Christianity And Yoga !

[eric]

Some people go to the gym to stretch and excercise and some take on some sport. My point? You can involve the Lord in your gym work or your sport, but you can't involve the Lord if your mind is in neutral. Satan just loves no man's land.

[felix]

Why would you say this? Our physical body IS the "flesh" and our spirit SHOULD (or IS) above our flesh.

No no no no.....this is not a good interpretation. Look at the overall context. sarkos in these instances is definately refering to the ethical nature of man (which desires to rebel against God) and not to our physical bodies. If our physical bodies are lesser than our spirits, then there is no reason for God to place us in physical bodies.

The word here Sarx is: flesh, whether of men, beasts, fish, or birds; the human body. I'm aware that the context here is also refering to the ethical nature. Yet this is not the part I'm really concerned with even though it is clear that the word flesh (sarx) is literally the human body.

The part of concern is the latter part where it was said "our spirit should not be elevated above it". Why? Refer to the scriptures in Romans 8.

Romans 7:23 (Amplified Bible)

23But I discern in my bodily members [[d]in the sensitive appetites and wills of the flesh] a different law (rule of action) at war against the law of my mind (my reason) and making me a prisoner to the law of sin that dwells in my bodily organs [[e]in the sensitive appetites and wills of the flesh].

Romans 8:8-10,13

8So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

9But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

10And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

13For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.

Tess...

Appears I'm not the one who needs correction

Paul would never have advocated dualism (which is what you're doing here). In fact, he quite adamantly opposed it. Using his letters to elevate spirit over body completely violates their intent. Gnosticism was the most prevalent enemy of the early church. Gnostics taught, among other things, that the body (and all matter) was evil. They taught that in order to obtain a more "spiritual" state (or set the spirit free), one had to deny their body of it's physical appetites. But if we interpret these verses the way you present them (equating body with "flesh") then we end up making the same error the gnostics made.

We have to remember that God created our spirits and our bodies. We shouldn't consider our bodies sinful or evil and shouldn't consider our spirit more important than our body. God created both, and both are equally important. This is why we should take care of our bodies, they are a temple, and we should use our members as a living sacrifice to God. So what does the word "flesh" mean? In context, when Paul uses the word "flesh" here, he is not speaking of our physical bodies. He's not speaking ontologically, but ethically. "Flesh" refers to our sin nature, or desires that are in rebellion against God. It cannot mean what you are trying to say because this would pose a problem with verses like John 1:14 which tells us the "Word became flesh" (meaning Christ).

You are making a lot of assumptions from nothing. Advocating dualism? I do not know what that is. The bible clearly tells us to walk not in the flesh but in the spirit. Please quote some scripture or at least explain what Romans 8 means...do not attack me.

You are doing the following:

Saying that I am doing this...

Saying that Paul opposed this...

Though you give no scripture to explain this.

In short you are saying [~] is bad and the bible says [~] is bad though you do not offer scriptural support. And that I am trying to promote [~] which I do not know.

The body of course is not evil in the sense that I would kill myself to free myself from sin and evil once and for all. That's absurd and that's not what I am indicating.

I simply asked "Why would you say this?". The context of the word "flesh" is not really my question. Tess, you responded to "It sounds like reducing and ultimately removing the motivations of the flesh in for the sake of the spirit." with

"Now if this is the focus, I would completely disagree with it. Our phyical body should not be equated with "flesh", and our spirit should not be elevated above it."

Explain this in light of Romans 8.

Edit: I believe you have unknowingly explained this to me already by your previous post so I have responded to this. If this is not your explanation then please clarify this.

[felix]

Tess,

after considering what you said for some time, I believe you have encountered the practice of fasting and you are against it. Fasting is a powerful spiritual exercise. It does indeed strengthen you into your spirit. Jesus fasted, Moses fasted, under the old covenant fasting was done very often. Jesus said "And when you fast do not make it obvious...". Note it says "And When you fast" not "if you fast". So it's abundantly clear throughout scripture that the Lord is not against fasting. Fasting is a great thing to do to grow spiritually.

God will not let you damage your physical body -His dwelling place- when you take on a fast. Normally I am led to fast and each time I have it has been a very powerful experience (though it does not necessarily always have to be...it's for the Lord's purpose and not ours). I am led to start and stop at the appointed time. The Lord will sustain me at the right time according to my needs.

