israelx7wordpresscom

“If I were hungry, I would not tell you…” speaks the psalmist by the word of the Lord. It is an hypothetical established by that leading “If”.

“If such a thing was or could be” the Lord is saying, “this is my disposition in it”. And although it goes on in all reasonableness of extrapolation that is totally consistent with any thinking man’s consideration of a supreme being; that is, that as the ‘maker’ of all things, the all things are already his and in his power of, and for, disposition, saying:

“…for the world is mine, and the fulness thereof.”

Of course that makes perfect sense. The One who makes and sustains all things to which He grants being of whatever sort, is never in owing to them for anything, and could never be, nor brought into, an owing to or for them. They can exercise no matter of need, nor even lesser, i.e. of desire, as though ‘over Him’ to some exertion. For if we conclude rightly that any consistent consideration of God is that of all supremacy with nothing ‘over’ Him in His sovereignty as both Creator and Sustainer, we could not even rightly say God ‘has to’ create, or sustain. That He may show Himself as Creator is not owing to His having to prove it, or anything to anything…in the creation. Much less sustain. He has nothing (again) over Him of force to either create or sustain. We may learn a little bit of some care in saying anything even slightly akin to “God has to” in any regard…or even that He ‘has to’ be, as we may resort in argument. These may be our ‘have to’s’ that in folly we have been all too comfortable in projecting.

In most short…”He does as He wills” with no requirement to explain Himself. For requirement, as need would have to be ‘over’ Him to make Him occupy place of necessity ‘is not’. Nor ‘can be’. (We will presently leave off the even deeper quandary of saying ‘nothing’…as though in our minds there is even a ‘vacancy’ over God’s head, unoccupied…for even all we might consider as ‘nothing’ must also be ‘in Him’, not around, not above, not beneath) But let us touch this before our ‘leaving off’. Of whatever things we may, either presently or one time or another consider as nothing…may have more substance in God than any man can imagine. Our ‘nothing’ may be turned to a ‘great deal’ of a something in God; if or when eyes are opened. As one (perhaps even as myself) could be fully convinced the square root of -4 is neither problematic nor not really found ‘in Him’. As is even all our disposition to ‘play’ with numbers…with mathematics; which we believe most often, our purest attempts in, and at, perfect reasoning. A ‘system’ able to be shown of all consistency. Or so we think.

Ha! “The numbers don’t lie!” Maybe think again if able. For to lying man everything is also…lie. (too much? or maybe just too soon?)

And it is not without recognition of my own estate in part, that I write. I cannot justify my ramblings. Nor can I anymore make full claim of knowing my estate, having learned in part what a liar I am. Even that has some presumption that may be found in it. For a man would implicitly be stating he has had some exposure to truth that has shown him to be liar.

But who (even if so) has had or has…enough exposure, or any knowledge of truth to justify his being? Much less speaking or writing? There is only one manner of being justified in all (His) being, that is not in requirement of justification. And that cannot be ‘in’ a created thing…it is either given, or not. The peach can say “I am”, but for it to say “because” will only betray all attempts (and assumed quite rightly) as being in some form of requirement to justify itself…for its being. A very present odor of self serving. Who would believe it…when so obviously given to self serving? And I am no more nor less than any other ‘thing’ in creation. Unable to justify, even if in some way awakened to its own being. But talk about a quandary! Among men (if I might ask) and that particular form of being we recognize as man, who, or what is not so fully devoted to some form of justifying their being? Their ‘right’ to be? We give many many reasons ‘for’ the why of our why we are, or the ‘way’ we are, do we not all…do that? Even if we might say “I am only here by happenstance, I am only product of chaos or some ultimate and random throw of dice”, have we not ‘shunted off’ our reason for being as being ‘owed’ to a something? (too stupid? or not stupid enough to make sense?) For in all, don’t we mostly operate so far above these first assumptions as a priori(s), to not even consider them?

Might they even be the nothing appearing things…that turn to be quite a ‘something’ in some other place?

“Of course!” we might say all too dismissively, “Of course men and man ‘do and say things”…never, or rarely considering if there be some ‘why‘ to it. But here’s the kicker, if you will. If you can. If you are able. You pretty well think you know the why’s of why you are, even some of the why’s of why you are the way you are (I am smart, I have done some investigating/experimenting/research/discovery/I am informed/ I see things rightly/My self would never lie to me about things perceived/ I trust myself to know myself…even as myself) And every man who is, who has ever been has had some conviction of himself being himself without question…and having enough understanding of himself…to be himself. In short…”I am smart enough to be me” I am sufficient of myself…to be myself. It really is all and only those others that need to justify their being…to me. And for being ‘the way they are.‘(too close to home? too close to describing…man?) We consider an Einstein or a Mother Teresa, a Lincoln…yes even a Hitler as having some justification in their being (even if it only be sole purpose of showing ‘what not to be’ as lesson)…but the obscure to us, the unknown to us, the smithy who lived 500 years ago in obscurity to us, the present woman in China drawing water from a well to carry home…to us it is very much as though, unless otherwise provable by them or by a societal pressure to know them for a ‘something’, they have little, or no reason to be. At least to some ‘us’. And in that same respect…as ‘we’ to her.

And if man has any brilliance at all, it may be in his most devout ignoring of connections.

But now you don’t like hearing how much you are like me. It’s OK. I didn’t like hearing just how much I am like you, either. At least at the first. I thought I was special. Special enough…to be me.

Just like everyone else.(too crazy? or just too soon?)

It is a rather difficult notion at which the mind rebels. That God would need anything. Or have any necessity to which he could, or would even make man privy, that would not undercut His being as God. The fullness of self existence and sufficiency would not but appear injured, if not out-rightly contradicted, by such.

A god with ‘needs’ is not merely philosophically untenable, or metaphysically repugnant, the concept of their being revealed to man (those needs) is likewise a betrayal of, and to, a certain ignorance of man’s observed estate; as one who takes full advantage, even in all cleverness of any necessity betrayed, to take advantage of it and by use of it to gain ‘the upper hand’. In short…need is weakness. And man the animal, as all animals do, capitalizes upon weakness. Gain is an expensive proposition whose only greater to man is loss.

Man only knows himself as in all owing to the necessity of gaining, and abhorrence of loss.

And we must find ourselves, if we care even at all to approach any concept of being honest broker; that disclosure of desire, though seemingly less in some magnitude than need or necessity would be apprehended, is as much akin to it in any form of considering absolutes, as to betray a mootness. Whether it be need or even desire in slightest form, we only know these matters as things impinging upon, or things ‘acting upon’ a personality.

They are, as desires, as needs, speaking to some form of incompleteness at which any concept of God as all sufficient, irreducible, and indivisible and beyond any subjection or being ‘subject to’ anything cannot but seem utterly incompatible.

And I had better tread more lightly here than I know how, revealing my necessity.

I can repeat or recite a thing I find in scripture as, no doubt, we all can. But if my necessity to show myself right is too plainly seen as opposition by an eye that sees and knows all things without sparing and having no respect to persons (but I am a ‘christian!’ I am allowed to ‘use’ the scriptures!) as mere extending toward a gaining ‘for myself’, I have had many assurances that He who sees, sees well.

Oddly, even as I reread these few words I see that great presumption in any stating of ‘no doubt’. Do not doubt it is God who allows, and God who can most easily prevent…even next characters from being typed. But the words are here, and the words are there, and let each hear and say as accorded their allowance by the only God able to allow and also prevent. There is an unquestionable folly to imagine it is ever anything other than this. Man supposes he shall or will or can…but God. God determines what is, and what shall be.

