Strange place. Strange stuff. Strange way we learn. There ain’t nothin’ we got that we haven’t received. Ain’t nothin’ that originates in us as men that is true. (And we would be just as proud were we to believe lies solely originate with us.) Anything that we may have is given; and that so particularly is reduced to the very matter of knowing or knowledge. “All knowing” may be a defective attribution when used of God in any comparative sense; as though a man knows some things but God knows all. It is perhaps then better understood as present and active, that any knowing at all, is only in God. Who Himself is the “all” of it.
But here we see the weakness of our language, and I especially of my own to even use a word such as “it.” For some knowing…or even knowledge that is in part may suffer being referred to as it, but the utter deficiency of useful implication in referring to all “the knowing” as present and active without limit as an it, here quite plainly displays all poverty of use. And it is not difficult then to understand how one prior exclaimed “Who is equal to such a task?”
Omniscience is not a useless word, it’s just that the God of all creation and quite present to every bit of it, knows precisely of our understanding when we use or consider it, and also knows all the whys of our usage of it. It only becomes a useless word when we believe it is a definition of God (even though true) that can be handled to forming some outline of Him. As though God Himself must be conformed, or pressed to occupation within a word of our construction.
Does this seem a silly matter? Consider this then. If I were to be talking to you about a friend or a person you had not met, of whom you had no knowledge, if I were to be speaking of him to make him better known to your understanding there could be a number of avenues taken. Factually I could say he is 6 foot 2 inches, weighs 205 lbs, has brown hair and eyes, born August 12, 1962. I might say “he is handsome” or she is …whatever. I could give all the facts I know, or any and all characterizations of personality, integrity (or lack thereof), status…etc. And these matters could run the gamut from the more objective (Born Aug 12) to the subjective in the extreme (handsome).
But, when we speak of God, we are first speaking of the “objective” of all, although whatever experience we may have of Him is allowed (for such time ordained) subjective in our interpretations…but, far more importantly…He is present (and the One truly present) to our (and any) conversation. All is done in His presence…even if to some (as has been made in accusation) He appears as absent…the peculiar derision cast at the believer for having an “invisible” (read: nonexistent) friend.
The implications of God’s being toward us who believe are very great. Exceeding all that might even be found comparative in the word “great” by all means. Endless. Boundless, and eternal. And here, in saying implications of God’s being I am not at all speaking of the assumption, hope, nor speculation that God exists…but of God’s being Himself. Not even the assertion that “He is”.
Just as you and I might speak of our “being” as the sum of all we know of ourselves to whatever extent we believe we know…we cannot but allow that anything at all we believe we know of God is totally reliant upon His disclosure. But here is where the all that is the all of difference lay between us. We, at best, only know ourselves in part, if indeed we do know anything of ourselves. But even what we may say we “know of ourselves” to us required informing otherwise how could we know it? And although this may appear again as mere playing with words there would require some knowledge (understanding, insight, apprehension) of what “knowing” actually means when it is said to know a thing.
Yes, the implications are great. And it matters not much (if at all, actually) whether we speak to one another or only hold court within ourselves. If we are truly convinced (as we might repeat as “a” believer) that “everything is open and laid bare before the eyes of Him with whom we have to do” we might begin to discover how many machinations, manipulations of so called knowledge and understanding we handle in a place we believe privy only to ourselves to some end of securing ourselves or for ourselves. Yes…God sees how I try to frame my words to Him in such a way as to “get what I ask for”. Or in whatever manner of my doing or speaking I might arrange things believed under my control to either present, or represent myself, in a certain way. Here the absurdity of all my attempting becomes all too plain to me as to be beyond laughable. Here my understanding of even what I thought I thought absurdity “means”… folds like a house of cards.
What then? How am I to understand? What…am I to understand? (And only God knows whether I can speak for man as a man and whether this is at all applicable to you)
That this entrust-ment of the gospel wherein any truth of God is found alone through its guarantor, Jesus the Christ, is made to a man (like myself…or not at all like me) to the end that he might learn it. What it means. And that any instruction therein found or impetus to share it is actually far less (as at first sight understood) for the purpose of others…but so that man himself might come to understand the things he says, or preaches, or teaches with any confidence. It also behooves a man (like me) to say that God’s economy is perfect, and that any work in the gospel as for the gospel (which remains Christ’s work alone) is always fruitful. Whether vessel through, ground watered from, or any word of its power, it is always at work…toward all things and everywhere.
In the world and its ways, it is entirely different. A man is deemed proficient enough to now pass on or teach by his achievements. He is considered some sort of expert and given a teaching chair. Whereas what we are given to learn, yes, even in instruction toward any “going” has far more to do with the revealing of our own inadequacy to all things, even our ineptitude…but for God. No doubt this is a hard word for some. That starting as it were, with some illusions of sufficiency we are then brought to knowledge only of our great dependence and necessity. And it would be remiss to let go without saying as in the above “but for God”…that therein lay all the difference and all the reality that becomes the truth of the disciple’s life. But for God is not only enough, it becomes to the disciple…all there is. If God be for us…
It remains interesting (to say the least) that toward the end of his life and ministry Paul would say what he has said in writing to his “son” Timothy. Yes, he kept the faith, yes, he saw a crown laid up (not only for himself) but that his only claim as testimony of his own self was as chiefest of sinners. Surely he had learned much along the path laid out for him. Perfectly prepared for him. And (or is it But?) he came to see his dire necessity for another to rescue, to save him from all he knew himself to be. He is even so bold as to say the “why” of his calling and choosing, not due to any expertise or greater grasp, not due to any better obedience rendered, or ability to see deeper or higher…..not due to any thing at all but God’s purpose to display both to and through such a one…His exceeding patience.
So many, even “like myself” tend to see, may even want or claim some desire to see (or claim) Paul as a worthy example in some following after. It would be silly if so, if extolling him as a pattern…to not come to the same understanding as Paul did, who not only remarked this of himself…but in such boldness also said “it is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation”.
Are you faithful? Am I? Are we?
Together.
In this?
israelx7wordpresscom 