Many people do not know this cause they have never done it but fasting is absolutely great for your health. It purifies your body. I have fasted for 2-3 days with just water. After carefully breaking the fast my body actually feels stronger, my mood is better, my mind is more clear, and most of all I have gained something from the Lord. Fasting certainly is not evil.

Men do not fast because they do not care about their physical body or because the spiritual body is greater. Rather men fast according to the leading of the Lord and when they need to deeply seek the Lord. It is a consecration and dedication to the Lord and involves a lot of fellowship with the Lord in prayer. We step out in faith knowing that man lives not on bread alone but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.

The fact is that the spirit is where the Lord is; we must walk and live by the spirit. This is where the law of spirit of life is. In our flesh the law of sin and death rules but the law of spirit overrules this one. In this way can we overcome the sin nature sown in our flesh by living and walking by the spirit.

Ironic you about be concerned about health, the reason I asked my original question was because of that...I was interested in knowing about yoga because I have heard that they have the potential of healing the physical body [yoga, qigong, and seeing auras (to see ailments in the body)].

[eric]

Felix.

Ironic you about be concerned about health, the reason I asked my original question was because of that...I was interested in knowing about yoga because I have heard that they have the potential of healing the physical body [yoga, qigong, and seeing auras (to see ailments in the body)].

They have all kinds of gizmos now. like MIR scanners CT scanners and endoscopic cameras ultra-sound and x-rays etc, to see the ailments of the body. Why would a christian want to sit cross legged on the floor and go into a trance. when they can cast all their burdens on to Jesus in prayer?

Doesn't make sense to me. Sounds a bit like yin and yang.

[apothanein kerdos]

Felix, what you're teaching (elevating the spirit above the body) is dangerously close to a heretical doctrine called "Gnosticism." Paul actually fought against it with a few of his epistles (this is one of the many reasons why your Romans 8 interpretation is incorrect). Notice also in Romans 8 that Paul talks about the restoration of our bodies and how God is going to restore the physical AND the spiritual world. Anyway, instead of talking about it here, please go to my topic misplaced metaphysical dualism to get a better idea of what I'm talking about.

[Smalcald]

There is nothing wrong with meditation, nor is there anything wrong with controlling our breathing, or breathing in ways that slow our minds down a little. But these are all Christian concepts, no need to bring in the Hindu's, nor they

[Kabowd]

Tess, comparing the english word "flesh" in different passages isn't enough to derive this doctrine.... is the hebrew/greek word the same in all of these instances? A lot of the time, translators seemed to have been at a loss for differing words to define the differences between different concepts....

I never said it did. Felix clearly equated "flesh" with "body" and also placed emphasis on the "spirit" over the body. This is what I was addressing because in doing so he/she is advocating misplaced metaphysical dualism. My post that you quoted was brief, I certainly didn't address every passage that contains the english word "flesh". My point was to show (as you imply, and I agree) that each verse should be interpreted in it's context to determine it's intent. I didn't have time to cover every single verse that uses the word "flesh", so I just gave a couple of examples as to why we can't interpret it the way felix is trying to interpret it. I think you and I are on the same page, just wording it differently.

The word here Sarx is: flesh, whether of men, beasts, fish, or birds; the human body. I'm aware that the context here is also refering to the ethical nature. Yet this is not the part I'm really concerned with even though it is clear that the word flesh (sarx) is literally the human body.

You're completely missing the point. You say you're not concerned about the most important part. "Sarx" doesn't necessarily mean the literal human body. In fact, you even state that you're aware that in this context this isn't what Paul is referring to but you want to ignore it. If you ignore the context you lose the meaning.