The mighty God, even the LORD, hath spoken, and called the earth from the rising of the sun unto the going down thereof.

2Out of Zion, the perfection of beauty, God hath shined.

3Our God shall come, and shall not keep silence: a fire shall devour before him, and it shall be very tempestuous round about him.

4He shall call to the heavens from above, and to the earth, that he may judge his people.

5Gather my saints together unto me; those that have made a covenant with me by sacrifice.

6And the heavens shall declare his righteousness: for God is judge himself. Selah.

7Hear, O my people, and I will speak; O Israel, and I will testify against thee: I am God, even thy God.

8I will not reprove thee for thy sacrifices or thy burnt offerings, to have been continually before me.

9I will take no bullock out of thy house, nor he goats out of thy folds.

10For every beast of the forest is mine, and the cattle upon a thousand hills.

11I know all the fowls of the mountains: and the wild beasts of the field are mine.

12If I were hungry, I would not tell thee: for the world is mine, and the fulness thereof.

13Will I eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the blood of goats?

14Offer unto God thanksgiving; and pay thy vows unto the most High:

15And call upon me in the day of trouble: I will deliver thee, and thou shalt glorify me.

16But unto the wicked God saith, What hast thou to do to declare my statutes, or that thou shouldest take my covenant in thy mouth?

17Seeing thou hatest instruction, and castest my words behind thee.

18When thou sawest a thief, then thou consentedst with him, and hast been partaker with adulterers.

19Thou givest thy mouth to evil, and thy tongue frameth deceit.

20Thou sittest and speakest against thy brother; thou slanderest thine own mother’s son.

21These things hast thou done, and I kept silence; thou thoughtest that I was altogether such an one as thyself: but I will reprove thee, and set them in order before thine eyes.

22Now consider this, ye that forget God, lest I tear you in pieces, and there be none to deliver.

23Whoso offereth praise glorifieth me: and to him that ordereth his conversation aright will I shew the salvation of God.

Psalm 50

“If I were hungry, I would not tell thee: …”

God help me but sometimes I think Christ a fool.

But, maybe it is not sometimes. Perhaps it is a more subtle attitude carried, betraying itself in thoughts and words that are at best only sometimes made more clearly discernible as to their etiology. Like a faint odor of rotting flesh where one may be at some loss as to how things ‘ought to smell’, but nevertheless has some conviction regardless, that that smell of corruption ‘aint it’…”That’s bad, that’s not right”.

Something stinks. Something is dead, here. I (or we) may not know every fragrance of true life, but something (or is it someone?) that allows that stink to be sensed brings some persuasion “You don’t want that to continue or grow greater”.

That foul miasma, more than just being noxious to the nose, is infectious. And for as much may want to trace its source, find its origin by seeking out its place of occupying for removal…any drawing nearer to it for discovery and action against it (as for its removal) only incurs a more dangerous estate by proximity. To ‘try to deal with it’ is the very danger.

It has been said, ‘a good friend will help you move.’ But a great friend will help you move a body. And there is a great friend.

And therein lies the rub. Both of the great friend and the dead body He is willing to help move. And anyone reading is far more than free to say ‘you do greatly err, that dead thing has already been removed, it is a finished work, a job complete, a fait accompli in Christ…” and to confess otherwise or hold any persuasion otherwise, or even broadcast some experience as otherwise (as could be inferred from this public writing) is not only heretical, but quite antichrist. Yes, I must bear that as possible accusation.

Somehow I am made not ashamed to air my dirty laundry nor even afraid to make that dreadful confession of sometimes being aware I think Christ a fool. For now at least, I do not think I can find a more base confession than that. But it would also be a pride (it too has an odor) to think I have plumbed to any significant depths of what a man may think of God’s Christ. As though I have touched to bottom of all things that may be found in man. But it might be enough for now (at least) that one who has rather ardently held to that name for succor and relief might confess to even greater weakness, debility, useless and mostly senseless babbling about experiences discovered.

And though pride is not excluded from present confessions, one more the fool would be inclined to say ‘I found out’ as though some diligent seeker, some trained explorer, some intrepidity accounted for that ‘looking into’…no, it just ‘happens’. “I spent many years following the Lord” or, “I was diligent in this or that” or “I prayed and studied much and have been rewarded…” No. God forbid, no.

My trail has always been to my most sincerest confession available of me (now), been one of self seeking. Interrupted at notable times? Surely. Contradicted at more notable times? Without doubt (to me). A someone unbidden showing up while attempting to ‘do’ the things foolishly thought to ‘make Him appear’? Absolutely (to me).

He simply keeps…interrupting. Unsettling things. And in that, time and again, shows Himself completely ‘unsubject’ to me or any of my pursuits. And more than completely immovable and untroubled by how He may appear as to such a one claiming His name…even knowing I would see Him as harshest enemy at certain times. He obviously is unmoved by what I think of Him. He is, who He is. No flatterer He. No ‘trying to gain’ nor fear of losing anything or anyone. No changing to fit my (or any) template to keep me from being offended at Him. He is who He is. Even the reality of what is-ing…is.

I can’t shake Him.

I could say, might say, might even be inclined to say “And I don’t want to”. But there is also a stink of pride in thinking I know much of my own wants. And God knows all the trails I have taken even better than I recall myself of trying to shake Him, or lose that tail (are the headlights still following?), stop something of a relentlessness that is often too troubling to acknowledge. I thought I was driving. But it was the headlights in pursuit that initiated every turn, every swerve, every careening around corners. I am the one ‘driving blind’ thinking I know where to go to ‘really’ find Him. He laughs. And there is too much of pleasantness and purity in that laugh that could deter from even the most ‘base of confessions’.

It’s a hot pursuit. By Him.

Wait, wait, wait! I believe I can hear. Aren’t christians, or isn’t a Christian (if in particular) supposed to be a someone so at peace in Christ and with Christ as to be completely untroubled with Him or by Him? And God forbid I speak otherwise. How to be at peace with someone in your home, your house, who does not subject Himself even to (as one might even, in their own house) subject themselves…is different. “Oh, Lord, that room is an utter disaster we never go in there; it’s such a mess we even prefer not to know what’s behind that door anymore” as He goes where He will. Flinging open doors, crashing through walls built for seeming safety, not afraid to touch and upset what was once framed to keep an identity intact, a self ‘humming along’ like a dynamo to its own order.

“Oh, but we love that picture of you on the wall!”

“Really? Do I look at all like that?” as He turns with eyes as flaming fire. And the picture ignites to ashes.

And that cross hung there Lord…please…it’s there for my gathering around to prayerfully consider in worship.

“Really? Do you think I worshipped the cross or around it? How about ‘from it’? As it, too, bursts into flames.

“Ahhh, I see you have a work room, let’s take a look!”

Ahh, maybe not Lord, it’s really really messy.

And the door gets blown off with “Hey, I thought you said it was messy? It’s the neatest room I’ve entered so far. Everything carefully filed and recorded, everything alphabetical and chronologically even ‘spritually’ cross referenced so as to never be lost…amazing work! It’s like you couldn’t forget each entry…even if you wanted to.

