www.IlluminateTheTruth.com

Anyone who elects the government as their King tends to do tragic things, like crucify the Truth.

Such is the folly of humankind: to be inclined to seal its only hope for abundant life in a tomb.

What is Truth

What to do with the Truth?  Shall one deny it?  Cover it up?  Falsify it?  Ride its coattails?  Or believe it. 

Governments and kings will postulate on the matter, but the choice endowed with eternal life was not designed for governments and kings to answer because world structures and systems and positions are not eternal.  The choice is a gift for each individual person to respond to.    

If only there wasn’t a choice, because a choice guarantees an initial catastrophe.  But eternal Truth builds its kingdom with dignity and desire – not by force or contempt – therefore, in the center of everything, a choice is given to us.   

We don’t choose what the Truth shall be.  We choose whether we will live by Truth or not.    

“What is truth?” (John 18:38).

The answer depends on whether that’s a sincere question, or a retort. 

“I am the Truth”, said Jesus (John 14:6). 

“Anyone who is of the Truth hears the voice of God” (John 18:37).  The one listening to the Word of God is hearing Truth.    

Pilate proved the words of God by demonstrating that Truth cannot be heard by one who is bound to please the roaring crowd outside, even if Truth is standing right there.  “The reason why you do not hear the words of God is that you are not of Him” (John 8:47).  Why should one listen to something they don’t believe in? 

It’s surprising to think that Truth allows Himself to be denied or suppressed.  It’s remarkable that Truth willingly delivers Himself into the hands of those who conspire to lock Him up. 

It’s not that Truth is helpless, but it has a patient nature – He has a patient nature – content to wait for a painfully long time before He is revealed in full light. 

The waiting time may appear as Truth’s apathy, weakness, subservience, or lack of existence.  But the waiting time is purposed to reveal the truth of who we are, in the hope that we will finally choose to live by God’s Truth instead of our own. 

All Creation is Bound to the Law of Truth

Every act and atom is accountable to God’s Truth. There is a proper way for everything. It’s written in the law of His Word and reflected in the laws of creation. For every action, there is a reaction. And for every choice there is a consequence. For every sin, there must be atonement. All things are subject and accountable to the order of Truth, through whom all things were made.

Life apart from the law of Truth is not a thing.  The only reason we are able to rule against the existence of Truth is because God allows this idea and it suits His purposes, otherwise there would not be choice.  But truly, to exist – to be alive – is to align with the laws of the One who created existence.   

And the law stated in the very beginning is this: we may either follow the rule of Truth, and live, or follow the rule of something else, and become subject to its short-lived reign.  We are either bound to the rule of life or the rule of death.  We cannot outwit this.  There is no other way.  We can escape the binds of death by choosing life, or we can escape binds of life by choosing death; but one thing we cannot escape is the reality our boundness (Romans 6:20-22).

So, when one perceives the Truth to be oppressive or offensive, and conspires to cast off the binds of Truth, he or she is still, in fact, not free.  This law is echoed throughout the Bible, and it is uniquely illuminated in John 18 – 21: when one sets out to make a mockery of the Truth, give it an unfair trial, publicly execute it, and finally become liberated of it, one doesn’t actually get liberation in its place.  That one is instead, now, in bondage to “not-Truth”.  They are bound to a lie.

The Playbook of a Lie

The pathology of a lie was exposed in the beginning.  It enters, masquerading innocuously, and lobs a barbed comment, begging engagement.  With convincing authority, it presents a single, attractive morsel to chew on followed by crafty reasoning replete with infectious disease. 

Somehow a belly-crawling lie with no leg to stand on can turn even the most devout ear by suggesting that, 1) the Truth of God ought to be questioned, and then 2) proposing that good and evil can be determined apart from God (Genesis 3:1-7). 

Following the path of this logic terminates in a belief that in order to be saved, one must now hide from the Truth (Genesis 3:8) or destroy the Truth (John 11:50). 

These are the thoughts of the Father of Lies who was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the Truth for there is no Truth in him (John 8:44).

The voice of a lie uttered from the Serpent suggested that God was holding out on the woman and man based on the idea that God could become envious of them – afraid that mankind would become like Him. 

Surely the Serpent, who wanted to be his own God with his own followers, was implicating God of the Serpent’s own governing sin: envy.  God had already made man and woman like Himself.  He had already created humankind with the authority and capacity to:

• dwell and commune with Him
• rule with Him
• display God’s magnificent wonders. 

Yet the sin of envy worked its way through the mind of Eve like leaven, and she rose to act upon the conviction of a lie: that it would be better to rule apart from God.  The concept of knowing apart from God became appealing, and with that, self-determination became the highest ideal. 

The prospect of self-determination always presents as enlightenment (Genisis 3:4-5; Proverbs 14:12; Isaiah 65:5), but usurping God’s Truth with one’s own knowledge is God’s definition of foolishness (1 Corinthians 3:19).  Good and evil which have been determined apart from God is a lie, and the law of God has predestined the way of a lie to end in death.

The one who allows anyone other than God to say who and how and why one is, is one who will tragically miss the mark of Truth.  God underscores the importance of knowing whom we have appointed to authenticate our righteousness or our unrighteousness, and to determine right and wrong: “Who told you…,” asked God (Genesis 3:11).  Who is the one now informing you of your shame or virtue – good and evil?

The one who defines good and evil by any voice outside of the person of God – even if it’s a voice coming from within the garden of God – will not become True enough, or also-True, or safely within the realm of Truth.  Even the Devil speaks in part-Truths.  No, the one who has determined to follow anyone other than God alone stands in opposition to eternal Truth.

Any King Other Than the Truth Will Be a Tyrant

What to elect in place of Truth?  What self-determined image shall be placed on the ruling throne, apart from Truth?  I suppose it doesn’t matter. 

The only suitable King is God.  Nothing else can occupy the temple’s Holy of Holies and give abundant life – not money, power, duty, piety, law, government, enlightenment, mother or father, or any idealized image of God or creation.

Even God’s chosen people – the Israelites, whom the Truth revealed Himself to and chose to make His nature known to the world through – even they were inclined to want a created ruler.  To be fair, they were not seeking a ruler apart from God.  Instead, they beseeched God to choose a human representative of God to rule over them as king; and ultimately, God would come in human form as their King.  But a human representative of God as King in the meantime would miss the mark of ruling as God rules. 

The people pleaded still, “We want a man-king to rule over us!” (1 Samuel 8). 

They had their reasons:

• To fight their battles for them
• To judge them (determine good and evil)
• To be like other nations
• To settle their disputes for them

“But,” God warned, “your king will be a tyrant.” 

God explains in the book of 1 Samuel what this means: a tyrant takes the people and their money and possessions for the tyrant’s own sake.  Tyrants are destined to set themselves up as equal to God – as the only God.    

No one will serve a tyrant with pleasure; rather, they will be slaves under the rule of cruelty and coercion.  Furthermore, tyrants pick their battles and delineate their own version of justice to magnify their own name, as opposed to lifting up the name of Truth.

Any King other than God – even a man-king appointed by God, selected for the purpose of representing God – will be a flawed representation at best, and will grow to become a tyrant whose rule (and rules) will burgeon into chaos, futility, and destruction. 

The downfall of God’s chosen ones on the heels of turning from His way throughout the Old Testament – the ruin of the people and nation appears so brilliantly choreographed – so perfectly tuned to turn fruitful gardens into plundered battlefields, why it almost looks as if tyrannical, mastermind, human hands had schemed their demise from the beginning.  But that implies too much credit to human hands. 

The rulers who sabotage foundations and poison the waters – the authorities who steal and kill – these seeking to destroy the place of God’s people are not of flesh and blood.  It is the power of evil and darkness, bound to this world, having its way in the flesh (Ephesians 2:1-5; Ephesians 6:12; Romans 7:23).  For this, the Truth is the only weapon. 

The Truth is the only way forward because only God can crush the true enemy in this world.  When God’s people engage their course assuming flesh is the enemy, they carry out the work of a lie.

A lie works quickly because its time is short.  Before long, a single inclusion in one body can give birth to a whole city of lies.  Lies produce fruits born selfish ambition: there is fear, shame, envy, deceit, malice, self-interest, disorder and every evil thing (James 3:16; Romans 1:29-31).

This is true of families and nations, in metropolis and desert, and Jerusalem and Babylon, starting in the days of Cain on up to the present day. 

The Mark of a Nation without Truth

A society without Truth is no less religious than a Truth-filled one.  The recordings and letters in the Old and New Testament demonstrate that a Truthless society absolutely worships something.  Actually, a society without Truth is compelled to worship a lot of somethings. 

In Athens, the aristocracy knelt at the temple of Popular Thought, complete with babblers and influencers posing on their platforms, purveying current ideology (Acts 17:18).  The loudest and most fanatical voices reacted properly in step to that moment’s messiahs, pariahs and darlings. 

Pedestals exalted the deities of the day, plus one empty pedestal for the unknown deity which had yet to reveal itself – an exhibit displaying that newness and openness were among the highest virtues in a sophisticated, polytheistic land whose citizens were cursed with the knowledge of their incompleteness.   

Can there be any rest for the one whose saving goodness is contingent on being in step with the latest human constructs?  But what good is it to please a society bound to a lie?  What complement to the soul is it to be considered moral by those who write their own, temperamental, self-centered moral codes.

Cities which are opposed to the Truth create upside-down systems of justice.  Prone to justify new ways of doing evil, its scales are weighted against the truth-teller while murderers are released onto the streets.  They prize self-indulgence and thrive on discord.  They offer their children as sacrifices to mythology, and elevate sexual perversion to a temple rite.  They deny what is visibly and plainly true in favor of images of creation and self-determined truths.  And even though these ways end in destruction, the citizens not only affirm, but applaud those who practice these ways (Romans 1:21-32).

A place without Truth is breeding grounds for insincerity, superstition, and volatility.  It only took a matter of hours for the Apostle Paul to be greeted as a god in Lystra, and then stoned and dragged out for dead. 

But even the descendants of the Israelite nation – the Jews and the Jewish leaders who were given the oracles (and the very Word) of God – were just as susceptible to the woes of a lie, exhibiting the pitfalls common to the whole of human landscape: ignorance, arrogance, elitism, hypocrisy, greed, exploitation, and presentism. 

Their city was home to a shepherd-less crowd, pious virtue signalers, doctored law, an old guard who preferred tradition over the Word of God, and an elite class who enforced (John 5:16) a fraudulent and ineffective mode of healing the poor and the sick and the marginalized.

Even a place with Truth can become erratic when the Truth is seen as a threat to one’s place, or is mistaken as the Savior of one’s worldly place.  Volatility reigns, even in Truth’s temple, when the flesh is seen as the enemy, and one’s place in this world beckons as the reward.  It took less than seven days for Jesus to be welcomed into Jerusalem as a King, and then crucified with the thieves. 

