What is it worth to see the Lord? (With apologies and thanks to Art)

[Israel]

As mentioned I got stirred by another thread this morning...on what at first appeared "another" Friday morning. And being stirred, appearing as a sloppy cup, I then spilled. Nothing I am convinced anyone does not know...except perhaps for me, needing to know of those things claimed...but not yet "as I ought to know".

Thanks be to God for His unwearying Spirit! Something came up as "memory" from several years ago on another site (FB)...to which I was compelled to read words a fool had written. In His unwearying, our Lord is also relentless...to have what is His, no matter what measure of presumption may appear as hindrance. A man may find himself in double speaking, but he shall never find the Lord so.


How the Lord Himself...has made "strait the way of the Lord"...straitens us, so that we might first see Him in whom such straitening was accomplished "I have a baptism to undergo and how I am straitened till it be accomplished"...and there testify of it to the world, and also, recognize in the brethren (as our brother Peter has said) "such suffering is also being accomplished in our brothers in the world". 1 Peter 5:9. And there...in that knowing...offer any form of hope by which also, we ourselves have been made comforted as such straitening is being endured.
This met me on FB after gushing all over Art's thread.






Do you remember a guy named Marshall McLuhan?
Wrote a book called "The Medium is the Message"?
It was the rage for a little bit, you know how things get hold like "The Peter Principle", "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance", "Why do Bad Things Happen to Good People", "I'm OK, You're OK", etc. I don't know how old everyone is, so if you lived through them you probably remember them, if not, you may have heard of them, and the more studious be even far more familiar with its contents than I.

But, to the disciple, the medium is the message...it's cannot be reduced to only do this, do that, believe this, don't believe that, attend this, talk this way, etc. Though we do have many many warnings...but all and only "in Him". (My poverty of expression does not diminish the Lord, only shows my desperate need of him)

But, what I aim for in simplest terms, is, Jesus is the message...the messenger himself, is the message. When I wag my finger piously quoting scripture, or pronounce from some seeming Olympian height a thing, not unlike Moses...to all "other" rebels in my self righteousness, it matters not a whit what I say, I am a laughingstock (rightly) to you, and also to heaven.

Yes, Jesus attracts many with his power, his confidence, his overwhelming security in his authority...and men, generally, when perceiving that, like that, even adore that, in this place of shifting sands.

But he himself, of all brokenness in delivering this "message" ultimately makes plain to the believer...(at least to the some I have seen, heard, believed)...that this place is not for parading ones righteousness, nor delivering of great and opulent oratory...but of learning of being one with THE one who, not only warned and entreated as need be, but allowed for himself to be so consumed of the truth of it, he gladly gave of himself, and then gladly gave himself (itself) in exchange. The one who could say, who did say, who does say "I delight to do thy will..."

It's one thing to warn a man, running away from him, "don't go around that corner, I just looked and there's a lion loose. You'll be torn to shreds" It's quite another for a man (unlike me) to come and say "I have seen something of the gravest peril, it's a hungry lion, it's not good for you to face it alone"...and that man, there staying with you, shows his honor by tackling it when it appears.

And, you are spared.

I know my language is poverty stricken, my examples childish and infantile.

But that is the difference, at least to me.

Many have, I don't doubt, as I have and perhaps still do, find it easier to "holler" at others from afar, fleeing from you...leaving you as a kind of welcome buffer (gee, if the lion gets him, at least it will slow him down enough to give me an even better head start)...which in a very particular way puts the lie to my "warning of you...out of "love"...in a very particular light. And so I can run through the streets, congratulating myself of my "great commitment" to delivering the message..."be saved!"...all the while putting myself as much (or so I think) out of harm's way...leaving all others for fodder. Yeah, that's pretty much me...a self serving coward. Rightly would one laugh at me.

But Him? Not him.

If one cares to, mock me for my inconsistency, my selfishness, my pusillanimity, and craven self aggrandizing...yes, you are "not wrong". Not wrong at all. But, it also shows...you have discernment! (Do we see how this "works"?)

