This unyielding need we have, often to the point of lust, for the knowing of a thing or things for ourselves surely stretches gaping mouthed into any matters concerning truth. Indeed there is nothing we would say we know in our (assumed) fullest understanding of that word know that does not presume such has been made ours…to our own self. And no less, when we say we know a thing this is strictly bound to our conviction we know it in some truth…the truth of it and the truth about it. And though we may readily admit we don’t know all about a thing we are yet convinced that what we do know…we know.
Yes, I can say I know mathematics. I know how to add, subtract, divide, multiply. But then a brilliant mathematician comes and presents some equation or formula and asks me to solve it. I do not really know if he has written this upside down or sideways, and I am at more than a loss for I am not even sure I recognize it as mathematics.
And very much depending upon the disposition of the advanced mathematician I could then be held up to ridicule “This fellow doesn’t know math at all as he says” or amongst all the other things that might be said he might say something very strange “Don’t worry or fret, I too started with only the tools of addition subtraction, et al. but I can teach you.”
Now either I must compromise what I have said, amend it, frame it better to its limit “I know some math”, or if obstinate (now my disposition comes into play) and persist “But I do know math!”, I insist. And find, by such obstinacy, I must be answered a very specific way. A harder way. For I am refusing to submit to one with a mastery plainly shown.
But here’s the thing in this very poor example. I know enough only to get into trouble. What I believe I know of numbers and functions (and I really do believe I know) does not allow me to receive his sigmas, deltas, curlycues and what all or be seen as math at all. There are no Greek letters in math! Math is only ones and twos and fractions and such. My knowing (as perceived as such) has actually limited my knowing.
As I said previously in not being able to even recognize whether his equation was upside down, sideways or such allows (even coaxes) me to take that space, place, or position…”this fellow is only making all this up; fabricated only to the end of shaming me with ignorance.” And in some sense not hard to understand (I trust it is not) it is my disposition toward imposing my motives (which I do not yet recognize as my own) upon him as fraud has now called into question…and very much so, his integrity.
And if so…and now…is any able to see how absolutely unbelievable it would be for me (or any) to have any expectation, let alone consideration that “Don’t worry or fret…I will teach you” might be heard?
Yet here I will tell you, and you alone, even if no other ever reads this, this has been all my way with the Lord, and all His answer. I have gotten into the deepest trouble (knowing only enough to do so) to either doubt or wonder at His word, and in so doubting His word, cast aspersions upon His integrity. Or wonder about it. Yes, this is me. And He knows this of me. He knows how I have “weighed him”.
Any matter of preference here is more than moot. It would be a lie for me to say “I would prefer I think of myself as one who hears and obeys” or “I would prefer to be seen as one who follows with some loyalty and devotion and obedience”. My preference has now become the lie even though I know very well I am still in possession of some. And if one were to say “O! but this is too hard a way” or “no one could ever like this” I couldn’t agree more. But is truth made subject to our liking, for if it is…only a thing able to be made…subject to…
Do you see?
Only God can settle this matter to any man. But how? How? How can a man be convinced (and as need be over and over…even as every man need be…over and over) of any truth to which he has no chord nor string in, nor of himself, to resonate? The man himself would have to be made into a different species of person.
Yes, this would be necessity.
But how?
Could he do it for himself? Make himself into what he is not?
Or, would it all be, of necessity, only a thing he must have done for him…as to be in him?
In your inner court, yes…that place right there (how visible it is!) from which all issues, even the temerity to speak…do you hear yourself? And if you have been given the temerity to speak from there…do these words frame themselves upon your lips and tongue as one who desires “the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth”? In both thinking to yourself and of yourself within yourself and/or even now with such boldness as to publish to others (by lip and tongue) as speaking true of you?
Or would you say “I love lies”?
See, here’s the thing we both know. One is a pleasurable way to think of one’s self, and if one can even be convinced they can convince others this is so…it appears as pleasure, too.
You see…we both know this.
And this, this “what we know” is all and enough to only get us into trouble.
That we love pleasure…not truth. And that we make truth in service to it.
And what is “truth” we make up?
There’s a word for it.
What could be made able to admit the truth of that?
It would take a different species of person.
Something that would have to be made able to come out of such inescapable self condemning of itself as loving lies.
Lies.
Yeah, that’s the word. Yes, that’s it.
israelx7wordpresscom 