The Way of Truth

It is possible to spend a lifetime studying and practicing and ministering the Truth and still not recognize Him when He comes.  It is possible to spend years with the Truth and have a pleasant relationship with Him and still not know Him as the only hope for salvation.

It’s possible to wield swords in vicious defense of the Truth, yet carry out the work of a lie (John 18:10).

The utter contrast of Truth’s ways versus man’s, and the cost involved for believing Him, can turn the most rock-solid disciple.  On the darkest nights, Truth’s most enthusiastic friend might step away and deny knowing Him.  His most devout follower may deny having truly understood Him.  He might even deny having associated with Him because anyone who publicly identifies with the Truth will suffer the same fate of being condemned by the world. 

There comes a moment when it is time to decide what to do with the Truth.

“Behold the man,” said Pilate hoping to defuse the bleating crowd by showcasing Jesus’s pitiful appearance (John 19:5). 

There He was, the Son of Man – man’s beginning, his highest form, and his destiny.  With all power, He embraced humility, clad in torn and pierced flesh, bleeding the blood that would atone for every sin in the entire world from the beginning to the end of time.  

To perceive Him as benign is to receive impotency.  The Jews knew Jesus was not benign.  The Jews argued that Jesus was a threat to Caesar because Jesus had claimed to be the Son of God – a king!  In civilizations where the king is perceived as a god, anyone challenging one title is challenging both titles. 

But Jesus never claimed to be the king of Rome.  And perhaps because Jesus is more desirous of what each person has to say about who He is than what He had to say about Himself (Luke 20:8; Mark 8:29; John 18:34), Jesus’s works and ways proclaimed His deity more than His words did (John 10:22 – 39).  And though He did use divine language to describe Himself, He never technically said, “I am the Son of God”, though He did not deny this title when confronted with it by the Sanhedrin.  And for this admission, He would be crucified.

According to Old Testament Law, blaspheme was punishable by death, with stoning.  But the Romans forbade prominent executions to be carried out by any power other than the Roman government, which meant that if the Jewish leaders wanted Jesus (who was becoming very well known) to be killed, the Romans had to do it.  And the Romans executed their criminals by crucifixion. 

Supporting this resolve to hand Jesus over to the Roman government was the retribution the Jewish leaders would surely face from the Jewish citizens if the Jewish leaders killed Jesus (who was becoming very well loved).  Better to pin Jesus’s death on the government, and direct any blame or animosity for His death, toward Caesar. 

The greater the tyrant, the more likely he is to interpret anything as insurrection, and the more disproportionate he will be in retaliation.  Pilate was currently under scrutiny for being too drastic in his measures against dissent, so he was eager to avoid being caught in any controversial rulings. 

Pilate had the power to execute, yet he could not determine any violation of Jesus’s that warranted execution according to the law of Caesar.  At one point he tried to pawn this case off to Herod Antipas – son of Herod the Great – who was in town visiting.  Pilate’s wife weighed in to affirm Pilate’s hesitation, sending him a note which pleaded for Jesus’s release. 

But if Pilate did not appease the Jewish leaders, there would be strain on the working relationship between Pilate and members of the Sanhedrin.  There would also be tension within the Roman government if Pilate handed Jesus back to the Jews to carry out their own execution, or if Pilate allowed this “king” to become a rival to Caesar as the Jew’s court ruling alleged Jesus surely was.  Meanwhile the pressure was mounting from outside Pilate’s palace as the crowd was chanting their demand to crucify Jesus. 

There is no evil where there is no good, nor is there a light to illuminate sin.  So, Pilate, born of darkness and unable to hear the Truth, was led by a lie to a place where he did not want to go.  His hand forced, he made a Godless judgement and enacted a Godless existance. 

He handed Jesus over to be crucified, and posted on His cross the verdict that warranted His death sentence: “Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews” – a phrase ascribed to Jesus at birth by the Wise Men – but a phrase He did not utter of Himself.  It was a proclamation that was true in the heavens and became the decree of a kangaroo court, because God is sovereign over everything – even the binds of a lie.

The saddest part about Jesus’s accusation is not that it was false; it’s that it was true – He is King – but the leaders didn’t want this Truth.  And God does allow for rulings against the existence of Truth. 

“Behold your King,” exclaimed Pilate, hoping the Jews would hear the absurdity of sentencing Jesus, who had Pilate nervously considering whether He might actually be a god (John 19:14).  Or perhaps Pilate was just hoping to wash his hands of any guilt – your criminal (or King), your ruling, your conscience (Matthew 27:24). 

But there He was, the King – the Son of God, one with God, and the answer to man’s incompleteness.  He did not set his sights on earthly thrones; instead, He came to overthrow the prince of darkness, sin, and death.  His birth meant God could dwell in flesh; His death meant God could dwell within our flesh.  To consider that He might actually be God is to be gifted the choice: what to do with this Truth?

In the case of The People versus Truth, in the court of Jerusalem, in the era which split time in two, Truth was convicted on charges of blasphemy and punished for the crime of insurrection.  Just like that – without a proper witness or defense or legal testimony, Truth was swiftly sentenced in the dark of night, and condemned to death in the interest of preserving the people’s place and peace within the kingdom. 

He was whipped, beaten, and mocked.  Afterward, the soldiers took the Truth to be crucified on the hill of death, and they monetized his garments.

Who Killed the Truth and Why?

Who carried the greatest fault in all of this?  Who was responsible for destroying the Truth?

Was it Caesar and all Caesar’s men?  Or the bleating crowd?  Or the virtue signalers in the town square?  The false prophets?  Was it the law doctors who weaponized the law to destroy the Truth?  Was it the justice leaders who made an artform of hypocrisy by swallowing camels while straining out gnats?  Or the religious elite inside God’s very temple? 

Who has blood on their hands for the death of Truth?

All are culpable, said Jesus, but “… the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin” (John 19:11). 

At first glance, John 18:3 may appear to hold the answer, narrating the part where “Judas… guiding Roman soldiers… and some officials from the chief priests and Pharisees” came to Jesus and arrested Him. 

But the soldiers were only there to prevent any rioting of the Jews upon the arrest of Jesus – especially since so many Jews were in Jerusalem to celebrate Passover.  And Judas and the Jewish officials were only carrying out Step 1 of a plan which had already been conspired by the high priest and the chief priests to arrest Jesus and have him killed because Caiaphas, the high priest had said, “…it would be better for one man to die than the whole nation perish” (John 11:47-50).

John 18:12-13 recounts that a detachment of soldiers with its commander and the Jewish officials arrested Jesus and handed him to Annas, the acting high priest and father-in-law of Caiaphas, who was the actual high priest that year.  But who handed Jesus over to Pilate?

It was an inside job.

Grave concern was mounting within the Sanhedrin.  The high priest, the chief priests, and the pharisees were consumed by the fear that the Romans were going to take away their place.  They worried it was only a matter of time before the Romans would take their temple and all the positions therein, their status within society, and their space for practicing their way and customs.  Certainly, the Israelite nation’s history, wrought with banishments and exiles, couldn’t have been far from their minds.

Furthermore, Jesus’s miraculous signs and wonders were starting to cause people to believe He actually might be God, or at least closer to God than the priests, and therefore these priests and Pharisees might lose their esteemed position within the hearts and minds of their own people.

Not long after the leaders had determined their course of action, the moment to capture Jesus presented itself, and finally “…the Jewish leaders took Jesus from Caiaphas to the palace of the Roman governor” (John 18:28). 

Their own admission comes in John 18:30 when Pilate questioned the Jewish leaders about the charges, and they replied, “If he were not a criminal, we would not have handed him over to you.”

And finally, Pilate confirms this in his statement to Jesus, “It was your own people and your chief priests who handed you over to me” (John 18:35).

A sovereignty within a sovereignty is a delicate dance.  Consider, for example, church within state, or the Spirit within flesh, or the Jewish nation within the Roman empire…  Delicate dances and a balance of power only last so long because the nature of power is that it is never content with status quo (so the saying goes).  

In Caesar’s day, the Roman officials tolerated the customs and culture of the Jews, but it was a tenuous relationship. 

The Romans permitted the Jewish leaders to retain their seats of religious authority in order to keep stability within the Roman empire.  The Romans allowed the Jews to practice their religious customs so long as nobody publicly challenged the authority or divinity of Caesar. 

Some Jews protested this violently.  Certain factions of the Jewish nation would rebel, in the form of deadly riots, against the claim of their host empire’s absolute authority.  Zealous Jews like Barabbas, a high-profile murderer and notorious criminal, frequently led deadly insurrections which was cause for intervention from both Romans and Jews. 

Riots led by Jewish zealots were bad for the Roman governors because it reflected poorly on Rome’s regional officers to have such unruly areas under their governorship.

Understandably, there was also pressure from the Roman citizens for the local politicians to get these reoccurring outbreaks under control.  Citizens do not want to live in volatile cities constantly under threat of riots.

But it was also in the interest of the Jewish religious leaders to quell these zealot-uprisings.  Ultimately the priests held their positions, and the Jews retained their place, so long as Caesar approved.  Too many Jewish zealots and too many riots might cause the Roman government to gaze in the Jew’s direction one too many times, with unfavorable results.

And certainly, a Jew who would even allude to possessing divinity or lordship was not good news for the future of the Jews in Roman land.  If Jesus’s claims of being “the light of the world” and “before Abraham” for example, or if His growing number of followers posed as a threat to the rule of Caesar, the Romans would have cause to address this in any manner they saw fit. 

Crucifying Jesus appeared to be the better, if not the only, option for the good and the safety of God’s chosen people.  The hour had come when those who would destroy the Truth would do so thinking they were offering a service to God (John 16:1-3). 

So, the high priest and the chief priests, who were appointed by God to bring sacrifices to God, brought the ultimate sacrifice to Caesar instead, and solidified their allegiance to the government.

It was a strategy for image management, posing God’s people in a favorable light, hoping to not appear as hostile or unenlightened to the surrounding rulers and any citizens with sway.

It wasn’t a hard choice.  How much better to preserve the culture of God’s people and therefore, necessarily, protect the place of the religious leaders that the Roman government afforded the Jewish people (compared to, say, life under an oppressive Egyptian Pharoah).  How much better to commission one of Truth’s disciples to sell out the Truth with a deceptively affectionate kiss, backed by the law of the land, for a few pieces of silver? 

Afterall, what is Truth?

Indeed, there is only agenda.

Why Were the Priests More Guilty in the Crucifixion of the Truth?