But Him? No, not him. He is all I am not, could yet have some hope to be in whatever measure I am allowed...but in all, not him. (Of course silly boy! You need not even mention that!)

I suppose I could tell you of my "brush" with a lion, but, if I have no scars, why, how, with garments arranged so neatly, a sly smirk and condescending attitude, could you, would you, ever believe me?

Sure, I can throw dust on myself (and have), try to look the disheveled part (and have) put on the sincerest face (and have) affect the most endearing tone (and have)...yet all of these give way when you see the Nikes on my feet, prepared to run from you....as the "one" (you) I refuse to get too near...for fear of knowing the lightnings possible strike, or lion's coming, and it would be so much the better for me...if only one of us "bought the farm"...and that...not me. Arm's length is what the world would breed into us, in all contracts.

These things are strange to discuss, stranger still that I could expect you to even read these words, stranger still that through a vessel such as the one typing I would say...despite what you think or believe of me...I have seen one who sticks closer than a brother in these things.
You would rightly ask..."then why aren't you more like him...christian?"
I am still learning how to play fair, it's something I have never been good at. But, really, I have no excuse.

I only have a plea of guilty, at which I am constantly surprised at who I am given to see.

He is not at arm's length.

Being "that guy" is such a small price to pay. And I see others so formed. Bless you for your irresistible non resistance.To being straitened.

 

[welderguy]

Thankyou my brother. I love you.

 

[Artfuldodger]

I'll have to read and study that over a few days. Interesting.

 

[Israel]

There is an orderliness in the order of God.

Of course that sounds childish. It is. Each of us may need to hear (as we always need to hear the Lord) the Lord's words about despising "one of these little ones". Even as we are being re-formed, experience the being made "new" in the new creation. The Kingdom, we have been told, is either received as a little child...or it is not received, at all.

It may be better to not despise this making in yourself, and of yourself something new, something made for an awe and wonder that so easily usurps the "need to know" (or need to show one knows) or becomes at least equal to it, so that we begin to appreciate that one must suffer at the hands of the other. Our "need to know" when meeting the Lord's desire to show, shows one is eclipsing. And one...being eclipsed.

This orderliness...this way, it appears some may grasp either easier or more soon (quickly) than others. I, as slow learner...am grateful to God for that. For them.

Though each believer may stoutly declare God is the God of order...and have such conviction of it (and one might say "must") as to be bold in it, we may come to admit (is this grace, or an older man simply being "pompous"?) we may know, and have known...little of the orderliness in that order.

I think I may be speaking only to those who have seen the struggle in a most fundamental matter. (And one is right to find suspect, for the testing, any one who uses such language...who is anyone to declare a "fundamental matter"?)

But the matter is this...and it is to you alone whether it appears fundamental, or is just the superfluity of a man who is himself superfluous...trying to establish himself as a presenter of...fundamentals. The unnecessary man, the Captain Obvious of humor.

Joni Mitchell phrased it too simply:

"Don't it always seem to go, that you don't know what you've got till it's gone?"

One may doubt/argue/speculate whether or not Adam came to some wrestling in this...but don't doubt this Adam has not. And to such provoking he has had discussions with his own Eve in it. How to rightly appreciate a thing in the moments of its having...apart from having to suffer loss to only then begin to learn of its value? A value only seen (so to speak) in the rear view?

What can defeat "taking for granted"?

I expect, and indeed welcome the reproof of those who will say, or may find their inclination to..."the resurrection is all that annihilates such silly considerings". Yes. All regret is there consumed in glory...even to the encouragements to "forgetting what lies behind!" And it is a necessary and wholly wholesome matter that we reprove to this. All our faith in "what is"...and also, no less...what "is not"...is there established. All is made new there, and old is shown as old crucified...only there.

