What Is Unspeakable? (pt 1)

How to say what I cannot say apart from entering that peculiar place where I make this incontrovertibly true to both myself and any hearer is, at very least, if not daunting…both interesting and in some ways, fascinating.

The question is both a matter of honesty and of some necessity for consideration, if any has even the slightest notion of integrity as being both an estate of being purely honest, and therefore true to itself, which is of the “moral sphere”; but also some estate better related and understood by some form of mathematics if accepted as true in function(s). That being the total integration of all matters into a “one”, an integer assigned some numerical value of which, as prime description, serves as more than simply a mathematical descriptor. The “prime” one. Not even first as in sequence…but first always and forever over all.

Simply, the “one” in which all things are. The first cause(r) in which all other causes not only exist, but that each or any subsequent cause cannot be separated “off” or by definition for discrete examination.

Consistent and unbroken in consistency to itself throughout so that no part that might be perceived of it (even if erroneously assumed to be able to be perceived) can be extracted for any defining to set it apart from any other matter of it so (though erroneously) perceived. There is neither either/or in it nor “this and that”, in it. All is perfectly and uninterruptedly cohesive both to and in “itself.”

And though far more than “blended”, that may be the point of concession one must make as a man for best impartation of the matter. For if it be, only that “it” is discerning of itself if there be to any particular. “It” is the sole eye that can see itself. And know itself.

And I trust, the wiser of any even with some piety attached have both an inkling of what I speak of as “God”, and, if any piety, also have some inkling that treading so in, or to, any referencing of that “God” as an “it” or even itself, is far more than vanity, but barely avoids blasphemy. If it does at all. It may be wholly so, as only that God would know.

And “He” also would know (as sole true knower) whether for me it is presumption or just “too late in the game” to consider otherwise; by such arrangement of His allowances ordained (to me or any) that must and unavoidably have brought me (or any) here.

Since “He” as all cause cannot be said by any subsequent cause to have included or have inclusion of what we would call “accident” (for one would have to stand antecedent to determine “rules of action”…and none of us do) each of us is all and only left at any particular point to “where we are”.

Another, venturing in his understanding, said it best in some grasp of grace associated with his “own” being:

But by the grace of God I am what I am.

Therefore what (or can “what” as such exist) not saying it?

This is also that place of un-tenability mentioned in first paragraph, a doing of what cannot be done. There is no “being” as such, except in and of that “integer”, that is not by allowance. And if by allowance, what does not consider itself so, must therefore consider itself…as that integer. And what is therefore allowed of “that One” must also be in all, and fully purposed of that One. And some men not only think, (for as “a” man I, and any, are allowed to know what “man thinks” even of his own thoughts) but act according to their “own will” toward purpose, and with intent.

And here is where this exquisitely and unutterably deep phrasing holds all sway:

For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope;;

Some”one” has purposed all matters of creation to a frustration, a futility, a vanity inescapable, even locking it “all” up to it. All is made to be a dog chasing its tail. Here any and all will “of the creation” is totally and manifestly displayed as not merely inconsequential, but totally void of anything over itself by will exerted in that creation.

It is “what it is”. Subject. Not merely as subject, but in all bondage to itself according to the will:

“… of Him who subjected it in hope;”

Yet before the abysmal despair of being assigned all frustration, all purposed frustration that might so totally consume a soul to abnegate its own self; hear, for the love of God hear. For we are not left (as it would seem almost irremediably) by this unutterable phrasing of truth (do you believe Paul “saw”?) if we are made able to not neglect but one word: hope.

We are given to hear (if we are given to hear) a matter all may, if made able, take comfort in. That despite the “locking up” of all things in creation by He who is above, beyond, “outside” of all creation as even Creator of creation in His locking it up; but that He with such locking “allows” (in that unutterably deep and inescapable “locking”) a glimpse from “outside” to that and those “inside”, that in Him is…hope. Without that word given in the darkest defining of our own estate (as it does seem “dark” to be bound to frustration, does it not?) what “hope” at all could be had?

We have hope only by His giving of it…even into that acceptance of “our” estate. We are delivered from…in our acceptance “of”.

Paul understood the necessity of being fully made “receiver” only, no matter what may come to persuade otherwise in pride for the purpose of plunging into all pride:

“What do you have that you did not receive…?”

And if one or any would say “I have hope…” he must come to understand such is only as a matter received as from another, lest, thinking it self generated and being brought to reliance after some fashion of the self’s ability to manufacture, he see such (artificial) hope dashed to pieces. There is no hope from the “self” but only a masquerading.

Do you see this meshing of the unutterably deep and (to us) darkly deep with light here?

And I will give her her vineyards from thence, and the valley of Achor for a door of hope: and she shall sing there, as in the days of her youth, and as in the day when she came up out of the land of Egypt.

If you know Achan, his doings, his taking of things forbidden and to be devoted to destruction and which brought the speaking of and thence the hearing of:

I will not be with you anymore unless you destroy whatever among you is devoted to destruction.

Then and only then will the place of all once shaming become a source, a door, of hope.

If one is yet terrified of shame, he may not yet be made able to see glory.

Till then perhaps this may not be understood:

Let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach.