Here's another recently realized nugget: courage doesn't mean being without fear, it means being fearful and still walking. I've been learning how to live well with a heart whose bottom occasionally falls out (i.e. waves of fear and anxiety). My first preference and approach is to find a solution that eliminates the feeling. Obvious, right? I wouldn't want it any other way; for me or for others. And I'm finding some really great ways that are making a difference. Ways, like routes, that help me avoid encountering those rough, anxious obstacles along the road. BUT, I was reminded today in the midst of a wave of anxiety (and trying to combat it) that I can be courageous AND anxious. It may sound obvious, but it actual brought me comfort in the midst of this uncomfortable feeling. Even though I desperately wanted the feeling to go away, I felt like I could rest while carrying fear. Imagine a traveler who occasionally finds himself bothered by an unwelcome growling, barking mutt. Try as he may for methods of keeping this dog away, it occurs to him to put a leash on it and bring it along. The idea I had felt something like bagging my fear, covering it with courage, swinging it over my shoulder, and proceeding to walk into the woods. I can't always keep from feeling anxious waves crash on my shores, but I also don't have to let them keep me from being courageous and continuing to swim.
It's not earth-shattering, but it helps.
Sunday, January 09, 2011
Saturday, January 01, 2011
Nearness to God
Another moment of inspiring realization. During a short time of conversational prayer tonight I realized that I'm no closer to God, no more intimate with God, no more pleasing to God, with me feeling better. With me experiencing my gifts and operating in them, I'm no closer to God than I was in my time of dispair and confusion with what's going on. It's an astonishing and suprising idea to me, but strikes me as profoundly true: that though I feel better and more actuated in my operating from a designed place of living with God, I'm no more closer or pleasing to God than I was when I felt confused and uncomfortable with where I was. This is simple, yet profound. I wish I could unpack it more, but there it is.
We're no more closer and pleasing to our Father when we're convinced of it, than when we're scared and unsure of it. That's amazing.
May You continue to teach me and hold me.
(Post addition: So what's it worth to be aware of God's nearness? Is there, therefore, any nearness to or farness from God? I do think so, but not in the same way I previously imagined. The nearness of God I pursue is 1) that I am aware of God's nearness for my pleasure and comfort, and 2) that I am open and honest with God in a way that He takes pleasure in: as I take pleasure in the nearness of my son as he snuggles in my lap.)
We're no more closer and pleasing to our Father when we're convinced of it, than when we're scared and unsure of it. That's amazing.
May You continue to teach me and hold me.
(Post addition: So what's it worth to be aware of God's nearness? Is there, therefore, any nearness to or farness from God? I do think so, but not in the same way I previously imagined. The nearness of God I pursue is 1) that I am aware of God's nearness for my pleasure and comfort, and 2) that I am open and honest with God in a way that He takes pleasure in: as I take pleasure in the nearness of my son as he snuggles in my lap.)
Thursday, December 30, 2010
Free to Love
This post, and probably many more fututure ones, will be more of a sharable diary entry. A way for me to record and remember parts of my journey. To testafy (insert southern accent).
It's been a very rough last several few months for more reasons than I care to now take the time to write. Suffice it to say, I've been questioning what difference I make. What difference church makes. What difference anyone can make. This has been one of my haunts during this season where the floor of my heart and head has fallen out from under my feet. I've lost a confidence I've had in many areas of my life. I think that's healthy in some ways, and not so much in others. Holding things lightly, with open hands so as to be teachable and gentle with others: good. Feeling like nothing I do matters and being paralized to move in any direction: not so good.
I've only got 5 minutes before getting the boys fed, so I'll try to fit this in quickly. Last night, through a sleepless time of prayer, I was intensely encouraged. I was praying for several people I hold in my heart. Picturing things for them, images I used to ask God to bless them by, and generally just desiring their encouragement and success. After about an hour of this for a few dozen people, I experienced my heart lightening and I myself was becoming intensely encouraged. It was a lightbulb momement for me realizing I could make people feel loved simply by thinking and praying for them. I didn't need to spend the face to face time that I wanted (and expected) inorder to love on them. I didn't need to fix and resolve everything I wanted to be fixed and resolved for them (which is something that I've been coming more to grips with lately: that I simply can't fix people like I can fix mechanisms or software). That partially sounds embarasing to admit that I even thought that. But there's a part of that motivation to heal, fix, resolve that I do think is good and right. The desire to see people healed: good. The expectation on yourself to heal them: not so good. I can't wait to pray for all the people I love more and I can't wait to let them know I'm praying for them. It's an outlet for me to make them feel loved cand cared for. I might not be solving their problems or spending time with them (both of which I would if I could), but I can make them feel loved and cared for simply by them knowing I'm thinking and praying for them often. That seems amazing to me right now. Like I was just given a present.
Another thing I feel like I learned through this experience is that I suspect this is part of what it means to not rely on my own flesh. To feel this encouragment and lifting of my heart come through time spent in prayer tells me something about the source of this strength I feel. The strength to love.
It's been a very rough last several few months for more reasons than I care to now take the time to write. Suffice it to say, I've been questioning what difference I make. What difference church makes. What difference anyone can make. This has been one of my haunts during this season where the floor of my heart and head has fallen out from under my feet. I've lost a confidence I've had in many areas of my life. I think that's healthy in some ways, and not so much in others. Holding things lightly, with open hands so as to be teachable and gentle with others: good. Feeling like nothing I do matters and being paralized to move in any direction: not so good.
I've only got 5 minutes before getting the boys fed, so I'll try to fit this in quickly. Last night, through a sleepless time of prayer, I was intensely encouraged. I was praying for several people I hold in my heart. Picturing things for them, images I used to ask God to bless them by, and generally just desiring their encouragement and success. After about an hour of this for a few dozen people, I experienced my heart lightening and I myself was becoming intensely encouraged. It was a lightbulb momement for me realizing I could make people feel loved simply by thinking and praying for them. I didn't need to spend the face to face time that I wanted (and expected) inorder to love on them. I didn't need to fix and resolve everything I wanted to be fixed and resolved for them (which is something that I've been coming more to grips with lately: that I simply can't fix people like I can fix mechanisms or software). That partially sounds embarasing to admit that I even thought that. But there's a part of that motivation to heal, fix, resolve that I do think is good and right. The desire to see people healed: good. The expectation on yourself to heal them: not so good. I can't wait to pray for all the people I love more and I can't wait to let them know I'm praying for them. It's an outlet for me to make them feel loved cand cared for. I might not be solving their problems or spending time with them (both of which I would if I could), but I can make them feel loved and cared for simply by them knowing I'm thinking and praying for them often. That seems amazing to me right now. Like I was just given a present.
Another thing I feel like I learned through this experience is that I suspect this is part of what it means to not rely on my own flesh. To feel this encouragment and lifting of my heart come through time spent in prayer tells me something about the source of this strength I feel. The strength to love.