Though whatever we may experience to ourselves, in ourselves of "our own death" may seem so perfectly personal as to ourselves be an undeniable reality...till it is itself superseded (after all...all men die! the better man, the worse man, the seeming good man, the seeming terribly evil one! the "innocent" child, the ancient reprobate)...there remains only one death that is entirely different...and is made only so...only in, and by, the resurrection.


The one who was never under any obligation to death...to know. He didn't have to "lose" to know. He didn't have to have "taken from him" in order to have, or learn...right appreciation of. His attention, and attentions...and therefore His intention, being pure in each moment (moments we may come to find eternal, reduced then to one moment of eternal substance...where time has no power to either alter or change) is now made ours. Are we not called to Him, in that...even by that?

We may try...and find our being tried in sorest of moments, when all is laid waste (or seems so) and all appears reduced in our soul to the very starkest of facing..."what do I really believe?"

Those having been there...know this place. You know of inventories taken there...the rummaging through of things...that even as they are being sought for grasp to "center the soul" in its dizzying swirling in that maelstrom, they then turn to dust the moment they are touched for security. This fire...is too real to submit to any fabrications.

And some are free to say...this is never the believer's portion. This merely shows the ever shaky Adam...and not the new man. The new man always has "firm grasp". And some may say "I don't have any benefit in ever considering that Adam, his only use has been to the being made a thing worthy only of forgetting."

But some of you know. The inestimable value of the truth in the resurrection is made most supreme to that man. The new man is simply that man...in disbelief for joy. One may say..."that's not enough of a "change".

And I understand this is far too simple for some. Too childish. The simple vanity of a man seeking to establish himself as one able to establish...fundamentals.

The "new man" is of a heavenly calculus that is obviously too advanced a math for this old fool to enter with any understanding... and so, being simpleton, he thinks he can make things...simple. LOL. Yes, indeed!

I understand that man all to well who says "but this is not enough of a change!" There must be more to it. Men look foolish walking around in simply "awe and wonder"...they look like hick tourists in new T shirts just purchased as they amble about a grand city...children who squeal with silly joy at some new unveiling. Yep.

The man who "already knows all the fundamentals" in a sort of quasi self sufficiency, establishing himself...I know a little of. He still struggles in some need to know...more...that often leaves him very much ignoring...what he has. And has a lesson set to him. It's hard for him to imagine anything beyond his own need...as supreme. One might even say...impossible for him to know...anything beyond his own need.

But he learns something in the maelstrom...where even his own trying to hold...and there...test his mettle of strength (which is there displayed to him as his greatest need) must buckle. He learns he cannot "wrap his head around" the resurrection...try as he might to display it to rational representation...to "show" a thing to the death encroaching...when all is demanding "what you got? what you got to keep me at bay"?

A "doctrine?"

There it is so silly to mouth..."but this is not real"...when you know beyond all...it is the most real thing you have ever touched. Are touching...and being touched...by.

It's easy for a man to imagine that there he can, and will, do better than "my God, my God, why have you forsaken me"...having a "firmer" grasp of the fundamentals. The firestorm of that terror, and the terror of that firestorm to a reduction...works.

He may be surprised.

If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

Friendly fire never seems that way...at first. We are sure we are under attack by the very unrightness of its feeling. Something we believe is trying to move us "off" from our conviction of the resurrection...is actually seeking to establish it...in us.

Form an "event" to a substance.

Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

 

[gordon 2]

Returning to our first love...somehow is a great testimony of the fundamental perhaps. But is it the fundamental? Is it your returning the fundamental or the reason for it or in His presence in that first love the fundamental?

I recall when you were all one word: Jesus.

What was the fundamental for Paul? For Peter? For John? What was the fountain head and the mineral water and the source of it all and this all in one?

We are told to seek Him and we do and his promise is that we will find.Yes.

Yet what manner will it be? Will we find what we expected or the unexpected? Will the Lord in our asking be the Lord in His answer? There is a difference so it seems. You have heard "He touched me." and " All I have to do is touch Him." or " I seek the face of the Lord (and will recognize it when I find.)"There is a difference in these two fundamentals so it seems? May the Lord touch you as he wills and if you touch him that He was ever your fundamental.


