the Wilderness, and God judged them for murmuring
and complaining.
No, the gospel you are promoting
just another spin on the appeal of the Church Growth Movement,
which also promotes Richard Foster, as does Rick Warren via his
toolbox to pastors.
3. Appeal
to Emotion. This
logical fallacy masks many spurious arguments. We appeal
to a person's emotions and then statements that do not stand
tests of logic, accuracy, and truthfulness slip by unnoticed. This
is frequently done when the question being debated is
very emotional or elicits strong emotions, such as the debate
over abortion or "keeping the faith pure".
RESPONSE:
Where did I appeal to emotion
to you? Where did you get that idea? My appeals are all based
on reasoning from Scripture. You are not suggesting that abortion
is an option for a Christian are you? We test everything with
Scripture...not emotion...including spirits such as "Philemon"
of which Carl Jung was possessed!
4. False
Disjunction, e.g.
the only kind of "centering down"
is New Age "centering down". This ignores the rich
history of centering down in the Church, and the fact that
practices from many religions including centering down have
been co-opted by the New Age movement. In conjunction with this,
one huge mistake many people make is to take our present knowledge
of the New Age movement and read it into books and teachings
prior to its inception. In doing this, they can declare that
people who lived decades, and sometimes centuries ago, taught
New Age beliefs.
RESPONSE:
Once again I do not recall
ever saying that all centering down is "New Age" centering
down. I can center down to do my homework, center down to practice
my guitar. I can say that Christ is the center of my life, so
thinking about him and praying to him could be argued to mean
that I am centering down. Additionally, what other religions
do with regard to centering down (as you stated above), is totally
irrelevant to Christianity, regardless of whether or not the
New Age Movement has co-opted this practice. As true believers
we are do obey the Word of God only and not incorporate the beliefs
and practices of all other religions, because they are not of
God! Why
Richard Foster's version is New Age is not a false disjunction
is that he employs and prescribes identical techniques to what
the New Age employs such as vain repetitions, Ashtanga Yoga,
Kundalini, and Buddhist prayers at Quaker gatherings that I can
document. In quote after quote, Richard Foster gives accolades
to promoters and practioners of Eastern Mysticism and Meditation
which mirror his own views. There is not even anything to mask
what he is doing. Secondly, you are not even historically accurate.
Though the New Age term itself might be recent, the beliefs and
practices the term refers to, go back to the Garden of Eden.
All New Age beliefs, each and every religion,
have at their very foundations the lies of Satan, which are always,
always, always to take away from the Deity of Christ and the
Word of God. Their beliefs stem from the Fall of Adam, and later
from the Tower of Babel, and Babylon. Even
at the time of Christ, Jesus himself commanded us NOT to pray
as the heathens do with vain repetitions (such as breath mantras).
Here is the direct commandment of our Lord himself:
"But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions,
as the heathen [do]: for they think that they shall be heard
for their much speaking." Matthew 6:7 KJV
So if the Lord does not hear
these kind of prayers, who are we really praying to? What possibly
God ordained purpose could they have?
And yet what do we find Richard
Foster recommending in his book Spiritual Classics?
Richard Foster states:
"Practice lectio devina
by taking a Bible text that you love, reading it over attentively,
then entering into prayer through a single word or phrase."
p.35 "Why does this little prayer of one syllable pierce
the heavens?" p. 45 (Source: Richard Foster, Spiritual Classics,
p. 35, p.45)
Jesus Christ said that if
you want to be his disciple, you must obey him. So how is praying
with vain repetitions and repeating a single word or phrase over
and over obeying Christ, when he gave specific instructions which
forbade it?
