By Cedric Fisher |February 19, 2022<\/p>\n
(Global Church Network Members and Participants: https:\/\/www.truthkeepers.com\/?p=2163<\/a>)<\/p>\n Introduction:<\/strong><\/p>\n I commonly refer to Kanye West\u2019s foray into Christianity as an example of how weak and bereft of discernment many professing Christians are. West was disturbingly welcomed throughout Christianity and its leadership. Individuals warning about West were blasted with angry accusations and insults. Few people cared that West repeatedly blasphemed Christ and the Holy Spirit on stage and in videos. He had virtually no opposition to \u201cgoing to and fro in Christianity, and from walking up and down in it.\u201d[1]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup><\/p>\n Christianity is under siege by professing Christian pretenders. People appear to be fascinated with anything new. That error is luring them into the snares of Satan\u2019s \u201cministers of righteousness.\u201d[2]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup> To be clear, those \u201cministers\u201d use words to disarm people and conceal their nefarious intent. A word, such as semiotics, may be the label for extra-biblical doctrine. The sad and tragic fact is that Satan\u2019s minions are now accepted as God\u2019s special envoys with new revelations of truth. A quick Google search for Jesus Manifesto, a book written by Leonard Sweet and Frank Viola, will produce page after page of glowing kudos. Most individuals will never reach the search engine page with an expos\u00e9 of the book.<\/p>\n This is not the time for new revelations, but for strengthening time-honored truth. We should beware of anyone claiming to have a new concepts of God\u2019s word, especially if he or she declares, as Leonard Sweet, that they see, hear, dream or imagine as no one else. The likelihood of God appointing such an individual is nil.<\/p>\n As the spiritual atmosphere become worse, the watchman will declare that it will become worser. Sadly, most people will react as before. No matter how often the watchmen warn them, and their warnings are proven true, people will continue to resist, ignore, and attack the watchmen. One day they will sit in the squalor of the ruins of Christianity, weep and cry out, \u201cIt\u2019s gone, it\u2019s all gone!\u201d<\/p>\n Alice Bailey, the \u201cMother of the New Age Movement,\u201d and James O. Davis, founder of the Global Church Network, have something in common. Were she alive, Bailey would join Davis in his ardent approval of Leonard Sweet. He was formerly an \u201catheist intellectual and scholar dedicated to exposing the nincompoopery and poppycockery, if not tomfoolery and skullduggery of all religions.\u201d[3]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup><\/p>\n I do not recognize much difference spiritually between an atheist attempting to expose Christianity as \u201cnincompoopery, poppycockery, tomfoolery and skullduggery\u201d and a New Age sympathizer presenting Christianity as being compatible with paganism. The results are the same for individuals that believe either deception. I opine that Sweet only diverted from atheism for the mission to convert Christianity into a religion he could agree with.<\/p>\n People may not realize that there are atheist pagans. If Jesus is reduced to less than deity (however covertly), and God\u2019s moral requirements minimized to optional status, little remains of the atheist\u2019s objections to Christianity. The result of mixing or replacing Christianity\u2019s scriptural truth with New Age concepts and philosophy produces a pagan religion atheists may tolerate.<\/p>\n Currently, Sweet has become significant in the immense effort to attract susceptible professing Christians to the New Age. He is labeled a New Age sympathizer, but I believe that he is a New Age minion. He is also co-founder and teacher in the Global Church Network\u2019s<\/strong> Global Church Divinity School (GCDS).<\/a><\/p>\n Although semiotics is not his creation,[4]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup> Sweet dreamed or imagined that semiotics should be added to the Christian belief system. Sweet is teaching semiotics in several seminaries, including Northwind Seminary, Portland Seminary, George Fox Seminary, Evangelical Seminary, and the Global Church Divinity School.<\/p>\n The GCDS is part of the Global Church Network. On their website, GCDS offers the following:<\/p>\n \u201cThe seven ministry tracks are Preaching, Teaching, Healing, Story, The Arts & Imagination, Christ Formation and Contextual Semiotics.