Presence of God

Sometimes we want to go back to when the presence of God felt so new and exciting, to when our evidence of His closeness was an overflow of emotion within ourselves. Sometimes we may even question how close (or far from) God we are by the lack of those feelings.

The truth is…God’s Word. His Word says that He will draw close to those who draw close to Him (James 4:8); that He will never leave us nor forsake us (Heb 13:5, Deut 31:6, 8); that His Spirit will abide with us forever (John 14:16); and that we are made one with Him (John 17:21).

Though these may not always “feel” like the truth, they are. I heard it put very well earlier: that the emotional overflow of the presence of God is the “honeymoon” stage. Those feelings as evidence of God’s presence appeal to the person that is ruled by emotions. When we 1st come to Christ (or back to Him), we are emotionally driven creatures. As we grow in Him, we become less ruled by emotions. To declare that we are far from God or that He has left us because we don't "feel" His Spirit as we used to, is a contradiction to God's Word. It allows the seed of doubt to be planted in our hearts.

Just as a marriage is at first overflowing with giddy love feelings, then as it grows becomes more grounded in trust, companionship, etc., so is our marriage to Christ. As our relationship with Him matures, it is less flooded with emotions and we become one—our heart is His heart, our mind is His mind. It is now our spirit that follows Christ, not our emotions. Yes, God will still bless us during prayer time, worship, praise, etc. with the overflow of emotion, but that is no longer necessary to draw us to Him.

Sam made a good point the other night—as our bodies build a tolerance to a particular drug, so our spirits do to the presence of God. This is not a bad thing. The Bible tells us not to be drunk with wine but filled with the Spirit (Eph 5:18), as though these two are comparable. Well, the more often a person drinks, the less evident the “drunkenness” becomes. This state has become the norm. So it is as we mature in Christ. We learn to walk more in the Spirit and less in the flesh. Instead of feeling different when in the Spirit, we feel different when in the flesh—uncomfortable, like something is wrong, altogether “yucky” inside. We seek quickly a remedy and that is to get back in the Spirit, our now normal state of being.

Growing in Christ, we have no need to be run by the emotional overflow, but are rooted in a faith and trust that God’s Word is true and hence, up, down, or turned around, He is still with us. He will always lead us through just as He did in the “honeymoon” stage. Once we accept this truth, the seed of doubt is uprooted.

“Say not thou, What is the cause that the former days were better than these? for thou dost not inquire wisely concerning this.” Eccl 7:10

Rape OK in U.S. If You're A Muslim?

Coming across an article regarding NJ case of: S.D. v. M.J.R. (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div.) and the implication that it was OK for a husband to rape his wife because it fell under their religious freedoms, I had to read it for myself. Here is the case breakdown, including evidence presented to the judge: http://www.leagle.com/unsecure/page.htm?shortname=innjco20100723325

So, this woman (17 or 18 at the time) is abused and raped by her husband, according to evidence including police photographs, and police and medical staff testimony, and the judge rules that because the husband had no criminal intent--acting on his religious beliefs that he is allowed to do whatever he wants to his wife--there is no charge of sexual assault. Are you kidding me? Ummm..what about evidence? Forget the fact that the man "thinks" it's OK. There are people who think doing drugs, drinking and driving, beating their children are all OK. Since when are our opinions on a matter above the law?

This is the exact wording from the website:

While recognizing that defendant had engaged in sexual relations with plaintiff against her expressed wishes in November 2008 and on the night of January 15 to 16, 2009, the judge did not find sexual assault or criminal sexual conduct to have been proven. He stated:

"This court does not feel that, under the circumstances, that this defendant had a criminal desire to or intent to sexually assault or to sexually contact the plaintiff when he did. The court believes that he was operating under his belief that it is, as the husband, his desire to have sex when and whether he wanted to, was something that was consistent with his practices and it was something that was not prohibited."

After acknowledging that this was a case in which religious custom clashed with the law, and that under the law, plaintiff had a right to refuse defendant's advances, the judge found that defendant did not act with a criminal intent when he repeatedly insisted upon intercourse, despite plaintiff's contrary wishes.

I'm almost in shock! Am I reading this correctly? The judge acknowledges it was non-consensual sex, yet it is OK because the man believed it fell under his religious rights. Unbelievable! Thank God this was overturned by another court.

Sadly, this is only the beginning of what's to come with such Islamic tolerance in the U.S. that we operate out of fear and neglect instead of standing up for what is right. And yet another hypocritical slap in the face for Christians who can't even stand on their religious beliefs to refuse to perform certain medical procedures (abortions) or refuse to perform homosexual marriages in their churches without being labeled as bigots, haters, intolerant, or worse.

Wake up America.