There is only agenda, except agendas come and go – they rise and fall – they are enthroned then dethroned by the next one.  They never create lasting peace.   

Where in world history is there an example of lasting peace and freedom and dignity following the compromise of Truth (with a capital “T” or otherwise)?  It was as unsustainable a practice for the Jewish nation as it is now for the church, and one’s family, and one’s soul. 

As governor, Pilate had been given the legal authority by God (John 19:11; Romans 13:1-2) to conduct the punishments assigned to guilty verdicts of the Roman and Jewish courts, according to the law.  Pilate carried out the sentence issued by the court of the Jews, but he did so despite, himself, finding no fault in Jesus.  He did not see Jesus as a threat to the Roman government, yet he authorized his death anyway.  For this reason, he carries some guilt for the injustice and the crucifixion of Jesus.

But the more guilty ones were the chief priests and the high priest.  God had appointed them to judge fairly and justly – to know God and to follow His law and to procure truthful verdicts.  Instead, they manipulated the civil power at hand to carry out their own, self-determined good.

The priests made the common mistake of believing that their place was given to them by man; but each one’s place is established by God.  Providing sacrifices and offerings to any other ruler in the name of securing our God-given place only feeds a tyrant who will soon swallow us up and spit us out.

In the end it was envy (Mark 15:10) – the same governing sin as the Serpent – which possessed the priests, and they rose to convict the Truth of being a liar.  They removed Him, ensuring that they would retain, for themselves, the people’s adoration.

The court in Jesus’s case was not ordered around God’s law.  The crime and the punishment had been decided before there was even a trial.  This wasn’t legal, and Jesus pointed this out: “Where are the two or more witnesses who will speak against me (are you asking me to indict myself – John 18:20-21)?”  The pharisees had been so quick in prior incidents to go by the book, when it was useful to attempt to disprove Jesus (John 8:13).  But now the book was nowhere in sight. 

Jesus’s Gospel message was not a mystery.  He had shared it with thousands in the open and in the temple and His message was consistent no matter the audience.  Why couldn’t two people be found to testify consistently as to the charges of blaspheme against Jesus? 

And, “Why do you strike me?” asked Jesus, who was struck by a court official when this punishment was neither warranted nor authorized (John 18:23).  All of this went against the law of God. 

Meanwhile, the religious leaders were determined to maintain their personal, ritual cleanliness.  They did not want to be excluded from the fast-approaching Passover feast based on a technicality, thus the unconventional and nonconforming logistics of the trial.  Awash in minutia they followed the ceremonial law so they could hold their positions at the festivals of God throughout the coming day, after having sentenced His Son to death just hours before.

But despite all the righteous posturing and intelligent posits and the cunning measures taken by the chief priests to kill one man in the name of protecting the nation of Israel as a service to God, they were eventually wiped out by the very government that the religious leaders handed the Truth over to. 

Thanks to the nature of a tyrant, it was only a matter of a few decades from this deceivingly noble effort to preserve their people, that they were either murdered or displaced, their temple ruined, and their sacred artifacts stolen.

“Caesar” destroyed their place, anyway. 

Inside one generation of Jesus’s death, a charismatic, narcissistic, renaissance man was scandalously pulled, with well-connected strings, onto the emperor’s seat, and deftly accomplished everything the Jewish leaders feared would happen, and more. 

The depraved annihilation waged by Nero Caesar was so brilliantly choreographed – so perfectly tuned to turn cities into rubble and temples into ruins – it’s tempting to think some mastermind hands had schemed it from the beginning.  But that would give too much credit to human hands.   

Our Calling as Priests of the Truth

What message might be embedded in this account for believers now, who are navigating places disposed to a lie? 

Whether within our nation, our churches, or ourselves, we will walk amidst places which bear the mark of Truthlessness as evidenced by its captured agendas and inverted outcomes, its self-determined truths and weighted scales, and by the movements which deny what is visibly and plainly true in favor of an ideal theory of creation.

Just as with the followers of God who lived in ancient Babylon, Assyria, Egypt, Athens, and Rome, we too are living amidst superstition and volatility. 

Just as with God’s chosen people who wandered the desert and found themselves in a captured Jerusalem, we too are navigating the pitfalls common to the whole of human landscape, and campaigns which replace the Truth with agenda. 

We too may endure brilliantly choreographed downfalls – perfectly tuned to sabotage foundations and divide member from body – downfalls which appear to have been schemed by mastermind hands from the beginning.

Today, Truth is being culturally martyred and litigiously crucified in the name of morality and peace and preservation, just as it has been for thousands of years.  But, while culture and courts may create barriers to the hands and feet carrying out the work of the Truth, they cannot take the Lord away (John 20:13-14), or separate us from Him (Romans 8:39), or even stall Him in the slightest from completing His good work (Philippians 1:6). 

Therefore, before we issue any comment or condemnation in the direction of politicians and culture industries for our society’s undeniable movement away from the Truth, let’s first allow for an examination of our own hearts to see if we are somehow culpable in the destruction of Truth – perhaps by our vicious defense of Him, or in our attempt to pose Him in a flattering but false light – for His name’s sake. 

For now, we are the priests of the Truth (1 Peter 2:5-9), called to know God’s law, and procure truthful verdicts, and proclaim His determined goodness.  Let’s watch that we don’t first, ourselves, compromise the Truth in the name of our own agenda no matter how much of a service to God our agenda might seem to be.

The most beautiful thing about Truth is not that it is relatable or relevant or seeker sensitive or inoffensive or inclusive.  The most attractive quality of Truth is that it is true. 

Believers of the Truth are called to be like salt – to preserve it and magnify its goodness.  A severe disservice is done to the Truth by human efforts to make it anything other than firstly, the Truth. 

If we believers are soaking into the landscape of culture, hoping to not appear as hostile or unenlightened to the surrounding rulers and citizens with sway, we may be missing the mark. 

If we sell out the Truth with a deceptively affectionate concession for a handful of culture’s currency, all to preserve our place and peace within our worldly kingdom, we will simultaneously seal our only hope for real living in a tomb, and feed a tyrant who will soon swallow us up and spit us out (Jeremiah 51:34).

Truth is not in need of a cultural makeover or a theological update.  The Truth does not need our own swords, or our enlightened morality, or any slight boundary revisions to attract more people to Him. 

It would probably be enough if the only magnificent wonders of God we displayed were His love and forgiveness which are truly remarkable though they are counterintuitive if we have set our mind on the things of men, and not on the things of God (Matthew 16:23). 

Removing a single letter from the law of Truth in order to ensure the people’s adoration effectively hands the Truth over to destruction.  It’s no good for the Truth to be mostly-True.  Even the Devil speaks in part-Truths. 

So, how shall we live as God’s chosen people, in the light of Truth, in this exact time called “now” which God has determined in advance that each of us should inhabit (Acts 17:34)?  What does it look like to know God’s law while occupying our God-given place within our country, our family, and schools, and friendships, and the body of Christ?

How did Jesus do it?  It’s an important question because this is what it means to be alive to the way of God – to align, in the place where we are, with the One who created existence. 

The Volatility of Jesus’s Time

We do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses (Hebrews 4:15).

Jesus faced persistent temptation in the wilderness during moments of tremendous physical weakness (Matthew 4:1-22).  He was tempted by His disciples (Matthew 16:23).  He was tempted in every way (Hebrews 4:15).

Just as it was prophesied, He endured physical and verbal insults, and was scorned and despised by the people (Psalm 22:6-7).  He was “not beautiful” (Isaiah 53:2), His hometown had a lowly reputation (John 1:46), His earthly father had passed away, and His mother had been forever marked by certain people within temple leadership as a fornicator (every Jew knows how to do pregnancy math, and not everyone believed the quaint story of Jesus’s immaculate conception – John 8:41). 

The people group Jesus was born into was then, just as it has been throughout the ages, one of the most despised people groups, consistently being made the scapegoat for the trouble in every society.

Jesus’s appointed time and place included a politically occupied temple, and a government which had recently evolved from the Roman Republic into the Roman Empire.

The leaders of the Jewish community were given a degree of political power within the Roman Empire so long as they carried out the will of Caesar.  This obvious conflict of interest laid some tricky groundwork for anyone who had a place of leadership within the temple, which was purposed to carry out the will of God. 

In 27 BC, Caesar Agustus became the first emperor of Rome.  This is the same emperor who years later “…issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world” (Luke 2:2), which forced Mary and Joseph to go to Bethlehem when it was time for Jesus to be born.

Around this time, Herod I “the Great” was serving under Caesar Agustus as Agustus’s client king in Judea which included the town of Bethlehem.  Herod was greatly distressed “and all Jerusalem with him” (Matthew 2:3) upon hearing from some traveling scholars about The King of the Jews whose recent birth was announced by a celestial event. 

The Jews of Jerusalem were dread-filled because a coming King meant a change in Roman leadership, and a change in leadership was usually ushered in with carnage.  As for Herod, who also bore the title The King of the Jews, in order to protect his rulership from this troubling god-baby whose exact location and birth date was unknown, Herod famously ordered the death of all baby boys in the region who were under the age of two.  

The Roman Empire had centralized its power.  All power, which was once in the hands of the Republic’s officials who were “elected” (quotes added because Roman elections had Roman nuance) to represent the people, was now placed in the hands of a single emperor whose job was to rule the people.  The emperor promised to fight the citizens’ battles, and determine good and evil, and settle their disputes for them. 

One narrative of Rome’s great Republic-to-Empire transition depicts the citizens of the Republic as having enjoyed peace and prosperity and freedom for so long, that they had no concept of an alternate way of life, nor could they comprehend the possibility of a fall.  Consequently, they had no sharpened skill – nor did they feel the need – to address real threats when they came (“How Rome Destroyed its Own Republic” by Becky Little, HISTORY.com). 

But the delicate dance of power only lasts for so long.  When the threats to peace and prosperity came and established themselves within the Republic and wreaked discord and disorder for long enough, the people became disposed to elect an emperor who promised security, though it would come at the cost of some of their freedom and prosperity. 

With more power, an emperor can do more good for the people!  As for the Roman emperors, each one after the next set themselves up as equal to God – as the only God – and picked their battles and delineated their versions of justice in order to magnify their own name.

Throughout history, citizens of various kingdoms have been forced to choose between freedom with less peace, or peace with less freedom.  And so the latter went, with the dawning of the Roman Empire.

But a closer examination of the Roman Empire hints that this choice imposed on the Roman citizens – between peace or freedom – may be a false dilemma. 

The inception of the Roman Empire kicked off an era known as Pax Romana – a time of “unprecedented peace and prosperity”, so say the various historical records.  And yet, this was also the era of Herod’s Massacre of the Innocents, and Nero’s savage siege on Jerusalem.  So, in truth, it was a mostly pax-ful era. 

