quote:

---

This post was inspired by the thread "Seeing Is Believing" and particulary by the discussion with Spenlake. I maintain that the "proof is in the pudding" and if something enhances our relationship with the Father, if it encourages us to be transformed more into the likeness of His Son - then it is of God. I have heard you say time and time again that Jesus is our picture of the Father. I have seen nothing that would contradict that in any of your books.

---

quote:

---

Could you help me - what is the "gospel" again?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by spenlake

Dr. Boyd,

If you do follow this board, you should be extremely disappointed with responses such as:

quote:

---

This post was inspired by the thread "Seeing Is Believing" and particulary by the discussion with Spenlake. I maintain that the "proof is in the pudding" and if something enhances our relationship with the Father, if it encourages us to be transformed more into the likeness of His Son - then it is of God. I have heard you say time and time again that Jesus is our picture of the Father. I have seen nothing that would contradict that in any of your books.

---

There are many many techniques and methods that bring comfort from pain in this world. All the major religions and many of the minor ones promise this and in some ways, they deliver. Only ONE brings salvation and eternal comfort. And it is not building false-reality that I enjoy with a spirit-inspired god of my own making.

There are many psychiatric methods that bring comfort in encouraging people to believe in a non-event so that the actual event fades. There are healings (physical and emotional) that happen in all religions, especially the spiritistic ones. Bahai, Eckankar, Hindu, Buddhism, old fashioned New Age, they all are successful when measured by the standard of the proof is in the pudding. My relative who is into Eckankar, which is based in our lovely state of Minnesota, would heartily agree with the statement from your reader and find comfort in your book. They would enjoy your seminar. It is exactly what they believe and find comfort in. As I said in my letter, I appreciate the fact that you let your readers imagine their own God, Father, and Jesus and do not force them to imagine yours. This lets them make their own idol and not have to bow down to yours which is probably more comforting. As I have interacted with the people on this site I have found their God interesting.

There is one person on your site who refuses to believe in a God that would have her be single, this is not acceptable to her and He wouldn't be welcome in her imaginations. Yet the God of the Bible told Jeremiah not to get married in Jeremiah 16:2, "You shall not take a wife for yourself nor have sons or daughters in this place." The God of the Bible also told Ezekiel that He was taking his wife as an example in Ezekiel 24:15. Is this the kind of god we imagine when left to ourselves? God took his servant's wife out of love for His people, to illustrate the seriousness and severity of the message He was speaking to them.

"And the word of the LORD came to me saying, “Son of man, behold, I am about to take from you the desire of your eyes with a blow; but you shall not mourn and you shall not weep, and your tears shall not come. “Groan silently; make no mourning for the dead. Bind on your turban and put your shoes on your feet, and do not cover your mustache and do not eat the bread of men.” So I spoke to the people in the morning, and in the evening my wife died."

In spite of the evidence, She refuses to believe in God as He has revealed Himself, and finds comfort instead in the subjective vision of a women of your church - claiming to speak for God about the future. I have no idea if and when God provides a husband ( and I have prayed that He will) but to state that I won't believe in a God who lets me be single is arrogant and unscriptural. This is the spirit-insprired god of our imaginations. She has found comfort in the words of a woman instead of the objective comfort of the God of the Bible. There is comfort but it is found the God of Ezekiel and his wife, who loved them so much that He died for them to reconcile them to Himself. This awsome proof of His love was witnessed by men who recorded it for and us for our hope and comfort.

If the person I am speaking of reads this, I promise you, in the name of God, that God loves you and is caring for you and that you have comfort in His Son. His grace is sufficient for you and the God that loved you so much that he sent His son to die for you does not mean evil to you. If He chooses to give you a husband it is for your good. If He chooses to withold it, it is also for your good. God give you grace to make good decisions an choices and trust Him to accomplish His will through your decisions - for marriage or not. Regardless of whether He provides a husband, He has demonstrated that He loves you and cares for you now in His death. He now lives and will bring all His promises to pass.