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Wrapping Words Around "Righteousness"
The purpose of righteousness is to be in "good terms" with God. This is also the definition of righteouness. In wearing that lense, one can see how righteousness is completely enabled by God's choice for us to be in "good terms" with him, and at the same time constrained by our agreement and choice of him. Like the water well and the water valve, without the well's choice to provide water, no water would be possible, and without the valve's choice to allow water, no water would be actual.
Righteousness is not a matter of what good things one does or does not do in order to be on "good terms" with God. Righteousness is a matter of one communing with God, who is good. To commune with God is to live. This living is eternal living.
If you desire righteousness, let not your focus be on "what must I do?" Let your focus be on "with whom must I be?" Be with Jesus at all costs.
Righteousness is not a matter of what good things one does or does not do in order to be on "good terms" with God. Righteousness is a matter of one communing with God, who is good. To commune with God is to live. This living is eternal living.
If you desire righteousness, let not your focus be on "what must I do?" Let your focus be on "with whom must I be?" Be with Jesus at all costs.
Thursday, November 15, 2007
A Reflection on Theological Approach
A: "Is God the most powerful being?"
B: "Yes."
A: "Is it more powerful to take control of everything or relinquish control of some things?"
B: "To take control of everything."
A: "Then God takes control of everything."
The previous dialog displays a chain of thought that leads people to inaccurate theological understandings. We often carve for ourselves measuring sticks out of our own concepts of such attributes as power, glory, and might, to compare statements about God against. We will easily admit that God is the most powerful being, while just as easily assuming that our own current perception of "powerful" is complete and accurate. We overlook that we are assuming we have an infallible concept of attributes such as "power" and "glory." I am not yet convinced that " goodness" can be far removed from "truth," but I am, however, convinced that attributes such as "glorious," "powerful," and "mighty" are secondary to "truth" in the same way that "bright" and "warmth" are secondary to "light". We may have only a fuzzy understanding of what warmth is as nomads in an arctic climate, and would therefore be grossly mistaken if we were to measure what the sun was according to our understanding of the warmth of mittens or the brightness of a flame.
I believe it is more accurate to begin from a question of "is such a proposition the truest to associate with God" than from that of "is such a proposition the most glorious to a associate with God."
B: "Yes."
A: "Is it more powerful to take control of everything or relinquish control of some things?"
B: "To take control of everything."
A: "Then God takes control of everything."
The previous dialog displays a chain of thought that leads people to inaccurate theological understandings. We often carve for ourselves measuring sticks out of our own concepts of such attributes as power, glory, and might, to compare statements about God against. We will easily admit that God is the most powerful being, while just as easily assuming that our own current perception of "powerful" is complete and accurate. We overlook that we are assuming we have an infallible concept of attributes such as "power" and "glory." I am not yet convinced that " goodness" can be far removed from "truth," but I am, however, convinced that attributes such as "glorious," "powerful," and "mighty" are secondary to "truth" in the same way that "bright" and "warmth" are secondary to "light". We may have only a fuzzy understanding of what warmth is as nomads in an arctic climate, and would therefore be grossly mistaken if we were to measure what the sun was according to our understanding of the warmth of mittens or the brightness of a flame.
I believe it is more accurate to begin from a question of "is such a proposition the truest to associate with God" than from that of "is such a proposition the most glorious to a associate with God."
I do not, therefore, assume our current perception of "truth" is infallible, but I do think that we assume less that we have a complete and accurate understanding of it, and therefore take more care in examining how and why we approve a statement as true or not. We use many things when weighing a statement for its truth. For example: our current understanding of other things, our relationships and other experiences, and the relationships and experiences of others as heard or documented. We work at resolving our understanding of truth (changing and hopefully increasing it) by examining many things. It probably doesn't always happen, but I think too often, we leave our current concepts of power, glory, and might unchallenged - accepting the default posture of "our parents" (i.e. the present world age).
I'm sure Jesus would've made the best official ruler Isreal had ever seen to date, but that didn't stop Him from eluding them every time they tryed to make Him king. Those guys had no concept of the type of power He came to display.
Tuesday, November 06, 2007
Law is the Expression of Character
This is a thought that makes sense of some things I am seeing at the moment. I would apply this proposition to both the natural and judicial ways in which we use the word "law." "Natural Law," referring to the ways that we humans describe the consistency of the way we observe our world to work, and "Judicial Law," referring to the ways that we humans decide what consistent results will follow an action.
When something is consistently occurring, it is because someone is choosing consistently.
That might sound like a stretch with how we think about natural laws (that would be a fun discussion), but I'm mostly intrigued now with how we think about things like Wisdom and Truth.
Think about how we use the word "wisdom." If someone is wise, or if someone chooses wisely for example. What do we mean? We mean something like "a type of choice" or "a way of choosing" that is wise. Perhaps both based upon the way something is done and that things that result. Jesus is quoted by Matthew of saying "...wisdom is justified of her children." (KJV) "...wisdom is vindicated by her deeds." (NAS) That speaks to how someone might know that something is wise because of what results. The author of the book of Proverbs has much to say about "wisdom" and often personifies it. I'm not trying to be romantic, I actually think that it might be more accurate to model these concepts as expressions of someone's character. The mind bender here comes into play when we are considering what effects the mind of God have on matter, energy, and time. If John is right in saying, "and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being." (-John 1:3) regarding the person Jesus ("the Word became flesh" -John 1:14), then it can't be all that much of a stretch to think about those things [matter, energy, and time] as maintaining some connection to that someone who created them.
This would probably take a while to unpack, but I think what I'd like to put on the table for chewing on is that: when someone "follows wisdom," they are actually acting in accordance with someone else's character - someone who defines and dictates what is "wise."
When something is consistently occurring, it is because someone is choosing consistently.
That might sound like a stretch with how we think about natural laws (that would be a fun discussion), but I'm mostly intrigued now with how we think about things like Wisdom and Truth.
Think about how we use the word "wisdom." If someone is wise, or if someone chooses wisely for example. What do we mean? We mean something like "a type of choice" or "a way of choosing" that is wise. Perhaps both based upon the way something is done and that things that result. Jesus is quoted by Matthew of saying "...wisdom is justified of her children." (KJV) "...wisdom is vindicated by her deeds." (NAS) That speaks to how someone might know that something is wise because of what results. The author of the book of Proverbs has much to say about "wisdom" and often personifies it. I'm not trying to be romantic, I actually think that it might be more accurate to model these concepts as expressions of someone's character. The mind bender here comes into play when we are considering what effects the mind of God have on matter, energy, and time. If John is right in saying, "and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being." (-John 1:3) regarding the person Jesus ("the Word became flesh" -John 1:14), then it can't be all that much of a stretch to think about those things [matter, energy, and time] as maintaining some connection to that someone who created them.
This would probably take a while to unpack, but I think what I'd like to put on the table for chewing on is that: when someone "follows wisdom," they are actually acting in accordance with someone else's character - someone who defines and dictates what is "wise."
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
...Enough to be Dangerous
I've got 29 years of breathes lived so far - a good 12 of them where I've been aggressively pursuing learning of Jesus - the last 5 or so of which I've been bathing regularly in scripture (in a way that's more than just the sprinkling I've baptized myself with since I could read).
While doing my best at serving and equipping fellow betrothed believers as a part of a local church, I'm becoming more and more confident in who God is (i.e. that I'm seeing a clear and accurate picture of who God is). What I'm struck with at the moment is how simple His heart is. No, no, I'm not trying to pull off that cocky, somewhat condescending persuasion I sometimes pick-up from preachers trying to turn their amps up to 11 - hear me out.
I'm pretty much seeing, all throughout scripture, that God's heart and mind could pretty much just be understood as a Dad who wants a big family to enjoy all that He has with. Seriously, that's it. From Genesis-naked-in-the-garden to Revelation-awestruck-at-seas-of-crystal, I keep seeing that same strategy on God's part in relation to how He's interacting with humans: He wants us happy with Him, like a great-grampa at his family reunion - all his kids playing in the yard, music blasting, grills fired, stories recounted, good times.
I think parents and those in authority can relate to this: they just want folks to get along with each other. If that could be done without the judicial and executive branches of government, all the better. But in experience - that don't work so hot. What's the end of all that? For people to treat each other well; to love each other.
But after all those words, here's my point: The God of the Bible, Easy to Understand; The Bible, Not so Easy to Understand. This could ruffle some feathers, I'm sorry, that's really not my aim. I'm just trying to communicate an analogy which I think displays why we get so theologically messed up and confused scripturally.
Any musicians reading this? How about computer users? I suppose just about anyone who ever learned or is learning anything can relate to this. Have you ever learned "just enough" about something to be dangerous? That can be some shaky middle-ground: when you know just enough about something to start operating out of it, but not enough to troubleshoot things when they go wrong. It's like that place where you haven't quite gotten a handle on just how much of something you DON'T know. Perhaps that little bit of knowing something gets you too big for your britches, and you think you can run the whole marathon after learning to lace your boots. There's just a lot of time and content that our scriptures cover - multiple ages, multiple cultures - just about every tribe, tongue, people, and nation. That's a lot. He's a big God. Our history is a big history. This stuff isn't so easy to get after a quick read through.
I think it really helps that new believers have a pretty good sense that there's a lot they don't know - which really helps us rely on God's knowing how to take care of us. It's when we get into adolescence and think a driver's license grants us the wisdom and the right where things can get really rocky.
So why am I saying this? I suppose because I can, but also because I really think that it would help a lot of not-so-young believers to get tethered to their Good-Hearted Father by allowing themselves a lot of grace when it comes to their trying to resolve all their questions from experience and scripture. You guys should feel free to live a long time in that tension of unanswered questions, where you're just not sure why things look as messy as they do at times, all the while being affectionate with The Overseer of all things.
If you build your faith upon your understanding of the bible: not so stable. If you build you faith upon the God of the bible: stable. I hope that made sense - I'm not trying to do a switcheroo here. Be free to question and doubt and walk and love - all at the same time - God can really handle all that.
While doing my best at serving and equipping fellow betrothed believers as a part of a local church, I'm becoming more and more confident in who God is (i.e. that I'm seeing a clear and accurate picture of who God is). What I'm struck with at the moment is how simple His heart is. No, no, I'm not trying to pull off that cocky, somewhat condescending persuasion I sometimes pick-up from preachers trying to turn their amps up to 11 - hear me out.
I'm pretty much seeing, all throughout scripture, that God's heart and mind could pretty much just be understood as a Dad who wants a big family to enjoy all that He has with. Seriously, that's it. From Genesis-naked-in-the-garden to Revelation-awestruck-at-seas-of-crystal, I keep seeing that same strategy on God's part in relation to how He's interacting with humans: He wants us happy with Him, like a great-grampa at his family reunion - all his kids playing in the yard, music blasting, grills fired, stories recounted, good times.
I think parents and those in authority can relate to this: they just want folks to get along with each other. If that could be done without the judicial and executive branches of government, all the better. But in experience - that don't work so hot. What's the end of all that? For people to treat each other well; to love each other.
But after all those words, here's my point: The God of the Bible, Easy to Understand; The Bible, Not so Easy to Understand. This could ruffle some feathers, I'm sorry, that's really not my aim. I'm just trying to communicate an analogy which I think displays why we get so theologically messed up and confused scripturally.
Any musicians reading this? How about computer users? I suppose just about anyone who ever learned or is learning anything can relate to this. Have you ever learned "just enough" about something to be dangerous? That can be some shaky middle-ground: when you know just enough about something to start operating out of it, but not enough to troubleshoot things when they go wrong. It's like that place where you haven't quite gotten a handle on just how much of something you DON'T know. Perhaps that little bit of knowing something gets you too big for your britches, and you think you can run the whole marathon after learning to lace your boots. There's just a lot of time and content that our scriptures cover - multiple ages, multiple cultures - just about every tribe, tongue, people, and nation. That's a lot. He's a big God. Our history is a big history. This stuff isn't so easy to get after a quick read through.
I think it really helps that new believers have a pretty good sense that there's a lot they don't know - which really helps us rely on God's knowing how to take care of us. It's when we get into adolescence and think a driver's license grants us the wisdom and the right where things can get really rocky.
So why am I saying this? I suppose because I can, but also because I really think that it would help a lot of not-so-young believers to get tethered to their Good-Hearted Father by allowing themselves a lot of grace when it comes to their trying to resolve all their questions from experience and scripture. You guys should feel free to live a long time in that tension of unanswered questions, where you're just not sure why things look as messy as they do at times, all the while being affectionate with The Overseer of all things.
If you build your faith upon your understanding of the bible: not so stable. If you build you faith upon the God of the bible: stable. I hope that made sense - I'm not trying to do a switcheroo here. Be free to question and doubt and walk and love - all at the same time - God can really handle all that.
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Why Wisdom?
Here's a sharing of some stuff that seems to be coming more clearly and closely into view. On one hand, I'm mostly just going to say, "This thing that's true is actually, really true." On the other, I just don't care enough to not spew what's got me really excited at the moment.
Where I'll end up is at some version of "Wisdom is good. Fearing/revering God is good. Humility is good." I think I'm just seeing a bit more clearly the gears that connect fear and humility with wisdom: how this works.
I'm not sure how well I'll be able to paint this blueprint in words, but here goes…
There's some huge correlation between one's posture of heart (as in, how willing one is to love another) and to how able they are to see things like they are (i.e. know what is true). I think this has to do with the fact that the same "person" who is at the steering wheel of our emotions and intentions is the same as the one who steers our minds. Therefore, if you desire/intend to do someone harm, then you will use your mind/thinking, as a worker uses a tool, to produce such. Essentially, you will "warp" or "bend" your reasoning (or stringing together of facts/events) in order to arrive, not at what is the most true, but at what is the most in line with your desires. This produces the "blindness of un-love." I think this is some of what Jesus was speaking about when He said, "The eye is the lamp of the body. If your eyes are good, your whole body will be full of light. But if your eyes are bad, your whole body will be full of darkness."
Are you willing to see good with your eye? If so, you will see things clearly as they are. If not, you will go blindly.
If you can see this connection, then you may also be amazed at noting that this wisdom of seeing things as they are is not a function then of how clever you are, (one's intelligence; sharpness of the hardware of the mind) but a function of what posture you choose to set your heart towards. I love that. This totally lends itself to showing how God may have designed in a sort of "safe-guard" against stuff that's not good, i.e. a way to put a scalpel in the hands of a surgeon and not a serial killer (even though they can and do get their hands on them).
What I'm seeing is that God seems to look within His children's hearts and give good gifts according to what they will do with them. He put a boy who is really good at looking after a bunch of sheep in charge of ruling the nation that is called by His Name. He put the big guns in the hands of the good-hearted small fries. Here's where I'm basically saying that it is very good to be humble, and God, seeing you, will feel compelled to exalt you. It is very good to fear God (not as in "Oh, look at that mean, scary deity who gets a kick out of spooking all his little-faith-lings," but as in, "Keep in mind that the hot chick you're going out with tonight has an armed and very protective father waiting at home for the news of the night."), and God, seeing you, will give you the ability to make choices that effect a lot of His children. It is very good to seek wisdom, and you will know and trust The Creator, the maker of life pleasure, and He will share this with you.
If I would sketch a flow-chart of this, it would look something like (see above)...
So here's the change that I'd like for you to leave with in your pocket: pay close attention to how you direct your intentions. Take seriously what you set your heart on. God is the designer of this machine we call the human being, and He designed it well. Pretend that God does actually hear all the stuff that flies between your ears. No, better yet, pretend that everyone else can (or at least will) hear what thoughts you think of them, and therefore, even if it's hard and goes against the grain of what you're now like, wield your will like an artist beautifying a dusty canvas. This is one of the awesome ways in which we were created in the likeness of God: we have the power to create, out of nothing, choices. Choices that effect the present in it's singular impact, and the future in it's impact on the choice maker themself.
Where I'll end up is at some version of "Wisdom is good. Fearing/revering God is good. Humility is good." I think I'm just seeing a bit more clearly the gears that connect fear and humility with wisdom: how this works.
I'm not sure how well I'll be able to paint this blueprint in words, but here goes…
There's some huge correlation between one's posture of heart (as in, how willing one is to love another) and to how able they are to see things like they are (i.e. know what is true). I think this has to do with the fact that the same "person" who is at the steering wheel of our emotions and intentions is the same as the one who steers our minds. Therefore, if you desire/intend to do someone harm, then you will use your mind/thinking, as a worker uses a tool, to produce such. Essentially, you will "warp" or "bend" your reasoning (or stringing together of facts/events) in order to arrive, not at what is the most true, but at what is the most in line with your desires. This produces the "blindness of un-love." I think this is some of what Jesus was speaking about when He said, "The eye is the lamp of the body. If your eyes are good, your whole body will be full of light. But if your eyes are bad, your whole body will be full of darkness."
Are you willing to see good with your eye? If so, you will see things clearly as they are. If not, you will go blindly.
If you can see this connection, then you may also be amazed at noting that this wisdom of seeing things as they are is not a function then of how clever you are, (one's intelligence; sharpness of the hardware of the mind) but a function of what posture you choose to set your heart towards. I love that. This totally lends itself to showing how God may have designed in a sort of "safe-guard" against stuff that's not good, i.e. a way to put a scalpel in the hands of a surgeon and not a serial killer (even though they can and do get their hands on them).
What I'm seeing is that God seems to look within His children's hearts and give good gifts according to what they will do with them. He put a boy who is really good at looking after a bunch of sheep in charge of ruling the nation that is called by His Name. He put the big guns in the hands of the good-hearted small fries. Here's where I'm basically saying that it is very good to be humble, and God, seeing you, will feel compelled to exalt you. It is very good to fear God (not as in "Oh, look at that mean, scary deity who gets a kick out of spooking all his little-faith-lings," but as in, "Keep in mind that the hot chick you're going out with tonight has an armed and very protective father waiting at home for the news of the night."), and God, seeing you, will give you the ability to make choices that effect a lot of His children. It is very good to seek wisdom, and you will know and trust The Creator, the maker of life pleasure, and He will share this with you.
If I would sketch a flow-chart of this, it would look something like (see above)...
So here's the change that I'd like for you to leave with in your pocket: pay close attention to how you direct your intentions. Take seriously what you set your heart on. God is the designer of this machine we call the human being, and He designed it well. Pretend that God does actually hear all the stuff that flies between your ears. No, better yet, pretend that everyone else can (or at least will) hear what thoughts you think of them, and therefore, even if it's hard and goes against the grain of what you're now like, wield your will like an artist beautifying a dusty canvas. This is one of the awesome ways in which we were created in the likeness of God: we have the power to create, out of nothing, choices. Choices that effect the present in it's singular impact, and the future in it's impact on the choice maker themself.
Thursday, October 12, 2006
Consistency vs. Contingency
I'd like to communicate how our relationship with God, our Father, is different than our relationship with the World. One way to do this is by showing how a "law of nature" is different than a "judicial law". A "law of nature" is not law because a man mandates a system to "need to" operate as it does, but rather because a man observes a system to operate as it does, and in as much as it operates so "consistently," it is categorized as a "law." Similarly, what we hear communicated through scripture is how our relationship with God, and actions which proceed from such, is consistent with such a relationship. Conversely, man determines how a relationship "ought" or "need" to operate, and we dictate that a relationship is "contingent" upon a dependent. The "law of gravity" and "judicial law" displays such a difference.
When we speak of the consistency of the "law of gravity," we are merely concluding from observation that, when a body of mass is within the sphere of influence of another body of mass, there consistently is an attraction which results. It can't be spoken of accurately as something which "needs" to be so, but as something which "is" so (or is seen/experienced to be so). When we speak of the contingency of a "judicial law," we are defining how a relationship will operate, because we mandate it to be so.
Our actions will be Christ-like when we come into relationship with God, not because they "need" to be so in order to be in relationship with God, but rather, because that "will" be so when in relationship with God. Similarly, when an apple is within the context of our nature, it will experience gravity, not because it "needs" to in order to be body of mass, but because it "will" do so when it is within our environment.
Our right standing with God is not contingent upon our right actions with those of the world, but rather, our right actions with those of the world are consistent with our right standing with God. If you love God, you will love your brothers. You need not love your brothers in order for God to love you, but rather, your love for your brothers will be expressed when you are, in fact, loving God.
This litmus test is not given for us to judge our brothers' relationships by, but to discern our own relationship according to.
