Luke 16:13 reads, “No servant can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will be devoted to one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and wealth.” Let’s say that it is a good principle but that I know of a few exceptions to that rule.
Are you okay with that?
I Kings 18:21 reads, “Elijah came near to all the people and said, “How long will you hesitate between two opinions? If the LORD is God, follow Him; but if Baal, follow him. But the people did not answer him a word.” So, let me leap from those two platforms to the more difficult intellectually gymnastic move of serving a god within and a god without!
Say What? More information please.
I’ve discovered that many of those who have a THEISTIC view of God (God out there who intervenes from time to time) seemingly can’t get a grip on a God that’s WITHIN. Payers must be to a deity WITHOUT- somewhere out there. Now, I know that God is both transcendent and immanent; however, the PERSONAL (can you say loving?) God can only be WITHIN for me. The mental construct of God’s attributes are more akin to James 1:8 (double minded) for me. Nor, can I be double hearted (Ps. 12:2).
I live and love the God within.
I can’t serve a master out there and at the same time a God in here. Have you thought about it? Maybe if you experimented with each for a season you’d be able to determine IF there really is a difference- in the results of your life. Whatcha got to lose?
Whatcha got to GAIN?

A Box Of Chocolates?
In the 1994 movie, Forrest Gump says, “My momma always said, Life was like a box of chocolates. You never know what you’re gonna get.” A reading of the New Testament is very much in that same genre. In one place it says that A is A and in another A is B! Why isn’t there more clarity, other than giving me the answer that God doesn’t cast his pearls before swine?
Be more polite please.
Let me suggest that why there is so much confusion and contradiction in the twenty seven books of the New Testament is because there were so many “competing groups” vying for having their point of view dominate. Let me be brief and list just a few as follows.
1-James the Just, the brother of Jesus was trying to keep Jesus as the Jew that he was without following some of the “non-Jewish” customs that Jesus broke such as not washing their hands before eating, healing on Sunday, etc.
2-Paul didn’t really know Jesus nor was he into the idea of Jesus being any more divine than any of us; rather, it was the universal Christos that Paul was attracted to which is why his more prominent phrase was about the Christos and not any historical Jesus.
3-There was the mythos that developed over the decades and centuries that was felt needed to elevate th historical Jesus to a level of divinity at least on par with the pagans and mystery religions: thus the virgin birth on December 25th, twelve disciples, buried for three days, and other ancient stories.
4-There was the Petrine (Peter the first bishop of Rome) segment who through the edicts of Constantine prevailed over all others (313CE) and developed Christianity into the mold that it largely is seen today.
As numerous scholars have admitted, Paul preached the gospel of immanent Christ- Peter stood for the fact and the message of a personal Jesus. Being a non-dualistic as I think I am from time to time, I believe I have come to a reconciliation of those two views. The Christos, divinity of the universal God dwells within me and I also embrace the LOVE of a personal Jesus and Abba Father.
Where are you?