There is yet another person that refuses to believe in a God that would send evil or deceiving spirits. This doesn't "feel" right and he cannot imagine it to be true. This god wouldn't be welcome in the exercises of prayers you promote. He would only find a "sweet" Jesus that didn't use evil spirits to accomplish His will. This person would end up with an imaginary god leading him astray if he followed the exercises of your book.

Even more extreme cases could be found that are only limited to the defects in our understanding of God compared to the written word. In saying this, I am not claiming to be free from defects myself. I have appreciated the honest interaction that I have had with your followers on this board. There are many good intellects and people that I would appreciate as friends - all sharing defects in our understandings of God as I do. I have come to appreciate that the OV discussion is hard because it is hard. I still think that it resolves nothing - I am welcome to my opinion. While I might think the OV issue drifts into the ether, the discussion concerning spirit-inspired false-truth as the basis for finding freedom is a blatant misunderstanding and corruption of the gospel which is central.

I appeal to you again, Dr. Boyd, repent from these silly ideas and return to the gospel.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by spenlake

Dr. Boyd,

If you do follow this board, you should be extremely disappointed with responses such as:

quote:

---

This post was inspired by the thread "Seeing Is Believing" and particulary by the discussion with Spenlake. I maintain that the "proof is in the pudding" and if something enhances our relationship with the Father, if it encourages us to be transformed more into the likeness of His Son - then it is of God. I have heard you say time and time again that Jesus is our picture of the Father. I have seen nothing that would contradict that in any of your books.

---

There are many many techniques and methods that bring comfort from pain in this world. All the major religions and many of the minor ones promise this and in some ways, they deliver. Only ONE brings salvation and eternal comfort. And it is not building false-reality that I enjoy with a spirit-inspired god of my own making.

There are many psychiatric methods that bring comfort in encouraging people to believe in a non-event so that the actual event fades. There are healings (physical and emotional) that happen in all religions, especially the spiritistic ones. Bahai, Eckankar, Hindu, Buddhism, old fashioned New Age, they all are successful when measured by the standard of the proof is in the pudding. My relative who is into Eckankar, which is based in our lovely state of Minnesota, would heartily agree with the statement from your reader and find comfort in your book. They would enjoy your seminar. It is exactly what they believe and find comfort in. As I said in my letter, I appreciate the fact that you let your readers imagine their own God, Father, and Jesus and do not force them to imagine yours. This lets them make their own idol and not have to bow down to yours which is probably more comforting. As I have interacted with the people on this site I have found their God interesting.

I appeal to you again, Dr. Boyd, repent from these silly ideas and return to the gospel.

---

quote:

---

Spen,

Please note that I said if it encourages you to be transformed into the image of Jesus Christ. I realize that transformation comes through the renewing of our minds and thought that it was understood that I intended things that are congruent with the truth of the gospel and with scripture. I'm sorry if that wasn't clear to you.

All roads do not lead to heaven (not even close).

Jo-Anne

---

quote:

---

The content of his "exercises" and the example that he gave claiming freedom in false-history are not congruent with the TRUTH of the gospel and with scripture. You must realize, even as you write this, that claiming to find freedom and truth by experiencing a false-event is not "true."

---

quote:

---

I don't mean to be pedantic but there is no such scriptural concept as finding freedom in an imagined false-event or inspired lie.

---

quote:

---

Would you describe Daniel's vision in Dan. 10:7 or Samuel's hearing the voice of the Lord in 1 Sam. 3:2-10 as an "imagined false-event or inspired lie?"
If you've read the book, which I'm doubting, you'll see that Boyd provides arguments as to why your above quote, which simply reads a post Scientific Revolution and Enlightenment worldview into the role of the imagination and how God uses it, is misguided. Boyd's critique of this worldview is found in ch. 9--SO READ IT AND RESPOND TO IT, MY MAN!!!