When we speak of the consistency of the "law of gravity," we are merely concluding from observation that, when a body of mass is within the sphere of influence of another body of mass, there consistently is an attraction which results. It can't be spoken of accurately as something which "needs" to be so, but as something which "is" so (or is seen/experienced to be so). When we speak of the contingency of a "judicial law," we are defining how a relationship will operate, because we mandate it to be so.
Our actions will be Christ-like when we come into relationship with God, not because they "need" to be so in order to be in relationship with God, but rather, because that "will" be so when in relationship with God. Similarly, when an apple is within the context of our nature, it will experience gravity, not because it "needs" to in order to be body of mass, but because it "will" do so when it is within our environment.
Our right standing with God is not contingent upon our right actions with those of the world, but rather, our right actions with those of the world are consistent with our right standing with God. If you love God, you will love your brothers. You need not love your brothers in order for God to love you, but rather, your love for your brothers will be expressed when you are, in fact, loving God.
This litmus test is not given for us to judge our brothers' relationships by, but to discern our own relationship according to.
Monday, August 21, 2006
Crowded Intimacy
I've been nudged to sit back down into a deeper place of intimacy with Jesus. I've been reminded that my individual abiding in Jesus is the best place for my heart and everything else (the stuff I do) to come out of. Like ingredients in an entree, or nutrients in the soil, the more "abided" on is in Jesus, the better what results. If intimacy with Jesus would be categorized as one step in the process of your day, it would have to be set apart as having al together different effect on the day than any other process. Like, there's a number of ways to move your body throughout the day, but there's one movement, that of moving food from your plate to your mouth, that effects all other movements: nourishing all other movements.
So after a crazy construction season in my life, I've been feeling the urge to revisit how "abided" I am, and some interesting thoughts surfaced this go around while studying scripture with some friends over breakfast.
Looking at John 15, when Jesus is talking about abiding in Him, I was caught off guard by what seemed to me to be the "grunt" of HOW abiding was to happen. I was expecting to hear about times of individual intimacy, really pressing in by yourself to seek God's heart and mind, about how to bask in Jesus. Whatever it was, I was expecting it to look like one branch really sinking deep into the vine. Instead, I got a different flavor. What I heard was something like, "Abiding in me looks like you loving people." It was this connected string of abiding in Jesus meaning obeying His commandments, and His commandment is to love on another.
It seems to me like, however being REALLY close to Jesus looks like, DEEPLY abiding in God, you will be doing this through being REALLY loving to people, and DEEPLY connected to others. I think this has to do with Him being Father to all people, so you loving your brother IS loving your Father. Think about how someone best compliments or builds you up. For me this is right in line with how when people seek to encourage my wife or my sons it is as much of a (if not more) effective way of encouraging me. Do you want to love me? Love my wife and kids. Give them gifts; flatter them. No friend of mine who seeks to honor me will do so to the detriment of my family - it's contradictory.
Do you want to love The Father? Love the sons and daughters of The Father. Love The Father's Bride.
So after a crazy construction season in my life, I've been feeling the urge to revisit how "abided" I am, and some interesting thoughts surfaced this go around while studying scripture with some friends over breakfast.
Looking at John 15, when Jesus is talking about abiding in Him, I was caught off guard by what seemed to me to be the "grunt" of HOW abiding was to happen. I was expecting to hear about times of individual intimacy, really pressing in by yourself to seek God's heart and mind, about how to bask in Jesus. Whatever it was, I was expecting it to look like one branch really sinking deep into the vine. Instead, I got a different flavor. What I heard was something like, "Abiding in me looks like you loving people." It was this connected string of abiding in Jesus meaning obeying His commandments, and His commandment is to love on another.
It seems to me like, however being REALLY close to Jesus looks like, DEEPLY abiding in God, you will be doing this through being REALLY loving to people, and DEEPLY connected to others. I think this has to do with Him being Father to all people, so you loving your brother IS loving your Father. Think about how someone best compliments or builds you up. For me this is right in line with how when people seek to encourage my wife or my sons it is as much of a (if not more) effective way of encouraging me. Do you want to love me? Love my wife and kids. Give them gifts; flatter them. No friend of mine who seeks to honor me will do so to the detriment of my family - it's contradictory.
Do you want to love The Father? Love the sons and daughters of The Father. Love The Father's Bride.
Tuesday, June 20, 2006
Working It In
"Submit therefore to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you." -James (James 4:7)
This is just an interesting thought (a suspicion) that comes from a few experiences, a recent one in particular:
I can image the enemy as a risky individual, tempting his own fate, trying to pluck possessions from the grasps of humans. Imagine you have an investment in something; something you've put most of your resources in for the last 55 years of your life. You've built a nest egg. You've committed yourself. Imagine the property you've been investing in for the last 55 years of your life - where all your money has gone into - was actually owned by someone else. You've started down this financial path years ago, hoping that the heirs of the property would not reclaim this invaluable plot of land. You've been hoping that the rightful claimers would continue to be unaware of their wealth. Here's the crux: what would you be like, you crafty scoundrel, when coercing the heirs? When you, on occasion, would meet face-to-face. You only stand on a lie, your claim is invalid, so you will push hard, but not too hard. Too hard, and your ground will crumble beneath you, and they may actually become more convinced, more confident of the value of that which is theirs. You must distract, not go too direct.
This thought came when I just remembered that I had had this crazy intense struggling within myself last week. There was this thought, this destructive thought, that seemed really attractive to me for a few minutes to nourish/to think on, but decided to stiff-arm it and suffocate the flame. At the time, it was so intense and attractive, I thought it was going to be something I'd have to work at for a while. I thought, "Oh, no, here we go now. Here comes a wave of this thing to battle for a bit." But I just remembered: I'm done with it. It didn't last but for minutes. I snuffed it right out.
Thinking about this, I get the feeling that the enemy is tempting his own fate when he tempts us sometimes: like trying to pull quills from a person's writhing arm. If your not careful, you may actually push them further in as opposed to get them out. These things work themselves in with barbs that go against the grain. Have you ever tried to get out a wood sliver and ended up pushing it deeper? I think the enemy get confounded, like a guy futzing with a door hinge and pinches his fingers. The last thing he wants is a more trusting and dependent relationship between humans and God, but that's often what results from human men and women choosing to concede to Jesus's defense of themselves rather than them defending themselves.
This is just an interesting thought (a suspicion) that comes from a few experiences, a recent one in particular:
I can image the enemy as a risky individual, tempting his own fate, trying to pluck possessions from the grasps of humans. Imagine you have an investment in something; something you've put most of your resources in for the last 55 years of your life. You've built a nest egg. You've committed yourself. Imagine the property you've been investing in for the last 55 years of your life - where all your money has gone into - was actually owned by someone else. You've started down this financial path years ago, hoping that the heirs of the property would not reclaim this invaluable plot of land. You've been hoping that the rightful claimers would continue to be unaware of their wealth. Here's the crux: what would you be like, you crafty scoundrel, when coercing the heirs? When you, on occasion, would meet face-to-face. You only stand on a lie, your claim is invalid, so you will push hard, but not too hard. Too hard, and your ground will crumble beneath you, and they may actually become more convinced, more confident of the value of that which is theirs. You must distract, not go too direct.