Every little insult you recorded as suffered for my name, every effort or labor you think consecrated to me, every seeming sacrifice, every delayed pleasure, any and every word spoken as in defense of me, every minutest detail of all you believe you have ever ‘done for me’ with a chair far too well worn to deny this room is visited often. Why, Imma guess you just pore over this stuff relentlessly and get a great deal of pleasure from it as shown by the meticulous care by which you have it arranged. Great job! Do you mind…?” As he touches but one page causing all of them to immolate with the most foul smelling smoke. “Oops” He says.

But that laugh! That laugh! Talk about infectious!

I have lost nothing, but the absence of that laughter! Can there even be more?

And there I am…left in what looks like it must be the last room, to me so far (anyway). I am by myself, I have retreated. Not so much accompanying Him around this house, but hearing a relentless beating upon a door, a battering of it too thunderous to ignore, to a shaking of all too unsettling to deny. The foundations, the foundations!

I ‘feel’ not as much with Him, but cannot deny His presence…it is at once the most troubling and unsettling of all sensations…yet simultaneous with a greatest comfort in the thunderously loud pounding betraying He is still at work.

It is where I have the body buried. Where I undertook to bury it myself.

Driven to this room as all others were filled with intolerable light, I have retreated. It is dark, it stinks and is dank. I dare not be found here. It is the place of all my dynamism, too keep that body buried, to hide it, to so totally obscure from view (both my own and others) with constant shovelings over it, endless, relentless, unyielding labors to hide a too shameful thing. It is to me my mainspring of all matters. Initiator of all doings. The stench affects me, the rot infects me.

A hiding of what I know I have done, and who I am.

I betrayed and killed a friend.

And so I say the only thing I dare not deny as reply to the thunder, my last play (it seems) to keep at bay an exposure I do not believe survivable, an exposure that even slightest light could not but destroy. And open to only an endless void of abysmal loss.

It is not that I will go, or be gone, it will be, even is: “I am not”.

And so I cannot help but think it, cannot even keep myself from saying it…”You do not want to come in here unless you are a fool, you cannot want to be near or with such a one…unless you are foolish…for there is nothing but death here, nothing but stink and malice and all spite, jealousy, and anger in here with me…and any will at all in any to ‘come in’ shows you can’t be of sound mind.

No one else can ‘really’ live here.

The laughter. O! the laughter that takes place of thunder.

The “yet not I”…lives.

It is good to carry some desire that God speak to you, some undeniable craving to know the truth of matters, the true way of things. And we find often that interest and curiosity end poles apart. That curiosity, even if only first motive sufficient, cannot sustain; for an interest to be satisfied requires some investment, some form of willingness to give away in hope of gain. And unless, or until that hope exceeds all consideration of seeming risk involved in investing, we remain the simply curious and subject to all manner of dissuasion. If, or when it becomes (at whatever point) too hard for us, interest/curiosity turns to another place. Or other more agreeable and facile considerations. And how we may dress these up in all manner of pious garb as though it is sufficient to keep truth at bay.

As often as we may be convinced (and are) that in some gain of truth all we have lost to risk is illusions of no value anyway…we still do not know to any certainty how many yet illusory things in us masquerade as ‘too precious’ to put up. Light it appears, is always showing us another corner not fully illuminated but needing to be, relentlessly searching out no matter how ‘far’ we may imagine we have come in either adoption to it, or friendliness toward it.

Light it appears to us ‘has its own agenda’. And we may even be persuaded to whatever extent we are, this itself is eminently interesting…to find a thing not able to be made subject to us, a thing if even in any knowing and apprehending maintains an integrity ‘not subject’. For what form otherwise, of any form of knowing, have we not bent to our own ends, not found ’employable’ by us for ‘our own use’? What, except for this light have we not made…tool?

To get and to hold may also end poles apart, though all starts with another’s giving. We may find ourselves very weak at holding and often feel discouraged, this one may not deny. As C.S. Lewis once put too trenchantly:

“Every one says forgiveness is a lovely idea, until they have something to forgive”.

I can only say for myself the truth of some finding out of this after ‘preaching’ to others. After all, being preachy…is fun. (If one doubts this, visit most any bar or pub, there’s usually at least one stool occupied by one deep enough into his cups to ‘get preachy’). Thinking one’s self in some form, or holding some form of teaching…is also fun. But the cross, for all its depth and wonders…yes…even gloriously breathtaking work in completeness is quite another matter; and one that is ill fitting to anyone’s conception of fun. It is far far greater.

And this matter of the cross of Christ, this weighty substance of the Lord’s death in service to His God, even done for us to a cleansing, and that by the very light He Himself is to make us also children of light, is revealed to us. And here we may find fun and fulness of joy may also end poles apart.

Fun, like curiosity…even perhaps given, or allowed as experience for a start of sorts, cannot sustain. We must always be given a ‘more’. It is not that Jesus did not know how the disciples would return after being sent out. He knew well what effect upon them would be as they too discovered through His deputizing…(or do we think Jesus does not ‘know how men are’?)

But He had more to give, more to say. Even ‘set up’ by His sending in order it be spoken.

Notwithstanding, in this rejoice not that the spirits are subject unto you; but rather rejoice because your names are written in Heaven.

but rather rejoice because your names are written in Heaven.

There’s some rebuke in that, isn’t there? At very least, reproof. “Rejoice not” and “but rather”. Is it to the end that Jesus is just a party pooper? A dampener? Or is it to, even if in some experience of that dampening of excitement, and toward the creation of a greater interest by what He has said to provoke to an interest in finding out what He means…and that by what He is saying?

“We saw” the devils subject…but this…well we don’t see this yet, know nothing about this really to even be a thing for rejoicing or even worth rejoicing over…but now that you have said it Lord…

Yes, the Lord is always ruining us for lesser things. And no doubt, even though this work be entirely miraculous and true (who doubts?) we have some care of causing injury to bruised reeds and smoking flax, for the Lord will use the very weakest ‘things’, and allow their use to the end of drawing, even the weakest thing of all to that end, self interest.

To hold some curiosity about the soul’s salvation, not only to some persistence to be shown possible by immortality, but also to a great flourishing in life, may also find first impetus toward interest in that weakness of curiosity as in “can this even be possible?…maybe I should take a look”. And so a care of weakness, and for weakness is ministered, for the Lord knows our frame.

But this man, who appears to have apprehended much in regards to the cross and its work, much in visions and revelations, much in experiences of both ecstasies while not withholding experiences of despair; came to a very particular, and particularly puzzling place (if one can see it) in regards to this impetus of self interest of, and for the soul. What would otherwise be of supremest interest to the soul, its ‘own’ salvation, the pursuit of it, the apprehending and holding of it, the rightest of “right’ things to be obtained in it, he was made ready to ‘let go of’ for the sake of others.

…For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my countrymen according to the flesh,…

What a place he came to. And for any who (this has been addressed before) are inclined to think this man spoke in hyperbole, or of some piety feigned ‘to get a point across’ and/or just relieve himself of some burdening…he begins this topical episode by saying…

I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost,

I hear “If you believe anything about me or from me, this has the uttermost endorsement I can render…” What do you hear?

Do you hear a man so consumed he does not even hold any care anymore for his ‘own’ salvation, his own ‘making it’, and not only so…but would even wish himself cut apart from the Lord, for the sake of others he knew ‘after the flesh’? And who knew more…since we so often resort to his words in instructions and impartation of revelations (do we not?) of the heights and depths of the glories of being joined to Christ?

No, I do not say he knew the all, or even most (for I do not know)…but dare we deny his “lot”? And if so…in ‘daring’ to think him untrustworty in these declarations of which he can offer no greater endorsement than as he has as verified to his conscience by the Holy Spirit, do we not put all other he may have other written…as to some doubt? Don’t try to stand on someone your exposition of logic already shows of some doubt…even when you do not know it.

