Escape From

Orthodoxy
Compiled from Essays by
Bob Couchenour
Between April 2006 and February 2009















Jesus said, "Those who seek should not stop seeking until they
find. When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are
disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all. [And after
they have reigned they will rest.]"
The Gospel of Thomas (2)





Preface
The essays presented in this book are a chronicle of sorts. Originally posted on-line
between April 2006 and February 2009, they trace my evolving thoughts as I allowed
myself to liberty to entertain ideas and concepts beyond the scope of "Orthodoxy" as
practiced in Western Church tradition. There are more essays that were written during
this period but they are not immediately concerned with the subject at hand. Yet, I cannot
claim that they are exclusive of or isolated from what was experienced in my thinking on
this spiritual journey. The focus of them at the time was not a matter of "spiritual"
interest, but rather political or economic. Saying this, I do believe there is no area of life
or thought which is true or isolated unto itself and one area affects the others. This is true
of what we experience in the realms of spirit and thought over against and in relation to
what is our experience in life as we are "materially" bound creatures. The question is,
"Was experience in the material creation the result or cause of what we comprehend in
our spiritual minds, or which came first, the chicken or the egg, or does it even matter?"
All of life and reality, however we may experience it, is connected, and there is no part
that is isolated unto itself. This I have come to believe over these recent years. That is not
to imply that we have figured it all out, that is by no means the case. But as we, the
human race, continue in our collective progression, we come closer to understanding the
reality that is our mutual experience. We progressively "know" more, more than we did
previously, and it is this unfolded knowledge which we realize as "truth". As we live in
the "truth" our individual and collective experience of reality broadens. We, the
enlightened, walk in newness of life.
Yet there are resistances to this "new truth", which really isn't new, but only
rediscovered. Religious doctrines and past traditions become chains and fetters binding us
to incomplete and often archaic modes of living and thought, virtual roadblocks without
detours, leaving humankind stuck, stunted and spiritually and materially retarded. The
end being death by spiritual suffocation, physically active, containers of enough half-
truth to sustain the appearance of life, yet never coming to a progressively fuller
knowledge.
Stephan Hoeller, a bishop in the Ecclesia Gnostica and lecturer and writer who has
influenced me greatly, has stated that in early Church history, when gnostic concepts
were declared heretical, there was no reason that the varying concepts could not have
evolved alongside one another, inferring a more mature and complete understanding of
truth, reality and Christ. This not being the case, those truths or concepts of truth and
reality once rejected are now coming to light and being rediscovered affording us in this
current age the knowledge and insights once hidden and/or denied us.
I am not so nave as to believe that the introduction of this "new" knowledge and truth
cannot or will not be contaminated, mutilated and manipulated into a plethora of various
dogma and doctrine, in too many cases, it will be. That is the nature of humanity
attempting to work out by entirely material "canal" means that which is a transcendent




spiritual truth, borne in, and out of and through our individual and collective unconscious.
Yet as more of the human race becomes collectively conscious the manifestation of
reality accordingly progresses and we evolve in our humanity and that which is of us
divine. We come to know and experience our relation to all reality.
I first began writing around 1985, from notes I had taken in the course of personal Bible
study begun around 1974 and following. The study continued through the early years of
marriage and raising a family. Eventually I was teaching adult Sunday school, not in a
small discussion group, which was the norm, but as a lecturer with questions and answers
following. This led to a thesis I wrote and self-published on the first eight chapters of the
book of Romans, focusing on chapter 6, 7 and 8. Most pastors I submitted this too were
reluctant to discuss its contents with me. I later learned that this was due to its "Gnostic"
nature, which at the time I was unaware was declared "heretical" by Orthodox accounts
and I do not believe the "men of God" approached were knowledgeable enough on the
subject, except to understand that gnostic concepts were "forbidden" and they would
rather not go there. Over the years I had continued to submit this for pastoral review,
none being willing to discuss or take issue with what I had written. These essays, though
separated from the original writing by some 25 years are essentially an outgrowth, a
natural progression or extension from that original "That Grace Might Reign" put forth in
1985.
From February 1974 through December 2005, I had been a faithful active participant in
any of a number of Orthodox Evangelical Fundamentalist communities. From
Charismatic-Baptist to Orthodox Presbyterian and back again to "Prophetic Charismatic",
I led my family with varying amounts of satisfaction and agreement in each. Each had
their strengths and weaknesses and I strongly believed and proselytized the fundamentals
of the Orthodox faith. Yet, I believed and recognized something more, something most
were either unable or unwilling to consider. I cannot with any absolute certainty make a
judgment as to which. All I can attest too is that the more dogmatically entrenched
anyone or in mass others were, the less freedom of thought was regarded as a virtue, the
more oppressive the environment of the fellowship became and the concept of freedom in
any of its myriad of possibilities diminished. Yet, in earlier, younger growths of
fellowship, as it were miracles seemed to abound and despite the seeming chaos and
disorder joy likewise abounded and fellowship was in no ways hindered, but flourished.
These seeming virtues and positive qualities I have long since ceased to attribute to the
"Orthodox" Christ, but rather believe they are the manifestation of the human spirit,
material and divine, experiencing a seldom realized release of the spirit, unburdened by
the cares of religion, dogma and doctrine.
I believe the human being is both spirit and material (physical, corporal). All that is
manifest as matter is first conceived in our minds. The realm of matter is the product of
what we conceive in our conscious mind, but that is not all that exists of reality. It is only
as our minds progressively grow in consciousness that more and progressively more of
reality becomes a manifestation of our individual experience. Yet there exists more than




we experience, our sense providing only a small window into that which is. My
experience of reality is undoubtedly different than yours; we do not conceive and
experience the same. You, or I , may be more perceptive of any of a number of things,
both those material and spiritual. But because one of us does not experience what the
other does, does not invalidate the reality and experience of the other. It may well be a
deficiency of perception exists and attention to the needs of growth applied in order to
circumvent the deficiency in question.
I realize that a position as I have stated opens the door to much in the way of
charlatanism, which is why I advocate the necessity of all to be educated as to their own
part and play in the reality of spiritual matters. Charlatans have abounded and still
abound even the more in this day. This is due to the ignorance of the masses of so called
believers, witnessing that with which they are not familiar and being sucked in via their
gullibility I.E. that which is a wonder must be of God, and attributing it to God, excusing
a laziness of mind not to apply oneself to "know" that which is in the self and is the
divine.
Stephan Hoeller, who I referred to above, made a statement to the effect that he believed
there is a move toward the secularization of much that is perceived as spiritually new or
recently revealed and he was not sure this is not a good thing. My own experience would
tend to support this. I have many contacts and friends across the gamut of religious
thought, including atheists, agnostics, those from virtually every world religion, not to
mention political ideologies, and among them are those exhibiting more than a little, and
most a great deal of spiritual insight, and to the chagrin of Church leaders most
surpassing even the most dedicated of Church goers.
Having said this I cannot unequivocally renounce the Church. I different areas to varying
degree, and certainly some more than others, the Church has made efforts to fulfill the
call of Christ as they perceive it in the Canon of Scriptures. Still there is no universal
benchmark and limited to the Bible scriptures as defined by Orthodoxy and each
denomination and often each individual congregation's pastor, a state of anything goes,
any which way we can make it go, the consensus of popular opinion or ruling elders
being the only real factor determining possibility.
Among the overall mass of Christian adherents there seems to me an inordinate lack of
knowledge of the history of what became their "Orthodox" faith, and if there is any, it is
spun with whatever makes the most favorable impression to the Orthodox cause. This I
find deplorable, for if Church history and the formation of dogma, doctrine and the Bible
were as objectively examined as may be possible, the tainted nature of what Christianity
became and is would disgust the most faithful of believers, driving them out of the pews
and into the streets demanding and searching for anything that is real and true. And I'm
not so sure that is not the way it should be.
I do not presume to suggest that the concepts and perceptions presented in these essay's is
absolute or complete unto themselves. If anything they are an introduction, a beginning




point of reference to some who may be searching for, and possibly already experiencing a
deeper, fuller manifestation of life than has traditionally been understood and accepted in
Orthodox frames of thought. I believe there is much here to be expanded upon, and as
others (myself included) proceed on our spiritual journeys, more will be added and
revised concerning these. This, as it occurs, will please me as having played my part,
having been true to that which I have come to understand and "know" as reality. I will
have "run the good race", I have "kept the faith".
Bob Couchenour - February 2013












Quasi-
Orthodox




4-4-2006

What ways are you currently exploring/wondering about/experimenting with
aspects of your Christian faith and relationship with God that you are hesitant to tell
others about for fear they might think you are going off the deep end or too far out
there?

Listening to and interacting with God in the moment in relational ways is messier
and evokes fear. What if I fail? What if I hear wrong? What about those crazies who
claim God "told them" to commit murder or the guy who believes God said to change
jobs and it all implodes? But aren't all relationships like this; exposing us to risk and
vulnerability? Can growing, vibrant relationships be predictable and controllable and
aren't they a process of trial and error as we get to know the other? Maybe knowing God
is less a science and more an art.

This is too close to home, because I am currently there.

Theologically, my basic foundations have been pretty stable for most of my Christian
life. Not exactly Fundamentalist, not classic Pentecostal, strong doses of liberal politics,
but consistent for at least 25 of my 30+ years following Christ.

From 1976 through 1978 I did an extensive study of the book of Romans. Lots of notes.
You may ask who wrote the book of Romans and I will answer I did. One of my practices
at the time was to write out the text of the Bible (in KJV) to get as immersed as possible
into the content. I probably rewrote the first nine chapters of Romans a dozen or more
times.

The early part of this study was strictly disciplined study. Nothing too exciting or earth
shaking. But once I started to get into Romans 6, the text began to come alive. Romans 7
was depressing. Romans 8 brought it all together. Everything up to this point started to
make sense. All the legal preparation that Paul was laying down initially started to take
on a validation transcending a purely legal logic. There were legal premises set but they
did not constitute the life conveyed by the Spirit. Romans 8 explained the dynamic of
Spiritual life triumphing over our legalistic religious dilemma. It was not - IS NOT - us
who accomplishes this spiritual adventure we are embarked on. It is Christ himself, in us,
in the person of the Holy Spirit. It is no longer me, but Christ.

Theologically, my basic foundation was laid. But living this out, in the context of a
church (and not just one church, but the general state of affairs of the church universal)
that doesnt really care, or is so caught up in its own image manufacturing, spiritual
issues are not a primary concern. Politics is the way to play the game. Ive never been
much good at that.

In 1985 I gathered my notes and put these lessons into a booklet. But, Church leaders
have their own problems, and politics is still the name of the game. In 2000 God started
to show up. Moved into a new fellowship where the emphasis on Spiritual things was




encouraged. There was little in the way of planning and organization, but God moved.
Many will read what I write and write it off as some sort of charismatic, Pentecostal
emotionalism. Well, consider, I had just spent eight years in one of the most conservative,
non-emotive, theologically correct Presbyterian denominations. I was not, by natural
character emotionally expressive. I generally analyze and apply the Scriptures to and
supposed spiritual manifestation. I dont accept anything based on surface appearances.
I was there to observe, make an assessment, apply my critique and if necessary blow the
whole thing out of the water. I was no fool and would not allow anyone to try and make
me one.

God took me on an emotional roller coaster ride. It was not the ministers. Far as I can
remember it was not anything any one said. God chose to deal with spiritual issues in my
life that for all intents and purposes had nothing to do with anyone involved or part of
what was happening at the time. I believe there was an spiritual and emotional healing
that was being appropriated at that time. There is a distinct difference in how I respond to
emotional stimuli, that I had not known before.

I found myself in fellowship here for five and a half years. Through the years the
tendency of the church to start creeping into the political modes operandi became a
growing reality. It is a present struggle the pastors deal with and wish they knew how to
circumvent. I believe their hearts are in the right place, but the political security game
does not surrender easily, and is so entrenched in the minds of church goers as the way it
is done.

I left active fellowship with this group last December 2005. I still consider the Pastor
there to be my pastor, although He has released me to pursue God much as a Father
would bless and release a child into the world. We are friends. I respect his integrity. But
he and I both realize there is only so for he can do as a pastoral figure. The time and place
comes to rely on God alone. That bridge has been crossed.

Prior to this, in August of 2004, God led me away from my regular employment that I
held for twenty-three years. This was with the oversight of Pastoral leaders and close
friends offering encouragement to follow the vision God had given me (and had been
communicated and shared for years) to focus my attentions to spiritual and music
interests.

Well, try to get the picture. I was 54 years old. Have ten children. Most of the older ones
were in the process of exiting the household. I have not had a regular job since August
2004. My wife works (part time). We had refinanced our house, with intentions to move
as soon as the Lord points in the direction my wife and I BOTH are comfortable with. I
have a LARGE tattoo on my right hand that says I AM THE LORDS, and have been
growing my hair long since leaving work. And this is exactly where I believe the Lord
wants me. Occasionally the church I was associated with sends a check to encourage and
help support us. Occasionally a brother in the Lord will bless us with something.

Am I a fool? Well maybe. But - the Lords not done yet.





4-4-2006

Yes, Thanks I saw

I have been pondering both your response and your blog/Divine Nobodies excerpt.

It seems we share common Spiritual perceptions and experience. I must admit, not having
a formal education, and finding fellowship with brothers like yourself, grounded in
Biblical and Theological academics, I feel a bit wanting. Not inferior, but academically
deficient. Not a lesser person, but less sophisticated in my ability to put things into words.
I have to take the time to think about what I want to write and consider my choice of
words before committing them to a final draft.

The questions you raised in the initial Start Up post are conversations that can dive
pretty deep. Before getting into them , I need to be sure I am committed to following up
on questions and such. I do not relish a debate forum. Long posts by seminarians quoting
God knows who is not my idea of a dialog. I am not referring to you in this statement, but
there are some who have got it all in the head and not much in the way of what I can
recognize as real Spiritual relationship. Maybe they just like to raise the intellectual level
to a place that tends to alienate me. Whatever?

What I do share is from experience, and what I have gleaned from the Bible, and usually
measured by the Bible, although not necessarily with either a fundamentalist or liberal or
charismatic/Pentecostal framework.

Spiritually - I do not feel any mans second. There are those, like yourself, that I respect
for the journey God has had them on, and may be a few steps ahead of me. But I know
God has had his hand on me and particularly in more recent years. This has allowed me
to place myself into situations of risk that have many if not most of my peers thinking I
have gone over the edge. Maybe I have - Gods not done yet. But God has a way of
balancing things out and providing just enough encouragement to keep me pursuing Him
and whatever it is that he intends for me. (details to come later)

Yady yada yada

I appreciate your starting a group of this sorts. I feel like there is a lot to come out, and in
other groups, bogged down in debate over the simplest and hair splitting issues, would
not offer opportunity to really address things without having to justify every other
sentence. To be blunt - spiritually - they just dont get it. And if it is the Spirit who
conveys Spiritual truth and reality, as much as I may desire to change their way of
thinking, its not my job to make it happen. I may be used to some degree, but its not up
to me.

Well - enough - I will be posting more as I process things.
Thanks for messaging me.
Bob




In 2006 I was struggling to remain "Orthodox". These are two emails I recieved and
arguments I respnded to at the time. From this one can observe the 'spiritual' dilema
I was contending with. Eventually, being true to what "I" perceived to be the truth, I
adopted a new way of thinking.
4-5-2006
I recently came across two emails from 2006, a time I was struggling with my
Orthodox faith and searching for real answers, not just the usual hype and rhetoric that
religionists like to pass off as the truth. One email was from a friend in Nashville, he was
a writer and minister with a Master of Divinity degree. He sent me a copy of an essay
from one of his contacts in New Zealand and he asked me to review it and give my
opinion. I felt quite honored that he would consider me for such a task, but it turns out he
respected my viewpoint as a knowledgeable self-educated layman. I read and reviewed
the document stating that I wish I had written it, although stating there were some points
that I was not entirely sure of. Below is the preface to the essay written by my friend, and
though I will not post the entirety of the document (it is not mine to publish) I will extract
and post the points I found fundamental agreement with and try to put things in my own
words.
The second letter, I wrote back to my friend regarding other issues and I will post it
separately later. In it I was struggling to retain my Orthodoxy, to hang on to principles
as traditionally accepted within the Church universal. I look back at it now and am
somewhat amused, because much that I was wrestling against, I have since come to
realize and accept as true. To be sure, I have no doubt gone beyond my original
antagonists assumptions and moved farther into areas of heretical thought than was
originally intended. I do not find a problem with this, as may be observed in my friends
statement of the baggage he carries having a Master of Divinity degree. He has a home
within the system which risks being compromised, should he or others like him become
too vocal in such matters. I, on the other hand, have nothing to lose as by way of
employment, thus, can speak freely, though without the support of any institutional
framework. I can speak (or write) on authority of my own conscience and the truth as I
have come to understand it and believe.
Preface to Old Wineskins:
Hi Bob, you're going to hate me for this possibly. Below is a rather lengthy article a
friend in New Zealand sent me. To be honest, I don't let many people see this stuff
because I know many would try to either lock me up or label me a heretic. Admittedly, it
pushes the envelope but I think it's food for thought. Now remember
as you read this, I have an evangelical/conservative background and normally wouldn't
quite jive with these thoughts but somewhere deep within I feel that some of it is ringing




true. I was interested in your thoughts because you don't have the liability/baggage of a
Masters of Divinity degree like I do. So, what are your thoughts? Again, sending this to
you doesn't necessarily mean I subscribe to all of it but it has got me thinking about
several things...
Extracts from Old Wineskins which I found fundamental agreement:
Its hard to persuade those who have been drinking the old wine for so long to try the new.
It requires a major shift in their thinking
This describes the major fundamental problem with Christianity today. Its why it is
falling to bits and will continue to do so. Trying to fit the New Wine, which is really the
spirit, into our old religious formats just wont work. The whole configuration of our
spiritual understandings (the old wineskin) have to change, and as most are not prepared
to do that, we lose the spirit and the chances of further true revelation is lost and
Christianity continues to collapse. We can study as much as we like, spending years at
Bible Colleges, but if we dont radically change the interpretation of our traditional
concepts we go nowhere. No matter how much knowledge we have, without the spirit we
are powerless and vulnerable.
In my words: change the interpretation of our traditional concepts, I had noticed for
years the tendency of the church to be effectively bullied by a Fundamentalist literalist
segment within the Church who thought it was their privilege, right and calling to
defend the faith from the encroachment of any and all interpretations of scripture
which did not line up with their particular frame of thinking. This has not been a new
problem, but rather extends all the way back to the first politicization of the Church and
its doctrines, essentially coming to fruition at the time of Constantines conversion,
circa 315 A.D.. Becoming a political entity, allied with the state (whatever that may be
at the time) robs the true faith of what is the innate divine potential and power which is
the resident inheritance of all human beings. Regardless of what may be official
recognized doctrine, apart from independence from the state, the Church becomes
little more than a vassal of the state. This is not to justify an independent Fundamentalist
Church, but rather allowing the Church, as an institution the freedom to evolve, and
change and mature in its understanding of God, Christ, the human community, our
responsibility to the cosmos and each other. As traditional concepts are set in stone
the role of the prophet is dead and fundamentally God is dead as we are concerned,
worshipping graven idols of doctrine and dogma existing in our own minds. Institution
do not embody the spirit, people do.
The modern church is little more than a collection do-good social institutions. The only
power it has is through the collective support of those adhering to those beliefs and
dogma they prop each other up and have to work hard doing it. Like any other




philosophy or culture it is man centered. They look to human leaders, charismatic
figurehead celebrities,
or even revered people from ages past for their inspiration. But I think we will find that
no matter what the Christian establishment tries to do to revamp itself, unless there is a
major shift in thinking, spiritually, it will now not succeed
In my words: I cannot condemn the do good social institutions. I believe they are
necessary and much needed. What I cannot condone is the attachment we have on
charismatic figures, or the purely copy-cat faith we place in human methodologies
learned from business schools. Not that they are entirely to be faulted, but the purpose of
business is the amassing of wealth, making the buck, with attention focused on the
bottom line, and lets not forget about the image we have to project. Here again, we,
the Church, have succumbed to the vision of materialistic values and allowed these to
be our benchmark of whether or not we are hearing and following God or in the
Spirit. We have allowed political and economic ideologies to define and virtually
replace what we both innately know and is defined in our own scriptures. In the
words of Bob Dylan as he once professed his faith, gonna change my way of
thinking. This is a process that entails a lot more than dumping a few old habits and
showing up to fill a pew. A total alternative to the way we have programed our minds is
in order i.e. a paradigm shift.
its what every Christian has been dreaming for, but its quite different to what any of us
could have visualized.
from out of this ongoing collapse we are witnessing today, there are many people,
disillusioned with the old set-ups, who are still searching. They know there is something
real somewhere? They have experienced it.
Theres still that little seed in us that first has to fall to the ground and die. Fall from that
old system of thinking, (the old wineskin) and this is the seed if it falls on fertile ground
(the new wineskin a new mode of open minded thinking) that will germinate and grow
into something truly magnificent it has to leave the old format behind first and start all
over again
To escape from this old wineskin, which personifies our traditional religious
understandings, it will take far more than just altering the forms of our worship,
leadership style, church structure, methods and organization or going back to early NT
principles. It makes little difference if we simply change our venue and methodology from
the most elaborate mega church super sophisticated system right down to the simplicity
of sucking on a beer, in our jeans in a pub with a few other like-minded believers, and
calling ourselves the enlightened emergents. If we still have the old baggage of standard
beliefs in our heads we go nowhere. This baggage is our ancient time honoured concepts




of how we see and understand God, Jesus, the Spirit, the devil, demons, the Bible,
heaven, hell, creation, the second coming, the Kingdom of God, discipleship, life, death
etc. etc. All these understandings need updating by the spirit to be compatible with our
modern thinking about our universe, and ourselves, in a believable and workable way. If
we are still carrying around the old formats they put a stone over the entrance to our
hearts and block the spirit. we must change
from static doctrines to a living ongoing understanding. Our teachers, if they are to be
of any use, should minister the spirit to trigger the truths that are already in us. We
havent realised that this is how it is. We have overlooked the obvious!
In my own words: The author of this document I am reviewing, Brian S., has pointed out
repeatedly to me and those he has conferred with that the meaning of metanoia, which
we translate as repent, has a much deeper meaning than the traditional way we have
thought of it and expressed in our religious lifestyle. It is not merely a change of life
patterns, giving up those we define as sinful and establishing a more godly way of
living. To experience metanoia, to repent, is to totally experience a new way of
thinking. Not simply ascent to a set formula of doctrines, dogma and creeds, but to
adopt into a new world view or view of reality. It is to recognize reality and truth as it
has never been experienced by oneself and to proceed, make ones way along the path of
growing in this new truth. Without this depth of conversion all we do is slap a new
decorative icing on a decaying, rotting cake. It is in this relationship and knowledge we
must be taught. It is not altogether efficient or structured, as may be determined by
human efficiency standards, but it is a depth of communication realized one human being
to another, through all the ups and downs and inconveniences of life. Some principles
may be expressed in the classroom situation, but that is not the place of growth and
learning. That comes as we relate to each other, in the depths of knowing who we are.
So, for the purpose of this exercise, and to keep it brief, Ill just deal with one of these
corrupted interpretations we have GOD! Christians drop this name off the end of their
tongues as though he lives on their mantle piece!
Our perception and visualisation of God is founded on beliefs that surfaced thousands of
years ago. It all started in a time when humanity, by todays standards, was ignorant,
pagan and very elemental. Their understanding of the universe was crude and their
known world was very small. As time passed the legends and stories of their God were
refined, written down, and through the contributions from different holy men and woman
and various other scribes and historians these finally became our Bible. This book
contains the foundational truths and working scriptures for the present Christian
church. Over the centuries, through deep study by many learned religious men and
woman we have interpreted these writings in a certain way. Through general consensus
and tradition we now have a pretty firm picture of that God in the sky and how he




operates. These principles have more or less stuck with us until to day and pity helps any
one who would dare to challenge these!
Most Christians believe the writings in their Bibles are totally true and accurate and are
accepted with blind faith like they were set in concrete. However, if they dont stand up to
the test of time, and things are falling down around our ears we must then consider that
we could have got a few things wrong. The more we learn about our modern world the
less realistic those old God interpretations become.
In my own words: I personally do not like using the word God. I has too many different
meanings to as many people who would try and use it or interpret it in the hearing.
Essentially God is the unknowable. Yet, we like to think we have gotten as clear a
picture as may be possible in our Holy scriptures. At the same time, the God depicted
in the Old Testament or Jewish scriptures appear to have a marked difference from the
God revealed in the Christian New Testament canon of scripture. Then there are the
plethora of scripture of other World religions giving use even broader insight into this
divine character, not to mention the multitude of ancient sacred writings that have been
rejected as heretical. When speaking of what may be considered by many attributed to
God, I prefer to refer to :the divine, whether capitalized or not. I use this to refer to all
that may be God but realizing that the divine is part of and intrinsic to our human
nature, a part of our nature that is not set in material observations but real and there none
the less, a part of our humanity which we have been taught to discount or reject
completely.
If we reinterpret what we have come to interpret as literal from the Bible, New and Old
Testaments, as metaphor or allegory, it is obvious that there are more actual parallels, if
not actual verifications of other concepts of the divine expressed through sacred texts of
virtually all ancient World Religions. It is only in our (not only ours but others)
Fundamentalist literalisms that a division of concepts of God is sustainable. Christian
Fundamentalists are not the only ones guilty of this. It is seen in Orthodox Judaism and
Islam as well, and I have little doubt can be witnessed in any form of religion that
demands a whole hearted absolute devotion to its own concepts of faith.
there was one bright light that turned up about 2000 years ago that put the cat amongst
the pigeons. He tried to turn our eyes towards a different way of viewing these old
scriptures and to reveal to us our true Father who he claimed was his too. He said wed
got it wrong and that he had come to explain things and show us the way. He spoke some
amazing things, did miracles too, but the learned people didnt take too kindly to him.
They were quite happy with their religion and their God and he was beginning to unsettle
the true believers. They found his claims were just too arrogant, unholy, disrespectful, so
these Old Testament believing religious leaders organised false accusations and had him
killed. However afterwards a few got the feeling they had stuffed things up a bit and that




maybe they had misjudged this man Jesus. They opened their hearts and the spirit began
to show them some amazing insights. There was a lot more to this man than what they
had first thought but they found him difficult to fit into their theology. They still had that
Old Testament God hanging over their heads. That one up in the sky and it wasnt too
long before they had Jesus up there somewhere with him too! Life carried on. It was a
good compromise, but they still had a problem. They continually found themselves being
pulled by the spirit one-way and pulled by those sky Gods in another way. But they built
very ingenious doctrines out of it this situation and even until this day nothing has been
totally resolved!
In my own words: We need to come to a better understanding of the person of Jesus
and his being the Christ or Christ-ed. This is where a great deal of the problem
within the Church really comes to a head. Old tome religionists perceive Jesus as the
Christ, the one and only. They have deified him, through some imaginative inventive
workings of theology, and declared him to be one with or the only emanation of the sky
God worshipped by the Jews. Modern Christianity has been sold, and bought into a
concept of God and Jesus, which was not preached and proclaimed by Jesus himself, but
is a restructured adaptation, a synthesis of what Jesus taught with the Old Testament
concept of the God they understood, the sky God and Roman cultural values. Jesus, as
a Christ-ed human being spoke in relation to the OT scriptures out of a divine nature
intrinsic to his person. A divine nature we are all endued with yet we are ignorant of.
Jesus, as the Christ bearer essentially manifested to teach us what we are and can be,
but it takes a change in our thinking. Being religious, espousing a few creeds or
religiously sanctioned doctrines, without a quantum shift in our thinking is worthless.
Changing our modus operandi and hanging on to the old religious stuff changes nothing.
It is not movement towards spiritual maturity, but rather an attempt not to accept the
responsibility and challenges inherent in any type of change. It also means admitting, we
got a few things wrong, and that is never a welcome condition. It can be embarrassing,
but that is movement towards growing up, growing up as a spiritual individual and
collective body.
We are faced with this same dilemma many of us have had definite experiences of the
intimate love of our Father is quite incompatible with a nature that could ever kill
anyone or torture them in hell fire for all eternity.
But we also have to admit that there is this very materialistic judgemental type of deity
evident too. What master do we serve? We cant serve both! Where is this clinical
criticising ethos coming from anyway? Are we being deceived somewhere?
There are these two definite streams in tension. Everlasting love, or full on judgement
and eternal punishment, yet Jesus seemed to point us to the loving side and had little time
for that other nature and its religious regime.




Jesus made no bones about what he thought of the Pharisees interpretation of their OT
sky God Yet Jesus promptly told them their father was the devil, a murderer, and a liar.
Have we made a mistake and are getting torn between a rudimentary intellectual
understanding of a sky God authority that we have fabricated ourselves from our own
old nature
I fail to see how Christian people still try to fit that crude primeval hypothesis they have
of a supreme deity Through all these centuries they have never yet been able to prove
to the world that this sky God even exists! Maybe hes a version that we have created
ourselves? A version that simply lives in our heads and we glibly take him on board as
the traditional teachings about him are passed down from one generation
to the next and then kept on being promoted by the religious people. A supreme deity
made in our image that gives us a great run around - an idol in the sky
Christians bandy around this word God like it is an object but behind this also you can
sense there is a fair amount of nervous respect and culpability. The word produces so
many different perspectives for different people. Youd hardly ever get two the same.
In my own words: When I first came to Christ, became born again, started
following the way, became a Christian or however you want to call it, I expected
there to be a spiritual emphasis attached to the teachings I received through those I
submitted myself too in the Church. As a babe in Christ I was ignorant and didnt know
nor was able to tell the difference between the real thing and what was whitewashing. I
soon travelled with an Evangelist who, did understand the difference and taught his
charges well. Yet returning to a regular Church situation was disappointing to say the
least, and a mixed bag of corrupted spiritualizing and justifying materialistic desires and
approaches to being in ministry and tainting the character of what one would think should
be representative of the character of Jesus. I can understand now that my Evangelist
mentor had to struggle with a great deal of human frailties and make concessions
himself in order to continue functioning in what actually is an immature, compromised
human (rather than spiritual) institution. And to be sure, this cannot be taken as a
universal condemnation of the Church universal, as the spiritual maturity of each
individual pastor, lay or professional, and leadership team they produce is significant as
to the development of each individual congregation, as individuals and as a whole. Yet
there are still major roadblocks keeping the Church at bay and hindering the full
realization of what it is and means to be in Christ.
As I continued my own studies, upon leaving the Evangelistic team, I continually found
ways to interpret Bible passages, which I have been told by pastors and ministers, my
logic was unarguable. Yet, no one would ever discuss or take issue with me. I was told
early on that what I was finding appeared gnostic. For years I remained ignorant as to




what this meant, all my resources were centuries old and Orthodox approved. As I
became progressively disenchanted with what the Orthodox Church was/is, I found
myself researching deeper into the theology which I was uncovering and discovered that
there is a great deal that the early Church, as a matter of political expediency, discarded
in the early centuries after Jesus. Most of this I will cover in future writing and postings I
have made since my initial review of this document in question. But at the time I first
reviewed this I was finding considerable commonality and I now understand that I was
approaching the scriptures unlike most Orthodox religionists. As limited as my resources
were at the time, they were sufficient for that time, as I was examining and learning the
scriptures, not as literal, but as spiritually discerned in and from my heart. My heart I
would now describe as my deeper inner being, or as some might say, my
self, the part of me that transcends consciousness and explores the unconscious
aspects of who and what I am. Yes, that is depth psychology, and I believe essentially,
soul and spirit, the part of me that the religious minded would say connects with God.
There is a great deal of difference between the humanistic limitations of intellect and the
deeper reaches of mind into knowing ourselves and that which we call God.
If we dump this pre-historic God up in the sky (we actually dethrone our intellect) and
turn to these deep feelings within, (true repentance) we connect with a being, or a
dimension, that is far more compatible with our modern understanding of the universe.
The new physics indicate that when matter is reduced to its smallest particles it breaks
down even further and into events or vibrations which can even disappear and recreate
themselves in different forms, and on that level the universe is really an interconnected
oneness. There is not really any place left for a separate God out there beyond all this
other than in our imaginations. So is it possible for us to connect with that foundational
level of energy underlying the universe? An energy that even seems to have the potential
to produce miracles and changes in state? Maybe we have the ability within us to do this
if there is that interconnectiveness?
In my own words: This is an area that has fascinated me over the last 5 years, and I have
subsequently done a lot of reading and research into it, and the connections implied
through the various theories expounded. At the time I first read this I was without a clue,
but since then have become a believer. The quantum realities now being discovered do
more to substantiate what I had originally suspected as a matter of faith and upheld by
these new understandings I find I can live my life in faith and knowledge. I believe
not simply because I suspect or have a gut feeling (though I do continually), but rather
I believe and live that belief because I know by intellect and experience. I cannot say it
is perfect, but were it really matters, it works, and there are a lot of things I learn and
acquire through the experience. I do, as I believe I hear, not with physical ears, but a
spiritual sensing, a feeling, but not physical. And often, physical feelings and emotions
act as a guide, or benchmark, but not always. I remain attuned, to myself, and others.




First. What do we understand about God? What did Jesus say? He should know
because thats who he was! God is a spirit = an eternal life giving energy. Anything is
possible. God is love = a personalised feeling (or nature) we can experience. Put the
two together and theres our Dad! A loving Father that cant do enough for us and is just
waiting for us to turn to him. But what do we do? We keep committing adultery by
turning back to that imaginary one up in the sky! The real one indwells there through
the spirit.
In my own words: I have many non-religious friends. Yet we are on the same
wavelength. I have found that except for Fundamentalist absolute literalists, most
religious descriptions of reality can be equated to secular and scientific thought. The
primary difference being the secularist scientist has researched the workings the natural
world in a greater depth than the religionist. Yet there is a common ground that can be
realized. There is an anthropomorphic personification that the religionist finds security in
that the secularist does not require, yet examining the same facts, there is actually little
difference in what each sees. On attributes it to God, the other natural causes, but it
still comes down to the same thing. Even in that which might be described as
miraculous, as we continue to learn and understand the workings of mind, a common
ground and frame of reference to reality discloses itself, and we can all see and
understand our universal connection to all that is. Remember what Jesus said about the
centurion, I have not seen such faith, even in all of Israel. The centurion was a pagan.
the new creation that we will see unravel is built on the living personality and nature of
our Jesus (his spirit). When we speak from this nature things begin to happen.
Creation has to sit up and take notice, because who is really speaking? Note: A brief
explanation of this saying and how to apply it practically, "If you ask anything,
according to my name, then I will do it for you!" said Jesus. For a starter the word
prayer literally means: a 'projected wish'. Now tacking the name of Jesus on the end of
some 'heady' religious prayer like it's some magic slogan or mantra is as much use as
using the name Charlie Brown! What 'the name of Jesus' means in practice is speaking
in his 'nature' (his persona). We do that by expressing the deeper feelings from our
hearts - his spirit - it's like learning a new language and takes practice and a certain
amount of courage
So the rock (the foundation of all creation) is a spirit and well find this so much more
substantial and real than our old system of fixed beliefs once we get used to the concept.
Our old understandings are now becoming very unstable and will fall away because they
are not true! Not eternally Truth is now available through a living energy Its the
Kingdom coming from within us, [the coming (presence) of son of man, which means the
son of oneself we are born out of ourselves!] and that cant happen until that impostor
of a God comes down from out of the sky.




In my own words: I have no god in heaven (up there, in the sky). I have no god but
what dwells in me. That can be explained in secular psychological terms, or through
some religious tradition, but not an Orthodox Fundamentalist tradition. the living
personality and nature of our Jesus is what we are innately, intrinsically, only we have
forgotten. Use whatever language you like to explain it, it really doesnt matter, though
Im sure you will piss someone off, religious or secular. Yet what Jesus the Christ was
we can be that is the manifestation of the sons of God referred to in the Bible,
specifically Romans 8:14 & 8:19.
There was more to this document, but at the time of my reviewing it I found to be more
theoretical and speculative.
It is time for me to review this article again. Im not so sure I would not find more that I
agreed with, I has been over 6 years since I first read it and in the letter to be posted next
I was struggling to hold onto my Orthodoxy and my replies reflected that. Over time,
and a lot of research and soul searching, I have found I have changed my mind as to what
I originally stated at that time. I shortly afterward realized that if I was going to be true to
what I believed, remaining Orthodox had no meaning at all. So, true to myself and all
reason and I believe God ordained logic, I ceased trying to justify a theology that
could not stand on its own or speak to the reality I experience.
The letter follows: I.E. Trying to Remain Orthodox
4-19-06
Jim
Yes I have been following, particularly the thread between you and Brian. In the response
to you
The "saviour" reality can only begin to be revealed when we turn and "live" from our
hearts. In this and other similar statements I find myself in full agreement. Then
statements are made that I find confusing at best and possibly plain and simple Gnostic
hog wash. around a physical "resurrection" that may have never occurred anyway, and
come up with the wrong understanding?
Maryanne's view of "Jesus"He was standing at the door of everyone's house all over
the world talking to them all at the same time."
"I've seen him plenty of times. He's just like everybody!"
This analogy of Jesus I personally find right on target. In the ministry of the Holy Spirit
in us, He is just like everybody. Someone once asked What does the Holy Spirit sound




like when He speaks to you. A wise man answered He sounds just like you. This is
my impression and conversation in the/with the Spirit. He sounds just like me.
Does "Jesus" personify our heart feelings trying to express themselves to our
intellects?.. In a sense yes. But I dont believe it is ultimately our hearts to be
expressed, as it is the new divine heart planted in us.
That being so then wasn't "he" entombed within us. Not talking to us from the outside -
but from the inside! Trying to get out from where "He" had always been but we wouldn't
take any notice. Christians were just as bad. They'd ask "Jesus" into their hearts and then
spend the rest of their days looking for him up in the sky!
YEP!!! - nailed that one
1. "The time has come for the Saviour, the "Son of ourselves", to deliver his people".
2. "Repent" (mentanoia - turn about - reconsider - think differently!).
3. "The authority of God is within your reach."
4. "Believe (trust) the good news". (the restoration of ALL THINGS)
5. And finally, "FOLLOW ME!"
for the Saviour, the "Son of ourselves", to deliver his people". -
Ill need to chew on this for a while
That's all it is. But that was nearly 2,000 years ago and it still hasn't happened. What's
gone wrong? If it is true have we been doing those things wrongly? Obviously we have!
Who is "ME" anyway? Is that the real heart ME?
No argument about doing it wrong
So instead of focusing on an earthly historical Jesus who came into existence twenty
centuries ago and had never been seen since, did we need to look for something else?
Surely it is only our imagination that keeps "that old one" alive and
Here we enter into a cosmic void. Are we talking about a real person, who lived, walked,
ate, slept and experienced the full spectrum of human existence, amongst men. Felt pain,
bled and died. And through the power of God demonstrated the resurrection power that is
available to and in us through Him. Or, are we talking about a container for an eternal
spirit, who lived walked, ate, slept and experienced the full spectrum of human existence,
amongst men, but as the container was disposable Pain, bleeding, and dying were none
issues? Is the Historic Physical Jesus irrelevant? Is the Spiritual (inner feeling) Jesus all
that is real?




As you can imagine I have some real problems with this. God placed us in time and
space. We did not place ourselves here - He did.
I have no arguments with the fact of problems and doing it wrong and there certainly is
the inner Spiritual dynamic that we have denied. Reducing it to purely a matter of
expressing our inner true self is equally in error as trying to apply a purely academic
approach to get the Historic Jesus into our heads. The Historic Jesus has implications first
in dealing with our natural man - Unspiritual head flesh nature. If that is not dealt with,
as I understand the Bible - The Spiritual, inner dynamic - the realization of the Holy
Spirit is just a pipe dream. Been there - done that - smoked my share of pipes.
we have millions of versions of that one around the world. There are not two of them
who are alike. A lot of them won't even speak to each other either. They have regular
fights amongst themselves. We can even have quite a few differently named groups of
them in the same town, but was the warm unifying
"feeling" which was emerging from within the hearts of ordinary people glimmers of the
real one? I knew it was so I decided to dump the belief that a physical Jesus still existed.
To me he was dead
but was the warm unifying "feeling" - Bull Shit - In my humble opinion.
I found that the meaning of the word "Jesus", derived from the Hebrew, "Joshua" meant:
"self existent eternal God + to be wide open and free + safe + preserve + victory". And
the word "Christ" meant: the "anointed" one - the chosen one. These abstract definitions
implied more than a mere "physical" being anyway.
more than a mere "physical" being anyway - Undoubtedly
Scripture also said "God" was in Jesus, so applying that logic in practical terms, the
historical physical "Jesus", must then be our `mental' image of the invisible higher non
material "God" in our hearts. It's the `LOVE` we keep slaughtering in favour of our
clinical doctrines and methods. I thought, "Surely it is only when we turn to our hearts
and feelings that we can ever hope to get a true expression of what those values are?"
the historical physical "Jesus", must then be our `mental' image of the invisible higher
non material "God" in our hearts - YES
It's the `LOVE` we keep slaughtering in favour of our clinical doctrines and
methodsSurely it is only when we turn to our hearts and feelings that we can ever hope
to get a true expression of what those values are?" -
Isn't this happening to us now? 'Metanoia' repentance?




I am having a problem buying into Brians apparent separation of the Historic Physical
Jesus and the Spiritual internal universal feeling Jesus supposedly in ALL humanity
regardless of the finished work of Christ in time and space. First I do not perceive a
dichotomy between the two, except that the Church has for all practical purposes denied
the Spiritual reality. Second, I am not convinced that it is purely a matter of getting in
touch with your inner feelings. Although that is a part of it. Third, the birth and
development of that Spiritual life in us is not intrinsic too us until it is born in us, and we
are not the authors of that. There is no doubt whatsoever that we in the church have made
a mess of things. That does not mean we got it all wrong, we got a lot of it wrong and
as He works in us , He will work the rest of it out of us. It is happening now. Not as quick
as I would like. And Im really a nobody and what I say may not count for much. But yet
there are those who I obviously minister too on a daily basis. If blog numbers mean
anything.
Good Lord you might find this in tomorrows blog. Maybe.
So I will continue to follow. I will not get caught up in a debate. As I process what is
presented, If I have to judge between my understanding of the scriptures (and I think you
see I allow for significant latitude) and what I perceive as an errant perception, well - To
thine own self by true.
Bob
There were some things that, at a time I was clinging to my Orthodoxy I explained as
Gnostic hog wash. The irony is this was stated in ignorance. I have since adopted much
of the hog wash, Gnostic or other as being the best explanation of what the scriptures
are trying to express. So, in that sense, I might be described as a Gnostic. But it does go
much deeper than accepting a new theology; it is a matter of finding the explanation that
fits the truth of my experience. Granted, some of that experience may seem rather
peculiar to many, but that does not make it invalid. If anything, it becomes the window
into possible potentials in all of us. Some you may have experienced, and more I have yet
to speak of.





I am not even sure what prompted this response, although I do still believe the
fundamental assertions I make here. Except one; I do not believe that the church, as
a whole, will ever figure it out.
Sounds a bit like heaven to me.

A number of years ago there was a movement with a similar concept. Movement really
isn't accurate because there wasn't really any defined direction, philosophy or established
leadership structure. We just did it.

We were involved in a lot of things that did us no good at all, as a matter of fact they
were quite destructive to our lives personally, and too each other. We were idealistic and
willing to put our ideals into practice. Of course everyones ideals had to be
experimented with, and this hit and miss approach usually left too many hit and too many
became missed.

They called us "hippies". We are a dying breed - All the crap we immersed ourselves in
took it's toll. Most, who survived, succumbed to the pressures of the materialistic system
and have blended into their environments. But there are an idealistic few of us left.

Of this "few", many, I suspect probably most who remained idealistic, have figured out
where we screwed up. It wasn't that our basic ideals were wrong. But we were not
connected to the truth and reality of the One who makes it all work.

Thanks Jim - maybe there really is reason to hope the church can figure it out.


This was my reply to my friend in Nashville who was throwing all kinds of questions in
my direction. Of course, he was and I believe still is an Orthodox Christian believer. I
am not even sure what prompted this response, although I do still believe the fundamental
assertions I make here. Except one; I do not believe that the church, as a whole, will ever
figure it out. Yes I believe there are believers who will get it, but as a whole No. I
also believe the ones who figure it out will be far more inclusive than what the
current Orthodox Church can produce. No doubt, some Christian principles and values
will be part and parcel of what this movement avows, but there will be more, a lot
more, and some that current Fundamentalist Christians will cringe at, this only
revealing their true nature. And at this junction, doctrine and creed will hold little value,
actually none at all.





This is a letter I wrote to my friend in Nashville regarding the interpretation of some
scriptures and the subject of physical death. Understand, at that time I still
maintained an "Orthodox" understanding and although still fundamentally the same,
I have expanded myy thoughts on the subject since.
John 8:51-53 AMP
51 I assure you, most solemnly I tell you, if anyone observes My teaching [lives in
accordance with My message, keeps My word], he will by no means ever see and
experience death.
52 The Jews said to Him, Now we know that You are under the power of a demon
(insane). Abraham died, and also the prophets, yet You say, If a man keeps My word, he
will never taste of death into all eternity.
53 Are You greater than our father Abraham? He died, and all the prophets died! Who do
You make Yourself out to be?
-----------------------
John 10:27-28 AMP
27 The sheep that are My own hear and are listening to My voice; and I know them, and
they follow Me.
28 And I give them eternal life, and they shall never lose it or perish throughout the ages.
[To all eternity they shall never by any means be destroyed.] And no one is able to snatch
them out of My hand.
----------------------
John 11:24-26 AMP
23 Jesus said to her, Your brother shall rise again.
24 Martha replied, I know that he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day.
25 Jesus said to her, I am [Myself] the Resurrection and the Life. Whoever believes in
(adheres to, trusts in, and relies on) Me, although he may die, yet he shall live;
26 And whoever continues to live and believes in (has faith in, cleaves to, and relies on)
Me shall never [actually] die at all. Do you believe this?
------------------------------
Read John 8:51-53 in the Amplified version. What is your interpretation?




I have been wrestling with John 10:27-28 and John 11:24-26 since I had read Brians
interpretation of death and I believe it was Ricks reply. I have been trying to find a
version that actually expresses these verses as they are quoting it and have not found it.
The gist of Brians thesis if I understand it correctly is that living in relation to and out of
our inner feeling Christ nature (which that much I can easily fathom), we will not
taste or experience physical death. I would love to be able to see that in these scriptures,
but I can not. I believe that is a very long stretch and reading into the words more than
was originally spoken by Christ.
The word used for death here does refer to physical death. The Greek thanatos. But in
understanding the death Jesus was talking about, I have to consider the original language
that Jesus was speaking to his audience in, that would have been Aramaic (or possibly
Hebrew). The concept of death as expressed by the Greeks and the Jews were not
identical. To the Greeks, death was simply the termination of physical existence. The Old
Testament understanding of death, besides including physical death, embraced the idea of
separation from God. Spiritual death is referred to consistently through the OT.
Even though this is true, I dont believe Spiritual realities were of any significance to the
Pharisaic mind set or ruling classes of Jesus day. There may have been an OT-Hebrew
language and customs that bound them as a people, but the politics and concepts of their
original faith had become more Greek or secular. Essentially spiritually divorced from
God - Dead - but they didnt know it. When one is Spiritually dead, a concept of Spiritual
Life is absurdity.
Now having said this - I do not believe that I will ever taste or experience death. I may,
and am quite confident that I will most likely shed this body. But my life is not solely
composed of this physical carcass. I would also have no objection that this body be raised
from physical death, or even maintained beyond what might be considered normal life
spans - into eternity if that were possible. But to gather that as a valid premise based on
these scriptures has not been proved.
John Wimber in explaining why many people did not receive healings expressed his idea
that we are in transition in experiencing the Kingdom - Weve had our D-Day but the war
is not over yet. I do believe in Gods operations in physical healings, signs and wonders
(as well as the exercise of the rest of the gifts), but they are not our toys to play with. I do
believe God does and has raised the dead in our current days. But that does not counter
the effects of the Fall (sin) as it still effects the all of creation. Our bodies are part of
that creation. We are in a battle to work out Gods purposes, but we are not the generals.
Im getting carried away.




Hope I interpreted sufficiently.
Bob





This is another letter to my friend in Nashville dated 8-17-2006. At the time he was
exploring Internet options and fellowship which was outside the Fudamentalist-
Evangelical box. These are my replies to his inquiries.

Jim

"after reading what follows you might be very sorry you are one of those people and Ill
never hear from you again". Despite what I write below - Don't count on this. These are
the thoughts that I am initially struck with.

Is such a conversation truly possible. "no holds barred"? "grace and love are the only
guidelines all participants are asked to follow". What would be the common definition of
"grace and love" that would allow for a no holds barred conversation? The grace and love
expectation would of necessity require a "this door swings both ways" interpretation "IF"
no holds were truly not barred.

"to encourage people in grace and love to be awakened to God in new ways and discover
the truth for themselves." What is the expectation here? "awakened to God in new ways
and discover the truth for themselves". Is it to apply our reason to aid in the
enlightenment of darkened minds, kept dark by religious assumptions? Is it to define "the
kingdom of God" in new, contextually relevant terms?

"a catalyst for the kingdom of God." "What kingdom of God?" or "Which kingdom of
God?" or "Whose kingdom of God?". The kingdom of God has become a clich for
whatever religious ideology or system wishes to employ it to further their particular
religious brand. If we would wish to truly implement a catalyst for the Kingdom of GOD
- I would presume there would be an understanding of just what that kingdom is. What is
it?

Or, Is the purpose to seek a consensus through conversation as to what that kingdom
definition and realization is?

"...doesnt matter what (if any) religious faith one subscribes to, what sexual orientation
one is, what political views"..."diversity of the people involved will help shrink the
distance we sometimes have with others who are different than ourselves or about whom
we have acquired and held certain stereotypes and prejudices about." I have no doubt that
this can be real, when people really want to communicate with each other. But it raises
the question about what the purpose and goal is. Is it to truly be a catalyst for the
kingdom of God (which is not defined yet) or is it to seek and implement a new
ecumenism (which may or may not be expressive of the kingdom of God).

Are there political, lifestyle, religious or other practices that are diametrically opposed, or
counter productive to the realization of "kingdom of God"? If yes, what is the criteria or
means for assessing these?





Just some thoughts

Bob









This is a reply I made to an online contact dated 8-17-2006. This friend and I, as well
as many who are my current Facebook friends, were part of an online community
who blogged and shared ideas, some a bit out of the mainstream. This friend is an
atheist from England. He and I also shared many compatible political views.

Aaron

Sorry to disagree with you.

About three years ago I finally met a local Baltimore Christian minister involved in
Christian Music promotion. I had wanted to meet him for a while, but did not press
myself on him. He had been privy to my writings and received my email Ezine. Sharing
our common hopes and vision, he told me Youre dangerous. Not as a rebuke, but a
compliment for actually attempting to express and live the radical nature of my faith,
and rationally communicate this and challenge others.

I am not a young man. Turned 55 yesterday. It has only recently that I have come to
understand what being radical actually means. And yes - as others come to understand -
we can be dangerous. Being dangerous means things will change. People will get upset.
The status quo - is no mo.

Radical Christians can be dangerous - that is exactly what we are supposed to be.






This is three paragraphs from my friend in Nashville on an online discussion group
and my replies to him ... very short and concise. He hit the nail on the head.

For most of my "Christian" or rather "churched" experience, I have been compelled by a
passion for God - to serve Him, to do His will. The sad thing is that most of this effort -
in reality - has been little more than "the desire for pleasures and the thirst for
experiences, for power, honor, knowledge, and love to clothe this false self and construct
its nothingness into something objectively real. And I wind experiences around myself
and cover myself with pleasures and glory like bandages in order to make myself more
perceptible to myself and to the world,..."

Sadder still, the religious establishment that I would submit myself too, to seek
"Spiritual" insight from, and guidance - were, and are caught in the same dilemma.
Passionately running the religious tread wheel pursuing after unreal values, never
actually connecting with or getting any closer to the ultimate. And they havent got a
clue.

"I think the true self is difficult to embrace because it is simply a gift to be received, not
something we earn or create ourselves. From the first moment of my existence the
deepest dimension of my life is that I am made by God for union with himself. The
deepest dimension of my identity as a human person is that I share in Gods own life in a
relationship of untold intimacy."

You grabbed the brass ring with this one Jim

Give the man a star





This was written at about the time I was coming to understand my own
Christian mysticism and the relationship it shared with other world religions.
It was first posted in August 2006, and is the same as it first appeared,
although the state...
Zen and the Holy Spirit
Zen From Wikipedia

Zen is a branch of Mahayana Buddhism which strongly emphasizes the practice of moment-by-
moment awareness and of 'seeing deeply into the nature of things' by direct experience.

Zen Buddhism is a branch of Mahayana Buddhism, and, as such, its teachings are deeply rooted
in those of the Buddha.

Zen is not primarily an intellectual philosophy nor a solitary pursuit. Zen temples emphasize
meticulous daily practice, and hold intensive monthly meditation retreats. Practicing with others
is valued as a way to avoid the traps of ego. In explaining the Zen Buddhist path to Westerners,
Japanese Zen teachers have frequently made the point that Zen is a way of life and not solely a
state of consciousness. D.T. Suzuki wrote that the aspects of this life are: a life of humility; a
life of labor; a life of service; a life of prayer and gratitude; and a life of meditation.

Zen teachings often criticize textual hermeneutics and the pursuit of worldly
accomplishments, concentrating primarily on meditation in pursuit of an unmediated
awareness of the processes of the world and of the mind.

D. T. Suzuki asserted that satori (awakening) has always been the goal of every school of
Buddhism, but that which distinguished the Zen tradition as it developed in China, Korea, and
Japan was a way of life radically different from that of Indian Buddhists. In India, the tradition of
the mendicant (bhikkhu) prevailed, but in China social circumstances led to the development of a
temple and training-center system in which the abbot and the monks all performed mundane
tasks. These included food gardening or farming, carpentry, architecture, housekeeping,
administration, and the practice of folk medicine. Consequently, the enlightenment sought in
Zen had to stand up well to the demands and potential frustrations of everyday life.

Most Zen monasteries and training centers, in the East and abroad, emphasize regular meditation,
both on a daily basis and in monthly retreat, as well as a discipline based in practice schedules
and everyday household chores such as cooking, cleaning, and gardening as an essential part of
the path to enlightenment.

Thomas Merton (1915-1968) the Trappist monk and priest was internationally recognized as
having one of those rare Western minds which was entirely at home in Asian experience. Like his
friend, the late D.T. Suzuki, Merton believed that there must be a little of Zen in all authentic
creative and spiritual experience. The dialogue between Merton and Suzuki (Wisdom in
Emptiness" in: Zen and the Birds of Appetite, 1968) explores the many congruencies of
Christian mysticism and Zen. (Main publications: The Way of Chuang Tzu, 1965; Mystics and
Zen Masters, 1967; Zen and the Birds of Appetite, 1968)

THEREFORE, SINCE we are justified (acquitted, declared righteous, and given a right
standing with God) through faith, let us [grasp the fact that we] have [the peace of




reconciliation to hold and to enjoy] peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ (the
Messiah, the Anointed One). Through Him also we have [our] access (entrance,
introduction) by faith into this grace (state of Gods favor) in which we [firmly and
safely] stand. And let us rejoice and exult in our hope of experiencing and enjoying the
glory of God. Moreover [let us also be full of joy now!] let us exult and triumph in our
troubles and rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that pressure and affliction and hardship
produce patient and unswerving endurance. And endurance (fortitude) develops maturity
of character (approved faith and tried integrity). And character [of this sort] produces [the
habit of] joyful and confident hope of eternal salvation. Such hope never disappoints or
deludes or shames us, for Gods love has been poured out in our hearts through the Holy
Spirit Who has been given to us. Romans 5:1-5

What makes me a Christian?

I can hear you shouting now - You must be born again, Believe in your heart, confess
with your mouth

But what does all that mean?

Weve already explored the fact that it is the Holy Spirit that brings us into a state of new
birth. It is not something you or I or any third party can determine to accomplish and
make it so. So what does it mean? What is the actual state of experiential new birth?

Before we go to far let me say I do accept and hold to the early historic creeds of the
Church (Apostolic, Nicene). I can endorse most Evangelical Statements of Faith with
some minor exceptions.

But most of these statements leave a great deal of room for interpretation and varying
explanation. Generally, most being arbitrarily and unnecessarily narrow in scope as to
exclude the greater portion of those who would be called by the name Christian.

A while back, maybe a year ago, I made a statement to a group of friends that most
Christianity is little different than Buddhism. By this I did not mean that Christianity had
syncretized Buddhist theology and doctrine, but that our practice of principles, Biblical
and Godly as they may be justified, amounts to essentially the same impersonal relation
to creation and our Creator as Buddhism. Biblically justified Christianity or Eastern
Buddhism - impersonal religious practice all amounts to the same thing.

We, in the Church, have mastered the art, and now the science of Biblical hermeneutics
and exegesis. Our religion of the Book is on a par with rocket science and brain surgery.
And even these disciplines are seemingly simplistic by contrast to the BS we can spew
and brews we can conjure. And just like Burger King, if you ask, seek and knock long
enough You can get it your way.

But, what makes me a Christian? Is it my resolute adherence to a creed, a mumbled
prayer confessing my sins past, present and future and a plea to keep me out of hell?




What is my Christian life? Is it church every Sunday, Wednesday prayer meetings,
tithing, benevolence and charity work on the weekends, a trip to the Gulf Coast to do
Gods work in hurricane relief? Is it quiet times, Bible studies, youth groups, nursing
home visitation, Christmas and Easter, and maybe a few others to bolster my religious
ego.

What is the primal nature of Christianity? Is it dogma gleaned from the Book? Is it the
academic intellectualization of concepts and principles too deep and mysterious for your
average schmuck to realize? Or is it a reality and life given credence to in the Book but
super spiritualized as to remain hidden and the perceived property and domain of the
initiated few guardians of the faith, accredited and ordained to maintain decent and
proper religious order?

Is it conceivable that someone may be receptive and responsive to the Holy Spirit and yet
Biblically ignorant?

I hear your argument, Now faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God -
Oh yes - I feel your pain.

Besides taking a verse out of context - What word are we talking about - the LOGOS.

Check this out - Pay Attention - The Bible, is never defined as the "logos", except as is
defined by we believers in relative recent history, attempting to nail down the mind of
God as tangibly and in as concrete a manner as is possible. But as is understood in the
general thought of the "Scriptures", both Old and New Testaments, "logos" transcends
the limited and narrowly definable, understanding and knowledge of God as handed
down to us in the Bible, the Scriptures. the Bible as "logos" may only be reasoned as
applicable, in that the Bible is the only historically reliable source of recorded
information received by the "faithful" from the beginnings of our faith. As such, it is the
one unchanging objective source to assess to our relation to the Spirit of Christ.

The Holy Spirit is ever communicating - in relation to us - and as the case may be, in
spite of us. And as the Church is seemingly in a never ending state of self absorption,
both as individuals and collective ecumenical communities, circumventing us.

Character in us- the Christ character- is a manifestation realized in the course of
experiencing life in relation to the Holy Spirit. It is not academic religion. It is the
practice of moment-by-moment awareness and of 'seeing deeply into the nature of
things' by direct experience.

Any schmuck can KNOW this. It is not a religious mystery.

I grant you that it appears that the mystics are the ones expressing the truth. But it
really isnt a mystical mystery. It is in the Book. It is not some foreign New Age
concept. It isnt any more a Buddhist discipline than a Christian relation. But it is a
relation.





And I am coming to realize that if we - the Church - cant get over our religious
academics and intellectualizing, realize that concepts and principles (no matter how
Biblical) are secondary, and begin walking in and experiencing that relationship we
purport to have -

Well - you get the picture - you finish it






Wilhelmus Brakel (1635-1711) The Christians Reasonable Service - Chapter Thirty
three: Distinguishing Marks of Saving FaithPublished 8-29-2006 as a blog

Living Dogs and Dead Lions
if you were only to consider that which is of an external nature, the godly would be
excelled by others in many things. There is something within the godly, however, which
incomparably exceeds that which is most impressive in the temporal believer. If you ask,
What is this?, I respond, Spirit and life. Is not a living dog better than a dead lion? Is
not a deformed but living person to be preferred over a beautiful person which consists of
fine, molten gold, and is but a sculpture? Are not the most insignificant motions of life to
be preferred to the noise and rattle of the internal workings of a clock? Obviously, the
answer is yes. Such is the case also here. Temporal believers are void of both Spirit and
life; however, true believers possess both. This is the reason that all activity of the
temporal believer misses the mark, whereas the activity of the believer does not. Spirit
and life must be present, or else all is in vain. If ye through the Spirit do mortify the
deeds of the body, ye shall live (Rom. 8:13); If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in
the Spirit (Gal. 5:25).
The difference is as follows: temporal believers are motivated by reason, honesty, the
desirability of religion, their character, upbringing, a fear of punishment, a desire to be
seen of menin order to openly or subtly obtain honor, love, esteem, admiration, and
possessions. They are, however, neither motivated by the Spirit nor the principle of
spiritual life. The godly, on the contrary, are motivated by the Spirit and the internal
principle of spiritual life.

Wilhelmus Brakel (1635-1711) The Christians Reasonable Service - Chapter Thirty
three: Distinguishing Marks of Saving Faith






First published September 08, 2006. In this I am beginning the serious questioning
process of many "presuppositions" assumed by the Fundamentalist-Evangelical
Church, particularly the absolute nature of the "Bible" as the "Logos" (Word) of God.
I also begin to surmise the logical conclusion of such a "presupposition", "Christian
Reconstructionism".

Presuppositionalism

Christians are regularly accused of not thinking for ourselves, of not exercising
intellectual acumen without reference to some Bible rhetoric, often unrelated to the issue
at hand, or dismissing as irrelevant when unable to find viable categories within our
particular world view.

This is not an entirely unjustified criticism.

When discussing faith, and for that matter virtually anything, reason and logic assumes
certain presuppositions.

Christianity presupposes: (1) God IS (2) The Bible (with varying degree of acceptance as
inerrant and infallible) is Gods written communication to mankind. Upon these our
knowledge of God, Jesus, the Church, Sin and all the rest are deciphered.

What is a presupposition? A presupposition is a ultimate assumption or foundational
unquestioned principle which is or assumed to be true in the course of argument for the
purpose of making other points. A presupposition is really an under girding belief that
precedes all other beliefs a person has; It is a belief that governs all our other beliefs or
the most fundamental commitment of our heart and mind. Each person insists on some
ultimate category of thought or conceptual framework which he must assume in order to
make a sensible interpretation of reality. All of our arguments are ultimately settled only
by appealing to the soundness of our first principles. Unbelievers start with the
presupposition that man can be as God in the sense of being his own ultimate authority
and erroneously believes he can do so successfully. For Christians we adopt the Word of
God to evaluate all other beliefs, and must regard it with certainty. Reason must be the
servant of Revelation (Gods Word). It is a view that places the Christian worldview and
its basic assumptions over against the non-Christian worldview and basic assumptions!
Presuppositionalism presents reason and evidences within a biblical framework.
Presuppositional Apologetics-www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/topic/apologetics.html

As an academic exercise presuppositionalism can be a healthy means of ordering
shattered lives and restructuring thinking previously allowed to run amuck . But as an
absolute definition of what constitutes Spiritual reality, it assumes too much.
Presuppositional reasoning, even in a Christian framework, is still subject to the
unregenerate nature of the mind using it. Unregenerate Biblical, unSpiritual
presuppositionalism is virtually nothing less than a good book in the mind and hands of
an intellectual pervert. Not all Biblical academics are Spiritually equal.

In Christian presuppositionalism, the content of the assumption is secondary in nature to




what is presupposed to be the divine container. Christian presuppositionalism assumes
the Divine Nature of the Bible as the written Special Revelation of God, I.e. the Word I.e.
the Logos. It assumes, that arguing Biblical categories equates to Spiritually endowed
inspiration.

But what if there is a problem with our presupposition? What if there is a fault in the way
we have been defining, and categories we have been applying to our understanding of the
Bible? What if Logos is a term inapplicable to the book we interpret as the Logos of
God? What if we have mismanaged the language of our faith as to overemphasize some
aspects and deemphasize that which may in actuality be the substance of our life,
subsequently allowing for an anemic realization of Christ in us?