This thought came when I just remembered that I had had this crazy intense struggling within myself last week. There was this thought, this destructive thought, that seemed really attractive to me for a few minutes to nourish/to think on, but decided to stiff-arm it and suffocate the flame. At the time, it was so intense and attractive, I thought it was going to be something I'd have to work at for a while. I thought, "Oh, no, here we go now. Here comes a wave of this thing to battle for a bit." But I just remembered: I'm done with it. It didn't last but for minutes. I snuffed it right out.
Thinking about this, I get the feeling that the enemy is tempting his own fate when he tempts us sometimes: like trying to pull quills from a person's writhing arm. If your not careful, you may actually push them further in as opposed to get them out. These things work themselves in with barbs that go against the grain. Have you ever tried to get out a wood sliver and ended up pushing it deeper? I think the enemy get confounded, like a guy futzing with a door hinge and pinches his fingers. The last thing he wants is a more trusting and dependent relationship between humans and God, but that's often what results from human men and women choosing to concede to Jesus's defense of themselves rather than them defending themselves.
Monday, June 19, 2006
It's On...
"He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him." -Jesus (John 3:36)
The Greek word translated here as "abides" (the transliterated word "meno") can be understood as meaning: to remain; to not depart; to continue to be present; to continue to be.
"He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil." -Jesus (John 3:18-19)
It seems here that on "Judgment Day" it will not be so much an action or judgment that God will do that will result in final separation from Himself, as it will be a final acquittal that will occur to remove that wrath which would have otherwise remained. It's not as much that we have to be careful when walking around to not catch a cold (wearing masks and gloves and taking injections), as it is that we've already got the bug and need a dose of meds.
We don't need to wait for it to come: it's on.
When did things get like this?
The Greek word translated here as "abides" (the transliterated word "meno") can be understood as meaning: to remain; to not depart; to continue to be present; to continue to be.
"He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil." -Jesus (John 3:18-19)
It seems here that on "Judgment Day" it will not be so much an action or judgment that God will do that will result in final separation from Himself, as it will be a final acquittal that will occur to remove that wrath which would have otherwise remained. It's not as much that we have to be careful when walking around to not catch a cold (wearing masks and gloves and taking injections), as it is that we've already got the bug and need a dose of meds.
We don't need to wait for it to come: it's on.
When did things get like this?
Monday, June 05, 2006
A Good Deal
Some men brought to him a paralytic, lying on a mat. When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, "Take heart, son; your sins are forgiven." At this, some of the teachers of the law said to themselves, "This fellow is blaspheming!" Knowing their thoughts, Jesus said, "Why do you entertain evil thoughts in your hearts? Which is easier: to say, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, 'Get up and walk'? But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins..." Then he said to the paralytic, "Get up, take your mat and go home." -Jesus (Matthew 9:2-7)
“Do not be afraid, little flock, for your Father has been pleased to give you the kingdom.” –Jesus (Luke 12:32)
“However, do not rejoice that the spirits submit to you, but rejoice that your names are written in heaven.” –Jesus (Luke 10:20)
It seems like God doesn’t assume it should impress us if we heal the sick or cast out demons. I can imagine the perplexed look on Jesus’s face when I’d be getting all excited about the amazing Jesus-type stuff I’ve accomplished, “Not like that’s not wonderful,” I could see in His face, “but that’s all toppings.” It’s like a starved man coming back from a desperate journey across a parched plain: how narrowly he escaped death, and at the sight of the nourishing banquet placed before him, his mind is reeling at the prospect of getting to use silverware once again. It’s all well and good, but brother, you nearly died! How exactly the food gets from plate to mouth is shadowed by the reality of any nourishment at all!
I think Jesus takes our names being written in the Book of Life as a good deal for the nearly dead.
“Do not be afraid, little flock, for your Father has been pleased to give you the kingdom.” –Jesus (Luke 12:32)
“However, do not rejoice that the spirits submit to you, but rejoice that your names are written in heaven.” –Jesus (Luke 10:20)
It seems like God doesn’t assume it should impress us if we heal the sick or cast out demons. I can imagine the perplexed look on Jesus’s face when I’d be getting all excited about the amazing Jesus-type stuff I’ve accomplished, “Not like that’s not wonderful,” I could see in His face, “but that’s all toppings.” It’s like a starved man coming back from a desperate journey across a parched plain: how narrowly he escaped death, and at the sight of the nourishing banquet placed before him, his mind is reeling at the prospect of getting to use silverware once again. It’s all well and good, but brother, you nearly died! How exactly the food gets from plate to mouth is shadowed by the reality of any nourishment at all!
I think Jesus takes our names being written in the Book of Life as a good deal for the nearly dead.
A Strange Suffering
You are aware of unseen beings, and you know their realm is within what you call spiritual. Some of these beings you know to oppose you and others you love, you call these being who oppose you enemies. You have the authority over them, the ability to command them.
Who are you? No, not what's your name, this isn't intended as a jeopardy question. Imagine with me that this was YOUR reality. If you added that facet to your present existence, that YOU, who you are right now, was able to see and command beings who opposed you and those you love, how would you respond to them?
Of what sort are you? What would your tone be with them? How quickly would you act? How impassioned would you get? What would you command of them? Would you allow them to speak? to address you? to ask of you? Would you listen?
I have observed a peculiar response from God to His enemies within scripture. Within the book of Job, God dialogs with Satan and agrees to allow Satan to have his way with God's servant Job. As recorded within the Gospels, Jesus is addressed by legions of demons possessing a man, who ask of Him to be cast into a herd of pigs, and Jesus says, "Go."
What heart must you have, if all authority has been given to you, and you endure your enemy's request? Who are you, Father?
Who are you? No, not what's your name, this isn't intended as a jeopardy question. Imagine with me that this was YOUR reality. If you added that facet to your present existence, that YOU, who you are right now, was able to see and command beings who opposed you and those you love, how would you respond to them?
Of what sort are you? What would your tone be with them? How quickly would you act? How impassioned would you get? What would you command of them? Would you allow them to speak? to address you? to ask of you? Would you listen?
I have observed a peculiar response from God to His enemies within scripture. Within the book of Job, God dialogs with Satan and agrees to allow Satan to have his way with God's servant Job. As recorded within the Gospels, Jesus is addressed by legions of demons possessing a man, who ask of Him to be cast into a herd of pigs, and Jesus says, "Go."
What heart must you have, if all authority has been given to you, and you endure your enemy's request? Who are you, Father?
Tuesday, May 30, 2006
Father's Heart
Fathers, what then: when your sons are wounded? When your sons are hurting, what then?
What hurt and anger you must feel, when it's your own blood that's wounded.
Fathers, what then: when it's your son that does the wounding? When your son is the murder and the thief, what then?