\u201d[5]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup><\/p>\n The explanation for \u201cContextual Semiotics\u201d under the subtitle of \u201cMissiology, Ecclesiology, and Entrepreneurial Innovation\u201d is:<\/p>\n \u201cEntrepreneurial Ministries, Leadership Development, High CI [Contextual Intelligence] Cultivation, & Intergenerational Ministries yoked to a theology of trusteeship and creation care.\u201d[6]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup><\/p>\n I included the above information in this section to reveal that much of what Sweet offers is packaged and labeled with words not commonly used. He uses axioms as if they are new thoughts.[7]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup> In fact, much of what I have read by Sweet is fraught with, and I have no malice in stating, linguistic silliness\u2014possibly for the purpose of appearing \u201cdeep\u201d and \u201cethereal.\u201d<\/p>\n Christ Formation<\/strong><\/p>\n Concerning Christ Formation, the GCDS courses that the student must complete include \u201cSpirit-Empowerment” and \u201cFaith Coaching.\u201d[8]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup><\/p>\n Conformance to the image of Christ is the sole cooperative effort of the Holy Spirit and the Believer. Thus, I wondered why Christ Formation involved teaching Spirit-Empowerment. If by \u201cSpirit\u201d they mean Holy Spirit empowerment, then they are in error. Jesus did not say to His disciples, \u201cTarry in Jerusalem until I arrive to teach you Spirit-Empowerment.\u201d Empowerment cannot be not taught\u2014it must be received.<\/p>\n (George Fox University<\/a>, where Sweet is a visiting professor<\/a>, states that Christ Formation is the same as Spiritual Formation. “Spiritual Formation:<\/b> A movement that has provided a platform and a channel through which contemplative prayer is entering the church. Find spiritual formation being used, and in nearly every case you will find contemplative spirituality. In fact, contemplative spirituality is the heartbeat of the spiritual formation movement.” Lighthouse Trails Research Project<\/a>)<\/p>\n Since faith comes by hearing and hearing by God\u2019s word, I also question \u201cFaith Coaching.\u201d Faith is increased and strengthened when we read and study God\u2019s word, pray, and are faithful to endure trials to victorious conclusions.<\/p>\n That stated, “Faith Coaching” appears to be another means to “Spiritual Formation.” Consider the following from Google Books describing the book, Faith Coaching: A Conversational Approach to Helping Others Move Forward in Faith.<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n “For too long, Christians have taken a delivery approach to spiritual formation: we memorize key verses and snappy concepts to spring on our un-churched neighbors; we provide fill-in-the-blank study courses for believers who want to grow in faith; we strive to tell, teach and transfer what we know. The results? Stagnant believers, lowered expectations and an avoidance of spiritual conversations. There must be a better approach. What if you could take a discovery approach to spiritual formation? What if you didn’t have to be an expert with all the answers but you could ask questions that helped others expand their commitment to following Christ? What if you could take a coach approach? And what if this approach were easy to learn, simple to apply, and bore fruit in the lives of those around you? Here is such an approach. Faith Coaching teaches you to leverage the power of coaching conversations to help others find and follow their spiritual path.”<\/p>\n What is the purpose for Contextual Semiotics being taught in a Seminary? Perhaps the statement from Sweet and Viola\u2019s deceptive book, Jesus Manifesto, might provide clarity.<\/p>\n \u201cThe historic Christian creeds are an expression of the need to answer Jesus, \u2018Who do you say I am?\u2019 question. But that \u2018you say\u2019 is contextual. Each new generation, in every culture, is given a \u2018you say.\u2019\u201d[9]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup><\/p>\n Christ asked His disciples the question\u2014not that He needed to know the answer\u2014but to provoke the men that had followed Him to answer from firsthand knowledge of His deity. If anyone could get the answer right, certainly it would be them. In the context that it was asked, Peter provided the answer, \u201cThou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.