Yet, here is confessing his willingness to lose the all he had of that…

Yet…how much he sounds like another, made willing to be a curse…for us.

But who would ever ‘want’ of themselves to come to such place, by their own desire? Who not only ‘would’…but could?

And so I end as I began:

It is good to carry some desire that God speak to you, some undeniable craving to know the truth of matters, the true way of things.

We can’t help but hold our own view of the Lord. It’s all we have of Him in our understanding if He has granted any sight. We have seen only what we have seen in His providence.

We might even be so bold as to say it is the Lord Himself, in His manifestation to each, that apportions to each and all; and only as He wills according to His specific purpose. It is not that the Lord who is unchanging has given less or more to any in the giving of Himself to us and for us; or changes from one to another, as though He ‘is not the same’ Lord in all to His people.

Nor is it necessarily a particular function of ‘coming out of a blindness’ that is cause; as if it were ‘of us’ that this takes place…some being to whatever degree ‘more or less yet blind’ or more or less yet sighted. But again, the Lord has a very particular purpose in mind regarding the revelation of Himself.

It is to the end of loving one another as He has loved us, of having souls purified to a sincerity not of this world, to which an apostle testified in even describing the reality of the process:

Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently:

Who would deny, if having any awareness of Him, or any claim in being touched by that love of the Lord in experience…knowing something of the greatness of that love? And in this, our view of mercy ministered (in whatever way) and perceived, by the love of the Lord, particularly according to that view in experience, loves that ‘view’ of Him? Yet God knows how very easily we find peace with ‘our own view’. Can even be deceived to an unrighteousness in love of our ‘own view’.

And that becomes a rub amongst us, doesn’t it? That matter of ‘view’.

The world loves its own, the Lord issued as both statement, but deeper, as a mechanism to be understood in the ‘why’ of it. At base is what holds the world together temporally, the denial of Christ’s preeminence in all. There is an unspoken agreement, no matter how far all other considerations and disagreements may superficially manifest…beneath it all, the world is what agrees to oppose the Lordship of Jesus Christ. No, there is not material contract signed, (unless one finds ‘signing on’ to follow the flesh) no polling of each or any actually, but there is a plain line drawn by Christ; the world and His kingdom. And “If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: (with its own notion of love and acceptance) but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.

There is ‘an agreement’ in the world, which, if we claim to see, perhaps have tasted to whatever degree in its hate of a disciple; there is no less a ‘base’ of agreement among those ‘not of the world’. Jesus Christ is Lord.

Yes…something is ‘easy’ in loving one’s own, loving those with whom one finds all agreement. Having much in common or may seem to be. But how are we assigned to manifest being ‘His disciples’ to the world? He tells us. By the love we are to have for one another…and a love not dependent upon superficial agreement of views (which can be fund abounding) by comfortable preferences.

And such is to be unfeigned, not with clothespin on our noses, not with any ‘buts’ or our own peculiar litmus tests for some worthiness. Love one another as I have loved you. A new (even THE new and unchanging commandment) given to us for our benefit overall. For to seek after accomplishes something…to be done with dissimulatings, performances, pretense and pretentiousness, facades, and a purifying of soul takes place as we endeavor by grace to see that place of un-feigning in all, and abide as He abides.

And as surely as we find His love is not ‘sappy’, any claim that such would be the whole of it in result as ‘just a gooey sappy faux love devoid of discipline, reproof, rebuke…and yes, even end up denying the Lord’s obedience’…one may made able to think again. Learning to love, in whatever measure such light of heavenly love has been ministered (Love one another AS I have loved you…) has come with, and in, many attendant rebukes and chastenings. And many repentings.

Much repentance, unless a man deceives himself.

What do we find, especially when overconcerned (perhaps concerned at all if apart from grace) “What will this man do?” Or “What are ‘they’ all doing?”

To one He may say what He gives one to do, may be entirely different from what He may have for another:

Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me.

Again, some will and can only see this as throwing the barn door open to all manner of heresy, horrible doctrines, and/or behaviors justified as ‘in the name of the Lord’…and quite falsely. Would it be fey to simply ask “Have you not already looked around”?

Of course we are more comfortable ‘around our own’, and none would deny the scriptures rife with warnings of our company kept and associations. And yes, it is to whatever extent we mask our own preferences in the religious garb of doctrinal purity (do you doubt?) or some justification for withholding of mercy if we see it called for, we will find ourselves opposing this: “Love one another as I have loved you”, forgetting all the dark places in mind, practice, perceptions, and conclusions from which the Lord patiently delivers.

That is, unless you are the one who ‘got it all right from the beginning’, never in need of chastening, many corrections, and repentance. And also eschewing those as though they are not appointed to the revelation of our salvation.

Yes, the love of the Lord. It’s easy to sit in some sentiments of our own imaginings as to purity and sincerity. But Christ would have it shown, not when we are all too comfortable in the amens of our agreements among those of some apparent commonness of either doctrines or experiences. Yes, it is no stretch that His purpose of apportioning Himself in some seeming difference to each, which some might call only a recipe for confusion, is itself a setting stage that love might be made manifest.

May some testimony come forth, even in sight of a world to which it is appointed to be seen “Yeah, they sure do disagree a lot (maybe even more than many) but man, they sure do love one another…”

By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.

The way in which the soul interprets matters is both a function of fear, which is consequent to its interpretation of death as/and looming nonexistence; and desire(s), particularly identified as pleasures which speak, not only of the soul’s craving of a continuance, but a continuance of such nature that is unendingly expansive and desirable. Few would want to ‘live forever’ (metaphorically speaking) in a 6 x 8 foot cell.

But perhaps this might be reduced even further to simply fear. For if, or when all other hope of pleasure is extinguished and is utterly and plainly removed, most would still opt for the living hell of that cell than face some fullness of soul’s extinguishing. At least for some time to face and figure out what is the cost of its continuing existence, and whether it is not only payable, but worth the paying. ‘Can a soul be so moved to embrace its own non-being?’, becomes a question. Is there enough ‘pain’ to do that?

And one might, if or when considering a suicide say ‘but of course there is enough pain’ (which may also be reduced to absence of all hope of pleasure, of relief), but the simple fact of the matter is that presently, neither you nor I, are suicides. We only guess here at motives. Yet even so we may have had some taste of the extremes of hopelessness and of which stuff of certain thoughts may enter.

Which brings us to another question “Is such pain ‘an additive’?” Or it simply some manifest convincing, or ‘hint at’ of hope’s possible absence? Would one have to ‘inflict pain’…or does it suffice to remove hope? Take away any and all hope and the soul withers into unending suffering. Pain is simply a mechanism designed (if or when inflicted/experienced) that makes us acutely aware of hope of relief. If one could ‘short cut’ directly to all loss of hope, not having to ‘inflict’ anything other, would it not suffice to clearly show the dread abyss the soul cannot but ‘draw back from’. The ‘no hope’ of any relief.

And, of course, this example is fraught with all manner of faults identifiable. But which, when examined individually as they might arise in protest of premise are themselves reduced by dissection, will yield same conclusions. And those severally seen as the terrors of isolation.

No, there are no other visitors to the cell. No, there is no recurring sunrise nor sunset to the cell. Even the ‘matter’ of the cell is not visible to its occupant, as though it might ‘speak’ to him in some engaging as in “Oh, there’s a crack there, but none there” or “I can count the bars if I choose and occupy”.