---

quote:

---

Dr. Boyd has redefined the words “truth” and “real” to mean different things.

On page 11 he states, “Wondering whether Christianity is real is not the same as wondering whether Christianity is true.”

On page 13 he states, “Remember, it’s not what we believe intellectually that impacts us; it’s what we experience as real.”

Dr. Boyd is telling us that the objective factual evidence that we tangibly discern and process with our intellect is less real than subjective experiences we don’t confirm with our senses. Dr. Boyd goes on to define “spiritual truth” as internal subjective experiences. He states on page 15,

“We have forgotten the truth that while the imagination certainly can be merely ‘imaginative,’ it can also be the means by which we experience spiritual truths as real.”

This may sound innocent, if spiritual truths experienced actually conform to objective truth – Scripture and the historical record observed by men. This is exactly what is denied, however, and the process that Dr. Boyd provides us with constructs an “alternate reality” in his imagination that is disassociated with the objective historical record. He constructs a lie and he claims it “real.” He implicates his imagined “spiritual Jesus” into his lie and claims it to be true and Scriptural, because it works.

I am not exaggerating. Dr. Boyd gives us the factual historical objective truth of an incident in his life. He had a cruel grandmother that didn’t give him a present and called him bad which he recounts on page 117,

“No, Greggie is a bad boy, and bad boys don’t get presents.”

This incident brings pain to his life. Dr. Boyd discovers the techniques of imaginative prayer and applies them on pages 118 through 122, progressing through a series of emotions from grieving to forgiveness. Dr. Boyd claims that Jesus personally leads him through this process. As the process unfolds, we see that what is happening is that Jesus Himself is changing the objective historical record witnessed by Dr. Boyd’s sisters to a different story that never happened. This story evolves into the following account on page 121,

“But this time, instead of seeing the angry wrinkled face of my grandmother, I saw the radiant, joyful face of Jesus. He leaned over the bag and peeked in with a wildly excited smile on his face. Instead of hearing my grandmother say, ‘No, Greggie is a bad boy,’ I heard Jesus exclaim, ‘Oh, of course Greggie gets a present! He is such a good boy!’ He rubbed my head vigorously as he said, ‘It’s a very special gift. That’s why I saved it for last.’ I began hopping and flapping my arms even more excited than before as I looked again into the paper sack. And there I saw a huge red toy airplane.”

Dr. Boyd has imagined, with the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and Jesus, a new historical record without witnesses that he now believes to be “real” and a spiritual experience of the truth. This is how the imaginative Jesus enabled Dr. Boyd to forgive his grandmother and find healing. It is the process of building a story that opposes objective reality, believing that it is inspired and therefore “real” and experiencing relief from the historical record that is now “unreal” so that forgiveness is possible. He states on page 123,

“It is crucial to note, however, that forgiveness usually comes at the end of the healing process (i.e. imagined story believed as true), not at the beginning.

Scriptures tell us of a different path to forgiveness which doesn’t consist of my creating inspired “subjective reality.” When I realize that I am utterly sinful and undeserving, with a monumental debt towards God I am incapable of paying, destined to damnation - and God comes and dies for me and forgives my mountainous debt and gives me eternal life instead, the antithesis of anything I deserved or merited – the gratitude that whelms up in my heart and mind at this realization enables me to forgive the puny debts that grandmothers owe to me. This is the gospel. This doesn’t require spirits to create freestyle historical records so I can forgive. It simply believes in the work that God, as a tangible man, did for me on the cross. This is where we find the true and real power to forgive, in objective history that was seen by witnesses and written down for us to read and understand.

Spen Lake

---

quote:

---

Posted - 04/14/2004 : 6:44:59 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Spen's rely to Laika,
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Laika says:
Now you're starting to make sense. Test what's being said.