\u201d[10]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup> It cannot be replaced by a \u201cyou say,\u201d inviting Billions of people to ignore Peter’s answer and re-ask the question.<\/p>\n Thus, since the perfect answer was given and recorded, the Christian creeds nor any individual need answer it differently. It is the answer that resonates through the ages. Christ built His Church on the solid rock of that answer. There would be no foundation of the Church if answers (foundations) were needed from every generation.<\/p>\n Sweet and Viola declares “you say” contextual and takes the great logical leap that everyone throughout history gets a \u201cyou say.\u201d (Why doesn\u2019t everyone get a \u201cwho do?\u201d) \u00a0They appear to be prying open the door for descriptions of Christ that are relevant to each generation. Thus, Peter’s answer can be modified or expanded. Whether or not that is what Sweet and Viola meant, the “you say” privilege makes it possible.<\/p>\n However, Christ did not provide a \u201cyou say\u201d to every generation, but an opportunity to say, \u201camen!\u201d<\/p>\n Jesus Manifesto or Jesus Manifest?<\/strong><\/p>\n So what are Sweet and Viola trying to present in their book? Perhaps the answer is in Sweet\u2019s following statement:<\/p>\n Sweet declared on Twitter, \u201cWhy Frank and I wrote Jesus Manifesto: You can be a Jesus Manifest.\u201d[11]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup><\/p>\n Is that what the GCDS really means by “Christ Formation?” Does the Scriptures spread wide for such a conclusion via a \u201cyou say\u201d or a manifesto? God\u2019s word is the supreme manifesto that does not need extra biblical advice or \u201csemiotic improvement.\u201d Sweet\u2019s Twitter statement appears to sync with the following definition of Christ Formation.<\/p>\n \u201cChrist Formation is an effort to form every candidate into another Christ.\u201d[12]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup><\/p>\n Jesus said, \u201cFor many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.\u201d[13]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup><\/p>\n The Futurist and Semiotician<\/strong><\/p>\n On his website, Sweet defines himself, among other things, as a futurist. Being a Christian \u201cfuturist\u201d must certainly involve the study of prophesy. If Sweet considers prophesy as God\u2019s word declares it, he should know that his (and similar individuals) involvement in Christianity is prophesied by godly men.[14]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup><\/p>\n Nonetheless, Sweet is not abashed to describe himself in the following statement.<\/p>\n \u201cLeonard Sweet is a scholar of USAmerican culture; a semiotician who \u2018sees things the rest of us do not see, and dreams possibilities that are beyond most of our imagining;\u2019 and a preacher and best-selling author who communicates the gospel with a signature bridging of the worlds of faith, academe, and popular culture.\u201d[15]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup> (underline mine)<\/p>\n The apostle Peter wrote:<\/p>\n \u201c\u2026knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.\u201d \u2014 2 Peter 1:20<\/p>\n Perhaps the reason Sweet \u201csees what everyone else does not see\u201d is because he fantasizes by New Age processing concepts that true Christ-followers do not accept. Since I know nothing of his dreaming, I cannot comment on his dreams. However, dreams linked with imagination can be a serious issue. Consider what the apostle Paul wrote in Romans:<\/p>\n \u201c\u2026because that, when they knew God, they glorified him<\/em> not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.\u201d \u2014 Romans 1:21<\/a><\/p>\n \u201cDreams, imagining, seeing what no one can see,\u201d when it pertains to truth, are all characteristics of mysticism. It can draw people to a vain individual rather than to God. Although the apostle Paul had visions, he did not use visions, dreams, and\/or imaginations for self aggrandizement. He pointed people to God with the truth that the Holy Spirit had also deposited in other Believers. At no point did he wish to be considered as the sole dispenser of God\u2019s truth or that people should esteem him as a great one.<\/p>\n It is important to point out that genuine Christ-following requires one to surrender his or her life to God. Redemption is the fact that God purchased us. If we accepted His redemption purchased by the shed blood of Christ, we cannot remain autonomous. We are either God\u2019s property or Satan\u2019s spoils\u2014there is no middle ground.