What do you consider “Religious Activities” that we need to continue today?

Nathan,
I’m listening
I think you’re saying there’s a balance.
I agree.
I grew up with so much religion and such a void of relationship with God that it’s difficult for me to see much value in religiousness.

Here are my thoughts and they are just that…thoughts.
Jesus participated in religious activities because that was the way people at that time had relationship with God. But as I read It seems to me He got much more from His personal times with God.
Is religion a crutch, given to man, so he, or she, can feel closer to God…..and once you understand what He’s like, you don’t need it anymore?
I wonder whether Jesus did the religious stuff, because He had to for man, not for God.

Was His purpose in coming to get us closer to God so we could move further away from the religious stuff and closer to a personal relationship.

I understand there’s a balance here.
But perhaps, and I just throw this out there, as we move closer in our relationship, we need less of the religious.

Oh… and it really is not a “schtick.”

In my opinion? Yea… I do think it is really important to consider the ramifications of the “masculinity” that we as humans assign to God.

But regardless… my main point was to Rick’s comment about moving to the far right/far left and it not helping us grow closer to God. And I argue that academic theology, and more specifically doctrine, does not necessarily help us grow closer to God regardless of where one lands on the theological spectrum.

Is the Father/Mother schtick really that important to derail the conversation?

Rick,

I hear you, but I’d sharpen the “sin is sin” thing. I didn’t explicitly say it before, but some things defined as “sin” pre-Christ are now irrelevant or at least less important post-Christ. Jesus addresses some directly and others, with a healthy dose of wisdom and prayer, can be discerned from the narrative arc of Scripture. Paul did that with circumcision, though my jaw still drops that he make such a massive move so quickly as he reached out to Gentiles. If I were a Jewish follower of Jesus, I would’ve been hopping mad just like those in Jerusalem.

So the “sin list,” so to speak, changed, but ultimately God is the definer of what is sin and not ourselves, so He’s free to bring people further as he did over the course of Abram to the apostles. And I think you raise a good point; God does change His mind in the Bible in relationship with His people. So while He is the ultimate arbiter of what is right and good, the decision is not made in a vacuum or without input from those He has called to be in relationship with Himself.

Now find a religious system somewhere in the world with a God that limits His actions in relationship with His creation like that, yet cannot be manipulated to certain decisions. That’s one of the beautiful distinctives of the living God revealed in the Judeo/Christian tradition!

And I’m just not on board with the whole relationship not religion dichotomy as if religion hexs our souls. Jesus was a deeply religious Jew; he didn’t teach us to be free of religion, but to be free of the twisting of religion for various unhealthy ends. I think the church is to be religious (steeped in tradition and history) and relational (always being willing to question certain traditions and history in light of new issues and challenges).