Your version of centering
down and imagination does not even fit the Biblical meaning of
meditation, but is, in fact, the opposite. Richard Foster's idea
of meditation is to imagine the loins of your mind to be let
down and relaxed that anything might enter. Here is the proof:
Richard Foster in his book,
Prayer: Finding
the Heart's True Home, speaks of the practice
of "breath prayer," in which a Christian-sounding word
or phrase is repeated over and over again like a mantra. Foster
wrote that "Christian
meditation is an attempt to empty the mind in order to fill it"
(Ray Yungen, Time
of Departing, Lighthouse Trails Publishing, 2002,
pg. 72). But fill it with what? This "breath prayer"
idea has gained popularity in charismatic circles that frequently
sing of "breathing in Jesus" or variations thereof.
(SOURCE: Jacki Alnor, Christian Sentinel,
April 2003. Richard Foster quote taken from
Richard Foster, Celebration of Discipline,
Harper & Row Pub., San Francisco, CA 1978, p. 15.)
This is precisely the technique
that lets demons enter a person. But we are to be circumspect
which is what a night watchman is, as this literally means having
eyes all around our head to guard against imaginations and seducing
spirits that would love to enter us.
The Apostle Paul commands
us to "gird up the loins of our minds," not let them
down, not empty our minds.
We are to put on the helmet
of salvation to protect our minds, as well as the shield of faith
that we might ward off the fiery darts of the enemy from penetrating
that part of our armor. One girds up the loins of their mind
for war, as that is precisely what we are in...a spiritual war.
Any good soldier girds up his or her mind when he or she stands
guard on a night watch. I know this first hand because I used
to stand guard in four-hour shifts at night over missile batteries
in the U.S. Army in West Germany. Emptying your mind and/or falling
a sleep on guard duty would get you court-marshalled. You had
to be vigilant and constantly alert, i.e., we are to have the
loins of your mind girded up...not let down! Succinctly, we are
to have the mind of Christ....not mindlessness!
This is perfectly consistent
with what the Apostle Paul further tells us:
"Be
sober and be vigilant; because your
adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking
whom he may devour" I Peter 5:8
How can a Christian be ever
vigilant and sober within his mind, if he is spending a lot of
time emptying his mind by practicing any
type of meditation which is the direct opposite of Biblical meditation?
For one of the very best
Scripture passages on the context and real meaning of what the
Bible teaches about "meditation," read the entirety
of Psalm 119, where you will find the word "meditate"
time and time again.
You want context? The entire
passage uses the word "meditate" to describe the author's
intent to meditate on the statutes, laws, and decrees of the
Lord, that the author might not sin against God. Now traditionally,
the "centering down" form of meditation promoted by
Richard Foster involves CLOSING the eyes. Well let's see what
the writer in Psalm 119 thinks about that. In Psalm 119:148 we
read:
"My eyes stay open
through the watches of the night, that I may meditate on your
promises." Psalm 119:148 NIV
When Jesus was praying in
the Garden of Gethsemane, he rebuked his Disciples for NOT keeping
their eyes open, for he wanted them to WATCH and PRAY (Mark 14:38)
WITH HIM. Let's take an even closer look at what Jesus had in
mind in terms of how he prayed (the highest form of meditation
which is to "watch" and "pray") in the Garden
of Gethsemane. Jesus Christ's idea of how to pray was to resist
temptation to the sweating of drops of blood. No human besides
Christ has ever accomplished this feat. Nevertheless, Christ
our Lord does set an example of what should be taking place during
our praying. This kind of praying has nothing in common with
techniques or purpose of praying for Eastern Meditation or any
other religion. Christ's method of praying has nothing in common
with Richard Foster's revised definition of meditation or "centering
down." Jesus Christ gave even more instructions when his
disciples asked him how to pray. The Lord gives them (and us)
instructions on how to pray when he gives us the Lords' Prayer.
Once again, he gives us no instructions which resemble "centering
down" meditation. This prayer is a petition and requires
the mind to be fully engaged, not unplugged. Finally, it tells
us to appeal to the Lord to protect us from the Evil One
(i.e., Satan). Eastern Meditation REMOVES the protection to let
the Evil One IN to our minds.
Just prior to this, Jesus
had lifted up his OPEN eyes to the Heavens to pray...not close
them when he raised Lazarus.