<\/p>\n Afterward, one will be targeted by demons. Surviving involves praying (not the praying-without-words \u201cContemplative\u201d plea for demon possession), and it requires self-denial (not legalism) that increases with maturity. One must be indwelled led by the Holy Spirit and he or she must read and study a genuine Bible.[16]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup> Trying to be a Christian while rejecting true redemption will make one \u201ctwofold more the child of hell.\u201d[17]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup><\/p>\n True Christianity is not a playground\u2014but a battlefield. We do not get to concoct our personal Christianity tailor-made to our desires and lifestyles. Because numerous professing Christians do not know or accept what genuine Christianity is, they have been lured under the false teaching of very dangerous satanic minions that speak like a lambs, but mixed with the words of snakes.<\/p>\n Semiotics is alluring for several reasons. It\u2019s new (to most people), it appears to be cutting edge knowledge, and it\u2019s taught by one of America\u2019s most notorious \u201cNew Christianity\u201d teachers. But the most alluring reason is that it removes the requirements for genuine Christ-following that the flesh and Satan\u2019s \u201cministers of righteousness\u201d despise.[18]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup><\/p>\n One dictionary defines semiotics simply as \u201cthe study of signs and symbols and their use or interpretation.\u201d[19]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup><\/p>\n In other references, Semiotics is called \u201cA new theoretical basis for the information age.\u201d[20]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup><\/p>\n It is called a \u201cNew Age\u201d language, perhaps referring to a new digital age of icons and emoticons. However, God\u2019s word can be misinterpreted if individuals deviate from His verbal and written communication to include the language of signs. God sent signs, not to confuse or complicate, but to validate Jesus Christ as His Son and the Messiah.<\/p>\n Does God call Semioticians?<\/strong><\/p>\n Definition of \u201csemiotician\u201d is in the following:<\/p>\n \u201cA semiotician is an individual who is an expert in or student of semiotics. Semiotics is the study of sign processes, which are any activity, conduct, or process that involves signs, where a sign is defined as anything that communicates something, usually called a meaning, to the sign’s interpreter.\u201d (Wikipedia)<\/p>\n We do not sit at a stop sign for hours determining an alternate meaning. We know to stop, and to go when the way is clear. There is also a large bold word on the sign. Likewise, we do not fixate on and ponder different meanings of the signs of healing, raising from the dead, et cetera\u2014we simply accept them. Besides, there are bold words in the Scriptures that inform us what those signs mean.<\/p>\n Sweet appears to employ semiotics to mix New Age concepts with his teaching. Some individuals would strongly protest that statement. However, Sweet stated in his book, \u201cNudge: Awakening Each Other to the God Who\u2019s Already There:\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cWhile I am engaging with people of other religious faiths, I find myself unable to commit to their conclusions or agree with their assessments. Yet at the same time I come away encouraged by spiritual truths found in their traditions, thrilled by new insights into my own faith, and more passionate than ever about being a disciple of Christ.[21]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup><\/p>\n Sweet appears to insist that semiotics will further inflame that passion.<\/p>\n On his Napkin Scribbles podcast, Sweet explains semiotics as he applies it to Christianity. He first asserts that he doesn\u2019t believe one can understand \u201cJesus Semiotics\u201d without comics. He declares that comics are very important.[22]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup><\/p>\n Napkin Scribbles<\/strong><\/p>\n I agree that his Napkin Scribbles podcast of how semiotics fits into God\u2019s word could be comical, but only if it were not (sadly) so discombobulating.<\/p>\n In Sweet\u2019s podcast, he stammers, struggles, and contradicts himself while trying to explain \u201cJesus Semiotics.