No, the soul ‘locked up to itself’ is all the hell there is and can be. Why do you think dark and dim solitary confinement is so effective and dreaded, even in this realm of the material and toward some ‘behavior modification’? The soul needs to express and have such feedback of existence by such expression. Even ‘bad’ behavior, which follows all the precise and same mechanism of ‘good’ behavior, does not differ in exercise. The soul’s being is affirmed only by feedback. Isolate from all feedback, and/or hope of it, and the soul is itself that living hell.

Though most of us prefer a stroke of affection to a strike of rebuke, in extreme the soul will ‘settle’ for anything. Here the so called nihilist is exposed as liar. No nihilist, if ultimately concerned with truth (or some profession of ‘objective’ absence) could ever have grounds for telling another ‘he is one’. And this even beside the more obvious lie of stating as truth “there is no such thing as objective truth…or meaning”

In some short response the soul is ‘always ruled’ (governed), as no less anarchists are liars, for they too must follow the rules of the soul (the rules of the road) in expression and necessity of feedback; and no soul ‘is’, that is not in every way….subject. No matter, if to any extreme it protests it follows it own ways, its own rules, and is fit to. The soul is itself always reactionary…even if, or when, given to deepest illusions of self creation and initiation. It is locked to being by the rule(s) of the soul. And no soul can be apart from hope. Even the soul of the suicide…hopes for relief in some acting upon itself toward some blissful imagining of unknowing of itself.

And here comes Jesus. Locking all down (or is it ‘locking all up’?) to a truth known to Himself as fully in Himself as the very truth of all things. Laying down a ‘rule of the road’, even that which no man can receive. But is true, nonetheless.

The Son of Man goeth as it is written of Him, but woe unto that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It had been good for that man if he had not been born.

“Wait!” the soul must say. This is not receivable. The only way the soul could know or believe this saying as to what is ‘good’, and ‘for it’, requires it first to be born to knowing. But Jesus is saying the good (of a soul’s estate) if found in betrayal, is to have never been. No soul can receive this to its own knowing!

Something must happen for any assent or agreement to this speaker’s trueness that reveals a good that is otherwise known, or ‘from’ otherwise issued, that is all and apart from any soul’s knowing, or ability to attain knowing.

‘Ye must be born again’, if any knowing is to be made known to any.

No man can say in truth “It were better (or good) had I not been born.” All his knowing is far too bounded to know this. He is already locked up to himself, even in that cell, even if only metaphorically, mentioned.

You know, sometimes a man may find himself given to that musing, particularly in some extremis of being when the nakedness of it becomes too great to bear, or seems too great to suffer “It might have been better to have not been born than to come to this”. Even thoughts of ‘unborning’ one’s self.

But it is far too late for that, and was never in one’s hand (though it may appear in imagination as such possibility ‘to do’ ). Yes, far too late. But always soon enough (and never too late) to recognize one’s hand is forbidden from any accomplishing of that which that hand had nothing to do…being.

The supreme ‘of being’ who may be known as the Supreme Being, has made, and keeps by sustaining, all rules of the road. They are unbreakable, unshakeable, and immutable. The soul is always subject….and no less, always seeking to cast off governance. It is locked up…until…hope of relief becomes all that is both desperately sought, while just as desperately plain it cannot accomplish for itself.

May the hope of relief…move you. But not in ignorance.

I simply don’t know any other way around it.

On our way to learning the depths of this commandment, this new commandment “Love one another as I have loved you” the working is at once far more profound, but also far more strange than could have ever been imagined.

If I were to say that in all I once held a certain perception of such as that which following Jesus would yield, even per an agenda perhaps; but am now finding it far different than once perceptions and conceptions, would you understand? Things are so very very different in substance than they once appeared.

Love one another as I have loved you. That new commandment.

It never goes away, never gets dimmer, only brighter, never comes to some fulfillment as I might have once apprehended fulfillment to mean. Yes, the word of the Lord, even these words of the Lord, have no dimming in them, no finality that any man (as I am persuaded) might say “OK, that part is done…what is next?”. There is always a deeper.

Now even as I write I sense some irksomeness, perhaps even a resistance to such seeming lack of finality. Almost as though it is a promise of constant frustration…to be told something, to be under instruction or pursue something that appears as it does, with ‘no end’.

Yet, even at my own resistance there is no dismay, for how could it ever be less than that? Who would have, or hold the Lord’s love as some finite thing: as when a project is finished and now is time to ‘move on to another’? Who has ever (I speak to men in Christ) so tasted of the Lord’s love (even specifically toward themselves) and ever thought “Well, that’s enough of that, time to move on to something else”?

What else takes your breath away…to not only know of His presence, but to know of it as the very manifestation of His love for one? Not there to condemn (though I dare not deny many rebukes), not there to pain (though I dare not deny the many chastenings) not there but for any other than His purpose to simply ‘be with’ the one and ones to whom He has promised “I will never leave you nor forsake you”. He, in all fulfillment of Himself as inseparably congruent and consistent with His word.

And this all done without any show of grimace, any form of distaste as though odious to Him to be ‘that one’ and do so, even to have been made so, as the one capable of full fellowship with man, and as a man. This is very high for me. Yet, it is who He is. To even come as one to sit in dust with any fallen who have known the disgrace of having their own mouths stopped with dust in their fall and without strength to even call for help, nor certainly utter one ‘good thing’. Utterly patient to be seen.

No, and Yes! it is different. Far different than once I surely thought, even believed was end. And here I make no claim of any attaining, only some glimpse of things far too wonderful than imagination might have conjured. Even if or with ‘best intent’. (Of which I can never claim, for it is far too late for me to deny the truth of how woefully short even what I may think are my best intents fall and fail) and how very untrustworthy they are always shown. His intent(s) always rise, my own are not merely negligible, but in all, for the ignoring. His intent. His intents. Again, so very high of me and for me to phrase. Yet, He is whom He is.

Yes, I thought or once imagined (and now I speak as a fool) that in such following there would be some eventual survey of my estate not only allowed but to that very end. That I might come to a place where I could perceive myself of some accomplishment, some attaining, and look upon myself with some satisfaction, even approval. I would ‘finally’ be ‘enough as my Lord’ to know myself as such, to delight in myself as such, to even relish at having been made so. See? I told you I must speak as a fool.

How could I have known, a thing so ‘coming out of’ all self interest? Ignorance is a wonderful plea to be given for any in His court to be allowed to declare. As is ‘not guilty’ by reason of insanity. But such must be supplied by the court as plea. I can only testify, it is. And His provision, no matter our estate, even when most foolish and thinking we see so well (I was sure being like Jesus would eventually make me think myself ‘cool’) not knowing how very appropriate is the changing of just one letter in that. A fool…but loved.

Love one another as I have loved you. It never ends. It cannot because He does not. The unveiling of what has no end (and we may come to glimpse) has a beginning far further before than our own imaginations might carry us, is well, yes, breathtaking. Again, it could be no less than He Himself could be less than He is. Everlasting love does not, and did not start at our own recognition of it, though we so peculiarly may still mark times and seasons. We are too well known well before we even know ourselves as ourselves. Even right now, in all we ‘may think’ we know of ourselves. Or Him.