Dark Night Of The Soul
The Dark Night of the Soul
St John Of the Cross
On a dark night,
Kindled in love with yearnings–oh, happy chance!–
I went forth without being observed,
My house being now at rest.
In darkness and secure,
By the secret ladder, disguised–oh, happy chance!–
In darkness and in concealment,
My house being now at rest.
In the happy night,
In secret, when none saw me,
Nor I beheld aught,
Without light or guide, save that which burned in my
heart.
This light guided me
More surely than the light of noonday
To the place where he (well I knew who!) was awaiting me–
A place where none appeared.
Oh, night that guided me,
Oh, night more lovely than the dawn,
Oh, night that joined Beloved with lover,
Lover transformed in the Beloved!
Upon my flowery breast,
Kept wholly for himself alone,
There he stayed sleeping, and I caressed him,
And the fanning of the cedars made a breeze.
The breeze blew from the turret
As I parted his locks;
With his gentle hand he wounded my neck
And caused all my senses to be suspended.
I remained, lost in oblivion;
My face I reclined on the Beloved.
All ceased and I abandoned myself,
Leaving my cares forgotten among the lilies

 

[gordon 2]

 

[gordon 2]

 

[Israel]

Thank you brother! I watched the first and am perhaps 1/2 through the other. If it is un-right to make any comment till all is reviewed, I do not know.

God knows whether I am as I seem to myself often presented; and which I most often loathe in judgment when I believe it to be nakedly beheld. The food critic...given to deconstructing a meal by what (perhaps is hoped to?) appear a superior palate. God knows what and how each man tastes, what seems highlighted or may even appear then as...too much...or too little. What can be more annoying ...or whom...than a supercilious bow tied wearing effete...? Pretending to eat...when he is all and only there for the tasting! Too much oregano...not enough basil. The shiitakes were too old to be used by 15 minutes!

But there are others! There are those whom delight in certain recipes...(unknown to any complete list of particulars) believing others no less know that delight. And so, because to them the taste of the meal is judged so hearty...so good...they cannot help but delve..."I must know what goes into "The Colonels" chicken coating!" I must know what, and how much of each ingredient that if perchance...I can even "make this at home"! And then, others no less.

Of course when we discuss the resurrection (or any do for that matter)... no let's be more broad...let's be as broad as (who am I to set the parameters? rebuke and expand as need be! Or...contract, no less!) the mention of the name. Jesus...and specifically, Jesus the Christ. Oh, the diners that may come! And no doubt, critics, too.

It's too late...once the name is mentioned, for any to legitimately seek to play coy, a meal is being advertised. A "No Critics Allowed" sign becomes the coyest form of all dispositions.


No...the hungry will show up, the curious will show up, the mere tasters and critics will show up, and yes...even the flies...will show up.

And yes, please, for the love of God as need be, argue the legitimacy of my usage of legitimately in the above, for I, no less nor more than any other...know not when I am seeing law...or seeking to make a law. If Jesus Christ can be "legitimately used" in service to our own cleverness...(other than to its exposing for repentance)...that cleverness itself take its proper place of shame...help me. To me it's a vital ingredient...though some may legitimately argue...not enough is found in your recipe.

If any of this be not mere fabrication to the general usage of "the Name", then it would hold true for anything as being held "in that Name". And again, as need be disabuse me of any notion, as need be, about "the resurrection" as being found in that Name.

This is not challenge...for though I know it is foolish to seek to provoke the Lord...I nevertheless hold that there are those of you..."set for the defense of the gospel".

For this is where I find liberty to address by comment what at least I have seen of these men speaking of the resurrection...specifically.

But for now, I say enough.