Presuppositionalism is not the ultimate evil regarding intellectual inferiority, presupposed
by so many in opposition to faith found in Christ. But presuppositions too narrowly
defined as ultimate and substantially weak regarding the content contained can only result
in an intellectually mediocre and Spiritually deficient faith.

When presuppositionalism is carried to its logical conclusions, based on assumptions
currently recognized by many if not most Evangelical Fundamentalists - Christian
Reconstructionism is the obvious ends. Christian Reconstructionism is a highly
controversial religious and theological movement within Protestant Christianity. It calls
for Christians to put their faith into action in all areas of life including civil government,
and envisions, among other things, the private and civil enforcement of the general
principles of Old Testament and New Testament moral law, including those expounded
in the case laws and summarized in the Old Testament Decalogue. Wikipedia

Christian Reconstructionism does not need the Holy Spirit - It has the rule of Law.

There are presuppositions that we need to hold and cling too. In order to know what these
are requires more than a declaration that the Bible is the Logos of God without regard for
what we even mean by Logos. The content of the presupposition does matter. We need to
seek discernment of that content, not because it is declared so by a presuppositional
statement, but as a result of the internal Spirit of God renewing our minds to receive and
properly interpret the words and language in first Spiritual categories and then the
academic. One does not equal the other.

And thus we will endeavor to seek





Published 9-12-2006 - a natural follow up to the previous "Presuppositionalism".
How I found myself in relationship to "Christian Reconstructionism"


Demolition Man

God is COOL - No - I mean more than Cool. I dont mean to sound irreverent or less than
religiously respectful than I should, but I mean the way God puts things together, when
He wants them put together and to be participating in what I find Him doing - that is
Coooool.

Like, it is one thing to be a pawn in the hands of religious self servers, it is totally another
to be a pawn in the hands of God. And enjoy my part while He plays the game.

You dig.

My generational history and age is showing, so get over it. Im a product of the sixties
and proud of it - sorry you missed the party. They said we had fun. A few of us survived.

I follow Jim Palmers blog and occasionally we swap ideas back and forth. Today he
made reference to The permission slip is particularly for people who believe (or open to
believing) that Jesus Christ is central to knowing God, but as part of the process, need to
deconstruct virtually all beliefs, attitudes, and practices associated with contemporary
Christianity, and be free to express a Christ-centered spirituality in a variety of ways,
some highly eclectic and unconventional.

In my blog Presuppositionalism (Friday, September 08, 2006), I stated When
presuppositionalism is carried to its logical conclusions, based on assumptions currently
recognized by many if not most Evangelical Fundamentalists - Christian
Reconstructionism is the obvious ends. (For the definition of Reconstructionism see the
blog.)

In Jims blog he stated I'm beginning to see more clearly what my own contribution in
the emergent conversation is about.

I too - and I must say, partly as a result of relations with Jim and other authors he has
referenced - I too am beginning to see more clearly what my own contribution is in this
adventure God has chucked us all into. I dont like the label Emergent or any other
label for that matter. I was well on the way into this adventure before I ever knew there
was such a thing as Emergent or whatever else you would call it. I am not endorsing a
labeled movement which can all too easily be captured, packaged and marketed by slick
Christian brokers to take advantage of the financial potential. I dont mind making a
buck, but my commitment is not to the profit possibility, or the movement. I do respect
certain teachers and men God is using. Im not sure I could endorse everything that
appears a viable practice as they may have entered into their new situations following
Christ.





I say I too am beginning to see more clearly what my own contribution. I am not any
sort of fellowship leader and am not seeking any such situation. But I am finding that I
am a Deconstructionist (probably an antonym of Reconstructionist).

Im one of those guys who need to deconstruct virtually all beliefs, attitudes, and
practices associated with contemporary Christianity.

Im Demolition Man.

But not demolition for the sake of demolition or deconstruction for the sake of wiping it
all out. But clearing out the crap - getting the shit and rubble and rotted stuff out of the
way so that it can be put back together the way it should be.

This summer, my wife and I endeavored into numerous home projects (and some we are
continuing through as the fancy struck us and we were in agreement). On of the projects
was to remodel our kitchen.

We have live in this house for twenty years, at the tail end of raising out ten children, and
money was never a luxury. But we recently found ourselves able to do what was desired
to do ten or fifteen years ago. In our own ways, my wife and I are both junk collectors.
Besides home schooling all our children and the stuff that goes along with that, clutter
everywhere had been a norm we had learned to live with, but increasingly was squeezing
us out of a place to simply live.

To do what we wanted to do in the kitchen - Everything had to go. Everything. Twenty
years of accumulated and piled to the ceiling CRAP. At least, since the kitchen was my
wifes domain, and most of this stuff was hers, it was crap to me. Nonetheless, if we were
going to remodel - it had to go.

Her job was to put everything in some sort of order and stick it anyplace but in the
kitchen. I could have helped, but she wouldnt have liked the way I would deal with it, so
she readily accepted the responsibility, boxed things, and crammed them into our living
room or onto our new deck just off the kitchen.

Everything came out. Tear down all the cabinets, sink, tear up the old linoleum - shuffle
the stove and refrigerator around from one side to the other as we needed. You wouldnt
believe some of the stuff we found under the old cabinets - disgusting. We did all this in
an orderly manner. We only had to go one day without the sink and dishwasher, so life
was not too inconvenient. Planning does seem to be one of my strengths.

New Paint, ceiling and walls - New floor- good floor - not the cheap stuff. Coffee and
beverage counter incorporated with trash and recycling cabinets. New cabinets (wall and
base) The is now 250% of the previous counter space, 19 cabinets compared to the 8
original. Larger deeper sink. New 108 kitchen table and chairs (New because we never
had the room for it before).





And now my wife is filling all those cabinets and counter space with the things shes
been collecting for the last twenty years, but never to got used. Youd never have known
they were there. It was all just part of the crap that was heaped onto the pile and lost in
the clutter.

Christianity has grown and become much like our old kitchen. A lot of the old cabinets
are rotted at the base. The sink has leaked, and repairs have been shoddy. Cock roaches
had nested behind the cabinets, and mice under the corner base. Ants can be a problem.
The walls are dingy. The cabinets are grease saturated. Door hinges - just take the door
off. The linoleum is torn and must be covered with a throw rug. Old temporary storage
units, have found their way to becoming permanent. I have to admit, it was a miserable
place to go to, and not at all a place to invite anyone.

And this is the church - and the typical Christian is content in their misery - not in the
least aware that there is treasure in midst of all that crap. And to get to it may mean
demolishing what is there in order to salvage the best, and rebuild to suit the current need
and situation.

Its not deconstruction for the sake of deconstruction. It is deconstruction to rebuild.
Deconstruction does not imply destruction.

There is a plan - there is a method - albeit, it probably is not my plan (strength though it
may be) - After all - Im only a pawn in His game.












This is actually several blogs posted 9-14-2006 - 9-17-2006. In these I am starting to
get into the meat of the matter of why "Orthodoxy" does not hold up under scrutiny.

Hermeneutical rules - Get the Picture
There are certain rules of interpretation that have been adopted by the majority of
conservative Protestants. These rules are part of a discipline known as hermeneutics.
Some, probably most, Evangelical theologians, to greater and lesser degrees, affix a
certain absolute nature to these rules. In general there is logical purpose to this, although
the extent that these are reverenced as absolute can be binding to stifling to down right
oppressive when it comes to reading the Bible and being confident that the Holy Spirit
may actually speak to the common man through the received Scriptures.
Knowing these rules, can be an aid in properly interpreting passages of Scripture. But
when an absolute nature is inferred - the ability of a living God to communicate to a
contemporary mind becomes the realm and dominion of the religious hierarchy. A
situation similar to that experienced at the time of and resulting in the Protestant
Reformation is actualized.
Rules of Biblical interpretation, though potentially helpful, are not of themselves,
absolute doctrines of interpretation, ever to be set in stone and immortalized - time
without end.
Hermeneutical rules, rather than absolutes - concrete foundations, forever placed blinders
to the Spirit - should be considered more as stereotypes, simplified conceptions: an
oversimplified standardized image or idea based on some general although not always
recurring observations. There may be some truth behind many stereotypes, but all too
often the stereotype is proven insufficient if not absolutely in error.
Any hermeneutical rule that we would seek to enforce as absolute for Scriptural
interpretation runs the risk of, in actuality, being set up as a god to bind God.
One of the first steps to correctly interpreting Scripture is being aware of what the Bible
says about itself and understanding how it has come down to us through the centuries
The Bible clearly claims to have revealed information about God. Deuteronomy 29:29
declares that, The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things revealed
belong to us and to our children forever, that we may follow all the words of this law.
In general, this is a good hermeneutical rule. But as an absolute, particularly as
referencing the scripture from Deuteronomy, it is too easily shot through of holes.
This verse, as a proof text for the inspiration of the entirety if the Bible, or even the
complete text of the first five books of the Bible is simply out of context and use to imply
and infer more than it says.




It does speak in reference to the second giving of the Mosaic Law as recorded here in
Deuteronomy and the blessing and curses associated. But to simply grant blanket
association to all prior or subsequent scripture is not the case.
Besides inferring a broader inspiration than is actually stated, the statement, as used to
prove full Biblical inspiration, is divorced from the greater context and prophetic
indictments made concerning Gods continued and future dealings with His people in
Deuteronomy 30 and following. Deuteronomy 30 is a continuation of the discourse of
Deuteronomy 29. The chapter break is of it self an arbitrary break.
Deuteronomy 30 continues to expound that even after trying to obey the Law, after
experiencing the blessing and the curses associated with the Law, the time will come
when God Himself will circumcise your hearts that you may be able to love the Lord
your God with all your heart. The implication being that there is something inherently
deficient in the Law to enable the keeping of its requirements. The Law is good - God
breathed - But it does not keep itself in the hearts of the recipients. And the recipients, as
well intentioned and faithful as may be possible, can not keep it either. A Spiritual
solution, over and above and apart from the Law is required. But like many of us, there is
much we will not hear until we have exerted what we perceive to be all our possibilities.
Anything to do it ourselves - and maintain our apparent autonomy.
In 1 Corinthians 2:12-13 the writer adds that, We have not received the spirit of the
world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given
us. This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught
by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words.
I dont really see it, but this is often quoted to prove the Bibles inspirational endorsement
of itself. Obviously the statement is true, but applying it exclusively to the Bible, or a
particular interpretation of the Bible is spurious at best. It can just as easily be applied to
any inspiration or manifestation of the Spirit in our lives.
The unique nature of the Bible is made clear by Paul in 2 Timothy 3:16. Paul tells
Timothy that All Scripture is God breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking,
correcting and training in righteousness.
Invariably in the New Testament denotes that definite collection of sacred books,
regarded as given by inspiration of God, which we usually call the Old Testament The
Old Testament canon in the time of our Lord was precisely the same as that which we
now possess under that name. He placed the seal of his own authority on this collection
of writings, as all equally given by inspiration (Mt. 5:17; 7:12; 22:40; Lk. 16:29, 31).
In 1 Tim. 5:18, the 2nd quotation is from Luke 10:7, from which it may be inferred that
the apostle included Lukes gospel as Scripture alike with Deuteronomy, from which
the first quotation is taken. There is no other occurrence where the New Testament
quotes itself.




Peter does make an inference to the writings of Paul, equating them to scripture, And
consider that the long-suffering of our Lord [His slowness in avenging wrongs and
judging the world] is salvation (that which is conducive to the souls safety), even as our
beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the spiritual insight given him,
Speaking of this as he does in all of his letters. There are some things in those [epistles of
Paul] that are difficult to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist and
misconstrue to their own utter destruction, just as [they distort and misinterpret] the rest
of the Scriptures. 2 Peter 3:15-16
The word to denote scriptures in the New Testament is graphe. 1. a writing, thing
written 2. the Scripture, used to denote either the book itself, or its contents 3. a certain
portion or section of the Holy Scripture. Scripture or as referenced it is written. graphe
, akin to grapho, to write (Eng., graph, graphic, etc.), primarily denotes a
drawing, painting; then a writing,
From the idea of graphe we get the English graph or to make something graphic, a
picture. This should be too surprising because the way ancient Hebrews thought and
communicated was in picture stories. This is evident in Jesus own style and abundant
use of parables.
I believe this is the ultimate purpose of the Scriptures. God is drawing us a picture. One
picture does not necessarily represent all pictures, any more than all men can be
represented by an abstract stick figure as is depicted in much modern art. But the
Scriptures are graphic illustrations of the mind of God. One picture does not say it all.
But, there is enough to be applicable for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in
righteousness. So that the man of God may be complete and proficient, well fitted and
thoroughly equipped for every good work. 2 Timothy 3:17
Too many interpret complete and proficient as perfect. It does not actually say that.
This is one of those instances where too much is inferred upon something that is not
there.
Another inference that is often applied to the Scripture is that of being the logos. I
dont believe that is in fact the case, and we will deal with that as we paint the bigger
picture.
Get the picture?
Hermeneutical rules and the Holy Spirit
The role of the Holy Spirit is to illumine the believer in order to accept and apply what
is found in Scripture. The key role of the Spirit is not to add information to the text, or
to give us special translating abilities, but to soften our hearts in order to receive what is
there.
The key role of the Spirit is to soften our hearts in order to receive what is there.




A role of the Holy Spirit to illumine the believer in order to accept and apply what is
found in Scripture is true - but too presume The key role of the Spirit is primarily this -
assumes a fundamentally academic and intellectual apprehension of the Spirit limited to
the letter of the book, and forgets it is the Spirit who is the third person of the Godhead
(is in essence God) and it is the book that serves the author and not the other way
around. I.e. We worship the Father, Son and Holy Spirit revealed to us in the book , Not
-We worship Father, Son and Bible illumined to us by the Spirit.
We need to get this together. It is the book the Bible that reveals the person of the
Spirit and communicates His purpose and function in our lives. It is not the prime
purpose of the Spirit to make us servants of the book, but the book is to reinforce and
assure us of the Life communicated through the Spirit - even as that life may transcend
the limited content of the book.
As a book - bound by a set number of words, sentences and concepts - its scope and
purpose is limited. It may in fact be the words of God, but is not in fact God. The words
and concepts may well be eternal
- as eternal is defined as maintaining value time without end, but are finite as no book
may express the entirety of the Person and all God is.
Expressing the entirety of the Person and all God is in and through our lives - as we
live in Him - in Christ - this is the prime purpose of the Holy Spirit. John 14-17
Hermeneutical rules and the Reformation
Prior to the Protestant Reformation in the 1500s, biblical interpretation was often
dominated by the allegorical method.the medieval church believed that every biblical
passage contained four levels of meaning. These four levels were the literal, the
allegorical, the moral, and the eschatologicalwith a new emphasis on the original
languages of Hebrew and Greek, the fourfold method of interpretation was beginning to
fade. Martin Luther argued that the church shouldn't determine what the Scriptures mean,
the Scriptures should govern what the churches teach. He also rejected the allegorical
method of interpreting ScriptureLuther argued that a proper understanding of what a
passage teaches comes from a literal interpretation. This means that the reader must
consider the historical context and the grammatical structure of each passage, and strive
to maintain contextual consistency. This method was a result of Luther's belief that the
Scriptures are clear, in opposition to the medieval church's position that they are so
obscure that only the church can uncover their true meaningCalvin agreed in principle
with Luther. He also placed great importance on the notion that Scripture interprets
Scripture, stressing that the grammar, context, words, and parallel passages found in the
text were more important than any meaning we might impose on them. He added that, it
is the first business of an interpreter to let the author say what he does say, instead of
attributing to him what we think he ought to say.




I am not unequivocally abhorrent of contemporary conservative hermeneutical method.
There is a lot of good sound wisdom in the approach to interpreting scriptures that has
been won for the church as a result of men of integrity following Gods leading and
applying themselves as best they understood His will. A recurring problem is as these
new freedoms and insights are implemented, others not so true to the original intent and
purpose, expand and take to extremes these methods and logic and end up constructing
perversions of that which was originally found to be good. I do not believe this regularly
observable fact is limited to any particular movement or line of theology, but is rather a
by-product of fallen human nature. The original integrity of a plan, means or method
becomes compromised by ambition.
Ambition may be define two fold: (1) an aim or objective that somebody is trying to
achieve, and/or (2) a strong feeling of wanting to be successful in life and achieve great
things.
It is this second inner drive in the heart of men that compels them to strive to do virtually
anything necessary to become more than what they perceive they are, to enforce their will
and purpose, to compromise or justify half conceived enhancements - the purpose being
not the integrity of what they would claim to represent, but their own situation as may be
ordered in the scheme of things. Unable to rest in God - they are driven to prove and
justify themselves - and secure their place in the Kingdom - whatever that (the Kingdom)
may be.
Luther argued that a proper understanding of what a passage teaches comes from a
literal interpretation. This means that the reader must consider the historical context
and the grammatical structure of each passage, and strive to maintain contextual
consistency.
This is an excellent beginning. The problem arises when this literalism is taken to
extremes and applied to passages that quite obviously are not literal but metaphoric. It
does not take into account the different literary genre, or types, in the Bible. A first step
should be to determine the literary genre of the passage. A passage might be legal,
narrative, polemic, poetry, wisdom, gospel, logical discourse, or prophetic literature, each
having specific guidelines for proper interpretation. Calvin agreed in principle with
Luther. He also placed great importance on the notion that Scripture interprets
Scripture, stressing that the grammar, context, words, and parallel passages found in
the text were more important than any meaning we might impose on them.
Here again this is a good basic rule. What it lacks is understanding of the Person of the
Holy Spirit except as it applies to an intellectual approach to interpreting the Scriptures,
based on what may be arbitrary standards of interpretation. Scripture interprets
Scripture is all to easily caught in the hunt and peck pulling of Scripture verses out of
context in order to support pet doctrines.
Both these men made great strides for the Church in interpreting and making
understanding of what the Bible teaches more accessible to the general population of the




Church. But they were not perfect. I truly believe, that as they realized their place in the
maturation of this body called Church, to the best they knew - they were faithful. Faithful
- Not perfect.
Our error is when we infer an implied perfection to what they accomplished and/or fail to
recognize actual errors in their doctrines and fail to address them openly and honestly
and/or build upon their errors and compound a theological dilemma with greater error.
Spiritual strides forward too easily slip into religious complacency.
History has a way of repeating itself. A state of religious complacency is not what I find
to be a particular worry to God. As such a state may exist - God has His way of stirring
the pot and stimulating a restlessness among His people. And among these will be men
with integrity enough to hear His voice and proclaim His Word. By Word I do not
necessarily exclusively imply the Bible - although it certainly is not excluded and will
assuredly substantiate the proclaimed Word.
Hermeneutical Rules - Context, or the lack there of
subtitle: Chucking All Reason and Logic for the Virtue of Ignorance
Context
1. text surrounding a word or passage: the words, phrases, or passages that come
before and after a particular word or passage in a speech or piece of writing and
help to explain its full meaning
2. surrounding conditions: the circumstances or events that form the environment
within which something exists or takes place
Another approach to interpretation is letterism. While often ignoring context, historical
and cultural setting, and even grammatical structure, letterism takes each word as an
isolated truth. A problem with this method is that it fails to take into account the different
literary genre, or types, in the Bible. The Hebrew poetry of the Psalms is not to be
interpreted in the same way as is the logical discourse of Romans. Letterism tends to lead
to legalism because of its inability to distinguish between literary types. All passages tend
to become equally binding on current believers.
There is a particular Christian movement that I have a peeve with. Actually there is a
second and most likely a third and forth, but the errant handling of the Bible and implied
absolutes asserted by this one really irks me.
I wont mention it by name, but Im sure most reading this will recognize it by the
characteristics exhibited and commonly associated with it. At the same time I want to
stress that I believe that the leaders in this movement (and others) truly do seek to be
Gods servants and in spite of the a chosen path of preferred ignorance.




By preferred ignorance I mean a conceptual grasping of Biblical truth based on a desire
for what it (the Bible) says, rather than a contextually complete apprehension of what is
actually presented. Doctrines and theology are built on a foundation of desires about God
sacrificing the truth of what the Bible (Scripture) actually says about God. To this is
added the encouraged products of our imaginations, with insufficient criteria to assess the
Spiritual content of what is imagined. Desire and imagination become the interpretive
norms of the Bible and the Spirit.
Context, in understanding Scripture, is more than what comes before and after a
particular passage. Context includes the literary genre of the passage. A passage might
be legal, narrative, polemic, poetry, wisdom, gospel, logical discourse, or prophetic
literature, each having specific guidelines for proper interpretation. For instance, the
wisdom literature found in Proverbs is to be seen as maxims or general truths based on
broad experience and observations. "They are guidelines, not guarantees; precepts, not
promises. Various forms of Hebrew poetry, simile, metaphor, and hyperbole need to be
recognized if the reader is to understand the passage's meaning. Hyperbole, for example,
uses exaggeration to make a point. Ignoring the cultural context of a passage is one of
the greatest problems in Bible interpretation. By culture we mean the behavior of a
people as reflected by their thoughts, beliefs, social forms, speech, actions, and material
artifacts. If we ignore culture, we often wrongly read into the Bible our twentieth century
ideas.
An acquaintance in Christian music ministry was having difficulty independently
studying and understanding the Bible. Expressing this to the foremost leaders within the
movement, he was advised, Only read the words in red. The words in read are the
words of Jesus in many Bibles. That in itself is not bad, but to take those words out of
contextual relation with the rest of the passage is purely a cognitive decision to treat as
irrelevant the why solely in arbitrary preference to the what spoken by Jesus. This
approach to acquiring Biblical knowledge, is not Spiritual. Its roots are every bit as
humanistic as any other approach that would exclude portions of Scripture because of the
miraculous inclusions that could not possibly be treated as factual. This red letter
approach to theology ignores the fact that the same Spiritually inspired author who
penned the words of Jesus for posterity also recorded the context and framework for
understanding and applying those words.
The contemporary Church is in an acute state of schizophrenia. Rather than expressing a
coherent complete corporate personality of Christ, we are a fragmented delusional driven
religion, lacking means to heal our selves and persistently demanding prescriptions of our
own conjuring.
Yet even in this state God has not deserted us or left us without care. Eventually the
arguments over to heal or not to heal, to prosper or not too, all find there way into the
relative void of nothingness, and all there is left is God. And whether our theology is
together or not, God IS.




And eventuallyif we really lookwe find He Is much closer than any theology could
ever allow us to imagine.
Hein meChrist.





There reached a point in my Orthodox Christian Life that I simply became fed up with
the "religous" attitudes and acceptable social nicities that we were expected to
extend to each other. It was all a religious farce as I saw it ... and sti...ll see it. These
are three posts I made regarding an issue someone had over my disposition
regarding "worship", and I was not willing to take the crap without being open and
frank about what I thought.

God Jam
It's "the Real Thing"



Spend enough time together, not necessarily with a planned agenda, but sharing a
common vision, something is bound to eventually manifest. A primary element to see this
happen is faithfulness, to God - to your vision - to each other.

As a skilled musician, it is difficult for me to just sit back or lay back, put on a CD
(regardless of the supposed anointing) and soak. Its like chewing on another cows
cud. Why would I want to do that when I can get the real thing from the source and by-
pass the middle man?

Now, I am not demeaning the practice of soaking as we are coming to understand it
and put it into practice and be blessed in the process. My point is that as a God blessed
and accomplished musician, soaking is second best when you have become accustomed
to plugging in and allowing and experiencing the direct flow of Gods creativity
immediately, in the first person. The act of soaking in the presence of God utilizing a CD
as the source of commuting us into Spiritual dimensions can never be more than a third
person experience, or gathering the crumbs that fall from another mans plate. And if you
are accustomed to Gods direct, personal inspiration, a second hand blessing.

Not all are musicians. Musicians as God made us are created to usher the non-musicians
into the presence of God. God created me to usher, not to be ushered. Musicians speak in
a language that transcends verbal, intellectual intelligence. It has been called the
language of angels. This language may be the communications of war, or peace and
comfort. Like any language, it must be learned. It is not as simple as the babbling of
tongues, but as a corporal and at the same time spiritual communication, speaks in
Spiritual realities.

Religious notions of what constitutes acceptable worship expression are often an affront
to musicians who have tasted of the creative waters gushing forth from the throne of God,
who have learned to drink freely and float without the aid of religious water wings.

This is God Jam.

Is God Jam a band? Yes, but No. It is a gathering of a regular set of musicians but is not
limited to a particular line up. Is God Jam an event? Yes, but no. God Jam is wherever
and whenever we musicians gather to exercise our gift with each other and to others, be it




in the church or elsewhere. It is our opening ourselves to the creative process as God
inspires, opens our minds, and we are willing and receptive to this in each other and seek
to compliment each other and as God grants, lead each other. Can any musician
participate in God Jam. Yes, but no. Novices of limited ability will be treated as
apprentices and expected to submit to the authority of the leadership. Accomplished
journeymen may fit in comfortably. Some musicians with many years playing, in reality
have little real knowledge of music, or have an inflated opinion of their own skill level.
When the rubber hits the road, these will burn out, or blow out, fairly quickly, and an
unwillingness to receive instruction and teaching to bring their skills up to par will see
them come and go. Master musicians will have no problem playing, but this is not a
democracy, nor are prima Donnas catered too. Prerequisites are a desire to allow God to
create through the gift He has given you, a willingness to submit to the authority God has
established within the God Jam social structure, and a willingness to set upon the task of
mastering your craft.

Is God Jam a closed Jam Session for musicians only? NO absolutely not. Anyone and
everyone are welcome to come, listen, enjoy, learn, worship, SOAK as God may be in
you and with you as you are. But- God Jam is not a show. The musicians purpose is not
primarily to entertain you, or to minister to you. We are gathered first to minister to God,
and that not necessarily in a way that caters to your idea of what may be proper. You may
be more comfortable boarding your 747. God Jam is a Space Shuttle. The timid need not
bother. We are going to war, not a tea party. Jams usually are quite long, typically 30 to
60 minutes. A short one may be about 10-15 minutes. Long jams go through phases or
movements. One jam flowed for about 90 minutes. Playing for such extended periods,
there are times between jams to fellowship with musicians. We need our rest and refresh
ourselves. As fun as it may be, this kind of playing is work.


Its Not That I Mean to Offend, It Just Comes Naturally

Jesus answered him, I have spoken openly to the world. I have always taught in a
synagogue and in the temple [area], where the Jews [habitually] congregate (assemble);
and I have spoken nothing secretly... Jesus replied, If I have said anything wrong [if I
have spoken abusively, if there was evil in what I said] tell what was wrong with it. But if
I spoke rightly and properly, why do you strike Me? John 18:20, 23

I put out two email newsletters. One is this God jam Newsletter, the other is a posting of
worship, teaching and other recordings I make on a regular basis.

Last week I received a response to an article which was actually included in both emails,
God Jam- Its the Real Thing. A brother took offense, and thought I was attacking a
ministry He is personally a part of. That was not the case and what I expressed were
opinions and attitudes Ive held for years.

There used to be a time, not so long ago, I would twist myself into all sorts of contortions
and flip over backwards to try and be diplomatic and placate offended parties. Not so, no




mo. I have also come to a conclusion, and this I have also held for years, as some have
been offended in the past can attest, unity is not a matter of holding the same opinion or
avoiding controversy for the apparent sake of peace. Such peace is not peace at all,
but fear of being real, for the sake of putting on a Christian religious facade. I know
are a few out there that will read this, who have been given with the same gift of offence,
so I dont feel too alone.

But I urge and entreat you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of
you be in perfect harmony and full agreement in what you say, and that there be no
dissensions or factions or divisions among you, but that you be perfectly united in your
common understanding and in your opinions and judgments. 1 Cor 1:10

For you are still [unspiritual, having the nature] of the flesh [under the control of
ordinary impulses]. For as long as [there are] envying and jealousy and wrangling and
factions among you, are you not unspiritual and of the flesh, behaving yourselves after a
human standard and like mere (unchanged) men? 1 Cor 3:3

For in the first place, when you assemble as a congregation, I hear that there are cliques
(divisions and factions) among you; and I in part believe it, For doubtless there have to be
factions or parties among you in order that they who are genuine and of approved fitness
may become evident and plainly recognized among you. 1 Cor 11:18, 19

Divisions and unity are both a part of Christian reality. On the one hand we are told to
be in perfect harmony and full agreement in what you say, and that there be no
dissensions or factions or divisions among you, but that you be perfectly united in your
common understanding and in your opinions and judgments. On the other hand,
there are cliques (divisions and factions) among you; and I in part believe it, For
doubtless there have to be factions or parties among you in order that they who are
genuine and of approved fitness may become evident and plainly recognized among
you.

Okay Paul, give me a break. On the one hand I am to wimpishly play the part of Harvey
Milk Toast and give into any sort of assertiveness by my brother in Christ for the sake
of unity and peace in bond of love in Christ. On the other hand, these differences may
well be the testing of my genuineness and fitness, if I stand my ground. Which is it?

Between these two poles, have differences become a matter of envying and jealousy
and wrangling Are we getting caught up playing the church political game?

Differences in polity, method, emphasis in ministry and a myriad of other possibilities are
to be expected. We are allowed to differ with each other. And in differing, the Lord will
make evident and plainly recognizable that which is genuine and of approved fitness. We
are allowed to differ. We are not allowed to devour each other because of these
differences. Do I envy? Am I jealous? Do I look forward to a good fight? To chalk up
another notch on my pearl handled spiritual peace makers. Excuse me, make that ivory
handled, Only a pimp would use pearl handles George C. Scott as Gen George Patton.





I for one love open debate. The problem with open debate, or at least the way most open
debates turn out, we begin attacking each other rather than issues.

I would like to include my response to the brother who took offense at the Its the Real
Thing article. But for now I will not. I would like to post His response to the article on
my website, and then respond myself. And likewise receive his response or rebuttal and
also read the opinions of others.

I do not fear the extremist that can get out of line. I have confidence enough that there is
enough of the Holy Spirit in the Body of Christ to put them in their place, and in the right
spirit.

No I will not post my brothers response; we need to mend some fences. And I would not
do that without His knowing it would be posted first.

But here is the issue. Jesus said I have spoken openly I have spoken nothing
secretly John 18:20.

What I have written and posted in these newsletters, I do openly and publicly. I welcome
feedback and response. But I will receive nothing as private conversation, and if a
response is warranted, I will not be silent.


What follows is my reply to a response to 'It's the Real Thing'. The author of the response
has not granted permission to publicly post their response, but that does not render a
restraint on me to reply. They shall remain anonymous. Bob Couchenour

----------------------------------------------------

****

Thanks for your response to the Real Thing. I think there is much we agree on, and just
as much we disagree on.

First what I wrote in the article was not and is not a reaction to what you may have
taught or did on the Sunday in question. Hence, It seems to have a defensive tone to it,
as though some offense was taken, is not the case at all. I could not be offended if I was
not there to be offended in the first place. I was not at *********** that Sunday. Second
the article was written before the Sunday you had the service. If anything rather than
defensive it is purposely offensive.

I dont have a problem with soaking or playing CDs. And if you notice in the article, I
write As a skilled musician, and any attitude expressed is As a skilled musician. I
certainly do believe you can be blessed and worship with CDs, but As a skilled
musician it is like chewing on another cows cud. Such a prospect has no appeal to me




As a skilled musician at all.

As far as what happens at God Jam on Friday nights. The church universal, contemporary
and traditional has been content to express Gods creative nature at a level of mediocrity
that lends to the perception of the masses of believers as ignorant, unthinking, culturally
deficient, and merely tolerable as an economic block of consumers to be made
merchandisable and marketed to simply because there is a sufficient number of sales to
be made. This marketing and merchandising mentality is not just a world modes
operandi, it is the churches methodology. Skill and Creativity are sacrificed on the altar
of marketability. The quality of the vast majority of the items that stock the shelves of
Christian bookstores is nothing more than kitsch with a religious theme. Our music, on
the whole (and I admit there are exceptions there) is little more than Christian schmaltz.
We have reduced our creative expressions to religious musical formulas that are proven
sellers. Now this does not deny that the church as a whole may be blessed by these
products. Its all there is on the shelves. Mass marketability determines what we are
offered. Creativity, skill and craftsmanship of production are not determinative of value.
Economic, low priced, quick factory to store distribution, and a sense of religious
sentiment is what determines what expresses Christian value and being. Our music is
allowed little more latitude.

We are faced with a problem that religious leaders are equated a position as artistic critics
and religious safe formulas that fit the mind set of a personal vain of understanding or
enlightenment are afforded their approval and blessing. We, ***********, and the
********* movement, are not uninfected by this. New movement, new forms.
Eventually the new becomes the traditional, eventually the traditional becomes the
classic. But new is new as long as it is in the process of creation. As soon as it is
recorded, encoded, burned onto a CD, or pressed into an album, or even transcribed onto
a paper chart or into a computer midi file, its newness begins to fade. Yes it can bless
others. But the Holy Spirit moves through people. He abides in us. There may be an
anointing that is present as that CD is played. But if that artist is truly anointed, there is
no better place to be than in the presence of the process of creation and not sucking up the
residue of what happened in a studio a few years earlier or a live presentation that
happened to be recorded. These recordings eventually become our benchmarks of what is
Christian and religiously acceptable. They take on their own religious sanctification and
canonization.

The intent of God Jam, for one part, is to move toward raising the level of musicianship
of Christian musicians. Besides this, to afford an open safe environment where serious
musicians can freely express their creativity in a fellowship of artists. It is a place where
musicians, who want to grow in their craft, can be offered a place to do it. Novices of
limited ability will be treated as apprentices and expected to submit to the authority of
the leadership. Accomplished journeymen may fit in comfortably. Some musicians with
many years playing, in reality have little real knowledge of music, or have an
inflated opinion of their own skill level. Master musicians will have no problem
playing, but this is not a democracy, Prerequisites are a desire to allow God to
create through the gift He has given you, a willingness to submit to the authority




God has established within the God Jam social structure, and a willingness to set upon
the task of mastering your craft. The musicians purpose is not primarily to
entertain you, or to minister to you. We are gathered first to minister to God, and that not
necessarily in a way that caters to your idea of what may be proper. You may be more
comfortable boarding your 747. God Jam is a Space Shuttle. The timid need not bother.
We are going to war, not a tea party.

I think it is a good thing that youve been doing through these various aspects of God
Jam (both the weekly and the periodic public venues), although I know from first hand
experience, the weekly gatherings tend to provide a time of fellowship that only the most
accomplished of musicians would feel welcomed at You came to two (2) Friday night
sessions (over eight months), with a vast period between the two. As the sessions
evolved, and the creative process is an evolving process, things moved on and changed. I
offered my time skills and service originally to any who wanted to advance their musical
abilities. Few, and this I believe includes you, are aware of the commitment, dedication
and sacrifice required to see this become a reality in their own lives. Or, if they are aware,
are unwilling to commit the time (energy and money) and DO what it takes. As the Lord
culled the sheep from the goats (I hope you will forgive my imperfect analogy) the core
of serious musicians and those sharing common vision evolved and new musicians are
being attracted and added.

The Friday night God Jam sessions are not intended to be a religious gathering to satisfy
some spiritual gurus idea of what we musicians should be or should be doing or should
not be doing. this is not a democracy nor are prima Donnas catered too, that is
religious as well as musical prima Donnas. I am the boss. I have a core of brothers
around me who share the same vision. They are my confidants and advisors. This we do
with the pastoral oversight of **** ***** and permission of the trustees and elders.

I will refrain from saying more

Bob





October 26, 2006 - This is very short, but I am finally reaching the "crux" of
the matter and asking the very pointed questions ... Finally asking the
questions I had been avoiding ... I already "knew" the answers, ... but just
waiting to see what arguments I would get ... none ever came.

What if knowing Christ has nothing to do with the rhetoric we spout, but everything to do
with the character we exude?

What if real Christianity is the life that emanates from the depths of our being and not the
rehearsed mindless babble we use to proselytize?

What if John Lennon was right?

Have we missed something





This was first sent as an email to two friends, one a writer/theologian in
Nashville Tennessee, and the other an older gentleman, former Evangelist
and at the time, someone I had come to rely on for spiritual guidance. It
was soon after pos...ted as a blog. I had been reaching a point where
"Orthodox" Christianity had lost meaning and I was finding it in truths
elluded to in scripture, but seldom taught with any depth or clarity ... I was
finding the truth in myself, as long as I was willing to search for it. External
"scriptural" interpretations had become empty and dead.

Blinded by the Light

My self taught theological learning extends back some 34 years to the time of my
conversion and more serious than most (not in professional environs). Being self taught
has allowed me a certain liberty to pick and choose of the resources I would be receptive
of. This, I believe, has afforded a greater latitude to the Spirit as I am led.

As might be expected, early learning experiences were more highly influenced by those I
associated with, looking to them as spiritual guides. But I was always the one to assess
the content and come to my own conclusions. This freedom has at times resulted in a
tension in relationships and eventual parting of ways - some more vehement than others.

What seems to be a pattern is - finding fellowship with a group of believers based on a
perceived common shared faith and experience - my own progressive relationship to God
engages me in a question, that, as it is explored and considered, results in a newer,
broader, but at the same time more perfect understanding of God, the Person of Christ,
the Spirit, the Kingdom , etc and so on. This leads to the tension in relationships - not
outwardly - but internally - in me. My relation with my brothers in Christ is thwarted, as I
no longer perceive Spiritual things in the same sense, as was originally entered into the
relationship. I feel no longer bound to perpetuate a religious status quo and mission as
was the foundation of our reason for fellowship. This situation is only exasperated by the
elevation of Spiritual authorities (I use the term loosely) who are granted position as a
result of their ability to maneuver the religious socio-political environ, Or have developed
their approved theology to the satisfaction and impression of the powers that be.

I recently did a short series of blogs on Hermeneutical rules for interpreting scriptures.
Dealing with positive and negative aspects (Im not sure Im really done yet).

Looking at the subject, as well as the writings of others, has prompted other questions
and considerations.

The Kingdom of God (Heaven) is at hand. The Kingdom of God (Heaven) is within
you.

Through out the Bible - plain - common earthly experiences were (are) used to express -
deeper - spiritual truth and reality. Earthly common expressions were used
metaphorically - simply because there was not a language, or categories of language
available to communicate the depths of the truth expressed. Jesus continued this tradition




in parables - with meanings both clear and hidden.

In our Evangelical zeal to interpret the Scriptures in as literal a way possible, have we
blinded ourselves to what Jesus was saying for the sake of a literal absolute - that
doesnt exist? Has literalism become our idol? And as a result barred the door to the
Kingdom that already is within?

Are we Blinded by the Light?

Me thinks, maybe - more than we thinks.



***************************

I am considering posting this, but I do respect the opinions of other explorers - and if
Ive missed something, Id like to get feedback on it.

I appreciate your time and thoughts

Bless you both

Bob





November 18, 2006 - By this time I had begun exploring the varying
competitive alternatives to what was to become early proto-Orthodox
Christianity. In my search I discovered that there really was NOT a single
concept of "Christianity" or "...who or what constituted the nature of
"Christ", and all the competing notions had what we now would consider,
equally qualifying Apostolic support. I realize that this is anathema to
contemporary Orthodox thought, but I had already become disallusioned by
the constant and contrived "religious" bullshit the Church spewed as a
matter of imaginative apologetics.


do you have AIM?

what do you believe concerning Zaroastrianism?

Steve
===================

Steve

I have disabled IMs like AIM and ICQ - too much clutter. I do a lot of recording and
mixing on the computer, and they become distractions. I do use MSN Messenger and
Yahoo Messenger - but disable them when working on music.

what do you believe concerning Zaroastrianism?

I have not studied it in any sort of depth - but from what I have gleaned - there are
elements of Spiritual truth that Jesus taught that are compatible with Zoroastrianism.
There are also elements (not the entirety) of Gnostic teaching that I find substantial
Biblical reinforcement for.

The church would suppress these. This is nothing new - it extends back 1800 years or
more. The church has evolved, since the time of Constantine, into an organizational,
political, pseudo-spiritual entity. The Bible and Scripture in general, is approached First
on an intellectual, naturalistic-mechanistic - dissect and analyze modes operandi and
Secondly, if it gets this far, on the basis of Spiritual dialogue recorded and preserved as
such. Canon of Scripture (aka the Bible) has been afforded its own deification as the only
source of communication of and by the Holy Spirit. If something cannot be logically,
rationally, analytically deduced and Biblical principal applied - it is suspect. (1 Cor 2:14)

This does not imply that the church is not a harbinger of Christs kingdom. It is a
statement that the church as it has evolved is more Biblical Political than Biblical
Spiritual.

The first, Biblical Political approaches spiritual reality and relation on the basis of
naturalistic resources and human abilities, and as such, recreates its religion in its own
image, and imposition through various political-religious-economic avenues. The second,




Biblical Spiritual, is spiritually born from within. Transference and assimilation is the
product of metamorphosis, initiated and accomplished by God, and may be conveyed
through relational contact - but is never imposed. (John 1:13)

The church has lost confidence that the Spirit of God is in actuality - active - where and
in whom - He chooses. We - the church - in our Biblical Political correctness - have
taken it upon ourselves to be the Holy Spirit. And as we deem necessary - impose our
will, cloaked as Gods. (Gal 4:29)

I know this has been rather long winded - but someone gets me started, and as I respond -
it grows into my next blog.

Hope you dont mind. And I appreciate the questions

Bob

==============================

Pomiferous

Well stated, Bob
I wonder sometimes which sect was the first to replace a living God with
the KJV.

================================

FingerStyle

"what do you believe concerning Zaroastrianism?" You know what Bob, way to much
semmitary school for me. When things get to thology focused I back up to one place.
"Believe as a child", "We are imbodied with the amount of faith", "Just have faith". I
had never heard of that term until I read this e-write of yours...... However interesting,
I think it derails the beleiver and places him/her in the wronge place...... I see what you
are saying, but for someone like me who has a very basic faith that works, everytime,
on time. blessing my friend. FingerStyle.

================================

Bob Couchenour


Neil
This was actually a question that was asked of me - to which I responded.

Nothing seminary about it - never been to seminary - or Bible school for that matter.

"Believe as a child", "Just have faith" - There's the rub.





Believe What? Faith in what? and expressed how? Is faith and belief a matter of
assimilation into a religious system? This is where I believe the "Biblical Political" has
already derailed those who are called "believers". And ignorance would keep us slaves to
the system, as defined by Religious (not Spiritual) leaders- in preference to the security of
the religious system (which may well mean their own security).

"Believe as a child", "Just have faith" becomes a catch phrase to maintain the religious
status quo - don't ask too may questions - don't rock the boat - the pastors know best - and
the believer is robbed of true intimate relation with God, as it cannot be experienced apart
from intermediatory Pastorial approval. I.e. if it would offend the Pastor - I better not go
there. And that means Spiritually, Intellectually or Physically.

Religious systems that do not lead us to a maturity of relationship with the indwelling
Spirit, Christ in you, and drawing on that internal Spiritual life force as the primary
resource for your LIFE, even as it may counter the religious nature of the system- These
are Not the church. They may be organizations with Christian names, and propound
Biblical principles - that may make them "Christian" in name - but Christ in You and
drawing on Him as His Spirit is alive in you - even in opposition to regularly accepted
"Christian" norms - these are those who constitute the Church. Not the building, not the
religious system, not the principles - Christ in you. There is a vast difference between the
two.





November 24, 2006 - After opening myself to new possibilities, I found
"spiritual" truth can be garnered anywhere, and in some of the most
surprising places. "Truth" was not the sole position of the Orthodox
religious, but spread over all creation ... liberally.

Reaching The Powers That Be

I am the recipient of several music and guitar related e-zines focused towards the needs
of independent musicians. One of the most valuable to me is The Buzz factor from Bob
Baker. I do not know Bob personally, but we have exchanged emails and I know he is
aware of my efforts as an independent musician. To the best of my knowledge Bob Baker
is not a Christian - He may be - our relationship is professional as musicians and He is a
marketing mentor and teacher to me. What I have appreciated about Bob is that he
expresses a tangible motivational faith in areas of independent music marketing that is
generally considered new and uncharted territory. It is the practical expression of what I
have believed concerning the value of the Internet (10+ years) and (dating myself back
even further) the value of the computer as a communications tool (20 years). His
knowledge and industry insights help me put feet to what I know I can and must do.

I received this yesterday. In his response to the posed question I found an insight that we,
Christians, The Church, need to give more heart too.

Reaching the Music Powers That Be
Reprinted from Bob Baker's Indie Music Promotion Blog

The other day I received a message on MySpace from an enthusiastic but sadly
misguided independent artist. He was genuinely excited about taking action to promote
his band's music. In his email he asked ...
How do we get our music in the hands of "the powers that be" or in front of
someone who will just help us get to where we want to be?
Here's the brief response I sent him:
Why do you need to get your music to "the powers that be"? In my opinion, you
are the power that IS. What you need to focus on is getting your music to FANS --
and getting it to them yourself.
The most important person to get you where you want to be is YOU. Stop
looking outside yourself for answers and miracles.
These days there are a seemingly infinite number of no-cost and low-cost tools
available that you can use to find your ideal fans and make them aware of who
you are and what you do. Start using them. Yourself. Now!
That was my best advice. Do you agree?

Bob Baker is the author of "Guerrilla Music Marketing Handbook," "Unleash the Artist Within" and "Branding Yourself Online." He
also publishes TheBuzzFactor.com, a web site and e-zine that deliver free music marketing tips and self-promotion ideas to musicians
of all kinds. Visit TheBuzzFactor.com for more details.

We - independent musicians - are plagued with a contagion - much similar to that
infecting the Church. We, IMs, for the most part are caught up in a dream world and
hopes that someday we will be discovered and some fat cat record producer will lay some




huge advance and contract in our laps, and everything will be easy street from then on.
And all well have to do is worry about how to spend the money. Yes, we all have our
fantasies.

And I can hear the arguments coming back at me - NO, thats not me - I just want to
make a living playing my music. Well - heres a secret for you - that may be true - You
see thats all I really want to do too. But - if you arent doing all the other stuff and
utilizing the resources available to you to build your music career - you are living in a
fantasy.

There is a lot more to the music business than just playing youre music. And if you
expect to make it with your music - as a business - paying the bills, and all this other stuff
of life -and are not willing to face the facts of the business side - you are dreaming. And
the reality is you are waiting for your sugar daddy.

The church, we Christians, in an all too similar way have been waiting for our sugar
daddy. We - in so many different spheres and manners have been looking for The God
Who Is There out there - somewhere - to show up and do it for us.

In our passion to bring the Spirit down and move amongst us we are missing the reality
of the God who is here. Not just near - but within. Our minds become so affixed as to be
entranced, in arguments, reason and Biblical human based logic, that we are incapable of
hearing that still small voice of the one who is with you and in you. (John 14;16-17)

Now - dont get the idea that I am advocating a rejection of the Bible - On the contrary. I
am advocating an embracing of a fuller understanding and appreciation of what Jesus
taught as expressed in the Bible. We have not, in fact actually accepted the reality and
Person of the Holy Spirit as IN FACT - IN REALITY - IN US. So we rely on our
arguments and reasoning and Biblical manipulations to construct our religion and put it
all together for us. And missing the God within - we are always wanting for the God we
hope is out there - some where.

I do not reject Biblical reasoning - reason and logic are not the enemy of faith , or God or
Christ. I do not reject the Scriptures, the Bible -or the early creeds of the church for that
matter.

What I do reject is the religious monstrosity that would smother the life out of the relation
that I have found with the God within. Such religion is not the expression of the Bride of
Christ, but is more the resemblance of the Whore of Babylon. This is not a blanket
judgment on all - but is the nature of human religion and doctrines do not constitute a
reality of Spiritual life. The Church has become vexed - too often incapable of discerning
twixt and between.

Unlike Bob Baker - I do not believe The most important person to get you where you
want to be is YOU. But neither do I believe it is He, who is out there - somewhere - and
I can only move as His Spirit happens to fall. Because He Is In Me. And I abide in Him.




And yes - sometimes I want to move ahead faster - but - when I listen to Him - things get
done. And to tell you the truth - sometimes Im not sure if Im hearing Him or me -
because Ive found - He sounds just like me. And when you listen - youll probably find,
He sounds just like you.

But thats what faith is





When the word Christian is used, what is the image that comes to mind?
December 29, 2006
What is the value of the name Christian?

When the word Christian is used, what is the image that comes to mind? Now I did not
say Jesus or Christ or Messiah, Yeshua that reference the man Jesus who walked
the earth two thousand years ago, and many of us worship as God, but Christian. And I
am not referring to some idyllic state of perfection and social order that many of us wish
to super-impose on our religious frame of thinking to give us a sense of having arrived,
God is in His heaven and all is right with the world.

But, shedding all religious frame of reference, which would tend to add a favorable
colorization and tinting to our view and perspective, what is there in the title
Christian that is intrinsically sacred?

Is it the title or name that I bear that makes me who I am? Or is it the spirit and life that
emanates from within me that defines who, and what, I am?

Is it my religious doctrines, which are continually being expanded, revised, redefined,
perpetually modified, magnified and/or discarded altogether, that establishes and gives
credence to my personhood and status in relation to my creator God? Or is it the life my
creator has invested in me, and wishes to see nurtured and matured and lived to its fullest
possible expression that is my reality?

Whats in a name?

Whats in a doctrine? When a doctrine is only a mans best explanation into Spiritual
depths, more often than not - presumed to be - but seldom realized.

Can Spiritual life truly be explained and conveyed from one to another, in purely
intellectual terms, apart from the enlivening in the recipient of the Spiritual capacity to
receive, by God?

When I say I place my faith in Jesus Christ, what do I mean? What do you mean? Is my
hope for salvation when I die because I believe in the atoning work accomplished on the
cross for me by the death and resurrection of Jesus? Does it mean that I bind myself to
rules and code of conduct in an attempt to emulate the life and teachings of Jesus? Or is
Christ something more than what a man did and taught two thousand years ago? Or a
figure up in the sky who is supposed to come back someday and straighten everything
out?

Or, when I say I place my faith in Christ, do I mean - yes Christ - the man two thousand
years ago named Jesus, died, buried, resurrected and ascended, and now returned in the
Person of the Holy Spirit, and abiding in me, communicating in and through me. Is my
faith in the doctrines that I Biblically formulate and manipulate to best explain revealed
truth, or is my faith in the indwelling life and presence of God, who could choose to




explain Himself in terms and categories perceptibly new and foreign to religious natures?

Where is my faith? In whom? Or in what, is it placed?

What makes a carnal man, with the right, correct, Biblical doctrine, to be presumed
spiritual, in contrast to a, Hindu or Buddhist or Muslim or Pagan with no Biblical
understanding - but - touched by the life of God and expressing that life?

I think there is a lot about being Christian and tagging ourselves with the name Christian
that needs to be reexamined.

Call me Pagan. If the Spirit is in me and living through me . . . Who cares?





This is an email exchange I had with someone who had been following my
blogs on MySpace. January 12, 2007
Mr. Know It All

need your advice cause you seem to be a guy who knows things. I really enjoy writing
and I want to encourage others with my thoughts and ideas. You have read my blogs and
know what I have too say.

Anyways...I want to do this writing thing. I want to get my foot in the door. I have a lot
of positive responses to my blogs so I think I can do it.

so, what do you think is the best way to get my stuff to magazines whether hard copy or
on-line and can you recommend any good ones to me?

I know you are busy and God bless your work...if you have any wisdom for me let me
know (Even if it is critical)

Thanks and keep making a difference!

Todd
=======================

you seem to be a guy who knows things.

- LOL -

Excuse me - I cant help it.

Well, maybe I can in print, but - do I really want too?

No - I dont.

Even if I tried to present a dignified image, by not reacting to this perception - Id be
chuckling inside.

I dont know if you can appreciate the humor in this - but Ill try and explain.

There are things I know - and there are things I believe.

Sometimes the two can and are confused - even in my own mind.

There are many - MANY, things that I believe, but not all have been substantiated to a
degree of confidence (at least in my own experience) as to be claimed as known. But
not knowing does not keep me from acting in faith on what I believe.





What I have experienced over a few decades believing has eventually in many cases
proven to be accurate assessments - although I cannot claim to have become the
beneficiary of my accurate perceived beliefs. Life situations often encroach and decisions
are made to meet the immediate need, often thus compromising the pursuit of a belief, a
truth, a perceived higher alternative - which compromises the experience or actualization
of the belief as being known.

To put it simply - Failure can be a wonderful teacher.

Now as to your real question about your writing.

Yes - you can write. You know Ive expressed this in the past. What I believe I see - is a
young(er) man with a lot inside - ready to burst - but searching for an avenue or outlet for
expression.

what do you think is the best way to get my stuff to magazines whether hard copy or
on-line and can you recommend any good ones to me?

Not being a professional writer, or publisher - or other such expert in the field - I do not
have a definitive answer for you here. But there are some things - I believe. Some - have
proven true - substantially for others. Some are in the process of being proven true. And
some are purely a gut faith, maybe with a little Biblical reference (although not
necessarily Evangelical approved).

I have been a computer hobbyist (hobbit(ist)) from prehistoric times (1983). Early on I
recognized the value of the computer as a communications tool. Set up a BBS (thats a
computer bulletin board service over telephone connections for those of you unfamiliar
with archaic computer lingo) in the late 80s. Became acquainted with the Internet and set
up www.fredweb.com in 1996. Go there and see where you actually end up. Over the
years I have nurtured and ignored this. It is only relatively recent that purpose has
started to become clear. And many seemingly diverse interests and preoccupations are
starting to merge and congeal into one cohesive yet diverse form -although form is not an
accurate descriptive. Form implies an almost institutional rigidity of purpose and order. It
is not that. Fluid organization does hold some truth - but there is also a perception of lack
of purpose or stability associated with this idea. The reality I believe lies someplace in
between.

Here in is the value, or should I say one of the values, of the Internet. It is technology for
communications by the masses.

As connections are made between individuals holding similar interests and/or attractions,
the establishment and implementation of organizational entities arises and sharing of
knowledge and resources multiplies exponentially. The cumulative result being an impact
is made on the world and society(ies) that we can barely fathom. There is an Interview
with futurist Alvin Toffler that speaks to this:
http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/rn/podcast/current/audioonly/lnl_20070101.mp3





Now I dont buy into every futuristic idea and vision. But faith and a little common
sense, besides a knowledge of technological and scientific advances, can prepare one to
move into a changing world, rather than being left behind or ignored, because in the view
of some established power holder your value is nil to marginal at best.

I do not have a list of publishers or resources to submit materials too. To the best of my
knowledge I have only had one of my articles published by a pseudo-legitimate
magazine. I say pseudo because it was not well established (and may not now exist).
They picked up on my article because they did an Internet search for the title of a book
they published where I quoted the title and subtle and made reference to its contents.

I would refer you to a mySpace friend of mine, you my be connected to him as well, Jim.
You can find his page link in my Top Friends. He wrote Divine Nobodies He may have
something to offer in the way of advice.

For myself - I have had to come to some conclusions. What is the purpose in me doing
the many varied things I do? Is it to make a dollar - or is it to give what God has given me
- and trust Him for the supply, and meeting of my needs? To what degree do I actually
trust Him?

If it is to allow the life of God to be expressed through you - as you write - I can help
you. Maybe there is financial reward - maybe there isnt. Im still waiting for payday.

The thing I do know is for a nobody who really hasnt accomplished very much - I am
sometimes shocked at the blog hits I get.

I guess Ive done something right.

If you are interested in self-publishing on the Internet, there is advice and resources I can
help you with. I am a strong believer in networking and the potential of creating
collaborative endeavors - without sacrificing individual character and creativeness.

If you want to hear more - give me a holler.

Bob





January 23 2007 - 2007 was probably the roughest year of my life. I went
through a separation and alienation from my immediate family, most of
which still needs to be reconciled. But it was also a time of some of the
deepest spiritual searching that I have ever experienced. Things were
recognized at this time which still have an on going and I believe "far
reaching" effect in my life. Although I still considered myself within the
Evangelical camp, things were coming to a head, and within the year, more
major moves, spirituallyy and physically would be realized.
What is truth?

What is truth?

Weve heard that question before.

Pilate said to Him, Then You are a King? Jesus answered, You say it! [You speak
correctly!] For I am a King. [Certainly I am a King!] This is why I was born, and for this
I have come into the world, to bear witness to the Truth. Everyone who is of the Truth
[who is a friend of the Truth, who belongs to the Truth] hears and listens to My voice.
Pilate said to Him, What is Truth? On saying this he went out to the Jews again and told
them, I find no fault in Him. John 18:37-38

Jesus is reported to have said, I am the Way and the Truth and the Life; no one comes to
the Father except by (through) Me. If you had known Me [had learned to recognize Me],
you would also have known My Father. From now on, you know Him and have seen
Him. John 14:6-7

Our ancient creeds declare, I believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and
earth. And in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord; who was conceived by the Holy Ghost,
born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried;
he descended into hell; the third day he rose again from the dead; he ascended into
heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from thence he shall
come to judge the quick and the dead. I believe in the Holy Ghost; the holy catholic
Church; the communion of saints; the forgiveness of sins; the resurrection of the body;
and the life everlasting. AMEN.

From this we derive the doctrine that Jesus Christ was both fully man and fully God. The
God-man.

I know what I am getting into can be easily confused. I will try to take my time reasoning
through some tough questions and what turn out to be implications, rather ignored than
faced.

Does Jesus equal Christ? In a simplistic and only relative sense I would most
naturally reply, yes, absolutely. But what are the particular definitions we place on or into
each of these names, the substantive content or value that is associated with the word




Jesus or the meaning Christ. I know that Christ is the Greek equivalent of the
Hebrew/Aramaic messiah, and so too Jesus for the Hebrew Yeshua, but what is the
value - substance - beyond simple parroted rhetoric - sought to be conveyed in these
names - or titles?

It has often been put forth and argued that Jesus could do the things that He did, live the
life that He lived, say the words and expound divine wisdom as He did - because He was
God.

So it is evident that it was essential that He be made like His brethren in every
respect, in order that He might become a merciful (sympathetic) and faithful High
Priest in the things related to God, to make atonement and propitiation for the peoples
sins. For because He Himself [in His humanity] has suffered in being tempted (tested
and tried), He is able [immediately] to run to the cry of (assist, relieve) those who
are being tempted and tested and tried [and who therefore are being exposed to
suffering]. Hebrews 2:17-18

Let this same attitude and purpose and [humble] mind be in you which was in Christ
Jesus: [Let Him be your example in humility:] Who, although being essentially one
with God and in the form of God [possessing the fullness of the attributes which
make God God], did not think this equality with God was a thing to be eagerly
grasped or retained, But stripped Himself [of all privileges and rightful dignity], so
as to assume the guise of a servant (slave), in that He became like men and was born
a human being. And after He had appeared in human form, He abased and
humbled Himself [still further] and carried His obedience to the extreme of death,
even the death of the cross! Therefore [because He stooped so low] God has highly
exalted Him and has freely bestowed on Him the name that is above every name, That in
(at) the name of Jesus every knee should (must) bow, in heaven and on earth and under
the earth, Philippians 2:5-10

As a result of God has highly exalted Him and has freely bestowed on Him the name
that is above every name, we all to easily misconstrue the fact that Jesus did not function
or experience humanity as anything other than a human being, subject to the same
frailties and temptations that we - in our ever failing stumbling do. I am not saying He
sinned. On the contrary, Jesus, in His relation to the Father could do nothing from
Myself [independently, of My own accordbut only as I am taught by God and as I get
His orders]. Even as I hear, I judge [I decide as I am bidden to decide. As the voice
comes to Me, so I give a decision], and My judgment is right (just, righteous), because I
do not seek or consult My own will [I have no desire to do what is pleasing to Myself,
My own aim, My own purpose] but only the will and pleasure of the Father Who sent
Me. John 5:30

It is the Spirit Who gives life [He is the Life-giver]; the flesh conveys no benefit
whatever [there is no profit in it]. The words (truths) that I have been speaking to you are
spirit and life. John 6:63





And I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Comforter (Counselor, Helper,
Intercessor, Advocate, Strengthener, and Standby), that He may remain with you
forever The Spirit of Truth, Whom the world cannot receive (welcome, take to its
heart), because it does not see Him or know and recognize Him. But you know and
recognize Him, for He lives with you [constantly] and will be in you. John 14:16-17 (see
John 14:26, 15:26, 16:7)

Our Christian religion, and I dont point the finger at any particular denomination or
movement (theres enough blame to go around), has a tendency to want to codify and
systematize faith in Christ. It makes things so much simpler,, and a modicum of control
can be maintained. A hierarchy and system of recognized government and organization
can be maintained. Besides the ability to exert an influential pressure within political and
economic spheres. So our faith becomes the domain of people movers and influencers.
And the code the measure of God and ones ability to know God.

Our failure is that we - in our worship of Jesus - elevate the man Jesus as having a
relationship to God substantially unique and superior to the relationship HE has made
possible and a reality for us. It is easier and more convenient to excuse ourselves from
dependence on God - living in and through us - and claim a forgiveness verse to place us
back in line with the code. Im not saying that the verse dealing confessing our sins and
subsequent forgiveness is not valid. I am saying it is a convenient excuse not to grow in
faith and relation to the God who dwells in us. And as long as we are more content with
formulated forgiveness verses and religious status quo - we will not know God - KNOW
God.

The implications being that what we presume as Christian influence in society,
government and economic spheres, are not in actuality Christ (Christian), but convenient
religion, subject to the influence and pollution of the external forms they would wish to
influence.

Freedom has become an illusion. An illusion defined and ordered by the economic,
political and religious forces to which we subject our wills and allow to become the
determinative powers over us. But all these systems are the products of human creation
and devise. There is not one system that has proven itself to be the universal, absolute
order - as instituted by God. They are all - at their particular point in history - mans best
attempts, or the best as benefited a particular class.

We are not free from this tendency of man to dominate others. The tools and resources to
accomplish this change with the particular age, but the goal is ultimately the same. How
is it possible for you to believe [how can you learn to believe], you who [are content to
seek and] receive praise and honor and glory from one another, and yet do not seek the
praise and honor and glory which come from Him Who alone is God? John 5:44

How many of us can actually say that we are not subject to the economic whims of
corporate conglomerates whose primary function and purpose is the accumulation of
wealth? Even if not employed within the corporate structures of these giant




conglomerates - the decisions made for them from within, or externally by governmental
influence and accommodation - we are all subject to and influenced by what is best for
the corporate well being.

Political favors are bought and sold. There is nothing new with this - corruption has
always been around. The difference is that the influence peddlers are so much larger and
the merging of corporations into economic monoliths continually becomes the economic
power that structures and defines our laws to the advantage of the powers that be.
Conscience is now the subject of what benefits the bottom line.

And we, the simple faithful buy it. We go through life supposing that this is the way it is
supposed to be. We have allowed our religion to snuff out our life. We allow corporate
economic interests and our fear of loosing our security to dominate our trust in the God
who is in us. Were not so sure we want to be crucified with Christ (Gal 2:20), or maybe
someone will devise a nice simple and convenient piece of rhetoric to placate my
conscience and I wont have to act on the prompting inside.

Our culture is faced with a dilemma. We are faced with dominance by the monoculture,
endlessly and noisily triumphant, offering by and large, a lot of nothing, whether
packaged as the news or entertainment.

That which influences us - what we read, watch, rely on for information, listen too for
enjoyment, TV, Motion Pictures, Recording Companies, News organizations -
throughout this nation are virtually all dominated and owned by half dozen (or ten
depending how they restructure themselves) mega corporations. Essentially 90% or more
of all the information and entertainment we receive is filtered through the grids of what is
progressively becoming an information cartel. And it is not just an information cartel. It
is an economic power cartel, which ultimately would include all various corporate
entities applying themselves to dominate their respective markets, and eventually
diversify, consume and control.

We are fed and consume as the truth - what they wish to tell us is the truth. And not
having independent resources upon which to question and critique - we swallow it.

We (and I sometimes wonder if I should include myself as part of the we) Evangelicals
were elated in 2000 and an Evangelical was elected President. I was just as happy as
everyone else. But a credibility gap has been ever growing and widening. In a
conversation about the 2006 elections, a young person asked What about the 2004
Elections to which I felt prompted to reply:

In 2004 Bush won by a 51% to 49% popular vote. He did carry the majority of
States - but only by the slimmest margins. By carrying the overwhelming number
of "congressional" votes (not the same as popular) a mandate was "presumed".
But when you come right down to it - 2% hardly constitutes a mandate - only a
grace period to either prove yourself - or enough rope to hang yourself. Recent
elections demonstrate that the American populace have run out of patience, and




rope.