Yes, it is strange how this commandment…stays. Strange as in too marvelous. Even all failings and falling shorts as when some harshness is revealed to me of attitude, disposition, impatience or irksomeness…serve its end. Have I been loved so? Out of some painful obligation? Out of some odious service? God forbid, He has never shown Himself anything but kind and forbearing in His patience toward a one whom, when coming to any or some sobriety, cannot but declare ‘justice was merited there and no less than death for such hypocrisy and deceit’…yet…’you have loved me past it.’ And not only so…but through it.

Dare I show less? God forbid! And yet I cannot deny of the many times I have…and still, finding the wonder of His love, sustaining. Dare I, in any way, be found implying even an iota of taking such for granted? Again, God forbid!

But too oddly it is, isn’t it? Such is ‘granted’. He has granted Himself in eternal love to us and for us, that even we might be delivered from such attitude that lends to a taking for granted. And so that, even if, or when we do, and are found indulging such attitude, He does not deny Himself. I better understand a little why Paul exclaimed in such as could only be dismay if left without the spirit’s full help “Who is equal to such a task?” Who could ever rightly ‘relate’ in word and words, or even higher, demonstration were it not for an intercessor ever attentive to our estate and frames and giving the spirit in His name to help with all our infirmities?

Yes. He has sent us, or better, granted us, given us, a too wonderful treasure hunt formed of all indelibleness mapped in us, by His presence…seek out how much you are loved, that vet particular ‘as I have loved you’, and you will find yourself unable to deny it your brother.

And that is too wonderful to a man who once thought he knew what love is enough to say…”OK, but what is next, what is in it for me after that?” with some (now too plainly seen) remarkably insane straight facedness, to himself.

If any have been brought in merest sense to know the innate hostility of what may be found in man to all that is eternal and true, and been made able to smell the acrid plumes that rise from such resistance, in such awful resistance, he may come to appreciate a great wonder.

That One has been given authority, and of such magnitude in all, that he has power to turn such a staunchly and dreadly committed adversary to a friend…and even One to whom He might show what love truly is. Yes, I once sought after beholding myself as ‘good’ friend, and made much of seeking to display myself as such. It is enough to be called friend, and to see hope presented for one who now holds some hope that he too, is being made able…to love.

This is too great a wonder, particularly for a man like me. The promise of being able to love, and given in too wonderful a way of finding…to see, search out, discover, just how very much I have been loved. I am not sorry at all for matters beyond my ability to plumb to all ‘end’. And if God grant that there be another time I smack my thumb firmly with a hammer of such force to even forget in such pang the One who already saw that coming, He understands my forgetfulness provoked in frame’s weakness.

“Love one another”…but not left there…”as I have loved you”

I testify there is no greater finding than the love that is in Christ. It is to see Christ, Himself.

It obliterates any tendency toward boredom…and taking for granted…that which has been granted us to know.

It’s such a simple matter, really…the dead can’t answer for themselves. But why would that be for a particular affecting toward, why that preference? First and most obvious, we can make anything mean most anything we like and prefer, without fear of contradiction. We can make a whaling story contain all manner of subtexts and references to psychological and metaphysical issues, explain what a poem means, find all manner of hidden sequences in a film, and diagnose a painter or sculptor by his artwork. And in all of this almost any theory is made supportable (including my proposition in the title) by enough words. And without the auteur or author present to refute…who is to say? Who has final say over meaning? Any?

Of course in reference to holy books or words considered holy we can feign an elevation of our esteem toward them as being ineffably untouchable and immutable…all the while, and no less, holding firmly to our own interpretation of their meaning. This petard set to a hoisting in and by our disingenuousness is set for the exposure of our particular disingenuousness; but, of course, that is my particular interpretation of God’s work among men, i.e. to show us all liars, (and that especially as before Him and most especially to ourselves) that we might seek relief.

Then secondly follows first, of making things say or mean to our own preference and from which we may claim some expertise, the very nature of apostles and prophets…personally. Being foundational to the structure of the church (shall I resort to scripture?) they are indispensable…but their person is rarely found so. And, in person…even less so. With their authority given for their work, and a foundational authority as mentioned, they are less inclined to make sacrifice of that authority (or will learn not to) by being men pleasers. Of course, if their delight is not in the authority of the One ordaining, but instead some affection for authority of themselves…they are either false or with much to learn.

And of course, presence in person make it very difficult to put words in their mouths…even if, or when, they are not clearly understood. They are made to be ready (when ready)…to patiently give answer. So, though much lip service may be given to the “apostle’s doctrine(s)”, less is given to, and more often denied or refuted to a one in person. And most (do I paint too broadly?) prefer rebukes found, even if found…from a distance. We may not yet know how very much we prefer (though we outwardly decry it as profane) our own ways. It’s so easy to disdain in person a one who speaks of “how things are”, preferring to seemingly exalt some others (though not present in flesh) and ours as being wholly devoted to their visions of how things are.
The truth that “Daddy’s home” is most often an interruption of our play and disorderliness, and is appointed to those of foundational office and calling. But, and this but is nothing less than most relevant, with no trust in themselves for sufficiency, and apart from any assuming of roles that would exalt themselves. To understand how and the workings of authority requires a deep looking into the Lord Jesus Christ, which is never exclusively theirs…but rather to provoke others, if made able, to encourage such deeper looking. How any man, in being sent with, or in any authority, might be able to consider himself least of all, servant rather than boss, given as to be some support from below (as a foundation) for those above and esteemed better than themselves…well, yes, one may be able to appreciate how deep a look that is by invitation and provoking to…a looking into Christ. And Jesus is quite open to all His own, and His depths are not withheld from any even if or though it appears some may be called to first go there.

You see, we are to whatever extent we remain, often in love with lies about ourselves. “I would have stood with Jesus”…”I would have seen and appreciated Paul’s depth and counsel where others perhaps did not…” (At my first response, no man stood with me” he said)

“Yes!, I get all he says and is saying! In fact, my denomination wholly endorses his writings as no less than all the scriptures…as inspired!”

“It’s even one of the statements of faith we have and require for membership in our church!”

We do not like when any see through our charades (too broad a brush?)…and to not be too casual, but not willing to sacrifice for an appearance of piety, the truth…”And God forbid any personally confront us (or me) on these matters…in person.” No apostles and prophets are more often preferred, or at least at some distance. And being “dead” suffices. Or their office and callings…concluded.

We are more often like those who Jesus spoke to in putting some distance, or at least hoping to. “Had we lived in the days of our father’s we would not have stoned the prophets (*unsaid: “like they did”). Had I heard Jesus personally, Paul, personally, Peter, personally…yeah…I am sure I’d be right there in the arena with them, on the chopping block with them…before the Sanhedrin, right there with Him…and not run scared or denying…as the ones we so often call “fathers” in the faith.

Do you yet have precious myths about yourself?

I surely do.

Apostles and prophets…different, but not different. Their eyes are to be given. This is no different than any other called of the Lord…to colabor as givers of sight. To be, by their own deliverance from shadows and fumes of obscurity that cloud sight and understanding…and meaning…that the Lord be seen, in His meaning…His significance. Not their own.

The ones we read, and read of, the ones we may say are reliable witnesses of the death and resurrection…did not become so, (although ordained to be so whose fruit would remain) apart from their own learning. That grace outstrips and outstripped their own exaggerations about themselves, their own affections for position, their own frailty and ease of being scattered, their own…in all, pretty much being wrong…about everything. Who they were of themselves, what they could do of themselves, how they could and would, and did, correct the Lord in His stating of how things are and what would be. And because that grace, and because of that work of grace toward themselves were then unashamed of preaching that gospel that not only can save the weakest, but by their own experience…does.