A tyrant’s subjects aren’t to pay much attention to the events which contradict a tyrant’s promises, especially if it is merely the religious element being attacked within the population.  After all, incredible advancements were made within the Roman Empire! 

The point being, when a tyrant takes his citizen’s freedom in exchange for peace, that citizen will end up with neither freedom nor peace.  There will be limited freedom, and there will be peace… plus wars which aren’t meant to be noticed, and which the tyrant will fight himself (using the people and their money and possessions for the tyrant’s own sake).  

What a time for the Messiah to come!  If it was ever God’s design to save an earthly nation, the freest period of the Roman Republic would be one to restore! 

But, of course, God does not promise national peace or prosperity, though we may pray for these things and work toward them and possess them with generous gratitude (Jeremiah 29:7).  We can claim no promise of peace on earth until His kingdom reigns on earth (Revelation 20:4-6); therefore, hoping firstly in the power of one’s nation is to lose grasp of the promise of Truth. 

The Jews, including Jesus’s disciples, knew God’s plan did not center on the triumph of Rome, yet their vision of God’s promise did not align with the Truth either.  No one’s did.  The human imagination is determined to limit the promise of God to a form of victory in this world.

No wonder the disappointment when the Anointed One did not free His chosen people from the political oppression or secure their place in Jerusalem high above Roman Rule.

And it’s no wonder why the high priest conspired to kill Jesus when it became evident that Jesus had no intention of elevating the platforms of the Jewish leaders currently in position.  In fact, it almost seemed like Jesus opposed the ways of the Jewish leaders.

Whether for the Roman or Israelite nation, a lie gave way to a fear that inspired a dictatorship which grew into tyranny and ended in chaos.  This trajectory is governed by a force as present and predictable as gravity.

Will this be the story arc of our nation?  Perhaps. 

The rulership (and rules) of this age burgeons, the temples of popular thought aggressively preach and purvey a morality which conflicts with the Truth, and world ideologies are pervading into the body of Christ. 

Lies are giving way to fear which is creating a people disposed to elect a dictator who appears to hold the promise of knowing good and evil. 

But isn’t this also a page from the playbook of a lie having its the way in the flesh?  Wasn’t this the way it went in the garden?   Isn’t this a revelation of the tyranny of sin in the heart of God’s beloved creation – male and female – whom He’s purposed to rule in their appointed times and places, separate from evil, and with God for all eternity which includes right now? 

A bit of clarifying.  It goes without saying, but should still be said, that leadership and authority are good things created by God.  The proclivity to be ruled exists in us, that we may search for God.  The rule of law is good for a body; but a body who wishes to be ruled by law may be creating a tyrant. 

Law is not bad, and neither are apples.  Idols are.  There are bad leaders, and there is abuse or neglect of authority, which is evil.  But as far as it pertains to us – God’s first instruction to each of us – is to not put these things, good or bad, above God.  The voice telling us to put the fear, or hope, of any created thing above God is a lie.  To do so is to crucify the Truth.

How would it look for us to walk in the same manner that Jesus walked, (1 John 2:6) through valleys disposed to a lie, and fear no evil, whether those valleys are in our minds or our relationships or our churches or our workplaces (Psalm 23:4)?

How do we master sin (Genesis 4:7) and cultivate the land before us (Genesis 1:28-30), and walk in the light (1 John 1:7), and practice Truth (1 John 1:6), even while the rulers of this world are having their way for now?

This is a vast contemplation – a lifelong, Spirit-guided meditation and a cover-to-cover study of the whole Bible – but as a place to start, John 18 through 21 provides some illustration of the beautifully unencumbered life of Jesus. 

The world hasn’t changed – it is still hostile to the Truth.  The Truth hasn’t changed – He still loves the world.  Therefore, it wouldn’t be a surprise if Jesus gave us the same directive that He gave to His disciples thousands of years ago: “Receive the Holy Spirit… and follow Me” (John 20:22; John 21:19).

And along the way, in order to remain wise to what is good and unmixed with a lie (Romans 16:19), the Word of God is our only weapon (Hebrews 4:12).  Only with God is it possible to walk from place to place without being defiled by the dung on the streets (John 13:8-10); and to eat the bread of this world to sustain the flesh, yet still remain hungry for the bread of life (Matthew 4:4); and to live in fellowship with body of Christ without being corrupted by any of its false teachings (Matthew 16:6-12). 

Addressing Some of the Volatility of Our Time

The lie manifests itself uniquely in every generation.  Our time and place has its own brand of volatility, but volatility will have a familiar ring in any age.  Part-True expressions of Christianity will exist as long as world ideologies exist.  But God is not content that we should have a part-True expression of faith which doesn’t mature into a fuller grasp of Truth. 

Only by knowing God more and more fully may we have a fuller measure of both freedom and peace; therefore, God implores us to not be satisfied with an un-experienced knowledge of His Truth (John 3:10).  It’s not good to be walking in the light of a stagnant and unpracticed faith. 

To that end, I submit the following critiques and encouragements (not exhaustive within themselves!) with the hope maturing the part-True expressions of Christianity that have been informed and limited by the popular thoughts of our day: 

Justice, Love, and Goodness

With regards to false teaching, our place in time is concerned with justice, love, and goodness; but our world has written its own definitions of these precepts along with the methods and mandates for how each should be fostered.  These disordered definitions and mandates have been embraced within some churches who preach the world’s propaganda using the language of faith, and the worldly shade is almost imperceptible. 

The scriptures say, “No one is good except God alone” (Mark 10:18); and “God is faithful and just…” (1 John 1:9); and “God is love” (1 John 4:8).  Therefore, the most good, the most just, and the most loving thing we can do is to firstly know God and believe Him and become like Him.  Obedience to our growing understanding of these qualities as they are determined by God, yields true goodness, justice, and love. 

In John 18 – 21, the Truth was not any more popular than it is now, but Jesus proves that by obeying God, we foster the ministry of God’s higher good, justice, and love on earth.  By obeying God – not a modern interpretation of His Word, not a critical theory of His people, not a nationally nuanced version of His promise – we bring light to the world.

Political Idolatry

In our nation, there is much debate on the election of our Caesar, because the onus is on us as citizens to empower whatever is good for the people, and to distinguish whether that “good” is patterned after God’s ways or the world’s.  To the degree that we are able, it is right to elect a leader whose policies align with God’s ways because God’s ways are good for His beloved creation. 

But it is wrong to elect a political Caesar to do the work God has given us to do. 

We have a God-given place with privileges and responsibilities as parents and citizens and members of Christ’s body to rule, with God, which He did not create in order that we should abdicate the rulership and the work of this place to Caesar or any other created thing – not even to an enlightened ruler posing as a representative of God – because this is the landscape God uses to work out His salvation in us.

If we have allowed an ideology or a cause to determine moral right and wrong for us, this is ideological idolatry.  If we have acquiesced to the government, allowing it to do the work which God has given us to do and to rule the place which God has given us to rule (the dimensions and work of this place is discerned through the Spirit and scripture), this is political idolatry.  If the roar of the crowd outside has caused us to forsake our private convictions, this is cultural idolatry.  If we implement personal or national policies merely so that we may be like others instead of first considering whether the policies align with the laws of God, this idolatry.  If we are clinging to a vision of salvation which is centered on our nation’s triumph, this is national idolatry. 

Reasoning Together

Violent and non-violent disruptions to the way of life have long prompted calls for righteous visions of anarchy and glossy visions of totalitarianism, though each one guts the heart of the people.  Even more notable, the extremists who call for one solution or the other (who always start in small minority) have a way of creating a less populated “common ground”. 

The Church, as with all of creation, is prone to fall prey to surrounding movements and the nature of extremes.  At times, it has conformed to the world by taking on part-True, or fact-void, convictions which create great divides, and in the process leave behind the discipline of diverse dialogue and informed reasoning centered on Truth. 

It’s clear today that “reasoning together” has fallen out of vogue, but this is nothing new.  Peter, Titus, James, Paul and Timothy each saw a need to remind their readers two-thousand years ago to be “epieikes”: reasonable, fair, balanced, gracious, to have a spirit of gentleness that is not derived of apathy or ignorance or timidity, but is derived from holding to the dignity and desire of the Truth (Philippians 4:5; 1 Timothy 3:3; Titus 3:2; James 3:17; 1 Peter 2:18).

“Even the pagans” love those who agree with them (Matthew 5:47).  What higher virtue can Christians claim as they do the same?  Believers are to be noted for their esteem toward (without an obligation to embrace the narratives of) those who oppose them.

It’s what comes out of us that defiles us (Matthew 15:11); therefore, don’t let a divisive culture cause us to become a divided church.  Don’t let a politically occupied culture make us become a politically occupied believer.  Don’t let a society which is hostage to a false dilemma bind us to a lie on one side or the other.  Let your reasonable-ness be known by all sides (Philippians 4:5).

Our Rights

We have no right that God should grant us any measure of success in this world, or grant us forgiveness or eternal life – all these are gifts from God.  If rights existed in the kingdom of God, that would indicate an economy which is sustained in part by God indebtedness to us – God owing us for some act on our part.  This is not the way of Truth.  Eternity is sustained by God’s gift of Himself and His covenanted promise of eternal life to those who will receive Him. 

However, as Christians who are American citizens, we have constitutional rights – not because we are Christians but because we are citizens.  Likewise, Jesus, a Jewish Roman citizen had legal rights according to the Jewish law and the Roman law. 

Jesus did insist on His legal rights which aligned with God’s law.  For example, even though He knew He would not get a fair trial or prevail in the flesh, that did not stop Him from pointing out the injustices occurring in real time – proceedings that were incongruent with the civil laws which governed His place.  Paul the Apostle does similarly, for example in Acts 22:25 and 25:10-11. 

We may choose to prayerfully surrender our civil rights here or there, but they are ours to lay down – they are not for someone else to take away.  It is not accurate to say that citizens, who happen to be Christians, do not have any rights; or that, as Christians, we should not claim any rights at all.  It is good to insist (while knowing we may or may not get our way) on our civil rights which are in step with God’s law and therefore are good for the people, in that they help enable True goodness and justice to be administered to each citizen.  Wherever our place is, it is good work to point out when good civil laws which align with God’s ways are being dishonored.

It is not good work to stay quiet in these cases merely for fear of suffering as Jesus suffered.

Submitting to Authorities

When it was His hour, Jesus went out to the religious and local governing authorities who had come to arrest Him (John 18:4).  He surrendered Himself to them out of obedience to God.  But it begs to be known that there were a handful of times prior when God provided a way out and Jesus did not surrender Himself into their hands as they sought to throw Him off a cliff (Luke 4:28-30), to stone Him (John 10:30-39), or entrap Him with His words (Matthew 22:15-40), or take His life (John 5:18; John 7:1-9) because it was not God’s will at those times. 