In replying to a question about Condoleezza Rices statement that the surge being
implemented by President Bush was not an escalation but rather an augmentation, Senior
White House correspondent Helen Thomas states Euphemisms have marked this
administration. They're great at it. Nothing is real.

Euphemism
1. less offensive synonym: a word or phrase used in place of a term that might be considered too direct,
harsh, unpleasant, or offensive.
A wide range of euphemisms is used in connection with death, sex, and excretion.
The phrase collateral damage is a euphemism for injury to civilians during a military operation.
2. use of inoffensive words: the use of a word or phrase that is more neutral, vague, or indirect to replace a
direct, harsh, unpleasant, or offensive term

What is Truth?

I am the truth - and what is that?

Is it the Jesus who lived 2000 years ago? Crucified, buried, risen, ascended and coming
back again? Is it the umpteen quadrillion creeds and codes we can manipulate to ease our
conscience? Is it our Religious supremacy and sufficiency? Or is it the Christ who lives
in you? How often and how much do we have to rationalize our conscience? Is there truth
resident in us that we find difficult to allow out - simply because it doesnt quite fit the
societal norms that have evolved around us, and we can justify as the way its supposed
to be?

What is your truth?

Pilot, I find no fault in Him - and we know the rest of the story. Truth to him was
political expediency.





This is my reply to a man in New Zealand who had been a sort of spiritual
guide and mentor for a season. The reply is regarding his comment at the
time to my "What is Truth" posting

Reading your comment to my What is Truth

In other words "truth" is a pure heart. "Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall 'see'
(understand, experience) God." In practice that means speaking the 'feelings' from our
hearts - and there it is - truth! You see Bob, the resurrected Jesus (as the life giving spirit)
- that's his nature! Dwells in there, within our hearts. All we have to do is speak the
feelings, and there is eternal truth. We must make those feelings our King and begin to
'live' from them. It just takes a little practice turning feelings into words, and a little
courage! It's a new language called 'The Word!' (perfect logic)

As I re-read this a second and third time - a light went on in my head.

It ALL makes sense now. Or at least moving in that direction.

I have been wrestling with the concept of the Word.

We are taught in our religion that this refers to the Bible, or what is written in that Bible.
But that makes no sense - In the Beginning was the WORD - no Bible implication
there. This is obviously referring to Christs eternal existence before time and all
creation. But what is the actual nature of this WORD as revealed in the Person Jesus?

In another exchange of emails with a singer/song writer, whose music I stream, I wrote
to her: I haven't had a chance to listen to "Beautiful Rainbow World", but if it is
anything like I Have A Dream - You have some excellent products. BCMP is not
primarily a "Christian" station in the usual sense, or a children's station - but you message
is universal - for children or adults. I am honored and glad to include this material in my
stations rotation.

This was just my heart responding to what I heard in her music.

To which she replied Thank you so much for your words! Your comments are exactly
what I had hoped for with my music - to bring a powerful message of hope and the
healing, transforming power of God/Love. The "pure in heart" see this so naturally!

This is a rather simple example - but it is representative of how I am learning to function
in relation to what comes from the essence of who I am.

It's a new language called 'The Word!' (perfect logic) In an academic sense - I have
been aware of the technical description of the Word as defined as Gods perfect mind,
thoughts, logic - But the actual manifestation - the exercising of that gift- nature - ability
- has only come to the surface relatively recently (progressively over the last six or seven
years). And at that has been most obvious in my writing. I have found I am able to write
and reason what is inside of me better than I can relate in most normal social situations.




My former pastor stated that my logic in my writing was undeniable. But in social
situations, arguing religious formulas and democratic equality of the absurd does not
render an intelligent - not withstanding Spiritual exchange of ideas.

It just takes a little practice turning feelings into words, and a little courage! -

What I find encouraging - and I didnt see before - I have been practicing - ignorantly,
not understanding what God was doing - just doing it. And He - in me - without the
intellectual consciousness of it - lives through me.

What I find almost foreboding - but exciting - As I respond and act, and write - express
that which is within - I am challenging not only the religious status quo - but the logical
extension as it is expressed in political areas, social concerns, economic justice and the
erosion of freedom. Areas that the current political environment are increasingly
threatened by and aggressive in their defensiveness.

I have been looking for a definition of the Word - That which was from the beginning -
the nature and life of God - In Me.

But it is not a definition - it is a life. And not life as an abstract defined term. Life - the
essence and expression of God. And no amount of trying to define it, can express it. It -
He - simply has to be allowed to be.

We are taught the experience is not to be trusted. But the experience of God is the only
definition that will ever really make any sense. Definition, Reason and logic apart from
the experience and expression of the Word feeling within - only amounts to just so
much babble.

See - ya got me going

Bob





2-15-2007 - Still clinging to many of my "Orthodox" resources and values
(which many I still retain), I found myself becoming more environmentally
"conscious". I do believe that this "shift" was a byproduct of the overall
change in thinking and attitude I was experiencing at the time. I.E. to put it
plainly, there was a "new-birth" being experienced which transcended the
religious Orthodox ideas that had formerly been dominant to "my"
"thinking".
Christians & The Environment

Gen 2:15 And the Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to tend and
guard and keep it.

After forming man God placed man in the garden, with the command to to tend and
guard and keep it.

Now I am not getting into an argument of how to interpret Genesis, is it literal or
figurative. I dont care either way (literal or figurative) there is a Spiritual truth being
set forth as a primary responsibility delegated to man by God to care for his environment
and responsibly reap the benefits of that environment.

The fact is we (humankind) have done a pretty good job of raping the land and trashing
the planet.

Christian concern for our environment i.e. the Earth, is not a politically liberal or
conservative issue. It is not a liberal or conservative religious issue. Yes, for the most
part, we divide ourselves along these lines, and make alliances with folks based on what
we perceive as our most crucial issues, and make compromises along the way in order to
maintain our political and religious alliance. In doing so some issues and concerns take
a back seat and ultimately are neglected, even to the point of being forgotten or devalued
as even being of any importance.

As a Christian issue care for the environment has become such.

Within conservative fundamental Christian religious thinking, care for the environment
and our responsibility to our planet is not a new issue. Francis Schaeffer wrote
extensively about this in the late seventies. At this same time he also was at the forefront
of educating fundamental evangelicals of the theological implications and very real
horrors of abortion. Working with C. Everett Koop, in their film and book What Ever
Happened to the Human Race, the Evangelical community became a political force in
opposition to the abortion rights movement. Prior to this time, abortion (as far as most
evangelicals and fundamentalists were concerned) was a Catholic issue. I even
remember hearing a comment by Jimmy Carter while running for president concerning an
answer he gave to two Catholic Nuns about his position on abortion his comment to a
colleague was Ill give them a little tickle.

Francis Schaeffer was about as religiously conservative as you can find, educated at




Westminster Theological Seminary under professors like Cornelius Van Til. Yet, in his
writings developed over years of conversations with young travelers hostelling through
Europe, a theology of responsibility to the environment was unfolding.

We I speak as an evangelical (and as much as it hurts, a fundamentalist) have allowed
ourselves to be caught up in the anti-abortion conservative values political machine. We
tout our Biblical centricity and then dismiss whatever fails to find a proper place in our
boxed fundamentalist theological construct. The truth is the Bible deals with a lot of
issues and our world and the effects of sin on our world. We choose to neglect these
things in preference to some very valid issues, but, we neglect them just the same. The
environment is a responsibility we inherit regardless of how much past generations
have trashed it.

The abortion issue ultimately is no more of an issue than the environmental issue.
Neglecting either is equally sin. I am not saying (forgive the imperfect analogy) a baby
seal is of more value than a human fetus. I am saying neglecting our responsibility to
either is sin.

We have found it more comfortable, more reasonable - to deal with the convenient ones.

What can I do?

Simply RECYLING - Conserving

I do those. What else is there to do?

Getting involved - Knowing whats going on in this world. Being aware of the major
environmental issues and doing something about them.

one thing you can do is simply get out and enjoy nature and that will lead you to
opportunities. Use the preserves that may be in your area. You can volunteer for
conservation organizations like The Nature Conservancy or the Audubon Society. And to
go even further you can talk to the local government about your concerns.

A few years ago (actually about 15), as I realized my sons were getting older and would
soon seek there own interests; I began taking them on canoe float trips. The Monocacy
River, Potomac River, local creeks. Antietam Creek was one of our favorites (remember
the battle of Antietam that one). These waterways embody a lot of American History.

I could go into a lot of description but that is not the point right now. There are sections
of these waterways that are absolutely gorgeous. Then you are faced with the refuse of
civilization. Trash dumped indiscriminately, industrial discharges, over farmed and
unmanaged farm fertilizers and pesticides ultimately draining into streams, creeks and
rivers.

I have since become aware of groups that annually float these water ways specifically to




police and clean up these areas. It doesnt happen all at once, but progress is made over
time. Pressure is brought to bear on polluters. Some issues must be dealt with
collectively, as there are no individuals that may presently be held accountable. This
means organizing, educating the public of the need and benefits and becoming engaged
politically.

This is not just a Christian issue, weve just been slow to recognize it and accept
responsibility. It is not overtly evangelistic, or necessarily religious, but I certainly
believe it is God honoring. And if I remember my Westminster Larger Catechism lets
see oh yesQ. 1. What is the chief and highest end of man? A. Man's chief and
highest end is to glorify God, (Rom 11:36; 1Cor 10:31) and fully to enjoy him forever.
(Ps 73:24-28; John 17:21-23).

For some reason I cant seem to separate the honoring and glorifying God from being
responsible for and enjoying God in the creation He has given us.

Maybe its just me.






2-20-2007 - This is study resources I had compiled in February 2007. As
mayy be noted the resources were all Orthodox, Fundamentalist,
Evangellical "approved", as most of mine had been throughout my Biblical
studies. But, some of the conclusions I had reached were anything but
"Orthodox". i believe a part of this is because I was not looking for "quick"
off the shelf answers, but I was willing to "dig" until I was convinced I had
found the "truth", or at least elements, and fragments of it, which would
eventually lead to deeper revelation. It may be noted that I believe
"heaven" is innate "in us" and not someting to be found outside or
"otherworldly" ... We all possess heaven ... and hell.


Heaven

This substantive occurs in Greek literature from Homer onward. Its exact etymology is
unclear; however, some conjecture that it has an Indo-European root meaning
"water-(Bietenhard, Colin Brown, 2: 188), or that it derives from horos meaning
"boundary" and ano meaning "above," thus "the boundary above" (Aristotle de Mundo
400.a7; d. Traub, "ouranos," Kittel, 5:498f.).

Classical Greek

Throughout classical Greek literature the term ouranos carries a dual sense. Simply put, it
occurs in a literal, cosmological sense to describe what can be seen, the realm visible to
mankind. It also occurs in a figurative, mythological sense to describe what cannot be
seen, the realm pertaining to the gods. In the former sense ouranos may refer to the starry
vault of heaven, the outermost regions of the earth, or to the entire order of creation. In
the latter sense ouranos may occur as an appellation for the pre-Homeric god Uranus, the
abode of the gods, or as a mantle for the world. The term never occurs in the plural in
classical Greek (cf. Liddell-Scott) ..

Septuagint Usage

In the Septuagint ouranos, occurring more than 400 times for the Hebrew shamayim, is
used to denote heaven in at least three various senses. First, ouranos may refer to the
firmament in which are foundations (2 Samuel 22:8 [LXX 2 Kings 22:8]), windows (cf.
Genesis 7:11), and pillars (Job 26: 11). In this sense it corresponds closely to the classical
Greek concept of heaven as a vault stretched out over the earth. Second. it may refer to
the area in which the birds fly, the atmosphere between the firmament: and the earth (d.
Genesis 1:26,28,30). And third, ouranos may refer to a region without boundaries, a
region in which God resides and from which God descends, possibly the region beyond
the firmament (d. Genesis 19:24; Exodus 19: 18). In the Septuagint the term occurs for
the first time in the plural, possibly in order to correspond with its Hebrew counterpart
shamayim which is also in the plural, thereby denoting completeness, fullness, or its
various aspects.

New Testament Usage





In the New Testament three concepts may be expressed by ouranos. The first is the
atmosphere that surrounds the earth. It is the place where the birds move (Matthew 6:26)
and men observe the weather patterns (Matthew 16:2,3). Secondly, it denotes the cosmos
and is mentioned with the earth to express God's creation (Matthew 5:18; Acts 4:24;
Revelation 14:7). The third use of ouranos expresses the spiritual habitations. It is the
place of God's throne (Matthew 5:34) and temple (Revelation 11:19). From heaven God
the Father speaks (Matthew 3:17), sends forth good gifts (Luke 11:13), and reveals His
wrath against all ungodliness (Romans 1: 18).

After His resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven (Acts 1:11). He sits at the right hand
of the Father and appears before Him on our behalf (Hebrews 9:24). A place is being
prepared there for His followers (John 14:2,3). All authority in heaven and on earth has
been given to Jesus (Matthew 28:18), and He will one day be revealed from heaven (2
Thessalonians 1:7).

The Third Person of the Trinity also has His habitation in heaven. He descended from
there upon Jesus as He came up out of the waters of baptism (Matthew 3:16). After His
ascension, Jesus poured out the Holy Spirit upon His waiting disciples (Acts 2:4,33).
Thus, as the One sent from heaven (1 Peter 1:12), He is called the "heavenly gift"
(Hebrews 6:4).

The angels also reside in heaven. Those that appeared to the shepherds in the field are
described as a "heavenly host" who returned after making their announcement (Luke
2:13-15). They surround the throne of God singing His praises (Revelation 5:11). Those
that rebelled with Satan against God were expelled from heaven (Luke 10:18; Revelation
12:4).

The believer's hope is "laid up ... in heaven" (Colossians 1:5), an imperishable inheritance
being reserved (1 Peter 1:4). Even now, the believer is seated in heavenly places in Christ
Jesus (Ephesians 2:6)! Treasures and great rewards are laid up in heaven (Matthew 6:20;
Luke 6:23) as well as a resurrected body that will one day clothe the believer (2
Corinthians 5:1,2).

The great goal of Biblical prophecy is the establishment of a new heaven and a new earth
(Revelation 21:1). This earth, groaning from the corruption of sin (Romans 8:21ff.), will
one day be destroyed (2 Peter 3:10; Revelation 20:11). It will be replaced by a new
heaven and earth, characterized by righteousness (2 Peter 3:13; Revelation 21:1).

From The Complete Biblical Library Springfield, Missouri, USA

In much of Christianity, heaven is a return to the pre-fallen state of humanity, a second
and new Garden of Eden, in which humanity is reunited with God in a perfect and natural
state of eternal existence. Christians believe this reunion is accomplished through the
redemptive work of Jesus Christ in having died for the sins of humanity on the cross.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven





THE LORD'S PRAYER
(One Possible New Translation From The Aramaic***)
by Neil Douglas Klotz

1a*) Abwoon d'bwashmaya...
1b**)O Birther! Father-Mother of the Cosmos,
1c***) Our Father which art in heaven.

2a) Nethqadash shmakh...
2b) Focus your light within us-make it useful,
2c) Hallowed be thy name.

3a) Teytey malkuthakh...
3b) Create your reign of unity now,
3c) Thy kingdom come.

4a) Nehwey tzevyanach aykanna d'bwashmaya aph b'arha...
4b) Your one desire then acts with ours,
as in all light, so in all forms,
4c) Thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven.

5a) Hawvlan lachma d'sunqanan yaomana ...
5b) Grant what we need each day in bread and insight,
5c) Give us this day our daily bread.

6a) Washboqlan khaubayn (wakhtahayn)
aykanna daph khnan shbwoqan l'khayyabayn...
6b) Loose the cords of mistakes binding us, as we release the strands we
hold of others' guilt,
6c) And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.

7a) Wela tahlan l'nesyuna, ela patzan min bisha...
7b) But free us from what holds us back,
7c) And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.

8a)Metol dilakhie malkutha wahayla wateshbutkhta l'ahlam almin. AMEYN!...
8b) From you is born all ruling will, the power and the life to do, the song
that beautifies all, from age to age it renews...
Truly-power to these statements-may they be the ground from which all my
actions grow. Amen!
8c) For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.

Legend: *a)=Aramaic; **b)= English Translation of the Aramaic; ***c)= King James Version






This is the posting the resulted from the prior study titled "Heaven" and
dated 2-20-2007. This was actually posted 2-22-2007.

Religious Assumptions

Do we really know how much of our Christianity is the actual apprehension and
manifestation of what Jesus Christ taught, as compared to the religious institutional
dogma that have evolved through the centuries by the piece meal construction and
application of academic knowledge?

How much of our faith is in fact, faith in religious assumptions accumulated as the
result of accepting temporal interpretations as absolute, and the tendency to accept as
Spiritual mystery, rather than face the realities of both the facts and establishment
criticisms, and so maintain the peace in the bonds of Christ? Bull Shit!

Whenever there has been expanding insight into the depths of Spiritual truth as
expounded in the Scriptures - somebody got pissed off, because it threw a monkey
wrench into their theology. And of course the faithful messenger, delivering the message
in its new enlightened form was branded the heretic. The truth being - delivering the
message is only exposing the heresy (old, canonized, accepted theology) as it had been
institutionalized.

Recently I was reading a transliteration of the Lords prayer, Peshitta (Syriac-Aramaic)
version of Matthew 6:9-13 & Luke 11:2-4. This was Jesus native Aramaic Language.
Aramaic is a language related to both ancient Hebrew and classical Arabic, the languages
of the Jewish and Islamic traditions. There is argument as to the precise pronunciation of
some words, but adherents to one dialect can understand what is spoken by adherents to
the other.

My initial tendency was to distrust the accuracy of a transliteration. Originally written in
Greek (and multiple transcriptions), translated into English (Umpteen million times), then
translated back to Aramaic, and then a literal translation back to English from the
Aramaic. It would seem like a sure way to lose something in the communication from the
original.

But in considering this loss of original content of the message argument. I have to face
the potential of having already lost the intent contained in the message of Jesus original
content, as He originally spoke Aramaic - which was translated into Greek - and
eventually made it to contemporary English (or Spanish, or German, or French, or
whatever). And to some degree, the best I can do in my dissecting the language, and
considering the multiple language and cultural interpretations applied to the original
message, is to reduce what I have to the most basic common denominator, critically
discount (as best I can) historical cultural bias that may have influenced interpretation,
and trust the Holy Spirit as He is ultimately my teacher and guide.

Every time there is a translation into a new language, the application of the new language




adds a new level of cultural baggage to the interpretation, as the result of concepts and
images conveyed and expressed in the new language, which may be foreign to the
original languages intent. So new theological images are introduced into the translation
and over time accepted as the absolute intent and meaning. Adding to the confusion is the
argument as to what was originally recorded as literal and historic, and what was
allegoric and metaphoric. If there is confusion here, everything that follows can not help
but be a misinterpretation.

In looking at the modern Aramaic transliteration of the Lords prayer - I approached it as
suspect. But there was a beauty and simplicity that I was (am) attracted to. This led me to
a re-examination of some of the concepts I have held as contained in the English
language Lords prayer. Like heaven.

In much of Christianity, heaven is a return to the pre-fallen state of humanity, a second
and new Garden of Eden, in which humanity is reunited with God in a perfect and natural
state of eternal existence. Christians believe this reunion is accomplished through the
redemptive work of Jesus Christ in having died for the sins of humanity on the cross.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven. Im sure there are other definitions and conceptions
as may pertain to particular theological perspectives, but for the sake of discussion, this
will suffice. The particulars are not the issue.

In Classical Greek heaven can refer to both a literal and a figurative, mythological
sense. The Septuagint translates shamayim as heaven in at least three senses. First - it
corresponds closely to the classical Greek concept of heaven as a vault stretched out over
the earth. Second, it may refer to the area in which the birds fly, the atmosphere
between the firmament: and the earth. And third, may refer to a region without
boundaries, a region in which God resides and from which God descends, possibly the
region beyond the firmament. In the New Testament there are three concepts. One, the
atmosphere that surrounds the earth. Two, the cosmos and is mentioned with the earth
to express God's creation. And Third, the spiritual habitations. It is the place of God's
throne (Matthew 5:34) and temple (Revelation 11:19). From heaven God the Father
speaks (Matthew 3:17), sends forth good gifts (Luke 11:13), and reveals His wrath
against all ungodliness (Romans 1: 18). This is the one we are primarily concerned with.

Even in examining this - something began to stick out at me (and this is a rabbit trail)-
shamayim is the Hebrew term for heaven. We get our English shaman and
shamanism from this. Just a note of interest - to examine latter.

Back to heaven - and it aint in the future. There is more that I gathered and it can be
looked at here.

Our Father Who is in heaven, hallowed (kept holy) be Your name.
Your kingdom come, Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.

John the Baptist came preaching Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. Matt
3:2





We take and place the emphasis here on Repent, and interpret that as forsake your bad
behaviors. While that is not entirely invalid, there is an over emphasis on behaviors and
de-emphasis on the root meaning of Repent, and that is simply Change your mind. Or
as better interpreted Think differently - and the object to think differently about is not
behaviors - but - The Kingdom of Heaven.

After Jesus was baptized by John, as Jesus came up out of the water, the heavens
were opened and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and settling on him.
And a voice from heaven said, This is my beloved Son, and I am fully pleased with
him.

The Greek word for heaven here is ooranos.
1. the vaulted expanse of the sky with all things visible in it
a. the universe, the world
b. the aerial heavens or sky, the region where the clouds and the tempests gather,
and where thunder and lightning are produced
c. the sidereal or starry heavens
2. the region above the sidereal heavens, the seat of order of things eternal and
consummately perfect where God dwells and other heavenly beings
Which heaven opened?

Heaven - shamayim - Hebrew - to be lofty; the sky - as aloft; the dual perhaps alluding to
the visible arch in which the clouds move, as well as to the higher ether where the
celestial bodies revolve - as the abode of God.

We have inherited a concept of heaven as a literal, spatial location and setting, filled with
similes more in keeping with culturally influenced norms and imagery (Greek mythology,
Nordic and Wagnerian Valhalla, Dantes Paradise - much as our concept of Hell is most
influenced by Dantes Inferno).

Im going to jump ahead a bit (and come back to this line in the future). Right Now I
want to try and draw some connections. Ive already mentioned the baggage that is part
and parcel with language, culture and translation. We, the Christian community, have
inherited and embraced as real a lot of cultural and religious baggage, without a
willingness to critically examine (outside of our traditions) the possibility that we may
have gotten something wrong.

Jesus said the kingdom of God is within you [in your hearts] and among you
[surrounding you].

The Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Heaven are recognized as referencing the
same Kingdom, expressed with different words by different authors.





Another concept that I have wrestled with for a long time is the Word.

We are taught in our religion that this refers to the Bible, or what is written in that Bible.
But that makes no sense - In the Beginning was the WORD - no Bible implication
there. This is obviously referring to Christs eternal existence before time and all
creation. But what is the actual nature of this WORD as revealed in the Person Jesus?

In an exchange of emails with a singer/song writer, whose music I stream, I wrote to her:
I haven't had a chance to listen to "Beautiful Rainbow World", but if it is anything like
"I Have A Dream" - You have some excellent products. BCMP is not primarily a
"Christian" station in the usual sense, or a children's station - but you message is
universal - for children or adults. I am honored and glad to include this material in my
stations rotation.

This was just my heart responding to what I heard in her music.

To which she replied Thank you so much for your words! Your comments are exactly
what I had hoped for with my music - to bring a powerful message of hope and the
healing, transforming power of God/Love. The "pure in heart" see this so naturally!

This is a rather simple example - but it is representative of how I am learning to function
in relation to what comes from the essence of who I am.

It's a new language called 'The Word!' (perfect logic) In an academic sense - I have
been aware of the technical description of the Word as defined as Gods perfect mind,
thoughts, logic - But the actual manifestation - the exercising of that gift- nature - ability
- has only come to the surface relatively recently (progressively over the last six or seven
years). And at that has been most obvious in my writing. I have found I am able to write
and reason what is inside of me better than I can relate in most normal social situations.
My former pastor stated that my logic in my writing was undeniable. But in social
situations, arguing religious formulas and democratic equality of the absurd does not
render an intelligent - not withstanding Spiritual exchange of ideas.

It just takes a little practice turning feelings into words, and a little courage! -

What I find encouraging - and I didnt see before - I have been practicing - ignorantly,
not understanding what God was doing - just doing it. And He - in me - without the
intellectual consciousness of it - lives through me.

What I find almost foreboding - but exciting - As I respond and act, and write - express
that which is within - I am challenging not only the religious status quo - but the logical
extension as it is expressed in political areas, social concerns, economic justice and the
erosion of freedom. Areas that the current political environment are increasingly
threatened by and aggressive in their defensiveness.

I have been looking for a definition of the Word - That which was from the beginning -




the nature and life of God - In Me.

But it is not a definition - it is a life. And not life as an abstract defined term. Life - the
essence and expression of God. And no amount of trying to define it, can express it. It -
He - simply has to be allowed to be.

We are taught the experience is not to be trusted. But the experience of God is the only
definition that will ever really make any sense. Definition, Reason and logic apart from
the experience and expression of the Word, feeling within - only amounts to just so
much babble.

Oh Yea - The Lords Prayer in Aramaic

Thank You Anne for posting this: (I checked out his web site - and there is a lot to feed
on there. It may not be Fundamentalist/Evangelical - but if Christ is in us, and love is the
benchmark - Id call it Christian)

THE LORD'S PRAYER
(One Possible New Translation From The Aramaic***)
by Neil Douglas Klotz

1a*) Abwoon d'bwashmaya...
1b**)O Birther! Father-Mother of the Cosmos,
1c***) Our Father which art in heaven.

2a) Nethqadash shmakh...
2b) Focus your light within us-make it useful,
2c) Hallowed be thy name.

3a) Teytey malkuthakh...
3b) Create your reign of unity now,
3c) Thy kingdom come.

4a) Nehwey tzevyanach aykanna d'bwashmaya aph b'arha...
4b) Your one desire then acts with ours,
as in all light, so in all forms,
4c) Thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven.

5a) Hawvlan lachma d'sunqanan yaomana ...
5b) Grant what we need each day in bread and insight,
5c) Give us this day our daily bread.

6a) Washboqlan khaubayn (wakhtahayn)
aykanna daph khnan shbwoqan l'khayyabayn...
6b) Loose the cords of mistakes binding us, as we release the strands we
hold of others' guilt,
6c) And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.

7a) Wela tahlan l'nesyuna, ela patzan min bisha...
7b) But free us from what holds us back,




7c) And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.

8a)Metol dilakhie malkutha wahayla wateshbutkhta l'ahlam almin. AMEYN!...
8b) From you is born all ruling will, the power and the life to do, the song
that beautifies all, from age to age it renews...
Truly-power to these statements-may they be the ground from which all my
actions grow. Amen!
8c) For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.

Legend: *a)=Aramaic; **b)= English Translation of the Aramaic; ***c)= King James Version






This was one of my initial replies to a group of "spiritual travellers" I shared
companionship with, being led by our mutual leader from New Zealand.


Hey everyone

I guess I need to get my two cents in here as well.

Some of you I am actually in the process of developing relationships with. Most of you,
although I have been aware of you and in most cases visited your web pages, you are for
all practical purposes names in a list. Over the past year, reading what some have
written, I can get an idea where you are coming from. Realizing this - and how I might
come across, I had purposely not pursued growing relationships, when I perceived the
potential more for conflict and alienation - than nurturing and encouragement.

Well - these are things well just have to get over.

From the beginning I have had a problem with the use of the term feelings as the
primary word to describe the inner, prompting and motivational force or life in each and
every one of us. Feelings (the word) can be to easily misunderstood as to refer to the
normal carnal human feelings. These may include sentimental emotions often described
as love, natural affections, compassion, sympathy, empathy, a sense of devotion,
nostalgia, romance and so on. Carnal feelings may also include hate, distrust, suspicion.
ALL essentially emoting from the same source - human character - with or without the
Holy Spirit. My animal passions are not necessarily expressive of Spiritual passions. My
dogs love me - but Im not sure they are filled with the Holy Spirit. (Maybe they are)
Maybe God is resident in them as He is in Me - and You - If I were a Hindu - it wouldnt
be a problem. But as we use the Bible as a primary source of reference I have found little
to support this.

Having problems with the term feelings does not mean that feelings is not useful to
describe what we are after, it just is not inclusive enough and at the same time exclusive
enough. It allows for inclusion of more than just sensitivity to Spiritual heart felts, and
at the same time implies the need for some ooey-gooey, ushy-gushy, fuzzy wuzzy sort of
emotional sentimentalism as a bench mark of what feeling the Holy Spirit is. The
language of feelings is not sufficient. Often, when I feel something that I believe is
God in me - aching to get out and be expressed, It is not necessarily something I would
describe as an emotional feel good thing. It is often a truth that I know, and not
necessarily because it was something I was taught (as in academics), but rather the
implantation of truth, manifesting in knowledge transcending normal human wisdom.
The mind of God - The mind of Christ - and not so much felt as - known. And sure - in
the act of expressing this - feelings - human feelings usually accompany it.

It has been stated that God is love -

And what is love?





The fruit of the Spirit as enumerated in Galatians 5 have been posited as the expression of
love - the expression of God in us. I have a very hard time accepting this application as it
is being expressed.

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,
gentleness, self-control; - No doubt - these characteristics are the product of Christ in us.
But these are not feelings used as a benchmark to discern the Spirit. They are the
product of the Spirit. Love does not always feel the way we would naturally desire.
patience can be a frustrating pain in the ass. goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-
control - these are not things you feel- they are things you do. They are acts of a
transformed will.

Our problem - or should I say the historic problem within the Church - is that we have
been trying to manufacture these - and hold them up as evidence that weve got it
together. But there isnt much taste to artificial fruit. May in fact kill you.

What is love?

Love endures long and is patient and kind; -

love never is envious nor boils over with jealousy, is not boastful or vainglorious, does
not display itself haughtily. It is not conceited (arrogant and inflated with pride); it is not
rude (unmannerly) and does not act unbecomingly.

Love (Gods love in us) does not insist on its own rights or its own way, for it is not
self-seeking; it is not touchy or fretful or resentful; it takes no account of the evil done to
it [it pays no attention to a suffered wrong].

It does not rejoice at injustice and unrighteousness, but rejoices when right and truth
prevail.

Love bears up under anything and everything that comes, is ever ready to believe the
best of every person, its hopes are fadeless under all circumstances, and it endures
everything [without weakening].

Love never fails [never fades out or becomes obsolete or comes to an end].

1 Corinthians 13:4-8

Theres not a whole lot here that suggests simply feeling your way through it. To be
exact - it is more counter-feeling, if we are defining feeling as is normally conceived.
And this is why I have a problem with feeling as insufficient in what I believe is
attempted to be expressed.

Let me say that I do not have a problem with the idea that I feel that I know - and as I
feel this - act accordingly - Or I believe., feeling that I know transcends my lower




carnal impressions, It does not eliminate them, or ignore them, but judges my impressions
on a broader, more encompassing plane. God made not only our emotions (seat of carnal
feeling), but our minds and wills. He - the Spirit - is in process of renewing the entirety of
our personhood.

Brian - at one time you stated there was a difference in the carnal feelings and the
feelings you reference in relation too getting a hold of in the depths of our being - I agree
whole heartedly - And realize them. Albeit maybe not as regularly or as sensitively as I
would wish.

A few questions.

How do we maintain life in them and keep from confusing them with our natural desire to
do good? Is it even something we should concern ourselves with?












These are quotations from a piece by Brian Sage, a former spiritual guide
and mentor of mine living in New Zealand. It is followed up with my reply to
Brian expressing my appreciation and admiration. Brian was probably the
most supportive person to me during this time (2007) of apparent
catastrophe in my life. I will say I still find encouragement in what I learned
from him.

From A common misunderstanding about the violent Brian Sage

I notice many 'heretics' say that maybe churches can remain but I'm
one that doesn't! It's all got to go and we start over again. A
little bit of 'leaven' leavens the whole loaf! It has to be a total
clean up otherwise we get re-contaminated very quickly and man
leadership takes over.


All religious organizations built on belief systems will be
demolished. You people might think I'm pretty tough on religion.

I DO NOT think the same about the people themselves,

Together we'll get them free to do what they have to,
but to do that we'll need to be a lot more conversant with the enemy
we are dealing with.


"Last Days"

blood bath between the powers of good and evil. A bit like your president
promoting a war of the righteous against the 'forces of evil'

The 'end time' battle will be within us

That's where the battlefield is, and when we go in there we'll need to know
much more about the 'mechanics' of how it all functions.


battle is between two 'kingdoms'

'kingdom' - 'authority'

war between two authorities who are resident within us

the 'reality' of this higher authority is derived through responding to our deeper
feelings.

those feelings are our true Father

a new more intimate and real relationship with our true "living" Father





not to fear - give us his 'authority' -

He'll keep 'feeding' us the 'feelings'. That's the bread of life. His nature! His spirit!



practical reality of the Kingdom

we need to do the same with the Kingdom of darkness

Satan and demons etc. They are definite authorities too but the authorities
from the two realms have major differences in characteristics

omnipresent, omnipotent - universal 'oneness' is always existing within us - if we all
open our hearts and speak from there we are all speaking from the same Father and we'll
feel that



Not so on the other side! Those authorities are 'learnt'. Taken on
board from an external source and they are a real mixture of stuff.

. . .mental image of their Allah who only exists in their
imagination - the same way as our old "God" did for us! What ever
way, these people are still our brothers - they need rescuing too,
as beneath this world of deception, we all still have that same true
'living' Father. They have a belief system that rules over them too.
This world of deception is what we need to take a close look at so we
can begin to deal to it - we do have the authority.


Before anyone can think or reason they need a language

We need words to think! The problem we run into is the meanings we give these
words because once we accept a certain meaning then that word has
power over us. If these meanings are not eternally true then we are
ruled over by lies. That's how the carnal mind works - it has to rely
upon teachings and information derived from external sources

The meanings we personally give . . . words rule us

beliefs exert an amazing subtle power over us and they make their residence in our
"home" and block us from being who we truly are. We become slaves to the meanings
that we give these words and we are not our true selves. The only way we can be
set free is to be able to connect into some source of eternal truth and that's where these
"feelings" come in. What sets us free is having the courage to speak these feelings.






. . .move beyond the position of just going around loving everyone, to a position of grace
and speaking the truth. We are full of grace and truth and giving whatever and where
necessary. The trouble with loving everyone, which is all rather nice, we soon get tricked
into doing this ourselves, in our power, and when we do that we are frightened of saying
what we should say because we believe it will offend.


Brian

You amaze me sometimes.

Reading your A common misunderstanding about the violent my natural minds
inclination was, I wonder who he is quoting here? Then recognizing that this was not a
quote - but actually an approach to Biblical studies very similar to what Ive used
personally for almost 35 years - I could not help and be a little bit jealous and envious
(wishing I had been the one to garner this truth) and at the same time proud (fulfilled that
another is carrying on a passion for truth - expressed in the Bible - but neglected by
POP Christianity). I wont sermonize about Pop Christianity right now, I do that
enough in my own blog, except to say Pop Christianity, really isnt Christianity at all -
only political religion with a What Would Jesus Do? facade.

You are digging deeper and finding more than most will want to hear. You may get some
compliments and pats on the back - but dont be discouraged if after that - the same ones
complimenting you just continue the same as they always do. These - really havent
heard - that does not mean that youve missed it. Youve found it. But it will not be
popular (in the long term), it does not fit the natural (carnal) minds thought categories.

But dont stop. There are those who will listen - and hear - and will come to a real
KNOWLEDGE of truth - Christ - incarnate - in the now.

Ill be posting this on my web site (www.bcmp.us)

Keep digging

Bob





FingerStyle was one of my MySpace contacts, a proficient classical style
guitarist and basically Fundamentalist Evangelical. We had thought for a
time of trying to connect and work on music if things ever worked out. I
was much more a student of the Bible and a "spiritual pilgrim" than he.
Eventually our paths began to part as I continued on my spiritual journey,
and to my mind - he remained satisfied with his. I have had recent contact
with him, though very little and superficial. Yet, I do respect him as an
accomplished musician.

My friend it sounds as if we have a few issues with the local establishment!? You are
right, the "church" as we look at it nothing more than a building where we gather from
time to time. The real church is you and I standing in belief of the word and the power in
which it contains..... The "church" has no other reference...... without people believing....
FingerStyle.


a few issues with the local establishment!? - Not really. And not to say there havent
been differences in the past. But these differences are not the issues themselves - but only
a symptom of bigger problems that transcend what the church may be on a local level.

The last church I was in fellowship with (I left in December 2005), I did not leave
because of problems or issues with anyone. I left because I could not pursue what God
has for me, while remaining in relation to the fellowship. It was a move I wrestled with
for several months. Changes were occurring, I did not find myself fitting comfortably
into the evolving new form. For me to be what God made me, I had to move on. This was
not a forced move in any sense, purely a realized conclusion that to be faithful to God - in
me - I had to cease reliance on finding God in the collective fellowship, a pastors well
meaning advice, and any other external resource as the Word of God.

real church is you and I standing in belief of the word and the power in which it
contains

. . .in belief of the word. . . - And here is the heart of the matter. Is the word the
words and language, stories and principles, history and proverbs, psalms and poetry,
prophecies and epistles and more, contained in the sixty-six books of the Bible, between
Genesis and Revelations? OR is there a depth and reality to the word that both
transcends what is contained in the chapters and verse we refer to as the book, the
Bible? AND although transcending containment in paragraphs penned by human agents,
resides in the depths of our humanity? Yet is not the product of our humanity, but is the
source of our being?

We, the Church, have allowed ourselves to become slaves to systems. And there are all
kinds of systems. In the USA, the most pre-eminent system is the rule of corporate law.
This manifests in a myriad of ways. The most obvious is economic dominance. But the
particular system is not the issue. The issue is the bondage to any system as the way,
in difference to the inner life, the Word (Christ in US), the true Light which gives light to
every man - resident in us - the real me - you.





The confusion of the Bible as the Word is a primary perpetrator of the enslavement of
the church to religious systems. Nowhere does the Bible make claims to itself as the
Word. This is an inference made by the religious establishment, which may be a well
meaning intention, but is ultimately the source and foundation upon which any particular
form of religious bondage may be imposed as absolute.

Now - dont presume that I discount the Bible. It simply is not God. It - in itself - is not
the Word. The Word is resident in each and everyone of us. Sadly - in most -
repressed and held in fear and bondage. But - that is changing.





This is from March 9, 2007. There are a few ideas I would alter here, but
essentially I am getting to thr point of my problem with Orthodoxy. What I
would change is the "exclusivity" that I was still attributing to the "Church".
I no longer belive that the "Church" has exclusive rights to "God, or as I
prefer "the divine".


From that time many of His disciples went back and
walked with Him no more. John 6:66

the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the
measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ. Eph 4:11-16 (or there
about)

We are not sure we want this.

The implications, we reason - are - too unreasonable.

The notion that I can aspire to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness
of Christ, we argue is absolutely absurd. And I would have to agree, for carnal man, to
attempt such a thing, relying on carnal human resources - flighty natural emotions - logic
built in humanistic frames of reference - reliance on the methods of men dependent on
principles sifted and processed more than common bleached white flour. And we are left
with filler material - the stuff cakes are made of. Attractive to look at - good tasting -
filling, but virtually all nutritional value has been stripped away. And too much only
makes you fat and rots your teeth. This is not a dig at over weight people or those with
dental problems. I certainly could use more exercise myself and my teeth are nothing to
brag about. I deal here with Spiritual conditions.

Through the last four or five hundred years, we, the Church, have endeavored to reach
this state of unity of the faith and knowledge of the Son of God as if it were some
kind of intellectual or academic acquisition. We interpret unity of the faith as a
universal acceptance of doctrine. As though we will all believe the same thing - one
interpretation fits all, and that one usually meaning - mine. knowledge of the Son of
God being a practical understanding of who the man Jesus was, his relation to God, all
the miracles and profound teachings attributed to him, his death and resurrection as our
substitute and its meaning to believers restoring our right relation to God. If we can
master these - our religion assumes a relative state of maturity. I say relative because
we have always got to have our out. You know - the bloopers - the out takes - our ever
present sinful nature.

In a previous blog I wrote about the problems translating and interpreting spiritual
dynamics from the context of one culture into the language and associated images and
concepts associated with the new language. Knowledge here is from the Greek
gnosis. From this we get Gnostic, which was an alternative approach to Christianity
rejected by fourth century church fathers as heresy, but that is not our discussion here.





Knowledge as defined by the Greeks signifies in general intelligence, understanding.
Essentially, it is intellectual, logical, reason, academic and scholastic. It is scientific and
dialectic. It is the exercise of the human mind. Now - I dont have a problem with that.
Fact is - we can use a lot more of it. The problem is when the knowledge or realization
of something to be known is not the same idea of knowing as was conceived in its
original thought categories. I.e. Greek knowledge does not equal knowledge as
originally understood in the Hebrew/Aramaic traditions.

The Old Testament Hebrew concept of knowledge implied an intimate relation and
attachment as in sexual intercourse between a man and a woman.

It is in this concept of knowledge that we are to realize our relation to the Son of God.

It IS NOT purely a head thing. But that is what the Church has made it.

We argue our doctrines and theology and presume they (our intellectual gymnastics) are
Christ - the exposition of the Word. And if everyone would just grasp hold of things the
way Ive got it together, Christ could come back, zap us out of here, and the rest of the
world can go on its merry way to hell.

The notion that the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God has
nothing to do with intellectual knowledge, but everything to do with relational realization
is made a foreign, even heretical concept, because we fail to grasp God as real. We - by
our cultural language and concepts have reduced the reality of intimacy to that of an
intellectual argument. We are alienated and estranged from ourselves, and from the
immediate intimacy with God in us.

a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ. is
not an unattainable. Oh if you define this as sinless perfection you might have a leg to
stand on arguing your religion, but sinless religion is not what is being measured here.
The state of faith as realized in intimacy of relation is the maturity and stature being
defined here.

Christ is not an intellectual argument. Christ is the indwelling, life giving Spirit.
knowledge of the Son of God is our union with Him.

And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and
some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service

no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every
wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming;

being fitted and held together by what every joint supplies, according to the proper
working of each individual part





The Church focuss on three things, occupation, indoctrination, and amalgamation.

Occupation - putting you to work - an idle mind is the devils workshop - keep em busy
and out of trouble. Indoctrination - educate them. Make sure their thinking straight. Dont
want any wild or crazy ideas stirring things up. Amalgamation - make this odd ball group
the Lord stuck me with work. Sure Lord, Youre building Your Church, but please, give
me a break - give me something to work with.

I know, I know, - Im being more than just a little sarcastic. Forgive me - Youve got to -
The Book says so.

We have made the works, the doctrine, the fitting together - the object of what being
Church is. They are not.

equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ
in the context used here - is a transitional state of preparation until we all attain to the
unity of the faith. work of service is not the end all, or purpose strived for. unity of
the faith IS.

Intimate, real, experiential (not academic) relational knowing - knowledge of the Son of
God - is the object of that faith. Not Doctrine. Maturity is realizing Christ. Realizing is -
no longer I - but Christ.

Intimate knowing and living in Christ we are no longer to be children, tossed here and
there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by
craftiness in deceitful scheming

Intimate knowing and living in Christ we can speak(ing) the truth in love, we are to
grow up in all aspects into Him who is the head, even Christ, from whom the whole body,
being fitted and held together by what every joint supplies, according to the proper
working of each individual part, causes the growth of the body for the building up of
itself in love

We apply ourselves to everything but what will accomplish the building of the Church.

It is relatively easy to put ourselves to work, to apply ourselves to doctrine, to work at
manipulating ourselves into organizational entities - and call it church.

Realizing and living out of relation to the indwelling God - thats a tough one.

That entails an entirely different way of thinking.

That might confuse and change the way a lot of things are done.

That sounds - r- i - s - k - y . . .





Riiiiiiiiigggghhht

That is repentance.

Amen






Beginning here I was introduced to the writings of Thomas Merton. He was
known as a "Christian Mystic" and had a great deal to influence my thinking,
especially as he related his "Christianity" to the spiritual ideas of the East.
Here I was still trying to remain acceptable to the Evangelical camp. I have
since come to the conclusion that "I don't need them and their 'religion'".
The truth is in me, if I am willing to take the time and effort to look for it.

"THE Lord made His world not in order to judge it, not in order merely to dominate it,
to make it obey the dictates of an inscrutable and all-powerful will, not in order to find
pleasure or displeasure in the way it worked: such was not the reason for creation either
of the world or of man.
"The Lord made the world and made man in order that He Himself might descend into
the world, that He Himself might become Man. When He regarded the world He was
about to make He saw His wisdom, as a man-child, "playing in the world, playing before
Him at all times." And He reflected, "my delights are to be with the children of men."
"The world was not made as a prison for fallen spirits who were rejected by God: this
is the gnostic error. The world was made as a temple, a paradise, into which God Himself
would descend to dwell familiarly with the spirits He had placed there to tend it for Him.
"The early chapters of Genesis (far from being a pseudo-scientific account of the way
the world was supposed to have come into being) are precisely a poetic and symbolic
revelation, a completely true, though not literal, revelation of God's view of the universe
and of His intentions for man. The point of these beautiful chapters is that God made the
world as a garden in which He himself took delight. He made man and gave to man the
task of sharing in His own divine care for created things. He made man in His own image
and likeness, as an artist, a worker, homo faber, as the gardener of paradise. He let man
decide for himself how created things were to be interpreted, understood and used: for
Adam gave the animals their names (God gave them no names at all) and what names
Adam gave them, that they were. Thus in his intelligence man, by the act of knowing,
imitated something of the creative love of God for creatures. While the love of God,
looking upon things, brought them into being, the love of man, looking upon things,
reproduced the divine idea, the divine truth, in man's own spirit.
"As God creates things by seeing them in His own Logos, man brings truth to life in
his mind by the marriage of the divine light, in the being of the object, with the divine
light in his own reason. The meeting of these two lights in one mind is truth."
from "New Seeds of Contemplation" - Chapter 39, The General Dance - by Thomas Merton

This jumped out at me today.

I know as some Fundamentalists read these paragraphs of Merton's there will be an immediate
tendency to reject it in it's entirety because of the statement "The early chapters of
Genesisare precisely a poetic and symbolic revelation, a completely true, though not
literal, revelation of God's view of the universe and of His intentions for man."

So - if that really bothers you - we'll pretend that statement is not there and proceed under the
presumption that the early chapters of Genesis are in their entirety - quite literal. The fact is - I




don't know. I wasn't there. And for me personally to assert the literal veracity of something I was
not actually witness too - is not an act of faith - but presumption based on hearsay.

Hebrews 11:3 says, By faith we understand that the worlds [during the successive ages]
were framed (fashioned, put in order, and equipped for their intended purpose) by the
word of God, so that what we see was not made out of things which are visible.
Amplified Bible. Regarding faith, whether Genesis 1-8 are Literal or Metaphoric or
Allegoric is not the issue. God made it - and there are images recorded to give us a
Spiritual insight as to what it was (and is) all about. By faith I accept these.

And said, Truly I say to you, unless you repent (change, turn about) and become like
little children [trusting, lowly, loving, forgiving], you can never enter the kingdom of
heaven [at all]. We often quote Matthew 18:3 to impress upon our evangelistic target, or
a weaker disciple, the necessity of accepting a particular understanding of Bible
interpretation as the absolute interpretation - to be accepted as a little child - trusting
and accepting, without doubts or questioning, for these would surely be acts of rebellion
and unbelief.

Our contemporary Bibles are even phrased as to express this particular premise. I.e. If it
is stated this way in the book - it must be so.

Now - understand me - I am a great lover of contemporary translations, particularly the
Amplified Bible. But sometimes- just because it is written - It Aint Necessarily
So

gC) ])O] CO ]_ 4O) ]C O 4C
4] gC) _]E] + 4C OC)-)C E4 O ])]
E4] ])+ 4 pC)])C 4 E44C Matthew
18:3 Textus Receptus Greek

and said, Verily I say to you, if ye may not be turned and become as the children, ye
may not enter into the reign of the heavens; Matthew 18:3 Youngs Literal Translation

In our translating and interpreting we too often impose arbitrary preferences to enhance
and express preferred understandings. This may be an unavoidable thing - but reinforces
the necessity of digging and re-modeling what we may have previously held as absolute.
The new model just may be closer too and expressive of Gods mind.

The word here for repent, be converted, turn is strepho . It is a synonym for
metanoeo and means to change ones mind. Repent = think differently.

Our thinking - Christian, Pagan, Secular or otherwise - Is in reference to the language we
use - and how we interpret and apply words. These words - images - abstract symbols -
are products of natural mental capacities. As such their reference is bound to a dimension
of being and reality, and express in terms and in association to this reality. The reality
of language is that of humanity - in relation to God or not - the carnal man.





The categories of language always find their primary reference in the capacities of the
human mind. They are not of themselves the expression of the mind of God. They may,
as we become connected, and relationally involved with the inner intimacies of God, our
real divinely infused resident nature, become the interpreters of that life, but the
language itself is the by-product of our humanity.

To put it simply presumed Christians (at least the vast majority of those professing
Christ), Pagans, Secularists and whomever else you wish to label -ALL - essentially find
themselves living in, enslaved too, bound too and speaking the same language of the
same kingdom. Oh yes there are plenty of doctrinal differences and reasons to abuse and
detest each other, but all of this is the result of living from and relying on the resources
provided by the kingdom of mens own making.

We presume that by changing our doctrines (theologies, mental apprehensions) that we
will change our habits and allegiances and grow closer to God. Acquiring a more
Biblical referenced frame of thought is our key to the ether world. But we fail to realize
that changing our minds as simply referenced turning around, repenting, rejecting
carnal behaviors, leaves us in the same kingdom. Our language and words may be
more religiously referenced, but they are drawn from the same source as before. And
ultimately will produce the same results. Whether that is expressed in one or another
form of religious superiority, fundamentalist jihad (Islamic or Christian), or religious
cannibalism, to name a few.

Repentance is a prerequisite to entering the kingdom of heaven. But not just repentance -
changing our minds - thinking differently - the old thought categories are passed away
- ALL is become new. Think differently, become as a little child. Now dont go back
to that trusting, lowly, loving, forgiving mental image of a child. Its a lot more than
that, and in some respects not this at all. This is the child image religion would have you
buy into. Religion is a product of that old kingdom. Theres a new sheriff in town.

He saw His wisdom, as a man-child, "playing in the world, playing before Him at all
times. And He reflected, "my delights are to be with the children of men. God
made the world as a garden in which He himself took delight. He made man and gave to
man the task of sharing in His own divine care for created things. He made man in His
own image and likeness, as an artist, a worker, homo faber, as the gardener of paradise

Have you ever considered the wonder that a child experiences. Or the delight of just
being - and the naturalness of play. To Play, is to work. To work, is to Play. And the
discovery in Play is never a burden. Learning is not a chore - it is the norm. We - in our
well intentions - and methods of expertise, begin the process of imposing expectations
and eventually robbing the joy from the character once delighting in the naturalness of
being. And another is assimilated as part of the Borg (ref. Star Trek Next Gen).

Im not so sure we were literally cast out of the garden. The one thing I am sure of is
that we have found our primary reference for thought, and understanding our being, in
another kingdom.





Maybe God is just waiting for us to come play in the garden? Maybe finding that garden
means thinking differently about a lot of things? Maybe its not something I will have to
try and think differently about, but simply will think differently - when Im in the garden?

Childish questions?





At the time I wrote these replies George W. Bush was still president. There
were some who took offence at my criticism of him, his administration and
U.S. policies abroad. ... Oh Well ...

Bob. I hope I do not detect some resentment creeping into your psyche.

=====================

Hardly your most mature work - If you mean that the use of words to tickle your
intellect is not evident - so be it. Political cartoons seldom make use of many words.

some resentment creeping into your psyche. - As I observe the abuses of power and
the fallacious claims to represent the God of Jesus Christ - resentment - you bet your ass I
resent being labeled or categorized with this clown.

And I say clown because that is the level of competence and maturity he has exhibited
as leader of the free world.

I originally was a George W Bush supporter. He has repeatedly evidenced that that
confidence was ill placed. Yes I feel betrayed as a Christian constituent, and will not
have it presumed, by my silence, that I continue to render or maintain that support. Im
done supporting what is a show of alleged Christianity. A tree is known by its fruit,
and the fruit that is evidenced here is self preserving politics.


===============================

Now if love is patient , kind, enduring, and keeps no record of wrongdoing. I fail to see
how accusations somehow qualify as a gift of the spirit. But, I do try to remain open to
correction.


=================

Love is also responsible. And as a participant in a democratic form of government - it is a
responsibility to speak. I would add a qualification, which is subject to each persons
viewpoint, - hold your tongue unless you really have something to say.

Love also rejoices when right and truth prevail.

We can take and twist the words of the Bible into any context and configuration that most
suits our purpose. This twisting and reassembling is not the Word of God. The Word
dwells in you - and regardless of the intellectual gymnastics we may put our minds
through and the contortions we may manufacture and call it the truth as evidenced by
the (choke) (cough)(gag) Word of God - the Bible, The truth is not evidenced by
these. The truth is known in you. Regardless of the religious crap you may assemble
around you, The resident Word of God - IN YOU - is bearing witness to the truth.





Our religion(s) construct facades of faith that keep us from realizing that truth. Religion -
Christian, Muslim or other, construct systems around us. They keep us from each other,
and by our focus on them - keep us from really knowing God. Spirituality, knowledge of
Christ, is not and intellectual argument. But it is to the Church, or may I better say, those
who would associate and propagate themselves as the Church.

What is dominant in this nation (I speak as an American) is not Christianity in relation to
Christ - the comprehension and realization of intimacy with the creator God, but various
forms and intellectualizations of religious order. None of which are necessarily the
expression of Christ.

It is this religious form that now occupies the White House. We are a democracy. Our
Constitution binds us together as a people. The Constitution is not the definer of faith, but
it is the binder of peoples of a plethora of faiths.

accusations somehow qualify as a gift of the spirit - We as the American people - are
the overseers of our government. We can argue that we elect officials to perform duties
and carry out responsibilities and thus delegate that responsibility. But who oversees
those to whom these responsibilities are delegated too. Whether it be the White House, or
the Congress, or the Judiciary - ultimately - as a Democracy - the buck doesnt stop with
GW Bush (or whoever else may occupy that seat), the buck stops with you and me, the
people of the United States of America. Abuse of power is all too easy, where dirty little
secrets can be kept in smoke filled back rooms. Public accountability is our only real
secure option. That does not mean all secrets are revealed. It means the right and
responsibility to exercise the Constitutional safeguards in open and public forum. Public
accountability is necessary, because this nation belongs to all of us.

If theres nothing to hide, Whats the issue? - The Administration is behaving like a little
boy with his hand caught in the cookie jar.





Truth and freedom derived from externals (the jot and tittles, little red
books, Mein Kampf, KJV, NASB, NIV, the Message, Koran, ad infinitum) and
processed by broken machines can only be caricatures of the real.

Jesus said his teaching would set us free; that he would show us "truth" and "the truth
will set us free."
what is freedom?
are you free?
what is this "truth" that sets us free?
======================

My response:

BIG Question.

Not sure I have the definitive answer. Maybe to satisfy myself, and even that is
questioning.

Truth and Freedom seem to be relative to the context of the particular culture.

Freedom is tied to our perception of what is truth. And even when those from relatively
common cultural roots, with common objective sources, apply our subjective analysis
to these presumed elements of objectivity, the perception of truth changes.

You can see this in the divisions, or sectarianism of the Islamic faith, and the
denominations of the Christian faith.

With each sect or denomination, a method to interpretation is applied to the particular
objective materials. Each renders a quite different outcome or assumed absolute
application of the processed data.

All this reasoning and analysis takes place in the human mind. Christian, Muslim, Pagan,
Cannibal - the mind of ALL - is essentially the same. What makes the difference is (1)
the data that is input (Bible, Koran, Book of the Dead, Ouija board, chicken bones,
whatever) and (2) the methods we are taught to apply to the input data in order to render a
satisfactory outcome, or Truth upon which we order our life, lives, society.

Being able to exist and function within this perception of truth is our particular
freedom.

Truth and Freedom throughout the world may be interpreted quite differently. In some
places, freedom is interpreted as release from captivity or slavery - A movement from
something - poverty, inequality, oppressive situations. Other cultures stress ability to act
freely - A movement towards something, financial independence, the exercise of
entrepreneurial initiative. Still others a countrys right to self-rule, and others, the
right to act or speak freely, and absence of something unpleasant and ease of
movement and the list goes on.





All these are freedom as defined by perceptions of what is truth garnered from the input
of what has been accepted as objective materials, life experiences and the methods we
are taught to analyze and process that information. This all takes place in the human
mind, Christian, Muslim, Pagan, Cannibal.

But what if the data input is faulty? What if the method of processing is insufficient or
broken? Either or both of these being a problem will render essentially the same outcome.
A mangled mess of fictitious lies. Sure the particulars will all manifest in different
appearances, but essentially - one lie is the same as another. And freedom derived from a
perceived truth, which is in actuality a lie - is no freedom at all.

You could call me a Bible thumper. I do believe the basics of what are contained in
many, if not most, orthodox historic Christian creeds. But what I have realized, and this
would qualify me as Un-Orthodox in many Christian environments, is that the truth
contained in the creeds and the truth as expressed in the scriptures, the Bible, as
exemplified in the life of the Church - are not the same.

Now it is true, that the Church has been desirous of regaining that Spiritual dynamic that
seems to have been misplaced in the course of two thousand years. So we put our minds
to work, dissecting the book, constructing our models, and every so often someone will
proclaim - Here it is, I think weve got it, and everyone gets excited, a few miracles
manifest, for a time everyone is getting high on God. Meetings and conventions occupy
our time, Bible studies pop up all over the place, and all is as it should be, God is on His
throne and revival has come. And eventually the miracles are less regular, the enthusiasm
begins to wane. And we settle into our religious maintenance mode. A modified theology
and less repressive doctrine of the Kingdom. Freedom is wonderful - we can now do it
our way. And our way becomes ever so now respectable. We are even welcomed into the
local ministerial associations. And everyone begins to realize - Hey, theyre just like the
rest of us. Maybe a few crazy doctrines, but basically nice people. I think we can handle
that. We are comfortable in our freedom. Those whom we were once so derogatory of,
for their lack of Spirituality are now our kindred brothers in Christ.

Unity can be a wonderful thing. But if all that unity is the product of the human mind -
the religious mind, the mind focused on the externals of being, the things that can be
declared as objective, and dissected and processed and spewed as oh so many contortions
of truth, then unity is just another perception, a temporal lie. Satisfying for a time, but
eventually challenged, dismantled and reconstructed in the image of the next collective
Spiritual bowel movement or mental hic-up.

Truth and freedom derived from externals (the jot and tittles, little red books, Mein
Kampf, KJV, NASB, NIV, the Message, Koran, ad infinitum) and processed by broken
machines can only be caricatures of the real.

What is real - Is in me. Processing and expressing - what is in me - that is freedom.





What is in me - is Christ - truth.





3-29-2007 - Though still referencing "God" and "Jesus", my attitude was
rapidly shifting and accomodating the "contemporary myth" as to what
constitutes "free human nature". Artistic images were starting to become
more understandable and desirable as expressions of what true spirituality
consists. This is not to say that I endorse the concept of the "artist as
priest", but the nature of the calling often entails creative expression, not
found through religious or archaic, antiquated traditions found in religious
systems.

Cool Hand Luke - Newman stars in the title role as Luke, a prisoner in a Florida prison
camp who refuses to submit to the system. His inability to conform drives the plot of the
movie, in the same vein as characters such as Winston from Nineteen Eighty-Four,
McMurphy from One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest or Holman in The Sand Pebbles.

Luke is sent to the prison camp for cutting the heads off parking meters one drunken
night, and when asked what kind of thing that is for a man to do, his explanation is
"Small town, not much to do in the evenin'. Mostly just settlin' up old scores." His
unquenchable spirit makes the other prisoners idolize (and idealize) him, and leads to his
Christ-like martyrdom at the hands of the authorities. There is occasional Christian
imagery and reference throughout, notably in the closing pullback shot, of roads forming
a distinct cross.

Monkey on a string - What Would You Say- Dave Mathews -

Up and down the puppies hair
Fleas and ticks jump everywhere
cause of original sin
Down the hill fell jack and jill
And you came tumbling after
cause of original sin
Rip away the tears
Drink a hope to happy years
And you may find
A lifetimes passed you by
What would you say
Dont drop the big one
If you a monkey on a string
Dont cut my lifeline
If you a doggie on a chain
Dont bite the mailman
What would you say
I was there when the bear
Ate his head, thought it was a candy
Everyone goes in the end
Knock knock on the door
Whos it for, theres nobody in here
Look in the mirror my freind




I dont understand at best
And connot speak for all the rest
The morning rise a lifetimes passed me by
Every dog has its day every day has its way
Of being forgotten
Mom its my birthday
What would you say

More often than not the grinder was a man, bearing a medium sized barrel organ held in
front of him and supported by a hinged or removable wooden stick or leg that was
strapped to the back of the organ. The strap around his neck would balance the organ,
leaving one hand free to turn the crank and the other to steady the organ. A tin cup on top
of the organ or in the hand of a companion (or an animal) was used to solicit payments
for his performance. The grinder would often have as a companion a White-headed
Capuchin monkey to do tricks and attract attention. The monkey would collect the money
from the audience and sometimes collect other shiny objects that attracted his attention.
Other attractions might be parrots, dogs, dancing bears and members of the organ
grinder's family who would dance and sing.



Wind up toys - Monkeys Banging Cymbals - A Cymbal-banging monkey toy is a
mechanical depiction of a monkey holding a cymbal in each hand. When activated it
repeatedly bangs its cymbals together and, in some cases, bobs its head. There are both
traditional wind-up versions as well as updated battery-operated cymbal-banging
monkeys. They are often created with red rings painted around their wide-open eyes,
creating an appearance many find creepy and disturbing, perhaps explaining their many
appearances in horror/scifi media.

Technology -

Economics -

Religion and Society - Religion in society is charged with the responsibility of setting
standards for the norm. Social graces and behavioral standards are the external
manifestations of what was at one time originally an internal developing spiritual life. But
what is it when the measure of the external is the sole criteria and the end in and of
themselves. It has become a case of whited sepulchers filled with dead men's bones. This
may also be true of our pride in our dogmatic religious theological correctness. Once
we've got it all together, God becomes a delightful addition, like icing on a cake, but not
the substance of our religion. And sometimes if God doesn't behave according to our
theological construct, He isn't all that desirable. And if He rocks the boat enough or
expects us to get out and walk on the water with Him, well He can just pack it up and go
someplace else. As long as we fear intimacy with the living God our religion will find a
way to logically develop a Biblical way and reason to shun Him and those sent by Him.





Karl Marx - According to Marx, religion is an expression of material realities and
economic injustice. Thus, problems in religion are ultimately problems in society.
Religion is not the disease, but merely a symptom. It is used by oppressors to make
people feel better about the distress they experience due to being poor and exploited. This
is the origin of his comment that religion is the opium of the masses but as shall see,
his thoughts are much more complex than commonly portrayed.


------------------------

Cool Hand Bob? Brian? Jim? Paul? Wayne? (insert
name)? ?

Bob, Youre dangerous.

This was a comment made to me a few years back from an evangelist/coffee house
Pastor, who had been receiving my email newsletters for a while, upon our meeting.

But why am I dangerous?

Im really - nobody. Not much of what could be considered a success as a business
entrepreneur. Not highly educated, but not ignorant. Not particularly impressive in any
respects. I can play a pretty mean guitar, but that doesnt really account for much. Guitar
players are not generally appreciated for other qualities besides those of making a lot of
noise, and although potentially annoying - could hardly be considered dangerous.

Dangerous 1. likely to cause harm: likely to cause or result in harm or injury 2.
involving risk: involving risk or difficulty

OK - Im dangerous

Dangerous to whom? Or what? and WHY?