\u201d In the process, he demonstrates a lack of scriptural knowledge and understanding. He explains:<\/p>\n \u201cAnd uh, uh, I\u2019m\u2014I\u2019m encouraging us to learn to get fluent in this language of reading signs, because the ultimate sign is Jesus, and we want to know what he\u2019s doing, where he\u2019s especially active so that we can then join Him in what he\u2019s doing.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201c..and where he is in everybody’s life\u2014everyone that you meet, Jesus is up to something and your job and mine as semioticians is to read what he\u2019s doing.\u201d<\/p>\n Sweet\u2019s depiction of Christ Jesus is not validated by God\u2019s word.<\/strong><\/p>\n The Holy Spirit is not active in the lives of everyone because the majority of individuals are not surrendered to God. Furthermore, Sweet mentions \u201cthe spirit\u201d but does not frequently acknowledge the Holy Spirit, who Christ Jesus declared that He would send after His departure. The Holy Spirit is in the Believer as Christ was with His disciples. Communication with the Holy Spirit is superior to sign language that requires us to learn from an individual who \u201csees\u201d and \u201cdreams\u201d what the \u201crest of us do not see or dream.\u201d<\/p>\n Another section of the podcast is very telling. Sweet claims, \u201cBut Jesus Semiotics requires a spirit hermeneutics. Uh\u2026hermeneutics is, how do you interpret, and, those signs. Recognizing them is what Semiotics is. Okay, that\u2019s Jesus. Interpreting those signs and what they mean, is hermeneutics.\u201d[23]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup><\/p>\n Christian hermeneutics is \u201cthe study of the general principles of biblical interpretation.\u201d[24]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup> We may one day open a Bible with only symbols and pictures of various things. It may evoke the notion of hermeneutics as \u201csign interpretation.\u201d As it is today, hermeneutics is how we study God\u2019s written word.<\/p>\n I disagree with the claim that \u201ca spirit hermeneutics\u201d is necessary, and that we must understand \u201cJesus Semiotics\u201d (signs and symbols). Our understanding of Christ comes from God\u2019s word. That knowledge of Christ will be illuminated by the Holy Spirit. However, the Holy Spirit does not tease us by flashing signs and forcing us to interpret them. The Believers that are filled with the Holy Spirit hear His voice. He leads us into all truth and the path does not pass by way of mystics and sages.<\/p>\n If Sweet were truly sent by God with special gnosis that the rest of us are not privy to, why did God deprive past generations of access to semiotics? Why would God choose semiotics for the present generations that are beleaguered by deception, apostasy, and Satan\u2019s minions? We may realize the answers when we consider Sweet\u2019s final explanation of \u201cJesus Semiotics.\u201d<\/p>\n Sweet goes on to explain, \u201cA biblical herm\u2026semiotics mandates, uh, a numerological hermeneutics. The spirit teaches us how to read the signs, that we\u2019ve gleaned from the semiotics. The spirit teaches us how to read Jesus. But reading Jesus is a semiotic task. Understanding and interpreting what Jesus is doing, and what that might mean for us, is a numerological task\u2014is a hermeneutic task.\u201d (ibid)<\/p>\n I wondered if he was concocting such a drivel on the go. Are we supposed to be reading the signs or read Jesus? Sweet cannot make up his mind if they are the same. Is a spirit teaching us, or is it a numerological, hermeneutical, and semiotic task? The podcast reveals that something is seriously wrong with Sweet\u2019s understanding of Christ. His attempt to explain is complicated by the amazingly confounding nature of his rambling discourse. The fact is, God has not sent Sweet or anyone else with semiotics as a means of further understanding His word.<\/p>\n One of Sweet\u2019s students explained in a video that semiotics is like an apple. One person may view it as fruit, and another person is reminded of gloating (How do you like them apples?!) and yet another person is reminded of Apple computer company.<\/p>\n Apply that to Sweet\u2019s \u201csemiotic hermeneutic\u201d and the result is that one may assume various interpretations of God\u2019s word. That is exactly<\/strong> what the New Age Movement is provoking with its foray into Christianity. The mission of New Age operatives is to convince Christians to believe that God\u2019s truth is subject to additions, interpretations, and alterations, i.e., \u201ctruths\u201d from other religions. It is to convince them that those \u201ctruths\u201d are equal to scriptural truth. They insist that God manifests as many gods, there are no absolutes, and all truth is in flux (except the claim that all truth is in flux).