It is not accurate to say that Christians must submit to the government authorities, period.  Rather, we are to submit to the Lord by submitting to the government (Romans 13:1-7), unless the mandates are in conflict with the will of God (Acts 5:28-29). 

As long as the government is not causing us to sin (Acts 4:18-20; Daniel 3:15-18; Daniel 6:6-11), we are to submit to our leaders where God has given them the authority (Matthew 22:21), because obedience to Caesar glorifies God, and this serves God’s purposes.  It bodes well for our testimony to have a record of obedience, not disobedience, which proves our hope in God.

It is not biblical to defy government orders just because we don’t agree with them.  It is also not biblical to obey orders which cause us to disobey God.  It’s not biblical to submit to the government merely to be like everyone else, or for fear of public censure, or by blindly following with an ill-formed understanding of what the government is asking. 

Jesus modeled a way of being fully aware of the injustice of His trial, publicly pointing out the misconduct of the governing agencies, yet submitting to the consequence of their misjudgment out of obedience to God because this was God’s will. 

Worldviews and Critical Theories

The world is continually re-defining, based on an unbiblical matrix, the classifications of oppressed people groups, and this moments’ issues to be properly concerned with.  As the matrix and the qualifications miss the mark of Truth, so do the solutions which further compound prejudice and favoritism, and villainize the innocent, and rob from the ones who truly are in need. 

Socially conscious gospels have had a way of incorporating themselves into the message of Truth since God began forming a people for Himself (Genesis 1, 3, 17, 18, Exodus, Numbers, Isaiah, 1 John, Galatians 2:11-14; truly the whole Bible).  Even now, some messages within the church harmonize and sympathize with the tenets of today’s gnostic-esque heresies, for example: ones which claim that a physical characteristic of the body deems one good or evil, and that those who are good can do no bad and the bad can do no good except to say they are bad.  Within this worldview, the exempt are the elite – too sacred for God (Isaiah 65:5) – they are the new authors of love and justice.  They rewrite history and claim some special truth which affords them power, and immunity from judgement.  Their bad fruit is left unquestioned.

The Word of God sufficiently addresses the real sin that these theories profess to liberate us from.  Yet still, some churches have absorbed the socially conscious matrices and corresponding penance schedules which purport to minister redemption through a system of double standards within an insatiable gospel.  Many will not test our moments’ truth-claims against the Word (1 Thessalonians 5:21), or try the day’s causes against the Gospel, and will favor instead a message of capricious absolution by way of pleasing man, over forever-salvation by the grace of God.   

The result, among other things, is a weary congregation who cannot hear the invitation of Jesus (Matthew 11:28-30) because their place within the matrix nullifies their weariness, and because the matrix presents as an end in itself.   

It is not a good look for Christians, who are called to be shrewd discerners of the Truth, to be carried away by headlines, heretics, and matrices which have proven to serve an agenda, perpetuate the work of a lie, and divide member from body.

Serving Others

Jesus emptied Himself and took on the form of a slave (Philippians 2:7-8).  Whose will had He come to serve – man’s or God’s?  See for yourself in John 4:34, 5:19, 5:30, 6:38, 7:17, 8:28, 12:49, and 14:31. 

Throughout the Gospel, Jesus’s servanthood to God took on many forms: washing His disciples’ feet, feeding people, healing the sick, and forgiving the sinner, going out of His way to interact with society’s outcasts, teaching Truth, pointing out evil, rebuking those who purveyed a false gospel, and challenging the religious customs and social messages which supplanted the Truth.    

But God gave Jesus, the Savior of the world, twelve disciples to teach and mentor and equip.  In our service to God, He does not ask us to be sensational somewhere else, to the neglect of the ones whom He has brought us to train and serve and care for. 

In John 5, Jesus went to the Pool of Bethesda and walked by “… a great number of sick, blind, lame, and paralyzed people,” and healed one paralyzed man.  Surely others would have thought Jesus ought to serve God by healing them all.  Moreover, consider the disciples: surely, they would have thought that the best way for Jesus to serve them would be to remain alive (Matthew 16:22). 

Therefore, it is good to draw near to the Lord (Psalm 73:28; Isaiah 30:21).  He desires us and wants us to know His thoughts (John 15:15) because we matter to Him.  He longs to free us from the anxieties which arise when we’ve become “distracted by our service” (Luke 10:40), no matter how noble the service. It is good to lean on Him and not put our, or another’s ambitions, great or small, above His, even in the name of serving God, for “If I were still trying to please people, I would not be a servant of Christ” (Galatians 1:10).

Doing the Work

All of us have parcels to steward for the kingdom of God.  The Creator God has dignified us by giving us important work to do, starting with the work within us, of believing He is God.  With the measure of belief God has labored to give us, we may now co-labor in our growing belief that what He says is True – that He is abounding in love and faithfulness, and He is our living and active answer for the sin in the world and the sin in us (Exodus 34:6-7). 

In light of this faith, we may employ the assets of His kingdom (forgiveness, wisdom, boldness, patience, grace, spiritual gifts, talents, etc.) in the roles and places God has appointed us to.

Jesus uses Matthew 25:14-30 to communicate that burying ones’ gifts as a response to fear of failure or wrath is God’s illustration of wickedness and sloth.  God does not demand a specific result, but does command that we boldly put to work whatever gifts God has given us.  Forfeiting our place by not doing the work means a loss of knowing Him more precisely and more completely.  He gives us enormous agency.  He wants us to go for it.

Regardless of the outcome, God edifies us with an opportunity to taste and see for ourselves the goodness of God.  This “seeing” comes by way of us stepping forward in faith (Joshua 3:10-13).    

He doesn’t want us to be owned by anything other than the One who made us and loves us.  He wants to be our governing narrative.  Nothing else can occupy our temple’s Holy of Holies and give abundant life.  Any other ruler will be a tyrant.

Here are more examples of what it looks like to believe God as we live in this world:

The Manner in which Jesus Walked

Jesus spoke the Truth of scripture at all times, even to the Father of Lies.  He issued no curses of hatred toward anyone.  He prayed ceaselessly.  He pointed out the sin of His betrayer, “You betray me with a kiss?” (Luke 22:48), and still called him “friend” (Matthew 26:50). 

He shared the message of salvation with His crucifier, Pilate.  He healed one of His arresters – the high priest’s servant – who was caught in the crossfires of Peter’s wrath (Luke 22:51).

When confronted by a lie, Jesus modeled various responses including: remaining silent (John 19:8; Luke 20:8), proclaiming the ways of God (John 3:16; John 14:6-7; John18:37 and more), and rebuking those caught up in it (Matthew 23:13-36).  But each response was tuned to the desire for all (rich and poor, high and low) to know the True salvation offered by the Father through the Son. 

As he hung on the cross, approaching his own apart-ness from God – a fate so dreadful it had caused him to sweat blood at the thought of it (Luke 22:44) – He arranged for his mother’s care in his physical absence (John 19:26-27). 

As he looked down from the cross and saw the soldiers gambling for His clothing, He interceded for them and asked the Father to forgive them.

The promise of suffering did not deter Him.  Sin did not overwhelm Him.  Lies did not corrupt Him.  Shame could not belittle Him.  Death could not destroy Him.  The tomb could not contain Him.  Darkness did not extinguish Him.  And all of the hate projected on him did not alter His deep, passionate, unstoppable love for the whole world.  The Truth remains true in all things.

We, too, can be like Him in this way as the Truth remains in us (Galatians 2:20; 1 John 3:2).

The Central Choice

Even more striking is what Truth does after He triumphs the worst we can do to Him: He comes back for us.

The fact that He comes back and seeks out each one of us, individually, while we are stuck in a state of hostility toward the Truth demonstrates the stunning fact that choice is central to the reality of Truth, but it is not that we have chosen Him – it is that He chose us.  God’s promise for everything is centered on the fact that Jesus chose to give Himself for us.

Jesus is our Tree of Life (Revelation 2:7).  By taking our fill from Him, we have LIFE, and we can be rescued from our measured, inverted reality of good and bad – right and wrong – and knowing evil.

How do we lift up the Truth and make Him King?  It’s an inside job. 

Jesus didn’t give His disciples a strategic schematic for overcoming errant national rulers.  Instead, He gave them the plan for overcoming the whole world: “Believe in Me” (John 14:1; John 3:16; 1 John 5:4). 

For now, God’s kingdom is not of this world (John 18:36).  For now, God’s kingdom exists in the places where we have elected Him as King within us, by way of a conscious belief that He is God.  His kingdom is magnified as we practice that belief and exercise it in all the places within us.

We will be brought to places that have been captured by a lie.  We will be led by various arms of the government and institutions, people groups and churches, our physical bodies, and even our own thought patterns to places where we do not want to go; and yet, we are free to follow Jesus even there (John 21:18-22).  Jesus is with us as we follow Him through, or away from, these places which have already been defeated by Him. 

We may approach the Pools of Bethesda, the wilderness, and deceit-filled trials, and not be overcome by them.  Despite what it may look like, He is leading us in our delicate dance to a God-filled destination.   

We may live a long life or a short life.  We may die a martyr or a king.  We may be admired or scoffed at.  We may be influential or insignificant to the world.  This is not the point.

The point is, follow Him. 

…

1 Timothy 6:3-16

If anyone… does not agree to the sound instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ and to godly teaching, they are conceited and understand nothing.  They have an unhealthy interest in controversies and quarrels about words that result in envy, strife, malicious talk, evil suspicions and constant friction between people of corrupt mind, who have been robbed of the truth and who think that godliness is a means to (worldly currency of any kind, including power, notoriety, security, and financial wealth).

But godliness with contentment is great gain.  For we brought nothing into the world, and we can take nothing out of it.  But if we have food and clothing, we will be content with that.  Those who want (worldly currency or an ideal image of creation) fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction.  For the love of (worldly currency) is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for (currency), have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.

But you, (men and women) of God, flee from all this, and pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, endurance and gentleness.  Fight the good fight of the faith. Take hold of the eternal life to which you were called when you made your good confession in the presence of many witnesses.  In the sight of God, who gives life to everything, and of Christ Jesus, who while testifying before Pontius Pilate made the good confession, I charge you to keep this command without spot or blame until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, which God will bring about in his own time – God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen.

…

Author’s note: The great and terrible thing about writing something like this is that it gives me a clearer vision and some handles for “taking hold of” such an abstract concept as eternal life now (1 Timothy 3:12); but it also reveals that my striving and my goals are far more often motivated by self-determined images than the invitation to believe Jesus.  I wish I could say “belief in Jesus” is my daily practice.  What I can say is that it is my aim.    