Things had moved from vagueness or theory and/or a far offness of mere words heard by their flesh…and into their own flesh. These were chosen to first go…knowing no confidence in their own flesh in all its now exposed frailty and vanity. They know and well understand until this work is done in a man, even that “any man” who may be found in Christ…to that curious but necessary hating of his own life when shown how empty and vain it is, he cannot but wait in his being despised.

It’s a promise made to him/them…even as to be received of all who might call themselves disciples and not hoarded to themselves for self glorying…but to, by all means and whatever means provided this not be lost to any as for any…”and you will be hated by all men for my name’s sake”.

Unless one cares to find some other meaning to those words. Maybe some distancing, maybe some “those may not be for today”…no less as apostles and prophets are so often consigned. Not needed…not for today. And make them as less than promise, or even as less than all the other promises many make boast of having…as their own.

After all…who doesn’t like…”likes”?

But who alone is able to save from a particular woe we may so often seek after, even in our sternest and most strident denial of its being motive?

“Woe to you when all men speak well of you…”

Only One is able to save. Amongst what so often and eagerly pursues “Likes”.

It’s a miracle, I tell you.

I tell you, a miracle.

Concluding as it did (Pt1) with a claimed liberty to address what is “just like him”, that is, the man who knows he has lied to himself in, and by, his own mind, I continue. Finding no prohibition, nor even shame in admission at how very often I lie, and am found lying to myself, even exposed as lying and lying to myself; would otherwise entail denying the Lord’s knowing by any denial, and also deny His grace and truth by allowing shame an upper hand in any attempt to conceal what is both so plain, and plainly paid for by the Lord’s death. And I understand now, better than I imagine I ever have…”Who then would want to listen to a liar?”

As surely as I could not convince myself, I can convince no other how far better it is to admit to one’s self that estate, and seemingly risk appearing as a liar, than to either deny the Lord in His knowing, or deny the Lord in His grace. We may often say “Let God be true and every man a liar” without any understanding at all, even often thinking as we may repeat it, it is now only applying to some other man, or some other men. We often think by repeating what is true, we are being ourselves, in all things, true. And, no doubt, it surely is a thin veil of comfort to think so, in this lying to ourselves that is being made too plain. And surely, if we do learn we have and do (even often) lie to ourselves, what is left but to lie to one another?

Is it not made…too plain? When Jesus spoke of the man who had gathered much to a building of barns for it and then spoke to his soul, is it not plain Jesus both hears and knows all inner conversations of man? Do you think not? Or that it was only that particular man, that other man of which He spoke?

And he spake a parable unto them, saying, The ground of a certain rich man brought forth plentifully: And he thought within himself, saying, What shall I do, because I have no room where to bestow my fruits? And he said, This will I do: I will pull down my barns, and build greater; and there will I bestow all my fruits and my goods. And I will say to my soul, Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years; take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry. But God said unto him, Thou fool, this night thy soul shall be required of thee: then whose shall those things be, which thou hast provided?

Now, as a liar, I will concede to other liars how easily this is made to appear as it is not. It is, to a liar, most easily grasped (and more comfortingly appraised) as meaning, “This is Jesus telling us, or at least a someone somewhere, ‘to not be like that‘ ” But who isn’t already like that? Who doesn’t think that way? “I’ve been going full bore, I’ve been spending myself, I have had the pedal to the metal (after whatever fashion), and now I will conserve…I will take my foot off the gas (to preserve it)…and coast now for as long, or as long a time, as I have provided myself”

If you have never been caught, or do not recognize, or worse, refuse to recognize the ease with which self indulgence is indulged, even in calculations and justifications, I have nothing to say. And I understand the weak refutation “Are you saying there is no rest, no ease to be had or found?” God forbid! For, it is only found of God, and in God through Christ. The man who labors for himself, who attributes fruit as coming from his own labors…does not yet even recognize, if there be any (fruit), it was also and only God who supplied all power…to labor. But while the man adjudges and proceeds from “the labors are my own, and the fruit is therefore also” he cannot but think thus, be caught thus, and exposed, thus.

But yes, it is no mystery of the how and why, even a disciple might think merely “This is Jesus telling us how we ought not to be”. But, when we find out we already are…

It is no less plain that to some this is appraised as more a mistake, a failure in, and by, not knowing, by which the man proceeds to speak to himself…he’s not lying to himself…he’s just mistaken. Oh, yes, indeed it is, indeed he is…mistaken, for the not knowing of how things are. And by that he speaks a myth to himself, a myth received and promulgated of all practice among men and of which men cannot escape…but by intervention. And more the point of the parable, is that intervention. How easily, in all our appraisals is that not considered? God speaks to the man!

Oh, yes, we can leave it at “this is a parable about a foolish man”…somewhere. A man Jesus is warning us to not be like. “After all,” we think from the comfort of our armchair as we study “God calls him a fool”. That him, there, in the story, “Yes, God, I agree, that man is a fool…because…” Because he didn’t even know he didn’t know. “Just how mistaken that man is, huh, Lord?!” Yes, some leave it there. Being glad it was of some other Jesus spoke. For we have now “taken the lesson”.

O foolish man who lies to himself! But what of God? God speaks/spoke to that man who is like that. Yes, he calls him a fool, yes, there is a sting to that, no doubt. But nevertheless…does God speak to him? Jesus says He does. Do you doubt? Or do you leave the story, may even like to leave the story/parable (are you now lying to yourself?) with the man, none the wiser, dying that night…and even justly…as a fool?
I would have to wonder about you as I must often wonder then about me, have you ever had an intervention? Ever…not had one? It’s plain this man had reproval, rebuke, rebuff, and right to his own face as a fool, by the Knower of all things. Do you think, believe…even barely consider God’s confrontation, so plain and frank…with stern rebuke…is made to none effect? If so, would a man, even any man in Christ…even a liar if shown so, not be right to hold some fear for you? About you? Or do you believe as that any man mentioned, who may even be of Christ, that God’s power to awaken a fool, is greater than fool’s love of slumber in the lies he tells himself?

Is Jesus speaking a parable of some man, somewhere? Or, is God waking us up to whom that man is? The man needing to be shaken from the comfort of the lies he tells himself…even that this parable is about…someone else?

The sting. Yes the sting. Might a man awaken at a sting? He may with eyes yet closed brush away some troublesome fly buzzing around his nose, or seeking to land upon his lips, barely rousing. But a sting? Will he sleep through that, to die a fool, as he rolls snoring toward the precipice? God knows, doesn’t He? Is it kind or unkind of God to sting? To even have Him say “you fool!” and know it is you and/or I unmistakably being addressed. Have any found the kindness in it? I know a fool who has. Might stings even and therefore…come to be treasured?

“Who are you, Lord?”

“Jesus whom thou persecutest”

Do you dare imagine, do you dare believe, if you are a man and have known anything about being man, even a man proceeding from what he thinks he knows…that there was in that moment, maybe even and only for the tiniest fraction of that moment, not some most profound and immediate knowing/sensing/experiencing in the man…of an “Uh-oh!”

Or, was it all and only, in Saul’s most heightened moment of inner conversation “Oh, cool, Jesus has something to say to me”?

I don’t think that Uh-oh ever left that man. I know it didn’t. He treasured it as he treasured grace, that Uh-oh moment, for he knew in himself grace is meaningless to a man apart from a most profound experience of the Uh-oh that shakes and wakes him. He was sure of it. It doesn’t make grace meaningless, God forbid! Anymore than I can make it mean more than it already does to any. Only God is both able to sting, and so heal that sting as it may be gloried in.