The Greeks would've used this word (sarx) to refer to physical acts (such as eating or sex), and the Hebrew concept of the word "flesh" would've encompassed humanity in general, specifically our weaknesses (in many contexts it referred to our sinfulness). A Greek philosopher that Paul would've been highly familiar with, Plato, taught his students to value what is "eternal" and "spiritual" only and that the goal of life was to rise above our bodies (and it's "desires"). While this may seem biblical on the surface, it closely resembles gnosticism (a religious group that the early church fought bitterly), and Paul rejected it vehemently. In one of his warnings against such philosophies (found in Colossians 2), he describes them,

"Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day-- things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ. Let no one keep defrauding you of your prize by delighting in self-abasement and the worship of the angels, taking his stand on visions he has seen, inflated without cause by his fleshly mind, and not holding fast to the head, from whom the entire body, being supplied and held together by the joints and ligaments, grows with a growth which is from God. If you have died with Christ to the elementary principles of the world, why, as if you were living in the world, do you submit yourself to decrees, such as, "Do not handle, do not taste, do not touch!" (which all refer to things destined to perish with use)--in accordance with the commandments and teachings of men? These are matters which have, to be sure, the appearance of wisdom in self-made religion and self-abasement and severe treatment of the body, but are of no value against fleshly indulgence." (Col 2:16-23)

Paul is specifically warning them against being duped by these philosophies (such as platoism and gnosticism) which advocated acts of piety and self-imposed regulations in order to make them more righteous. Paul didn't teach that the flesh/physical was evil...in fact he taught that all things visible and invisible were created by God in Col.1:16.

The part of concern is the latter part where it was said "our spirit should not be elevated above it". Why? Refer to the scriptures in Romans 8.

Okay, let's look at the verses you're using:

First, Romans 7:23:

"...but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members."

You imply that this means the body is bad and the spirit is better. This is absolutely incorrect. In fact, this verse supports what AK and myself have been saying. The "law" Paul is referring to in the members of the body is the ethical, sinful nature not the physical body itself. You have to make the distinction between ontological and ethical in order to understand the meaning. God created our physical bodies, they are not evil in and of themselves, they are just unredeemed. In the very next verse, Paul reminds us that in Christ we'll receive our glorified bodies.

Next, let's look at Romans 8:8-13:

"If Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, yet the spirit is alive because of righteousness. But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you. So then, brethren, we are under obligation, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh-- for if you are living according to the flesh, you must die; but if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the body, you will live."

How in the world do you take this to mean our spirit should be elevated above our bodies? If you would read the entirety of chapter 8 (and Romans 12:1-2), you'll understand that Paul is teaching that our bodies should be used to glorify God, he is not teaching that our spirit is more important than our bodies. Have you read 1 Corinthians 6:12-20? This is why historical context and understanding the philosophies present during this time is so important to grasping what Paul is teaching. Gnostics were prevalent in Corinth, they would've believed that the body was unimportant, and sought to experience a more "spiritual" state. But Paul often emphasizes the importance of the physical body and using it for the glory of the Lord, while also warning against the fallen/sinful nature that lives in rebellion against God.

You are making a lot of assumptions from nothing. Advocating dualism? I do not know what that is. The bible clearly tells us to walk not in the flesh but in the spirit. Please quote some scripture or at least explain what Romans 8 means...do not attack me.

You are doing the following:

Saying that I am doing this...

Saying that Paul opposed this...

Though you give no scripture to explain this.

In short you are saying [~] is bad and the bible says [~] is bad though you do not offer scriptural support. And that I am trying to promote [~] which I do not know.

I'm not making assumptions. You specifically stated in post #22 "Our physical body IS the "flesh" and our spirit SHOULD (or IS) above our flesh." I believe I just explained the dualism I was talking about earlier and why your quote concerned me. We cannot elevate one element of creation (in this case the spirit) over another (the body), they are on equal levels. Both were created by God (and inherently good), and both were affected by the fall (thus needing redeemed).

Unfortunately, this imbalance crept into Christianity early on (thanks to people like Thomas Aquinas and Augustine), who unknowingly perpetuated this divide. This is where the Catholic church got the idea that being Monks, Priests or Nuns was a more desirable spiritual persuit than any other vocation. This is why celibacy is considered more "holy" than marriage, and poverty is admired over possessions. It all goes back to this view that what is physical is less important than what is "spiritual". In a more broad sense, I believe this is also why Western Christians (as a whole) are sometimes less concerned with social justice (feeding the hungry, helping the poor, funding cures for diseases, medical missions) because these are not considered "spiritual" needs. We tend to me more focused on things like evangelism or matters of the soul/spirit, and often neglect a person's physical needs (considering them less important). On a similar note, I also believe this misplaced metaphysical dualism has led to the ethical demise of our culture. Christians abandoned vocations that seemed "worldy" (i.e. law, politics, medicine, science, art) in order to pursue more "spiritual" vocations...which left our secular culture to itself, making the modern philosophies even more prevalent in those vocations where Christians became less prominent.

