Put childish things away, and become men

Two comments from the ever-useful PuritanBoard showing how mainstream Christians have been dissuaded from the true faith by false teachers:

While Christian mysticism is highly suspect when it comes to theology, I do know a lot of believers who got trapped in it for a while (as I was). In those circles, Brother Lawrence, Julian of Norwich, Teresa of Avila, are all popular names as are Amy Carmichael, A. W. Tozer and Oswald Chambers. While the first group are more catholic in their approach, they all seem to have one thing in common and that is some "deeper life" relationship with Christ that is only attainable by doing something. (i.e. closing yourself in up in a room and fasting and praying for days, separating yourself from people and the world in order to become more spiritual, etc.

As I see it, it is nothing more than works salvation and/or sanctification (depending on which group you are involved with).

This was written by a woman who has been made a moderator at that forum (which means she is deemed 'safe' doctrinally). Notice how she has to put down the biblical practices of fasting and praying by connecting it up with "closing yourself up in a room" - scary!...and weird! Does the Bible say close yourself up in a room when you fast and pray? Methinks no it does not. I mean, there is a passage about going into your closet, and so on, but that doesn't play on the subject of fasting and praying in some general way. But you know, the modern versions based on the corrupt Alexandrian manuscripts have deleted references to fasting in connection with prayer, so for the mainstream Village of Morality Christians it's a mute point anyway.

But look at her last sentence. Such an absolute non-understanding of sanctification. The devil in Reformed churches has given up on corrupting the doctrine of justification by faith alone (though the Federal Visionists are currently actually making a new attempt at that I should say), so the devil decided he would teach a false doctrine of sanctification in the Reformed churches to make up for the clear understanding of faith alone the Calvinists have, for the most part.

Effort is necessary at two areas of the order of salvation: conversion and sanctification (what is called active, progressive sanctification to distinguish it from definitive sanctification). No effort is necessary for regeneration, justification, adoption, etc. Effort is necessary for conversion and sanctification. Conversion requires learning what one is to repent of and what one is to have faith IN. It involves making efforts to understand God's plan, his Word, doctrine, etc. Sanctification requires efforts (otherwise Bunyan's Christian - from Pilgrim's Progress - could have just stayed home). The parable of the talents gets at effort in sanctification. Jesus' entire teaching on awakening and loving your enemy and all the rest involves effort in sanctification. God doesn't regenerate you for you to then sit on your butt and do nothing. Once regenerated you have the ability to do good works and to effect effort in your sanctification. You are no longer dead in sin and dead asleep with no power to do anything but rebel from God with your every thought, word, and deed.

Here's a second comment from the same thread:

I cannot directly answer your question about those particular "saints", but I would like to add a general comment.

Mysticism is defined as follows:

mys·ti·cism (mst-szm) n.
1.a. Immediate consciousness of the transcendent or ultimate reality or God.
b. The experience of such communion as described by mystics.
2. A belief in the existence of realities beyond perceptual or intellectual apprehension that are central to being and directly accessible by subjective experience.

mysticism - definition of mysticism by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

So, if this is an accurate definition of mysticism, then anyone who is a mystic is NOT a Christian. Several things about mysticism are anti-christian:

1. The belief in immediate consciousness of God, rather than mediated consciousness of God. God has exalted His Word above all of His Name, and therefore, anyone seeking to be conscious about God without a mediated revelation of the content of such consciousness is in rebellion.

2. The belief that such realities are "beyond intellectual apprehension" and therefore "accessible by subjective experience." God's Word is a clear Word: it is NOT "beyond intellectual apprehension". Man may refuse to hear it because he doesn't like it, but the point is that he knows what it says. Man is the image of God. As such, he was created in knowledge, with the capacity to intellectually apprehend propositions revealed by God. If this were not the case, there would be no such a thing as logic, or conscience, or truth. All would be subjected to man's experience of the divine. This is the basic idea of liberalism: deny the image of God, and make god the subject of our own experiences.


This is why mystics reject the propositions revealed by God in the Scripture. One, for instance, being justification by God's grace, through the work of Christ, received by faith alone. l don't think that the doctrine of justification is their basic problem. Rather, the basic problem I would identify is their refusal to accept what God created them to be, and how God mediates His messages to men.

Notice in his point #1 he has a total lack of understanding of the role of the Holy Spirit in the mystical union between Christ and believers (to put it in Thomas Boston's phrase). Now notice also the arrogance of the man (young man? I don't know) in affecting a teaching pose and tone in his words. This is the product of the shallowness of Reformed environments and of the devil's influence in corrupting the Word of God and instilling a fear and reverence of man above the fear of God alone.

His point #2 is a straw man taking off his lack of understanding of the role of the Holy Spirit in the union between Christ and believers.

They call themselves Calvinists, but they've obviously never read Calvin's Institutes, certainly not Book 3. It's the basic shallowness and juvenile nature of the culture of academia. They've never put childish things away because they've yet to become men of God.