 

[gordon 2]

Yes you are most likely in part correct re: the motivation ( I see in part only as) a need to prove the gospel. But the sandwich I sink my gums into is the idea that the resurrection is assessed by the church leaders, the apostles and those to the new faith as "the event" of a new beginning in the material and spiritual world and the beginning of the end times... and the world to come. God is risen to judge the world and of course God will do it in His way.

The witnessed event of a bodily resurrection that is not with a body exactly like it was before the resurrection is also prayer provoking.

I go to where perhaps that the view then of God in the all in all was refined within the views of a resurrection (a rising) of God himself intimately active with his people (s) and that the Messiah was not a political figure, could not be a politician, but rather Lord and savior and God and judge over them as also over all nations.


John 10:34 “We are not stoning You for any good work,” said the Jews, “but for blasphemy, because You, who are a man, declare Yourself to be God.” 34Jesus replied, “Is it not written in your Law: ‘I have said you are gods’? 35If he called them gods to whom the word of God came—and the Scripture cannot be broken.

And then Jesus goes on to state why His claim in him is valid.

From the above is given a reference in scripture to Psalm 82 and from 82 the reference goes to Job 1st chapter. Note the last verse in 82...

8. Rise up, God, judge the earth, for all the nations belong to you.

Seems God has a habit of answering David's prayers.

So can I suggest that for David and alot of saints before and since that the worth of seeing God was/is as you said I think all in Jesus or in David's prayer answered in the flesh--- our Savior Jesus.

From David's 82ed Psalm, now the song is Joy To The World, the Lord is come...

 

[Israel]

There are matters of which it appears (as these exchanges/conversations move even from years to decades in length!) we each, in whatever place we are given to occupy in our convictions, and to whatever depths they are established, refer. We, in that sense..."coming from that place" to each may have a particular flavor.

To use the recipe metaphor, I think some of us if blindfolded to some participants particular identity, nevertheless may have some ability to "guess" who has done the cooking. In one sense this observation is neither here nor there, and of no consequence.

Except that we might admit these words we see on screen...(by some more, by some less) are (if one can receive it) our service to one another, either recognized as such to the depth they are...or even perhaps by some unrecognized. In that sense, even if we, or any, deny that particular matter I see (as truth) as we give away "ourselves", we allow glimpses undeniable (or so I say) into our kitchens. And we all draw from our larders, our stock, of what ingredients we have. Or perhaps better, have been given. Perhaps even...taught to use.

We have a taste it seems...for consistencies. And we also (for want of a better description) have certain ingredients that we find essentials. With little exception I believe, and across the board (especially this board) in each is experienced a compelling to "represent" the Lord Jesus Christ, rightly.

The entrance into that discipline, though we may argue or contend over its origins in us, nevertheless does not provide (even in those arguments) the denial that this compelling in, and to this discipline...is there. In shortest, regardless of how or where a man may see himself relative to this banner...none (?) would deny the salience of its inscription:

"I am set for the defense of the gospel"

and therefore the right representation of the truth of God in, and declared through, Jesus Christ.

(and that is "my" therefore, I have linked what no other man is under obligation to accept, regardless of his disposition to the banner, I cook with what ingredients I have been given, and each will find whether I [or any of us speakers/writers] are simply concocting...or following a given recipe.)

Even the chefs...themselves.

"Bravo!" I hear with slow clap (which is necessary to me) you have taken several paragraphs to merely say "you perceive christians here"!

Yes, I have. And that means nothing of itself in regards to my estate, as though a certain implicit stance of righteousness is found in admission of that, for the Devil(s) himself/themselves recognize a disciple. Or disciples.

"Jesus I know, and Paul I know...but who are you?"

What I think of myself means nothing (but hey...a devil might say that! in hope of feigning some sort of humility to deceive the simple!). It matters not at all how I may "think to myself" of myself as I observe whatever discipline in my kitchen...what to include, what to exclude...what "I think" is shown poison...what I may in all deceit...believe is savory.