"Then they took away
the stone [from the place] where the dead was laid. And Jesus
lifted up [his] eyes, and
said, Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me." John
11:41 KJV
So we don't even see Jesus
praying or instructing us how to pray or meditate like anything
even resembling Eastern Meditation or Richard Foster's version
of meditation.
Again the Apostle Paul says:
"Finally, brethren,
whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things [are] honest, whatsoever
things [are] just, whatsoever things [are] pure,
whatsoever things [are] lovely, whatsoever
things [are] of good report; if [there be] any virtue,
and if [there be] any praise, think on these things." Philippians
4:8 KVJ
With the
mind of Christ, this is the kind of thinking or meditation we
should be practicing. What is pure
or commendable about Carl Jung's practice of divination or the
complete balance of his theory of the subconscious, which he
believed came from what we possessed in our subconscious as animals
before we became human (thus totally denying the creation of
man directly from the dust by a Sovereign Creator) ?
What is of good report of
Carl Jung?
What is noble about his personality
theory, which he also drew from paganism and a spirit-guide that
possessed him? Are not these things clearly abhorred by both
Jesus Christ and the Apostle Paul? We are to flee these
things, not embrace, promote them and feed them to God's children.
You want to call your kind
of meditation Biblical. But I challenge you to go through the
entire Old and New Testaments and do a word search for the word
"meditate" or "meditation", and look it up
in the Hebrew and the Greek (as you did with the word "you"
in the New Testament). You will not find one instance or precedent
for the word meaning anything close to your revisionist definition.
You will not find a precedent for it. You will not find an example
of Jesus Christ or any of the Apostles practicing it or recommending
it. But you will find it practiced and promoted in
Eastern Meditation and the New Age Movement.
Finally, the New Age Movement
did not borrow or hijack centering down from Christianity. Though
not under the same name, the practice is as ancient as Babylon
and the Tower of Babel. And the Tower of Babel was constructed
because of the same lie Satan used in the Garden of Eden, "You
shall be as God."
When you say "church"
you mean Roman Catholicism and the Carmelite Order traditions.
But Roman Catholicism is both pagan and apostate. Indeed,
your version of centering down indeed matastesized into the Church
and spread spiritual death into the Church, just as various forms
of cancer metastasize in the organs of the human body, eventually
causing physical death. Your form of "centering down"
is also rooted in the Church's first and tragically on-going
heresy, Gnosticism.
Despite what you believe
and stated above, centering down has no rich history or
even existence in the TRUE CHURCH. For you to claim that New
Age beliefs are only recent, reveals a tragic lack of knowledge
of both history and Scripture. As the prophet Hosea declares:
"My people are destroyed
for lack of knowledge: because thou hast
rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt
be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy
God, I will also forget thy children." Hosea 4:6 KJV
5. General
Assumption. To
say that Richard Foster admires Thomas Merton because he quotes
him is an assumption you have drawn, not a verifiable fact.
RESPONSE:
It is absolutely astounding
to me that you would make this statement with all of the Merton
quotes Richard Foster has in his book. One does not have to assume
what a person clearly states and publishes. Here is a quote from
Richard Foster, quoting Thomas Merton:
"...offers you an understanding
and light which are like nothing ever found in books or heard
in sermons"
Richard Foster further says
of Thomas Merton:
"Thomas Merton has perhaps
done more than any other twentieth-century figure to make the
life of prayer widely known and understood." Foster considers
Merton's book, Contemplative Prayer, "a must book".
He also states, "Merton continues to inspired countless
men and women," and credits his books as being filled with
priceless wisdom for all Christian who long to go deeper in the
spiritual life." SOURCE: A TIME OF DEPARTING,
Ray Yungen, Trailhouse Trails Publishing Company, 2002. These
quotes were drawn from Richard Foster's books: Devotional Classics
and
Meditative Prayer.
And this
is not admiring Thomas Merton? If note, I would surely be curious
to know what a good example would be, by your own definition!