Now why is what Boyd's saying about a child wanting to feel like he has worth so unscriptural?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You agree we are to test what is being said, by "imagined Jesus" and Dr. Boyd. What follows is my explanation of why it is so unscriptural. Dr. Boyd is teaching us a method to find comfort in an imaginary false historical record that he is claiming is inspired. Forget the good and bad boys for a minute and look at the larger context. I am being asked to "believe" and experience this false so much that it becomes more real than the real. It is in this that he promises me freedom.

Dr. Boyd tells us on page 17 that, "Chapter 7 outlines an imanginative spiritual exercise that I call "resting in Christ. This book is largely the written version of a seminar I have led on this form of prayer over the last sixteen years."..."By focusing on the use of Spirit-inspired imagination in prayer,"..."In chapter 8 I provide and example from my own life of how the Lord can use our times of resting in Christ to free us from the deceptive messages of our traumatic memories."

This process of reconstructing alternate "realities" that aren't real in the objective factual sense and calling them Biblical and Holy Spirit inspired is gravely concerning. We must test them to see if they are indeed from God as Dr. Boyd claims. He gives his own example (pages 116 - 125 dealing with a historical event witnessed by his sisters) as proof of how the Lord frees us from traumatic memories through practicing the spiritual exercise he is teaching. In his example, Dr. Boyd's freedom from these memories occurs because a spirit convinces him that a spirit-inspired false-reality, not witnessed by his sisters, is more real and should be believed.

Intentionally convincing myself to believe in what is false isn't Scriptural, but delusionary. 2 Thess 2:11 is speaking about people forsaking the objective truth for a delusion. The definition of delusion is a fixed false belief held in spite of evidence to the contrary. Dr. Boyd is claiming that this is not delusion because the inspired internal "reality" is greater evidence than the objective external event that was witnessed by his sisters. Bunk. This is not the objective truth of the gospel nor the objective revelation of Christ. His teachings on this imaginative spiritual exercise fail the test.

I believe that the "truth" means objectively true. Your doctor is teaching one that he acknowledges is objectively false but is real anyway because he has experienced it. This is what delusion looks like. Sincere, heart-warming and comforting delusion. The delusion doesn't revolve around good or bad boys but history that is being re-invented and believed for comfort - in the name of God.

Christianity is not "hiding from facts through delusion," although that is what the pagans accuse us of. Christianity is standing firm on the promise of God, given objectively with words and proved by the resurrection, in the face of acknowledged real tribulations and experienced sin and real pain. We are not teaching people to become truth escape artists or delusionary mystics - unlike the false teachings of this book.

Your defense of this overall broadview from Scriptures is what I am hoping for. Or, perhaps Dr. Boyd has made a sixteen year mistake and he should repent and return to the gospel and its awesome power to heal our incurable wound.

Spen Lake

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by John Earp

I got the book last night, finished it just an hour or so ago. Overall, except for a few relatively minor things, I am at a loss to understand what is so heretical and dangerous with helping the immensely emotionally scarred people in the book by use of visualization techniques to help them internalize the truth of who they are in Christ.

As to the accusation that Boyd has EQUATED this teaching with THE GOSPEL, I found nothing to indicate that in the pages of this book. What it seems to me Dr. Boyd is interested in is applying the gospel to the emotionally scarred, to in effect, "set at liberty them that are bruised, and to heal the brokenhearted." Would that more ministers take this same approach.

It speaks very poorly of the heart of spenlake and others like him that he would find the profoundly significant, life-changing emotional healing of poor, crushed, bruised, and broken people such as Dr. Boyd describes in his book objectionable. As a pastor who has often felt quite frustrated in my attempts to help people just like those described in Boyd's book, and who has seen real spiritual and emotional benefit to some people by means of techniques similar to those encouraged in this book, I found this book quite refreshing and hopeful in tone. One has to wonder what precisely the critics are hiding in the hidden dungeons of their own psyche, to speak so hatefully towards the work of one who is obviously sincerely working to bring people into the freedom for which Christ gave his life to give.