What shame and hurt you must feel, when the flesh of your flesh is the transgressor.
Fathers, what then: when your sons hurt your sons? When your household is destroyed by those within, what then?
What grief you must know, when all of those who are cut and all of those who do the cutting are bone of your bone.
What if your love for your wounded son was your love for your son who did the wounding?
Brothers, why do we rape our sisters? When will I cease to wound you, my siblings? I seek the day I drop the knife and my family gathers to heal each other - to bring life to our dead parts.
While today is still today, I'm glad I'm not the Father. I'm glad I know not of the depth of that suffering. How slow you are to judge, for the sake of your heart for those, your children, who do the hurting. How patiently you endure.
What hurt and anger you must feel, when it's your own blood that's wounded.
Fathers, what then: when it's your son that does the wounding? When your son is the murder and the thief, what then?
What shame and hurt you must feel, when the flesh of your flesh is the transgressor.
Fathers, what then: when your sons hurt your sons? When your household is destroyed by those within, what then?
What grief you must know, when all of those who are cut and all of those who do the cutting are bone of your bone.
What if your love for your wounded son was your love for your son who did the wounding?
Brothers, why do we rape our sisters? When will I cease to wound you, my siblings? I seek the day I drop the knife and my family gathers to heal each other - to bring life to our dead parts.
While today is still today, I'm glad I'm not the Father. I'm glad I know not of the depth of that suffering. How slow you are to judge, for the sake of your heart for those, your children, who do the hurting. How patiently you endure.
Friday, April 07, 2006
End of Truth
A man chose a path which seemed better than its alternatives, clean and bright and full of life. The path was pleasant and proved a wise choice. Along the way he met a companion to travel with, whose company proved far more pleasant than any path without it. His traveling from then on became far less about the path beneath him and far more about the companion about him.
I do believe that God is true and can therefore withstand inquisition. However, while I also love truth, I do not honestly feel motivated to rebuild the foundations of my belief in God when its legitimacy is challenged. This lack of motivation could be the result of fear, if either God was untrue or if my belief in God as true was without full [or “enough”] confidence. This lack of motivation could also be the disconnect between the vehicles of Truth and of God, as ends in themselves.
There are two roads one can walk by that will end at God: Truth and Goodness.
If one seeks for that which is true for the sake of Truth (regardless of what one may find to be true), one will come to know The Existing One, God.
However, once one travels by way of Truth to God, they will come to know why the road is to be traveled, and may [without embarrassment] abandon traveling for the sake of the road for traveling for the sake of Him who the road lead to.
The end/goal/destination of Truth is not Truth itself [that which is true], but Him who is true, God.
I do believe that God is true and can therefore withstand inquisition. However, while I also love truth, I do not honestly feel motivated to rebuild the foundations of my belief in God when its legitimacy is challenged. This lack of motivation could be the result of fear, if either God was untrue or if my belief in God as true was without full [or “enough”] confidence. This lack of motivation could also be the disconnect between the vehicles of Truth and of God, as ends in themselves.
There are two roads one can walk by that will end at God: Truth and Goodness.
If one seeks for that which is true for the sake of Truth (regardless of what one may find to be true), one will come to know The Existing One, God.
However, once one travels by way of Truth to God, they will come to know why the road is to be traveled, and may [without embarrassment] abandon traveling for the sake of the road for traveling for the sake of Him who the road lead to.
The end/goal/destination of Truth is not Truth itself [that which is true], but Him who is true, God.
Friday, March 17, 2006
Solenoid
"But from there you will seek the LORD your God, and you will find Him if you search for Him with all your heart and all your soul." (Deuteronomy 4:29)
There are several questions that approach the issue regarding why it seems difficult to know God? Why does it not seem "so bad" to do things that are spoken of with great distaste from God through the prophets? Is every "not-so-bad" non-believer really headed for hell? Why are we required to search for Him with "all" our hearts and souls? Why so much work? Why would not "most," or even "some," be all that's required? There are several ways to voice this apparent inconsistency in character between a God desiring all men to know him (1 Timothy 2:4), and yet who requires so much.
I suspect a sufficient response may be described in terms of the operation of a solenoid: a small switch responsible for triggering a larger switch. A human choosing to drink alcohol in the presence of others can display this effect. If one wishes not to become sexually involved with one with whom there is mutual attraction, the choice to partake in a substance that decreases one's inhibitions may effect all other choices while under such a state. The former choice effects the latter. Similarly, when driving over sloped terrain: the possibility of stopping at the top of the hill may diminish as one increases in speed moving towards the bottom. The frustrating response, "You should have thought of that before" comes to mind.
I think it entirely possible, even likely, that this principle may be present in the issue regarding why we must seek God with "all" of our hearts and souls in order to find Him. In the same way that our affinity to alcoholism is affected previous to our making any decisions at all, by virtue of our parents being alcoholic, our affinity to being numb towards things outside of the character of God may have been affected previous to our making any decisions at all.
Perhaps our hearts and souls were once undivided from His, and no amount of searching was needed for the finding. Perhaps after innumerable displacements from His character, one's entire effort of searching is required for finding. Perhaps it is not the magnitude of the distance which is the requirement, but the position of the destination (yes). Once the party has ended, and "home" becomes everyone's aim, some take more coffee than others for the drive, and some not at all. I propose "all" of one searching may not be so drastic an effort the more one has found Who God is.
There are several questions that approach the issue regarding why it seems difficult to know God? Why does it not seem "so bad" to do things that are spoken of with great distaste from God through the prophets? Is every "not-so-bad" non-believer really headed for hell? Why are we required to search for Him with "all" our hearts and souls? Why so much work? Why would not "most," or even "some," be all that's required? There are several ways to voice this apparent inconsistency in character between a God desiring all men to know him (1 Timothy 2:4), and yet who requires so much.
I suspect a sufficient response may be described in terms of the operation of a solenoid: a small switch responsible for triggering a larger switch. A human choosing to drink alcohol in the presence of others can display this effect. If one wishes not to become sexually involved with one with whom there is mutual attraction, the choice to partake in a substance that decreases one's inhibitions may effect all other choices while under such a state. The former choice effects the latter. Similarly, when driving over sloped terrain: the possibility of stopping at the top of the hill may diminish as one increases in speed moving towards the bottom. The frustrating response, "You should have thought of that before" comes to mind.
I think it entirely possible, even likely, that this principle may be present in the issue regarding why we must seek God with "all" of our hearts and souls in order to find Him. In the same way that our affinity to alcoholism is affected previous to our making any decisions at all, by virtue of our parents being alcoholic, our affinity to being numb towards things outside of the character of God may have been affected previous to our making any decisions at all.
Perhaps our hearts and souls were once undivided from His, and no amount of searching was needed for the finding. Perhaps after innumerable displacements from His character, one's entire effort of searching is required for finding. Perhaps it is not the magnitude of the distance which is the requirement, but the position of the destination (yes). Once the party has ended, and "home" becomes everyone's aim, some take more coffee than others for the drive, and some not at all. I propose "all" of one searching may not be so drastic an effort the more one has found Who God is.