Remember Cool Hand Luke. Luke is a prisoner in a Florida prison camp who refuses to
submit to the system. Lukes inability to conform and unquenchable spirit makes the
other prisoners idolize (and idealize) him, and leads to his death at the hands of the
authorities. Critics and reviewers often point out the Christian imagery implicit if not
explicit throughout the film. Im not going to describe the plot, get a copy and watch it.

But what was Lukes crime? Initially, cutting the heads off parking meters.

But that is not a crime warranting death. There must be more. What was it?

Luke was an impudent rascal. His crime was wanting to be free. His crime was thinking
freely. His crime was not being broken by the system.

Luke was dangerous - to the system. If his spirit spread and infected the thinking of the




rest of the inmates - Authority was at risk of loosing control.

Luke was not dangerous. Luke was a threat. A threat to the established, well run
dehumanizing machine that would break a mans spirit and stuff him in a cubical. Well fit
to reenter a society of broken spirits.


Our religion has turned us into little monkeys on a string.

The Organ Grinder turns his crank and we hold our tin cup, make cute noises and faces,
and collect our shiny pieces.

What would you say
Dont drop the big one
If you a monkey on a string
Dont cut my lifeline
If you a doggie on a chain
Dont bite the mailman
What would you say

And you may find
A lifetimes passed you by

Dave Mathews

Monkeys Banging Cymbals - Turn the key, wind me up and watch me go.

Religion in society is charged with the responsibility of setting standards for the norm.
Social graces and behavioral standards are the external manifestations of what was at one
time originally an internal developing spiritual life. But what is it when the measure of
the external is the sole criteria and the end in and of themselves. It has become a case of
whited sepulchers filled with dead men's bones. This may also be true of our pride in our
dogmatic religious theological correctness. Once we've got it all together, God becomes a
delightful addition, like icing on a cake, but not the substance of our religion. And
sometimes if God doesn't behave according to our theological construct, He isn't all that
desirable. And if He rocks the boat enough or expects us to get out and walk on the water
with Him, well He can just pack it up and go someplace else. As long as we fear intimacy
with the living God our religion will find a way to logically develop a Biblical way and
reason to shun Him and those sent by Him. Hey Babe, What Did You Expect? 05-01-02


If religion fails in its societal responsibility, as expected by political and economic
systems, the religious system is of NO value.

Major religious systems, whether Christian, Muslim or other, are considered and treated
as complicating real issues, based on sectarian prejudice and the unwillingness or




inability to engage in constructive dialog, and as a result are unable to perform their
societal roles in relation to each other. This is not an invalid criticism. And the Christian
church as a whole, or at least as recognized, perceived and understood by the world in
general is as guilty as any other. To put it simply, as regards political entities, if they
could, the religious system would be better off chucked. meet with God-

Technology and Economics are the two primary factors that drive our modern world. And
Economics is, or would be, the leash holder of the Political. Religion apart from its
ability to influence and manage the minds of the populace, serves no function to either
the Economic or Political Systems. And, as should be expected, that influence requires
implied common values of the Economic and Political interests.

Technology is sold to us for its labor saving benefits, and implementation will benefit all
and free up time for more domestic and recreational interests. While generally there is a
potential for this, the general realization has not been so, but rather increased productivity
without corresponding increase in wages, and a decrease in jobs. Technology has allowed
for an increase of more technically trained positions, but not comparable to the numbers
or wages lost. Economics and the sake of efficiency - the purpose being the maximization
of corporate profits - rules and becomes the final arbitrator as to the use and value of
technology. Rather than technology becoming our liberator, we become the slaves of a
new form of economic dominance.

Thus far the Internet has been one exception to the complete dominance by the giant
corporate conglomerate system. That does not mean economic interests are not seeking to
rest control, they are. And the avenue to accomplish this is through political influence.

The religious system fails when the interests of the established, recognizable religious
representatives, by proxy, allies with the interests of either the Political or the Economic
systems, in difference to what is the interests of God. This could be as either a failure to
properly interpret God, or an actual lack of KNOWLEDGE of God (not the Bible, but
intimacy), or a preference for security and position.

Regardless of what is the cause of failure, now - this is assuming that what I express - has
real Spiritual validity - To the degree that I (or anyone else for that matter), to the
degree that I am faithful to Christ as I know Him in me, and express that life - the life of
God - the life of the Spirit - I may be dangerous, - to the system, - Religious, Political, or
Economic.

Not everyone buys into my politics. Thats cool. No sweat off my back. Very few, if any,
have been willing to challenge my perception of the reality of the indwelling of Christ.

My purpose is to grow in the understanding and expression of His Person in and through
me. That may well challenge the predominant understanding of religious expression as
realized and constructed by usual academic methods. If it is God - you wont be able to
stop me. If I am a kook - Why are you reading this?

I may not be right in everything I express - but there is enough - people are listening (or




reading as the case may be).

I am no longer tethered to the organ grinder.

I can no longer be wound up to clang the cymbals like a mechanical toy.

Life is no longer passing me by. I am beginning to live. I have found there is Life.

I have decided to follow Jesus, No turning back, No turning back.





4-3-2007 - Continually growing ever more critical of the nature of the
"Church", one might "presuppose" I was/am "anti-Church". This is not the
case at all, although I do believe an even greater "reformation" than the
original instigated by Martin Luther is well in order. The"Church" needs to
"redefine" itself apart from political, economic and need I say "religious"
interests


Sacred Cow Barbecue

Take no thought our Father in heaven cares for us.

Now when He was asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, He
answered them and said, The kingdom of God does not come with observation; nor
will they say, See here! or See there! For indeed, the kingdom of God is within
you. Luke 17:21

Having correct language but misconstrued concepts will always result in perversion of
doctrine and application.

An error that has persisted in the church, in various forms for the its virtual full existence,
has been the attempt to become something of influence through political, religious and
now economic power avenues. Sometime between the first century AD and the Emperor
Constantine, the church morphed from a Spiritual enigma to a Religious/Political power
entity.

The concept of the Church was defined and held as the predominant religious influence in
relation to the evolving and ever changing political landscape. As they (the political and
religious systems) found common purpose to ally, relative stability, peace and order could
be maintained. And this was relative only in the broadest sense possible. Changing
religious ideas during the Reformation, although opening the Scripture to broader
examination and interpretation, hardly improved the general state of peace and political
order. Even in contemporary times, though there is improved expression of freedoms and
the rights of man, the security of these freedoms is precarious and by no means universal.
The state of peace is none the better than any other period in history. It can be argued it
has deteriorated proportionally to our ability to arm ourselves. Put your faith in weapons,
and you no doubt will end up using them.

The modern Church, as a whole, has not proven to be much of a positive influence to
challenge nationalistic, militaristic tendencies. On the contrary, some segments, endorse
and encourage these tendencies, to the point of blessing and evoking Gods favor. World
economic inequalities, dis-proportional dominance by the West, emerging Communist
China as a key player, all add to conflicts of interests with accepted Christian values,
more often willing to be compromised, than adhered to for the sake of corporate profit.
The Church, for patriotic or economic purposes would prefer to pretend It isn't so or
It's somebody else's fault. Self interests, personal peace and happiness, maintaining the
status quo, have become the new sacred values of the Church.





Through all these historic situations, the Religious-Political alliance laid claim to, with
the approval of the religious power bearers, being the expression of the Kingdom of God.
Of course, lesser, non-allied Religious groups laid claim to the Kingdom of God, and
awaited their turn to share in the Political pie.

All this political endeavoring to be the Kingdom of God, to construct a theology that
would incorporate the ultimate reception of the Kingdom, the Second Coming of Christ,
the Rapture, the Tribulation, the Thousand year reign.- All in earthly human terms. ALL
flies in the face of Christs pronouncement that The kingdom of God does not come
with observation. We have not come to understand and experience the kingdom of
God is within you. And not realizing it within, we endeavor to build it with out.

The Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Heaven are one and the same. The
internalization of the Kingdom, the realization of Heaven as a current state, the abode of
Christ, the Word, the indwelling Spirit, God in His Heaven, Is in You.

Once we begin to live from this Kingdom, Heaven isn't that far away. The manifestation
of the will of God on Earth is ours for the making. It's not in our heads, or the
manipulations of external things. Whether it be the Bible, people or nations. But it is the
internal Life of God manifesting through a human being You, and me.

Sound too idealistic?

That's your head.

The church has lived long enough out of it's head.

It's time to start living out of Him.
























our Father in heaven





4-4-2007 - What does "In the Name of Jesus" really mean?


Contractual agreements and treatys are made regularly between corporations and
between governments. Representatives of the institutions and organizations act In the
Name of or in proxy of whom they represent.

In our Religious-Political state much, if not most, of our actions are performed In the
Name of the one we represent. By that, we mean we act in proxy of the one we
represent. Their Name, or what their name represents, is ours legally to use, with power
of attorney, as their representative. There may be no actual intimacy between the one
whose name is used, and the one applying the authority, represented by that name. It is
purely a legal transaction, not dependent upon a state of character, a matter of
communications, or other such familiarity of knowledge. Of course, an intellectual
apprehension, is assumed as the virtual equivalent to an intimate relation. Assuming to
be, and actually being, are not necessarily the same.

This is the state of being Christian as much of the Church finds itself. Dependent and
verbally confident in, but not necessarily knowing, on personal levels, the intimacies of
the Life to be experienced in relation to the divine character and person within. Legally,
we think we know what should be, but the experience, except as may be construed in our
minds, eludes us.

Functioning In the Name of, exhibits little, if any, of the power assumed to be
associated with the name. We verbally assume the name of Jesus, but have little
knowledge of what relationship to the name is. The significant expression in the name
of Jesus indicates in the authority or power of Jesus, To genuinely believe in or
into or to call upon the name of the Lord Jesus indicates commitment to Him and
establishment of communion with Him. Communion with Him, is drawing on His
Life - borne in you.

To act In the Name of Jesus - means more than a legal act, presumably as His
representative. To act In the Name of Jesus, is nothing less than acting as Him - but
not just as Him legally. As Him, As He communes in and through us. As the light is in
us, we see, as the Word expresses - we speak. As we relate to and realize, That which
was from the beginning, we KNOW a state of relation with God experienced in the
garden prior to the fall.

Religion - would hide this from us. This relation to God does not fit religious categories.
It assumes a relationship to God that can not be manipulated by or come under the
mandates of a religious hierarchy. It sets people free. It allows God, to be God.

But dont worry, theres plenty out there to keep feeding you youre religious junk food.
If thats what you really crave.

There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. This man came for a witness, to
bear witness of the Light, that all through him might believe. He was not that Light, but




was sent to bear witness of that Light. That was the true Light which gives light to
every man coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made
through Him, and the world did not know Him. He came to His own, and His own did not
receive Him. But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become
children of God, to those who believe in His name: John 1:6-12





4-5-2007 - In Him Was Life

John 1:4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men.

1. zoe (2222) (Eng., zoo, zoology) is used in the NT:
of life as a principle,
life in the absolute sense,
life as God has it, that which the Father has in Himself,
and which He gave to the Incarnate Son to have in Himself, John 5:26,
and which the Son manifested in the world, 1 John 1:2.
From this life man has become alienated in consequence of the Fall, Eph. 4:18,
and of this life men become partakers through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, John
3:15,
Eternal life is the present actual possession of the believer because of his
relationship with Christ, John 5:24; 1 John 3:14,

This life is a term equivalent to the gospel, the faith, Christianity, Acts 5:20.
Death came through sin, Rom. 5:12, which is rebellion against God. Sin thus involved the
forfeiting of the life.

-------------------------------------------

William Edwy Vine, in his Vines Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New
Testament Words does have more to relate concerning zoe - life. But most of that, is
not concerned with the substance of the life - zoe, it is to bolster what is a commonly
accepted Evangelical perspective (some valid, some subject to debate), mostly defining
our legal relation to life.

My concern, right now is what is this life - that is light - that was possessed by this
Word - the Eternal Christ. Being able to find and provide an exhaustive, all inclusive
definition - I do not believe is possible. Because we are dealing with an infinite
qualitative quantity that is the life of God, Himself. And as God is infinite, we, as finite,
can not contain all that might define that life.

But our relative infinitesimal being, such as it is, is the receptor, the container, the
expresser - of that life.

I have come to believe that to try and apply some qualitative, quantitative description of
this life, apart from the actualization of this life, in the one being communicated too, is
a near (if not actual) impossibility. How can you communicate the infinite, in finite
categories. The best our language would be is parables (though not actually a parable).

But still, we are capable of recognizing qualitative factors of this life as: righteousness,
peace and joy, character traits of: love, joy (gladness), peace, patience (an even temper,
forbearance), kindness, goodness (benevolence), faithfulness, gentleness (meekness,
humility), self-control (self-restraint, continence), diligence, virtue, knowledge
(intelligence), godliness (piety), hope, humility, meekness, merciful, purity of motive.





These are not the results of a manufacturing process. They are the result of a nurtured
life. A seed that is planted, germinates and is encouraged to grow. Not made to grow. Not
held in expectation of a arbitrary, predetermined standard or benchmark of what qualifies
as maturity, but allowed to develop to the potential God gives.

Our religious systems have perverted this. And just as there are the competitive, survival
of the fittest, social and economic Darwinian standards exalted in the world, the
predatory animal nature of man is allowed to dominate our Church environment. We take
it unto our own selves to make it happen. Politically, Economically, Socially and
Religiously.

Life will grow, given the proper environment. Our religious fertilizer (BS) is not
mandatory. Our religion rewards us with social standing, recognition, possibly position.
Seeking the Kingdom rewards us with Jesus, and ALL that may be His. Social
standing, recognition and position, are not on that list.

But you do what you want too.





4-5-2007 - The Big Bang is still going on, IF we have the mind to consider
and experience it


The Big Bang

In the beginning infers the origin of time and space. Of all that is, the Word, the
logos was first.

All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was
made. John 1:3

He -Christ - the Word - is the firstborn over all creation. Colossians 1:15b

Firstborn - prototokos - root - protos - from this we get the English prototype. Christ -
the Word - is the prototype of ALL creation. If it exists - Christ is the original. ALL
creation finds its identity in Christ.

For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. [For all things originate with
Him and come from Him; all things live through Him, and all things center in and tend to
consummate and to end in Him.] To Him be glory forever! Amen (so be it).Romans
11:36

and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. John 1:1 He is the image of
the invisible God, Colossians 1:15a

These verses that I have referenced, John 1:1,3, Col 1:15, Rom 11:36, are regular used to
denote the divine nature of Christ. But as regarding what are the potentialities resident in
the reintroduction of this relationship, little is communicated.

Now - let me take a step back. When I say little is communicated, I mean little is
communicated as resourced through the now resident Logos as He is birthing his
character, nature, life in us.

There is plenty of Bible teaching going on out there. Not all Bible teaching is the
overflow of the life of the Word, Christ from within. The vast majority of the what is
preached in our churches - is head religion. Doctrine and dogma learned to be spewed
to meet the needs, or as they are perceived, of religious forms. This applies to Old line
traditional churches, more contemporary Evangelicals, Pentecostals, Charismatics, or
others. Now - let me add. That is a pretty broad generalization - and as a whole, I believe
true. But even as I state this, that does not mean the Church is completely void of that
connection and relation to the life of the indwelling Word. The issue is the Church has
become more dependent upon what it can learn with its head, and concerned with
maintaining what is perceived as advances in the faith, which are ultimately nothing more
than the canonization of new religious forms that feel comfortable, THAN with the
dynamic relation to be realized with the God in us.





Weve got plenty of doctrine. And doctrine about a God of Miracles. What we have very
little of - is experience with the God within.

Consider this - pretend we can go back - waaaaayyyy back. Back to a dimension of
nothing - All is nothing. There is no universe. All is Void. Not even any ALL because
ALL implies something. Back to the ------- VOID - - - - - God

Into the Void - God - the Word

Just a dotsmaller than anything you can imagine.

Then..BANG

an in an instant ----- all that is -------- IS

And that Bangcontinues.

This was not meant to sell you on the Big Bang theory, but just a mind exercise.

A parable of the Word.

That power - that life - that God - that created all that is ----- from nothing.

That is in you.

That is who our Christ is and the power of that BANG is the life that is in us.

It is not our religious monkey see, monkey do.

It is Personal - - You God





4-8-2007 - This is a Bible Study I did using the Bible as scripture alone and
highlighting the significant words and providing original Greek meanings to
demonstrate how we in the "Orthodox" Church have miss used and mis-
interpreted that which we dignify as being the "inspired" and inerrant
"Word of God", i.e. the Bible.

WORD

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 1:1 - logos

He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without
Him nothing was made that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of
men. And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.John
1:2-5

There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. This man came for a witness, to
bear witness of the Light, that all through him might believe. He was not that Light, but
was sent to bear witness of that Light. That was the true Light which gives light to
every man coming into the world. John 1:6-9

He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know
Him. He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him. But as many as received
Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in
His name: John 1:10-12

And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as
of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.John 1:13-14 - logos

For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit;
and these three are one.1 John 5:7 - logos

He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of
God.Revelation 19:13 - logos

WORD OF GOD - BIBLE, NOT

and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come,Hebrews 6:5 -
rhema

which He promised before through His prophets in the Holy Scriptures,Romans 1:2 -
graphe

and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make
you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.2 Timothy 3:15 - hieros
gramma

Much in every way! Chiefly because to them were committed the oracles of




God.Romans 3:2 - logion - oracle - utterances of God - the contents of the Mosaic
law

If anyone speaks, let him speak as the oracles of God. If anyone ministers, let him do it
as with the ability which God supplies, that in all things God may be glorified through
Jesus Christ, to whom belong the glory and the dominion forever and ever. Amen.1 Peter
4:11 - logion - oracle

For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins
according to the Scriptures,1 Corinthians 15:3 - graphe

And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God;
Ephesians 6:17 - rhema

Therefore lay aside all filthiness and overflow of wickedness, and receive with
meekness the implanted-emphutos-engrafted word - logos, which is able to save your
souls. But be doers-poietes, of the word - logos, and not hearers - akroates, only,
deceiving yourselves. For if anyone is a hearer of the word-logos, and not a doer, he is
like a man observing his natural face in a mirror; James 1:21-23 - hearer - to listen, give
audience, understand - doers- a performer

as newborn babes, desire the pure milk of the word, that you may grow thereby,1
Peter 2:2 - logikos - 1) pertaining to speech or speaking 2) pertaining to the reason
or logic 2a) spiritual, pertaining to the soul 2b) agreeable to reason, following
reason, reasonable, logical

But He said, More than that, blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep
it!Luke 11:28 - logos

For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword,
piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a
discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.Hebrews 4:12 - logos

Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one
another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the
Lord.Colossians 3:16 - logos

holding fast the word of life, so that I may rejoice in the day of Christ that I have not run
in vain or labored in vain.Philippians 2:16 - logos

Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be
ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.2 Timothy 2:15 - logos

Of His own will He brought us forth by the word of truth, that we might be a kind of
firstfruits of His creatures.James 1:18 - logos






Then He spoke many things to them in parables, saying: Behold, a sower went out to
sow. And as he sowed, some seed fell by the wayside; and the birds came and devoured
them. Some fell on stony places, where they did not have much earth; and they
immediately sprang up because they had no depth of earth. But when the sun was up
they were scorched, and because they had no root they withered away. And some fell
among thorns, and the thorns sprang up and choked them. But others fell on good
ground and yielded a crop: some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty.Matthew 13:3-8
Therefore hear the parable of the sower: When anyone hears the word (logos) of the
kingdom, and does not understand it, then the wicked one comes and snatches away what
was sown in his heart. This is he who received seed by the wayside. But he who
received the seed on stony places, this is he who hears the word (logos) and immediately
receives it with joy; yet he has no root in himself, but endures only for a while. For
when tribulation or persecution arises because of the word (logos), immediately he
stumbles. Now he who received seed among the thorns is he who hears the word
(logos), and the cares of this world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word
(logos), and he becomes unfruitful. But he who received seed on the good ground is he
who hears the word (logos) and understands it, who indeed bears fruit and produces:
some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty.Matthew 13:18-23 - hear - 1) to be
endowed with the faculty of hearing, not deaf 2) to hear 2b) to attend to, consider what is
or has been said 2c) to understand, perceive the sense of what is said 3) to hear
something 3a) to perceive by the ear what is announced in ones presence 3b) to get
by hearing learn 3c) a thing comes to ones ears, to find out, learn 3e) to give ear to a
teaching or a teacher 3f) to comprehend, to understand

He answered and said to them: He who sows the good seed is the Son of Man. The
field is the world, the good seeds are the sons of the kingdom, but the tares are the
sons of the wicked one. The enemy who sowed them is the devil, the harvest is the
end of the age, and the reapers are the angels. Therefore as the tares are gathered and
burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of this age. The Son of Man will send out His
angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and those who
practice lawlessness, and will cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be wailing
and gnashing of teeth. Then the righteous will shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of
their Father. He who has ears to hear, let him hear!Matthew 13:37-43

Listen! Behold, a sower went out to sow. And it happened, as he sowed, that some seed
fell by the wayside; and the birds of the air came and devoured it. Some fell on stony
ground, where it did not have much earth; and immediately it sprang up because it had no
depth of earth. But when the sun was up it was scorched, and because it had no root it
withered away. And some seed fell among thorns; and the thorns grew up and choked it,
and it yielded no crop. But other seed fell on good ground and yielded a crop that sprang
up, increased and produced: some thirtyfold, some sixty, and some a hundred. And He
said to them, He who has ears to hear, let him hear! But when He was alone, those
around Him with the twelve asked Him about the parable. And He said to them, To you
it has been given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God; but to those who are
outside, all things come in parables, so that Seeing they may see and not perceive, And
hearing they may hear and not understand; Lest they should turn, And their sins be




forgiven them. And He said to them, Do you not understand this parable? How then
will you understand all the parables? The sower sows the word.-(logos) And these are
the ones by the wayside where the word.-(logos) is sown. When they hear, Satan comes
immediately and takes away the word.-(logos) that was sown in their hearts. These
likewise are the ones sown on stony ground who, when they hear the word.-(logos),
immediately receive it with gladness; and they have no root in themselves, and so
endure only for a time. Afterward, when tribulation or persecution arises for the words.-
(logos) sake, immediately they stumble. Now these are the ones sown among thorns;
they are the ones who hear the word.-(logos), and the cares of this world, the
deceitfulness of riches, and the desires for other things entering in choke the word.-
(logos), and it becomes unfruitful. But these are the ones sown on good ground, those
who hear the word.-(logos), accept it, and bear fruit: some thirtyfold, some sixty, and
some a hundred.Mark 4:3-20

And He said, The kingdom of God is as if a man should scatter seed on the ground, and
should sleep by night and rise by day, and the seed should sprout and grow, he himself
does not know how. For the earth yields crops by itself: first the blade, then the head,
after that the full grain in the head. But when the grain ripens, immediately he puts in
the sickle, because the harvest has come. Then He said, To what shall we liken the
kingdom of God? Or with what parable shall we picture it? It is like a mustard seed
which, when it is sown on the ground, is smaller than all the seeds on earth; but when it
is sown, it grows up and becomes greater than all herbs, and shoots out large branches, so
that the birds of the air may nest under its shade. And with many such parables He spoke
the word-(logos) to them as they were able to hear it.Mark 4:26-33

A sower went out to sow his seed. And as he sowed, some fell by the wayside; and it
was trampled down, and the birds of the air devoured it. Some fell on rock; and as soon
as it sprang up, it withered away because it lacked moisture. And some fell among
thorns, and the thorns sprang up with it and choked it. But others fell on good ground,
sprang up, and yielded a crop a hundredfold. When He had said these things He cried,
He who has ears to hear, let him hear! Then His disciples asked Him, saying, What
does this parable mean? And He said, To you it has been given to know the mysteries
of the kingdom of God, but to the rest it is given in parables, that Seeing they may not
see, And hearing they may not understand. Now the parable is this: The seed is the
word-(logos) of God. Those by the wayside are the ones who hear; then the devil comes
and takes away the word-(logos) out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be
saved. But the ones on the rock are those who, when they hear, receive the word-(logos)
with joy; and these have no root, who believe for a while and in time of temptation fall
away. Now the ones that fell among thorns are those who, when they have heard, go out
and are choked with cares, riches, and pleasures of life, and bring no fruit to maturity.
But the ones that fell on the good ground are those who, having heard the word-(logos)
with a noble and good heart, keep it and bear fruit with patience.Luke 8:5-15

And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures
the things concerning Himself.Luke 24:27 - graphe

And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures.Luke




24:45 - graphe

These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word
with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were
so.Acts 17:11 - graphe

You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they
which testify of Me.John 5:39 - graphe

They answered and said to him, Are you also from Galilee? Search and look, for no
prophet has arisen out of Galilee.John 7:52

for he vigorously refuted the Jews publicly, showing from the Scriptures that Jesus is the
Christ.Acts 18:28 - graphe

The place in the Scripture which he read was this: He was led as a sheep to the
slaughter; And as a lamb before its shearer is silent, So He opened not His mouth. In His
humiliation His justice was taken away, And who will declare His generation? For His
life is taken from the earth. So the eunuch answered Philip and said, I ask you, of
whom does the prophet say this, of himself or of some other man? Then Philip opened
his mouth, and beginning at this Scripture, preached Jesus to him.Acts 8:32-35

Then Paul, as his custom was, went in to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with
them from the Scriptures,Acts 17:2

Now a certain Jew named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man and mighty in
the Scriptures, came to Ephesus. This man had been instructed in the way of the Lord;
and being fervent in spirit, he spoke and taught accurately the things of the Lord, though
he knew only the baptism of John. So he began to speak boldly in the synagogue. When
Aquila and Priscilla heard him, they took him aside and explained to him the way of God
more accurately.Acts 18:24-26

So when they had appointed him a day, many came to him at his lodging, to whom he
explained and solemnly testified of the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning
Jesus from both the Law of Moses and the Prophets, from morning till evening.Acts
28:23

He who rejects Me, and does not receive My words, has that which judges himthe
word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day. For I have not spoken on My
own authority; but the Father who sent Me gave Me a command, what I should say and
what I should speak. And I know that His command is everlasting life. Therefore,
whatever I speak, just as the Father has told Me, so I speak.John 12:48-50

For as many as have sinned without law will also perish without law, and as many as
have sinned in the law will be judged by the law (for not the hearers of the law are just in
the sight of God, but the doers of the law will be justified; for when Gentiles, who do not




have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a
law to themselves, who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience
also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing
them) in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my
gospel.Romans 2:12-16

But we have renounced the hidden things of shame, not walking in craftiness nor
handling the word of God deceitfully, but by manifestation of the truth commending
ourselves to every mans conscience in the sight of God. But even if our gospel is veiled,
it is veiled to those who are perishing, whose minds the god of this age has blinded, who
do not believe, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God,
should shine on them.2 Corinthians 4:2-4



-------------------------------------------------------

Heaven

Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where
thieves break in and steal; but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither
moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal.Matthew 6:19-20

But he, being full of the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and
Jesus standing at the right hand of God, and said, Look! I see the heavens opened and
the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God!Acts 7:55-56

But as it is written: Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, Nor have entered into the heart of
man The things which God has prepared for those who love Him. But God has revealed
them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of
God.1 Corinthians 2:9-10

For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed with our habitation which is from
heaven,2 Corinthians 5:2

And war broke out in heaven: Michael and his angels fought with the dragon; and the
dragon and his angels fought, but they did not prevail, nor was a place found for them in
heaven any longer. So the great dragon was cast out, that serpent of old, called the Devil
and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was cast to the earth, and his angels were
cast out with him.Revelation 12:7-9

Heaventhe place of everlasting bliss
A. Inhabitants of:
God 1 Kin. 8:30




Christ Heb. 9:12, 24
Holy Spirit Ps. 139:7, 8
Angels Matt. 18:10
Just men Heb. 12:22, 23
B. Things lacking in:
Marriage Matt. 22:30
Death Luke 20:36
Flesh and blood 1 Cor. 15:50
Imperishable 1 Cor. 15:42, 50
Sorrow Rev. 7:17
Pain Rev. 21:4
Curse Rev. 22:3
Night Rev. 22:5
Wicked people Rev. 22:15
End Matt. 25:46; Rev. 22:5
C. Positive characteristics of:
Joy Luke 15:7, 10
Rest Rev. 14:13
Peace Luke 16:1925
Righteousness 2 Pet. 3:13
ServiceRev. 7:15
Reward Matt. 5:11, 12
Inheritance 1 Pet. 1:4
Glory Rom. 8:17, 18
D. Entrance into, for:
Righteous Matt. 5:20
Changed 1 Cor. 15:51
Saved John 3:5, 18, 21
Called 2 Pet. 1:10, 11
Overcomers Rev. 2:7, 10, 11
Those recorded Luke 10:20
Obedient Rev. 22:14
Holy Rev. 19:8
E. Believers present attitude toward:
Given foretaste of Acts 7:55, 56
Earnestly desires 2 Cor. 5:2, 8
Looks for 2 Pet. 3:12
Considers far better than now Phil. 1:23
Puts treasure there Luke 12:33
F. Described as:
House John 14:2
Kingdom Matt. 25:34
Abrahams bosom Luke 16:22, 23
Paradise 2 Cor. 12:2, 4
Better country Heb. 11:10, 16
Holy city Rev. 21:2, 1027; Rev. 22:15




Heavens, natural
A. Facts regarding:
Created by God Gen. 1:1
Stretched out Is. 42:5; Jer. 10:12
Will be destroyed Heb. 1:1012; 2 Pet. 3:10
New heavens to follow Is. 65:17; 2 Pet. 3:13
B. Purposes of:
To declare Gods glory Ps. 19:1
To declare Gods righteousness Ps. 50:6
To manifest Gods wisdom Prov. 8:27

From that time Jesus began to preach and to say, Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at
hand.Matthew 4:17

Blessed are the poor in spirit, For theirs is the kingdom of heaven.Matthew 5:3

Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness sake, For theirs is the kingdom
of heaven.Matthew 5:10

Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven, for so they
persecuted the prophets who were before you.Matthew 5:12

Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your
Father in heaven.Matthew 5:16

For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by
no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.Matthew 5:18

Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so,
shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he
shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.Matthew 5:19

For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes
and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.Matthew 5:20

Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.Matthew 5:48

Take heed that you do not do your charitable deeds before men, to be seen by them.
Otherwise you have no reward from your Father in heaven.Matthew 6:1

In this manner, therefore, pray: Our Father in heaven, Hallowed be Your name. Your
kingdom come. Your will be done On earth as it is in heaven.Matthew 6:9-10

For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive
you.Matthew 6:14

but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and




where thieves do not break in and steal.Matthew 6:20

If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more
will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask Him!Matthew 7:11

Not everyone who says to Me, Lord, Lord, shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he
who does the will of My Father in heaven.Matthew 7:21

And I say to you that many will come from east and west, and sit down with Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. But the sons of the kingdom will be cast out
into outer darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.Matthew 8:11-12

And as you go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.Matthew 10:7

Therefore whoever confesses Me before men, him I will also confess before My Father
who is in heaven. But whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before My
Father who is in heaven.Matthew 10:32-33

Assuredly, I say to you, among those born of women there has not risen one greater than
John the Baptist; but he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he. And
from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and
the violent take it by force.Matthew 11:11-12

At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth,
that You have hidden these things from the wise and prudent and have revealed them to
babes.Matthew 11:25

For whoever does the will of My Father in heaven is My brother and sister and
mother.Matthew 12:50

He answered and said to them, Because it has been given to you to know the mysteries
of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given.
Matthew 13:11-52

Then He commanded the multitudes to sit down on the grass. And He took the five
loaves and the two fish, and looking up to heaven, He blessed and broke and gave the
loaves to the disciples; and the disciples gave to the multitudes.Matthew 14:19

Jesus answered and said to him, Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood
has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.Matthew 16:17

And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth
will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in
heaven.Matthew 16:19

At that time the disciples came to Jesus, saying, Who then is greatest in the kingdom of
heaven? Then Jesus called a little child to Him, set him in the midst of them, and said,
Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will
by no means enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore whoever humbles himself as this




little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.Matthew 18:1-4

Take heed that you do not despise one of these little ones, for I say to you that in heaven
their angels always see the face of My Father who is in heaven.Matthew 18:10

Assuredly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and
whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. Again I say to you that if two of
you agree on earth concerning anything that they ask, it will be done for them by My
Father in heaven.Matthew 18:18-19

Matthew 18:23-35

For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mothers womb, and there are
eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made
themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heavens sake. He who is able to accept it, let him
accept it.Matthew 19:12

But Jesus said, Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is
the kingdom of heaven.Matthew 19:14

Jesus said to him, If you want to be perfect, go, sell what you have and give to the poor,
and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me. But when the young man
heard that saying, he went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions. Then Jesus said
to His disciples, Assuredly, I say to you that it is hard for a rich man to enter the
kingdom of heaven. And again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye
of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.Matthew 19:21-24

Matthew 20:1-16

Matthew 22:2-14

For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels
of God in heaven.Matthew 22:30

Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in
heaven.Matthew 23:9

But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut up the kingdom of
heaven against men; for you neither go in yourselves, nor do you allow those who are
entering to go in.Matthew 23:13

Matthew 25:1-46

And behold, there was a great earthquake; for an angel of the Lord descended from
heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat on it.Matthew 28:2

And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, All authority has been given to Me in




heaven and on earth.Matthew 28:18

And immediately, coming up from the water, He saw the heavens parting and the Spirit
descending upon Him like a dove. Then a voice came from heaven, You are My beloved
Son, in whom I am well pleased.Mark 1:10-11


And when He had taken the five loaves and the two fish, He looked up to heaven, blessed
and broke the loaves, and gave them to His disciples to set before them; and the two fish
He divided among them all.Mark 6:41

Then, looking up to heaven, He sighed, and said to him, Ephphatha, that is, Be
opened.Mark 7:34

Then the Pharisees came out and began to dispute with Him, seeking from Him a sign
from heaven, testing Him.Mark 8:11

Then Jesus, looking at him, loved him, and said to him, One thing you lack: Go your
way, sell whatever you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven;
and come, take up the cross, and follow Me.Mark 10:21

And whenever you stand praying, if you have anything against anyone, forgive him, that
your Father in heaven may also forgive you your trespasses. But if you do not forgive,
neither will your Father in heaven forgive your trespasses.Mark 11:25-26

For when they rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are
like angels in heaven.Mark 12:25

Jesus said, I am. And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power,
and coming with the clouds of heaven.Mark 14:62

So then, after the Lord had spoken to them, He was received up into heaven, and sat
down at the right hand of God.Mark 16:19

So it was, when the angels had gone away from them into heaven, that the shepherds said
to one another, Let us now go to Bethlehem and see this thing that has come to pass,
which the Lord has made known to us.Luke 2:15

Rejoice in that day and leap for joy! For indeed your reward is great in heaven, For in
like manner their fathers did to the prophets.Luke 6:23

And He said to them, I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. Behold, I give you
the authority to trample on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy,
and nothing shall by any means hurt you. Nevertheless do not rejoice in this, that the
spirits are subject to you, but rather rejoice because your names are written in heaven. In
that hour Jesus rejoiced in the Spirit and said, I thank You, Father, Lord of heaven and




earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and prudent and revealed them to
babes. Even so, Father, for so it seemed good in Your sight. All things have been
delivered to Me by My Father, and no one knows who the Son is except the Father, and
who the Father is except the Son, and the one to whom the Son wills to reveal Him.Luke
10:18-22

Sell what you have and give alms; provide yourselves money bags which do not grow
old, a treasure in the heavens that does not fail, where no thief approaches nor moth
destroys.Luke 12:33

I say to you that likewise there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents
than over ninety-nine just persons who need no repentance.Luke 15:7

I will arise and go to my father, and will say to him, Father, I have sinned against
heaven and before you,Luke 15:18

So when Jesus heard these things, He said to him, You still lack one thing. Sell all that
you have and distribute to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come,
follow Me.Luke 18:22

saying: Blessed is the King who comes in the name of the Lord! Peace in heaven and
glory in the highest!Luke 19:38

Then an angel appeared to Him from heaven, strengthening Him.Luke 22:43

Now it came to pass, while He blessed them, that He was parted from them and carried
up into heaven.Luke 24:51

And John bore witness, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and
He remained upon Him.John 1:32

And He said to him, Most assuredly, I say to you, hereafter you shall see heaven open,
and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man.John 1:51

No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of
Man who is in heaven.John 3:13

John answered and said, A man can receive nothing unless it has been given to him from
heaven.John 3:27

Our fathers ate the manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from
heaven to eat. Then Jesus said to them, Most assuredly, I say to you, Moses did not
give you the bread from heaven, but My Father gives you the true bread from heaven.
For the bread of God is He who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.
Then they said to Him, Lord, give us this bread always. And Jesus said to them, I am
the bread of life. He who comes to Me shall never hunger, and he who believes in Me




shall never thirst. But I said to you that you have seen Me and yet do not believe. All
that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no
means cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will
of Him who sent Me. This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given
Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day. And this is the will of
Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have
everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day. The Jews then complained about
Him, because He said, I am the bread which came down from heaven. And they said,
Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How is it then
that He says, I have come down from heaven?John 6:31-42

This is the bread which comes down from heaven, that one may eat of it and not die. I
am the living bread which came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will
live forever; and the bread that I shall give is My flesh, which I shall give for the life of
the world.John 6:50-51

This is the bread which came down from heavennot as your fathers ate the manna,
and are dead. He who eats this bread will live forever.John 6:58

Father, glorify Your name. Then a voice came from heaven, saying, I have both
glorified it and will glorify it again.John 12:28

Jesus spoke these words, lifted up His eyes to heaven, and said: Father, the hour has
come. Glorify Your Son, that Your Son also may glorify You,John 17:1

----------------------------------------

Kingdom of

and saying, Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand!Matthew 3:2
From that time Jesus began to preach and to say, Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is
at hand.Matthew 4:17
And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, preaching the gospel of
the kingdom, and healing all kinds of sickness and all kinds of disease among the
people.Matthew 4:23
Blessed are the poor in spirit, For theirs is the kingdom of heaven.Matthew 5:3
Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness sake, For theirs is the
kingdom of heaven.Matthew 5:10
Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so,
shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he
shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.Matthew 5:19
For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes
and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.Matthew 5:20
But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things shall
be added to you.Matthew 6:33




Not everyone who says to Me, Lord, Lord, shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he
who does the will of My Father in heaven.Matthew 7:21
And I say to you that many will come from east and west, and sit down with Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven.Matthew 8:11
And as you go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.Matthew 10:7
Assuredly, I say to you, among those born of women there has not risen one greater than
John the Baptist; but he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.Matthew
11:11
And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffers
violence, and the violent take it by force.Matthew 11:12
But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, surely the kingdom of God has come
upon you.Matthew 12:28
He answered and said to them, Because it has been given to you to know the
mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given.Matthew 13:11
Another parable He put forth to them, saying: The kingdom of heaven is like a man
who sowed good seed in his field;Matthew 13:24
Another parable He put forth to them, saying: The kingdom of heaven is like a
mustard seed, which a man took and sowed in his field,Matthew 13:31
Another parable He spoke to them: The kingdom of heaven is like leaven, which a
woman took and hid in three measures of meal till it was all leavened.Matthew
13:33
Then the righteous will shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He
who has ears to hear, let him hear!Matthew 13:43
Again, the kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field, which a man found
and hid; and for joy over it he goes and sells all that he has and buys that
field.Matthew 13:44
Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant seeking beautiful pearls,Matthew
13:45
Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a dragnet that was cast into the sea and
gathered some of every kind,Matthew 13:47
Then He said to them, Therefore every scribe instructed concerning the kingdom of
heaven is like a householder who brings out of his treasure things new and old.Matthew
13:52
And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on
earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in
heaven.Matthew 16:19
For what profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul? Or
what will a man give in exchange for his soul?Matthew 16:26
At that time the disciples came to Jesus, saying, Who then is greatest in the kingdom of
heaven?Matthew 18:1
and said, Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little
children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.Matthew 18:3
Therefore whoever humbles himself as this little child is the greatest in the kingdom
of heaven.Matthew 18:4
Therefore the kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who wanted to settle
accounts with his servants.Matthew 18:23




For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mothers womb, and there are
eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made
themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heavens sake. He who is able to accept it, let
him accept it.Matthew 19:12
But Jesus said, Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of
such is the kingdom of heaven.Matthew 19:14
Then Jesus said to His disciples, Assuredly, I say to you that it is hard for a rich man
to enter the kingdom of heaven.Matthew 19:23
And again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than
for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.Matthew 19:24
For the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the morning
to hire laborers for his vineyard.Matthew 20:1
Which of the two did the will of his father? They said to Him, The first. Jesus said to
them, Assuredly, I say to you that tax collectors and harlots enter the kingdom of
God before you.Matthew 21:31
Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a
nation bearing the fruits of it.Matthew 21:43
And Jesus answered and spoke to them again by parables and said:Matthew 22:1
The kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who arranged a marriage for his
son,Matthew 22:2
But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut up the kingdom of
heaven against men; for you neither go in yourselves, nor do you allow those who are
entering to go in.Matthew 23:13
Then the kingdom of heaven shall be likened to ten virgins who took their lamps
and went out to meet the bridegroom.Matthew 25:1
For the kingdom of heaven is like a man traveling to a far country, who called his
own servants and delivered his goods to them.Matthew 25:14
But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when
I drink it new with you in My Fathers kingdom.Matthew 26:29
Now after John was put in prison, Jesus came to Galilee, preaching the gospel of the
kingdom of God,Mark 1:14
and saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and
believe in the gospel.Mark 1:15
And He said to them, To you it has been given to know the mystery of the kingdom
of God; but to those who are outside, all things come in parables,Mark 4:11
And He said, The kingdom of God is as if a man should scatter seed on the
ground,Mark 4:26
Then He said, To what shall we liken the kingdom of God? Or with what parable shall
we picture it?Mark 4:30
It is like a mustard seed which, when it is sown on the ground, is smaller than all
the seeds on earth;Mark 4:31
For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My
sake and the gospels will save it.Mark 8:35
For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?Mark
8:36
Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul?Mark 8:37




And He said to them, Assuredly, I say to you that there are some standing here who will
not taste death till they see the kingdom of God present with power.Mark 9:1
And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom
of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into hell fireMark 9:47
But when Jesus saw it, He was greatly displeased and said to them, Let the little
children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of
God.Mark 10:14
Assuredly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child
will by no means enter it.Mark 10:15
Then Jesus looked around and said to His disciples, How hard it is for those who have
riches to enter the kingdom of God!Mark 10:23
And the disciples were astonished at His words. But Jesus answered again and said to
them, Children, how hard it is for those who trust in riches to enter the kingdom of
God!Mark 10:24
It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the
kingdom of God.Mark 10:25
Blessed is the kingdom of our father David That comes in the name of the Lord! Hosanna
in the highest!Mark 11:10
Now when Jesus saw that he answered wisely, He said to him, You are not far from
the kingdom of God. But after that no one dared question Him.Mark 12:34
Assuredly, I say to you, I will no longer drink of the fruit of the vine until that day when
I drink it new in the kingdom of God.Mark 14:25
Now when evening had come, because it was the Preparation Day, that is, the day before
the Sabbath,Mark 15:42
Joseph of Arimathea, a prominent council member, who was himself waiting for the
kingdom of God, coming and taking courage, went in to Pilate and asked for the body of
Jesus.Mark 15:43
just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word
delivered them to us,Luke 1:2
while Annas and Caiaphas were high priests, the word of God came to John the son of
Zacharias in the wilderness.Luke 3:2
Then the devil, taking Him up on a high mountain, showed Him all the kingdoms of the
world in a moment of time.Luke 4:5
but He said to them, I must preach the kingdom of God to the other cities also, because
for this purpose I have been sent.Luke 4:43
Then He lifted up His eyes toward His disciples, and said: Blessed are you poor, For
yours is the kingdom of God.Luke 6:20
For I say to you, among those born of women there is not a greater prophet than John
the Baptist; but he who is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he.Luke 7:28
Now it came to pass, afterward, that He went through every city and village, preaching
and bringing the glad tidings of the kingdom of God. And the twelve were with
Him,Luke 8:1
And He said, To you it has been given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God,
but to the rest it is given in parables, that Seeing they may not see, And hearing they may
not understand.Luke 8:10
He sent them to preach the kingdom of God and to heal the sick.Luke 9:2




But when the multitudes knew it, they followed Him; and He received them and spoke to
them about the kingdom of God, and healed those who had need of healing.Luke 9:11
But I tell you truly, there are some standing here who shall not taste death till they see
the kingdom of God.Luke 9:27
Jesus said to him, Let the dead bury their own dead, but you go and preach the kingdom
of God.Luke 9:60
But Jesus said to him, No one, having put his hand to the plow, and looking back, is
fit for the kingdom of God.Luke 9:62
Whatever city you enter, and they receive you, eat such things as are set before
you.Luke 10:8
And heal the sick there, and say to them, The kingdom of God has come near to
you.Luke 10:9
The very dust of your city which clings to us we wipe off against you. Nevertheless
know this, that the kingdom of God has come near you.Luke 10:11
And He said to him, You have answered rightly; do this and you will live.Luke
10:28
But if I cast out demons with the finger of God, surely the kingdom of God has
come upon you.Luke 11:20
But seek the kingdom of God, and all these things shall be added to you.Luke 12:31
Then He said, What is the kingdom of God like? And to what shall I compare it?Luke
13:18
It is like a mustard seed, which a man took and put in his garden; and it grew and
became a large tree, and the birds of the air nested in its branches.Luke 13:19
And again He said, To what shall I liken the kingdom of God?Luke 13:20
It is like leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal till it was
all leavened.Luke 13:21
There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham and Isaac and
Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, and yourselves thrust out.Luke 13:28
They will come from the east and the west, from the north and the south, and sit down in
the kingdom of God.Luke 13:29
Now when one of those who sat at the table with Him heard these things, he said to Him,
Blessed is he who shall eat bread in the kingdom of God!Luke 14:15
The law and the prophets were until John. Since that time the kingdom of God has
been preached, and everyone is pressing into it.Luke 16:16

*****
Now when He was asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, He
answered them and said, The kingdom of God does not come with observation;Luke
17:20
nor will they say, See here! or See there! For indeed, the kingdom of God is
within you.Luke 17:21
*****

But Jesus called them to Him and said, Let the little children come to Me, and do not
forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of God.Luke 18:16
Assuredly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child




will by no means enter it.Luke 18:17
And when Jesus saw that he became very sorrowful, He said, How hard it is for those
who have riches to enter the kingdom of God!Luke 18:24
For it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter
the kingdom of God.Luke 18:25
So He said to them, Assuredly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or
parents or brothers or wife or children, for the sake of the kingdom of God,Luke
18:29
Now as they heard these things, He spoke another parable, because He was near
Jerusalem and because they thought the kingdom of God would appear immediately.Luke
19:11
So you also, when you see these things happening, know that the kingdom of God is
near.Luke 21:31
for I say to you, I will no longer eat of it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.Luke
22:16
for I say to you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God
comes.Luke 22:18
Now behold, there was a man named Joseph, a council member, a good and just
man.Luke 23:50
He had not consented to their decision and deed. He was from Arimathea, a city of the
Jews, who himself was also waiting for the kingdom of God.Luke 23:51
Jesus answered and said to him, Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born
again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.John 3:3
Jesus answered, Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the
Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.John 3:5

================================

He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without
Him nothing was made that was made.

That was the true Light which gives light to every man coming into the world

He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know
Him.

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. Colossians 1:15

For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son,
that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. Romans 8:29

And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the
dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence. Colossians 1:18


=================





In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.

That was the true Light which gives light to every man coming into the world.

And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.

He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know
Him. He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him.

For there is no partiality with God. For as many as have sinned without law will also
perish without law, and as many as have sinned in the law will be judged by the law (for
not the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the law will be
justified; for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the
law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, who show the work
of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between
themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them) in the day when God will
judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel. Romans 2:11-16





4-13-2007 - In this I make it clear that I have embraced a wider concept of
"faith" and "truth" as are contained in ulterior models.

Excerpts from a letter to a friend

Differentiating between what is familial love - natural affections - and the deeper -
fuller spectrum of love as described, elucidated and demonstrated in the life of Jesus
Christ Familial - Family - affections - we can all (I assume all) easily comprehend
them. You dont need a divine encounter to love your offspring (although ultimately it is
an expression of God). But what if the love of God (the inborn character of God) is
contrary to what may be natural affections? What if the vision of love - not familial - but
divine - encompasses a greater sphere than immediate relations? What if, in hearing the
words of Christ - as expressed in the Bible - a personal sense and need to apply these,
compels one to risk it all for the sake of what Christ says? In an apparent conflict of
interests between the familial and the divine, which love wins? How do we know
the difference?

Ive been finding out that most of what is truly Spiritually Biblical does have some
Gnostic and New Age elements. I am not saying I have embraced Gnosticism or the New
Age, but there are truths that they both have realized - where as the church hasnt got a
clue. I have come to believe that the Political embracing of Christianity by Constantine
and the subsequent purging of the Church of Gnostic thought and writings was a greater
atrocity than Hitlers attempted holocaust of the Jews. To come to think of it, Constantine
and the Council of Nicaea may well be argued as the first in a series of regimentation of
Christian thought that ultimately evolved into the crusades, the Inquisition, European
Holy wars, witch burnings and innumerable other religious acts in the name of God and
Christ. All Bull Shit (with a sword). Let me add, that I really believe if pure Gnostic
thought had prevailed - It probably would have evolved into just another religious system
over time too.

If you are going to talk about Jesus Christ, and what He taught and did, you cant do that
without the Scriptures (Bible). They are the ultimate reference. How that information is
discerned and applied, is where our problems lay. And, quite honestly, others works of
reference are not out of the question. I think the religious baggage, how most of us have
been force fed our Biblical religion has left a bad taste in our mouth for the Bible.
Having done virtually all of my Bible research independently of religious oversight and
direction, I dont have a problem with it.






4-18-2007 - Following the "Spirit" in regards to telling the truth and being
faithful to the "God" you serve, does not alway appear "pretty", but that is
what the "Spirit of Prophecy" is.

Religiholics

Religion - Christian religion - would, and does, get a hold of us by the balls and lead
us around to jump through hoops, to apply ourselves to Talmudic standards and legalese,
to measure up to the perception, as conceived in the minds of the religious elite -
educated and trained in cookie making, tossing in a measure of this, a cup of that, baked
and cooled and set out in a very attractive Christmas display.

And our religious elite knows what is best for us. They have set themselves to sifting
through the book, to pull this principle and that. Juggle this verse and syncretise it with
that one. Christian faith ceases in being the reality of faith and relation to the Living God
and succumbs to the ease and comfort of knowing the rules. We are Religiholics.
Addicted to perpetually re-definable measures of arbitrary codes - multiple codes. Ask a
different pastor, and I use the title pastor loosely, or religious expert, and you will get
as many sets of codes, as men defining them. Of course there are the super codifiers - the
ones who have gleaned the most, the keepers of the faith, the influencers, the ones
that all the others base their sifted morals on. The Gamaliels - teachers of the new law
- the builders and trainers of the persecutor Sauls.

And should we not line up, theyll just squeeze a little harder. The goal - the purpose - is
not to KNOW - to experience the intimacy and immediacy of the Creator God, Too
relate, to commune, to hear, to respond - But too conform - Too fit the mold -

And the measure of love becomes a perverted caricature encapsulated and embodied in
the Code. No longer is the living resident indwelling Spirit of God related to, drawn
upon, and relied on. Life is buried and bound and wrapped in a shroud of religious grave
clothes. For a significant number, I believe the overwhelming vast majority of the church,
Life - in relation to the Spirit - in us, is a fantasy. We have confused our religious grave
clothes, and the ordered dignified religious image - as the Spirit - and what is of the
Spirit. We are so good at being religious, and codifying our doctrine, that we have
become desensitized to the reality that there even is a Life deeper, more real, and vital -
than our Religion.

But as long as we have our super-gurus, and as long as they dont squeeze too hard, and
maybe if theyll just stroke us a little - Religion will be just fine. Never mind that it is not
the real thing.

Religion - Christian religion - being bound by the code = masturbation of the soul
(presumed as spiritual).





Immediacy of intimacy and relation with Christ in you, the Word, the Spirit from your
innermost being - Now thats passionate love making.

Its time to stop living in fantasies in our minds and experience the real thing. Stop
reading about love making and attempting it as a technical operation put together from a
play book - and jump in - become consumed in the passion - dont worry about the
mistakes - the imperfections - youll get through it - and enjoy it. And there is NO guilt.
Thats that old religion.

FYI - concerning that old Christian religion - I dont measure up - and I dont care
anymore.

Im married to another.

DO YOU not know, brethrenfor I am speaking to men who are acquainted with the
Lawthat legal claims have power over a person only for as long as he is alive? For
[instance] a married woman is bound by law to her husband as long as he lives; but if her
husband dies, she is loosed and discharged from the law concerning her husband.
Accordingly, she will be held an adulteress if she unites herself to another man while her
husband lives. But if her husband dies, the marriage law no longer is binding on her [she
is free from that law]; and if she unites herself to another man, she is not an adulteress.
Likewise, my brethren, you have undergone death as to the Law through the [crucified]
body of Christ, so that now you may belong to Another, to Him Who was raised from the
dead in order that we may bear fruit for God. When we were living in the flesh (mere
physical lives), the sinful passions that were awakened and aroused up by [what] the Law
[makes sin] were constantly operating in our natural powers (in our bodily organs, in the
sensitive appetites and wills of the flesh), so that we bore fruit for death. But now we are
discharged from the Law and have terminated all intercourse with it, having died to what
once restrained and held us captive. So now we serve not under [obedience to] the old
code of written regulations, but [under obedience to the promptings] of the Spirit in
newness [of life]. Romans 7:1-6





4-19-2007 - I read this just now and remembered. I had forgotten I had
written this. Now I think, maybe, I am closer to it than ever.

I dreamed last night that I was back on the Frank Gonzales Evangelistic team. I traveled
with them in 1974-75. We were in some generic location, working in association with
some generic pastor, about to go onto the streets, to witness. The pastor dressed in a light
blue suit, Frank Gonzales in short sleeve shirt and perfectly styled teased and slicked
back hair. The pastor directed us to a multi-bay garage with half a dozen mechanics
working under cars. Frank Gonzales steps out in his usual aggressively confident stride
and sets his sights immediately to the center bays and a proceeds to engage the already
occupied mechanic in a theological exchange. I cringe, Youve got to be kidding me, as
I follow, lagging behind and feeling the disgust and offense of the mechanic as he is
accosted by the boldness and insensitivity of this evangelical clown. The patience of the
mechanic, holding his tongue, in the midst of Spiritual worlds in conflict was something
to behold.

I am drawn to the side of the garage, to a gathering of apparent stereotypical low life
sorts, known for hanging out and wasting time around garages and bars. I wander up and
sit myself down on the curb next to a scrubby, unkempt disabled man. He is seated in a
chair, part old musty easy chair modified with wheels to function as a wheel chair and
provide some limited mobility. At first look he appears tattooed, and several ear rings
dangle from his ears. Dirt is the most evident quality, I can only imagine the body odor.
There is one other old bearded guy who sits across the parking space from him. You
might presume he is a wino. He only sits and stares.

I say nothing. But as I observe, it becomes apparent to me, these men are not here, not in
this condition, because they chose this. This is where life has left them. It becomes
apparent that there are conditions that neither of these men have any control over what so
ever. Their health is deteriorating. They are in the process of dying - slowly - almost
undetectably. Just inconvenient derelicts waiting to be removed from the scene of what
ideally would be a respectable business and cornerstone of the community.

I sit - I say nothing, except to think, How ludicrous that it be presumed, that my purpose
should be to try and sell my religion to these men?

I begin to feel and relate to what they are feeling. Imagining their stories, but more
specifically, empathizing with their condition. What hope is there?

The man sitting next to me speaks and says My leprosy is healing. What had appeared
as dangling ear rings and other body markings begin to peel off. His countenance
brightens. Healing is beginning - there is hope.

Sitting on a curb - I found a friend.

The alarm goes off - I wake up.

================




Note: Frank Gonzales was one of the greatest influences in my life. This was a fictitious dream, and does
not represent the real person and character of Rev. Frank Gonzales, though I do believe it is representative
of what the church would have had the ministry of Frank Gonzales to have been.





4-27-2007 - A bit of Church history that virtually none in the "Church"
knows about the development of the Orthodox Christian faith

Freedom?

For sixteen hundred years, since the time and influence of Augustine, we, the church, and
by our docile acceptance, have embraced, endorsed, and have been living under, and have
subjugated society as a whole, to a concept that freedom is only to be realized in relation
to submission to imperial (secular authority) rule, and the episcopal (authority of church
leadership) oversight.

Bull Shit.

Its time to realize the truth and face some facts.

More to come. . .

Original Sin

Christianity - the religion - has lost something.

Jesus Christ - manifested in the flesh - the express image of the divine. All that is God the
Father - revealed in the man Jesus the Christ. That which was His, given of the Father -
He, Christ, made ours. In such a state of communion we, the church - ecclesia - set upon
our life in Him, of Him, through Him.

Within a century the dynamic evidenced signs of change, divergence from the internal
Knowledge, confidence and manifestation of Him, to argument and debate as to just what
it was that constituted this Him, this - Christ in us. And as the argument and accusations
and condemnations increased - He - in us - was lost. Now - dont get the idea that He was
lost entirely - there have always (I believe) been the few. But, as what was recognized as
the church - He - Christ in us - was replaced by doctrine and dogma. Religion
supplanted relationship.

As was the early state of the church, the presumed primitive order, was not so universal.
The primitive nature of the church - was diverse - often confusing and contradictory.
There was no universality of doctrine. Doctrine was not the dynamic that stabilized and
defined the character of the body church. The divine in-borne nature and character of
Christ was the promo evangelian.

Surprisingly, much in the way of doctrine, that we in our modern, contemporary
Orthodox faith hold as absolute, was not the absolute as conceived, taught and practiced
in the early church. Even the doctrine of original sin was not a doctrine understood and
taught by the church until it was conceived and expressed by Augustine (circa 400 c.e.).

The early centuries of the Church was a time of persecution, challenging Imperial and




societal norms, and a hodge-podge of systems of belief. But this was and environment
that demonstrated the fact of the internal reality of the presence of Christ in the faithful.
Doctrine had little to do with it. It was acting in faith, which often meant offending,
challenging and being a threat to the status quo, Imperial, religious and economic. The
internal Christ motivating the faithful, in pursuit of justice and freedom, evidenced a life
dynamic transcending the mere simple resources of human intelligence and strength of
character.

In the early fourth century, the Emperor Constantine converted to Christianity. This
ushered in a new period of acceptability for the Church. Except for a short two year
period, the Church grew to become the accepted state religion. With this new found
favor, the Church and its leaders became the recipients of the blessings of wealth and
influence associated with the Imperial court. Also, as it was now the in thing, the
official sanctioned religion, the influx of the nominally faithful, and the social values of
such, became the new standard of the faith.

It was in this new sanctioned state of the church that Augustine came to realize his
influence.

Augustine found his faith, two generations removed from the persecution norm
experienced by the early Church. Augustine, as a believer, was associated with the
segment of the Church that was most closely related to Imperial circles. He did not come
from the disenfranchised segments of society, commonly associated with Christians of
earlier years.

Augustine had a brain. I mean - He had the head gear. Augustine also had some carnal
issues, that he over indulged in his youth, and continued to plague and influence his
thought life through out his life.

Prior to Augustine, Orthodox theology primarily recognized the free will of man as
foundational to what was Christian theology. This allowing for independent thought,
decision and realizing the internal prompting of God as individual persons in relation to
God. Augustines own weakness in relation to his inability to control his own libido, and
inferring this weakness as a universal weakness, was instrumental in the development of
the doctrine of original sin. Essentially - his perception of his sin - became the
foundation upon which Church doctrine, both Catholic and Protestant, have been founded
for sixteen hundred years.

This was conveniently useful in an Imperial state needing a justification to impose its
order and will over those that it would rule. The doctrine of original sin provided the
Imperial state, and every political order since, whether monarchies or democracies, the
justification to impose itself as the divine representative to compel submission to the
elite, who, by divine authority, know what is best for the sin tainted incompetents
suffering in their moral affliction, and too ignorant to know what is best for themselves.

This same logic and doctrine, by necessity, implies and establishes the justification for




the order of clergy and priests, that has ruled and enamored the church ever since.

But - from the beginning - it was not so.

Life in Christ, originally was threatening to the established order. To think it would be
any different today, in our modern world - Well - lets just say there is a different set of
Imperial, social and economic oppressions to be faced. Slavery - takes many forms. That
we justify our particular form, does not make it any more acceptable.

Freedom, and coming to realize it - often, no - usually - requires a sacrifice - more often
than not - humanly impossible to make. But, infused and realizing the internal, divine life
of Christ - set free from that which would encumber us - the world will turn upside
down.

But its not doctrine. Its not original sin.





4-28-2007 - Shortly after my fathers death and shortly before the home
domestic situation crumbled.

If you can see this you are beginning to see

My earthly father died a week and a half ago. He was 78 years old. He had been in a
nursing home for the last 8 plus months and had been suffering from Parkinsons disease
for the last 15 years. Eventually the disease incapacitated him to the point the could not
feed himself or do anything unassisted. His passing was peaceful, in his sleep. He
reached a stage were he wanted to go. I can understand - life, as it had become -
essentially - ceased to be.

Grieving at his passing has not been fraught with emotion. We had become estranged in
my teen years, working for him in my twenties was essentially two bulls butting heads
and eventually I walked away giving up on any meaningful relationship with him. Over
the years we had reconciled and I gained an appreciation for him that was not possible
being close to him.

Growing up, my mother took us to church, my father was always at work (Sundays too),
or on days he was off, was into the mountains to hunt or go fishing. He seldom, but only
occasionally took me and my brothers with him. In his later years he began to attend
church with my mother, but was never a spiritual father to me, as I had already grown
through and out of and beyond what he was beginning to glean from his new found
religious associations. I loved him just the same, there just wasnt anything he had, that
he was capable of expressing (at least not in language that I could understand) that
conveyed very much too me.

I have been reading the memorial statements of other family members, his nieces,
nephews, grandchildren, and work associates who worked with him after he started
working for the county, and what I read is all wonderful and respectable, and the things
you would want to be remembered for - but this is not the man I knew. There is a side of
his character that I, my mother, my brothers and sisters - all know too well. And we will
keep our mouths shut about it. We may open up to each other privately, but we wont
publicly shatter the illusions.

I am glad for the memories that others have been able to express concerning the loving
man and influence he had in their lives. I have had to realize love, and a loving father,
elsewhere. Now I am not saying my father did not love me. But his ability to convey that
love - to those closest to him - was limited - marginal - one might even say shallow. Not
that it wasnt there - it just had a difficult time getting out to the objects of that love, at
least, at a time, when it would have been most beneficial. The objects being his family.

I am not so sure I am all that different than my father. Even though I, for all practical
purposes, as my family was increasing and growing, was active in church, put forth a
resolute effort not to make my fathers mistakes - Im not so sure, in the effort, I havent
made the same mistakes, only sugar coated with a religious veneer. Or simply substituted
a new set of mistakes and reasoned applications to err in another direction.





You see, I and my father, both love. But how we know to love - the means which we
relied on to express that love - was for most practical purposes - not the source of love
from inside us. But rather the efforts of disconnected men, doing the best they could with
the information available to them at the time. The church provided me with all sorts of
systems and theories and Christian principles. But they never taught me to relate to the
love that was resident in me in the person and character of Christ, the fount of ALL that
is truly love. Instead it was practical psychology with a Christian front and language. Not
necessarily all bad - but not the true source.

Coming out of this religious norm, recognizing a depth of being beyond principle -
brands one as a traitor to the faith. A freakish, cultic fanatic, more closely associated
with David Koresh (Branch Davidians), Jim Jones or even Marshall Applewhite and
Heaven's Gate. I tried to open up and explain the internalization of faith and Christ with
my mother. Im sure she can only envision me being isolated away in some communal
religious sect, eventually coming to some disastrous end. The funny thing is, my non-
Christian, New Age open sister, is the one who is most receptive to what I am realizing in
Christ. So, in a sense the score stands at:

Pagans = 1 Christians = 0

Im sure my Evangelically active nephew counts me as a heretic.