This essay took me nearly four years to write.  It feels like it took longer.  I can’t discern whether it is an edifying piece for our time or the most over-processed word salad to have ever thieved a person of their time.  I do know that the process of writing this helped me mature in my faith and gave me a greater grasp of the Truth. 

I deliberated at length whether to include the subcategories under “Addressing the Volatility of Our Time”.  We are all politically fatigued and suddenly everything is political, so shall we not discuss the subject matters of the day in the interest of “not getting political” as Christians?  Perhaps!  It would probably be enough to discuss the Word of God in the context of the Babylonian through Roman era alone, but it would be to the detriment of our collective reasoning and personal application skills.   

As citizens we’re free to have any combination of convictions based on any combination of influencing factors.  But Christian citizens who submit that their convictions are ordered according to the way of God provide something to discuss, in the interest of adding knowledge to faith (2 Peter 1:5-8), when one lands differently than the other.  Anyway, I don’t know if it was the right decision to include those musings, but it was right at least for me to think through those things.  I offer my convictions for you to consider.

I was inspired to write this piece in 2020 when my Bible study group examined the Gospel according to John.  The crowd’s line, “We have no King but Caesar!” in John 19:15, jumped off the page and I was convinced there was much to mine in the chapters just before and just after their proclamation. 

It was apparent in 2020 that the state of our divided country and our divided church had much to do with our divided citizens who were either looking to blame politicians for everything or put all their hope in politicians for a life of true promise.  But, whether we look to Caesar as the problem or solution for all that is good and evil, we lose sight of the Truth.

I spent many years (and am inclined even now to keep on) being angry at various created beings and entities for the divided and Truthless state of our world.  I realized, thanks to this meditation, that directing my animosity toward fleshly targets carries out the work of a lie.  I’ve found exactly zero joy working for a lie, by the way, despite its promises of satisfaction. 

“How shall I now live in light of what is True?”  This question was a gift.  This isn’t where I was originally steering this essay.  For much of the time, this essay was merely a place for me to release my bile.  I didn’t know where I was steering it, but it was nowhere good, and I believe God was not content with that (who am I that He should care, yet He does), thus the 3+ years of meditating, chewing, wrestling, rejecting, accepting, and streaming into words.

I know with certainty that God informed me as I was writing, though that doesn’t guarantee infallibility in this piece; therefore, taste and see for yourself whether this is God’s truth.  I hope it inspires peace and unity and goodwill, but the Truth will do what is good according to God’s definition of goodness.  If all of this goes unread, or strips me of the people’s adoration, what is that to me?  I will follow the Lord.

That’s my aim, anyway.

If the collective “we” are made in the image of the Triune God, what might that look like for the Church? What does that look like at my church?

The following is an excerpt from a written examination of my own church’s process toward fuller and fuller togetherness. It offers some observations and discoveries within our diverse body as we continually co-labor toward oneness in Christ.

As I considered my church from its beginning, I noticed we followed a sort of evolutionary path much like the individual human’s growth trajectory. I also observed that our moments of brightness have not been limited to an age or a stage or a particular section of the body.

I do believe that the whole trajectory toward a purer reflection of God glorifies Him–even times that may look to us like chaos and attrition; but for this piece, I mean to focus on our oneness-in-Christ as our moments of brightness, our calling, our reward, our witness to the Triune God, and our eternal destination. (And I guess I indulged in coming up with a few creeds that I think would be shared by many in our church).

One thing to note: we happen to be a non-denominational church. That fact, I think, has enabled the inclusion of more perspectives regarding non-salvation issues, politics, etc. As such, our unique brand of diversity within our church body has offered complications, complexity, and (when aligned with our calling) a fuller sense of wholeness.

In times of heightened polarization, it does me well to remember that togetherness is the goal, and that fact is to be served well by (not thwarted by) our individual differences.

…

“…The positives of being non-denominational is that it has fostered some inter-denominational worship practices. For example, we follow the traditions of liturgy and lectionary. We have incorporated The Book of Common Prayer into our services. We offer weekly communion. We have prayer candles. We sing hymns and contemplative and modern worship songs. Our church offers a mosaic of ways to worship on a Sunday morning; but instead of being confusing or contradicting, this eclectic method of worship has proved to be connective and inclusive.

Another positive of being non-denominational is that it brings in a wide range of people, starting with denominational backgrounds: Presbyterians, Assembly of God, Catholics, Orthodox, Lutherans, and more worship here. And of course like most churches, we welcome people of different faiths and the self-professed “non-religious” to join us, in hopes that they will one day worship the Creator God with us.

Somehow this seems to foster a range in demographics as well: young and old, wealthy and homeless, liberal and conservative, churched and unchurched.

Not surprisingly, some of us are comfortable with the idea of women in ministry, others are not. There are people on all sides of the creation and evolution story. Some of us believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman, others believe marriage should be a loving, committed and monogamous relationship-end-of-sentence. Some identify as “religious”, others, “spiritual”, and still others, both. We have teetotalers and scotch drinkers, puritans and cigar-smokers, all in one body.

As such, represented within our church is a deep respect for tradition and newness, doctrine and enlightenment, science and scripture, contemplation and action, and a desire for right relationship with it all.

How can such a vast array of people call the same place “home”? We are learning. But we are conscious of the truth that Jesus sought the poor and rich, the Jew and Gentile, male and female, the pious and the sinner, the law-bound and the intelligista, the family, the orphan, and the widow, and was thrilled to call them each “His”.

If such a range of people groups are invited to thrive together forever in the Kingdom of God, can they co-exist at our church? We are learning.

It is not always easy to see diversity as a positive, but we cannot deny that diversity, as opposed to likeness, has served as a major catalyst to healthy maturation for us, both individually and as a church. Often posing as a daunting threat to manage, we have been shaped to embrace the eclectic demographic within our church as one of our biggest assets, specifically because it is teaching us about love.

Learning about God by practicing love as demonstrated WITHIN the Triune God:

God has been teaching us something about himself, and how to be a church after his own heart, specifically through the diversity within our church.

Firstly, we are a reflection of God—the Triune God: a diverse and perfectly collaborative union of Mind-Body-Soul. The Triune God is the answer to the question of what we, the multifaceted church, are supposed to look like, collectively. Thanks to my church’s history of differences within our body, we’ve had some practice at what we believe to be our calling: becoming more like the diverse and rightly-collaborating Triune God. In other words, we don’t have to all be the same in order to be right in God’s eyes (or ours). I believe we are called to represent well, the places to which we’ve been scattered, and gather together under Christ, because God is too big to be represented by one or two “positions” or causes.

When there is diversity within a church (differing gifts, demographics, convictions and perspectives, etc.—which our church has aplenty), it can be tempting to impose a yoke of conformity or uniformity to forge a type of unity, or representation, which humans and churches are prone to think they ought to have; but ultimately, uniformity is not the highest witness to the nature of the Triune God. Our collective collaboration represents God in a fuller, more complex way.

In the Father, Son, and Spirit, we see distinct differences working together in reverence, humility, and love. In one toward the other we see grace and empathy—even obedience and sacrifice. Likewise, it is our grace and empathy and humility toward our diverse members—not an insistence of conformity—that makes us a truer reflection of God. We believe this is part of how and whom we are called to be.

Learning about God by practicing the love show FROM the Triune God toward us:

Secondly, we are a reflection of God’s love toward us. We have discovered, with relief, that to love people does not require that we agree with them (or that they agree with us). God loves us, and yet, to be sure, he does not agree with all that we think. Agreeing on everything is not a prerequisite for God’s love. Why would we make it a condition of participation in our church? Neither is “agreement on all disputable matters” our lifeline to salvation. Christ is our salvation.

We will not forsake doctrine or knowledge, and we will not disregard the law; but if we are discerning the truth within them accurately, they should be pointing us toward togetherness (not sameness—not divisions) in Christ, and oneness with each other. Even the “lesser matters” should be promoting the same objective. And this is the objective Christ has for us: belief and faith and hope and trust in the true and actual Christ. On that much, we insist, is Truth for all. If we will be like-minded in this one thing, there will be fewer disputable matters high enough to divide us.

We will not turn a blind eye to destruction, diversions, distractions, and sin. In fact, we believe that loving the church body includes addressing these things. But as a general practice, we will set our minds on whatever is good and whatever is pure.

We remember the way of love that Christ showed and shows us humans, and will hold that up as our guide for loving others; meaning, we the church do not rest on our similarities and agreement—our lock-step stride in non-salvation issues—as the highest testament of our Christian love. Rather, we depend on the exchange of grace and truth, longsuffering and forgiveness, as we look to the Father for our righteousness. This is our means and measure of co-laboring with Christ, like Christ, into the image of God.

We have found that specifically diversity offers an abundance of opportunity to practice adding to our faith: goodness, knowledge, self-control, perseverance, godliness, mutual affection and love. These are the greater fruits that can harvest when committed members are vastly different yet called to love.

This doesn’t answer all the questions or solve all the problems, but it is a directive which implores us to look up as we go forward as a diverse church.”

…

April 17, 2020

We need to go back to work. And not just for our own sake. Here’s why.

The Economics of an Indefinite Shutdown are Risky for the Future of Healthcare

The California small business workforce represents 48.8% of the private-sector (read: state revenue-generating) workforce in California, according to the US Small Business Administration Office of Advocacy. In fact, small business owners represent over 99% of the private-sector employers in the state.

While many of their services have been categorized as non-essential during this shutdown, small business tax revenue for the state certainly is essential. Even without knowing the isolated number of state revenue generated by small business, logic would suggest that an indefinite shutdown of business is not a viable solution for the overall health of the state. Of course, not all small businesses are shut down at this time, but Gavin Newsom estimates that unemployment claims have reached 2.7 million. That’s a lot of unemployment expense, and a lot of tax revenue not realized by our state.

While talking about money may sound insensitive in light of those suffering and dying from Coronavirus, much of people’s health depends on the tax dollars now vaporizing from the system.

I propose it’s time to reopen California.

The Stats Reveal Work-Force Age to be Far Less At-Risk

We have given thirty days for America to get American statistics on Coronavirus in America. We have given thirty days for hospital beds to be added, for ventilators, PPE, and test kits to be manufactured and disbursed, and for therapy drugs to be studied and tested.

Today, April 17, 2020, roughly thirty days after the shutdown was implemented, most hospitals are much less crowded than originally anticipated. Tens of thousands of ventilators sit unused, but available. There are drugs which have been proven, in a large number of unsung cases, to have very good results in the treatment of Coronavirus.