<\/p>\n The bottom line is that every true Christ-follower is indwelled by the Holy Spirit (Romans 8:9). God will not send anyone to tell His people what He can speak to them via His word and the Holy Spirit. Furthermore, there is not one thing I know about God or Christ that any other Believer cannot know.<\/p>\n If the result of Sweet\u2019s teaching separates Christians from the Holy Spirit by the cleverly instilled Eastern religious principle of \u201cboth\/and,\u201d they are susceptible to explore and accept the errant doctrine, philosophy, and concepts of God in other religions. Sweet\u2019s semiotics provokes individuals to have different views of God and His word. One or more of those views is likely to line up perfectly with a New Age belief.<\/p>\n That is precisely how Christianity is being dismantled. The major goal of the United Religions and New Age Movement is to convince Christians to give up their fundamentalism\u2014to believe in the Eastern philosophy of both\/and to believe in God and other gods\u2014in God\u2019s word, and also New Age heresy. It is very disturbing that the GCN\u2019s many pastors, theologians, apologists, leaders of denominations and large ministries, have not utter one word of protest.<\/p>\n The Attack on Fundamentalism<\/strong><\/p>\n Robert Muller, former Assistant Secretary-General of the United Nation, said:<\/p>\n \u201cPeace will be impossible without the taming of fundamentalism through a United Religions that professes faithfulness only to the global spirituality and to the health of this planet.\u201d[25]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup><\/p>\n The New Age religion aligns with Muller\u2019s insistence that religions professes faithfulness only to the global spirituality and to the health of this planet.<\/p>\n The United Religions Initiative draft charter contains the following:<\/p>\n “We believe in the universality and eternity of the Spirit. We believe that all religions derive their wisdom from that ultimate Source. Therefore, the world’s faith traditions share in common wisdom, which can be obscured by differences in religious concepts and practices.”[26]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup><\/p>\n The New Age has long been engaged in provoking an eastward shift of Christianity from the Scriptures and into the Eastern Religion\u2019s concept, both\/and.<\/p>\n The Law of Non-contradiction<\/strong><\/p>\n Both\/and violates the Law of Non-contradiction. The Law of Non-contradiction is that nothing can be what it is and what it is not. We see that law established in the Scriptures many times. One popular verse describes it well.<\/p>\n \u201cBut let your \u2018Yes\u2019 be \u2018Yes,\u2019 and your \u2018No,\u2019 \u2018No.\u2019 For whatever is more than these is from the evil one.\u201d[27]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup><\/p>\n Christ was obviously not commanding us to speak only those two words. He was telling us not to say \u201cyes\u201d when we mean \u201cno\u201d and vice versa. It is violating the Law of Non-contradiction.<\/p>\n The fact is that God insists that we either<\/strong> accept Him\u00a0or <\/strong>be rejected by Him. The rigidity of either\/or is the single most despised or hated characteristic of God\u2019s word. We must choose Him alone as God, or choose the god of the world system and his gods\u2014we cannot have both. Eastern Mysticism declares that we can have many gods. A genuine Believer chooses God\u2019s word and the absolutes it is founded on. Eastern Mysticism has duplicity as the centerpiece of its belief system. The narrow path to God is paved with His truth. The Eastern principle of both\/and can never be syncretized with Christianity without the death of Christianity.<\/p>\n Applying semiotics to knowing Christ, or to what He is doing (He\u2019s sitting at the right hand of the Father), or attempting to use semiotics via the Holy Spirit, is a bizarre and unbiblical concept. There isn\u2019t even the slightest hint in God\u2019s word that one day, because of Leonard Sweet, we would replace the Spirit of truth (that leads us into all truth) and compromise God\u2019s written word, with semiotics.