New score:

Pagans = 1 Christians = minus 1





4-30-2007 - In the process of making a complete transition regarding my
faith. Many Orthodox may look at this and be confounded, and feel assured
they have such a faith. The issue is not your "faith", but the "doctrine" that
is clung to, and inadvertently becomes a "retarding" factor of "faith". And
this is the strength and error of "Orthodoxy", the adherence to errant
creeds and misrepresentation of the faith. To the end effect, we, you and I,
become the slaves and servants of any we elevate to have authority over us,
be it political officials or religious leaders.

What is this gnosis? What do these people know?

Gnostics are supposed to be the people who know.

What do the knowers know?

You know who you are. You know where you came from. You know where you are
going. And you know what you are supposed to do.

So, when the gnosis comes, it is sufficient for the purpose.

===========================

What do the enlightened know?

You know who you are. You know where you came from. You know where you are
going. And you know what you are supposed to do.

So, when enlightenment comes, it is sufficient for the purpose.

It is not a human production. It is attentive reception. Waiting for a train running on an
irregular schedule.





5-5-2007 - Now this is getting down to the "nitty gritty", because as I
became aware of this and it becoming a reality in my life, the appearance of
not "worrying" I believe became mis-construed as "not caring". And once a
perception is adopted, by one or the other, a conflict of interests and values
is soon to follow.

Take NO thought

Therefore I tell you, stop being perpetually uneasy (anxious and worried) about your
life, what you shall eat or what you shall drink; or about your body, what you shall put
on. Is not life greater [in quality] than food, and the body [far above and more excellent]
than clothing? Look at the birds of the air; they neither sow nor reap nor gather into
barns, and yet your heavenly Father keeps feeding them. Are you not worth much more
than they? And who of you by worrying and being anxious can add one unit of
measure (cubit) to his stature or to the span of his life? And why should you be
anxious about clothes? Consider the lilies of the field and learn thoroughly how they
grow; they neither toil nor spin. Yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his magnificence
(excellence, dignity, and grace) was not arrayed like one of these. But if God so clothes
the grass of the field, which today is alive and green and tomorrow is tossed into the
furnace, will He not much more surely clothe you, O you of little faith? Therefore do
not worry and be anxious, saying, What are we going to have to eat? or, What are we
going to have to drink? or, What are we going to have to wear? For the Gentiles (heathen)
wish for and crave and diligently seek all these things, and your heavenly Father knows
well that you need them all. But seek (aim at and strive after) first of all His kingdom
and His righteousness (His way of doing and being right), and then all these things taken
together will be given you besides. So do not worry or be anxious about tomorrow, for
tomorrow will have worries and anxieties of its own. Sufficient for each day is its own
trouble.Matthew 6:25-34

But when they deliver you up, do not be anxious about how or what you are to speak;
for what you are to say will be given you in that very hour and moment, For it is not you
who are speaking, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you. Brother will deliver
up brother to death, and the father his child; and children will take a stand against their
parents and will have them put to death. And you will be hated by all for My names
sake, but he who perseveres and endures to the end will be saved [from spiritual disease
and death in the world to come]. Matthew 10:19-22

Now when they take you [to court] and put you under arrest, do not be anxious
beforehand about what you are to say nor [even] meditate about it; but say whatever
is given you in that hour and at the moment, for it is not you who will be speaking, but
the Holy Spirit. Mark 13:11

And when they bring you before the synagogues and the magistrates and the authorities,
do not be anxious [beforehand] how you shall reply in defense or what you are to
say. For the Holy Spirit will teach you in that very hour and moment what [you] ought to
say. Luke 12:11-12





And [Jesus] said to His disciples, Therefore I tell you, do not be anxious and troubled
[with cares] about your life, as to what you will [have to] eat; or about your body, as to
what you will [have to] wear. For life is more than food, and the body [more] than
clothes. Observe and consider the ravens; for they neither sow nor reap, they have neither
storehouse nor barn; and [yet] God feeds them. Of how much more worth are you than
the birds! And which of you by being overly anxious and troubled with cares can add
a cubit to his stature or a moment [unit] of time to his age [the length of his life]? If
then you are not able to do such a little thing as that, why are you anxious and troubled
with cares about the rest? Consider the lilies, how they grow. They neither [wearily] toil
nor spin nor weave; yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory (his splendor and
magnificence) was not arrayed like one of these. But if God so clothes the grass in the
field, which is alive today, and tomorrow is thrown into the furnace, how much more will
He clothe you, O you [people] of little faith? And you, do not seek [by meditating and
reasoning to inquire into] what you are to eat and what you are to drink; nor be of
anxious (troubled) mind [unsettled, excited, worried, and in suspense]; For all the
pagan world is [greedily] seeking these things, and your Father knows that you need
them. Only aim at and strive for and seek His kingdom, and all these things shall be
supplied to you also. Luke 12:22-31

I usually dont quote this much scripture in my blog, but with what I have been
considering, and the predominance that the particular subject held, as recorded stated by
Jesus, by three of the Gospel writers, in nearly parallel or comparable statements, it
seems to be of some importance to Christ himself, and the early church fathers in their
allowance and endorsement as included in scripture.

The idea that we can essentially surrender worry and concern, - back off from the
pressures of life and society - and trust God, to be the source and supply of all that we, in
our earthly, human experience, may find necessary, - so contradicts the norms of
contemporary values - worldly and religious, that to actually do it - renders one as a
cultural pervert. Now, when I say pervert - do not misconstrue this as a sexually
demented being. Cultural pervert infers one so embracing ideals and reason so contrary
to materialistic values and purpose, as to alienate themselves, by personal preference and
choice, and to elicit a sense of discomfort and antagonism within the characters of those
associated with, as to provoke violence.

Coming to realize a depth of Spiritual truth - and having the chutzpah to actually, live it
out, and as prompted - express it - may not always be the best means of winning friends
and influencing your uncle. And should the truth realized actually be a contradiction to
previously held values, held in tandem with relations of the closest sort, what might you
expect to be the ongoing status of that relationship - once held sacred - but now in
conflict with deeper, truer reality?

What determines the sacredness of any relationship, if not the express values of the only
one who may be called, sacred, holy and good? Are not all other perceptions of the
sacred only illusions and imitations of the real?





What, me worry? I guess Ill just take no thought of it.





5-10-2007 Having realized many neglected truths concerning the history of
the "Church", a transition is nearly complete.

Transcending the Orthodox Kingdom of God?
or this, that and the other

Orthodox Christian thought initiated some nearly nineteen hundred years ago. I say
nearly nineteen hundred (1900) years rather than two thousand (2000) because as the
message was originally taught by Christ, heard by the original disciples and Apostles and
recorded in their various means and understanding, transmitted to their subsequent
disciples, in the various form and testimony as perceived relevant, numerous
interpretations and implementations of the original message began to evolve. Some of
these perceptions of the original message appeared to be in conflict and out right
contradictory to other perceptions claiming the same resources as their foundation of
thought and doctrine.

For me, the question coming to mind is, Were these varying, differing perceptions, in
actuality contrary and in conflict with each other, each mutually exclusive of the other?
Or, were these alternative perceptions different sides of the same coin?

Why is it that the western Church evolved the way it did and in embrace of an assumed
orthodox doctrine, and the Church as established and realized in other parts of the world
evolved embracing other forms of doctrine and even more in the way of accepted
recorded Scripture dating as far back as any recognized by the western Church.

Now, when I say western church, what do I mean? The western church was that portion
of the Church that was founded in and grew in its evolution, in and out of relation to
the Roman Empire. Essentially, all the cultures of Europe, and particularly western
Europe.

Coming out of this foundation of an evolved culture, we, western civilization, have
difficulty perceiving and realizing that the Church, as developed in our cultural context,
is not - and was not - the full and complete expression of what constitutes the Church
and in an even broader scope, the Kingdom of God.

We, the west, and our ancestral predecessors, for the most part, have been kept ignorant
of the fact that there were, and remain in their isolated circumstance, expressions of
Christian practice, dating back to first century Apostolic influence. These Christian
communities can be found in areas of India, Iran, and Iraq, as well as the Coptic Church
which can be found in Egypt, Ethiopia and north Africa. Most of us are aware of the
Eastern Orthodox Church, but this is not the broader church at issue here. Eastern
Orthodoxy, is in reality, the result of the subsequent split of the Roman Empire into
eastern and western spheres.

In the second century, doctrinal schisms were becoming apparent. What is the nature of
Christianity?, What was or who was Christ? and more.





Now - in our evolved orthodoxy - with two thousand years of academic exercise and
assumption of absolutes (deemed heretical to be challenged or assumed otherwise) - these
are simple answers to us. Christ IS this - that - and the other and the Church are
those who believe and do this, that and the other.

But what is all this . . .this, that, and the other?

THIS - THAT - and THE OTHER - is what church fathers, in decisions made in response
to particular issues, in a particular time and context, determined was the best, as they had
oversight of what the church had evolved to at the time. By church fathers, we are
not referring to the original Apostles. Church fathers were church leaders and
theologians growing in influence, subsequent to Apostolic mission. Not all these church
fathers were in agreement on all issues. Prior too the general acceptance of the Church
and Christianity as the accepted state (Imperial) religion, there were doctrinal divisions,
and none too cordial. Where upon the Constantinian paradigm shift, Constantine realized
the necessity of a universality of Christian religious thought and doctrine.

One Emperor - One Church - One Doctrine. Consequently, convoked by the Roman
Emperor Constantine, Bishops gathered at Nicea. With the Nicene Creed a precedent
was established for subsequent 'general (ecumenical) councils of Bishops' (Synods) to
create statements of belief and canons of doctrinal orthodoxy the intent being to define
unity of beliefs for the whole of Christendom. Constantine in convoking and presiding
over the council signaled a measure of imperial control over the church.

In years to follow, more councils occurred, to define what was to constitute orthodoxy of
the Christian faith, including establishing what scriptures are acceptable and has become
our Bible. What is significant in all this emergence and developing of western
Church doctrine and orthodoxy, is that the secular political dimension has always had a
substantial influence in the working out of the presumed Spiritual outcome. This has
been true through out the history of the western orthodox church whether initially Roman
Catholic or Protestant.

In all this, whatever, and whoever, may have constituted the formally acknowledged
leadership of the politically recognized church, have been redefining and perfecting what
is the this, that , and the other, that we, the uninformed, ignorant masses of the church
must embrace and adhere to in order to be acceptable in the Kingdom of God. Or,
maybe it would be better stated the kingdom of their god?

Looking back in twenty-twenty hind sight, tracing the history of the western Church, one
can not help but wonder, to consider, Has there been something of the true Christ nature
that the Church - in our political game playing, and accommodating of the ruling powers
of this world - has lost? Is our western concept of what is Christian - our orthodoxy -
our doctrine - our ruling over and dominating each other and ultimately the world through
economic and political/military fear mongering, really of God, or evidence that the god
we serve is no god at all, but only the imitation, the usurper, the ruler of this world, a




substitute progressively embraced and endorsed as a matter of religious political
expediency.

Beyond western Christian religion there is (albeit not politically correct - or dominant by
an stretch of the imagination) Apostolic Christian influence - in corners of the world that
could never be imagined as regions such faith would be found - and survived over so
many centuries surrounded by cultures so aggressively antagonistic. These expressions of
the faith do not adhere to western Christian values - or orthodoxy. Neither do they have
such a tainted history of apparent un-Christian violence. These Christian expressions
realize something recorded in scriptures foreign to western orthodoxy.

Per chance? Maybe we threw the baby out with the bath water?





5-11-2007 - I was warned not to get to heavily into this frame of thinking
on spiritual things. But I believe that warning and associated "fear" was
concerning the taking as "literal" and absolute all the potential "pitfalls"
that may be encountered as the result of defining "any" system to help us
understand deeper spiritual realities. Since originally posted I have realized
very little that does not fit, within reasonable bounds, what is written here

Before ALL -

God thought - Ennoia - from en + nous - mind - the Divine Mind -

And we were a part of that divine mind

Even as [in His love] He chose us [actually picked us out for Himself as His own] in
Christ before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy (consecrated and set
apart for Him) and blameless in His sight, even above reproach, before Him in love.
Ephesians 1:4

And in our minds Ennoia had descended through the lower worlds and finally become
imprisoned in gross matter, where she was subjected to abuse. - Degraded - Prostituted -
A Whore.

but the Father manifests himself as the Son and rescues Ennoia to reinstate her on her
original throne.

There are three types of human beings. Hylic, Psychic and Pneumatic.

Hylic - also called Somatics - humanity comprised matter-bound beings material or
animalistic in nature - the lowest order of the three types of human - entire focus on the
material world, such as eating, sleeping, mating, creature comforts - The world and the
instinctual drives with no sublimation

Psychic - matter-dwelling spirits - meaning "mental, of the soul" (in turn derived from
psyche meaning "soul, mind" - emanating from the human mind - intellect, emotion, and
will

Pneumatic - matter-free or immaterial - The highest order of humans as opposed to
hylics. "spiritual," immaterial, souls - One who identifies with the spirit (pneuma) as
opposed to the material world (hylic) or the intellect alone (psychic). The pneuma is the
spark that came from and is drawn to reunite with the Father.

Dont be too overly concerned, because the fact is, we all partake of each of these
conditions. What makes each of us individually different is that the worlds we create for
ourselves may be predominantly focused or preoccupied with our lives in any one
dimension of existence (hylic, psychic or pneumatic) more than the others.

In Christian environs, the norm has been to shun the hylic mind set as of the world. The




psychic minds ability to recognize the carnal nature and rationalize systems of disciplined
mastery over our unruly passions and the flesh - has blessed us with a glut of holiness
doctrine and puritanical sin police. And it all makes perfectly good religious sense - to the
sacred psychic mind.

Sacred Psychic - head religion - Thats not a Jesus freak, but faith devised and managed
in the confines and realm of the human intellect. This is the sphere that the vast majority
of what we call Christian gets its origination. A degraded whore, in relation to virtually
every concept of what is faith and God that happens to look good at the time. So detached
from the her real husband, as to have more in common with the Samaritan woman at the
well, and lose count of the number shes slept with, than a virgin looking for the
bridegroom.

The psychic mind has difficulty realizing and recognizing that there is a dimension of
human experience that transcends the intellectual kingdoms we create for our comfort
and convenience. The problem is, that this transcended dimension is not subject to our
wills and mental gymnastics. As a matter of fact, though it may engage our minds, overly
exercising our minds, and most definitely relying on our minds, will most likely be a
cause of hindering coming to understand a Spiritual capacity innate in every single
human being. It is not a matter of intellectual genius or being mentally challenged. It is a
matter of God. It is the mind of God. It is Him - In Us - As He Is - And always has been.

But our psychic religion - All of them - Christian too - plays the whore.

The relation that we would claim exists - EXISTS, but not in relation to the God of ALL
being - from whom ALL derive.

Our psychic mental religion is in relation to the god of law and slavery, and systems and
codes, doctrines and dogma, wars and domination, and anything that would alienate
mankind from each other. It is the god of good works and measuring up, image and self
esteem, and fitting in.

Psychic mental religion is the religion of repentance - And we are quite sure weve
figured this out. And our repentance from dead works is oh so rational. Putting off that
flesh.

But is repentance - REPENTANCE?

Is changing our life style what its (repentance) is all about? Moving from the hylic to
the psychic

Or is our psychic state just as snafued, only on another plain?

Repentance, as translated in the New Testament is the Greek word Metennoia.

Met-Ennoia - the Divine Mind - Metennoia - "change of mind" or perspective -




classically translated as repentance by Orthodox theology.

We are to repent. But dead works of the flesh - animalistic in nature - eating, sleeping,
mating, creature comforts - the world and the instinctual drives with no sublimation -
These, Are not the issue.

The issue of repentance - metennoia - is changing that which we perceive as the divine
mind.

To quote Bob Dylan Gonna change my way o thinkin - Its not life style.

I grant you - Life style may change. But thats not where its at. Life style alteration - IS
NOT THE SPIRITUAL BENCHMARK. Oh, excuse me, for psychic religion, it is.

For the Spiritual believer - there is God the Father.

John 14:5-26 - in Pneumatic and Psychic perspective:

Psychic Question - Human Intellect -
Pneumatic Response -
Response to the Psychic Mind -

Thomas said to Him, Lord, we do not know where You are going, so how can we know
the way? Jesus said to him, I am the Way and the Truth and the Life; no one comes to the
Father except by (through) Me. If you had known Me [had learned to recognize Me],
you would also have known My Father. From now on, you know Him and have seen
Him. Philip said to Him, Lord, show us the Father [cause us to see the Fatherthat is all
we ask]; then we shall be satisfied. Jesus replied, Have I been with all of you for so long
a time, and do you not recognize and know Me yet, Philip? Anyone who has seen Me
has seen the Father. How can you say then, Show us the Father? Do you not believe that
I am in the Father, and that the Father is in Me? What I am telling you I do not say on
My own authority and of My own accord; but the Father Who lives continually in Me
does the (His) works (His own miracles, deeds of power). Believe Me that I am in the
Father and the Father in Me; or else believe Me for the sake of the [very] works
themselves. [If you cannot trust Me, at least let these works that I do in My Fathers name
convince you.] I assure you, most solemnly I tell you, if anyone steadfastly believes in
Me, he will himself be able to do the things that I do; and he will do even greater things
than these, because I go to the Father. And I will do [I Myself will grant] whatever you
ask in My Name [as presenting all that I AM], so that the Father may be glorified
and extolled in (through) the Son. [Yes] I will grant [I Myself will do for you]
whatever you shall ask in My Name [as presenting all that I AM]. If you [really] love
Me, you will keep (obey) My commands. And I will ask the Father, and He will give
you another Comforter (Counselor, Helper, Intercessor, Advocate, Strengthener,
and Standby), that He may remain with you forever The Spirit of Truth, Whom
the world cannot receive (welcome, take to its heart), because it does not see Him or
know and recognize Him. But you know and recognize Him, for He lives with you




[constantly] and will be in you. I will not leave you as orphans [comfortless, desolate,
bereaved, forlorn, helpless]; I will come [back] to you. Just a little while now, and the
world will not see Me any more, but you will see Me; because I live, you will live
also. At that time [when that day comes] you will know [for yourselves] that I am in
My Father, and you [are] in Me, and I [am] in you. The person who has My
commands and keeps them is the one who [really] loves Me; and whoever [really] loves
Me will be loved by My Father, and I [too] will love him and will show (reveal,
manifest) Myself to him. [I will let Myself be clearly seen by him and make Myself
real to him.] Judas, not Iscariot, asked Him, Lord, how is it that You will reveal Yourself
[make Yourself real] to us and not to the world? Jesus answered, If a person [really]
loves Me, he will keep My word [obey My teaching]; and My Father will love him,
and We will come to him and make Our home (abode, special dwelling place) with
him. Anyone who does not [really] love Me does not observe and obey My teaching.
And the teaching which you hear and heed is not Mine, but [comes] from the Father
Who sent Me. I have told you these things while I am still with you. But the Comforter
(Counselor, Helper, Intercessor, Advocate, Strengthener, Standby), the Holy Spirit,
Whom the Father will send in My name [in My place, to represent Me and act on
My behalf], He will teach you all things. And He will cause you to recall (will remind
you of, bring to your remembrance) everything I have told you. John 14:5-26






5-12-2007 - The only thing I would change here, or try to define more
clearly is what I mean when I use the word "God". "God" will do as
speaking to the masses of those indoctrinated to an "Orthodox" way of
thinking, But the "Self" as defined and researched by Carl G. Jung will do
just as well, and probably closer to the truth. I must add though, that Carl
G. Jung did not distance himself from the world of religion, and rather
recognized its benefits and place in the world we humans exist in, but he
understood myth as myth, and the container of "truth" virtually incapable of
expression otherwise.

Wormhole

a hypothetical connection between widely separated regions of spacetime. Concise
Oxford English Dictionary

a hypothetical structure of space-time envisioned as a long thin tunnel connecting points
that are separated in space and time. Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary

In physics, a wormhole is a hypothetical topological feature of spacetime that is
essentially a "shortcut" through space and time. A wormhole has at least two mouths
which are connected to a single throat. If the wormhole is traversable, matter can 'travel'
from one mouth to the other by passing through the throat. While there is no
observational evidence for wormholes, spacetimes containing wormholes are known to
be valid solutions in general relativity. Wikipedia English - The Free Encyclopedia

We are all, or I assume all, familiar with Star Trek imagery and influence in our modern
cultures. Unless youve been isolated on the top of some mountain somewhere or on a
deserted island or held captive by pygmy cannibals of a prehistoric culture in the extreme
back wash of the Amazon or jungles of New Guinea for the past forty (40) years - the
world wide distribution and homogenization of our entertainment forms virtually
guarantees a common language of concepts, if not actual words and dialect.

So - when I say wormhole, most, if not all, can conceive a mental picture of being on
the bridge of the Starship Enterprise (the original, Next Gen, Television or Cinema) and
staring into a large flat screen depicting a nebulous tunnel drawing you ever farther and
deeper into a cosmic vortex eventually and finally depositing you into a foreign galaxy in
unknown regions of the universe.

Get the picture?

Well - inside of us - in our depths of being - there is a virtual wormhole. And via this
"shortcut" through space and time - we know God.

It is not a one way traverse - we come to Him - and He to and in us lives.

Our problem is, in our ignorance, all we realize is a spiritual Black Hole. You know,




those theoretical space object which has an extremely strong gravitational force. a
region of space having a gravitational field so intense that no matter or radiation can
escape. a celestial object that has a gravitational field so strong that light cannot escape
it and that is believed to be created especially in the collapse of a very massive star.

You know - those things up there that will eventually suck everything in and consume
the universe. Those dimensions of the cosmos one certainly does not want to get too close
to, for fear of what was there, but now isnt. This is our comfort level with the one thing
that can connect and relate us to the only true reality that is - or is worth knowing.

But we think, Better the world I know, than the universe I dont.

So we stagnate in our fear, and wait for the inevitable end, when all will be consumed,
and the Black Hole with the greatest gravitational pull, devours ALL the rest. So we, in
our state of being devoured, placate ourselves with the joys and pleasures of the cosmos
we know. Or maybe well get lucky before all this happens, and an asteroid or other
heavenly projectile will hit the mark and well end up going the way of the dinosaurs.
Who really cares? What is the sense of fearing it? Do we really think we can stop it? Or
control it? Or divert it?

This is not just the projected fears of our contemporary culture, in visions and
imaginations encompassing expanding perceptions of the created universe. It is the state
of fear of our religious being. We may not use scientific cosmic imagery, but rather
employ Biblical types - but the fear is the same.

Rather than Boldly go(ing) where no man has gone before - We fear endeavoring into
what all men are meant to be. One with God.

One mans Wormhole is another mans Black Hole.





5-19-2007 - Still using "religious" references (which will continue probably
as long as I live), substitutes may be made, but the truth is always the
same.

Sometimes life . . . Or Beer for Jesus

Sometimes life just doesnt work out the way you hope, or think it should.

Sometimes our perceptions and expectations just arent aligned or in accord with what
turns out to be reality.

Sometimes our realities, or should I say our constructions of reality are illusionary
phantoms - poltergeists of our minds.

Religion does not exemplify the exorcising ability to cast out, manage or overpower these
demons of the mind. Christian religion, as a religion, may well be the enabler, the
power behind the throne, and/or ultimately the very constructor of these psychological
dominators of what is the human personality.

We, in our religious smugness, think that we can construct a form, a pattern, a set of
answers, that if adhered to, will ultimately keep us on the straight and narrow, be our
guarantor of a well ordered life and prosperity. Our focus becomes primarily doing
what is mandated by the code, our rules of order. And lives that dont quite appear to
measure up to the standard, as conceived by arbitrary standard devisers, all so religiously
justified, simply didnt do what they were supposed to do.

Our faith is in the doing.

Its easy to find reasons or things to condemn one another about. Ultimately, somebody
(anybody - take your pick, it doesnt matter who), didnt do, isnt doing, or wont do -
what is arbitrarily conceived in your mind - what is necessary - for some purpose that you
have rationalized and deemed absolute, for your express purposes (which you couch as
sacred). For a resultant outcome that squares with your mental ideal.

Our ideals become the roosts of our religious demons.

But what if it (reality) has nothing to do with the doing? And everything to do with
simply being? What if doing the will of God actually boils down to simply being -
and allowing Him to be through me? Is it worth considering that in Christ, I dont have
to worry about What Would Jesus Do?, and all I have to do is be me, because He is in
me, He and the father are one, and I am one with them?

Is it possible that moving from a religious mind set of the Church of the Doers to a
mind settled on Being, that there might be some disruption of the status quo - stirring
up forces comfortable in their roosts? And willing to fight for their territorial dominion?





Is it possible that in becoming a beer of Christ, might tend toward indefinable results,
because life is no longer centered on my hopes, but Him, in me as my Hope? And that
Hope, walked out in Faith, subordinates my perceptions and expectations to His
providence.

Yes, sometimes life just doesnt work out the way you hope, or think it should.

Set up a cold one for my buddy Jesus over here.





5-24-2007 - This is a comment I received to a prior post "A Dream 4-19-07",
and my reply to the commenter.

I have thought a some days about this post here.. and I have concluded to exclaim to you
that this dream was a Angelic encounter. (The man with Leprosy) And I will simply
profess to you that The Holy Spirit is trying reveal more to you. I believe that with your
enteraction with Frank..there was a impartation that took place, and God is calling you to
a deeper place of intamacy with Him through Jesus our Bridegroom King. In this place of
encountering Him.. ministering to Him and not people (see tabernacle of David and
phrase (DAY AND NIGHT) then you will naturally or should I say, "supernaturally"
begin to look past peoples outer conditions ie; leprosy.. "stereotypical low life sorts" to
see them as God sees them..His Children/Bride whom He died for.. with the God's Glory
waiting to be revealed... then you will unintentionally walk in ministry to others. You will
see God's mighty power the same power that raised Christ from the dead, operating
through you to see the sick healed, and the outcast adopted into The House of The Father
of Glory.

This may not be the best interpretation of this dream.. Im sure others could do a much
better Job.. but i have waited for a couple weeks now try and hear and see something
different and I am still hearing and seeing the same thing as the first time I wrote it..
except.. I believe (having not been in contact with you) that since this dream, there has
been some dramatic changes in your life or paradigms.. After All...Im convinced this
was a Angelic encounter.

Bless you with Every Spiritual Blessing In Heavenly Places, (Ephesians 1:3)
Beau Million

=============================

Beau

Thank you for your perception of this dream of mine.

Whether this was an Angelic encounter - I do not know. I do believe God the Father
reveals Himself through dreams. The agency of this revelation I have yet to determine
with certainty. Not that I am not listening or open, but Spiritual dynamics and forces
transcend what are the capabilities of finite minds, so our perceptions and interpretations
of these may square with the fact of the revelation, but not be as literally engendered as
our minds devise explanation. In other words, Angelic encounter or manipulation of
my psyche by the Holy Spirit or other plausible explanation, it doesnt really matter.
The fact is God is revealing more.

I also believe that with my interaction with Frank. there was a impartation that took
place. I have believed this for many years.

I believe that since this dream, there has been some dramatic changes in your life or
paradigms. Yes - there are changes in the works, as I have hinted at in recent blogs. The




paradigm shift, or change in mental processes, acquisition of a broader yet more clearly
defined knowledge of God, has been in process for many years. BUT, now appears to
be coming exponentially more often and in depth of perception. Being so intimately
involved with myself, it is hard for me to recognize how I have changed, but I know I
have. These are not changes, those who have been closest to me are comfortable with. As
you will read in my latest blogs. I am in the process of a marital separation after thirty-
one years of marriage. I am not seeking this, but it is being forced on me with the threat
to either separate amicably OR face out right divorce litigation. For the sake of peace
and causing as little damage to my children as possible, I will leave and set up
housekeeping as a bachelor. There are details that I could but wont go into. Just let it
suffice, my wife and I are working mutually with each other, but she wants me out.

There is much that you express that parallels what I have believed myself - for some
time. The how of realizing this has always been something I have wrestled with. But
the fact is, it is not me who is responsible to make it happen. It is ALL Him.

There is just one thing I wish to remark on. When I use descriptions such as
stereotypical low life sorts, this is not how I actually perceive them, but used only as a
point of reference to communicate a common image that religious sorts would
normally seek to avoid. The reality is, that I believe my wife, in her Evangelical religious
standard, now perceives me as fitting into this stereotype (with some differences but
essentially Ive lowered my standards - spiritually, manifesting in a different value
system). By religious standards, she is probably right. But, as I am continuing to know
God, I can not go back to play the religious social political game.

What you express about the manifestation of Gods power - You are not the only one to
express this, But not in relation to this particular blog, but rather other communications
and exchanges I have had with others longing to realize Him in their person.

It is a confusing time right now. A transition period I am just feeling my way through. I
only try to be faithful. Faithfulness. Depending on your perception, that has always
been a dominant strength, or weakness, in me. Not that I have not been faithful, but its
results, are not always perceived as positive. Sometimes faithfulness costs.

Thanks for your insights. It is encouraging.

Bless you brother

Bob





5-27-2007 - Using Orthodox religious references I was stepping beyond the
Orthodox fold and becoming more critical. At this time I also started to
incorporate resources made available through the Internet and gleaned
from secular media. A clip from the movie "Hero, starring Dustin Hoffman
was posted with this. Outside the USA I believe the movie was titled "Local
Hero"

(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6E75bbW5O8&list=UUGuXHpQT27lUxCOAEBz1_6Q&index=24)

For Christs Sake

I recently responded to an excerpt from a book by David Anderson (EVERYONE HAS A
DOT - Gracism: The Art of Inclusion). A portion of that response follows:

There must be a theological response to racism in the culture and racial segregation in the church. Right?
There isits gracism. - Gracism.fm- David Anderson

First, at first reading David Andersons Everyone has a dot was good sound Evangelical
logic. But it assumes a state of grace where either (1) overcoming someone elses
perceived bigotry is accomplished by putting on an attitude or state of grace to accept
the other in spite of their bigotry, or (2) racial bigots must put on a good veneer of
grace to overlook the deficiencies of the other. In either case, the underlying attitudes
are not dealt with as they really are, as being false, but merely suppressed with a new
attitude called grace. The point is all these attitudes - bigoted mentality -
perceived deficiency (however manifested, by either the oppressor or the victim) - or
grace - ALL of these are mental apparitions. Apparitions manifesting in our minds as
thoughts. Created internally as the product of our own natural mental processes, or
acquired externally through culture and education, but still the less then connected
expression of the indwelling Word - Logos. Mental creations - manipulations of logic and
reason to produce our own answers, but more than often not the result of apprehending
and proceeding out of and through our inborn divine nature. But it can look very good,
and religiously impressive.

Grace is realizing that these manufactured standards - dont really matter - Im not
playing by their rules. There is life within, and being taught by that life causes me to
realize a death to the old measure and standard that condemns me, and produces SIN in
me. For me to continue in my religious constructs, or bigotry or acceptance of
insecurities, or whatever other mental assumption derived apart from Christ in me,
subjugates me to the power of the Law and SIN.

These apparitions are real spiritual forces. They are created beings. But are they of
the devil? of the satanic legion of demons? I dont know. I believe they are the
construct of human mental capacities, and in relation to the indwelling Logos, a kind of
Anti-logos or Anti-Word or Anti-Christ.

Normal orthodox Christian theology defines grace as: "the free and unmerited
assistance or favor or energy or saving presence of God in his dealings with humanity...".




Grace is a gift of God and is not considered to be deserved by the individual. the freely
given, unmerited favor and love of God; God's spirit or influence operating in mankind; a
virtue or excellence of divine origin; or the condition of being in God's favor or one of
the elect.

From this concept and theology of freely given, unmerited favor, accepted by us from
God, we, in our attempts to realize practical application of this unmerited favor
endeavor to provide means of expression, reasoning and rationalizing avenues of
religious norm, acceptability and accountability. To become what is gleaned from our
sacred texts and reconstructed in our minds as dogma and doctrine. It is as though after
realizing unmerited favor, we set ourselves upon the task of meriting it. And on top of
all our recognized human deficiencies, we begin to load on ourselves the rules and
obligations to manage and control our wicked character. So on top of all our crap, we
become buried in a new dimension of crap, or more probably, something that we spray in
the air to cover the stench. Eventually, our air fresheners become just as disgusting and
suffocating as the odor we are trying to cover up.

Our concept of grace, while true that it is the freely given, unmerited favor of God, is
deficient in that it presumes our changing or making the changes that would be
representative of the grace endowed upon us. We reason, I have received the unmerited
favor of God therefore It rests upon me to make that unmerited favor, that grace,
WORK. So our minds get to spinning and weaving our religious slip covers to spread
over that old stained, torn and mildewed chair - so that at least - we will have something
that appears decent enough to sit in.

What we fail to realize is that the grace we receive has already wiped out the old wicked
stinking character, that old musty chair that the cat pissed on - is gone. And what we
perceive of it in our natural minds - is not real. We fail to realize that there is life in us,
imperceptible with natural eyes, but there none the less. But we are still sitting in that piss
soaked lounger that has become so comfortable to us. And we cannot even recognize the
smell of the urine any more. Spray a little more. Throw on a new cover - There ya go.
Good as new. (vomit- barf).

But grace - not just unmerited favor, but Him. O wretched man that I am! Who will
deliver me from this body of death? I thank Godthrough Jesus Christ our Lord! Rom
7:24-25

In each and every one of us - there is life. Most of us do not realize this. And many,
thinking they realize it, set about the process to manufacture it. So we build our religion.
Many ways, means and forms, but all essentially of the same purpose, to know God, and
to relate to each other. And some may even realize elements of truth, or even historic
validity to prophetic claims. But very few touch or are the product of the life, the Logos,
the Word, that which was from the beginning and born in the image bearing nature of
God within us.

So in our mentalities we construct our plains of existence. Most are infused with multiple




layers of religious, economic, political, familial and whatever other dimension of life may
be perceived of value, or real. But most, are not the by-products of the direct realization
of the immediacy and intimacy with the divine, internally.

He is there. And He is Real. He is the only real. But He is not found in yours, mine or
their religion.

Hero - Review by Priscilla Stafford

Bernie Laplante (Dustin Hoffman) is not necessarily the kind of
man to be nominated 'Role Model of the Year'. He's divorced, a
liar, a cheat, a thief, and headed for jail. On the way to pick
his son to the movies, he is the lone witness of a plane crash
and very unwillingly saves the lives of all those on the plane
after a boy begs him to save his father. He leaves the scene
complaining at the loss of his shoe and his car which is now a
wreck. Driven home by a homeless guy named John Bubber (Andy
Garcia), Bernie gives his one remaining shoe to the guy, saying
he'll never stick his neck out for anybody again. Gale Gayley
(Geena Davis), a tv news reporter who was saved from the crash,
is bent on finding the mysterious man who saved everyone on the
plane. The media builds the mystery man up, calling him 'the
Angel of Flight 104'. Gale's tv station offers a $1 million
reward and much to Bernie's consternation, the homeless guy he
had spoken to claims to be the 'hero'! Since no one got a good
look of the 'hero' and John has the other shoe which matches the
one left at the wreckage, who's to claim otherwise? And anyway,
who would believe Bernie to be the hero-type?

A very satirical story, "Hero" is not necessarily about 'real
heroes'. Instead, I could say that this film should have been
named "The Ideal Hero" (nods to the Oscar Wilde play, "An Ideal
Husband"). Both take the idea of the 'ideal', in this case the
ideal hero: just how ideal is ideal? Is ideal just what we see on
the surface? Because the surface can be deceiving... This film
cleverly gives a very insightful look on how deceiving it is
about what we 'want' to see and what the 'reality' is.

Dustin Hoffman is such an incredibly 'unlikable' fellow that we
can't help but start to 'like' him, thus created more of an irony
to the story. As the story progresses, you can't help but start
sympathizing with him, at the same time just wanting to hit him
over the head and tell him what to do to make things right! Geena
Davis also gives a solid performance and she handles her role of
the tv reporter with a hidden, soft heart professionally. Andy
Garcia's character may seem 'too good to be true', but in fact I
think that's what the whole point was. Is too good to be true
real?





6-9-2007 - Though still using Orthodox language I am increasingly adapting
it to more unorthodox "Gnostic" ideas and theology. I do currently hesitate
in using such "religious" language though, as I have found that many of the
same truths can be expressed in more secularized language and
communicate beyond the isolated religious stratum. Many normally religious
terms, such as 'God" and 'Christ', may be replaced with the "Self". I know
this idea will no doubt offend and be rejected by many die-hard
Fundamentalists, but regardless ... the true nature of what is human and
intrinsically "divine" in us remains

What if?

This is my reply to several posts on private and public blogs and emails within a select
group of friends. I have hesitated posting it here because there are concepts I express that
transcend what may be considered acceptable, politically religious correct
Fundamentalist/Evangelical/Orthodox norms. I am not one who of my own desires would
set out to cause a controversy or debate, Id rather let it ride and let someone else argue
and live in a state of elevated blood pressure. I dont relish having to respond to every
nickel and dime objection. Serious inquiries are one thing, purposeful attempts to draw
into debate - are another. So - if there are those who really want to dissect and develop
your arguments as to the heretical nature of these things - Gather your material, compose
your thoughts, write it as logically as you are able to present it - and post it on your own
blog space. But - if you are seriously inquiring - to learn - to find truth that may be real -
deeper than the confines of what our religious systems have permitted, then I welcome
your query.

The original posts are listed first and my responses follow.

=============
What measure, gauge, method, system, etc. do you use to determine what is true?
=============
Do we engage, react and respond to circumstances, situations, events, people, things and
places based on who we believe we are in that moment?
If God IS love and Christ (God) IS our life, then is love who we are (our identity)?
What would life be like if we adopted and depended upon 'love' as our only identity?
What other identities do we adopt and why do we adopt them?
Did Jesus see himself as love, and live out of that identity?
==============
Maybe the "dot" is anything that separates. If we are all expressions of the only source
(God), our identities are exactly the same. The prodigal son's father focused on his son's
sonship. Maybe grace is focusing on the divine as ourselves and others even when
we/they aren't expressing that reality. I find freedom and peace seeing and interacting
with people on that basis. I just wish I 'lived there' more.
==============

Rick (and the rest of the gang)





A lot seems to be coming from your direction, so rather than try to express my
perceptions as individual topics, Im going to face them all together in one place. Some
of these I believe are interconnected.

Maybe the "dot" is anything that separates. - and If we are all expressions of the only
source (God), our identities are exactly the same.

Im not sure our identities are exactly the same. If by identity we mean Christ, I
guess, in a sense, they are the same. If we mean our personalities in Christ, I dont
believe this is true. Christ in us is our common source. Our connection and relation to the
divine, existing before all time and space, the life power that emanates through us, but not
of us or from us.

Each of us has a mental concept of what that Christ is. The man Jesus being God the
Fathers express manifestation of that character, and each of our individual mental
pictures of Jesus being our own personal model upon which we pattern our Christs.
So, as many mental perceptions as we have - the same number of distinct personalities
may be expressed. Not that one is better than the next, they may just be distinctive, and
possibly even contrary to the other.

Now, the source, and perceiving that source, or as we have been expressing, feeling,
that is were our identities proceed from, and that source is the same, but may, as we
interpret and act, differ in personality as it is expressed. All this assume we are drawing
from the same source - Him - in us, and not our own intellectual contrivances.

Anything that separates in and of it self can not be the dot. Because then that which
is Christ in us, may well be that dot. Separation, or at least its very real potential, is an
attribute of what will occur as Christ is formed in us. Jesus said he did not come to bring
peace, but a sword, and a mans enemies will be those of his own household. Also
leaving homes, wives, children, parents for the sake of the Kingdom is not inconceivable.
Now it is true I am finding experience in this. But what is more, I am coming to realize
that love, and realizing it as best expressed to those I love most, entails a willingness to
let go. More than the natural of a parent letting their children go, but in order to
manifest love to the object of that love - parting (in all its pain and discomfort) may be
the only viable answer.

This brings up focusing on the divine as ourselves and others even when we/they aren't
expressing that reality. If WE are not expressing that reality - (operating in relation to
Him - the source) - focusing on the divine as ourselves and others is an impossibility.
Apart from our immediate sourcing Him, in us, we are not able to appraise or evaluate
anything. In such a state, our mental condition is the same as the rest of the world. Only a
different form of religion. Only by active participation in Him is focusing possible. This
is not to say that we do not or are not to focus, but it is not we who focus, but Him who
focuses us. Maybe it sounds like splitting hairs, but Ive realized, I cant do it , or make it
happen, and the more I try, the further away from Him I find myself. Now I still read, and
seek, and try to be open and receptive, but it is Him who divulges what He wills, as he




wills.

Reading your blog that Jim reposted if God is Love and the replies is an education in
Spiritual levels and dimensions. If you hadnt noticed (and youd be blind as a bat if you
hadnt), I am not very accommodating to orthodox religion as it pertains to what I
perceive as deceptive, restrictive, blind faith based on preferred ignorance of Spiritual
realities that are clearly described and elucidated in the scriptures and substantiated in
life. But this is not a disdain for any individuals. It is the religious norms that have
evolved over the centuries, that essentially keep us from relation with God that I feel such
contempt for. Of course, those who would so ardently defend these falsies (fallacies) ,
would earn the burden of this contempt.

I can not judge or argue with any of the replies to this blog, Nor do I desire too. They are
obviously seekers. But - if you will notice, there are levels, or dimensions of thought as
to where the mental position of the replies are manifesting from. Most are generating
from the mind of man. One in particular, using the mind, on a lower plain. Drawing on
natural categories, apparently attempting to realize God from baser knowledge and
understanding. Another - understanding God as the religious other - seeking to do His
will. Seeking to know God in what I must do, what is required of me. And another,
realizing a dimension of Spirit - transcending what would be considered the norm. This
one coming closest to what we have been talking about.

In virtually all of these perceptions there is an attempt to fit into what is normal orthodox
religious categories - a dimension of Spiritual being that has been ignored or out right
disqualified as relevant for so many centuries, if not actually persecuted as heretical. The
mental norms are established as the judge and jury as to what is God and of God. The
mind has become the sphere of adjudging and realizing the Kingdom or its imitations.
The tendency for most is to construct the religious norms, and then as Spiritual dimension
is realized, try to make the new Spirituals fit into the old categories. OR if the new does
not fit the Old - reject the new as untested, in error, potentially heretical.

is love who we are (our identity)? What would life be like if we adopted and depended
upon 'love' as our only identity? To the natural mind - the mind dependant upon its own
resources, the mind steeped in the religious norms and resistant to alter these, these
become nonsensical questions. They dont fit into the categories as understood and
established as absolute. Those categories focused on , me, and I, and what I must do, or
what is required of me. The reality of Him, as anything other than a historic figure, the
incarnation of the God out there, is not conceivable, because their faith - their religion - is
built from and in their heads. The reality of the heart is yet to be realized. Thats not to
say it is not there. That is not to say that Spiritual potential does not reside in them. But
the categories of the natural mind - the religious mind - precludes its comprehension.

What other identities do we adopt and why do we adopt them? - Too many to go into.
And why do we adopt them?- because we are not secure in Him in us. (short and sweet)

Did Jesus see himself as love, and live out of that identity? - Jesus could say and do




nothing but what He received from the Father. Seeing Himself as love I dont believe was
an issue. Hearing and relation to the Father was. I believe as we realize, know and are
able to maintain that relationship - attempting to be love will not be an issue for us. As
we see Him (the Father), as we receive and respond, we are love. When will we see this
fully manifested? - Thats not my worry, Im not paid to think. I listen, I respond (obey),
I am.

What measure, gauge, method, system, etc. do you use to determine what is true? The
good simple Evangelical answer to this would be, the Bible, period. But since I am no
longer a good simple Evangelical, I am allowed to (or will regardless of what others
think) divert from the religious norm.

Samuel Butler said Life is like music; it must be composed by ear, feeling, and instinct,
not by rule. Nevertheless, one had better know the rules, for they sometimes guide in
doubtful cases, though not often.!

The Bible gives me the rules. But, these rules are not the gleaned and artificial
extractions of the religious elite. The Talmud of modern Judaizers. In relation to the
indwelling Logos, there are few, if any rules that apply. And those that are applied, are
between myself and that Logos. They are not my impositions upon anyone else. In
relation to my dealings with other men and society, particular what is the Christian
community, there may be social standards that are better understood, than neglected,
particular if I wish to move within that general community.

As a musician, as I have come to understand and master many styles, forms, genre, the
more localized to the American western mind and aesthetic, as well as various world
genres and cultural types, It becomes apparent that in music, there really are NO
absolutes. But, if I wish to play and be appreciated within a particular culture, it is
probably best advised that I temper my music to accommodate the taste of the audience I
wish to communicate with and gradually introduce a broader set of aesthetic values as my
audience is able to receive it. This means knowing their rules, although not necessarily
adopting them as my absolutes. The rules, if used properly, can become tools for
communication.

But what do I use determine what is true?

Assuming - Christ dwells in me - To thine own self be true.

Bob





6-25-2007 - Still speaking to a primarily religious mind set. Remember, this
can be re-written and secular language employed (And I may do it
someday). My use of religious terms and images in no way changes the
underlying universal truths.

Sin and the Image of God

How many images of God do we have?

I dont mean how many pictures? or how many statues? or material representations
we have produced. But how many, and what are the mental concepts that we hold
individually and collectively of who (or what) is God. What is there that you, I, or the
Church, holds as divine, that is in fact a product of our culture, our religious traditions,
our family heritage, our own personal foibles, our denominational distinctives, or any
other source, apart from the Spiritual revelation of God (or what may be called God or
any other name that is the first cause of ALL).

The fact is, it is to much and many to comprehend. For each one of us God is unique.
The image of God conceived in my mind, though more than likely incorporating
similarities to the God conceived in your mind, as we perceive on different levels, ability
to comprehend and varying information input, differs and may actually contend with the
God conceived in your mind. And all this applying the same inspired scripture and
common objective resource. Even amid the same denominations, incorporating the
same creeds, and educational resources, the mental images constructed will vary, one to
the other.

I would dare say that for as many who claim faith in God the Divine there are as
many created mental images.

In commenting on adultery, and the commandment prohibiting it, Jesus said everyone
who so much as looks at a woman with evil desire for her has already committed adultery
with her in his heart

That is the seventh commandment.

What would this imply concerning ALL these different images of God we have
constructed in our minds?

My intent here is not to lay some sort of guilt trip on us all. And I mean US all. I am
not exempt. The fact is mental adultery or mental graven images. We are ALL
guilty. But the issue is not our guilt.

The issue is sin, but what exactly is this sin. Following traditional orthodox line of
thought here, sin is both the individual violations of Gods commands and our indwelling
character inherited from Adam as a result of the first sin and expulsion from paradise.
Since then we have been subjected to the law of sin and death. There are other traditions




and myths that explain things somewhat differently, but for now, this, to avoid
unnecessary consternation, will suffice.

The actual word for sin is a term used in the sport of archery which means to miss the
mark. We aim. We let loose the bow string. The arrow flies. And we miss. SIN.

In our natural, and I stress natural character, the character subject to the laws of
creation, the creation with bounds of height, width, depth, time, and material, atoms and
molecules, ameba and higher life forms, machines and animals in this dimension, we
are subject to sin. We try but more than often we miss the mark. There are many of us
who through the process of education are taught to and master the systems we develop to
manage ourselves and become productive by economic and other measures of status, but
if examined objectively and revealed honestly are perpetually screwing up along the way.

Sin is a universal fault we all have to deal with. If you can claim in good conscience that
you dont or havent screwed up Maybe, just maybe, you might be exempt here, but
then I believe you are self deceived or a liar, so you cant win.

Regardless creation is screwed up, and we are a part of it.

For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of
death. For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending
His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin
in the flesh, so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk
according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. For those who are according to the flesh
set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the
things of the Spirit. For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is
life and peace, because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not
subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, and those who are in the
flesh cannot please God. However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the
Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not
belong to Him.Romans 8:2-9

There are two worlds universes dimensions we can live in. There are two sources we
can draw from. One appears readily recognizable weve spent all our lives here. We see
it, we touch it, it produces feelings, and our minds are acclimated to it. It is the natural
world of creation. We obey the rules, stay within the lines, dont be too disruptive, work
and study hard and make our contingency plans and maybe just maybe- our God will
take notice and bless our efforts. Or maybe we arent that ambitious, or dont have the
resources to make all this creation stuff work together. Well then theres always heaven
someday after you die surely thats reward enough, considering all your
imperfections and fudged up life. Yes in this world there is much to look forward too
taxes and death. Then if youve been good as defined by the code but determining
which code is the right code might be a challenge- maybe heaven. In this dimension
the Law of the Creator God Thou shalt notad infinitumhas not been revoked.





Then there is that other world universe dimension. It is not readily recognizable. It is
not the material existence we have been planted in and grown accustomed too, but it
coexists in relation to us. It is not a parallel universe, as that would imply dimensions of
time and space, but it is a dimension of ALL being, the abode of the only eternal self
existent one. It is not the Twilight Zone, although the Twilight Zone or the Outer Limits
or One Step Beyond may be better able to conceive its reality better than most of our
geniuss in theological ivory towers.

It is the Spirit and the ever existent Logos Christ, of before all time that which is of
the Only Father God before all creation in you.

Words and our theology formed and developed in the foreign dimension of creation,
are not sufficient to express Him. To some He is personal to others a presence to
others a feeling to others a confidence, an intuition. And in all He is real.

And we in our captivity yearn. We struggle we wrestle with our existence seeking
the freedom that can only be realized in Him.

And He touches and we feel. And in our ignorance we shrug Him off. And some of us
persist in our struggle, looking every which way and where only to find despair the
nothingness of the lie.

But the few realize maybe And He touches again. And we dont know. And in our
despair we hope maybe and in the right moment we speak. And we realize, it was
more than me it was we He in and through me We speak. And I know.

And doctrine and dogma - the code lose meaning I have touched God. And heaven
isnt that far away. I can go there any time I want.





7-1-2007 - C.G. Jung often wrote and referred to a "universal unconscious"
which we are all partakers of. This is essentially the "Spiritual dynamics and
resources of insight transcending material dimension" that I write about
here, in language more suitable to my American Christian compatriots, who
were my primary audience at the time.

Flesh and Blood - Not

Then Jesus answered him, Blessed (happy, fortunate, and to be envied) are you, Simon
Bar-Jonah. For flesh and blood [men] have not revealed this to you, but My Father Who
is in heaven. Matthew 16:17

But I tell you this, brethren, flesh and blood cannot [become partakers of eternal salvation
and] inherit or share in the kingdom of God; nor does the perishable (that which is
decaying) inherit or share in the imperishable (the immortal). 1 Corinthians 15:50

For the weapons of our warfare are not physical [weapons of flesh and blood], but they
are mighty before God for the overthrow and destruction of strongholds, 2 Corinthians
10:4

To reveal (unveil, disclose) His Son within me so that I might proclaim Him among the
Gentiles (the non-Jewish world) as the glad tidings (Gospel), immediately I did not
confer with flesh and blood [did not consult or counsel with any frail human being or
communicate with anyone]. Galatians 1:16

For we are not wrestling with flesh and blood [contending only with physical opponents],
but against the despotisms, against the powers, against [the master spirits who are] the
world rulers of this present darkness, against the spirit forces of wickedness in the
heavenly (supernatural) sphere. Ephesians 6:12

Flesh and Blood is a metaphor for our life and existence within the confines and
bounds of natural, physical creation. It denotes all the properties and qualities that are
derived in association with this realm of being, including the capacities of the natural
mind: intellect, emotions and will. It does not refer to or suggest relation and connection
to Spiritual dynamics and resources of insight transcending material dimension. Our
being, as realized, of, in and through our flesh and blood quarters is devoid of any and
all reference, knowledge and intuition regarding a higher spiritual reality or
consciousness.

Any ability to transcend or perceive beyond our flesh and blood experience is a gift of
God. It is an infusion of unfamiliar light and life into the dark regions of netherworlds
groping for purpose and meaning.

Creation is the parchment upon which God writes. History is mans clumsy interaction
with what is written. Creation is the habitation of flesh and blood. Onto this surface
the Logos was written. Into this spatial existence the Word, speaks. And among us




Christ abode. And as a stranger, a sojourner, a foreigner longing for a home near
forgotten yet abides, speaks and writes his love and life in and through us.

The Divine partook of the inferior nature, and the Word became flesh. Not to remain as
an indefinite finite manifestation, but to lead, to free, a material epiphany invading the
lower regions of corporal existence and so to lead captivity captive as it were, into a
realization of life and liberty, [He led a train of vanquished foes] and He bestowed gifts
on men.

Eph 4:8.

Hell needs to be rethought. The despotisms, against the powers, against [the
master spirits who are] the world rulers of this present darkness, against the spirit
forces of wickedness in the heavenly (supernatural) sphere all need to be
reconsidered.

Our spiritual contention is not out there someplace in Never-NeverLand. It is not
some ethereal dimension that we enter into of some absolute other worldly nature. It is
not that pretend intermediary cosmic no-mans land that manifests Archangels
brandishing swords, seated on magnificent steeds, garbed in white robes bearing the sign
of the cross, lopping off the heads of Middle-Earthean orks, rallying the hosts of
heaven, and so rescue us poor forgotten oppressed humanity.

Its not happening out there Out there does not exist.

It is ALL happening right here, right now. And despotisms powers master spirits,
ARE world rulers of THIS PRESENT DARKNESS.

Now PAY ATTENTION I am not saying that George W. Bush, Kim jong il,
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Stalin or Hitler or any of the other current or former world
leaders IS the manifestation of spirit forces. They are human beings subject to the same
faults and error as you, me, and the rest of creation. As the subjects of creation they are
they are confronted with and realize cognitive rationale that sets the course of what
transpires in the world they are placed. By choice, by providence, by luck of the draw (if
you can consider that), by manipulation and deceit, by force of arms, by threat and
intimidation, men become forces of rule and power in the world of creation. It is in this
present darkness that spiritual forces of wickedness manifest. Heavenly spheres are not
some spiritualized pie in the sky La-La Land. Heaven, the Kingdom of Heaven is now. It
is not a part of creation. It IS none the less. Access too, in and out of, IS an
accomplished fact. He that ascended descended and back again. It is our heritage as
we know Him, abide in Him, manifest Him are Him.

In the minds of men the battle transpires. Most assume this to be for the dominion and
rule of this created world, and to an extent that is true. But the reality is, it is for the
hearts, or the extinguishing of the life in men that would realize their oneness and
attachment with their Father. We are enamored with cares and worries so far removed
from us, yet so aggressively imposed upon us that to focus our attention toward ultimate




value and reality becomes a pipe dream, and confusion of realities wisps of smoke soon
forgotten illusions.

But God not flesh and blood.





7-3-2007 - Going public about my Spiritual transition.
Coming Out of the Closet

Now that Ive got your attention let me reassure some of the more shocked at the title of
this blog that I am indeed sexually straight. But maybe there is something that we all
need to look at and consider.

Homosexual attraction is something that I can not fathom. Sexually oriented, I appreciate
and am attracted to women. The better looking, and made up to appear sexually
attractive, the more natural stimulus is present. That is simply the way it is at least in
my experience.

But sexuality is a reality we experience in our natural created state. It is part of our
lower, carnal nature. It is the instinctive function of our animal/human nature. It is not
without feeling or even cognitive energies, but is not the product or our higher nature as
realized in the Spirit. Now, let me qualify this, because as we realize our Spiritual being
and nature, I believe the union of two like minded Spiritual soul mates, joined in the
giving of our bodies in sexual intimacy is akin to if not actually a sacrament reflecting
and expressing our the true Spiritual union in Christ.

As a created by-product of creation, sexuality is subject to the same weakness and
defective realization as the rest of the entirety of creation. That imperfection may be
realized in obsession with sexual interest (pornography), heterosexual lust (acted out or
internalized), clinical perversion (at least as deemed so by the particular societies norms),
or what ever other violation of standards are considered taboo. Our culture seems to tend
to evaluate these diversities graded on a curve. Some are worse than others. While
some are absolutely sick and warrant prolonged observation and quarantine of the
perpetrator, others are merely the product the human animal and after all, boys will be
boys. Generally, the less taboo, the natural attractions of the sexes, if things are handled
discreetly, a sanctified dont ask, dont tell is the preferred and accepted modus
operandi. Different churches, congregations and denominations deal with these violations
of the sexual religious code differently. Some with rapid legalistic condemnation, censure
to excommunication for any violation, others have adopted an absolute right to privacy
protocol. I believe most of our churches have little idea of the lack of concern God places
on sexual sins, as compared to what actually is the real Spiritual condition of the
habitants of the created order.

When you come right down to it, as regards sex, sexual whatever, as it is confined to
and a fact of this creation and is not a realization of our Spiritual natures Sex dont
count. In Christ, as I am in the Spirit, as He (and that is a generic He) is in me, I am
neither male nor female. Whatever imperfection I may carry as a matter of my carnal
nature, it will never be a part of my nature as I am in Christ. ALL sin in the flesh has
been dealt with.





Our problem is that we are trying to live out our Spiritual natures, as carnal human
beings. It doesnt work that way. It will never work that way. Sure you can go on trying.
Enjoy the failure, the condemnation, if thats what really turns you on. But in Christ, in
the Kingdom of Heaven, in the now, we will be as the Angels. And that means sexless.

Now, dont get the idea that I am advocating some sort of antinomianism (the view that
Christians are released by grace from the obligation of observing the moral law). But that
Law is not our Law as we are in Christ. Laws as we live in society in Christ or out of
Christ Spiritual or unspiritual laws serve to manage our horizontal relations with each
other. But these laws, the constructions of carnal men (albeit potentially guided by divine
grace, although subject to the same imperfection of creation), are not OUR law in Christ.
There is a relation and subjected yielding that is a manifest quality of our being in Christ.
It is not subject to the laws of creation as it is the manifest nature of the Father
indwelling us, and surpasses the created finitudes as the divine is infinite.

For many years, I have been a closet believer. I moved and functioned within the
confines of traditional Evangelical and Fundamentalist organizations, and even tried to
assume and assimilate their doctrine and dogma. And I was pretty good at it. But I knew I
was different. It just wasnt such a comfortable fit. There was something different in me
that was difficult to express and share with my religious peers. Than a few years back I
was internally prompted, and moved to a freer situation. It was fine for a while, and I was
able to stick my head out of the closet occasionally. Still, few understood, and the
prevailing overall nature of the way things were across the board, was not really all that
different than the other more conservative environments. Basically the same old stuff,
with a little more sugar, and not a whole lot of foundation to encourage deeper Spiritual
understanding. More than not, a lot of experimenting, hoping for the best. Then I
realized, I wasnt going to find it in any one else, Or in any place else. It was already in
me. And as I am willing to follow Him, in me, I can step completely out of the closet.

Good Lord was it stuffy in there.

Doctrine and dogma has had to take a subservient position to Him, but I can breathe
now. And some of the doctrine, well, its turning out, it may not be all its cracked up to
be.

Classified Looking for more closet escapees I know
youre out there.






7-13-2007 - More "truth" as I had been realizing it. As I look back at these
essays it occurs to me, there was more transpiring in my life than just a
legal separation and divorce. At the same time I was producing these I was
writing up "Separation Agreements" to be included in the future divorce
from my "Ex". Some may write it off as coincidence, others as possibly
"prophetic". As I was growing in my own awareness, I would now call it
"synchronistic", although I could not see it at the time. But 20-20 hind sight
seems to bring a lot of things into perspective.

Father, Son and Holy Spirit

How many times do we speak of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, as though they
are external realities?

DO NOT let your hearts be troubled (distressed, agitated). You believe in and adhere to
and trust in and rely on God; believe in and adhere to and trust in and rely also on Me. In
My Fathers house there are many dwelling places (homes). If it were not so, I would
have told you; for I am going away to prepare a place for you. And when (if) I go and
make ready a place for you, I will come back again and will take you to Myself, that
where I am you may be also. And [to the place] where I am going, you know the way.
John 14:1-4

When Jesus said I am going away to prepare a place for you I will come back again
and will take you to Myself, that where I am you may be also, why is it that we
automatically and arbitrarily presume that this is a state of being that is yet to be realized?
Is it not just as possible that this is a state of Spiritual existence is in all probability our
actual present state of being? When Jesus said And [to the place] where I am going, you
know the way was he just speaking a metaphorical abstraction, or did he actually mean
that we (at least potentially) do know the way? And if we DO know the way, why do
we have such a difficult time realizing it?

Thomas said to Him, Lord, we do not know where You are going, so how can we know
the way? Jesus said to him, I am the Way and the Truth and the Life; no one comes to the
Father except by (through) Me. If you had known Me [had learned to recognize Me], you
would also have known My Father. From now on, you know Him and have seen
Him.John 14:5-7

I am the Way and the Truth and the Life; no one comes to the Father except by
(through) Me is a commonly used quote of Jesus among orthodox and particularly
Evangelical sorts, to justify the absolute singleness of realizing God through the person
of Jesus Christ, and without saying, by their particular interpretation as to what that
relation consists of and how it is entered into. But what was Jesus actually pointing to
here. Was he pointing to himself as the historic figure of the God/Man who walked for
some thirty three years on earth, was crucified, buried and resurrected? Or was he
pointing to a state of being that is to be realized in our current existence, as we abide in
the place he has prepared for us?





When Jesus said If you had known Me [had learned to recognize Me], you would also
have known My Father was this just a rhetorical replay to Thomas, who had obviously
spent some time, years, with Jesus, but still did not know him? Or was this a statement
expressing the nature of Spiritual knowledge that Thomas, and the other disciples, had
failed to grasp? Even in the actual physical presence of Christ, was it the nature of these
men to fail to recognize and apprehend what the whole thing was about? Was Is there a
spiritual obtuseness that prevents us from apprehending the present nature and reality of
knowing Christ as he currently is? Currently IS? Not WAS two thousand years ago, but
NOW IN our space and time, is our realization of him hampered by our own
preconceived notions of spirituality or the generationally passed on doctrines of men
held as absolute in lieu of first hand, first person relation and knowledge of he who said
And I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Comforter (Counselor, Helper,
Intercessor, Advocate, Strengthener, and Standby), that He may remain with you
forever The Spirit of Truth, Whom the world cannot receive (welcome, take to its
heart), because it does not see Him or know and recognize Him. But you know and
recognize Him, for He lives with you [constantly] and will be in you. John 14:16-17,
and I will not leave you as orphans [comfortless, desolate, bereaved, forlorn, helpless]; I
will come [back] to you. Just a little while now, and the world will not see Me any more,
but you will see Me; because I live, you will live also. John 14:18-19

When Jesus said I will come [back] to you. was he just talking about some indefinite
occurrence of future history, or was he speaking of a more immediate and definite, real
time, God in the now manifestation that we contrive as realizing him as some nebulous
glue binding the church, or was he actually inferring that He lives with you [constantly]
and will be in you?

When Jesus said, The Spirit of Truth, Whom the world cannot receive (welcome, take to
its heart), because it does not see Him or know and recognize Him and the world will
not see Me, could this have been a hint that in our pursuit of being religious, God
pleasers, and failing to recognize and find him, there is another reality of being that
exists, but is not comprehendible by the standards and measures of normal and natural
creation resources? Is it possible that he exists and speaks and wishes to commune but
our minds, our ideas and concepts, our religion(s), dogma and doctrine have built
fortified walls, keeping him out and imprisoning us? Is it possible that being born again
may actually mean forgetting all this other crap, the doctrine, dogma and starting all
over again with him? Not the externally imposed religion - Jesus, but the I will
(HAVE) come [back] to you, the He lives with you [constantly] and will be in you,
the you know and recognize Him, the you will see Me, Jesus. If that is a possibility,
maybe we will find because I live, you will live also.

Its just a thought.





12-11-2007 - From mid July 2007 on to mid December 2007 life was
consumed with "separation", moving everything I owned to Seattle
Washington, to join a 'Metal' band and back to Gettysburg Pennsylvania,
when the band thing didn't work. I finally arrived back in Gettysburg early
February '08, but had started connecting with a more diverse "world-wide"
collection of friends on the Internet. At this point my transition from
"Orthodoxy" was (for arguments sake) complete, but I still retained (and
retain) many core values and language which I do not believe will change.
Only the definitions of the language change or are expanded as new insights
are realized.
Confusion Among the Gods and Schizoid Religion

Before too many get too bent out of shape, let me say from the very beginning that I
believe there is only one true God, but, who or what that God may be is subject to a
great deal of conjecture. And it is in our conjecturing and deductive analysis that we
come to inferences that become graven mental images carved in stone in our minds. And
as these images become assumed as absolute, though they actually be but constructs of
our own mental resources, their assigned presumed absolute nature elevates them and
grants them the power and influence as though they were the one true God in our
lives.