And no man would be wrong to say, and may even be the rightest..."you use a lot of words to say you don't trust yourself...which by their use is a more apparent testimony that in thinking you have "much to say"...you actually do trust yourself...a great deal!" Even...to such an excess of unwholesomeness...your own death cannot be far behind...cooking in such a toxic kitchen. Too many rotten things show up in all your serving! If you eat as you serve...you must surely die. And if you do not "eat as you serve"...a hypocrite's end is just as sure!

God knows.

So, any address of the resurrection (which even devil's know...and perhaps to the "knowing better", though God forbid!) as the touchstone of the faith (If Christ be not raised...) will of all...be dealt with in accord to its significance in toto...that is to make any "play of it" is death indeed...or even unwholesome embrace...(let no man be so foolish to believe the devils are afraid to mention it...using it to accuse to a hoped condemnation the rationality of the believer!) is to not invite judgment.

But...

As it is touchstone, all must eventually...as "springing from it"...must also "come down to it"...it is for us...an inescapable consideration. No matter how far in pleasures doctrinal considerations may take the mind, no matter how deep we believe the now heavenly mathematics may show themselves in the apportioning to us our ingredients for cooking...the axiom of the resurrection is that upon which all hinges.
And therefore...anything or everything "about it" that may be said (or better, has been said by those declared trustworthy)...and all as may be seen pertaining to it...is not said, was not said, vainly.

"But as touching the resurrection of the dead..." Paul said.

I have not found his recipe...concocted.


PS I believe very few of the physicians I have mentioned this to "like it"...or like it much that anyone might even know it...let alone "put it to them". But the very few who are able to smile are enough.

"Sometimes the very best doctor a man might find...is the one who refers him to a better doctor"

 

[gordon 2]

I have to wonder that because I make you as a part of myself that your pilgrim's progress is mine and for that part it is myself the pilgrim seeking to turn to the right as you do? Our commonality is the possibility that we are all on these boards men and women to a living faith.

It is true that culture influences cooking. Nevertheless, cooking from the heart is not cooking from gut feeling. ( I once went to Golden Coral Bradenton FL. and I had many choices as you most likely know. I had dinned there before this time. On this one occation there was something different. On this occasion there was a room separate with perhaps a sitting of 70 people in celebration of some special family event or person.

For some strange reason I decided to eat what they were eating, as I knew them to be locals and I was from away. The spread was the same for both guests, them and the others like me. There was so many choices that one could not chose to eat it all. And so I had what most of those locals had, being to the line behind them and watching their choices, I chose to eat what they chose. Now let me tell you this: It is the best spread I have ever had away!!!!!!!!!!**** and it was not because people were trying different things that they chose what they did, ( most had the same things) it was because that was the way they knew best to show joy and love as family.)
**** Someone latter told me I had chosen items of the Southern soul food menu.


So what is the essential fundamentals of our kitchens? Ho!

Now to point to Jesus as if mine is not yours is just not Christian. Ho!

I'm still open to Paul's cooking and John's for that matter. All I can claim is that through cultures and the various roads taken on them by sundry pilgrims since, they ( Paul and John) have this in common: Personally witnessed to them the resurrected Lord! And so back and forth the world changed. Paul's intellect was full of spices and John's was as old as David's. The resurrection seems to have given them a whole new table menu from the old and the new.

I'm hungry! You?

 

[Israel]

So what is the essential fundamentals of our kitchens? Ho!

Now to point to Jesus as if mine is not yours is just not Christian. Ho!

If by my words it is rightly discerned as implication; that according to me there has been a different distribution of essential fundamental(s), I am rightly rebuked. If it is to some other implication...not for the bearing of accusation from me to you, nor you to me, then I am even more rightly encouraged.

Now to point to Jesus as if mine is not yours is just not Christian.

But the place of gratitude is not always the place of greatest, nor first "apparency."

If we are still speaking of the resurrection, as I trust we are, and both posted vids are to that same reference (though I do not wish to make more nor less of them than they are) it is sufficient. I am persuaded there can never be found an "over consideration" of the significance of the resurrection.