Now I know I cannot deliver that sting, having had no power to awaken myself, if indeed I am. Part of that sting is a man learning, and continuing to learn…that as much as he might like, as much as he might feel compelling, as much as he might even find a burning desire…even as these things grow deeper and farther in himself to desire as he had never understood it…once…he is, in all of himself, and of himself…of no ability.

One might think it odd, wouldn’t one? Wouldn’t growing mean one is getting better at stuff? I mean at least some ability to plainly show all ease in it. But then, Jesus as fully grown would have left testimony of a man declaring as he walked up Golgotha’s hill, “Cake walk, cake walk everybody, just a cake walk for me, see you in three days. I been bearing the cross all the days I have been with you, it’s cool (you guys kill me, you really do! ha ha!)…see how good at it I am now!”

Some may think that joy precludes tears and snot and cries and blood (O! the blood) and sweat…and even some sensing of an uh-oh…Eloi Eloi lama sabacthani. No it is only joy that makes any to bear it. Even to a man most probably soiling himself, and publicly, and quite without ability to restrain.

But a man like me? At best, a liar, believing in that intervention for such.

God knows.

You know. The only one whose joy gives us strength.

That One.

And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.

How many times might Jesus ask us…why? What is He after? Is He after our answer as an un-knower in seeking out knowledge? That He might learn something if we have an informed enough response? (I’m persuaded most I know would chuckle at that proposition)

Or is it something else? Perhaps like “what is your standing, whence your standing upon?” From what and which do your actions take form and proceed? Do you know? At all? Along with all attendant thought processes by which action proceeds.

And not so He might know…but that we might.

O! my, how deep might this probing be? If I do answer, do I not de facto open the door to this “game” of pursuits and pursuing?

Can I pretend enough to not have heard the question? To not involve myself in this game?

Knock, knock…

Knock, knock…

Knock, knock…

OKAY! OKAY!…”Who’s there?”

Red pill or blue pill…do we “want” to know, or do we not want?
(Again) O! my, where might this lead…could it even lead to the “why” of want?

And who has right to ask that “why?” Does any? Do any? Is there any, are there any with right to know “our” why…to the point that they have right of answer? Who started this game anyway…?
(Who started this silly writing might be more the present question)

Just a silly child. Just a silly child that has found that even if in the valley of decision, where all appears up as option or optional for choice and choices, there is one undeniably off the table for consideration, and that made so, just by his being.

He had no choice in that, to be thrust into that place, this place…of deciding. Thrust of no choice of his own into that, this valley. He was made (created) and made (forced) in that making…to be here.

All around are choices, everything appears to call for it/them…appeal for them, make demand for them, so that his ears are now numb in their suffusing…and certainly to, especially to, that curious self help helper guru who states…”Remember, everything is a choice”. Yes, yes…okay okay okay…I get it, I get it. I get it. Everything hangs in a balance. Tomorrow will be the result of today’s choices. I…get…it. Even that each second following another will be according to choice made in that previous.

But…I didn’t choose to know…about choice and choices…it, this knowing of them, appears as surely thrust to me as my being, as though I can foolishly consider non-being as what being is not, like I have that horsepower in my consciousness. Or think I can even now choose not being. (And no, I don’t think(?) I have chosen to be a fool…but…)

What is the why?…the why, of why I both am, and find myself here in this valley? That I am, I do not doubt. That I am in a place laden with choice(s), neither do I doubt either.

I do find a prohibition against speaking for you, that you in particular that may read. I have no power to accuse, nor any power to enforce agreement. You are who you are. Who and what you are you answer in every moment with your being. And I can only say, I do so no less. It is not as though I am responsible to myself to be that who or what I am, it is simply that there is no escaping it. (Have you been able?)

And if we have at all common experience and might even say (as to ourselves) “but now I will be different”, even if born of a deepest longing, desire above or beyond all desire, and by which we supply and apply our will to effect…do we see it does not matter? It is still an “I”…just seeking to be different. It is like a child showing pictures of himself…”this is me in the swimming pool, this is me riding a bike.” This is me choosing, choosing to be different…or even, this is me choosing to not choose.

Whenever we touch our “I” (and, is that avoidable?) we touch the unavoidable of all, of no choice. Yet…now in a seemingly choice filled place. Red pill or blue pill? See how deep the rabbit hole goes…or wake up in the morning as though none of this ever took place? Does it matter? One cannot but make the choice they do…anymore than they can choose not to be…who they are.

Listen, I am not ignorant that these things can be discomfiting. Or, that if received as blithely written, it is simply a man by spreading words is trying to ameliorate some strange frustration(s), or matters springing from those. Does it matter, at all, what I am? To me it might (at best) be of some matter, but how any perceive me is as out of my hands as me trying to not be…me.

But, in regards to that, do you doubt that I have ever sought to be a something other? A “better” me…by whatever metric might be applicable…by me? A smarter me? A more successful me? A more knowing me? Go down any and every list imaginable of words that might be stuck in front of man…kind man, patient man, clever man, wise man, intelligent man, wealthy man, talented man, artful man, yes “better” man, as modifier…and I will not deny I have sought such modifiers to indeed modify the thing inescapable if left of itself…that thing which left unmodified I am both ill at ease with, and forever seeking to improve upon (by metrics I have had no choice in)… just a man. Yes, I have even tried on even the grandest of all (by metrics thrust to me) a spiritual man.

And by no means have I tried all on, I am not nor ever have been doctor man, lawyer man, President man, councilman, electrician or plumber man…in matter of career and seeming choices thereof. Those are not what I meant in list of modifiers…yet they are, aren’t they? And no less. I indeed was once a sales man (some may say, even now) but that was just as ill fitting (though I tried, I think I really did, at least to the extent I was moved by wanting to be a wealthier man that it seemed to hold some promise of). The modifiers are always ill fitting as hard as we may seek to establish them, and I am convinced, it is not because of themselves, but because of how ill fitting the thing is they seek to modify. Or better, we seek to modify by them. Man. And the very why of why we do…seek them. Yes, I do know what impostor syndrome is.

I have met none but one…content to be…man. And he only speaks…to man. Even as…for man.

Now, there are a billion and more words waiting to be said in regards to that, and I am not at all convinced I should have time for them…but they are there, surely.

And I know there are those who have said, might say, and yet do say…”But you have met him only in mind, even your own mind!” That is true, no doubt. But where else is any man “met”? Even in this instant…you are measuring me. At least the me you are able to perceive. In your own mind. And I am at the same issue, and no less, in this writing. I perceive…a reader. How do I perceive you? The same way you perceive me…in mind.

And what pursuits might be additionally called for in that, that is, if we care to know in some sense…beyond mere perception? What experiments done to “see” if somehow, at least to ourselves, perceptions align with what each of us may call reality? Or, can we never…know anything? One would think reality must be established first in and to each…before any holding against it as for determining truth might be recognized. Do perceptions make the reality, or are perceptions to be held against a real (if one concedes such a thing as “real” self exists) for their determining of actual alignment or spuriousity [sic].

And at least in this I know I am spitting into the wind if thinking I have any ability to communicate with any who do not already know how easily they either are, or have been, deceived by their own mind(s). No, I’ll easily admit to no ability at all. None that extends past the man who knows he has lied to himself.

He alone do I have liberty to address…being just like him.