"THEN GOD spoke all these words: I am the Lord your God, Who has brought you out
of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before
or besides Me. You shall not make yourself any graven image [to worship it] or any
likeness of anything that is in the heavens above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is
in the water under the earth; You shall not bow down yourself to them or serve them; for
I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the
children to the third and fourth generation of those who hate Me, But showing mercy and
steadfast love to a thousand generations of those who love Me and keep My
commandments." (Exodus 20:1-6, AMP)

From the God who is accredited creation and deliverance of the children of Israel from
Egypt, these two commands are the first given to this gypsy nation as received by and
delivered through Moses. These became as it were the Preamble for the remainder of
the Ten Commandments which was the foundation for all the Levitical religious and
social law of this emerging people. Based on these laws and subsequent divine
declarations, the people of Israel went forth to conquer (in as bloody a manner as is
recorded in the annals of savagery) and lay hold of the land promised hundreds of years
before to their forefather Abraham. The Old Testament abounds with miracles attributed
to the one true God and the acts of the people of Israel carrying out His mandates,
substantiating the fact that I the Lord your God am a jealous God.

The conception of the one true God as perceived and understood by Moses, and as it
was recorded and codified became the first principle of what became the nation Israel
and their idea of the nature of the one true God. Faithfulness and unfaithfulness
resulting in subsequent rise and fallings of this people in relation to surrounding nations.




The Law, judgment and violence became the hallmark of relation to this
perception of the one true God. Prophets arose from within this people Israel and time
and again delivered inspirational adjuncts, clarifying and even redefining perceived
religious norms, only to be rejected, judged and martyred, falling prey to the predominant
religious notion of the one true God.

Mercy, a concept alluded too, showing mercy and steadfast love to a thousand
generations, and even included as part of the Law, became an oversight. In all the
history of Israel, there is no recorded occurrence where the Year of Jubilee was ever
enacted. The Year of Jubilee being the freeing of slaves and bondservants and restoration
of lands and properties to the original owners as a means of correcting potential injustices
and economic domination by a privileged propertied elite. Religion has a way of
justifying and holding on to its assets. Ownership becomes a religious right, or maybe
more properly, rite. Spiritual veracity becomes subordinate to material interests,
Spiritual realities questionable or degraded as the product of natural causation to be
manipulated at will. Eventually God as we choose to formulate Him, is dead. Thus
material minds conceive, justify and elevate their one true God as THE true God.
OR not, as it suits their purpose.

Along comes this guy named Jesus. It had been a few centuries since any Prophets made
the rounds, except for this guy named John who wandered the wilderness wearing freaky
clothes and eating bugs. But John fit the image, and justifiably so, he didnt pull any
punches. He recognized the sin of the powers that be and went straight for the jugular.
Well this didnt win him any popularity contests. As a matter of fact it got him an
invitation to the palace and his head served up on a platter at request of a hot little
number arousing the passions of her step dad, King Herod. Hey, what the hell whats
another martyred prophet?

But Jesus was cool (I hope you arent offended by my contemporary vernacular but I
really dont care any more). Jesus did not come out immediately attacking the powers
that be, but He had some things to say. He spoke in parables and his language was both
pointed and veiled. He found himself in the company of common men, tax collectors,
government officials, religious rulers, whores and prostitutes, beggars and thieves. Yet
too actually pin him down and find what could be made a just cause to condemn him
was not too easy. A lot of political plotting and maneuvering had to be engaged before he
could be detained, charged, tried and executed. But such is the way of religion. It has to
first persecute and condemn what it will eventually deify and worship.

Jesus concept of God, though rooted in Israels history, did not square with the religious
elites definition and their historic identification. The then current religion of the Jews
identified with a God of created material universe. The religious hierarchy was a divinely
appointed institution perpetuated and guarded as the sacred keepers of what was of
God. That which could be rationalized, although deficient, could be argued as absolute,
in light of argument to the contrary. Expediency and maintaining religious tradition were
the ultimate priority. Divergent thought concerning God was condemned as blasphemous.
Now, this does not mean that there were not divergent ideas from Jewish tradition that




differed from those of the religious elite, the Pharisaic sect. There were, but they were
isolated, not in the main stream, and to an extent, secretive. Into this snakes pit of
religious and political turmoil Jesus stepped.

To Jesus, God was not resident in tradition or Temples or alien environs to be dreamed of
as a reward in the afterlife, but God was (IS) immediate. God, and what He may be, is
innate and resident in us. The Kingdom of God was not a religious or political
institution, filled with committees and governing bodies debating theological absolutes
and heresies, social or political expediencies. The Kingdom of God is both the immanent
and transcendent life, ever available to us but not subject to our desires or manipulations.
It is the Self existent reality underlying ALL. And we are heirs to this life and reality.

Jesus lived this reality. He resourced life transcendent to creations limitations. Father
God, guided, equipped and sustained this man Jesus. That which we call the Word the
Logos Christ this was the experience of Jesus in its fullness. It is this quality that
Jesus came and revealed to us. It is our thinking about it for which we must repent
change our way of thinking Not change our lifestyles or sinful behaviors but
change our concept of God. God is not the eternal score keeper. He is eternal being and
life and we are intimately joined to him.

Christianity has evolved, and from early times, as a religion with a split personality. We
have adopted the religious God concept from the Jews and have been trying to
syncretise this with a pseudo-spiritual natural religion as we deduce it from New
Testament scriptures in a theological cut and paste to determine what is our most
reasonable concept of God. Or, as we have perceived elements of natural human
character more desirable than others, and elevate these traits as being the manifestation of
God in us. And in some aspects, just in our existence, the God character sneaks through
and occasionally surprises us. But for all practical purposes of understanding, we
discount this aspect as beyond our understanding. It does not fit our religious categories,
and its unorthodox nature scares the be-Jesus out of us. And not having apparent
connection to religious norm or subject to its authority is usually deemed unreliable to
bad pizza or of the devil. So we live as religious schizophrenics. Religious split
personalities, at times worshipping the God of Thou shalt and shalt not and damn the
rest of them and at times the God of our own reason and emotional stability, content in
our sanctified support group. And occasionally slipping into the ether-world, but this is
too weird, beyond our religion, best stay where its safe. And we wonder why things are
such a mess.

We humanity as a whole and more specifically we in the Christian community do not
realize how connected we are. It is not a matter of denominations or organizations or any
hierarchal structure we may collect ourselves around, but it is a matter of the divine life
that resides in us and ultimately entangles us in dimensions of existence few come to
conceive and fewer realize. But we are universally and divinely joined. Our realization of
this has become a lost art, and in much of religion where it is being conceived and
explored is being condemned, out of ignorance, as New Age mysticism or the occult.
That is not necessarily the case.





The reality of our connectedness, apart from religion, is when you come right down to
it, the ultimate importance. And as a direct relation to this, the God we worship, or more
exactly the conception and perception of the God we worship is ultimately what will
deliver in our existence what it is that God manifests as. And we wonder why things
are such a mess.

There is ultimately only one true God. But manifesting Him has been delivered to us. We
need to change our way of thinking and in the process learn to let God out.





6-9-2008 - Most of 2008 and on I was engrossed with the political circus we
call an "election", but occasionally a question was raised concerning
"spiritual" issues and I had to throw myself into the discussion

Topic of discussion from a friends blog: There are two kinds of atheists: strong
atheists and weak atheists. The strong atheist makes the absolute claim There are no
gods. Since this statement cannot be proven, it is similar to a religious belief.

Poolie: This comment is as good a farm-fed line of bullshit as you will ever hear. "The
strong atheist makes the absolute claim There are no gods. Since this statement cannot
be proven, it is similar to a religious belief." The strong atheist is able to make that true
statement simply for the reason that there IS NO proof of gods. I could make a similar
statement above about non-believers of the Easter Bunny. Does this mean some folk
actually give the existence of the Easter bunny a certain amount of credence?

RevRichie: I find it very interesting how people of God or so called believers can preach
their beliefs but when opposing views are presented, they feel pressured to change. Could
it be that their beliefs are that fragile? Seems to me that if they were strong believer and
had the truth, they would not feel threaten when opposing views are presented.

Bob: What constitutes "proof"?

RevRichie: In my opinion, the only proof or evidences is SELF-EVIDENCE. There is not
physical evidences that would stand up in a court of law.

Poolie: Something physical. Something to see, feel, hear, or smell.
You know the kind of thing...
"hey gang, there's a hippo in the front garden!"
"Yeah right"
"True. It just trashed your Honda!"
"Oh shit!"

Bob: The next question would logically be "What constitutes 'God'?" ... Is it - he - or she -
or some nebulous immaterial nothing ... or is "IT" an embodiment of physical
proportions? Is "It" (God) to be construed in the Classical Orthodox Christian perception
- a Supreme Being existing in other spheres or dimensions - the big guy in the sky with
his tally sheet counting my fuck ups, OR is "It" something completely miss-construed by
religion, even to being evidenced to in the fact that we do think and reason? ... But we
construe these rational processes as purely the by product of evolution ... and that is not
discounting evolution or raising us as the "crown of creation" (which may or may not be
true), but in fact establishes our existence in an intimacy with ALL that is real - animal,
vegetable or mineral, ad infinitum. But religion ...fucks the whole thing up .... What is
"God"? How can anyone argue the existence of anything that IS NOT clearly defined ...
What is "God"? .... And as that is defined .... What makes that definition absolute? ....
Even an atheist declaring "God does not exist" ... has to have a conception of what does
not exist ... And I'm sure as is defined by most religion - I would be considered an atheist
- by their definition of "God" ... But that does not mean I am closed to concepts of




spirituality that are gaining recognition through non-religious scientific investigations.
What makes any of us so sure that the limits of our own experience, and teaching,
thinking and logic, are the limits of human and dare I say *innate" divine potential? And
as far as real hard evidence - that being the life lived and manifested in those who
understand this potential. I am not trying to convince any one of the "reality" of God. The
one thing I'm sure of is that most would not have a clue what I believe concerning God as
I might use the word. "God" as a description of what may be "divine" has lost it's
meaning having been perverted by religion. But if we are to consider the existence or
non-existence of a thing - what is the definition of that thing - and in this case - 'God"?














Post
Orthodox





In December 2007 and through mid-2009 I had switched online homes and
began blogging to what was primarily a secular audience, an eclectic mix of
free thinkers (atheists, occultists, conservatives and liberals, politically and
religiously, spiritists, spiritualists, some Evangelicals and Fundamentalists,
and about every cultural expression that may be conceived) from all around
the world, most emanating in the U.S.A. and Europe, but no place was not
represented with the exception of mainland China. By this time I was not
writing as an Orthodox believer, but as a relatively well informed past
adherent to that line of faith. I had discovered too much that did not
square in the Orthodox frame of thinking and was scripturally untenable.
The result being a shift in my writing, trying to defend the faith, but now
taking direct issue where I thought attention needed to be drawn.

This is a response to a blog from my friend Jim Palmer.
"How can a good God allow human suffering?
"What father among you, if his son asks for a loaf of bread, will give him a stone; or if
he asks for a fish, will instead of a fish give him a serpent? Or if he asks for an egg, will
give him a scorpion? If you then, evil as you are, know how to give good gifts [gifts that
are to their advantage] to your children, how much more will your heavenly Father give
the Holy Spirit to those who ask and continue to ask Him! " (Luke 11:11-13, AMP)
Human beings are capable of both "good" and "evil" deeds and actions. As a matter of
our created nature, and as Orthodox theology would espouse, our fallen nature inherited
through natural lineage from Adam and Eve and their sin and fall in the garden. Orthodox
theology purports that this "fall" tainted ALL of creation with the sin of this
transgression, thus allowing into creation the effects of evil and all the accompanying
suffering.
"The Spirit Himself [thus] testifies together with our own spirit, [assuring us] that we are
children of God. And if we are [His] children, then we are [His] heirs also: heirs of God
and fellow heirs with Christ [sharing His inheritance with Him]; only we must share His
suffering if we are to share His glory. [But what of that?] For I consider that the
sufferings of this present time (this present life) are not worth being compared with the
glory that is about to be revealed to us and in us and for us and conferred on us! For [even
the whole] creation (all nature) waits expectantly and longs earnestly for God's sons to be
made known [waits for the revealing, the disclosing of their sonship]. For the creation
(nature) was subjected to frailty (to futility, condemned to frustration), not because
of some intentional fault on its part, but by the will of Him Who so subjected it
[yet] with the hope That nature (creation) itself will be set free from its bondage to
decay and corruption [and gain an entrance] into the glorious freedom of God's
children. We know that the whole creation [of irrational creatures] has been
moaning together in the pains of labor until now. And not only the creation, but we
ourselves too, who have and enjoy the firstfruits of the [Holy] Spirit [a foretaste of




the blissful things to come] groan inwardly as we wait for the redemption of our
bodies [from sensuality and the grave, which will reveal] our adoption (our
manifestation as God's sons). " (Romans 8:16-23, AMP)
It goes without question that creation is in one hell of a mess. We, humanity, are as much
a part of that creation as any rock, tree, cesspool, mountain, ocean, planet, sun, star
galaxy or universe. We are subject to the laws and material nature of manifested created
reality.
Genesis tells us that "God" created ALL that is. It further tells us that "God" judged
and condemned man and mankind for the transgression of one. And we are told that
multiplying sin and transgression entered human history, thus compounding the
judgments' to follow and affecting human relations ever since. The effects are
unarguable. History, regardless of the source bears out the dilemma humanity finds itself.
The question we are faced with is, Is this "God" of creation, the God of judgment, the
God of Law, the God of conquering and wiping out entire civilizations, Is this the God
that Jesus eludes to as "Our Father in heaven"? Or is it possible that this "creator God",
the God of Israel, the God of the Pharisees, this is the God Jesus referred to as "your
father, the devil".
"You are of your father, the devil, and it is your will to practice the lusts and gratify the
desires [which are characteristic] of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning
and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a
falsehood, he speaks what is natural to him, for he is a liar [himself] and the father of lies
and of all that is false. " (John 8:44, AMP)
Is it possible that the "God" Jesus came to reveal to us transcends this God of Creation
and manifests in us in a deeper dimension and reality than what we can perceive in our
"created" natures? Is it possible that "real" "reality" is composed of "life" existent above
and beyond this God of Creation and as this "life" is beyond creation, in us it is
imperceptible to the "God of Creation", just as it is imperceptible too all of creation
except those the Spirit would reveal it? Is it possible that the defects in creation are there
as a matter of reflection of being deficiencies found in this "Creator God".
Can a "good" God allow human suffering? No, I don't believe so. But the God of
creation can. By all that Jesus described the "Father" God as being "good", it doesn't
square with the God revealed in creation and history. The fact remains that in this
"created" world and existence "we will suffer". Jesus Christ entering and partaking of
creation subjected himself to the same creation sufferings that all humanity experiences.
But the story does not end with his death, burial and resurrection. The life that he
demonstrated is the same life that exists in each and every one of us, imperceptible to the
God of creation, but overcoming the deficiencies of creation. The truth is we have lived




in ignorance for most of the existence of the churches life. Most of that life has been
reliant on natural creations resources to exist in "creation". Our worship and conception
of "God" has been more focused on a God of Judgment inherited from Jewish Talmudic
tradition than the Father revealed by Jesus.
Much of our current problem is that we, being un-exercised in the deep inner reality of
the Spirit within in us, often confuse our natural minds reason, logic, natural human
feelings as being that of the Spirit. Even as noble as our intentions are, and "logical" as
our theological premises may be, that which is not truly the actual act of the Spirit from
within, rather than our attempts to emulate that which we reason as "Spiritual", these will
ALL come to naught. Even what we perceive and define as "love", apart from the actual,
not emulated but actual, manifestation of the divine within, this too will ultimately turn
out to be just another religious waste of time. That does not mean "good" things will not
be done. Humans are capable of "good" and "evil" apart from God. It means it was not
God, and will end up in the line with those arguing "Lord, Lord did we do. . . in your
name?" and the Lord answering "Depart from me, I never knew you."
All this raises a lot of questions, and I'm sure some arguments from traditional orthodox
believers, But if it does that's cool. It means "real" answers and possibilities will have to
be explored and considered. The same old religious B___ S___ won't do any more. We're
finding out that God the real "God", is bigger than that, and closer, and more immediate
than religion will allow us to KNOW.





Taking the departure I did there was a questioning from some who
had previously followed my writing. This is a reply to one such.

Question: Where does YHVH (Yahweh) fit in all of this?"
"There can be only one absolute truth, I believe God wants us to make an effort to find this
truth, (himself)."
"I read your blogs and would like to know what you mean in describing the dichotomy
between the "creator god" and the god that might deliver one beyond this futile creation.
Where does YHVH (Yahweh) fit in all of this?"
==================================================
We go through life, prodding our way, making decisions based on assumptions of truth and
reality handed down to us, or extrapolated from prior experience, and which we in the moment
grant absolute status. Even realizing the potential error inherent in our assumptions, we press
forward, because we believe without question that there must be some "absolute" reality to make
sense of it all. We assume there must be a "personal" creator. By personal I mean a supreme
being or entity that is the first cause of all that is the realm of creation that we can see, touch,
smell, hear, and in any other way or manner perceive, and this personal creator is "personal" in
that "He" manifests attributes and qualities associated with humans, thus binding him in relation
to humankind.

We go through life and experience and realize many things that we cannot explain or find
difficult to fit into our evolved logical reasonable categories. For each individual person the level
of this cognitive development may be different. That does not necessarily mean one may be
superior to another cognitively, but it may, but what it infers is rather there is a lack of exercise to
develop, experience and realize, potentials of thought or spiritual perception that are not
commonly recognized and endorsed as the "norm".

We live in a "religious" world. Some find ourselves in the context of a western culture dominated
and influenced by an "orthodox" Christian (oC) world view. This "oC" paradigm has experienced
mutations through the centuries (i.e. accommodating scientific relativism, the Reformation, and
more), but has been able to survive to exert influence in our culture, beyond the politically correct
accepted stratum deemed acceptable by the society as a whole. Even those who would call
themselves atheists find themselves bound to the influence of the dominant cultural influence. It's
a matter of survival. In other areas of the world, the predominant religious influence differs, but
the exertion of influence within those cultures, is comparable (Islamic cultures, Hindu, Buddhist,
relativistic humanism, etc). Being "dropped" in the middle of any of these cultural situations,
from birth or transmigration, one is left with the dilemma of fitting in, or being ostracized for
being "different". That does not mean one cannot be individually different, but there are usually
costs and consequences deemed too high for the distinction of being "true" to ones self. You can
see much of this in the cultural seasonal celebrations and holidays we partake in. Nobody (or very




few) wants to be considered a "Scrooge".

As we make our way in life, most of us simply want to survive. And if we can accomplish that,
the next priority is to build some sense of security, a financial nest egg, property, and a position
of influence something that gives us a sense of power over our own lives. Having these, the
desire to control that which is beyond us others - through financial, political, and religious
means. Doing this means accommodating the systems that be. To advocate something that is not
considered the "orthodox" norm (and I use orthodox in the broadest sense here to include
orthodox economic, orthodox political, and orthodox religious norm), going against the flow of
society in general, is a very risky under taking and can lead to disastrous personal and collective
results, should failure or no realization be the case. Better to work within the established system
and "play it safe".

But what if any of these "systems" are built on faulty assumptions, deficient concepts granted a
relative absolute (that makes good sense - duh!!!) status, and perpetuated through history and
culture because the effort and risk to stand against the inertia and momentum gained by the
systems over the centuries is monumental at least and humanly impossible by any perception?

We are delivered in the first five books of the Old Testament, the Torah, the "law", whose
authorship is generally attributed to Moses, a perception of "God", as recognized and realized in
the lives of men, from the first man, Adam, through Noah, to the confusion of language and
dispersion, and the patriarchs of Israel, to the Exodus out of Egypt of the people of Israel and
their wanderings in the desert for forty years. It is essentially upon this perception that Israel
conceived their notion of YHVH (Yahweh), the "only one absolute truth", the "one true God".
Scripture, those deemed acceptable, and interpreted as literally absolute, and interpreted and
applied as was most beneficial to the situation at hand, upholding the honor of YHVH, and or
politically expeditious, became the religious and social mandate. The assumption of the literal
absolutism of the "Torah" and what is attributed to the Prophet Moses, assume more than the
Prophet was, and an infallibility, not only of the absolute nature of scripture but a "perfection" of
the man Moses in relation to the one true god, YHVH.

Based on these perceptions and notions, the people of YHVH went forth and conquered, settled
and lived in relation to their "perception" of YHVH. But was this perception of the one true god,
as held by Moses, and subsequent generations (even as they progressively defined it), Was this
the "true" absolute conception as "God" truly is? Is YHVH truly "God", or is he purely a
conception of "God", and an imperfect one at that?

We all have our own conceptions and perceptions of who or what "God" is. Some of these are
based on religious texts, accepted scriptures and other commentary, feelings and intuitions. Even
individuals relying on the same scripture and resources, with similar experience and background,
each one has a unique and personal perception of what God is. Denominationally bound and
united congregational entities, when it comes right down to the individual personal understanding
of the divine, each is personal and unique. What binds us together as a people is not the true
knowledge and understanding of God, but commonly held conveniences of dogma and doctrine.





In these "commonly held conveniences of dogma and doctrine" our religious system manifests.
These, quite apart from the life of what may be "God". From their beginnings, this was the
preference of the people of Israel. For fear, or what ever other quality of human nature, they
chose not to meet with God as He is, but rather required the intermediary Moses to hear God for
them, to deliver to them, what they feared they could not bear. Fear and ignorance, not Moses' but
the peoples, essentially became the predominant guiding force in receiving and understanding
God. Religion has a way of simplifying things we are not willing to meet first hand and face to
face.

What ever it is that we conceive and perceive God as, in our minds, as in the case of Israel, that is
the God we will serve, and that is the God that will manifest in our lives.

"Where does YHVH (Yahweh) fit in all of this?"

We have a tendency that we want to hold onto some sense of security arising from past
perceptions. If I conceive something new, will I truly be secure in it? What if I'm wrong? We
need to come to an understanding as to whether YHVH was and IS, the only one true God, OR "is
YHVH and all the baggage that comes along with him, and everything done in his name, is this
only a 'perception' of the one true god?"

Is it possible that in our quest to "know" the one true God, the "only one absolute truth"
(presuming there is such a thing), that the errors of our predecessors and their declaration of
absolutes, has diverted us and derailed the spiritual train we find ourselves on. Is it possible that
our concern is more for maintaining a humanly comfortable status quo, to get by the best we can,
rather than face the music and stand in the gap of cultural social and religious error? Has our
religion become, in the words of Karl Marx, "the opiate of the masses", but it is more convenient
and comfortable than the alternative?

Is it possible that Jesus, and many prophets and sages before him, realized a dynamic of
humanity, that is not so readily perceptible to what we understand as normal human senses, yet is
there, and we partake of it, but in ignorance, partly by choice, neglect or reject it. And not so
unoften, are discouraged from realizing it, by well meaning, dogmatic "others", living in
ignorance themselves.

I believe "God", or what we call "God", is closer than we realize. This, I believe, IS "God" as
Jesus knew Him. Is He personal? Yes No Maybe. I relate to "Him" personally. But that is
essentially because of many things in "me". The way my mind can conceive and perceive "Him".
"Him", this is an anthropomorphism, that I use, but, I question its actual validity.

We are on the edge of a universal paradigm shift. Human conception of reality has experienced
these periodically through out history. Our understanding of "creation" began to shift about a
hundred years ago. It is only now beginning to experience broader acceptance. Most of the church
lives in a conception of reality based on Newtonian Physics. Though expressing a relative truth,




and held as absolute for many centuries, that absolute bubble is being shattered. The
understanding of spirit and matters' relation in a unified field of being, and our connectedness are
only now beginning to surface. Our religious problem is not that its is contrary to Jesus, or
unbiblical, it is that we have preconceived ideas of how reality must fit into our religious system.
This has always been the human problem. Change implies new order. New order means a change
in hierarchy. Change is threatening, but "ignorance", even more so.

The God we worship, the perception of the God we hold in our minds, this is the God that
manifests reality. We are Gods ability to manifest in our lives and creation. Considering the state
of creation, the world, our personal lives, collectively, through prayer, thought, visualization,
feeling, - what is the reality of the "God" we worship?





Son of Man 1-4-2008
I have thought of subtitling this "Relative Divinity A Problem With the Deification of
Jesus", but that seems too radical for the way many "Christians" think and process new
data, outside the orthodox box, paradigm or mind set, so just pretend you didn't read
this sentence. "POOF"!!! There, I waved my magic wand, and it's not there any more.
Sound ridiculous?
Sure it does. Because it IS still there. It's still in your mind. And if you re continuing to
read, you are curious. A new thought has been planted in that fertile ground of
imagination and possibilities and you are experiencing a stimulus of "life". Something is
prodding you to consider that there may be potentials of being available to YOU, a
simple human. Things that have remained hidden, buried in the depths of your being, but
there none the less, and maybe, just "maybe", there is a hope of finding what that nature
and hidden reality is.
Let me assure you though, before too many hopes are given rise too, that "I AM NOT the
one to give you all the answers". I am but a spiritual pilgrim myself. I may be a few steps
ahead of a few of you, but there are many, many who have gone before me that I glean
and learn from. And as I do, and process that information, AND allow the life within me
to nurture and reinvigorate these, a resurrection of life is manifested, to be witnessed by
ALL that the same Spirit of Life would touch and impart itself into.
Okay, I know it's starting to sound "spooky" to some of you. But before you write this off
too quick, SLOW DOWNre-read slowly give the words and thoughts some time to
process. It's NOT that weird. THINK. (hmmm - what a concept)
I have found eighty-five (85) references in the New Testament Gospels to the "son of
man". Orthodox theology has designated this saying or concept, as a "title". A title to
refer to "Jesus", equivalent as "the son of God", i.e. the title "Son of Man" equals the title
"Son of God", only "Son of Man" emphasizing Jesus' humanity and "Son of God"
emphasizing his divinity. Got it? Literally, for all you literalists, "son of man" "Denotes
mankind generally, with special reference to their weakness and frailty (Job 25:6; Ps. 8:4;
144:3; 146:3; Isa. 51:12, etc.)", I.e. Humanity human beings. Orthodox theology, and
this includes Evangelicals of every flavor, Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox,
declare this, 'son of man', to be a "distinctive title of the SaviorIt denotes the true
humanity of our Lord. He had a true body (Heb. 2:14; Luke 24:39) and a rational soul. He
was perfect man."
But, "Is this assumed orthodox perception what Jesus was saying and referring to when
he used this phrase, 'son of man'?"




Yes, "Son of Man" is a title referring to Jesus. But it is more.
As the "Son of Man" equaling the "Son of God", it is easy to rationalize a peculiar
divinity, coequal status of Jesus with the "father" God. We can elevate and worship Jesus
"the" Christ, and thereby place God and His being as external to human experience. The
rationalization that Jesus could "do it" because he "was God" becomes ingrained in our
psyche and very convenient to every excuse and selfish rationale pardoning our lower,
base, carnal whims, as opposed to realizing the full nature that is humanity as expressed
and demonstrated to us in the person, the human, the man Jesus.
What Jesus did, what Jesus said, ALL that was Jesus Jesus, the being who walked and
lived and had his presence among us earthly terrestrials some 2000 years ago, ALL that
manifested in that life, was the experience of a human being. A full, spiritually enabled,
materially existent human being. A "son of man". And the fullest expression of the "son
of man", human.
Was Jesus, the one called the Christ, the man bearing and demonstrating a transcendent
life, divine? Yes. But so are you.
That same "Spirit" that raised "Christ" from the dead, dwells in you. That same Spirit of
life, life that transcends limited physical created realities dimensions, this same Spirit
resides in you. But our paradigm, our limitations of thought and perception of reality is
stunted. Most of what we are capable of considering and by extension realizing is
determined for us, and we, as a matter of seeking the path of least resistance, content
ourselves to follow the herds' way of thinking. Just enough to get by, or master the
system that IS, after all this IS all there is.
Jesus didn't think so. Jesus proved there to be more.
It's really pretty simple to understand why more of us don't experience reality in the same
fullness and dimension that Jesus did, He made it pretty clear himself. There are
substantial costs to be realized. Human nature incapable of perceiving spiritual reality
beyond creations limitations, can and does exert pressures to dominate and suppress and
as it can exterminate higher, imperceptible values and qualities of Life, because "after all
this IS all there is."
I believe there's more.





Speaking in Language We Can Understand
We, human beings,, speak, write and generally communicate in language that makes
"sense" to us. We draw from images containing associative meaning to express our
perceptions of "truth" and "reality". As new language is developed, words are coined and
more precisely narrowed and defined, our ability to articulate what it is that we really
mean is enhanced. This process of expanding language and in so doing becoming able to
more clearly understand the nature of reality and the accompanying possibilities may be
exactly what is necessary for us to live in the depths of our being. And thus drawing ever
closer to that divine character of Christ in us.
By necessity, language has always been expanding. Ancient languages expressing
spiritual and cognitive truths, as they became perceptively archaic and antiquated, were
supplanted by languages more receptive to growing and broadening, incorporating the
definitions of new words, and thus conveying to the then and now contemporary minds,
the substance of what is being communicated. This process in no way subjugates the
ancient languages as inferior or unable to convey truth and reality in the context of their
respective cultures. Our contemporary problem is the literalism we associate and apply to
the interpretation of the images conveyed through these ancient writings. We
contemporaries in our insistence on narrowly defined absolutes fail to comprehend and
appreciate the richness and all the ancient language contains expressed in so few
conceptualizations. We seek to translate word for word, concept for concept, expecting
that our committed dedication to literalism is in fact the only infallible means of passing
on the spiritual truths understood by our ancient forbearers. We fail to realize that our
literal interpretations are not the full truth as understood and received by our ancient
ancestors. Our literalisms, word for word, concept for concept, story for story, fails in
that we do not live in the same world paradigm as the original. Our world, as may be
experienced by an ancient, may well be perceived as a step into the "Twilight Zone" or
"The Outer Limits" and even as we may conjure our own perceptions of fantasy. But our
world is not the world of the ancients. Yet there is a common spiritual connection
between us. And there is common spiritual reality to be experienced. Our contemporary
problem is that we too often try to conceive and realize that truth in a paradigm
perception as foreign to us as if we were living in another galaxy and life is no longer
carbon based but silicon based.
The ancients, for all we know, did not have the scientific understandings available to us.
That does not preclude the lack of understanding as to the what and how of what was to
be realized in human spiritual capacities. Their communications may appear less
sophisticated and descriptive, but that would only be to the undiscerning eye and mind.
The richness of the language and the concepts conveyed may well have, and I believe
assuredly, expressed in terms relevant to their world view, the actualities of spiritual




reality that we, in our literal hopes, have found so elusive. Elusive, yes, but only as we
fail to engage in the mind that would speak in our time to our present-day cultures.
1700 years ago the baby was thrown out with the bath water. Narrow literalisms, and
dogma based on shallow cognitive reasoning supplanted the actual faith in what is the
innate divine life in humankind. Political convenience became the rule of the church and
alliance with secular rulers the sought after prize to prop up and maintain the appearance
of life in the now starving deprived body of Christ.
But life had not been totally lost, and in times manifested, only to be squelched.
Persecuted, made the subject of inquisition and crusade, feared for what it could become.
Spiritually outside the bounds of religious hierarchal norm, control would be lost. How
could a society possibly exist and function with each individual acting in personal and
immediate relation and response to that divine nature within? Orthodox doctrine may
have casually expressed an allusion to the indwelling Spirit, but to actually understand
and realize the experience of such a reality was beyond the literal cognitively bound
mind-set of what had evolved. And so the rule of "law" prevailed, convenient to the
relations with the state to maintain order and as necessary or desired dominate and
control.
But you cannot capture, control and dominate the Spirit of God in humankind
indefinitely. Where God (as we may call him, but only as reference for now) resides in
humanity, God's life, the Logos, the Word, Christ, WILL be made manifest, in our
cultures and times, in language and concepts that WE the bearers of the divine life
can comprehend and communicate. And as we do, we may realize all that has eluded us
in our quest for what is God. It is not to be found in "ancient fairy tales" clung to as literal
absolutes. It is to be found in the divine nature resident in us all, speaking in language
you can relate to and follow. As is currently being realized, science may well not be the
enemy of faith, but rather substantiate it.





Mindset
There is a mindset that would have me be satisfied in my nature with God, as long as I
am emotionally fulfilled. Hell, I can learn that from my dogs.
There is a mindset that presumes life is limited to the dimensions of creation and only
that which may be deduced as the best of this experience is God.
There is a mindset that avoids the claims Jesus said would follow his disciples
(particularly the negative ones), because either they havent figured it out yet, or it hasn't
been revealed to them, or just maybe they aren't his disciples. After all, there are many
things associated with Jesus that we ALL would much rather avoid.
There is a mindset that is more concerned to create a niche within the religious system
and progressively more so as the potential for filling their pockets increases. A basic rule
of religion: Follow the Spirit = Follow the Money
Life, abundant life, is not measured by the externals, the mindset that the world or anyone
else would measure you by.
If your mind is set, metanoia, changing ones mind, changing your way of thinking,
repentance, changing your perception of God, is an impossibility.
Minds that are set, are the substance of graven images






Psychological Pathological Contagion's and their Mutations
A product of the sixties, my values, lifestyle choices, and general world view may have
initially been described as "quasi-hippy". I was not deprived by any means, neither was I
spoiled. Our familys economic status would have been considered middle class (possibly
lower middle class, being blue collar). To us kids growing up, it just seemed normal.

The sixties in the US were turbulent times, exciting times, idealistic and ideal shattering
times. The War" (Viet Nam), Civil Rights, the assassinations of John, Martin and
Bobby, demonstrating for peace, demonstrating for equal rights, demonstrating for the
sake of demonstrating, it didnt matter, there was something that needed changed. Music,
the Beatles, the Byrds, Jefferson Airplane, the Grateful Dead, Jimi Hendrix, Janis, the
Doors, Cream, Bob Dylan. Partying, wine, marijuana, LSD, running away, speed, heroin,
sex. NewportMontereyWoodstock....Altamont. The party was over.

We were always encouraged to question things. To examine, gather information as
objectively as possible, assemble it and analyze the findings, and take what ever course of
action would be appropriate, to build upon it, improve it, and as necessary, correct it.

In a secular world, it was not hard to find things that needed improved and correcting.
The obvious deficiencies of society and culture did not require any kind of religious
absolute to tell us what was wrong. Whatever there was that was innate in us clearly
pointed these things out. We had not yet reached a point of buying into our parents
values, which were shaped primarily through their experiencing the Great Depression of
the thirties and World War II in the next decade. Things our parents took for granted as
obvious improvements and advancements in technology, the relative standard of living,
the booming economy, relative domestic stability (though I believe a state of preferred
ignorance and denial prevailed), "What was he problem with all our kids? Cant they see
how good things are?"

Yes, and No.

My parents generations ideals were to put food on the table, a roof over our heads, a coat
to keep us warm and as much as possible continue to consistently raise these standards.
And raising these standards would include an ever growing pile of toys under the
Christmas tree, accommodating the "normal" social amenities that our class would be
accustomed too, striving to improve ourselves by moving up the social class ladder, a
bigger house, more cars, a few more toys (for the big kids this time), a well managed
retirement plan, a cemetery plot, and insurance to cover final expenses. Now Dont
assume that I am condemning these things. But these are not ideals, these are not values.
Although to many of us, this is exactly what they have become.





Ideals: A conception of something in its absolute perfection. One that is regarded as a
standard or model of perfection or excellence. An ultimate object of endeavor; a goal. An
honorable or worthy principle or aim.

Values: Sociology. the ideals, customs, institutions, etc., of a society toward which the
people of the group have an affective regard. These values may be positive, as
cleanliness, freedom, or education, or negative, as cruelty, crime, or blasphemy. Ethics.
any object or quality desirable as a means or as an end in itself.

There is another "values" that has been assimilated. And this "value" has become the
measuring stick or benchmark that a generation of "ideals" has succumbed to. The value
of the dollar. The value that a materialistic, consumer driven society would place on the
value of things. Ideals have shifted from the root of noble ideas to the base commonality
of things.

My generation, and this really applies to more than my generation, but I can speak with
intimate understanding of my own, my generation is plagued with two Psychological
Pathological Contagion's (I say two, Im sure there are more). Boomeritis and Affluenza.

Boomeritis, according to Ken Wilber, is the deadly combination of a modern, liberal,
egalitarian worldview and a deep unquestioned narcissism. A pathological state of
consciousness that particularly afflicts Baby Boomers. Boomeritis is characterized by
relativism, narcissism, and an aversion to hierarchy. Now understand I am not a supporter
or endorser of Ken Wilber. I have never read any of his material; I have only done some
research. But, there are some things he has stated that I can agree with. It should also be
noted that there are more definitions of Boomeritis, particularly among the medical
community regarding "boomers" growing athletic related injuries.

Affluenza is a term used by critics of consumerism, a portmanteau of affluence and
influenza. Sources define this term as follows: affluenza, n. a painful, contagious,
socially transmitted condition of overload, debt, anxiety and waste resulting from
the dogged pursuit of more. affluenza, n. 1. The bloated, sluggish and unfulfilled
feeling that results from efforts to keep up with the Joneses. 2. An epidemic of stress,
overwork, waste and indebtedness caused by the pursuit of the American Dream. 3. An
unsustainable addiction to economic growth.

My generation fucked up. As a whole, in general, we blew it. Not finding sustainable
meaning in the noble and valiant efforts to reform society, not being encouraged or taught
how to endure, not being given any "real" handle on purpose, we partied our asses off. A




lot of us got fucked up and died. The church was not any help. And I may add, as a
whole, it still isnt.

When it reaches a point that you are down, and the only perception that you have is
looking up, but no way to realize "upward mobility", you start grasping at whatever
offers some promise of hope. As a generation the "boomers" burnt out. So much promise
and it went up in smoke, literally.

But we realized there was a way. What had our parents been telling us all along? What
had we been chanting in virtually every protest demonstration along the streets of
Pennsylvania Ave and on the Mall, "Work, Study, Get Ahead, Kill". There is a way.
There is hope. Not exactly the hope of our ideals, but when your minds been blown, who
gives a shit?

And this was a turn, a "metanoia" that the Church could embrace. These were good solid
American values. Industriousness, Economic Enterprise, financial stability, finding our
place in the Kingdom of God, a house on the hill, a political convert, an offering in the
plate. And Boomeritis, well thats really no problem. All we need to do is re-focus that
egalitarianism from the general populace to "us". And "narcissism", well, we all have a
little bit of that. As long as we can continue to make them feel good about themselves,
they shouldnt be any problem. And the Affluenza, I dont see that as being a problem at
all. After all everybody knows "more is better than less". Just keep em busy and theyll
never feel it. Remember, an idle mind is the devils workshop.

The ideals so many of us held in the sixties were not pipe dreams. Yes, that is what we let
them become. And as screwed up as things have been along the way, I still realize these
ideals resident in me. This in spite of the varying attempts by the "church" to convert me
to the point of being satisfied with the religious and political status quo, or more precise,
their reality. Im sorry. There is a deeper reality inside of me that I realize more than what
I have found in the standardization of religious doctrine. The community of "believers"
extends well beyond the controlled environments and sanctified associations bearing the
name "Church". Many of them do not even refer to "God" and Jesus was just a man. If he
was even that. But in their being there resides a hope, a "faith" (although even religious
words like faith hold little meaning to them), an essence of the divine, that religion, and
I mean most religions, can only speculate and talk about and never realize. This
"community of believers" is my church. There is hope that we will prevail over our
Boomeritis and Affluenza.

Gen-X and Gen-Yers, dont get to thinking you are immune to these infirmities. In your
own way, you suffer from mutations. And just as you can see the crap and things that




need changed, you have ideals. Ideals that have nothing to do with religion. Ideals and
values that are real. Dont let society, religion or any of the rest of what pressures you in
life rob these from you. But, even as you fuck up (and many will), you still retain the
source inside you. It is never too late.
"metanoia" to change ones mind, change your way of thinking normally translated as
"repent".





The division of soul and spirit
"For the Word that God speaks is alive and full of power [making it active, operative,
energizing, and effective]; it is sharper than any two-edged sword, penetrating to the
dividing line of the breath of life (soul) and [the immortal] spirit, and of joints and
marrow [of the deepest parts of our nature], exposing and sifting and analyzing and
judging the very thoughts and purposes of the heart." (Hebrews 4:12, AMP)
For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword,
piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a
discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. (Hebrews 4:12, NKJV)
If our presuppositions are wrong, the experience we comprehend based on these, is a
fantasy, an illusion we construct in our minds, a manipulated perversion of reality.
I had always been an independent free thinker in the orthodox Evangelical community.
This has at times led to some points of contention, confrontations and strained relations
between me and recognized appointed leaders and in my own family. Many do not have a
clue as to where I am coming from, and most really don't care to find out. This
exploration to "know God", not just to talk religious language but to realize and
experience the nature and being of God, as the divine may exist, finds me excluded from
and rejected by former relations. I do not fit their standard of acceptability. I am too
foreign, my ideas too strange, it is as if I do not wear the proper religious attire (I speak
metaphorically). My perceptions, differing from the norm, result in decisions, and
ultimately actions and behaviors, that challenge the conventional model. I admit, it can
feel very lonely, but knowing truth as I have come to realize it, I can not go back.
Orthodox Evangelicalism is the most influential religious dynamic in American culture
today. Much of this is accelerated and perpetuated due to the political clout realized by
their numbers. This seems to be truer in the second half of the twentieth century and into
the twenty-first than it had been in previous years. The United States has always had a
religious dynamic core to our values, and these core values were influential and
recognized through culture in general whether in or out of the religious community.
Religious influence was a matter of just being there, it was the only recognized "Good"
religious alternative. Assumptions about God, decency, society, were defined by
fundamental universal Christian standards. As American society has become more
pluralistic, the fear of the threat of invading religious and cultural differentiations, new
and apparently alien and even outlandish ideas, has tended to unite the conservative
"Christian" factions, despite their prior and seemingly insurmountable theological
differences.




Orthodox Fundamentalism is a prime influencer of Evangelicalism as well as Roman
Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theological thought. Fundamentalism interprets and
declares that the "Bible" is "the Word of God". And as "the Word", a certain divine
nature is inherent. Essentially, wherever the Word is spoken of, the Bible or its deduced
principles are assumed. The Bible, its principles, precepts and concepts, is therefore
assumed to be "alive and full of power" "penetrating to the dividing line of the breath
of life (soul) and [the immortal] spirit" The Bible is assumed to be the agent of God to
cause and effect that which is manifest of God. In the course of Western religious history,
this assumption may be looked back on as a positive step, allowing for the proliferation
of religious conceptualization beyond the restricted confines of educated clerical elite.
But to a vast degree, we have come full circle and are right back where we were five
hundred years ago. The primary difference being, we are divided into innumerable
denominations, all claiming the Bible and their particular spin as the true "Spiritual"
interpretation. There is a theology for every one and the Bible can universally meet every
need. That it can do this may be the one valid argument to justify its divine nature. It can
satisfy every one. Only not all at once. And God forbid that we ever get together to argue
and debate, anyone want to relive the European Holy Wars?
We declare the Bible to be the Word (of God) because in our natural mind, the Word is
logic, the Logos. And the scriptures we presume are the most definitive expression of the
"logic" of God. As such, these are the words of God, the ideas and principles of God, the
commandments as it were, written in stone. Unchangeable, infallible and absolute to the
perfecting of all that is necessary to Godly life and being. We apply ourselves to the
analyzing and application of the book.
But I believe we have made a faulty assumption. The "Word", the "Logos" existed in
eternity, before whatever may have been created, as a companion and express nature of
that which was and is self existent. The "logos", transcendent to creation, instrumental in
creation, sustainer of and indwelling creation, the "logos" exists. And the Word became
flesh and dwelt among us.
The "Word" tabernacled (pitched its tent) among us, in the person of Jesus, the Word
realized human expression in its fullness, the fullness of humanity.
In our zeal to guarantee a purity of the "faith" we have reduced the dignity of God and the
dignity of that which is "in the image of God" to that of a few compounded verses,
slapped the adjective "Holy" onto it and declared this is all that may be known and
experienced in relation to the divine
"But to as many as did receive and welcome Him, He gave the authority (power,
privilege, right) to become the children of God, that is, to those who believe in (adhere to,
trust in, and rely on) His name" (John 1:12 AMP). This is not a simple insert in a story




some two thousand years ago about a group of Jews welcoming a man called Jesus. It is
an eternal, ever present and existent reality and experience of ALL who would come to
hope in and partake of the Word, the logos, as He/She/IT is in and innate in our being.
The true nature of what is human and in relation to all humanity and all creation.
This is the Word that "is alive and full of power [making it active, operative, energizing,
and effective]; it is sharper than any two-edged sword, penetrating to the dividing line of
the breath of life (soul) and [the immortal] spirit, and of joints and marrow [of the deepest
parts of our nature], exposing and sifting and analyzing and judging the very thoughts
and purposes of the heart."
But this implies that there are a lot of "Biblical" assumptions that will need to be
rethought, possibly changed, and maybe even discarded. DUH!!!
So what?
A common conception is that the human is comprised of Body, Soul and Spirit. This
might be an over simplification, but for the sake of discussion it will work. Most of us
live on a "soulish" level, mind, emotions and will. The Spirit to most is the great
"unknown", but it is here that we relate to what it is that transcends normal senses and
mental and physical perceptions. It is here that the "logos" meets, resides and relates us to
ALL that is eternal and more that we cannot perceive in our material being. It is here that
our true nature resides.
In our natural soulish condition we construct a persona, an ego, and image of what we
believe we are. Most of this is the result of our interrelating with the physical world
around us, and the ideas and concepts ingested in the normal course of life. All this builds
up a false "self" through which we attempt to relate to the world through. Believers,
unbelievers, Christian, non-Christian, pagan, or whatever, this is the way we have been
taught to use our minds to be what it is we think we should be. Some of this may appear
very good, some very impressive and some very carnal. The point is we attempt to create
an image and live in relation to the image rather than coming to grips with the notion that
we don't do it through our "heads". Now I am not suggesting that minds should not be
used, or that emotions are not real. But there is a depth of character that speaks to us from
within and all too often we are so enamored with head shit (religious or otherwise) that
we haven't got a clue who we are, what is God, is there a God? Or how much of this
religious stuff is just bull shit?
Over the past several months I have come to realize that there are real emotions and
feelings that I have, but for the most part, I experience these and relate to these primarily
on a soulish and physical level. Not that this is bad in and of it self, but to remain under
the dominance of these mental and physical tyrants, keeps me from growing and
experiencing the inner divine impetus that is the real source of these mental and physical




manifestations of these feelings. Here is one of the errors that much of the Christian
religion I believe succumbs too. The perception that these manifestations of "love", either
mental concepts or physical emotions, are the manifestation of God. The assumption that
a social expression of what is assumed as "love" is the realization of ALL that is the inner
reality of the "logos", the innate divine reality.
Love encompasses a lot more than feeling and adapting to what are natural and socially
prized expressions of affection. Love and being "love" entails an in depth searching and
finding who you really are. Going beyond the religious, social, mental, familial, physical,
egocentric, image that you live your life around. Sorting all this shit out is exactly what
the "logos" does. And if we let "IT" do what "IT" does best, heaven ain't that far away.





Humility My Ass!
Sometimes it takes a good kick in the ass to make you start moving like you probably
should have been all along. Sometimes you need to be hit with a bigger hammer. That
little watch smiths tinker toy wont quite do it. What YOU need is a twenty pound
sledge swung wide and landed hard. ThereDid you hear THAT? Sometimes its not our
hard headedness that keeps us from getting it or doing what we need to do to do what
we need to do, but our stinking thinking. Our minds, our perceptions, our assumptions,
the things we have been taught, the values and qualities that have been ingrained in us
and presumed to be absolute spiritual expressions of divine character, our
misconceptions and ill-defined assumptions of ego and inner being often confused and
condemned as to leave us immobile and of very little value to those we love, God or
ourselves. WE dont need a swift kick in the ass; we dont need a bigger hammer. We
need a new mind.
Ever since I first became a Christian I had been involved in church worship teams and
for a while traveled with an evangelistic team. My love for music, skills and talents were
always submitted too and at the disposal of whatever group or recognized leadership was
appointed over me. This was never perceived as a problem, it was merely assumed this
was the way it was. Periodically teachings on submission to authority were incorporated
into the agendas of those in charge and delivered with the authority of church dogma.
These submission teachings inevitably included concepts of humility and as a natural
inclusion, considering it was musicians being dealt with, the ego trip or inflated ego,
the artistic temperament became topics of discussion, almost always with indirect
reference to some personality in mind. Challenging these officially sanctioned
assumptions would never be considered as that would immediately create a stigma and
raise doubts about the faithfulness and commitedness of the vile perpetrator casting seeds
of doubt and disharmony. So, for the sake of unity of the body, for the sake of peace
amongst the brethren, you live with it. You humbly shrink back into your officially
sanctioned comfort zone. You find your place in the body. And you stay there. And
faithfulness and value is accounted as knowing your place.
Now, for the maintenance of officially defined social organization, this might appear to
work fine. No one would ever claim a perfection of function, but as a pragmatic
application, it serves. But is there something, a residual effect that is created and lingers,
not just as a part of the social structure, but in the hearts and character of the faithful
adherents to what may in actuality be a perverse domineering infrastructure, created and
evolved to produce the most efficient order, catering to the lowest common denominator,
and held has the ideal of church life?
Me thinks that ordering rather than maturing the saints (Eph 4:11-15) may have evolved
as the prime directive of the entity that we so reverently call church. And to fall out




of order, may be the only path available to those realizing the hollowness of what
Christian religion has become.
Too often spiritual maturity, and I define this as realizing the real innate nature of Christ-
the Spirit, as defined by religious institutions is ones ability to fit into the system, to
maneuver the corridors of religious political correctness, speak the right language, know
the right verses, endorse the right people, assume the common values and be able to
sanctify these with reference to scripture.
As I have been involved with numerous and varying worship teams, 30 plus years worth,
there inevitably arises a desire within the group, usually not from the top down, to do
more. To use our talents and be as effective as possible, whether as an evangelistic
outreach or an artistic expression, or potentially moving into a more professional full time
experience using our art and talents. Sometimes these visions of growth and development
are encouraged. Depending on the church organization and leadership polity, these
visions may become usurped, or hijacked by the powers that be, and reinterpreted and
manipulated to serve the intents and purposes of what is determined to be in the
organizations best interest. Seldom if ever does a vision, calling, as conceived and
borne in the hearts of the originators ever come to realization. The church political seizes
control and life through the body is squelched leaving the individuals concerned feeling
second class, unworthy, insufficient, unspiritual, unable to realize God. The ambitions of
the religious elite, often in ignorance and only operating in a carnal spiritually divorced
mind set, functioning as ALL who find themselves in a dualistic world can only hope to
relate, seize opportunity to maintain their status quo. After all it is survival of the
fittest.
For thirty plus years I was reigned in by this religious mind set. I assumed the spiritual
values as dictated to me, or if not fully assuming them at least I submitted to them. But
thirty years of submission leaves a mark, a sense of training in thought, the way it IS, had
become engrained. The older I got the more solidified the concepts and assumptions
became. All being assumed as religious absolutes, or so I was led to believe. And though
I had been an independent thinker, I never really had any desire to rebel. So I bit the
bullet. As contrary as it seemed to me on the inside, I was not the one in authority; I was
not the one with the spiritual responsibility to lead; besides if the leadership was wrong,
and I followed, they were the ones who are accountable. Or at least, so I was led to
believe. Held in check with promises that God, God out there, would fulfill our every
desire and do for us what we had no plan or motivation to implement as we the faithful
waited, waited for God out there. And promises became realized for what they were,
carrots dangled from a string on a stick in front of the nose of an ass to keep it moving
along.




Worship, we were taught is the ultimate expression of our musical art. To apply our
talents to less was to compromise our spiritual gifting. And of course, one must never
expect compensation for the talents offered in worship and service to God and His
body. Our reward is heavenly rewards. Besides, God would obviously reward our efforts
through other means and resources. But, someday, we will change all that. We will model
ourselves after the Temple worship and the tabernacle of David. They paid their
musicians. That was a gravy train gig. Someday. Have you ever noticed, that someday
never comes? And when that someday is assumed, it never is realized as it was originally
conceived.
But I was just a humble musician. Talented, gullible, and humble. Humility my ass.
In the church, through leadership of varying levels and positions, I was told of all the
promise that God would work through my talent. God, you know, the God out there,
would manifest and work His healing miracles. Now I must admit, I am still waiting. The
presumption was that all I have to do is be faithful and wait and God will.
This prediction, or prophecy as you will, I also admit I believe. But there is much from
my religious past that I do not believe. I do not believe that all I have to do is wait. I do
not believe it is the God out there who will manifest His miracle working powers. I do
not believe that worship, as defined by religious elite is the ultimate expression of my
gifting as a musician. I do not believe that playing as an expression of my relation to God
should not be compensated. I do not believe that keeping my place as suits religious
authorities is what God wants.
I do believe that God is in me. I do believe that the ultimate expression of worship is to
be true to that Spirit in me, in spite of the religious dogmatism that may be thrown in my
face. I do believe God is bigger and more inclusive than what is the Bible. I do believe
there is a market for my talent. I do believe that as I need musicians to support me, they
are already there. I am seeing this opening up. I do believe I must accept the
responsibility that previously Id been told God would do. I do believe that as well
intentioned as probably most church leaders are, the way the church has evolved, the
structure and doctrines adhered to as absolute do as much to hinder the true spiritual
development of the faithful as they do to preserve a decent order.
I do believe Christ the Spirit the Word the Logos the Father IS IN ME. And I
can have confidence that what I do is in relation to that divine reality. And I dont have to
justify my humility to anyone.
Humility? Humility my ass!





Time for us to move beyond our religious preconceptions
2-11-08
"...the hippies of the 1960s did understand something. They were right in fighting the
plastic culture, and the church should have been fighting it too... More than this, they
were right in the fact that the plastic culture - modern man, the mechanistic worldview in
university textbooks and in practice, the total threat of the machine, the establishment
technology, the bourgeois upper middle class - is poor in its sensitivity to nature... As a
utopian group, the counterculture understands something very real, both as to the culture
as a culture, but also as to the poverty of modern man's concept of nature and the way the
machine is eating up nature on every side." (Pollution and the Death of Man) Francis A.
Schaeffer
As Francis Schaeffer himself predicted, our little idols of the American Dream will
topple towards fascism as the ideologues take over, perhaps even with our blessing, as
long as we have our personal peace and affluence. Byron Borger on April 1, 2000
True Spirituality really knows NO bounds. And as I have stated before I define this
spirituality as knowing and realizing the innate indwelling nature of Christ. I believe this
divine nature is not a matter of assumed doctrine, but transcends religious explanation,
but may be communicated in religious language, although seldom as literalisms. This sets
me outside the orthodox box. Orthodox Christianity finds its definition within the covers
of the Bible, and at that, a very particular perspective and interpretation of the ancient
texts. So even if I held exclusively to the texts of approved canon, I would still not meet
orthodox standards. I dont really care any more. Truth is truth regardless of the path and
source through which it reaches one.
Francis A Schaeffer was an early influence in my Christian life. He is also one of the
most orthodox and Biblically conservative theologians of our time. He did teach me a
respect for the Bible. But as in most religious systems, as he became entrenched in his
own presuppositionalism, the presuppositions took precedence over the content of what
was the underlying spiritual dynamics at work in him and contained and communicated
in the Bible. Nonetheless, he remains a dynamic man of God and voice to his generation.
Schaeffer realized there were truths that the church had difficulty coming to grips with.
He is probably most influential in his arguments and reasoning regarding abortion and
pro-life issues. He gave the Evangelical church a platform upon which to take a militant
stance, although I believe this stance has been manipulated, and redefined for purposes
less than what are the natural extensions of his thought and reason. Pro-Life has
assumed an arbitrary and limited political characterization that tends to bottle in the mind




of the Spirit and disallows the living Christ from being exercised, at least in and through
what are normal sanctified church conceptions.
Francis Schaeffer realized there was an issue that the church was susceptible to, and
never really came too grips with. our little idols of the American Dream and
our personal peace and affluence. We, the church, still havent come to grips with it.
Over the second half of the twentieth century, coming out of a world war like no other in
history, having created systems and methods of research, development, production and
distribution hitherto never conceived, we entered into a time of growth and prosperity in
stark contrast to the Great Depression and sacrifices formerly experienced one generation
before. The anthem of hope of the thirties seemed to become realized in the fifties,
Happy days are here again. Regardless of the realities of the imperfections in the world,
they were distant, unseen, and out of mind. Life became settled, dependable, a sense of
security prevailed. Into the sixties as our own national and regional imperfections,
inequalities and conflicts of our ideals became ever more obvious, unrest of conscience
became an impetus to cause young minds, not yet conformed to the status quo, to explore
and consider possibilities that to their parents seemed unrealistic and out of the question,
and simply not in step with the accepted standard, or the way it is done. The mind set
of the war had become and remained the paradigm to define reality and how to make
ones way and to achieve and realize success. Success being defined as the acquisition
and accumulation of more and more things.
This mind set had prevailed not just as a prime value of secular culture, but had in time
become the overwhelming predominant value within the church. Where the church had
purportedly at one time been the upholder of spiritual values, presumably transcending
the materialistic, the real nature of men, desiring security that they could touch, manage
and control, supplanted the values of spirit, often found to be subjective, nebulous and of
an idealistic nature more akin to fantasy than real hard cash.
the way it is done, this is still a dynamic that controls us. the total threat of the
machine, the establishment technology, the poverty of modern man's concept of nature
and the way the machine is eating up nature on every side. These are still things that we
grapple with, and our wait and see attitude has not realized any improvement. And the
establishment machine not only continues eating up nature on every side but now is
given permission to devour and consume the citizenry. And we are kept pre-occupied
with The mind set of the war.
our little idols of the American Dream and desire for our personal peace and
affluence has led us to an economic and political reality towards fascism with our
blessing. And all supported and Biblically justified under the guise of our varying
Gospels of Prosperity. The spiritual reality that had been the church is now the




conveniences of religious and political correctness. The Nation is fine, the economy is
just what it is supposed to be, and God is in His heaven, all is right with the world. And
we havent got a clue that we have become slaves. We havent got a clue that we have
masters. And this is just the way it is supposed to be.
just the way it is supposed to be. Yes, I suppose absent of any knowledge or
understanding and experience of the innate Christ, things are just the way it is supposed
to be. But what would a knowledge and experience of this divine presence mean? If I
read my Bible correctly, I think it means that individually, there might be some drastic
changes in our manifested experience. I believe it would mean, some of the idols and
values that have us so engrossed would be toppled and our standard of living, our toys,
our social status, would probably all be affected. I believe it could mean that the
experience of Jesus might actually become an actual model and personal experience in
us. Maybe thats what scares us. It might mean that our religious association would
become stressed or even severed. It could mean that it would be more convenient to the
political establishment if we were out of the way. But if there is a spiritual reality that
transcends this finite material existence, what does it matter? If all there is IS what we
experience in this physical sphere, why bother? Why cant we get off the fence and
commit to what we say we believe. Are we really so insecure in the God that raised up
Jesus from the dead, to think that He would not manifest that same life in us? Should we
actually step up to the plate without a bat, do we actually believe He would not put one in
our hands? Or are we afraid of the scourging? Are we afraid that the tortures that are now
being practiced might someday be extended to us?
Why is it that I find more of the expression of the Christ Spirit the Word the Logos
The Father, in non-Christian friends who claim to be atheists, agnostics, spiritualists,
undefined, hetero-homo-bi-sexuals, conservative atheists, liberals, Gnostics, new agers
and occultists, than I do in the Evangelical church?
Its not such a hard question. The fact is we are ALL connected. And sometimes, when
we have not actually arbitrarily determined and defined what the nature of that
connection is, that nondescript freedom allows a Spiritual dimension liberty to be
realized, and sometimes in persons and relations that would confound our religious
sensitivities. I think its time for us to move beyond our religious preconceptions and
allow the Spirit the ability to be and do in us what that Christ would do. And you know
something; I dont really care what you call it.





Manifest Destiny
"Manifest Destiny was the belief that the United States was destined to expand from the
Atlantic seaboard to the Pacific Ocean; it has also been used to advocate for or justify
other territorial acquisitions. Advocates of Manifest Destiny believed that expansion was
not only good, but that it was obvious ("manifest") and certain ("destiny"). Originally a
political catch phrase of the 19th century, "Manifest Destiny" eventually became a
standard historical term, often used as a synonym for the expansion of the United States
across the North American continent.

"The term was first used primarily by Jacksonian Democrats in the 1840s to promote the
annexation of much of what is now the Western United States (the Oregon Territory, the
Texas Annexation, and the Mexican Cession). It was revived in the 1890s, this time with
Republican supporters, as a theoretical justification for U.S. expansion outside of North
America. The term fell out of usage by U.S. policy makers early in the 20th century, but
some commentators believe that aspects of Manifest Destiny, particularly the belief in an
American "mission" to promote and defend democracy throughout the world, continued
to have an influence on American political ideology." Manifest Destiny From Wikipedia

In pre-Civil War America the principle of "Manifest Destiny" played an important role in
the collective conscience of Americans moving west and into territories inhabited by
indigenous peoples or those holding prior claim. Our God given right to expand and lay
claim to territories was held by most to be as self evident as those expressed in the
Declaration of Independence of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". Not all
American politicians fully bought into this though. Abraham Lincoln was an outspoken
critic of our involvement in the Mexican-American war of 1846-1847 and the subsequent
"Mexican Cession" adding lands which comprise New Mexico, Colorado, Arizona, Utah,
California and portions of others. In its current extreme conception there are those who
would advocate the annexation of Canada, Greenland, and Mexico. These were original
inclusions of the principle, but never "manifested".

There are many Im sure who wonder why do I focus on such things as "Manifest
Destiny", control by Corporations, seemingly un-Christian spiritual alternatives? Why
focus on these rather than Spiritual issues and the historic person of Christ and issues that
concern the church and Christianity?

I focus on these because in me resides the Christ who manifested 2000 years ago. And if
we look at the historic situations of that period, these are the issues, or by extension what
they have developed into that Christ and the early church came into constant conflict
with. These ARE Spiritual issues. They are not the dogma and doctrine the world would
like to limit the church to, and the church has been so accommodating about, but they are




the issues that affect the entirety of humanity. And our Spirituality, if it is truly God, is a
Spirituality that is realized and experienced in ALL. The church has been button holed
into a straight jacket of religious dimensions. Our religious preconceptions and political
adaption of extra-Spiritual doctrine to justify our self-centered and serving material
natures, and conveniently providing justification for our National and International
policies, has divorced us from our innate and divine character. We have become so
engrossed in the material values and elevated standard of living we have achieved that we
have come to believe these are our God given right. We are unable to see the state of
things as they actually are. We are systematically prevented, held in a state of blissful
ignorance.

"Truth" is not always evident. Often, truth to be made real, to be manifested, must be
sought out. It must be mined, purified and refined before its value becomes evident. The
"truth" of the gospel of Christ as proclaimed by the church, over centuries being mixed
with pollutants and non-Spiritual politics, regardless of the Biblical reformation, is not
the gospel of Christ that indwells all creation and beyond. What make us the church
so arrogant as to think that God would not speak through hearts that are open and
receptive and through cultures, though foreign to us, His truth? In our preconception of
the Gospel, as Biblically defined as we may understand it, what makes us think that we
have an absolute corner on Gods truth any more than the Pharisees who made the same
biblical claims in the presence of Jesus? The sinful (material, natural, physical,
literalistic) characters of the Jews who condemned Jesus Christ are the same that are
shared with us in our current religious and political characters.

