The very statement of “being saved” I have come to ponder.
Why does the church and we Christians hold that phrase as so important? And what exactly does that phrase mean in reality? And how does that phrase influence past and future behaviour? And is it really what this “God Soft Hands Jesus stuff” is all about?
“I have been saved” (along with “I am saved” and “I was saved” and “have you been saved yet”) is a rite of passage. It seems to me now to divide real Christians from the curious and questioning.
Have you revealed your true self publicly? Have you become what you were always intended to be … have you come to terms with what you are but denied ever since … have you found your true inner self … the one you can (and will eventually) live with in harmony every day of your life (from now)?
The life of the saved is one of denial (pre-saving).
Jesus died for you. You are/were already saved. All you have to do is admit it, accept, believe it, and live it – and live a life in harmony with those who have already admitted and accepted and believe. You cannot help who you are. You can only help who you will become. To deny who you are is to deny Christ Himself. And you can deny it all you like, but we – who are saved – know you already have Christ inside you – whether you admit it or not.
This is the teaching I was taught on the way to being saved.
But the more I was saved the less I was saved. The more I read? It was of GSHJ getting ticked-off at man’s inhumanity to man. Of being pissed at those purporting to be saved but who were selling a story to make a fast buck. Of telling those who had authority over others to … love. Of telling those who got ticked-off with those in authority to … love. Of telling those with the gift of love to spread the good news of … love.
I do not read of GSHJ condoning any label we use to define who we are and how we are to behave – or that we use to define how others are to be and are to behave.
The very label “Christians” was not given by God Soft Hands Jesus at all. Just like Pharisee wasn’t. Nor the raft of labels on the go when GSHJ walked and talked. All those labels that defined how to be and how to behave – labels that differentiated others who did not and would not behave (as they should).
GSHJ raised the bar (again) – and “I Am” came to life (again) – and “Who I am” was challenged (again). But we still prefer to focus on “Who I am”.
On sin and (outer) behaviour – on “measuring sin” – on the definition of sin – on the frequency of sin – on the reasons for sin – on the size and being of sin. Because we still need to refine and define sin so that we can still forgive sin – and create the rituals of sin and forgiveness – and the washing away (or not) of sin (and how and who – and who not): If we do not know sin – how can we forgive sin – how can we love the sinner?
And a new order of following is established – with the same order of business and rules: “I have been saved” .
“I have been saved.” – “I have come out.”
More and more they sound the same to me. Both require an audience. And both are said for an audience. One audience (“we” say) is full of God. The other (“we” say) is full of sinners.
The GSHJ I know sees no difference.
The GSHJ I know sees the real inner “I Am”.
The GSHJ I know sees the love of each – and the inhumanity of each – in each.
The GSHJ I know connects with love and gets ticked-off with “our” inhumanity of love.
The GSHJ I know doesn’t see the outer behaviour we (still) use to judge and define (as we still do).
I think we still confuse “Christian stuff” with our own personal distaste – and then so often justify it with the concrete we pour over the bible. The concrete that says, “Who I am (and who you are)”
I don’t believe GSHJ likes things set in concrete. Concrete makes “sin” safe … “inhumanity” safe … and makes all “love” conditional.
“Break not just bread together-alone – break concrete together-together.”