To date, 957* deaths have been recorded in California since the known onset of Coronavirus. This is high, and climbing higher. It is about double or triple the average recorded number of deaths for the annual flu. Considering the total population of California which is 40,000,000, this is a virus which has killed one in every 41,797 in our state, and counting.

About 70% of the deaths were attributed to the 65+ age demographic, according to a CDC national statistic. Why do I point that out? Not because I am a self-centered ageist who cares nothing for the elderly. I mean to say that there is a small and clearly distinguished portion of our population who is high-risk. 14.3% of our population is 65 and older, according to the Census Bureau. The rest of us are lower-risk.

Would it be unreasonable to ask those who consider themselves to be high-risk to remain under voluntary quarantine, while the state reopens?

Here’s the other point that begs to be seen in these statistics: of the essential workers who have been working outside of their homes—those in the hospitals and grocery stores and delivery routes—those who are in the most vulnerable vocational positions for contracting Coronavirus: how many have died? That’s an elusive number. Our only clue comes from the other side of the age statistic.

Consider that those under 65 represent about 30% of the 957 Coronavirus deaths in California, or approximately 287 deaths. Also consider that “those under 65” include those currently working in hospitals, grocery stores, and delivery routes. About 34,380,000 of us in California are under 65. Even with underlying health conditions remaining in the equation, it would seem that all of us under 65, including those working in constant contact with people—sick or otherwise—are at risk by a factor of one-in-119,791, or 0.000008%, and climbing.

Speaking on behalf of all small business owners, this is a risk factor we will agree to work with. Irresponsible as it may sound, as a matter of continuity, we small business owners tend to focus on determined living, rather than fear of dying.

The Facts Disprove the Models Guiding our Policy-Making

At the onset of Coronavirus in America, modelers projected up to 240,000 deaths with social distancing. Now the projections are 60,000 or less with social distancing. Is this discrepancy due to the fact that we just did a really, really great job at social distancing, or was it that the original models were just really wrong?

As we make sweeping, future-altering policies based on models, I would like to point out that the one thing models prove, when it comes to anything novel, is that models are guesses which usually err on the sensationally wrong side, and the more sensational the number, the more it gets featured by the media and remembered by its consumers.

Is the Mitigation More Deadly than the Virus?

Meanwhile, there is a 100% chance of tumbling into a second Great Depression if so many of us remain unemployed. Fickle and biased as models can be, I wonder what the models would say about poverty which comes with its own risk factors and mortality, including crime, malnutrition, suicide, abuse, addictions, violence, lack of medicine, and no education.

Speaking of education, schools have shut down, and education is now limping along inside student’s homes, at a lesser quantity and quality depending on the district and the family home. And I would be remiss if I did not point out that for many students, being sequestered-in-place presents a higher threat to their safety than their risk of dying from Coronavirus.

We are making unprecedented mandates as if Coronavirus alone is our problem. If that was the case—if that was the only threat to our state—the mere suggestion of reopening might be negligent; but we have many other risk factors and challenges to consider. As we have teetered beyond the edge into economic collapse after just four weeks of shutdown, I hope that all risks are being weighed in this decision to either reopen or continue shutting in California which suddenly has approximately 2.7 million unemployed workers and counting.

Adding insult to injury, even with most hospitals at lower-capacity, they are still unable to provide service to those who need it. Elective surgeries, emergency services, urgent biopsies, diagnostic exams and more, are all on hold because of mandates, optics, or fear of Coronavirus. Overcrowded or underwhelmed–either way, many who are sick or injured for any reason other than Coronavirus, are not getting necessary treatment. My point: the mandates are counteracting their intent. This is not a “do no harm” policy.

The mantra of the state, which has been eagerly preached by its people: “Stay Home. Save Lives,” implies that we who need to go to back work are unvirtuous-at-best in our priorities. It rings a bit like propaganda to me, and I think it’s fair to point out that it is mainly coming from those whose income has not been affected yet. But mostly, in comparing Coronavirus’s mortality statistics with poverty’s mortality rate, I wonder whether this statement is true.

Confirming this skepticism, studies between Denmark and Sweden suggest the voluntary quarantine method using common sense and reasonable prudence, versus a shutdown, has little effect on the mortality rate of Coronavirus, while a shutdown has catastrophic consequences, economic and otherwise.

Is it truly unloving to our high-risk friends to ask that those who consider themselves to be high-risk remain under voluntary quarantine? Is it truly unloving to reopen California for the sake of millions of our families and our state’s overall health, while each of us take our own personal precautions, respectfully?

Never have we asked the “well” population to quarantine indefinitely, especially when there is now a known minority population at-risk who could self-quarantine. Never have we mandated that healthy, viable, working people shut down indefinitely, especially when we know now that collective participation–not collective withdrawal–is the key to the sacred ecosystem of living. At the very most–if we do completely erase the risk of Coronavirus (was that really our goal?)–it will be at the great cost of nearly everything else. Like living. And lives. And freedom.

Incidentally, in case anyone is wondering, should we remain in shutdown despite now knowing the rough statistics about Coronavirus, we can know this about ourselves: a risk factor of 0.000024% is all it takes for us to indefinitely surrender to the government our right to assemble, and our freedom to work, and for education to be severely compromised.

The Purpose of Our Efforts Thus Far

What was the purpose of shelter-in-place? Was to scrub the state down to a risk-free reality? There’s no doubt we’ve earned it. Loved ones have died of Coronavirus. Loved ones have died of other causes, alone and without family around them, because of the risk of Coronavirus. Convalescing family members have been in isolation for over a month. Senior students have missed their graduation, their last sports year, and some have lost their opportunity for scholarships. Everyone has sacrificed their family vacations. Parents are now working and home-school teaching. Struggling students have been left behind. Millions are unemployed. And frankly, I’m surprised we’re standing for it.

This is a tremendous amount of sacrifice. We’d like to think that this amount of sacrifice was worth it, to the degree which we perceive “worth it” to be. We’ve earned a zero-risk state. But we’re not going to get it, ever. We’ve never had a zero-risk state. We live alongside risk every day–much of it due to our own choices.

As for the original intent of the shutdown, the realistic goals have been accomplished: 1) We have a better understanding of Coronavirus’s statistics in our country, 2) We have the space and the equipment for additional Coronavirus patients, 3) We have slowed the spread. Additionally, we have a new category of data: the adverse affects of prohibiting non-essential activity within the country, over the course of just four weeks.

We are as prepared as we can reasonably be. We know who is at-risk. We have the information and the resources to mitigate within reason and to reopen.

Our Threshold for Risk: Then and Now

More deaths will occur when we open, and more people will continue to file for unemployment as we stay shut. What is the ethical ratio of deaths-to-unemployment? Who could say?

Instead, let’s examine our response to past health crises. Consider that our state had no moral qualms about remaining open in 2017, despite the estimated 6,340** per year by influenza/pneumonia, in California alone, even with a vaccine for the flu (watch those numbers shape-shift with Covid19 deaths in 2019-2020). In 2017, 13,800** per year died due to chronic lower respiratory disease; 59,516** per year died from cancer; and 62,797** per year died from heart disease… and at no time did the government, or those at-risk for these diseases ask that the state be shut down on their behalf.  When we look back on 2020, will there be suspiciously fewer deaths due to influenza or respiratory complications?  

Here’s an interesting statistic: did you know that an estimated 80,000 died, nationally, in 2012 of the flu? So says the CDC, according to an article by Maggie Fox of NBC written on 9/27/2018. Our country managed to stay open even then. That’s fairly high number, considering the Coronavirus models’ newly revised projection of 60,000 deaths. On a more local level, it is estimated that in my county 94 people died due to influenza in 2017. Currently (and yes, tragically), six Covid19 deaths have been recorded here in Placer county.  I am open to being enlightened, here.

Unfortunately for the serious care and mitigation that Covid19 deserves, the fact of this virus being used to support political narratives truly robs it of all credibility.  And the high incentives offered for placing a death in the “Coronavirus” column, or for reporting a high number of positive cases does nothing to help.

The Problem with Science

As we wait in protest for sanctions to lift, I think it’s worth considering whether those who benefit from crises are the same people who are telling us how long this shutdown should last.

We have been told that science will be our guide for the state’s reopening—not politics. Most critical thinkers and small business owners know that while science may be Apolitical, the interpretation of scientific data is almost always political. If you disagree, compare a sixth grade California science book to a Texas one. The science taught in each is as different as each state’s political climate. Heck, we’ve even re-written history based on politics. So, the promise from Governor Newsom that science will determine our opening brings little comfort. How about we use wisdom, instead?

It’s true, the number of recorded deaths based on available testing so far paints Coronavirus as the most deadly virus in recent history. All the more reason for each of us to be responsible, considerate, kind, careful… but not jobless, indefinitely.

The Facts and Faces of Small Business

While we business owners will remain positive, as a necessary survival skill we must also be realistic and proactive. To that end, I’m speaking up. We are truly not content to remain home indefinitely, crocheting. Our employees are losing their jobs, while we business owners are losing our business—some of us might even be temporarily losing our industries. This will be crippling to our families, and also our state.

We are watching years—even decades—of work be destroyed. Our business and our livelihood is crumbling before our eyes as is the livelihood of those we employ; and the tragedy is, it doesn’t have to. We could have planned around 2-4 weeks of shutdown. We cannot plan around “indefinite”.

As a sign-off, I honor my fellow small-business friends by calling out their business, helping put a face to the tireless and tenacious work they have invested in building and owning a company. I’ve heard teachers, health care workers, grocery store workers, and “all of the wonderful government employees who are working so hard to file the small business worker’s unemployment claim” (Newsom) be thanked prolifically with parades and balloons. And I’m grateful for all of their service that they are getting paid for providing! But I haven’t heard much airtime devoted toward thanking those whose job and income was sacrificed for the perceived health and safety of others.  So thank you, small business owners.

You are our community’s dentists, orthodontists, car wash companies, auto mechanics, specialized doctors, dry cleaners, daycare workers, clothing boutique owners, coffee shop and brewery owners, restaurateurs, swim school and music teachers, entertainers, event coordinators, venue/destination owners, CPAs (though they can work from home and might not be affected by the shutdown, they will tell you why this shut down is not sustainable), dance and gymnastics and karate studio owners, art shop teachers, horse trainers, antique shop owners, photographers, private preschools, wine tasting room owners, bakery owners, animal therapy for kids with special needs workers, landscapers, caterers, funeral directors, contractors and tradespeople, builders, realtors, engineers and architects (all of construction will certainly be affected by a depressed economy if the shutdown remains indefinite = bad for California since it’s one of THE biggest income tax revenue generators for the state), stationary supply shop owners, fitness trainers, aestheticians, auto repair shop managers, hair stylists, pet groomers and more!

The Coronavirus will not be the last virus to come through our country. As for indefinite shutdowns as mitigation? Never again.