The early church was faced with the reality of the political world dominated by the
Roman Empire. Orthodox theology, and particularly Evangelicalism, would lead us to
believe that Christianity was experienced and defined and manifested as may be deduced
from a limited number of scripture verses. Conceptions of the "church" not so understood
or realized as manifesting otherwise, understood through diverse interpretations and/or
scriptures not included as part of the Biblical canon, are considered invalid or outright
heretical lies. The fact is for three hundred plus years the church came into constant
conflict of Spiritual values with the Roman Empire.

The Roman Empire began as a republic, the Roman Republic (510 BC 1st century BC);
a republic is a representative democracy. The populace, eligible citizens, vote for others
to represent them in legislative bodies to make laws and manage the affairs of state. The
United States is a republic. It has been described that the Romans actually added very
little in the ways of science, religion, medicine, philosophy, but they were adapt at taking
the ideas and invention of others and expanding upon them. What the Romans were good
at was as managers. They developed a military machine that allowed for their expansion




and acquisition of surrounding territories and domination of peoples and exploitation of
resources to their own benefit and desires. The Military machine provided for
stabilization and relatively safe avenues of trade and commerce. As the acquisition of
new territories commenced, trade and commerce grew bringing ever greater wealth into
the coffers of the Roman hierarchy.

"The Roman Legions formed the backbone of Roman military power. Rome used its
legions to expand its borders to eventually dominate most of Europe and the area around
the Mediterranean Sea The early Republic had no standing army. Instead, legions
would be conscripted as needed put into the field to fight the war for which they had
been created, and would then disband back to their civilian lives, which for most meant
farming In the later Republic, Gaius Marius instituted the Marian reforms (107 BC)
Marius restructured the standard legion He also recast the legions as a standing
professional Roman army Now, instead of being a short term landholder recruit
fighting to defend his own home and property, the typical Roman legionnaire was a
lower-class "career soldier" who had enlisted for a period of 20 years, working towards a
"pension(but not guaranteed by law) ... The fact that such pensions were not
guaranteed by law had the subtle, but important, effect of refocusing the loyalty of the
legionary, who now fought as much for his General, who could guarantee his pension, as
for the country." Wikipedia

In the First Century BC, the emerging empire reached a state of discontinuity and
rebellion. The Senate did not hold the loyalty of the legions and generals competed with
each other for supremacy. The vast extent of the territories of Rome became
unmanageable. Eventually Julius Caesar was appointed dictator of Rome in 44 BC. This
did not give him absolute authority, but jealous rivals conspired and he was assassinated.
Civil War ensued between rival generals and their respective legions. Eventually
Octavian Caesar, Julius Caesars nephew, was declared Emperor in 27 BC thus ushering
in what we know as the Roman Empire. Through the next 500 years there were relatively
good emperors and those decidedly corrupt and perverse. The Senate still existed, but
with increasingly less influence in the affairs of state.

This was the political and military Goliath that the church contended with for the first
three hundred years of its existence. We have been taught that the primary reason for the
churches persecution is that they refused to worship Roman gods and in particular the
Roman Emperor as they were declared divine. There is some truth to this, but the reasons
underlying persecutions concerned much more. Emperor worship was the focal point that
represented ALL that that was the Roman Imperial System. The system, as a system, was
corrupt, enslaving, demanding the allegiance of all in order to function. To buck the
system was considered seditious. The empire would not stand for any hint of rebellion as




it demonstrated time and again in quelling rebellions, and as particularly demonstrated in
68-70 AD in Judea. Christianity never was a military force to contend with the empire,
but neither were they submissive. As the faith spread in all its sectarian expression, more
converts were made, but less in the way of spiritual dynamic was maintained. In the early
fourth century Constantine gained the throne and in an apparent conversion began the
institutionalization of Christianity as the state religion. The empire was in a state of
decline, but very little as regarding the actual function and nature of the empire changed.
Even Christianity being accepted had little influence. All that can be said is that rather
than an official paganism state religion, a particular perception of Christianity was
endorsed. In the merging of the empire and the faith, and the subsequent history of the
Orthodox Church, the question of who converted who has to be asked. Or had the faith as
realized by the masses reached a level of the lowest common denominator. In order to be
the ALL inclusive religion, was there a spiritual dynamic lost for the sake of political
convenience and manageability.

We, Americans, and I address more specifically American Christians; need to reassess
what it is we believe? What is it that we truly value? Is our form of Christianity, and I do
not specify a particular denomination, but our general orthodoxy and its alliance with the
American governments agenda our agenda? Are the Economic Corporate values
expressed and defended through National and International policies our Spiritual
values? Is the "democratization" of the world our new "Manifest Destiny"?

We may well tout the superior value of democracy and our republic form of government,
but how well do we recall that Rome was a democratic republic, and Caesar was known
as a "master of the mob". His ability to influence and sway the populace to his support
had propelled him into the premier position as dictator. Eventually, to maintain the
system, absolute control was invested in one man. And the system worked, but at what
cost. What cost freedom? This is not a question of a freedom we are sold as a by product
of our political and military supremacy, but WHAT COST does a free man have to pay in
facing up to and challenging an increasingly corrupt, dehumanizing, social, political,
economic and religious system? A democracy can only function as the people are
educated and well informed. Today there are half a dozen major corporations that own
and control 90 plus percent of ALL the news, information and entertainment that makes
its way to the public. And these corporations are the mouthpiece of conglomerates that
lay claim to owning most of the world. How free and unbiased do you believe the
information is that you receive to make an informed decision?

We are controlled by economic corporate interests that buy and sell governments at will.
Our government is not exempt. What do we do and how do we respond to such
situations?





Yes, I consider these Spiritual issues. Why are we afraid to deal with them?

I have heard so much rhetoric about the church desiring to return to "first century
Christianity". If you dont want to face the issues, confront the new imperialism, why
wouldnt I think that first century Christianity is a sick joke?

Maybe theres something they had that we need to reevaluate? Maybe this is our
"manifest destiny"?





By summer 2008 I was busking on the streets of Gettysburg. I did meet a
lot of interesting people, some I have written about elsewhere. But, there
was a segment who were very pushy and demanding, the religious
proselytizers. At this juncture in my life I was fed up with their religious
dogmatism, and though I publically maintained a civil demeanor, I later
vented through my writing and posting it online.
Come Jesus Come
I am spending regular daily time on the streets of Gettysburg. As I do, and observe, I
modify my approach. Adding a sign advertising Guitar and music theory lesson. I will
start becoming more mobile so I can search our the best potential sites to situate myself
(location location location) Duh I will need to start pacing myself 3-4 hours
continuous playing is a long ass time but it is excellent practice Its no wonder some
of the legends who spent time on the streets paying their dues were as great as they were

Bear with me for a few moments As most of you know, I have a love-hate relationship
with the Fundamentalist/Evangelical community (leaning closer to hate progressively). I
realize there are many good decent people in this religious environment they have been
my friends. But there are the assholes. Ever so well meaning A-s-s-h-o-l-e-s --
These AHs who permeate the core and hold the most power within this religious
subculture have convinced me of something . We have been invaded the aliens do
exist they are among us they look like us (to an extent) they are the purveyors of
brainwashing religious shit to subjugate us and keep us in line their purpose is to serve
their masters, the corporate elitists the dispensers of the will of God they walk our
streets seeking the unsuspecting they knock on your doors they smile with
plastic expressions.. The love us - in the Lord but under that mask they can hardly
keep from vomiting Their only real hope is that Jesus is coming back to snatch
them out of here so they dont have to put up with the likes of us Fuck You Come
Jesus Come Maranatha get their asses out of here
A primary doctrine of Fundamentalist/Evangelicalism is Dispensationalism. Dont
worry I wont go into it too deep, and there are some Evangelicals who Do Not
subscribe to it. But it is pervasive. What it means is some dude divided the history of the
Israel and the Church into arbitrary dispensations. This happen at this time, God did
this at this time and in the future He will do this. Got It Yeah I know Its a load
o horse shit
But the real HARD CORE religious nuts have been convinced that they have got to get
out there out there, where? wherever YOU are and stuff their Bibles down your
throats because they have got to get you saved because Jesus is coming back and




they do not want to be found inattentive to the fields that are ready for harvest ----- and
guess what ? ---- You are the harvest ..
You see these nut cases do not believe they are of this world and you want to know
something I dont believe they are either Come Jesus Come get their insensitive
phony asses out of here Im done trying to be nice to these . ASSHOLES ..
Yeah I was hit by one of these fuckers this evening Conversation started out cordial
then I made the mistake of being honest . I know I should have known better
being trusting is a fault I live with And the conversation turned to my separation
and pending divorce I dont know that I need to go further I think you can imagine
ignorant insensitive - bastards Stick your Bible up your ass Come Jesus come

One good thing ... in a state of agitation ... I can play my ass off.





July 2008 found me taking a stab at parables of a more contemporary sort.
The Gospel According to Bob From the Other Side of the
Wall
I am everything that society hates. I do not meet the standards as a productive member. I dont
mesh. I dream and consider what is on the other side of the wall and even worse I looked over the
wall, and then I made the mistake of walking through the gate. As I explored eventually I heard
the gate close. So now I wander in darkness and uncertainty. Nothing is real, only perceptions,
and loneliness. But I hear voices calling, I am not alone only blindVoices some only
whimpers and whispers - afraid to shout out and scream Where are you - I know you are
there?
Who are you? As a matter of fact who am I? I dont know anymore Im not sure I care Not
that I am incapable of caring, but no one ever produced a solid substantial reason to care
Reason the mental exercise of logic but logic can be twisted manipulated poured into
any molds predefined as the absolute And absolutes only exist in the minds of the fearful
the ones inside the wall the ones in the molds (and there are many molds). Preformed and set
out to bake and dry productive contributors to the wall
Pink Floyd yeah they hit on it - for a while but even they were consumed into the wall
you dont believe me check their bank accounts
Dont confuse this as condemnation oh no only an observation a recognition there are
not many on the other side of the wall Some may talk about it but being outside the wall
can hardly be described as fun it is not the party those on the inside talking about it would
imagine You see most who would venture to the other side of the wall, make their visits
tethered supported by umbilical cords and lifelines to retrieve them and pull them back to the
security of arbitrary absolutes you know - the molds
So what is the fascination to be on the outside of the wall only one it is real There are no
absolutes at least nothing - that can be reasoned as absolute. Because reasoning an absolute
always assumes some presuppositional framework or infrastructure upon which to hang ideas as
foundational. And outside the wall there is NO framework. Outside the wall all there is, is only
what I perceive, what I conceive, what I feel these are real.
Some may wonder how can anyone live such an existence I dont know Im not sure one
can Im still figuring it out I only know it is real And do not presume that one
becomes less human, less capable of mental processes, or less feeling out side the wall the
fact is all that is human is enhanced ALL is simplified and amplified All these are
depended upon there is not the confusion of what if this or what if that there is the
assurance of I feel this and this is important The mold and even the option of molds (and
there are MANY) is not a question All is the immediate the now simply being And
there is love but is not predefined by the molders it is because it is no explanations
necessary




And they nailed Jesus Christ to a tree .
Maybe I should be committed before it's too late ... maybe it is too late.
hmmm... Outside the wall ... I don't think it matters.





As debates heated up online, I was not shy about how I felt, and the
ignorance that was displayed. In this article I let a particular
Fundamentalist user have it, both barrels, at close range. Unfortunately
he did not read it until a couple months after the issue.
Johnny get your gun or No More Mr NiceGuy
This was started as a comment on one of Rev Ritchies blogs: Famous Quotes - Helen Thomas .To
understand the context, it may do well to check it out. But as I got going, and the intensity that I
was feeling, I didnt think it right to burden Rev Ritchie with my venting. I will place a link in his
comments though. Writing from the heart can be passionate though and if on the recieving end
undoubtedly offensive. I am ending the Mr. NiceGuy approach when I am stirred. I will try to
refrain from personal attack, but I have found that when argueing religious and some political
issues, people will be offended. Live with it or get over it. Or write a blog about how much of a
jerk I am. Im a big boy I wont cry
The Johnnys of this world "As an American, I am ashamed of Ms Thomas"
The Johnnys of this world "the left has no clue as to what most of the conservatives really
believe and stand for"
Rev- "This is why I try my best to provide supporting evidence for my claims, can you make the
same claims?"
Rev, we both know The Johnnys of this world will never produce any supporting evidence to
their claims. They have none Or at least none that could ever be considered admissible in a
court of law let alone the court of public opinion. Because all The Johnnys of this world have
is a subjective preconceived perception of what is supposed to be It has nothing to do with
objectivity And the Johnnys of this world believe the "left" "has no clue as to what most of
the conservatives really believe and stand for" This only exhibits ignorance in assuming they
know you and me, and our past histories and what has led to our perspectives and opinions. They
are ignorant of our respective and need I say conservative religious foundations. Im sure they
must perceive you as some liberal (religious and political) quack, and myself right there alongside
you, only a little more unorthodox. What The Johnnys of this world do not want to recognize is
that intimacy with the intellectual and perpetual preference for ignorance within the orthodox
religious community is a prime factor that drives such as you and I to be numbered amongst the
"liberals". Truth and evidence I mean real substantial evidence (not the spin crafted and handed
to us by corrupt politicians) TRUTH be damned it doesnt fit their paradigm. The Johnnys
of this world can hand us Bible verses, of which they presumes our ignorance but this is where
The Johnnys of this world get caught with their pants down They only realizes their
perspective on scripture and fail to consider that we both are quite well versed Biblically as well
as in other scriptural traditions The Johnnys of this world and their religious cohorts can
exist for one reason only the ignorance of the populace in general They provide simple
answers (touted as absolutes) to maintain their own feelings of superiority and control. "In the
Lord" of course And of course only as subjective opinion Issues such as American
foreign policy over the decades and incursion into the political status of independent nations




mean only one thing to The Johnnys of this world are we getting our cut, are "We" in control?
Of course not in these words but it still comes down to the same thing and the "crusade"
to quell the evil forces of Islam is a convenient religiously endorsed sanctification of American
imperialism Now we all know The Johnnys of this world perceive this as American Manifest
Destiny to spread the gospel of democracy to the heathens so they can be "Just like us" What
the Johnnys of this worlds fail to realize is that as a people "the world does not hate us"
they hate the International foreign policy that American government enforces to the benefit of
American and now International corporations in creating the "New World Order" What The
Johnnys of this world choose to remain blind to is the fact that as a nation, as a people, WE have
already been subjugated to the purposes of this "New World Order" and MSNBC, CNN and
FOX has not provided the information to make them aware of this But they have their Bibles
the all sufficient all-encompassing Word of God and as long as we stand firm we
shall prevail The notion that Orthodox Evangelicalism may not be the absolute it is
presumed to be is something The Johnnys of this world will not allow themselves to consider
It is anathema to them They think they can think freely but unless it is directed to them to
be considered as dictated to them, they fear becoming contaminated with potential demonic
influences. The Johnnys of this world fear anything except the approved officially sanctioned
doctrinal line Although Im sure they can quote "scripture" to the contrary I think they really
fear loosing their souls to eternal damnation just an opinion
A Johnny statement: "As an American, I am ashamed of Ms Thomas"
Well as an American and former Orthodox/Evangelical for thirty plus years and licensed
minister since 1989 I am ashamed of what you neocon religious AHs have turned this country
into The lying SOBs you so unthinkingly, gullibly support and allow to rape the world only
evidences the true shallowness of the faith you presume to profess no apologies
I know without a doubt and for a fact that within the Orthodox Evangelical community there are a
lot of good God fearing people But youve got a problem The religious community has a
problem and this nations has a problem Christian faith and a nations conscience have been
hijacked Some may be surprised but I even have a neocon that I consider a friend He is not
an Orthodox Christian though and thus cannot speak within the context of the church It also
makes me feel there is hope for him LOL
Id like to offer a challenge to those who consider themselves "Christian". But this means reading
your Bible in a way that will most definitely offend the religious establishment read what Jesus
said dont ask your pastor to explain it to you, dont ask a minister for their opinion read the
words of Jesus for yourself dont go to commentaries or other forms of opinion just what
Jesus said consider it in the context of the situation Jesus was in get several translations
examine the differences in wording ask yourself why one is worded differently than another
after becoming comfortable doing this on your own get a good Hebrew/Greek translation and
Lexicon to dive into the richness of the language I think you will begin to recognize a depth of
spiritual truth that has been kept hidden from you Not necessarily intentionally (although I
will not rule that out) but because Christianity has been reduced to a form and the Spiritual




life that may be possible is not resident in a doctrine or in a "form". The "Spirit" resides in you.
And contrary to religion the Holy Spirit is not necessarily an "orthodox-evangelical" spirit.
The vast majority of my friends are online. There are very few professing Christians among them.
It makes No difference. I have atheist friends, spiritualist friends, most probably defy
categorization, and I am probably finding myself most comfortable here. If any one want to use a
label. These are good friends no we have not met except online but the respect and free
exchange of ideas we are able to exercise with each other provides for an education in life our
parents could never have conceived. We are not limited to the confines of clubs and
organizations, the Masons, Moose, Elks, NoC, AmLeg, VFW, the Country Club and on and on
we are a network of interconnecting relations that provides us with perspective and information
that transcends the limits of what once was a limited vision of prior generations. This is a world
wide party and national interests are now perceived through the lens of the international
community. And we the nobodies of the world are part of it the notion of them and us is
growingly seen for what it is an arbitrary distinction to separate us, to keep as mistrusting and
at odds with each other We are beginning to know the world not just through the eyes of our
government and the corporate press and one thing we are finding is that we like each other
It has nothing to do with nationality or religion I grant you there are many on every side of
political and religious equations that fear this "internationalization". But these see the world
differently. To them the world is to be consumed and dominated while maintaining as much
control as possible and whether you can receive it or not the benefit of the few
But now I have friends around the world we are not "corporately" connected we are
independently connected. This IS NOT the New World Order Oh I suppose in lower case it
may be a "new world order", but it IS NOT the Corporate Globalization that High dollared (or
Euroed) elitists perceive as their conception of dominating Earth. But (just follow me for a while)
this "internationalization" is a spiritual inter-connectivity I know spiritual sends chills up
and down the backs of some of my friends, but just hold on it aint that bad, and probably not
what you are thinking. I do not use "spiritual" in any religious context. Religion has nothing to do
with it. If you want to define "spirituals as "relational" suits me Having said that, as most
of you know, I do believe in "spiritual" dynamics I will not argue or try to impose on you even
though I believe I see these, in you but you can believe what you want no sweat off my back
But it is this relational dynamic that IS a fact however we may define the reality behind it

We have hope because we have each other sounds like some nice idyllic platitude maybe
it is but I think it holds some truth I am not afraid of hell or damnation because essentially I
am no different than the day I was conceived, born and eventually take my last breadth. All of
lifes potential ever resides in me and in each and every one of us I hope that doesnt sound
too religious I dont think it is a religious thing Sure knowledge, skills, and talents were
learned and increased, but these are things I do, not what I am. Whatever it is that makes me
human was there all along some call it consciousness I wont get into that, I have read a bit,
but I am not a psychoanalyst to explain it in depth. Is it purely a naturalistic science or is there
transcendent meaning? I dont know In fact I dont believe it matters. What does matter is




we exist we relate and often in ways and manners we find difficult to explain - at least to the
satisfaction of all.
In this I do not see myself disconnected from "Christ". I do not see my atheist or agnostic or
pagan, spiritualist or any other who has found me as a friend as rejecting Christ. Because I am not
a "Johnny". Johnnys Christ - is not - my Christ. My Christ is in me Well where did you ever
come up with an idea like that? the Bible I think you will find it in Johnnys Bible My
Christ is not separate from me and if you really want to get into it and do the Bible research
my Christ is me and dig a little harder and consider ALL the implications of the words of Jesus
Christ, know what youll find there is NO difference between you, Christ and God. I.e. You
and God are not separate but the same I am not saying it is easy to conceive or live and put into
practice we all (believer or not) carry a whole lot of bull shit baggage and in fact I know of
atheists who live it better than so called believers. But if you really want to hold up the Bible as
your absolute definer of what life is get all of it not just the stuff you can fit into a religious
brief case. Or what you can use to manipulate some ignorant fools trusting nature.
I know I have used religious and non-religious language here. I hope I have not confused anyone.
But there is a tendency amongst religionist, and I dont think it matters what religion, to require
and speak in literalisms. In applying this as a premise for acquiring spiritual truth they assume
they have the answers in difference to the Spirit that is the innate nature in humanity. The
Johnnys do not trust the spirit in man (woman). They trust their doctrine They know it all
The admonition of Jesus as to why he used parables to elude the "wise" and enlighten the foolish
never hits them that it is in their attributing their doctrinal perception as absolute they have
actually excluded themselves.







Paradigm Shift
7-3-08
I write much the way I do with explanation that I know is not necessary for most of my
friends, because this is not the only place I place and publish my blogs and other
creations. The audience is different depending on the online community. Multiply in a
sense has become my online home, but it is not the extent of my online presence.
Though I am nearly fifty-seven years old, my knowledge of computers extends back to
1983 and the Internet to 1996. All independent of vocational purpose. To put it simply I
believed in the possibilities the computer offered (s) particularly as a communications
device.
The ability to realize new forms or methods of communication combining various media
types, to me is a dream come true. But although the resources can now be assembled
and utilized to manifest a more impacting realization in communications the content or
truth and wisdom of that communication IS NOT something that is readily acquired
through a sound bite, or like pulling up to a fast food drive up window placing your order
and hitting the road. Wisdom and real knowledge and understanding takes time. You
have to allow your brain to assimilate and process information, dwell on it, ponder it, toss
out he bones, chew on the less desirable cuts, digest it and let it become assimilated as
part of you. Our culture, western and particularly American, finds this process
undesirable. To them, the computer is a tool to circumvent the human state of truly
growing in preference for an illusion of maturity founded on vast quantities of
information and the ability to handle it quickly. I find nothing human about that.
This is not a blog about my distaste for the corporate mentality that dominates our
culture, but it is in this cultural corporate way of thinking that we have been forced to
understand and create our realities. What makes it so pitiful is that ninety plus percent of
the populace has NO clue that this is a manufactured contrived state of being. It is
viewed as the norm, the way things just are, the way of the world, REALITY.
Simply because they have never been permitted, at least on any authoritative level, the
permission to consider the alternatives. There is an assumed trust that our leaders must
obviously know what is true and what is best for us.
There will always be a need for leaders authoritative types to provide direction and
aid for the less capable within our human relations. But as society has evolved
authoritative has been has been supplanted by authoritarian. The ideal, as elucidated in
Biblical language, is that the leader is the servant of all. I dont believe I have to go into
the argument as to how this has become a perversion. Our political systems have and




continue to fail us as we allow ourselves to continually white wash the rotting fence. The
fence needs to be replaced.
But we will not replace the fence. My great, great (great, ) grand-father built this fence
and it has served our family well for score upon score of years. Sure there are a few
planks that need replaced, but it is such a fine fence, and it is our heritage, besides the
cost of replacing it would be enormous, we could never afford it. No-replacing the fence
is simply out of the question.
Meanwhile beneath the surface the posts that extend several feet into the ground,
the pillars upon which the framework is affixed has rotted decayed and turned to dirt.
But we do not see this. We assume all is well. We do not see the termites, worms and
maggots that naturally infest and destroy what ever it is that we create and depend on. We
delude ourselves by thinking that what was once so well built and founded would and
should last forever. World without end Amen.
In our pride of believing we know and understand who we are, our bounds for reality
become set. This applies to us individually in virtually all facets of our existence and
relations, and it applies to us corporately, as family units, extended families, tribal
relations, organizational affiliations, all levels of regional and national identity
ideologically, philosophically, metaphysically and Im sure more can be added. It is in
these concrete bunkers of perception that we find our security. We can live, exist, relate,
grow, prosper, experience meaning in life.
As our shared national experience was being consummated and birthed, the DNA content
(ideals and perceptions) of our ancient fathers and mothers joined and as there were many
sperm and DNA donors desiring to participate in this grand orgy the fence was built.
Agreed upon and compromised boundaries were set and each could come and go in term
and have their pleasure all without the inconvenience of fucking each other. And the
fenced served the designers well for many years.
Time marches on and times change and the peoples living within the boundaries of
the fence have changed The collective DNA of the now residents hold virtually no
resemblance to that of the original depositors. And the inbreeding of the progeny of the
forefathers has produced a crop of idiots and maniacal flag waivers incapable of
conceiving anything other than what shade of white we should paint the fence this year.
The collective DNA has changed The fence was never meant to be permanent
Historically, NO fence ever has been permanent. The boundaries originally established
do not fit the realities of what constitutes the collective residents. The only ones served
by the fence are those sly enough to use it as a means to dominate and control. The fence
NO LONGER serves but dictates and restricts.




Now why is it that there are so many committed to the fence at the decided preference
to elevate it to a deific status? Why is it that the fence (whether you call it that or not) has
become God? Or at least Gods divine vehicle?
Fear
Besides the Civil War, the United States has remained relatively free of forced violent
change. Thats not saying we are not plagued with violence, Im not that blind, but as a
staging ground for warring factions in organized open armed conflict we have been
very lucky. This reality is an ideal that many conceive as a deific right and as a matter
of maintaining it will allow any imposition upon free mans rights in order to maintain
their feeling of security.
We live in a paradigm of fear. This is becoming established as part of our national
psyche. But not for everyone, although it is hard not to be affected by it. But it does seem
to affect the guardians of the fence more than the rest. And those who are not that
impressed with the fence and realize its rotting nature are subject to the fear of the fence
crumbling and crushing them.
Over the last eight, nine, maybe ten years I have found myself in a progressive real
and (I would say) absolute paradigm shift. I believe the idea of a paradigm shift is
something that is over used,
mis-used, not really understood and in most cases spouted because it sounds so
intellectual by dumb asses wanting to sound smarter than they are. But I use it anyway
because it fits and my life bears it marks beyond my writing.
Ten years ago I was a part of an ultra-conservative denomination, the Orthodox
Presbyterian Church (OPC). That is not say I was ultra conservative, but due to many
distasteful splits and church political disappointments in 1992 my wife and I desired a
fellowship where we could just arrive at on Sundays and let the wounds heal. Forget the
(religious) progressive crap and just be. As time went on the restrictive nature (spiritual,
political and social) of the fellowship and the leadership structure and polity began to be
recognized for the repressive reality it was, by both myself and my wife. In the summer
of 2000 we migrated to another ultra-charismatic-prophetic fellowship in town (CF) and
were immediately branded heretics (that may be an over statement but very close). In
this new fellowship we were encouraged to be expressive. It was a wild place. I became a
part of their worship team and these were the high times. It was in this environment that
my own writing began to blossom and take off. Many times to the disconcertion of
church leadership as I found myself challenging hypocrisies that may have been well
established as a part of the nature of the fellowship, but certainly were not the ideals that
where publicly professed and espoused, whether Biblical or otherwise. I.e. The religious
nature of both fellowships was essentially the same only one was blatantly repressive




and the other had a wild hair up its ass. But the wild haired bitch did make for one hell
of a party and an environment that I could stretch my fledgling wings and prepare to fly
on my own. I had become a friend of the Pastor here. I know for a fact his wife, who was
co-pastor, had problems with me, and I with her. I was not the submissive one to be led
around by the nose and I think she felt threatened by this. But, in most that I did here I
was encouraged to go for it.
Prophecy the exercising of the gift of prophecy was a characteristic within the
network of churches that CF related to. This was not a denominational network totally
independent.
Now Before I lose too many of you youve read this far trust me while I try to
explain something. I believe there is a gift of prophecy BUT it is so misused,
misunderstood and defined by whatever religious conception serves a particular purpose
that for anyone to truly exercise it and be recognized in it is to me nothing but a
contrivance and means of being a religious showman. That being said, I have witnessed
and been the recipient of this gift exercised through others. I have absolutely no doubt of
its validity. BUT as with anything else man seems to get their hands on and
particularly in this day and age It is used to turn prophets (I mean the true ones and
there are also a greater number of charlatans) into Circus performers. My own core belief
is this is directly attributable to the tenacious clinging too Orthodoxy as the one true
expression of the faith. And this influence of Orthodoxy penetrates and infects the
entirety of what is the not only the Churchs mind set and paradigm of reality but is the
underlying foundation as to how must humankind regardless of religion or not
conceives reality. I.e. For 1700 years and more Orthodoxy was the underlying
principle that defined what and how reality is perceived. In or out of the church it
doesnt matter in order to survive we learn to adapt and perceive reality through a
common lens. Periodically adjustments were made to accommodate scientific enquiry,
but the nature of reality still and even in the sphere of science reality is fundamentally
an orthodox paradigm. I do not argue that this orthodoxy has a continual difficult time
maintaining its status But what keeps it intact is 1700 plus years of momentum and
ignorance on the part of the majority of humanity to conceive and consider options
declared heretical and virtually unrestrictedly purged from the mind and culture of
western civilization. In the free and open environment that we experience now, for how
ever short a time it may be, this information and ancient knowledge is resurfacing. Will it
gain a foot hold in our culture to be sure there are more than a few that will exercise
every (and I mean EVERY) effort to see that it does
not.
Within this prophetic movement and as a movement it is corrupted from its original
inception, but in this movement there is a theme that continually resurfaces. And that




being the Paradigm Shift to be experienced within the Church. This shift is
something that I do not have a great deal of doubt about. BUT as these prophecies are
received and proliferated through the Church and repeated by copycat ministers assuming
their own divine inspiration and ability to talk a congregation to death as being God for
the intent of working up the gullible and taking an offering they -the church hasnt a
clue as to what is implied by the words Paradigm Shift. And too many assuming their
unconventionally less than mainstream circus antics is the realization of or into this
shift, whoop and holler, roll on the floor, shimmy and shout, and leave convinced they
have reached God in the new level promised. And week to week, month to month, the
same prophet repeaters make their rounds, spout their (choke) revelations, take their
dumps, and the offering and life goes on .
But in reality nothing has shifted The same underlying assumptions of the nature of
reality, the nature of God, the orthodox pattern and framework dictating everything
within its context ---ALL remains the same. A new flavor has been added to our ice
cream selection but its still the same stuff (I like Ben & Jerrys Cherry Garcia
Chunky Monkey is not bad either).
But Paradigm Shifts are a reality. Not because some guy behind a pulpit says so but
because some of us are living and experiencing it And in the nature of the shift find it
is not all that much fun Not that we would do anything any differently but a real
shift can completely dismantle your world new friends must be realized family and
relations suffer some irretrievably few would be willing to proceed very far as
values are turned upside down and possessions are risked I used to think that a
paradigm shift was possible within the context of orthodoxy. But I do not any more
because the problem is orthodoxy. And few realize the depth of that nature. Most are
not willing to examine history except through an orthodox lens. As such whatever is
contrary or doesnt fit in the box is excluded. We are left with a uni-dimensional view of
reality. There is past and future but there is no up or down or left or right or even
consecutive simultaneous possibilities. Sounds nuts, doesnt it That is because you are
thinking with an orthodox mind set whether atheist theist deist whatever
you are looking through the lens of an orthodox paradigm Yeah I know you
think Im nuts Thats another thing that happens when theres been a real paradigm
shift Im nuts Im getting used to it.
But there is too much that I am discovering that is real beyond the perception of
orthodoxy. But you need to consider it first, and then do it Ive been told to expect
miracles
There has been a lot of talk about change talk does not create change and even the
nature of change should it be founded upon faulty principles and systems is nothing more
than painting that old fence.




Paradigm Shift II
7-4-08
But "Paradigm Shifts" are a reality. Not because some guy behind a pulpit says so
but because some of us are living and experiencing it
I cannot help but get the impression that what I wrote is being interpreted within
numerous frameworks other than the one I see through. That is not bad, as it can lead to
clarification and a better use of language if we are willing to dialog. That is not a problem
for most here, but there are some who may never get it.
I am not a scientist. I do not speak and generally apply language as it may be applied in
science. Granted, the idea of a paradigm shift is rooted in science and scientific language.
But as language spreads and is used in other disciplines and concepts are associated and
applied in these varying fields the original intent may take on an expanded or mutated
definition.
As I speak of a paradigm shift science really is not part of the equation Im not
sure metaphysics is part of the equation But what is shifting isa complete and total
psychological and spiritual perception of the world, reality, the church, God, relations,
And as these are no longer set in a concrete as was the case originally ALL options are
possible. Im sure as the process continues some absolutes may be arrived at, but Im not
sure they would not actually be conveniences to hang my hat on as long as they work.
I dont believe I am disagreeing with Aaron I actually believe we are seeing the same
thing although we build on different foundations. But for me science is not what its
about this is a personal and inner subjective transformation of my mind. Although the
inner subjective perceptions realize and work out in very tangible ways.
Concerning prophecy with the proliferation of charlatans and wannabes, religious
and secular, physic and spiritual finding a common perception may be a pipe dream.
And even as there are the real and the false, varying nuances in the gift may manifest in
a myriad of ways. If there is a first principle, and Im not sure there is, to me it would be
forget the show boaters. I might also include dont make that call to the psychic network
unless you just have money to throw away, and in that case Ill give you my number, Im
sure I can come up with something. Would it be the real thing probably not but Ill take
your money.
Screw the prediction shit thats not it . Screw the vague psychological profiling
where you can pick one from columns A and one from column B and through in an egg
roll and some fried rice and dont worry about what it is its Chinese food they
dont have to know what it is theyll like it. Or astrological charts, Tarot cards,




chicken bones, tea leaves or whateverThats not it. Although it could come that
way. But that is only the externals. And in most cases are manufactured deceptions.
But I refer to gifted people whatever? may be the underlying first cause of that
gifting (some say God, some say Quantum realities, some say this, some say that), who
perceive intimacies of character, vision, objective realities of ones life with hither to no
means of having prior knowledge of one-yet by whatever means know the one they
speak too, but without prior knowledge or relation. No predictions No purpose todivulge
these other than to encourage one on their course. By objective realities I mean
physical realities measurable scientifically verifiable. Now, though I have not the
experience in the varying alternative mysteries I cannot speak to much of them, but I
do believe, inside or outside the church, more than likely the same truths apply there are
the real and there are the wannabes then there are the outright Charlatans ---
unfortunately, I think, but cannot prove, they are the most pervasive.
I have only had a Tarot Card reading one time. I was nineteen. The girl who did the
reading was a couple years younger than me. She was raised in the occult. She made a
prediction about my life based on the cards. That is thirty eight years ago. Her prediction
is happening now. Do I know how my life is going to unfold, what will happen next hell
no? Wish I did. Is her prediction some sort of self-fulfilling prophecy that I sub-
consciously manipulate and guide myself into and through I dont think so, but I dont
know? Is it happening? Yes. In relation to the church experiences, was I duped?
Certainly some would believe so, but most of them will believe what they want anyway.
Do I perceive some validity to the experiences yes I do yes .. It is experienced
subjectively and whether manipulated sub-consciously or by what-ever objective
reality manifests





What is Love? and What is Falling in Love?
We use the word love a lot. It is one of those push button words. Usually exchanged between
a man and a woman exhibiting interest in each other and although a clear definition and common
perception and understanding of just what is being expressed to often clouded in a myriad desires,
pre-conceptions, social and environmental expectations, only to name a few. Virtually every
culture and religion has its own understanding of what should constitute love. And these often
subdivided and categorized to fit into convenient logical forms based on the root cultural
philosophy. Every culture has its expectations as what is expected in the roles of a man and a
woman. Fit into these predefined expectations and it is understood that you can and will
experience the fullness of your humanity and know love. But is that really so?
I love you I cannot help but wonder You what me? Because, what is love?
I am not going to try and explain what love is based on every possible conception. I certainly
do not know or understand them all and will only focus on those that I do understand. And for
most I would communicate with this would be sufficient seeing we share a common western
civilization heritage.
Western Civilizations are most dominantly influenced by an Orthodox Christian conception of
reality and the values that are core to who we are as human beings. I am not saying I accept these,
but recognize this is the framework upon which and out of which European and American social
and cultural norms derive. Even unbelievers are affected simply as being a part of and needing
to survive within this cultural context. Often our underlying mind sets, presuppositions, or mental
paradigms are simply assumed uncritically. There are certain absolutes that do not require
investigation or questioning they simply are. So under this weight of overwhelming universal
acceptance reality is assumed. Even scientific investigation is formed within this reality
framework, though I know there are many who would argue differently. But I wont go into this
question here; it is not what I am dealing with.
The highest expression of love as recognized within the Orthodox framework would probably
be a quote of Jesus Christ, No one has greater love [no one has shown stronger affection] than to
lay down (give up) his own life for his friends. John 15:13. This is expressed in more pragmatic
terms in 1 Corinthians chapter thirteen, also known as the love chapter:
Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I have become
sounding brass or a clanging cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all
mysteries and all knowledge, and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, but
have not love, I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I
give my body to be burned, but have not love, it profits me nothing. Love suffers long and is
kind; love does not envy; love does not parade itself, is not puffed up; does not behave
rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked, thinks no evil; does not rejoice in iniquity,
but rejoices in the truth; bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all
things. Love never fails. But whether there are prophecies, they will fail; whether there are
tongues, they will cease; whether there is knowledge, it will vanish away. For we know in part
and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect has come, then that which is in part will




be done away. When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child;
but when I became a man, I put away childish things. For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then
face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know just as I also am known. And now abide
faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love. 1 Corinthians 13 New King James
Version
As an ideal this is what love is defined as in an Orthodox context. And as sentiments, these
are noble aspirations. But - this is an incomplete perception of love It defines love as the
things we should be doing It takes what is elsewhere perceived as a fallen human condition
and attempts to pour humanity into a mold that will compensate for the perceived deficiency. It
defines human spiritual nature as the acquisition of habits and keeping the rules. What is missing
in this love definition is the realization that humanity is innately spiritual and endowed with
transcendent capacities of being. It presumes the modus operandi that if you can make yourself
appear spiritual you will logically be spiritual.
Thus under the guise of a presumed spiritual appearance populations and cultures are
manipulated, Image is everything, content is irrelevant The content of what love should be
is engrained in the minds, but merely assuming an ideal is not the same as the ideal giving birth
within us and growing into a manifestation of our character. And it is this that comes from
within not what is dictated through external sources that defines our divinity our spirituality
who we really are.
Love is not the byproduct of what we do What we do is the result of the love we are
As I am that divine creature I will not have to try to accomplish 1 Corinthians 13 I will not
have to take a vote as to whether or not to give up my life for another As I am love I will do
it This same passage (1 Corinthians 13) in the Amplified Version expresses this much better
than other more word for word translations:
IF I [can] speak in the tongues of men and [even] of angels, but have not love (that reasoning,
intentional, spiritual devotion such as is inspired by Gods love for and in us), I am only a noisy
gong or a clanging cymbal. And if I have prophetic powers (the gift of interpreting the divine will
and purpose), and understand all the secret truths and mysteries and possess all knowledge, and if
I have [sufficient] faith so that I can remove mountains, but have not love (Gods love in me) I
am nothing (a useless nobody). Even if I dole out all that I have [to the poor in providing] food,
and if I surrender my body to be burned or in order that I may glory, but have not love (Gods
love in me), I gain nothing. Love endures long and is patient and kind; love never is envious
nor boils over with jealousy, is not boastful or vainglorious, does not display itself haughtily.
It is not conceited (arrogant and inflated with pride); it is not rude (unmannerly) and does
not act unbecomingly. Love (Gods love in us) does not insist on its own rights or its own
way, for it is not self-seeking; it is not touchy or fretful or resentful; it takes no account of
the evil done to it [it pays no attention to a suffered wrong]. It does not rejoice at injustice
and unrighteousness, but rejoices when right and truth prevail. Love bears up under
anything and everything that comes, is ever ready to believe the best of every person, its
hopes are fadeless under all circumstances, and it endures everything [without weakening].
Love never fails [never fades out or becomes obsolete or comes to an end]. As for prophecy




(the gift of interpreting the divine will and purpose), it will be fulfilled and pass away; as for
tongues, they will be destroyed and cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away [it will lose its
value and be superseded by truth]. For our knowledge is fragmentary (incomplete and imperfect),
and our prophecy (our teaching) is fragmentary (incomplete and imperfect). But when the
complete and perfect (total) comes, the incomplete and imperfect will vanish away (become
antiquated, void, and superseded). When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child,
I reasoned like a child; now that I have become a man, I am done with childish ways and have put
them aside. For now we are looking in a mirror that gives only a dim (blurred) reflection [of
reality as in a riddle or enigma], but then [when perfection comes] we shall see in reality and face
to face! Now I know in part (imperfectly), but then I shall know and understand fully and clearly,
even in the same manner as I have been fully and clearly known and understood [by God]. And
so faith, hope, love abide [faithconviction and belief respecting mans relation to God and
divine things; hopejoyful and confident expectation of eternal salvation; lovetrue affection
for God and man, growing out of Gods love for and in us], these three; but the greatest of these is
love.1 Corinthians 13 AMP
Yet under the weight of Orthodox tradition, working in an ass backwards manner for seventeen
hundred years the Church simply has not figured this out. And now in our current age and
increasingly for the last three or four centuries Orthodoxy has assumed a Machiavellian
quality and character. We as the progeny of this faith - this domination of society by an ill-
conceived and politically motivated religious spirit now reap the inevitable. But I diverge too
much.
Love, as defined by Orthodoxy is peculiarly one dimensional. It picks and chooses as the ideal,
what it, in its limited confined and restricted Fallen nature of mankind mind set has deemed
absolute. I.e. "Orthodox perception regarding the sexual and natural nature of human beings as
sinful" - is good, and "any other perceiving these human natural passions as desires as normal" -
is perverse.
Orthodoxy would like to wipe out all that is natural to our humanity. It views this human
nature as antithetical to the divine. It argues the wonder of creation and yet declares that creation
is fallen. I have my own theories into this but here again I diverge too much.
As human beings we experience much of what all creation experiences on a physical level.
Within us are bodily functions that can correlate to that of other higher species. We exist as
animals and spiritually derived beings. We are connected to all of reality and creation. There is no
arbitrary division between us and all other manifest creation.
In our natures we experience the reality of feelings as the result of hormones, endorphins,
serotonin and even may be aroused through the stimuli of pheromones.
But are these in and of themselves the creators of love in us? No one can deny that most
normal (whatever that may be) human beings experience these and are often spurred to action as a
result of stimulation - most often not understood. We just know we feel and that feeling elicits
a response in us. It is who we are




These are the feelings Orthodoxy would like to subjugate to a process of reason but not just
any reason Its' reason Its' definition of what constitutes a greatest wellbeing for society
and that wellbeing and society is a political convenience It is no longer human beings - being
human but the imposition of the theological absolute to maintain a desired economic and
political stability. If that can be accomplished God is in his heaven and all is right with the
world.
But you cannot fall in love except as you acquiesce to the Orthodox rule of humanity.
And you are fallen you do not know best youll screw your own lives up and potentially
reveal cracks in the orthodox wall
What orthodoxy fails to recognize is that the passions we feel, the innate drives we experience
these are integral to our humanity But Orthodoxy would suppress these tell me I am a
sinner condemn me for feelings I cannot deny

I love a woman No I have not died for her I have not exercised all that is expressed in
the orthodox 1 Corinthians 13 ideal we have never met But I feel for her
Pheromones can be eliminated as we have never shared each others presence except for online
hormones, endorphins, serotonin may well have entered the equation (I think without a doubt)
but what is it that triggers or stimulates these? I have never been aroused by nude images of
her, I have an extremely limited few images of her all quite modest and expanding those
avatars all definition is lost. Often much of the time we share is just being there and realizing at
the other end of the connection is someone I can relate to, trust, and open up to in intimacies
generally not to become public information. She knows my fears, strengths, and I am becoming
increasingly privy to hers. I will not lie to her . And I do not believe she will lie to me we
like each other And all the chemical stuff has kicked in
Orthodoxy would deem this should remain a Platonic relationship screw Orthodoxy
because I have come to believe the fullness of my humanity that includes hormones,
endorphins, serotonin and pheromones and probably a lot more... this is all the divine in me
There is no arbitrary division between the spiritual and the natural Cartesian dichotomy is
simply a twisted perversion of reality to placate the Religious and scientific community and keep
them from stringing each other up by the balls
I love a woman It is not simply a desire for sex I love a woman it is not purely desire to
remain Platonic Where did it come from I dont know I dont really care it is there
and that is what matters





"Somewhere over the rainbow" OR "In myself" ?
You do well extracting content from the ancient myths, and even as I observe spinning
your own. This is an excellent quality. The purpose of "myth" is not to elucidate
scientific "factual" information, but rather to cause one to "think" to consider ponder
and as perception is realized to reach an end to "know thyself".

Modern and I suppose "post-modern" (Im not really sure what the difference is) humans
relate to life in what might be referred to as a Cartesian dichotomy. The Spiritual and
Physical spheres of reality never so to meet or cross paths. The Physical plane most
dominated over the modern centuries in a Newtonian paradigm. I realize there began a
shift around the late nineteenth century to which the likes of Albert Einstein was most
influential and new dimensions of reality or perceiving physical reality needed to be
accounted for. Much of which Einstein had his own difficulties with, being grounded in
Newtonian physics and logic AND assuming an absolute nature that required him to
make a greater intellectual leap than he was capable of. Still, "quantum" evidences and
questions confront us. Demonstrating mind boggling possibilities yet to be discovered,
but giving potential credence to truth, hidden and denied, for centuries and millennia.

Yet most of humanity lives in the context of a Newtonian reality. It is the comfort zone
Religion and Science have learned to accommodate themselves to. And it really does not
matter too much which religion the same dichotomy exists. For the masses religion,
catering to their general ignorance holds greatest influence. The vast unknowns of
reality are defined and placarded as divine absolutes and religion maintains a tenuous
marriage with science, providing science accommodates the political whims of the
powers that be, all too often established and tenable via the ignorance and gullibility of
the "voting" public.

All this in a nutshell to know and serve a "God" out there somewhere
over the rainbow

And few No I would have to say none ever coming to realize or know
themselves as "themselves" Oh a great deal may be known about religion, about
"every action has an equal and opposite reaction", and nuclear fission and fusion, and
good family planning, Dr. Phils guide to finding the meaning of life n your cubicle
But how many can live with themselves unencumbered by all these layers of bullshit?
How many have realized that reaching inside finding that place empty of ALL else is
the place to know and begin to realize yourself to know thyself and in knowing
experience what is the divine.

It is not the Cartesian compromise that separates us from knowing the divine within




(knowing ourselves). That was only a convenience that the Church had to accommodate
itself too and found advantage in as it too became a political tool. But what is fearful to
the Church and Politics and ever more so now Economics is that humankind will
begin to think for themselves to realize their humanity and not have to be placated
with the illusions of deities that do not exist except as they are contrived and manipulated
from behind the curtain.

I am and ardent believer in the divine I make NO secret of that but Ive realized the
divine is within me it is here that I find meaning purpose all and more than what
is the hype of religious side shows and circus acts

Myths are not the conveyors of facts at least not scientific facts as would be
defined by Cartesian science But they are the conveyors of human truths and insights
into our being Granted often hidden cryptic even illusive and often
relaying different levels of truth to different recipients but truth leading to knowing
yourself the divine

I have been asked if I could return to my wife. for those who do not know she gave me
the boot about a year ago (Im not going into details now) Is forgiveness possible there
Yes I think it is Yes to return to her, I could and would but we live in two
different worlds now I believe she realized it a long time before I did And I believe
there is a great deal of ill will she harbors I no longer fit into the religious categories
of the past I cannot return to that Do I love her ? yes I believe I do But
loving her and knowing myself does not work out to be compatible to the world she
would desire Being caught in a religious lifestyle and maneuvering the maze is
something we no longer share in common. If that is the basis of a marriage, though "love"
may exist, the marriage is a farce a sheet of paper as much as it may offend some
(or many) love is not the accommodation to religious expectations and marriage, a
true "spiritual binding" is not resident in a certificate. That, marriage on paper, is a
political convenience

This should it become popularized not just a fad among the few but the
prevailing perception of human relations becomes a threat to virtually every
established order And many cannot conceive of such But we idolize those who can
and some are elevated to the status of "deity" and systems form their own
mythologies that support and give credence to the established order, but never leading
deeper into oneself, only somewhere over the rainbow And there is only one reason
for that we cannot recognize the deity that resides in ourselves And they, the
established order, cannot have that





In August of 2008 I was inspired to throw this together. It is a take-off off
the Wizard of Oz, which I have been told was originally a political satire
from around the turn of the century about the US coming off of the Gold
Standard? In the book, the shoes were gold. This piece is both a
contemporary political and religious satire, if you can see it. Be warned
some may find the language used to be quite offensive, but it was employed
for a specific reason.
Ignorance Knows No Bounds (A True fantasy)

When I first left Kansas and landed in Oz I was mesmerized. I thought what a wonderful
place, so beautiful, so interesting, such bright colors, and fascinating people. So much
was new, so much I had never imagined. And the Munchkins were so cute, quaint. And to
get anywhere, there was only one way to go to get there, Follow the yellow brick road.
So simple, Why didnt I think of that? With Toto in tow I wound myself round and was
off to see the wizard.

I found a friend the inquisitive sort but nothing was sure and soon became a
bore So Toto in tow, and one friend mo, down the road we did go off to see the
wizard

Such beautiful apples a delight to the eye and good to eat (didnt I hear this myth in
Kansas) maybe they can make us wise and we can know But they were
corporate property and not to be had easily so dumb shit straw head started a tiff
nothing too big mind you just enough to piss off the corpos and to placate us they
tossed some budgeted consumer good will merchandise at us and a non-transferable,
ten percent off the purchase of any of their over inflated regularly priced goods, limited
time only, redeemable at any of their franchised outlets coupon. But there was too
much fine print to fit on the coupon, and we didnt have a lawyer to interpret it all for us
so we went looking for the Wicked Witch of the West so we could cram it up her ass.
We found the witch, but she was a tight ass, so after getting a bit burned, we flipped her
the bird, and Toto in tow, with my friend Moe, and a few wise apples, down the road we
did go, off to see the wizard.

Oh, I almost forgot we came across this hollow dude just sort of hangin out (its easy
to forget about hollow dudes). I think hed been stuck there for a while I think he had
experienced some sort of emotional trauma didnt like to talk about it very much
and we didnt push the issue But we gave him a bit of moral support .. Asked if he
wanted to join the band (he was a hell of a metal drummer) and Toto in tow, a
Hollow Dude, Moe, and yours truly by this time we had consumed the apples down
the road we did go off to see the wizard

Not is all cool along this endless highway we passed through some underdeveloped
depressed areas god damn friggin cop webs every fuckin place OH excuse me
that should have been cob webs mustnt confuse the issue or malign those so
nobly dedicated to protect and to serve And watch out for the fat cats the slum
lords we ran into one tried to bully us I think they call it extortion he sounded




real tough but he was really a pussy had this strange fascination with tails ..
particularly his own but we figured hed be good to help guard our asses we found
out later he made a damn good lead singer so Toto in tow, Hollow Dude, Moe, Pussy
and Yo yours truly down the road we did go off to see the wizard

I dont know what got into Tight Ass, but she really had a tude. But you got to give her
credit; she had some connections to some really good shit I mean kick ass brain
numbing stuff. Yo- yours truly, Pussy, and even Toto got absolutely wasted fucked up
but damn those dreams were amazing Hollow Dude got all emotional and reverted
back to his former post-traumatic condition and was useless Moe ran around like a
chicken with its head cut off I suppose its all the same He never did have too
much upstairs Then what would you think This God damn Miss Goody Two
Shoes fairy angel has to stick her nose into our stuff and do what SHE decides is best for
us, waves her fuckin wand, hides the stash, replaces it with some snow NO ..no .. no
I mean snow you know the white shit that falls from the sky the cold stuff
not the nose stuff Damn religious do gooders I thought I left all that back in
Kansas Any way we get our heads back together gave Hollow Dude emotional
support .. and headed up the road off to see the wizard (bet you thought I was going
to do the Toto in tow routine well the songs not over yet)

Well we made it to the Forbidden City real uptight, nervous, defensive control
freaks these citizens in the green Dont get me wrong once they let us in they were
nice enough but talk about fear and unable to think for themselves sheesh
My God sure they had all these fancy services and weird horses that could trip your
mind but anything that was new or not usual to the Forbidden City they went into
a tizzy Get this Tight Ass is flyin round oh Id say about a thousand feet up
I think she had some really special stuff that her and her fellow bitches ahhhh
witches can get but shes up there I mean really smokin That broom was
really doin a number And these green freaks are scared shitless I mean scared
shitless Youd think theyve never seen anybody ever enter an altered state of
consciousness and connect with their higher inner self and realize an out of body
experience Well maybe they havent but to go into a tizzy over it And all
they could do was cower and cry The wizard will know, lets see the wizard I
dont know but this wizard guy really had this place by the balls or so it would
appear And whats so weird is Nobody can see the wizard not nobody no
how At least thats the line you are handed at the door And these dumb shits the
wizard surrounds himself with they dont know whether theyre coming or going
But I have a suspicion a theory I dont think anybody around the wizard knows
because the wizard doesnt know Of course at this particular time that was just a
theory and since I had shared it with Moe, Hollow Dude and Pussy it was written
off as a conspiracy theory But this WIZ he knew how to intimidate Ole Pussy
shit himself running to the john at least thats where I think he was running to

Any way the WIZ turned out to be an ass nothing new there .. most of them are I think
but WIZ was a wiz of an ass and had this fetish for Tight Asses broom stick I




think they had some kind of a kinky relationship and he wanted a keep sake You know
something to connect with make it a little easier to get into the fantasy

Well we went looking for Tight Ass little did we know we were under surveillance
Not the WIZ (although if he could have he would have) but Tight Ass she had the
cctv system that seemed to be everywhere Damn at one time it was zeroing in on
Kansas I can only say it was a god damn good thing her and the WIZ broke up
can you imagine those kind of power tools in the hands of unscrupulous ego maniacs
well just thank your lucky stars this is just a fantasy I hate to think it might be real
would be up shits creek hmmm hmmm hmmm

Well Tight Ass got her bead on us and who the hell knows where she got them
but she had all these flying monkeys I mean ugly dudes maybe there were a few
dudettes but they were still ugly Damn ugly How ugly? DAMN ugly
Im not real sure but I believe these were the demons that the jolly green folk may
have been so scared shitless of They sure fit the profile That may explain the break
up with the WIZ green folk cant handle too much weird stuff throws them all off
balance they need regularity a place for everything and everything in its place
but please . Dont make the mistake of letting them clean your home if you are sick
and cant yourself you wont be able to find shit theyll know where they put things
and theyll assume you should know but you have to love them and forgive them
they mean well but sometimes they like to assume they can rearrange your home
as if it were their home but dont be afraid to kick their asses out

Any way back to our fantasy The monkeys really made a mess of things Poor
ole Moe is scattered all over the place straw men can be pretty flimsy but I guess
they serve a purpose but if you ask me a little bit phony (but keep that to
yourself) we wouldnt want to hurt anyones feelings The monkeys grabbed yours
truly and Toto and spirited us away to some dingy detention center for an interview.
Tight Ass was trying all her psychological interrogation techniques and was about to
prepare for the water boarding I admit I was starting to get scared and that cctv
system you know I think Tight Ass must have some sort of borg implant
because she can be flyin who knows where and keep her eye on you scary shit indeed


Toto managed to make a break and hooked up with Moe, Hollow Dude and Pussy. They
decided to infiltrate the ranks of Tight Asses military .. kind of a covert operation
They got in and followed Toto to break me out. Now the shit starts to hit the fan
fuckin Marx brothers movie it was Youd think the military would have their shit
together but I suppose when you have a Tight Ass in charge you can only expect so
much then again maybe it wasnt the military but the Tight Ass in charge dont
matter Well we were cornered no way out of this one Moe was getting
burned this was desperate Some how out of somewhere this presumed bucket
of water appears I say presumed because thats what I thought it was Trying to
douse the flames consuming Moe (straw men make great fires) Tight Ass got soaked
It was then that I realized that this bucket of water was actually a bucket of sulfuric




acid well Tight Ass and the acid didnt mix too well just be careful to step
around the puddle

We got the broom stick and made it back to WIZ But WIZ was waffling Lying
bastard tried to crawfish But Toto aint no dumb huckleberry that dog got smarts
and what should appear from behind the curtain Well If it isnt Professor
fucking Marvel the Flim Flam man well well well

Well PfM got exposed and made a cunning exit Moe, Hollow Dude and Pussy took
control of the Forbidden City yours truly found Miss Goody Two Shoes and told her
to forget the going back to Kansas crap I just wanted the rest of the really good shit
she snatched and get out of my life to which she complied And I lived happily ever
after but Im not so sure of the residents of the Forbidden City because since
they didnt pay attention to the man behind the curtain they ended up with a straw
man, a hollow dude and a pussy running the show

So if there is a moral to this story I think it would be this Pay attention to the man
behind the curtain because even in the land of OZ Ignorance Knows No Bounds
flim-flam, straw man, hollow man, pussy sounds like a sure combination for political
success





2008 was a circus of a presidential year and I wasnt id it any better
than most, although I did take a more liberal position on most
things, I did occasionally have to chime in to correct some
overzealous (but meaningful) proponents of the cause.

Palin, Zombie Kook cultist??? My reply
The following is my reply to a friends post of videos about Sarah Palin. They may be
view here:
http://sonxpro.multiply.com/journal/item/29/Sarah_Palin_Zombie_Kook_cultist

I had been a charismatic for most of my Christian experience. That is essentially a
modernized or contemporary Pentecostal. The Assembly of Gods are a Pentecostal
denomination. Within the Charismatic/Pentecostal movement depending on the church,
sometimes things can get pretty wild, rolling on the floor, fainting, babbling in tongues,
etc, although this wild side IS NOT the norm. The last church I was in that was wild
especially in the early days. But the people are not really freaked out. Trust me for a bit.
Pentecostalism has a history that goes back just over 100 years as a division from
mainstream Evangelicalism that emphasized the present day experience of spiritual gifts
recorded in the Bible and occurring in first century Christianity. It is this that set them
apart and under suspicion of the rest of Evangelicalism. Besides the gifts doctrine is the
same.
About thirty-five years ago, partly under the influence of the Moral Majority and Jerry
Falwell a political mind set was adopted by Evangelicalism across the board. The
primary issue being the right to life. At about the same time another vein of theology
was emerging through Orthodox-Reformed-Presbyterians known as Dominion
Theology. A movement known as Christian Reconstructionism was its out growth. This
movement would establish a Theocracy with Old Testament Law as the foundation, I
wont go into the details of that here. Under the leadership of men such as Gary North,
Greg L. Bahnsen, and Rousas John Rushdoony, Dominion Theology found its way into
Evangelicalism across the board, traditional Baptist, Methodist, Charismatics,
Pentecostals and Reformed Presbyterians. Charismatics and Pentecostals found this
particularly in line with their thoughts on the Kingdom of God and Baptists and
Methodist finding it politically convenient.
Traditionally Reform/Presbyterians will have NOTHING to do with Charismatics and
Pentecostals. But now there is a common ground upon which to ally themselves. The
establishment of the Kingdom of God The problem is not Pentecostals or the
Assembly of God They are as legitimate as any other Evangelical group But there is
a cultish' tendency that has invaded the entirety of Evangelicalism




Not all churches of the same denomination may adhere to this Dominion Theology, but it
is becoming more and more influential And not just in the churches perceived as
kooky
I have been both Charismatic and Orthodox Presbyterian and it is the Presbyterians
that are the intellectuals and the ones thinking this thing through. All the leaders I
mentioned came from the Orthodox Presbyterian church I spent eight years there
Palin is a problem not because she is Assembly of God . Its bigger than that The
Assembly of God are a church that encourages the involvement of women You will not
find that in an Orthodox Presbyterian church Male elders rule there.
The videos as I have had a chance to see them are too obviously propaganda They
really do not depict the reality of what is happening Essentially I think they speak
from ignorance and a desire to sell a position without really understanding the real nitty
gritty In any religion or perception of spirituality there is a language that is unique
to that group In order to understand what is being communicated it would do one well
to learn that language that has not been done by the person putting these videos
together.
==============
I have seen nothing in these that makes these distinctively "cultish" as Assembly of God
... There are Independent Evangelical Churches and mainline denomination churches
ALL accross this country that are essentially identical ... That is my point ... It isn't one
cult or one denomination ... it is an underlying theology that has increasingly found
opportunity to infiltrate religious thought and influence what is perceived as the "destiny"
of the church, and by extension - the United States - I.e. Manifest Destiny. The people are
not "kooks" as some may describe them ... but there is a level of brainwashing ... But I
have found just as much of that brainwashed and brainwashing potential in virtually
every advocate of a particular concept of spirituality ... or political ideology ... (I would
even add the produced videos- not pt 1 & 2 - demonstrate an attempt of their own at
brainwashing), The problem, with Palin and the church, is the pervasiveness of this line
of thought which has grown into a political goliath. IT now steers the ship of not just
"Christian" ideals and purpose - but that of an entire political party ...





Why I Like Atheists, Socialists and Communists More Than
Christians and Still Remain Spiritual

There is a common misconception that religious and spiritual are interchangeable,
and as one is being referenced in speech or writing the other is often assumed by the
individual receiving the communication. Besides thinking too much, I have also been
accused of parsing words. This is true. I do analyze the language of the communicator to
try and get the depth of what they are trying to communicate, to try and draw out of
abstract symbols what is the substance lying beyond the symbols, and thus avoid
unnecessary confusion or improve upon the communication to more precisely express the
substance between the words. This sometimes frustrates people both religious and non-
religious and even some who perceive themselves as spiritual.

In a pluralistic society, words are the things people live by. There may be many
religious concepts, interpretive perceptions of what constitutes spirituality or deeper
dimensions of reality and even the substance of our common material reality but it is
through words that we endeavor to build bridges into each others minds and thus
establish a common ground upon which to relate to one another. Everyone, in their own
communications knows what they are talking about, but often has difficulty conveying
these to others. This might be the result of a limited or dogmatic definition of the
language and words they are trying to use, an unwillingness to examine and accept other
possible uses of words and language as they may be interpreted by the receiving parties,
or even a perception that it is the responsibility of the receiving party to do the work of
correctly interpreting the concepts rather than the responsibility of the communicator to
do the work to make their communications as precise and definitive as possible in order
to avoid confusion. As a result there is actually very little real communication that takes
place. And often as a result what is attempted leads to heightened levels of alienation
between those involved.

Rhetoric as a means of stirring people to action is often a useful political tool. But
seldom are rhetorical statements analyzed for the depth, or lack of depth, of content they
contain. Rhetoric tries to express in concise, memorable, declarations what would
normally take a thesis to express. Unfortunately, most of the communications that take
place across the board of political and religious and even economic theory is on the level
of rhetoric, and the ones expounding this rhetoric have NO depth of understanding of
what it is they are trying to communicate. They are captivated by key words and catch
phrases that they assume hold substance but have never done the work to actually think
them through themselves or apply their own individual critical analysis to dissect and
make up their own minds. And even as they succumb to the language of hyperbole, to
examine the effects and results in an objective way is held anathema, a betrayal of what




they had originally held as absolute sacred. No matter that resultant conditions do
not line up with what was presumed intended, there must be some mistake, and though
they find themselves sinking into the abyss of fraudulent deceptions they shall not be
moved Such is the bonds of religion with or without God.

This is the state of religious Christian faith in America And I would suspect, as this is a
human condition and tendency, the state of religious minds around the world.

Few Christians actually read their Bibles as to actually do the work of allowing it to
do what they claim it can and will do. The Fundamentalist presupposition is that the
Bible is the express Word of God, and it is through these divinely inspired abstracts
that God the divine will accomplish in the hearts of those he wills His intended
purpose. Yet, these same adherents to the faith find that attempts at independent
research and study is not wholly encouraged, except as it may be guided and monitored
so as to insure a proper interpretation and outcome of the study. A hierarchy of
dogma must be considered and adhered to and ultimately submitted to in cases where
diverse interpretation makes itself apparent. The doctrine of the priesthood of the
individual believer and the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit as teacher and guide
are disregarded as unreliable. And so the conscience of humankind is ignored. It is a non-
entity. It plays no more in the matter of our humanity. The law as handed down and
expounded through the traditions of men must be maintained. And we are told, Dont
think too much, it will get you into trouble.