<\/p>\n My advice to Sweet\u2019s students and followers is:<\/p>\n Stop concerning yourself with what Jesus is doing, and discover what God wants you to do. For that information, you should remove unnecessary distractions and obsessions in your life. Study God\u2019s word by the assistance of the Holy Spirit and pray. When I say pray, I do not mean as the heathen pray (Contemplative Prayer), but pray sincerely from your heart. Communicate with God in private.<\/p>\n Sweet\u2019s semiotics is making something simple, complicated. People are being diverted from the simplicity of the Gospel, and scriptural understanding of who Christ is, to look for signs. Further, he insists those signs must be interpreted by a spirit. It certainly will not be the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n I feel sadness for Leonard Sweet just as I do for anyone that has no spiritual acumen to know who God or Christ truly is and how they interact with humanity. One statement by Christ puts a golden pin in the large ballon of Sweet’s complicated gnosis.<\/p>\n But Jesus said, \u201cSuffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.\u201d[28]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup> <\/em> Matthew 19:14<\/p>\n How could those children know Christ intellectually? Could they have even known Him instinctively? Parents of those children could not have known Christ long enough to have taught their children. Further, I do not believe that children would have gathered around a Rabbi as a matter of custom. Would parents even permit such a thing since his words would be well beyond their ability to understand?<\/p>\n Those children knew Him deeper than human intellect and beyond instinct. They came because of their childlike wonder of Him. His innocence resonated with the innocence in them. How can that be explained as instinct or learned behavior? No one like Christ had ever existed on earth.<\/p>\n They were drawn to Christ because of Himself\u2014nothing else. It is a phenomena science might call inherent in humanity, but God\u2019s word calls it a gift. The pure goodness of Christ awakened the gift of faith in children. They would have not been able to explain it. His magnetism attracts the pure in heart and compels a deep desire to know Him. Adults sat at His feet, but children wanted Him to hold them.<\/p>\n Deep calls unto Deep<\/strong><\/p>\n That reaction of humanity to Christ cannot be taught in a seminary. It is already resident in each person. But it is something that must be first recognized, responded to, and then lived. Sadly, people reject the desire to know Him and doom themselves to eternal darkness. Other ones seek intellectual reasons why they should keep Him at a distance while offering obligatory statements of belief in Him. Other ones attempt to alter knowledge of Christ and God\u2019s word so that Christ appeals to them. It is an attempt to avoid full surrender. They do not wish to completely give up who they are, to have their lives hidden with Christ in God.<\/p>\n The one with faith as a child knows his or her sinful condition, cries out like a child to the Father. In the throes of brokenness, he or she is suddenly made whole by redemption. All of science and New Age blathering may console the intellect of humanity that reveres autonomy rather than brokenness and surrender, but those influences are no match for the \u201cbaby cry\u201d of the soul that hungers and thirsts for the living God.<\/p>\n The following statement by the apostle Paul agrees with Christ. We must kneel on our pride and submit to the cry from our deposit of faith.<\/p>\n \u201cFor I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.\u201d \u2014 Romans 12:3<\/p>\n That statement goes well with another statement Christ made about little children.<\/p>\n And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them, and said, \u201cVerily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven.\u201d \u2014 Matthew 18:2-4<\/p>\n Both the apostle Paul and Christ regarded humbleness as faith\u2019s companion. It becomes apparent that God desires those qualities to be the foundation of every individual\u2019s understanding of Him. That is how we should approach Him and how we should teach people to approach Him. On that premise, we can build a relationship with Him.<\/p>\n However, individuals, such as Leonard Sweet, are not humbly satisfied with the faith and knowledge that everyone can possess. They\/he must be special, \u201cseeing what others cannot see,\u201d and offering complicated ways and means to know Christ.<\/p>\n What Christianity Never Needed<\/strong><\/p>\n Sweet decided that Quantum Spirituality should be applied to Christianity.