I hope this explains my initial posts more thoroughly.

[germanJoy]

Why are some christians so fast in responding to the yogi spirit's transcedental meditation and the like but so slow in responding to the Holy Spirit's biblical meditation, prayer, fasting, communing with God, etc. .

A mature genuine born-again christian will be able to discern good and evil and will not be caught unready by the deceiving doctrine of Christian Yoga. But an immature self-seeking christians will be the first ones to fall into the trap of being led by a false spirit to seek God and/or the level of spirituality.

The "Christian Yoga was introduced by a French Benedictine monk 20 years ago which is being practiced today by Roman Catholic convents and monasteries. I am not surprised why these "christians" would hunger for "spiritualities" other than what the Holy Spirit of God could give.

To reach the "spiritual world", one needs basically ONLY the Armor of God, i.e., the Word of God and the Holy Spirit. Anyone who tries to add any sources (from any religions like hinduism, buddhism, taoism, etc.) brings/invites a demonic spirit into oneself. Christians who have not experienced the power of the Holy Spirit are very susceptible to be easily deceived in this area living a life of chaos, dissatisfaction, emotional and health disturbances, depression, uncalmness, over-fatigueness, etc. Instead of reading their bibles to know more of God's provision for their needs and turn to Jesus Christ who alone can rescue them from their dilemnas, they prefer to look some place else.

When I was indwelt and in-filled by the Holy Spirit of God, I needed nothing else but my bible to feed my soul and my mind with the Sword of the Spirit and the shield of faith that enabled me to extinguish the flaming arrows of the evil one. Yoga is "an artificial gun" with plastic bullets transforming a christian into a synthetic substance easily burned by fire and trampled down by the devil. So, believers of Christ, why not instead be a solid-strong army of Christ by being well-equipped with the full Armor of God?

Put on the full armor of God, that you may be able to stand firm against the schemes of the devil. For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places.

Therefore, take up the full armor of God, that you may be able to resist in the evil day, and havind done everything, to stand firm. Stand firm therefore, having girded your loins with truth, and having put on the breastplate of righteousness, and having shod your feet with the preparation of the gospel of peace. in additional to all, taking up the shield of faith with which you will be able to extinguish all the flaming missles of the evil one. And take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God Ephesians 6:11-17

Mighty warriors of God, be dressed up for the battle where Jesus Christ our Lord and King is SOLELY the Victor, our Commander-in-Chief. Amen!

[eric]

[Elihu's Girl]

I think that we could think about this "Christian Yoga" as something different... The word "Yoga" was put on there, I believe, in part, to attract people, and to draw a connection to what it is, and perhaps to bring popularity to it.

The Hindus did not create the body, nor do they hold a monopoly over certain ways to exercise... if you can separate the hindu beliefs from the exercise, (which I believe you CAN, as apart from the beliefs, what is yoga but stretches and exercises?) why not incorporate certain types of stretching and exercise into part of your day to meditate on God's word, AND strengthen your body, at the same time?

I believe firmly that if they did not give the program the name "Christian Yoga".... nobody would have objections to it, (like, they could have called it, "Meditation and Stretching".... and there would be no protesting to this extent...)

This seems to be a weak/strong Christian thing... if you can separate the beliefs from the actions that are not sinful, then go ahead- the same as stronger Christians were perfectly able to eat meat offered to idols, without being sinful... but the weaker Christians who just recently came from worshiping the idols, may struggle with the issue a lot more.

Some people go to the gym to stretch and excercise and some take on some sport. My point? You can involve the Lord in your gym work or your sport, but you can't involve the Lord if your mind is in neutral. Satan just loves no man's land.

Can you practise the physical aspects of Yoga without the mind numbing/mind emptying aspects? I say that you can. I say that for Sarah in the article, putting her mind in neutral and chanting was what made her uncomfortable with yoga in the first place... So she took out the Hindu aspects and uses it as a way to focus on faith, focus on Christ, build faith in Christ, explore faith in Christ. This is something for mature christians only.