And this law we find sanctified in or political and economic ideals. Real right and
wrong are irrelevant The Law, and no matter the origin of the law, the Law is
the divine we worship. IT IS the Word of God. Certainly this would be denied by the
religious who claim their allegiance to the transcendent other out there somewhere
but what is that nature of their lives? Have they really examined the law, the word
submitted too? Do they really understand the implications of the political and economic
policies of the institutions they elevate to the status of divine representatives? OR is it
easier not to think? To consume the swill that is slopped in front of us? Yes I
might have to agree There are some things better not thought of

But I have not found this to be true of Atheists, Socialists and Communists. OH yes
there are the sorts that rely on shallow rhetoric and when really pressed dont have very
much to say but as a whole being on the fringes of and even outside the norms of
intellectual social acceptability as a matter of survival they have to think
shallow answers dont suffice. Cultural absolutes are not They find alternatives and
often, very often these express a logic and equitability that the status quo ignores.





The status quo is interested in maintaining what they have personally gained. Alternatives
threaten this. The vision of the status quo assumes a divine right to what is, and what is,
is theirs. Even as they might seek to sanctify their rights, they are not averse to
compromising even that which they promote as the absolute, their Bible. Just as there
are perceived absolutes of judgment to be rendered on social deviants, there are principles
of restoration and equity that are neglected, and have been so since antiquity, and thus
nullifying any credibility or claim in divine leadership (by their own standards).

But Atheists, Socialists and Communists hold no such absolutes. Their minds are ever
open and aware of changes in society and culture. There is not an arbitrary stagnation to
be perceived as the way or what we should return to. Society and culture are ever
evolving, needs change, and systems to meet these need change. There is NO Utopia that
is the ultimate of what society will ultimately be except as that is realized in the equity
of right of all human beings to pursue and be all that one IS. Resources are not the right
of those best capable of exploiting them. There is NO right to exploit ones fellow man.
There is NO Divine Right of Kings Yet that is what the status quo would seek
after each man a King But we fail to recognize that a king rules, by force, by
intimidation, by law, through ignorance, and whose intention is to profit off the efforts
of another by cunning, guile or deceit.

I may not express my spiritual perceptions in the same language as Atheists, Socialists
and Communists, but I have found that there is a spiritual dynamic that most of these
express that I share. It is not in the language of the religious, but it is in the language of
the desire for a better experience in life for their fellow human beings. Most of these will
never know this experience. They are realists, pragmatists. But they are more than their
own accomplishments or toys that make up their material existence. There is a connection
to reality and the hopes of ALL humanity that religion has either forgotten, ignores, or
explains away through rhetorical mumbo jumbo. Atheists, Socialists and Communists
without presuppositional absolutes from what I have encountered know how to use
language and often demonstrate more of what may be considered Christian (Gal
5:22-23) attributes than their religious counterparts.





The best advice I ever received was from one of my favorite aunts, when I was between
the ages of 8 and 14, probably numerous times, To Thine Own Self Be True. I write not
to accommodate social convention but to express myself. I do not write with the purpose
to satisfy my desire to sexually attract another, although finding another of a compatible
mind is important to me. What I write is posted in numerous blog spaces of virtual
communities with differing intent, OKC only being one. I realize that what I write may
offend others Get over it or move on or write your own entry (blog or journal)
refuting my perspectives use your mind take the time to actually exercise some of
that gray matter Sound arrogant? maybe But that would depend on why one
might be offended I find no reason to apologize for my own thinking

The Tyranny of God

Who is God?

What is God?

Throughout the history of mankind there have been conceptions of God, all attributing a
divine essence to a deity or deities. Sometimes masculine in nature, other times feminine.
Sometimes the union of the two. Sometimes a division of the divine into multiples each
emanates their own sphere of influence. Occasionally regional in influence, in other cases
as regarding their influence on nature, the cosmos, the heavens, the seas, the underworld,
sexual relations, the various passions of humankind, the course of history. God, or the
deities how ever one may recognize the divine, the creator the, supreme influencer, the
savior, the protector, the healer, and ad infinitum.

I will say from the beginning that I believe in what may be referred to as the divine. But I
would also have to conclude that mankind has made this divine a lot more complicated
and difficult to comprehend, understand and realize than it actual is. And as we are
insecure in our own beings we fail to realize the fact of the divine. And our insecurities
and ignorance, as men have been able to manipulate the control these, have led to a state
of perceiving ourselves and reality as deficient in a world that we find ourselves. A world
every bit as manifest as ourselves and emanating from the same divine source. But we
perceive a disconnect. But that disconnect is not inherent in the creation of which we are
a part, but is in our thinking concerning it.

Humankind is not disconnected from the divine, or divinity. We are not disconnected
from, as he may be called God because we have a perception that we are
disconnected. Yet even though we have this perception, the perception it self does not
establish a true disconnect. What the perception establishes is our inability to function as
though we are connected. The connection exists, but we are blind to it, or better stated
ignorant of it.

This is a state of ignorance that initially is exploited, and as history progresses, becomes
assumed as absolute. The ignorance becoming the quintessential unchangeable nature
upon which we build our relations to that which we realize as our need. We need that




which relates us to all else. That which provides significance for our being, to me, to you,
to them, to our environment, to all that out there the universe the cosmos, space and
time.

Ideally, we live in relation to the archetypes. Simple uncomplicated sufficient unto
the need a satisfied man paradise Eden.

But we find man unsatisfied, captive to his passions. Possessing becomes comparable to
security. Security to influence and control. Control equates to power. And power
supplants what is the divine in us. A new divinity is emerging. Not out of the primal stuff
of which we all are but the imaginary the false the illusion. The creation of
mens mental faculties. Created in the image of the power barons. Defined to sanctify and
justify the hierarchy of nobility and gentry the castes are set. And though times and
images change and adapt the essential illusions persists. Modifying itself in a self-
perpetuating metamorphosis as required by the evolving collective consciousness of the
cultural whole.

And so our new God evolves along with the whims of society. Yet always a reflection
of the established economic political order. And as much as we would wish to reconnect
to the divine that resides in us, as there are those who retain a memory, the dominant
theology of social order (of which we all are subjected) - this theology is part of the
fantasy, the illusion. It is not the real stuff that resides as essential to our being. It may
capture our attention, and evoke noble ideals, but it is the imitation and not the actual. It
is the fraud, feeding us half-truths and serving to convince us that we are full, when in
fact we have no concept of fullness, only the deceptions of the masters and their
underlings. And these know no truth themselves other than a place on the hierarchy, and
a desire to climb higher. Illusions can seem very real when one is paid well and
conscience is no longer a memory. But if it is all you know one would even die for it.

So God whatever the name YHWH Jehovah - Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva Allah
Zeus Jove yada, yada, yada terrorizes us. And we find meaning in subjection to the
tyrant. And we call on the Most High God not realizing that the Most High only
exists in the images we create in our minds- the images passed onto us to suffice as place
holders for the divine we find so difficult to remember. But that we have forgotten exists,
and surfaces. But as long as we hold another in its place, we worship and serve the idol
that has our attention, and such it is that manifests in our lives. The God we hold in our
minds is the god we worship If that god is the demiurge of the Old Testament that
is the nature of the manifestation that can be expected. It is this god that
Fundamentalist Christians cling to. I would also contend that the Allah that
Fundamentalist Muslims cling to IS (in fact) THE SAME. It is not a matter of name; it is
a matter of contrived manifestation and quality. The god of Evangelicalism is
essentially the same though possibly tempered by a few Jesus quotes. But as the New
Testament as a whole is regarded as the divinely inspired Word of God, this creates its
own set of problems defining the nature of the god they worship. And all these and
others - would set their god as my tyrant. They would define God deity the




divine for me. With all due respect stick it where the sun doesnt shine I have
realized the divine and it is in me and as I am what I am it is me





Separation of Church and State ... Not So Fast ...

We think there is a "Separation of Church and State" doctrine inherent in our democracy.
Don't jump to any conclusions too fast. In my blogs Palin, Zombie Kook cultist??? My
reply and Why I Like Atheists, Socialists and Communists More Than Christians
and Still Remain Spiritual and in comments I made in my blog Meet Joe Six Pack, I
referenced two dynamics that are at work in American politics through the religious
Evangelical and Fundamentalist Christian communities, Dominion Theology and
Recontructionism. The former referencing the underlying theology or justification from
God to participate in activities and actions to impose a particular Biblical view point
and code of laws on society as a whole. As I grew in my understanding of this theology
and movement within Evangelicalism and recognized how it was progressively
undermining the Spiritual value and dynamic of what I had realized as the Gospel and
replacing it with a conservative political agenda I found myself on an accelerated
course out of and away from the church. To be sure, it was only one of numerous
problems, although I do believe virtually inseparable.
This morning I received the following email from one of my former acquaintances. I
have known Mike since 1990, attended the same church from 1992-2000, spent many
evenings together discussing, debating and arguing finer points of our faith and yet
remained friends over the years. Im sure our friendship was based more on our common
music interests and former lifestyles. Michael had excellent taste in music, and liked what
I was doing giving direction to a worship team caught in an ultra-conservative religious
environment. I eventually found need to leave this environment upon being summoned
and subjected to an inquisition by the church elders.
Well, this was the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC). Presbyterian theology is
Reformed theology, Calvinist, and as Presbyterians go, the OPC is without a doubt
the most conservative of Presbyterian lines. They are not dumb or stupid. Intellectually, I
would consider them (as a whole) a far grade higher than most common denominations.
But their a priori presuppositions held as absolutes betray their ability to truly utilize that
intellectual ability. They are held prisoner by antiquated, archaic literalisms. And even as
they may relegate these absolutes to subordinate frames of reference as they pursue
secular and materialistic scientific endeavors, they apply to and enforce upon the world
their religious and political dichotomy of reality. Give me that old time religion its
good enough for me.
I have found, as much as the dynamic of the lie pervades and dominates what is the
world we have inherited, I cannot live there anymore. I cannot support or endorse it, or
allow myself to be perceived as such. And as resistance to any fallacy is necessary to lead
to exposing the truth, as difficult as that may be, and as complex as surrounding issues




may be perceived, following the truth as realized in ones own heart is the only path to
being true to ones self and ultimately God the divine.
There is a divine logic reason the logos. But it is not found in humanistic mental
exercises that is religion. The divine is innate revelatory a flash of enlightenment. It
is not political it is not ideological. But it is truth for the now. Some might argue
that it appears relativistic, but that would only be an appearance as justice appears
relativistic. What is the justice of the exploitation of mankind and of our shared
environment ultimately for the gain of a few? There is no justice as such, although the
relativistic reasoning of the few assuming the divine rights of wealth and power would
convince us of such. Such is not the mind of the divine, but the minds of men controlled
by and espousing deific illusions for purposes of selfish gain and maintenance of a status
quo that appears to be to their advantage. Yet should their advantage change - so would
their loyalties and arguments.





Why is there so much disdain for Christianity?

Reading the comments on a friends blog lit a fire under me Be warned there is
religious content here or maybe a refuting of religious content But there is a
historic perspective that may interest some (anyway)

(1) Why is there so much disdain for Christianity? What does the history of 'Romanized'
Christianity, or the sordid actions of innumerable popes, priest, and various religious
leaders have to do with the sacrifice made by Jesus the Christ?

(2) They manipulated inappropriately, earlier myths involving similar stories or
traditions, when they thought (erroneously) it was time for an update on "the old desert
camp town meeting", and continued tweaking it until they could take away the instinctive
spirituality, AND replace it with a programmable kind, where you get them all under
your thumb, if you are the big gun...(in this case the Roman leaders)...and they kept
hammering away like Thor, until they got the populace suitably indoctrinated to their
schemes... unfortunately they've been hammering so long, it caused them to become
deaf...thats why they still are at it...control and subjugation of humanity in religion

(3) When man steps in and uses the Word of God for their benefit it becomes a
religion. Thus causing the religion to become a God, Taking away the Power of the
Blood of Jesus. If you look closely Religion tells you what you can-not do to be "holy"
putting a noose around your neck. BUT The Lord of Glory came to bring freedom

The first paragraph is a leader to a friends blog providing a link to a contents list of 150
Bible stories. The two following paragraphs are comments posted in reference to the first
paragraph. Two quite different and essentially opposing views. The third paragraph
reflects the opinion of someone who considers themselves a believer. The second is
someone though not stated one way or the other perceives a natural and political
explanation. The leader paragraph is someone who, though not actively espousing
Christian faith eludes to its imagery leaving the impression of endorsing it.

Why is there so much disdain for Christianity? False assumptions. 'Romanized'
Christianity would more properly be referred to as Orthodox Christianity. I make this
distinction as that Romanized would tend to carry the connotation of Roman Catholic
in difference to Protestant which split off in later centuries. The fact being that whether
Roman Catholic or Protestant, both are essentially lines of Orthodoxy. Prior to the
conversion of the Emperor Constantine (315ce) there was NO official state recognized
Orthodox Christian faith. Orthodox means Approved; conventional. Christian faith
was not the organized dogmatic doctrinally defined institution it was to eventually evolve
into. Amongst the varying distinctions were divergent perceptions as to the nature of
Christ and his purpose and intent. Most of these growing out of the divergent
perspectives of his closest disciples later recognized as his Apostles into the broader
world. Later a Jewish convert called Saul, to become known as Paul, became zealous in
his propagation of what he understood as the message of Jesus, the man known as the
Christ. In his spreading of the Gospel within the Hellenized Roman world he was very




influential and successful. Yet, he maintained a connection and relation to the Jewish
Church as it was organized in Jerusalem and governed by James, the brother of Jesus, and
Peter, one of Jesus most outspoken disciples.

Though connections were maintained to the Jewish Christian community in Jerusalem,
there were significant differences as to how the faith was realized. The church in
Jerusalem was essentially made up of Jewish converts, familiar with and indoctrinated in
historic Orthodox Judaism. As a faith the Jewish Christians were recognized as a
divergent sect of Judaism and under Roman law afforded the protections of the state as
Judaism was eligible. No doubt and as history reveals in 68-70ce being approved by the
state is no real satisfaction to an invaded and occupied people by a foreign power or
guaranty that the state will continue to recognize religious sanctions. Yet, the Judaic
perception of the Christian faith, as Christianity evolved in this environment, was highly
tied to the Hebrew traditions of the Law as delivered by Moses and progressively
enhanced upon by Jewish teachers and scribes to clarify points as Jewish culture evolved.
Hence, the Law based conception of Christianity was forming its roots. James and Peter
being the most influential here.

Paul, as prior to his conversion had been an ardent persecutor of the emerging Christian
sect, though mending relations with James and Peter, was never fully received by the
Christian community at Jerusalem. Paul was an intellectual. He had a much broader
perspective of the world, its faiths, the Hellenized Roman mind set, and though originally
a practicing Orthodox Pharisee, he could conceive spiritual perceptions transcending the
limitations of a legally based system as was growing in Jerusalem.

Besides James, Peter and Paul there were other apostolic influences. Among these were
Thomas, Phillip and dare I say Mary Magdalene and Judas Iscariot. Within the frame
work of Orthodoxy these are never recognized. To varying degrees within Orthodoxy
these personages, although acknowledged as having existed, their writings and influence
have been systematically purged from the approved canon of scriptures as they present a
totally different perspective of the faith: as has become endorsed and sanctified by the
Orthodox church.

Prior to the conversion of the Emperor Constantine (315ce) the was NO Orthodox
church. Throughout the Roman Empire and beyond there were varying schools of
Christian thought that were being espoused. Mostly influenced by the varying Apostles
and their peculiar perspective and nature of their individual relationship to the man Jesus.
Not all the Apostles realized the same perspective of relationship. Some, it can be
argued perceived deeper relations of experience into the nature and person of Jesus. To
others this relationship would have been less perceptive and more superficial. Yet, they
were what they were. Out of these varying schools writings emerged attributed to the
teaching of these varying lines of perception.

Peter according to early church writings eventually became associated with the church at
Rome and purportedly oversaw things there for about 25 years. Paul was eventually
brought to Rome under Roman arrest from Jerusalem. As a Roman citizen he had the




right to appeal to Caesar. Both men are regarded as influential in the churches life. Both
died martyrs deaths between the years 64 and 67ce. There is much reason to regard the
perspective of the two as diverse, Peter even eluding to this in his own writing: And
consider that the long-suffering of our Lord [His slowness in avenging wrongs and
judging the world] is salvation (that which is conducive to the souls safety), even as our
beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the spiritual insight given him,
Speaking of this as he does in all of his letters. There are some things in those [epistles of
Paul] that are difficult to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist and
misconstrue to their own utter destruction, just as [they distort and misinterpret] the rest
of the Scriptures. 2 Peter 3:15-16. Though diverse, Peter being more tied to prior Jewish
legal tradition and Paul appealing to a more intellectual spiritualized conception, I have
come to a conclusion that Paul and Peter tried to maintain a mutually respectful relation
to each other.

As Constantine received the faith, and this conversion can not in any sense be construed
as a matter of proselytization but inspiration, the influx of citizenry into the church
and influence across the empire was immense. The empire was now becoming
Christianized, but the problem was; there was NO defined absolute as to what
Christianity was. The only real common point of reference was a man named Jesus who
became known as the Christ who lived in Palestine some three hundred years before. And
all these factions claiming relation and inspiration from him. In 325ce Constantine called
for a gathering of Church leaders from across the empire to gather at Nicaea in Bithynia
(present-day znik in Turkey) to sort through the mess and define what constitutes
Christianity. To say the least there was no little debate as the implications meant the
eventual persecution and extermination of the losers emerging from this council. This
was a political move on Constantines part recognizing that one unified church being
under the direction of one spokesperson afforded the emperor influential power to control
under the auspices of divine authority. As Peter had relocated to Rome and statements in
Gospel accounts attributed to Peter authority in the church, the bishopric at Rome was
determined as the center of Christian authority and a more legalistic perspective as to the
nature of Christianity was adopted. This, as well as declaring a transcendent divine nature
to the person of Jesus, became the political cornerstone for the church in relation to the
empire and subsequent Dark and Middle ages and into the Modern era. Since then the
Orthodox or approved doctrine and dogma have remained virtually unchallenged as to
defining the nature of reality and the political and economic structures the world has
inherited. That is changing

It is here and in this light that I take issue with that which in many respects with what has
remained unchallenged. At least as the Orthodox continues to pervade and assume its
own absolute status.

the sacrifice made by Jesus the Christ This sacrifice can only be spoken of as
'Romanized' or Orthodox. It is part and parcel with the entirety of 'Romanized'
Christianity, or the sordid actions of innumerable popes, priest, and various religious
leaders that evolved out of it. It is one and the same The Demiurgic god as
adopted by Orthodox Christianity through the adoption of Orthodox Judaic concepts of




divinity can only produce the image of a divinity requiring sacrifice. Sacrifice and
the acceptance of that divine sacrifice are requisite to the maintenance of control. To
deny the sacrifice of Jesus Christ is to place one in a personal standing of
accountability and relationship to God and outside the rule and control and protection of
the church. As such persecution and extermination are quite acceptable or at least
reasonable as the Demiurge would apply reason. I leave history to prove the point.

When man steps in and uses the Word of God for their benefit it becomes a religion.
The Word of God What is it exactly that we are referring to here? In February 2007
I wrote to my former spiritual mentor:

We are taught in our religion that this refers to the Bible, or what is written in
that Bible. But that makes no sense - In the Beginning was the WORD - no
Bible implication there. This is obviously referring to Christs eternal existence
before time and all creation. But what is the actual nature of this WORD as
revealed in the Person Jesus?

In another exchange of emails with a singer/song writer, whose music I stream, I
wrote to her: I haven't had a chance to listen to "Beautiful Rainbow World", but
if it is anything like I Have A Dream - You have some excellent products. BCMP
is not primarily a "Christian" station in the usual sense, or a children's station -
but you message is universal - for children or adults. I am honored and glad to
include this material in my stations rotation.

This was just my heart responding to what I heard in her music.

To which she replied Thank you so much for your words! Your comments are
exactly what I had hoped for with my music - to bring a powerful message of hope
and the healing, transforming power of God/Love. The "pure in heart" see this so
naturally!

This is a rather simple example - but it is representative of how I am learning to
function in relation to what comes from the essence of who I am.

It's a new language called 'The Word!' (perfect logic) In an academic sense
- I have been aware of the technical description of the Word as defined as
Gods perfect mind, thoughts, logic - But the actual manifestation - the
exercising of that gift- nature - ability - has only come to the surface relatively
recently (progressively over the last six or seven years). And at that has been most
obvious in my writing. I have found I am able to write and reason what is inside
of me better than I can relate in most normal social situations. My former pastor
stated that my logic in my writing was undeniable. But in social situations,
arguing religious formulas and democratic equality of the absurd does not render
an intelligent - not withstanding Spiritual exchange of ideas.

It just takes a little practice turning feelings into words, and a little courage! -





What I find encouraging - and I didnt see before - I have been practicing -
ignorantly, not understanding what God was doing - just doing it. And He - in me
- without the intellectual consciousness of it - lives through me.

What I find almost foreboding - but exciting - As I respond and act, and write -
express that which is within - I am challenging not only the religious status quo -
but the logical extension as it is expressed in political areas, social concerns,
economic justice and the erosion of freedom. Areas that the current political
environment are increasingly threatened by and aggressive in their defensiveness.

I have been looking for a definition of the Word - That which was from the
beginning - the nature and life of God - In Me.

But it is not a definition - it is a life. And not life as an abstract defined term.
Life - the essence and expression of God. And no amount of trying to define it, can
express it. It - He - simply has to be allowed to be.

We are taught the experience is not to be trusted. But the experience of God is
the only definition that will ever really make any sense. Definition, Reason and
logic apart from the experience and expression of the Word feeling within -
only amounts to just so much babble.

The Word of God IS NOT the sixty six books that are accumulated as the Bible. The
Word is the God you experience within it is already in you it is innate Your
life your experience of consciousness is the Word you already know but
religion and religious perceptions robs you of fully appreciating that experience.

And we misconstrue religious concepts for what they are not . the Power of the Blood of
Jesus is reduced to superstition with little insight as to the significance of that blood.

And Jesus said to them, I assure you, most solemnly I tell you, you cannot have
any life in you unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood
[unless you appropriate His life and the saving merit of His blood]. He who feeds
on My flesh and drinks My blood has (possesses now) eternal life, and I will raise
him up [from the dead] on the last day. For My flesh is true and genuine food, and
My blood is true and genuine drink. He who feeds on My flesh and drinks My
blood dwells continually in Me, and I [in like manner dwell continually] in him.
Just as the living Father sent Me and I live by (through, because of) the Father,
even so whoever continues to feed on Me [whoever takes Me for his food and is
nourished by Me] shall [in his turn] live through and because of Me. This is the
Bread that came down from heaven. It is not like the manna which our forefathers
ate, and yet died; he who takes this Bread for his food shall live forever. John
6:53-58





The blood and flesh of Jesus are current not something from the past It is not
religious doctrines that we appropriate and assent too but a living presence that we
experience and live in. It is not a magicians incantation or a witches spell it is the life
that you are participating in but too often find shrouded by social and material cares. And
this religion takes many forms. As soon as we attribute to any religious form an absolute,
we compromise our freedom. Our freedom becomes the subject of the arbitrary
interpretation of another.

instinctive spirituality is our nature. It is not something that should need to be taught.
But as we increasingly become the products of society and cultural norms. A lot of
teaching and training needs to be untaught and undone. We are taught to only perceive
but so much and that through a particular grid screen or lens Why is there
so much disdain for Christianity dirty lenses and maybe even blinders and too
many have realized there is more that can be seen and experienced than what has been
approved and it is not the evil that Orthodoxy would paint it

Speaking in Language We Can Understand

We, human beings,, speak, write and generally communicate in language that makes
"sense" to us. We draw from images containing associative meaning to express our
perceptions of "truth" and "reality". As new language is developed, words are coined and
more precisely narrowed and defined, our ability to articulate what it is that we really
mean is enhanced. This process of expanding language and in so doing becoming able to
more clearly understand the nature of reality and the accompanying possibilities may be
exactly what is necessary for us to live in the depths of our being. And thus drawing ever
closer to that divine character of Christ in us.

By necessity, language has always been expanding. Ancient languages expressing
spiritual and cognitive truths, as they became perceptively archaic and antiquated, were
supplanted by languages more receptive to growing and broadening, incorporating the
definitions of new words, and thus conveying to the then and now contemporary minds,
the substance of what is being communicated. This process in no way subjugates the
ancient languages as inferior or unable to convey truth and reality in the context of their
respective cultures. Our contemporary problem is the literalism we associate and apply to
the interpretation of the images conveyed through these ancient writings. We
contemporaries in our insistence on narrowly defined absolutes fail to comprehend and
appreciate the richness and all the ancient language contains expressed in so few
conceptualizations. We seek to translate word for word, concept for concept, expecting
that our committed dedication to literalism is in fact the only infallible means of passing
on the spiritual truths understood by our ancient forbearers. We fail to realize that our
literal interpretations are not the full truth as understood and received by our ancient
ancestors. Our literalisms, word for word, concept for concept, story for story, fails in
that we do not live in the same world paradigm as the original. Our world, as may be
experienced by an ancient, may well be perceived as a step into the "Twilight Zone" or
"The Outer Limits" and even as we may conjure our own perceptions of fantasy. But our
world is not the world of the ancients. Yet there is a common spiritual connection




between us. And there is common spiritual reality to be experienced. Our contemporary
problem is that we too often try to conceive and realize that truth in a paradigm
perception as foreign to us as if we were living in another galaxy and life is no longer
carbon based but silicon based.

The ancients, for all we know, did not have the scientific understandings available to us.
That does not preclude the lack of understanding as to the what and how of what was to
be realized in human spiritual capacities. Their communications may appear less
sophisticated and descriptive, but that would only be to the undiscerning eye and mind.
The richness of the language and the concepts conveyed may well have, and I believe
assuredly, expressed in terms relevant to their world view, the actualities of spiritual
reality that we, in our literal hopes, have found so elusive. Elusive, yes, but only as we
fail to engage in the mind that would speak in our time to our present-day cultures.

1700 years ago the baby was thrown out with the bath water. Narrow literalisms, and
dogma based on shallow cognitive reasoning supplanted the actual faith in what is the
innate divine life in humankind. Political convenience became the rule of the church and
alliance with secular rulers the sought after prize to prop up and maintain the appearance
of life in the now starving deprived body of Christ.

But life had not been totally lost, and in times manifested, only to be squelched.
Persecuted, made the subject of inquisition and crusade, feared for what it could become.
Spiritually outside the bounds of religious hierarchal norm, control would be lost. How
could a society possibly exist and function with each individual acting in personal and
immediate relation and response to that divine nature within? Orthodox doctrine may
have casually expressed an allusion to the indwelling Spirit, but to actually understand
and realize the experience of such a reality was beyond the literal cognitively bound
mind-set of what had evolved. And so the rule of "law" prevailed, convenient to the
relations with the state to maintain order and as necessary or desired dominate and
control.

But you cannot capture, control and dominate the Spirit of God in humankind
indefinitely. Where God (as we may call him, but only as reference for now) resides in
humanity, God's life, the Logos, the Word, Christ, WILL be made manifest, in our
cultures and times, in language and concepts that WE the bearers of the divine life
can comprehend and communicate. And as we do, we may realize all that has eluded us
in our quest for what is God. It is not to be found in "ancient fairy tales" clung to as literal
absolutes. It is to be found in the divine nature resident in us all, speaking in language
you can relate to and follow. As is currently being realized, science may well not be the
enemy of faith, but rather substantiate it.





By December 2008 my thought processes had incorporated a great
deal of other scripture not recognized in the Orthodox Canon of
scripture, specifically the Gospel of Thomas and others found in the
Nag Hammadi collection. There were more that had been
investigated, but Gnostic thought and historical reference were
now as important to me as the canonized Scriptures of the Church.
As time progressed I began to realize a great deal of wealth that was
hidden in the scriptures of virtually every world religion, although I
could not and cannot say I can endorse any with any absolute
certainty as being the way. They all play their part in giving us, the
human being and the human community, insight into our human
and divine nature. I also began to see, more explicitly, the value
contained in many of our modern works of art, and specifically
motion pictures, many obscure and not promoted as I believe they
actually warrant.

Fireflies in the Garden
I keep my abode cool. Meaning I conserve the heating oil not having filled the tank yet
this year and stretching resources a long as possible. I think I am actually living on a
miracle right now, as it was last March that the tank was filled, and I was not living as
conservatively then. Layers of shirts and sweaters keep me warm enough. But even as
temperatures have had a discouraging effect on the creepy crawlies and air borne visitors
I was favored by the visit of a guest normally only seen in these parts on summer
evenings. A firefly crawled slowly up the base and then the spiral ribbed post of my desk
lamp. As it made its way in under and over the chaliced shaped bowl into which a shaft
extends and the light bulb is screwed, the warmth of the light brought a quicker
movement and animation to my visitor. As it circled the bowl it began to flex its wings.
Eventually fluttering a few feet to another perch. It eventually disappeared behind the
table. About a half hour later I noticed my friend crawling back up on the lamp table,
moving slowly again. It crawled around the lamp base and apparently being somewhat
disoriented onto a stack of envelopes and I lost track from then on.

Did you know that the secret to firefly light is natural Viagra?
Scientists have identified the elusive chemical that fireflies use to turn their flashing
bellies on and off, the same one that helps regulate heartbeats, aids memory and triggers
erections in humans.
The chemistry that makes fireflies glow has been known for years according to insect
researchers. But how hundreds of species of the bug could blink their lights in precise,
distinct patterns remained a mystery until this week when a team of researchers reported
that the key was nitric oxide.




Nitric oxide carries messages between cells and plays a major role in treating impotence.
The popular drug Viagra facilitates penile erection by regulating the simple molecule.
As in humans, nitric oxide stokes passion in fireflies, which have evolved intricate
mating rituals based on flash communications.
"Fireflies are very romantic beasts because their whole adult life is spent courting," said
Tufts University's Sara Lewis, the co-author of a report in the Friday edition of the
journal Science.
Shortly after the arrival of my visitor I was pondering what should I apply myself to now.
I can find plenty to occupy myself with. The problem is that the possibilities are virtually
endless. But I wanted more than to just occupy time I wanted "What should I apply
myself too?" That is a tough one. I have long range goals, but these cannot be forced.
They are based to a great extent on relationships. And I have learned my lessons about
forced relationships. But as I was browsing I came across something that captured my
attention. About that in a moment. Carl Jung tells the story of one of his early patients
who related a dream she had been having that involved an Egyptian scarab. This is a
large hard-shelled beetle that is often depicted in Egyptian hieroglyphics. As she related
this dream Jung was distracted by a tapping on the window. A large scarab beetle
common to the area but related to the Egyptian scarab was tapping on the window. This
was an event the led Jung into his investigations of synchronicity, unrelated
correspondences of acausal events seeming to have meaning but normally written off or
shrugged aside as coincidence but occurring statistically at a much higher rate than can be
accounted for by "pure chance". I have realized such in the past, and believe they occur
more frequently than we are aware, but we have been conditioned to ignore them or
explain them away. It is a cultural impediment most of us have to deal with. Some think
its just a lot of bull shit. I really dont give a damn what they think. They can believe
what they want, they are not living my life. But I believe the universe is connected, and is
more than just "pure chance". I am not saying religion has it figured out, but there is more
than what can be seen, measured and observed. And we are connected to that.
Anyway, I was browsing I came across a film, "Fireflies in the Garden". You got it it
clicked right away.
Most know me as a fairly decent musician. A few recognize an ability to do a fairly good
job writing. Fewer still recognize the spiritual journey I am on. These are the ones who
come closest to "knowing" me. And even at that, time and distance precludes the kind of
depth that would truly be desirable. That is one primary reason for writing.
One of my friends, Jackie, left this comment on my blog "Life Moves On" the other day:




"Jesus said, "Let him who seeks continue seeking until he finds. When he finds, he will
become troubled. When he becomes troubled, he will be astonished, and he will rule over
the All." The Gospel of Thomas
"My interpretation of this is that when 'going within' meets our objectionable forces, we
are appalled at our own transgressions...The shame of acknowledging a chink in our
armor and a realization that we are at a crossroads of forgiveness and upliftment..and a
washing away of what has weighted us down for so long. The astonishment is actually in
the amazing release of this bondage into the light of awareness and forgiveness. Meeting
our mistakes and facing them in our shame and our sorrow is the basic groundwork of
full empowerment over the ALL withininstead of the other way around"
I initially struggled with this Until I watched this film, "Fireflies in the Garden". It
stars Willem Dafoe and Ryan Reynolds as a father and son coming to grips with personal
faults, failures and disappointments in each other and themselves. I found I could relate to
both characters. In a sense, in my own experience, I am or have been to one degree or the
other - both. I watched half and had to wait a few hours to finish viewing it. It was
opening me to me. And I didnt like what I was seeing. All this goes much deeper than
what I am doing now but it does bring me face to face with things that to me, had been
invisible.
It is a process and life does go on
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0961108/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fireflies_in_the_Garden

http://www.facebook.com/firefliesmovie
http://movies.netflix.com/WiMovie/Fireflies_in_the_Garden/70115897?locale=en-US





Dreams, Images and Archetypes

What makes a good story?

What makes a good story is its connection to universal elements that transcend the limits
of culture, but manifest in cultural forms or images readily recognized and associated
with the particular culture. Often, maybe even most often, an absolute literal expectation
or veracity is not expected or required. The metaphoric or moral value contained within
the story being deemed the substance most relevant.

Stories such as J.R.R. Tolkiens trilogy The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit, the
more contemporary Star Wars saga by George Lucas, the stories spun and related to us
by such cinematic directors as Steven Spielberg, and I we could go back through modern
cinematic history and include those such as John Ford, Frank Capra, George Stevens and
many, many more. These are (with others) our master story tellers weaving these ancient
universal elements into conceptual images that we, of a contemporary, modern mind, can
relate too.

Sometimes these stories are placed in contexts of recent history, or what is recognized as
our common understanding of ancient history, or a perception of what might be our
collective future exploring the cosmos. Sometimes fantasy worlds are created to transport
our minds into dimensions of thought and possibilities we could not consider otherwise.
It would seem that often commonly shared contemporary reality inhibits us in
considering the more significant truths and depths of value to be incorporated as part of
our human experience. That does not mean it cannot be done it is and in very
creative ways. But too often the depths to be exposed as such are not universal, but those
limited to the unique culture and social values of that time. Some, most for their time
and circumstance are effective story, but limited in dimension, lacking what it would be
that would relegate them to the realm of classic. It is the classic that conveys these time
and culture transcending values from one age to the next, or even to last through the ages.
It should be understood that I see the word classic as overused, misapplied, and thus
devalued, as much of our contemporary language is having been hijacked by the
commercial mad men of Madison Avenue advertising. I fear that much of our language
is in need of radical redefinition if we are to continue to communicate in the abstract
forms of speech and writing but that is another issue.

Often what makes a cinematic story great is the non-verbal communication that can be
conveyed and expressed. This can be in the form of the composition of the images
displayed, the grandeur of the scenery, camera placement in relation to the subjects. More
often it is the ability of the actors to relate to the character they portray and become one
with that and thus in their acting exhibit expressions and emotions that, when the film
is properly edited, has drawn us into the inner psychological and emotional experience of
the character. Good acting and storytelling is more than just relating a tale, but involves
us, the observer, in the experience of that story. This is the general measure of the art of
storytelling was it made real to you. Fantasy or contemporary context aside did it




involve you. Where did I you fit into the story? It should go without saying what
the composition of the music soundtrack contributes to this whole.

But what makes a classic story or cinematic work a piece of art is not what I am
interested in here. I am interested in the universal elements. These have been defined as
archetypes. Archetypes are a primitive mental image inherited from the earliest human
ancestors and supposed to be present in the collective unconscious Concise Oxford
English Dictionary Primordial image, character, or pattern of circumstances that
recurs throughout literature and thought consistently enough to be considered universal ...
archetypes originate in pre-logical thought, they are held to evoke startlingly similar
feelings in reader and author. Examples of archetypal symbols include the snake, whale,
eagle, and vulture. An archetypal theme is the passage from innocence to experience;
archetypal characters include the blood brother, rebel, wise grandparent, and prostitute
with a heart of gold Britannica Concise Encyclopedia.

I watched two films yesterday, or started watching a second. One thing about the Internet
is that if you take the time you can acquire skills that allow you to locate and access
information and even just released cinema that were only released within the last week. I
watched the remake of The Day the Earth Stood Still and began watching Australia
but fell asleep a after about a half hour. I will pick it up later today. I did not find The
Day The Earth Stood Still particularly great but it did attempt to apply a few archetypes
to the characters. The most interesting in both films being that of the boy through whom
the story is related. The early portrayal of the aristocratic woman, played by Nicole
Kidman in Australia, was also one that showed up in my dreams.

It is in our sub-conscious that archetypes actually exist. The better a story can relate to
the archetype the more significance its meaning to us, and so we find relation to it. Yet
sometimes an entire story may not relate to the universal archetypes, but only one, or a
few. Thus we measure the value of the particular story and what it has to convey.

As archetypes actually exist in our sub-conscious, they manifest in our dreams. These
archetypes are our connection to ancient relation and experience. They express in our
dreams, imaginations and desires characters of inner being that are too often suppressed
by contemporary notions of value and acceptability. I.e. that which we are in the depths
of our humanity and relation to the whole of the cosmos, including time and all space, are
regarded as irrelevant, suspect and to be disregarded. It is not part of our humanity, and
they that manifest interest in such or even experiences of such are freaks to be avoided.
We have been compelled to accept the Dr. Phil, pop-psychology, pop-religious
paradigm of reality. Contemporary notions of reality and humanity that mold us into
productive cogs in the greater machine of society governed by a corporate economic
culture, to perceive beyond these risks expulsion, excommunication and potentially
incarceration or commitment.

Archetypes express real human values and fears. Modern economic values and
realities are not those of archetypes. But the archetypes are universal and lasting.
Economic values are manufactured and fluctuating from year to year, decade to decade,




culture to culture. They are not lasting, and even the best economic minds have
difficulty coming to terms with the changes faced. I say best in quotes because in
reality as the system is an arbitrary manufactured system the is NO best. All there
is, is speculation that the system can be manipulated and propped up enough to last a
little longer. Eventually the nature of the system will demand its complete obliteration.
But that will mean a complete reorganization and redefinition of money and our social
relation and obligation to each other, the world and the cosmos. Until then we apply
Band-Aids and stock up on duck-tape.

As a society we are not completely ignorant of the impression of this archetypes on us.
Creative writers and artists often draw on these and give us new language through which
to guide us and align us. Too often these are hijacked for the sake of avarice and so
become the pawns and property of the moneyed corporatists, even to the point of
acquiring ownership to hide and suppress for fear of the longer range possibilities and
impact that may be detrimental to the privileged minoritys place of economic and
political superiority. This is the same with any creative technology that is perceived as a
threat. Buy it and hide it. But the biggest threat is the free thinking of the human mind. If
it cannot be bought , it must be discredited. If it cannot be discredited, it must be
destroyed.

Such is the dominance that modern economic values and realities have on us. Such is
the internal and external war we fight in our own consciousness and live manifested in
time and space.

Most of humanity has been held captive, and convinced there is little or nothing of value
except what can be bought and paid for, what can be secured through acquiescence and
self-surrender and subjugation to the economic forces we perceive as reality. So we buy
or time, play the game, and hope to simply get by another week, a month, a year, hope
not to be laid off. We are not taught there is an innate connection and relation to more
that is. We are not taught the secrets of success and life as are innate in our humanity. We
are taught the rules of the manufactured game, subordinating our humanity for the sake of
the economic security, and selling our souls to the god of this world.

Yet, we, humanity are more and the more communicates to us and often through
us in the form of the archetypes. I am learning to pay attention to them to listen and
learn. Dreams hold a great deal of significance. Struggles often difficult to be faced and
come to grips with in my waking conscious state are occasionally lived out in my dreams,
characters often taking on a representational form. And as I remarked above about the
early portrayal of the aristocratic woman, played by Nicole Kidman I found an
obsession of my ex-wife in her, yet not my ex but my mother in law to whom my ex-wife
would maintain an umbilical relation too. A marriage cannot work when the marriage bed
is shared by either ones own progeny or ones in-laws. Though I do not explain the
dream, it was through a dream and the images of the dream that I can realize, that I am
not, and was not, the scum-bag some might pre-suppose me to be. Is this self-
psychotherapy? Maybe thats what Carl Jung might suggest. And I dont have to lie




down on some shrinks couch. The answer has been in me. And there are answers in
each and every one of us. We only need to learn to listen and pay attention.





Keys to the Kingdom

Christianity has degenerated. From what the faith and reality expressed in the life of the
man Jesus Christ first demonstrated and passed on to his disciples it has evolved into
little more than a caricature a distorted perversion a laughable joke. It has earned the
scorn and contempt of thinking and inquiring minds not because of any intent to
persecute but due to its own insistence on and clinging to obvious distortions of its
sacred texts and literal interpretations held absolute based not on any qualifying
objectivism but an irrational and self defined measure of faith, more often than not
being redefined along the way as it proves untenable. This quality of tenacious adherence
is not the result of an inner spiritual endowment from on high but rather a normal human
quality of mind to become rested and secure in the knowledge we have rather than to risk
the possibilities of change and discomfort as new and more substantial knowledge and
evidence is revealed, potentially discrediting the foundations of reality we have become
so comfortable and confident in. This is not a divine faith such as might be described
as a gift of God. It is fear of the unknown, and a desire to build secure fortresss and
isolate ourselves from all the might bes and maybes that threaten to dismantle our
illusions and sense of security.

As Christianity entered stages of collective organization and politicalization its center of
gravity shifted. Whereas the dynamic of the faith had rested upon the oral traditions of
the Apostles and the teachings of Jesus, passed from teacher to teacher, mentor to charge,
spiritual transactions occurred - spiritual life onto and into spiritual life, life to life,
presence of being to the same. Just as Jesus had both teaching and a message to the
masses, he had the depths of teaching prescribed for inner circles of disciples, disclosed
not to all indiscriminately but to the souls prepared and receptive to what the natural
mind, the mind centered to its limited egoist extent, can not accept and partake in.

As the Church began to accommodate itself to the political expediencies of the times
men, for the sake of a perceived collective security, compromised. The transition from a
vital dynamic living spiritual force to the vulgar mundane lowest apprehension of reality
was about to reach fruition. Succumbing to the pressures and the enticements of the
banal, severed from connection to what was knowledge of the divine, intelligent but
worldly minds collected their texts and created their religion. Dependence upon the
knowledge of the Spirit was lost. Faith now became the dominion of the
Intelligentsia, commissioned and sanctified to define and bring order into the supposed
chaos as perceived by less than the divine mind. And the Judas church received its thirty
pieces of silver.

History has born out the reality of the human need to resist and escape the encumbrances
of religious domination to often enforced through secular rule and arbitrary argument to
justify the immediate temporal demarcation of good acceptable order. Elitist class of
economic overseers have evolved beyond the idyllic vision of antebellum plantationists
into the new order of master of the world, and each man woman and child a commodity
to be managed for the profit of a few and the acceptable order of all. These are the
merchants of illusion, fear and ignorance is their intent, control and subjugation is their




purpose, profit and power is their motive. And the church RELIGION is powerless
a muted dumb emasculated non-entity ---- except as it serves as lackey to the
powers that be, and keeps its charges in order. But here the church is not just the
manipulated tool but very often the impetus to stimulate the political beast into action and
providing a sacred context upon which to function and carry out its will and social and
political action. Armed with such empires are built and cannon fodder is never in short
supply. And besides, we can say We have God on our side.

Yet, in the heart of man there resides a spark of life. Far too often hidden, denied,
rejected, explained away, buried beneath the layers of social, cultural, collective and
personal egoist crap, but there none the less. For most, we have not been taught about it
or have been taught to ignore it. In a few cases we have been taught to manage it, but
only within the context and confines of prescribed limits of acceptable good social order.
Never in any circumstance or stretch of the imagination should we entertain suggestions
that these seeping forth of our unconscious are to be considered beneficial or of value or
that they are any more than the product of a vivid imagination which un-curtailed could
be quite dangerous.

There is a lot of religious baggage that we carry, and this is not just Christians that have
to deal with this. It is the problem of every human being that is raised in a pre-dominantly
religiously established culture. It could be unbelieving Muslims in the Middle east.
Though not accepting the faith, their perceptions and definition of concepts are
determined and inherited into their personal vocabulary and mind-set. The same with
non-Christians in Europe or America. To speak of certain concepts immediately brings to
mind a certain perception. You might not accept the concept, but the perception is
defined for you and incorporated into your library of mental images as commonly
accepted by the prevailing culture in general. I.e. You might not accept or believe it, but
it has meaning to you as to give you the ability to reject it rationally. The problem is that
in most religious cultures the concepts originally espoused and taught have been
perverted and distorted to take on an entirely other meaning than the depths and spiritual
value they originally pointed to. So in rejecting the commonly held definition of the
concept does not necessarily equate to a rejection of the original spiritual truth, but rather
a rejection of the lie. It is in this context that I can realize an affinity to an atheist who
would deny the reality of God or spiritual dimension. If the only reference we have
to God and the spiritual is a perversion than the rejection of the idea of God is
certainly not a disqualifier in the atheist life of a more certain spirituality than the
presumed believer. Language and terminology may certainly need to be reassessed so
the depth of the meanings can be recognized, but the word God in and of itself is
worthless it is merely an abstract container of a deeper reality in dimensions of human
experience that the material realm can not contain or bind.

Such words as heaven have lost their meaning, being defined in materialist literalisms
of occupying time and space. And if not actually considered as literal the perception of
otherworldly holds the potential of present actual experience of the heavenly as poppy-
cock, or the limited experience of chemical reactions in our bodies or a certain good
feeling. Though good feelings may well and do accompany the experience of heaven, it




is not the feelings themselves that are the heavenly. The feelings themselves may be no
more than the physical stimulation incurred as our brains release a chemical response to
that which we find agreeable. And it is just as possible that we might confuse the
stimulus as the spiritual and inadvertently become addicted to it and begin to judge our
addictive response to whatever as spiritual insight. But even as we confuse and
misinterpret, the reality of heaven is not beyond us.

We fail to recognize the Kingdom of Heaven is within us. Forget the word kingdom.
Forget the word heaven. Jesus stated that he resides in us and he resides in God, and
vice versa, and they abide in us. Forget all that abide stuff. Forget that Jesus said he and
God the father whatever. Forget it all. For the time being that is all just religious words
that essentially have no meaning.

Now having chucked all that religious stuff have you changed. No you are the
same as you were two minutes ago but for the sake of argument we have trashed a few
religious notions. Yet though those notions have been trashed you are the same
whatever it is that you are still exists. Your humanity has not changed. You think feel and
react. You are a sensate being of full human capacity. There is no heaven or hell. There is
no God, only you right now.

But what are you? What does it mean to be human? What are the limits of my human
constitution?

In just over a little more than the last hundred years or so explorations into the dynamics
of the human psyche and consciousness have taken strides into the depths of human
personality that had not been realized en masse in western civilization for nearly
seventeen hundred years. Sigmund Freud was one of the first and is still highly regarded
and influential. Carl Gustav Jung was another, about twenty years Freuds junior. But
Jung, diverged and expanded his research beyond that of Freud to include possibilities
Freud, for reasons of philosophic bias, could not consider. It is a situation where the
vision of the junior colleague may have surpassed that of his mentor, and reached into
dimensions of being and conscious and unconscious reality that provides a fuller and
truer understanding of what it is to be human. Human - not just as the physical being, but
human as the conscious entity experiencing the dimensions of the physical and
unconsciously assimilating all the more that is beyond the limitations of material sensory
perceptions.

There is a complete new vocabulary that has been emerging and making its way into our
cultural vocabulary. Archetypes, anima, animus, alchemy, amplification, complex,
individuation, persona, primordial-image, psychoid, shadow, synchronicity and more.
Investigations into the meanings behind our dreams, where do they come from, is there
more we need to pay attention too?

Jung realized that so much of what he was discovering was not wholly unique, but had
relations to perceptions of universals that can be recognized in many primitive cultures
and had direct parallel associations to orders of ancient alternative Christian perceptions




ultimately declared heretical by the politically evolving Orthodox line. These
alternatives were the Gnostics. Jesus to them was not what Jesus was to the
Orthodox. His teachings delved deeper into the psychic and spiritual condition of what
it is to be human and what the nature of reality consists of beyond the material.

Jesus told Peter on one occasion I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven;
The Amplified Bible, Mt 16:19. There are a few differing interpretations that explain
what Jesus meant by this statement including elevating Peters status to that of first pope
to crediting a prior statement of Peter as the foundation of the church. Although I have
researched and examined the numerous variations of interpretation in the past, and all fall
within an orthodox framework, none of them expresses a Gnostic quality that is
equally Biblically sustainable and finds common perception and relation to the reality of
human dynamics revealed by Jung.

Peter was a very human character. Subject to emotional outbursts and outspokenness,
often speaking before thinking - sometimes revealing spiritual depths and then
immediately getting him into trouble. A natural leader, though not always the most
insightful. A perfect bundle of human contradictions.

The pronouncement I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven was not a
reference to Peters superiority. The keys to the kingdom are a possession of each and
everyone of us.

After Jesus death and resurrection in the book of Acts Peter preached a sermon where he
quoted from the prophet Joel:

And it shall be in the last days, God says,
That I will pour forth of My Spirit on all mankind;
And your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,
And your young men shall see visions,
And your old men shall dream dreams;
New American Standard Bible : Ac 2:17

Dreams and visions are the issue here. Remember, as far as we are concerned for the sake
of argument, There is no God.

In Acts 10 two visions are related to us. One that of a Roman Centurion named Cornelius
and the other that of Peter. Each of these visions occurring in some kind of dream like
trance state and having relation to each other. The Apostle Paul was impressed by and
guided in his missionary endeavors on several occasions by dreams. Throughout the
Bible dreams and visions have had a substantial impact on the spiritual lives and
characters of those experiencing them. I will not go into them all but these include
Abimelech concerning Sarah , Jacob concerning the ladder, Joseph, Solomon, Daniel,
Joseph Marys husband, Pilates wife and more. This does not include the list of visions
that may also be recognized as dream states.





There is no doubt that in most of these cases there is a perception of God that was
associated with them. But that perception was just that a perception. And there is no
evidence that one perception was the same as anothers. All there is recorded is the dream
and the interpretation and in some cases the subsequent actions that followed.

Language is not an absolute bench mark of reality. Language is the temporal abstraction
of symbols to hold a commonly recognizable quantity or quality that can be conveyed
from one thinking communicating mind to another locked within the boundaries of
material reality. If there would be no bounded limited existence encapsulating us in finite
dimensions of body there would be no language. Our experience would be that of
dimensions unbound by time and space. And it is this unbounded reality that communes
with and in us, and is often manifested through our dreams.

I believe Carl Jung found the keys that the church lost so many centuries ago.






what do u think about Islam?"

AgAder is a beautiful young woman in Saudi Arabia
who happens to be one of my Facebook friends. I
posted an update that I was listening to a lecture
series entitled "Can the Modern World Believe in
God". Within a very short while she asked:

what do u think about Islam?
Muslims believe in Allah & they worship only
Allah & about the prophet Mohammad he is only
the carrier of the message of Islam

This was my message back to her.

================

AgAder

what do u think about Islam?

I think depending on who I am replying to this could be a dangerous question to answer. I
hope you can appreciate my attempt at a little humor?

I can only answer this as I think and not as may be propounded by anyone else or any
other group (religious or political). When talking about any religion the nature of god is
inevitably called into question . Whether that god is the god of the Jews , the god of
Islam , the Christian god , the pagan gods, Hindu , Buddhist or whatever . Among the
three major religions Jewish, Christian, or Islam , and I believe this would include
virtually all their associated sects , god is perceived as something transcendent to man.
By this I mean Im not god , you are not god , no other person is god , and all the creation
is not a part of what is god . All that exists in creation is just that , an aspect of the
creation of god , but not essentially a part of god . God exists outside and apart of the all
creation . Yet this transcendent god sustains all creation , and creation cannot exist apart
from this divine maintenance. All is dependent upon the deity to exist and function .

Within Islam , Judaism , and Christianity different frameworks have been the erected
within which differing cultures have evolved . Each of these frameworks expressing a
perception of understanding of what their relationship is to the one true god . Different
names are used , subtle differences in character are expressed , but essentially it is the
same god that each points to . Whether it is Allah, Jehovah, Yahweh or any of the other
variants , it is the same transcendent deity that all wish to serve and live in relation to.
Unfortunately within these varying frameworks there are elements that see theyre
framework as the absolute and cannot consider the possibility or potentiality that though
the frameworks may be different god is actually the same .





But that is perceiving god or deity as something transcendent , something other worldly ,
something not in the immediate relationship to his creation . This is where I would differ
from all of the major religions Christian, Jewish, or Islam. There is a transcendent nature
to god . But theres also an immediate immanence to his existence in relation to all of his
creation . God is not an alien transcendent being , but rather immediate and innate and
integral to who I am and who you are and his existence is essentially our existence . The
religions of the Far East of come much closer to perceiving this . Yet if you take a look
at the sacred texts of Islam, Judaism, and Christianity theres a great deal that can be
extracted from them that points to this innate divine indwelling relationship we all
experience with god . A major problem is we try to interpret everything literally . This is
true of all of us . Literalism is the easiest way around things approaching our ancient
texts and trying to approach god thus we do so ignorant of the value and thought and
meaning that transcends the limitations of our human logic and capabilities . We fail to
understand that whatever it is that is the divine , god , speaks to us through myth allegory
parable fables even poetry and the arts . These are not to be interpreted literally, but they
speak to the heart of what it is that we are as human beings . This transcends the
limitations of our intellect and touches us in a subconscious level that is more often
associated with instinct and the mind of the mystic, although there really is nothing
mystical about it . It is the nature of who we are as human beings before we became so
enamored with the baggage of culture and politics and religion . Things that divide us as
human beings . But not only as human beings , but divide us from the divine . Whether
we name that Allah or whatever else suits us.

So what would I think about Islam ? I know that within Islam theres a sect known as the
Sufi . Im not real familiar with them . But I have read some of their writing . And I
realize theyve come to very much the same understanding concerning the divine that I
have been realizing but from the background of a different framework . I used to be a
fundamentalist Christian . Im not any longer . There are many things Ive been learning
for a long time but simply do not fit the literalist interpretation and perspective of what
has been propagated through much Christian religion . There also seems to be a great
deal of what might be considered fundamentalist Islam that suffers from the same
problem . And I know for fact the same thing exists among the Jewish community . We
are spiritual creatures that inhabit fleshly bodies . But the nature of the flesh tends to
dominate and control what we think we are . And that spirit that is our actual being
becomes suppressed , and hidden away in the dungeons of our life . It is that spirit that is
the nature of god in us .

What I have expressed is not a Christian theology . Or Jewish for that matter . But it does
express a spiritual perception that dates back well before the time of Christ and Moses,
and actually has its roots in the esoteric mystery schools that fundamental religion of all
sorts tried to eradicate . But ultimately it is not a matter of theology or dogma and
doctrine , it is a matter of realizing what it is , who it is , that you are , and coming to
know yourself and in knowing yourself , - knowing god .





I know how all this can be confusing . It is not the kind of thing I was taught growing up
. It was not kind of thing that I was taught religion was . But even as I was taught the
traditional concepts of god and religion , from inside of me I knew there were something
else , something more , it took a long time to finally realize what that was . Im not
trying to say that this is what everyone should believe , but I do believe that as the divine
resides in me the divine also resides in you , and every part of his creation . We are all
connected . Very often we use religious language to express this . Much of this
connectedness is becoming evident through contemporary scientific investigation in the
field of quantum physics . Much of the same thing that I have been expressing here will
also be expressed in scientific language as time proceeds . It all comes down to the same
thing .

I will end this now , Ive gone on long enough . I hope it isnt too boring . If you have
any questions , Im glad to answer anything I can .

Your friend ,

Bob





Esoteric Exoteric

A while ago I was invited to join a group (off site) "Esoteric Music Theory". I have since
been asked to write some teaching articles for discussion. These would include various
aspects including music theory, practical skills and spiritual issues. I will blog some of
these here on Multiply also.

In front of me as a blank page, and my purpose is to fill it . To do this I could simply
reach back and draw from a lot of facts and figures and lay out a lot of information .
Things that had been memorized as a matter of rote. Skills that had been acquired
through disciplined repetition . And produce yet more evidence of the amazing mental
superiority of the human ape monkey see , monkey do.

In too many respects this is exactly what the production of art has become in our
conventional world . Within the framework of the corporate mindset, the mindset that
perceives human creativity as a matter of that which is profitable , and if it cannot be
made profitable it holds no value. This is the reality that artists have had to contend
with for the last three to 400 years. And increasingly ever more as we are continually
dominated by, not governments, but worldwide corporate mega structures that control
and determine what it is that is acceptable to the market. Thus determining and limiting
that which is to be marketed, ultimately controlling what it is the mass of humanity is
permitted to think, consider and find any depth of meaning to life in and through. As if
such could be considered possible under such domination, constraints and control.

Yet simply because were dominated by such economic megaliths is not sufficient to
bind and constrain the spirits of free thinking human beings . And even as these
freethinkers are inspired and reach down into the depths of who they are, a creative
genius emerges. More often than not without plan or desire to be noticed or to fit in, and
often breaking all and any rules of either political correctness, artistic norm and even that
which is deemed cutting edge. Without regard to satisfying the values of ones peers and
risking becoming ostracized, even from that most valued. Through such -- a depth of
expression and human dimension emerges, first viewed with mistrust , then maligned and
degraded, eventually subject to debate, and as the depth of truth and value becomes self
evident embraced, to become the new expression of collective human consciousness.
But as the saying goes it dont come easy.

The name of this group is esoteric music theory. The Rakefet Encyclopdic
Theosophical Glossary explains:

Esoteric [from Greek esoterikos pertaining to the inner] Applied to the advanced
instructions given to qualified candidates in Mysteries or schools of philosophy, first used
popularly in Greece by Aristotle. Jesus in the Bible had teachings for his disciples in
private, and others for the public, precisely as all other ancient religious and
philosophical teachers always had. Esoteric teachings both were and are such as could not
be understood or profitably received by those not previously prepared by study and
probation. Exoteric or outer teachings were often given in symbolic language which




revealed the esoteric meaning only to those who were in possession of the keys to
interpretation.

Conventional thinking , regardless of the era, is incapable of its own mental resources to
comprehend values that transcend the outer teachings. There are limitations to natural
logic and reason. Theres a quality of human spirit that exists beyond these. Many
would teach that every human being is endowed with the potential to experience this
inner depth. Others would teach that only the few , the elect, the elite are thus the
chosen, by whatever it is that is the divine. Some consider these deeper esotericisms to
be acquisitioned through various disciplines and natural human efforts. Others have
realized these to be utterly transcendent, to be granted and appear and manifest as it were,
other worldly. I do not presume to answer or debate to any of these possibilities. I
assume no absolute catchall to categorize what I personally find no explanation for,
except to recognize that it simply is.

Regardless of how it gets there or where it comes from, whether it be psychological or
spiritual, or both , it is in this dimension of human experience that the mass of humanity
has been conditioned to disregard, as it were to forget, to treat as irrelevant and unreal, it
is here that the artist dips his cup and drinks and is refreshed. And it is from this well that
the artist offers to his contemporaries living water .

The esoteric teachings, the glimpses into the depths of our humanity, are not the products
of our voodoo imaginations. In this I do not disqualify the practice of voodoo. Nor do
I disqualify the active and creative use of our imaginations. But as limited contemporary
minds might and do regard that which cannot be comprehended through logic and reason
alone as bunk, voodoo and imagination have become the catch phrase for all that
hints of charlatanism . The esoteric is not that which we can imagine or create. It exists
and is real. Our imaginations and spiritual practices may well be rendered expression and
conception of this. But it is not the product of our imaginations or religion . It exists
regardless of imagination or religion. i.e. although there are those who do the reality is,
you cant fake it. Yet that is exactly what our world does fake it. Until the next fad or
profit making scheme can be unfolded .

As the name of this group suggests, there is a real depth and dimension that transcends
contemporary societies values and forms. I believe it is the true calling of the artist to
manifest these. Call it religious, call it spiritual, call it psychological, call it whatever
you want to, it is all the same, but what it is more than anything else it is human . Fully
human. And reaching these depths of our humanity and giving expression to them, with
all the skill and craftsmanship that is also a part of our humanity, it is then that ones
actualization as an artist is manifest . It is then that ones creation may be realized to
stand the test of time. Until then art is little more than monkey see , monkey do.





Ignorance

Ignorance can exist on both sides of any issue. Propoganda is the tool of ignorance. They
cumulatively become a two edged sword striking at whatever gets in their way. Reason
and "any" claims to deeper spiritual (or otherwise) values are the first victoms. In order to
attain any movement towards peace or reconciliation, the sword must be abandoned.

It has been argued that the best defense is a strong and agressive offence. I believe that
comes from the "George W. Bush Strategy for Peace in Our Times". Defensive postering
is one thing, but often becomes confused by our own sub-conscious desires and will to
"control". That may first be rationalized as the "freedom" to control "my" own destiny.
Then collectively "our" destinies. Ultimately it manifests not as "control of personal
destiny" but domination of any who are assumed to interfere with our perceived destiny.
And this has nothing to do with religion or the lack of it. It is individual and collective
human nature and is fueled by ignorance. And ignorance is not the sole possession of the
religious. "Religion" is only a tool or excuse of the ignorant, as is secular humanist
sectarianism by the equally ignorant.

Fear is a product of ignorance. Not the ignorance of facts and figures and histories , but
the ignorance of who or what we are as the human being . Our understanding of
knowledge begins with our comprehension of what we believe of ourselves as a people.
My family, my siblings, my extended family, my tribe, our immediate social structures
and values and networks , our collective mythologies and beliefs, our state, our regional
geography, our national identity, these all contribute to what it is we believe we know
is the absolute nature of reality and the way humanity is intended to be realized and
understood. We send our kids off to institutions of higher learning in the hopes that there
might be a grander understanding of the world and human possibilities instilled in them .
Sometimes this leads to an awakening in the minds of a few who are capable of
recognizing the poverty of the heritage from which they came and beyond the finitude of
their original traditions, and so peer into the immensity and apparent infinite potential
that exists in the world and universe as a whole. Most maintain their relations and
connections to their traditions. It would appear that most treat the opportunity to grow
beyond their traditions as a temporal hiatus from what has been imbued as an absolute,
and are only content as they return to the more familiar and that which can be safely and
easily negotiated. This really has nothing to do with a geographic situating but rather a
social and cultural gravitation. Thus education and knowledge are reduced to filling the
minds library with facts and figures, history that is considered mostly irrelevant, and
philosophies that are little more than intellectual toys but seldom considered with serious
intent as the mind of genius groping with realities lesser minds can only write off as
fantasy or comprehend through navel gazing. And do not presume that I treat navel
gazing with any sort of contempt. Because contained in the concept of navel gazing is
the notion that there exists more than what is apparent to our five natural senses. But
there exists a dimension of mind or spirit that materialistic humanism fails to comprehend
within the bounds of its predefined Newtonian-Cartesian reality. This reality, though
claiming the title scientific and denying the existence of what cannot be measured or
quantified or the divine, except as it may be explained as the byproduct of an actual




physical processes, though the word god is foreign to such a philosophy, this reality
is every bit as religious and dogmatic as those that find no other explanation for truths
beyond the limitations of their own minds do through religion.

The secularist and the religionist are ultimately identical, because their shared
ignorance exists not in the difference of the quantity of facts and figures or natural
processes, but it exists in the lack of knowledge of knowing themselves as human beings.
Whether this be a spiritual or a psychological depth of understanding makes little
difference. What is spiritual and psychological may in fact be the same . They may
be interrelated . They may be unique unto themselves . But whichever is the case both
are realities. Linguistics and semantics may overlap and be a confusing factor, and
coming to common definitions and understandings regarding the various and separate
disciplines may hinder rather than enhance the process of coming to knowledge that is
universally recognized. But as there are minds committed to the integrity of learning, and
not the commitment to themselves or their traditions or their ideologies, the evolution of
the human mind will occur. And as minds and thinking evolve and expand so does the
reality we experience . First individually ultimately collectively.

But to willfully choose to think and act as a matter of preferred ignorance only renders
more of the same, religious or nonreligious . Ignorance knows no bounds .