[30]<\/a><\/sup><\/sup> It\u2019s like he believes that faith needs a constant upgrade\u2014that faith is not sufficient as God provided it (Dealt every man a measure of faith). It presents the concept that faith should change with a multiplicity of concepts as he \u201csees things the rest of us do not see, and dreams possibilities that are beyond most of our imagining.\u201d How did Christian history\u2019s great men and women of faith survive and thrive spiritually without such a sage?<\/p>\n If what is being offered by Leonard Sweet is essential to the Body of Christ, then the Church was near vacuous in both knowledge and faith in the 2000 years before the advent of Sweet. However, that conclusion does not agree with history. Furthermore, Christianity has not become better because of the teaching of Sweet and like individuals. I have no reservations in stating that I believe there are many more apostates in Christianity than there are faithful people of God. I am confident in stating that Christianity is chockfull of heresy, pusillanimous hirelings, and New Age \u201cchange agents.\u201d Sweet has made a significant contribution to the tragic state of affairs.<\/p>\n Christians do not need any more complicated hodgepodge\u2014they need more people who \u201csit at the feet\u201d of Jesus and come away with His word like a \u201cfire shut up in their bones.\u201d They do not prosper spiritually by constant dredging and imbibing New Age paganism. Their faith is turned off by dependency on sages and mystics\u2014squatters in God\u2019s earthly kingdom.<\/p>\n One can meander for years in the shallow pools of human wisdom. But the ones that hunger and thirst for God, the deep in them cries out for the deep in God at the noise of His waterspouts.<\/p>\n Imagine seeking a beautiful waterfall only heard about. You hack through the jungle, soaked with sweat, nearly out of drinking water, and feeling wilted in the humidity and heat.<\/p>\n Then you hear it\u2014the unmistakable sound of water cascading down a high cliff. Your heart pounds with excitement and anticipation of deliverance from the stifling heat. Then you kick free from the bondage of clinging vines and weeds into the shore of a beautiful clear river overwhelmed by a mighty torrent of water unleashed from the river above.<\/p>\n Our souls can cry out for God like that. We have to yield to the desire in us, magnify it by deprioritizing everything else. It\u2019s not a mystery. We do not need a psychic, guru, sage, mystic, or anyone else. We must only yield to the eternity in us (soul) that longs to know the eternal God.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n By Cedric Fisher |February 19, 2022 (Global Church Network Members and Participants: https:\/\/www.truthkeepers.com\/?p=2163) Introduction: I commonly refer to Kanye West\u2019s foray into Christianity as an example of how weak and bereft of discernment many professing Christians are. West was disturbingly welcomed throughout Christianity and its leadership. Individuals warning about West were blasted with angry accusations […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2150","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","post-preview"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paIm2N-yG","jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.truthkeepers.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2150"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.truthkeepers.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.truthkeepers.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.truthkeepers.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.truthkeepers.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=2150"}],"version-history":[{"count":16,"href":"https:\/\/www.truthkeepers.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2150\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2171,"href":"https:\/\/www.truthkeepers.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2150\/revisions\/2171"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.truthkeepers.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=2150"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.truthkeepers.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=2150"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.truthkeepers.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=2150"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}The Allure of Leonard Sweet<\/h3>\n
The Allure of Semiotics<\/h3>\n
Semiotics, Another Path to the New Age<\/h3>\n
God\u2019s Truth Contrasts Sweet\u2019s Semiotics<\/h3>\n
Conclusion:<\/h3>\n
\n