Protect and Serve
The primary purpose of the Law is to protect others. It does this by condemning the offender. The Law proceeded from a just heart, as thought from the heart, words from the mind, the spoken from the unspoken, seen from the unseen. It is a snap-shot, a cross-section, a projection; the 2-dimensional from the 3-dimensional.
What is righteousness? What is right standing? We commonly (and appropriately) think of this within the context of the judicial system, according to the Law. But there is a fuller, deeper, richer, clearer understanding to be had of this. The right standing is according to the Law, yes, but it is to/concerning the Law giver. The end is not the Law, the Law is a just expression towards attaining to the heart of the Law giver: to stand, and this face to face. Yes, the heart of the Law giver is that we, His children, are made to stand before Him (which is our glory and to His praise). What is this end? The Father and His Children; the Husband and His Wife; Christ and His Church.
What components are necessary for this goal? The face-ward posture of both parties. If this goal is not reached, why is it not reached? Either or both parties must be hardened; must turn their backs and look elsewhere. If this goal is failed, it is not because God has turned aside, for by His own Hand has he accomplished the just requirements of the Law. We will stand because God is able to make us stand.
What is righteousness? What is right standing? We commonly (and appropriately) think of this within the context of the judicial system, according to the Law. But there is a fuller, deeper, richer, clearer understanding to be had of this. The right standing is according to the Law, yes, but it is to/concerning the Law giver. The end is not the Law, the Law is a just expression towards attaining to the heart of the Law giver: to stand, and this face to face. Yes, the heart of the Law giver is that we, His children, are made to stand before Him (which is our glory and to His praise). What is this end? The Father and His Children; the Husband and His Wife; Christ and His Church.
What components are necessary for this goal? The face-ward posture of both parties. If this goal is not reached, why is it not reached? Either or both parties must be hardened; must turn their backs and look elsewhere. If this goal is failed, it is not because God has turned aside, for by His own Hand has he accomplished the just requirements of the Law. We will stand because God is able to make us stand.
Beautiful Blindness
What is the attraction of a "blind faith?" I do admit to see some glimmer, though I must also admit I take it to be of the same sort as costume jewelry. I suspect that the majority of the instances where one comes across a claim to take God to be who you have not come to know He is (yet and/or yourself), stems from the claim-giver's fear and unbelief (for surely if one says a thing louder and more confident, it must validate its validity; to think so highly of your will as to insist it's potency can effect a truth; I now recall as a child feeling and acting as if to shut my eyes hard enough was to dissolve the obstruction to my will.) Is it not so clear that our projections of a Good God may go no further than the screen of our Imagination? Our God knows our minds; who we know Him to be. Surely there can be times where we can take Him to be both who He is and who we have not known Him (through experience) to be. And this is faith, and this is trust. But I ask, faith as what? Trust in whom? We have not trusted ourselves into our cultural context; we are born into Christian homes as others are born into Law homes. Why should we expect/desire to take our culture's word for who God is anymore than we should expect/desire other's to trust theirs? It is not trust in our doctrine that will fulfill the requirements of the law, neither trust in our parent's upbringing, nor our culture's accurate depiction of their creator. It is the definer, enactor, and fulfiller of the law that does Himself, and who knows our minds. Surely He does not now expect of us what we are not now?
What is the attraction of a "blind faith?" It is to propose and assume that our God desires us to know what we do not, to take Him to be who we do not know Him to be. And this is balanced upon fear; we resist challenging the assumption for fear it is true, for if it is, such challenging would negate its "blindness." This knowing is trusting. This trusting is incurred either associatively (concerning God's Being through other human beings) or experientially (concerning God's Being through our human being).
I reject blind faith. This is too strong, though. I reject that God desires our blindness of faith (even in Him). I must concede that it is a good thing to come into light by way of darkness, to sight by way of blindness (but, "by way of" might be better expressed "before"). It is a good thing to come to God any way one can, but once you find He is not hard of hearing, stop shouting. It is an insult to continue on playing Marco-Polo once you find your companion to have been waiting all this time at the table. Eat with Him.
If you do not will to know God is Good, you will not so know Him.
If you will to know God is Good, you will know He is so.
We come to know God by a cooperation of our wills with Truth.
We do not come to know God by an independence of our wills, which is a cooperation of our wills with Mis-Truth through maintained projection of our Imagination by our will.
How can one assist another to trust that God is Good? Not with clever rebuttals to ceaseless arguments (only a type of questioning and admittedly bias). How does one display that God is Good: by outwards expressions of actuated trust in His Goodness. Lead in following. Show how one follows well. But one must concede to not winning the battle in order to fight well.
What is the attraction of a "blind faith?" It is to propose and assume that our God desires us to know what we do not, to take Him to be who we do not know Him to be. And this is balanced upon fear; we resist challenging the assumption for fear it is true, for if it is, such challenging would negate its "blindness." This knowing is trusting. This trusting is incurred either associatively (concerning God's Being through other human beings) or experientially (concerning God's Being through our human being).
I reject blind faith. This is too strong, though. I reject that God desires our blindness of faith (even in Him). I must concede that it is a good thing to come into light by way of darkness, to sight by way of blindness (but, "by way of" might be better expressed "before"). It is a good thing to come to God any way one can, but once you find He is not hard of hearing, stop shouting. It is an insult to continue on playing Marco-Polo once you find your companion to have been waiting all this time at the table. Eat with Him.
If you do not will to know God is Good, you will not so know Him.
If you will to know God is Good, you will know He is so.
We come to know God by a cooperation of our wills with Truth.
We do not come to know God by an independence of our wills, which is a cooperation of our wills with Mis-Truth through maintained projection of our Imagination by our will.
How can one assist another to trust that God is Good? Not with clever rebuttals to ceaseless arguments (only a type of questioning and admittedly bias). How does one display that God is Good: by outwards expressions of actuated trust in His Goodness. Lead in following. Show how one follows well. But one must concede to not winning the battle in order to fight well.
Thursday, February 16, 2006
The Cry of The Church
Do you not know who you are, oh man? You see God rightly as high and mighty, but you do not know your place with him. He has made you to be His Companion. He calls you Brother, and Friend, and Wife, and Child. The Earth is cursed for now, and His face hidden from sight, but we will again walk with Him as Adam once did. Even now, we have access to His mind, His spirit, as we live on broken ground. As there is killing and profaning the beloved of God [Men] by Men (and His heart DOES break), even still do we have access to His thoughts (as Cain did). Oh, may the Earth be released! May His face no longer be hidden from sight! May we once again hear the sound of your feet as we walk with you! Glorious are you, God, to call us to yourself! Praiseworthy: to uphold our honor and count us as worthy of your suffering! May your name be praised by all lips as you are seated in Mercy above all! Precious, are you, Lamb of God, worthy of all praise and honor!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)