In addition, what Dr. Boyd is describing is not the inducing of "false" memories, but rather the healing of the emotional scars remaining as a result of TRUE memories. He nowhere says that the old memory is to be erased or overwritten; rather, Boyd's point seems to be that we can and should receive Christ as the healer of our souls, a fact attested to by spiritual writers and leaders throughout Christian history.

I have personally devoted myself to the study of "the spiritual writers" in great detail, including many of the writers Boyd cites in his work, and what Boyd IS saying is completely congruent with this noble stream of Christian teaching. Of course, a strict Calvinist can typically never stomach anything much that would deviate from Calvin one iota). Who would seriously accuse A.W. Tozer or Charles Finney of advocating an unscriptural mysticism? A serious look at their actual writings reveals that these men were thoroughly committed to Scripture, while also affirming the absolute necessity of the REAL presence of Christ in the believer by means of the Holy Spirit to effect true transformation of heart and life.

Except for the fact that Dr. Boyd in this book fails to distinguish between struggling with sin and struggling with temptation, I find nothing to fault this book for. I pray that it will indeed help many hurting and spiritually cripped believers find the freedom that Christ died in order to grant them.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by moon_river_j
I am only on chapter 3...am amazed at how fast you finished it John (must've skimmed it!).

---

quote:

---

John says: As to the accusation that Boyd has EQUATED this teaching with THE GOSPEL, I found nothing to indicate that in the pages of this book. What it seems to me Dr. Boyd is interested in is applying the gospel to the emotionally scarred, to in effect, "set at liberty them that are bruised, and to heal the brokenhearted." Would that more ministers take this same approach.

---

quote:

---

One has to wonder what precisely the critics are hiding in the hidden dungeons of their own psyche, to speak so hatefully towards the work of one who is obviously sincerely working to bring people into the freedom for which Christ gave his life to give.

---

quote:

---

John says: It speaks very poorly of the heart of spenlake and others like him that he would find the profoundly significant, life-changing emotional healing of poor, crushed, bruised, and broken people such as Dr. Boyd describes in his book objectionable.

---

quote:

---

One has to wonder what precisely the critics are hiding in the hidden dungeons of their own psyche, to speak so hatefully towards the work of one who is obviously sincerely working to bring people into the freedom for which Christ gave his life to give.

---

quote:

---

John says: It speaks very poorly of the heart of spenlake and others like him that he would find the profoundly significant, life-changing emotional healing of poor, crushed, bruised, and broken people such as Dr. Boyd describes in his book objectionable.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by spenlake
A wonderful commentary but it fails to address the points that I raise. You consider them meaningless.

John's response:

Yes, I do, for your non sequiturs do not merit response. It is YOU who have claimed that Boyd equates "resting in Christ" with the Gospel. None of the quotes you cite demonstrate your claim on this point.

What I found Boyd to be saying was simply this:

1. The "try harder" solution is no solution at all, but just makes things worse.

2. The solution for Christians (those who by definition have ALREADY believed the message of the Gospel), yet find themselves still tormented by besetting sins and overwhelming destructive addictions, is to learn to APPLY the truth of the Gospel (which the quotes you cite demonstrate--Boyd is referring to imagination submitted to the truth of Scripture and the leadership of the Holy Spirit, not "do-it-yourself" mysticism, as you have so often claimed). Dr. Boyd presents a technique of application of the truth of the Gospel of Christ and the intimate relationship with Christ that all believers are meant to have with the goal in mind of healing of deep emotional scars from past traumas.

spen's comments:

Dr. Boyd has, on page 17, told us his own story is an example of the practical application of his exercises. In this example he imagines a spiritually-inspired non-factual event. This event is contradictory to the factual event which he lived and experienced in his body. He clearly states that he found the comfort and power to heal in experiencing this false-event. He is extremely clear about this on page 122 when he states, "What the Lord is doing in reworking memories like the one I've shared...He is quite literally entering into the neurological network where memories reside and altering it..." Dr. Boyd is telling us that God is changing the memories to change their meaning. This is done by a false-event. Fictional truth substituted for factual truth.

John replies:

As Boyd obviously still recalls the events as they originally happened, and includes these in his narrative, it is not true that he is substituting "fictional truth for a factual truth." Perhaps he is overstating his case here, but again, he quite obviously recognizes that the original memories remain. What his therapeutic approach seeks to deal with is the pain associated with the original memories.

spen's comments:
You then, without addressing the issues I have raised, counter attack with unfounded accusations.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One has to wonder what precisely the critics are hiding in the hidden dungeons of their own psyche, to speak so hatefully towards the work of one who is obviously sincerely working to bring people into the freedom for which Christ gave his life to give.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I believe that Dr. Boyd sincerely wants to help people and relieve their pain. I even believe that these techniques, like many New Age, Buddhist, Hindu and spiritistic techniques might WORK. They are, however, not the gospel that he claims they are.

John's response:

Boyd's reputation as a leading apologist for the claims of Christ and His Gospel soundly defeat your absurd claim that he is somehow claiming his therapy suggested in this book IS the Gospel.

spen says:

Finally,
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John says: It speaks very poorly of the heart of spenlake and others like him that he would find the profoundly significant, life-changing emotional healing of poor, crushed, bruised, and broken people such as Dr. Boyd describes in his book objectionable.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am misrepresented. I have never denied that these people, including Dr, Boyd, felt comfort. I am not altogether oblivious to their real pain.

John says:
"not altogether oblivious?!?!?!" I can just FEEL the LOVE.

spen says:

I am saying that the comfort that Dr. Boyd felt is not the gospel. It cannot be "true" because it is reached through constructing something false. It is much more cruel and base of heart to claim to offer an eternal comfort when it actually is a false and temporal one.

John's response:
Continuing to beg a question, as you are doing, proves nothing. Doc nowhere makes the claim that his therapeutic approach to helping Christians be free from EMOTIONAL traumas of their past is EQUIVALENT to the Gospel.

I think you are misunderstanding Dr. Boyd's use of the phrase, "congruent with" the gospel and with Scripture. All this means is that his approach is not contradictory to the Gospel or Scripture. He is not saying it IS the Gospel per se.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edited by - John Earp on 04/17/2004 9:21:33 PM

---

quote:

---

John tells Spen: Continuing to beg a question, as you are doing, proves nothing. Doc nowhere makes the claim that his therapeutic approach to helping Christians be free from EMOTIONAL traumas of their past is EQUIVALENT to the Gospel.

I think you are misunderstanding Dr. Boyd's use of the phrase, "congruent with" the gospel and with Scripture. All this means is that his approach is not contradictory to the Gospel or Scripture. He is not saying it IS the Gospel per se.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by spenlake
On page 30 Dr. Boyd claims, "It is important to see that our ongoing problem with sin, despite our new identity in Christ is not really with our behavior. This is the symptom of the problem but not the problem itself....More specifically the problem lies in how we view ourselves, how we define ourselves, how we experience ourselves, and thus how we live out our identity in Christ."

In this passage we see that Dr. Boyd eliminates sin as our root problem and tells us the problem needing fixing is how we experience ourselves to live out our identity in Christ. Thus, if we ultimately deal with sin (its root) through these exercises, which is what he is claiming, he is calling it the gospel. It is our answer to sin.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by spenlake
You have not brought a SINGLE scripture to support your point, just a name and reputation of a man. I have brought many scriptures to prove the contrary.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by spenlake

Laika,

Even though you say and Dr. Boyd writes, "So Problem NOT behavior, Problem IS how we view ourselves" this is not what scriptures say. The scriptures say that sin is the problem. God didn't send His Son to deliver us from the bondage of our poor image, but of our sin.

---