Time to reopen, California. Open up those beaches and parks and tennis courts. I have a feeling that from many angles, the science will prove that these are the safest places to be. Let’s all be respectful and responsible for ourselves out of consideration for those at high-risk. And let’s get the small businesses back to work.

…

*This number includes deaths due to Coronavirus, and deaths due to other conditions of those carrying Coronavirus. Typically the number of deaths by annual flu stops getting recorded in the spring. That will not be the case for Coronavirus. Never has there been such eagerness to declare a specific cause of death, and many argue that the final number will be inflated due to the political nature of this virus, and fact of the financial incentive offered when Coronavirus is determined as cause-of-death.

**These figures are from the CDC website based on 2017 which was the most recent year available. The CDC estimates these numbers because it knows not every single death due to (say) pneumonia gets recorded, so they estimate the number. The number of deaths due to pneumonia and influenza are combined for various reasons.

“Do you want to be healed?” he asked, immediately following my run-on statement of

 

grievances

disappointments

sins

exterior problems (eloquently stated, of course)

worries

irritations

injustices…

 

all of which are contributing to my current, toxic state of mind.

 

I didn’t even have to wait a full second for the offer, “Do you want to be healed?”

Hmm.  Such a poignant question.

 

He didn’t say, “Do you want me to fix all your problems?” and to be honest, I might want that more.

As if I could just… be fine.

I even created some of these problems.

 

Very likely, I will still have to exist with these conditions that pull at me, derail me, exhaust me, grieve me; but I could be filled with the fullness of peace… and general “all-shall-be-well”-ness.

That doesn’t sound like enough.

I might just rather complain about things.

 

Do I want to be healed?  What a question.

I shall consider it.

Creation’s Original and Ultimate Design

 

Think with me.

 

Think with me about well-functioning, collaborative systems.  Think about the solar system, and the nervous system.  Or how about sports teams, or the human eye, or a symphony.

 

Think Eco systems, or mosaics.  Consider how each piece works together, forming a bigger picture that is far more dazzling and illustrative and advantageous than each piece in isolation.

 

Now think politics.

 

Wait—don’t think about that yet.

 

Go back to thinking about wholeness.  Think about the importance of each element in good design.  Contemplate the meaning of “Gestalt: The whole is greater than the sum of its parts”—it’s a condition where the whole is greater—to be whole is greater.

 

Imagine a well-balanced bottle of wine.

 

Remember, in Paul’s letter to the Corinthians, where he likens of the body of Christ to the human body: each person and part is different, but absolutely useful and beneficial to the whole.  Sure, the body can adapt to being without some of its parts, but how much better for the arm and the body to be together.

 

Think about life!  Think of all of the different things that must come together in order to be alive.

 

In well-functioning, collaborative systems, everything is important; every ability is a blessing to the whole.  Every part is intended for a place of relevance and dignity because it has the purpose of perfecting-by-participating-with the whole.

 

Non-interrelation means “unsustainable” or obsolescence.

 

THINK about that.

 

 

The Template for Creation’s Original and Ultimate Design

 

Now think about the Triune God.

 

God the Father, Son, and Spirit is a well-functioning, collaborative, living system.

 

He is not just “good”, He is “all things working together for it”.

 

He is a triad of mind, body, and soul — power, sacrifice and connectivity — for the sake of a fuller, bigger, more complete version of power, sacrifice and connectivity.

 

God is fluid diversity.  He is complimentary differences as one complete Being.

 

Scriptures from Genesis illustrate that this multi-faceted Being is the Creator God who creates in like fashion.  He is the over-arching system.  He is the template for all systems.  And specifically, the multi-faceted human creation is formatted as this—resembling God himself.  In fact, we have been created not only to resemble God; we have been created after, in, through, because of, and for Himself the Triune God.

 

Furthermore, the verses in Colossians and Philippians and more convey that we have been created diversely with the intention of working together like (with, in, through, for….) God Himself.

 

The active element, the life-giving element, present even before the beginning—“working together”—is the key.  It makes stuff happen.  “Let us create…”

 

 

Collaboration is the Key

 

With so many moving parts in the boundless Kingdom of God, working together is what keeps all things from becoming a lifeless and spoiling heap.  While there might otherwise be contradiction, redundancy, separation, and ultimate cancellation; working together enables growth, and places of dignity and purpose, value and effectiveness.

 

Think of “working together” as reconciliation—not as in just the good absorbing bad, or the unity that triumphs separation in the sense of forgiveness, though it is that, too—but consider reconciliation simply as: all things collaborating respectfully, perfectly.

 

Reconciliation serves to edify and enhance.  It shapes, sharpens, and develops.  It is active and inclusive; the means and the end.  It increases the whole as it increases all things in size, number, attributes, and behavior to further perpetuate working together with all things (viz. magnify).

 

Reconciliation is our Template.

 

The burgeoning universe reflects its Template in this same way in that all things are working in correspondence with its nature of being active and inclusive.  As a result, it further reflects its Creator by way of it being, as scientists say, both infinite and expanding…  It isn’t enough to be big, and merely have done something once–it is proliferating according to its template, and as such, it is growing into a fuller and more complex version of itself.

 

In a similar way, we can be fully saved, and yet also be led into fuller salvation.  It isn’t enough to just have a static dose of unity or salvation; because this goes against its nature, and the name of its very author.  To be truly alive is to be growing in fuller unity.

 

(I can’t help myself here, I love this stuff.  Here we have a paradox.  “Infinite” and “expanding”–two different concepts which work together to reveal the nature of its Creator.  How?  It showcases the idea that God is big enough to include two truths which would otherwise cancel each other out: like “infinite and expanding”.  The universe is an example of an edifying fusion, held within the hands of the Creator, of two or more truths which could otherwise stand alone.  In so doing, this union of seemingly opposing ideas reveals the presence of God who is big enough, not only to include differences, but unite them as they work together.  It is an expression of the promise in Matthew 18: “Where two or more are held together, there is the Triune God”; for THERE is reconciliation.  Where there is reconciliation, there is the presence of God).

 

Think about that!

 

 

Humanity’s Highest Potential and Ultimate Design: Reconciliation/Collaboration.  Reflecting a Diverse, Collaborative, and Loving God

 

Now think about the human creation.

 

The human creation is a reflection of God.  It’s not just what we ought to be; it’s that we ARE.  By virtue of our vast differences, we reflect a giant, diverse, equipped being.  And when we’re in a spirit of togetherness, we’re in a posture of rightness and authenticity according to our ultimate design (our true identity) simply by being in alignment with what IS: triumphant, unfailing, collaborative oneness (which is actually the definition of love).

 

Expanding this thought: “God-as-oneness, and humans made to reflect such” would suggest that collaboration is our highest form of potential.  Enabled by the Spirit of the reconciling God.

 

When it comes to a concept or a movement, reconciliation is the most important thing.  Being “with”—not “against”—is the nature of our truest identity.  It is more important than any offering to God, says Matthew 5:23-24.  On these grounds, the highest form of righteousness therefore is not isolated purity, but rather collaboration (within/despite the messiness).  It is not rightness in solitary, it is rightness in solidarity.

 

This kind of rightness glorifies the over-arching Truth, and the end-game of God—oneness and unity in and under Christ—as clarified in John 17:21, and in Ephesians 1:10 (initially, this is a most insulting message; and then it is the most relieving, joyous, freeing, empowering message an individual could hear… which is not unlike the way the Gospel is typically received).

 

Collectively, we are as multifaceted as the components of the universe, and each component is nothing short of splendid, if we are to believe Psalm 139:14.  Taking our cue from the systems around us, success for us both individually and collectively actually requires that there be differences.  And its triumph is not realized with a contest of importance for the individual; but rather upon the embracing of the importance of everything.

 

My point with all of this laborious contemplation of the indefinable God, and in exploring concepts like “all” and “paradox” and “oneness” is to propose that a being—specifically the collective human race—which is seemingly all over the board and/or existing in contradiction with itself might not be wrong so much as it is just not yet fully aware.  All of the right parts and pieces are there, it just hasn’t grown into itself yet.  It may be self-aware, but it is not wholly conscious.  And it won’t get “right-er” by cutting itself off from its other parts.

 

Any dysfunction within itself is not due to the fact of widespread differences, but rather the disparaging nature and lack of willingness to work together—a sign of immaturity, and a behavior that further compounds itself.

 

This state of disunity indicates shortsightedness.  It reveals a lack of understanding of whom we’ve been modeled after.  It’s an indication of an absence of God-mindedness, and therefore an absence of the nature of God: humility, for example, or the goal of genuine unity, to name another.

 

Without the presence of God-mindedness (the ability to see things as God does), and without understanding of where God is leading us (toward fuller unity in Him in all things), “all things” looks like a sin.  Without any hope in the ultimate goodness and authority of God, “working together” looks like a mess.  Incongruent.  It’s counter-intuitive.  It looks like an insult.  It looks impossible.

 

A divided/divisive group is a group which has not grown into the reflection of its Creator who is big enough to include two opposing-seeming concepts, and big enough to overcome the threats of inclusivity.  In its state of immaturity, a divided group sees contradiction (as it is itself in contradiction), where God might be seeing potential for collaboration.  A divisive group sees threat to its individual ideologies, where God sees a place to work together toward a full and perfect ideology—unity in Christ.  Reconciliation.

 

 

How Those in the Kingdom Might Collaborate Toward Their Ultimate Identity (Practical Suggestions for Being Participators in our Maturation Process)

 

Incidentally, with this talk of collaboration, and all things…  I am not suggesting that there is no wrong.  On the contrary, there is wrongness and potential for wrongness everywhere.  There was even potential for bad in the Garden of Eden, remember?  There was that option to disobey; and also, notice that the Voice of Separation visited Eve even before she chose wrongly.  No, there is badness and wrongness in every direction.  But there is also goodness.  So, I’m suggesting we heed Philippians 4:8 and err on the side of focusing on God’s ultimate goal.

 

Furthermore, I’m not proposing we align with, or even allow destruction, and partner with hate.  Even God himself finally cleaves from any being that cannot disembody destruction or a desire for it.  We have the right to dust off our feet and move on if reconciliation is refused.

 

Slander and malice are wrong, but they are God’s enemies to fight.  They are symptoms of disunity.  So, in the case of our politically divided country at-large, I’m suggesting we work with the root cause: our state of separation.

 

How do we turn the tides and begin working together?  Surely we can draw upon the illustrations of our own personal trajectory of becoming more fully one with Christ!

 

For example, here’s how God works with me:  He doesn’t require my 100% agreement in order to begin working together.  Mostly, he relates to and works with the things we have in common.  He does not turn a blind eye to my sins, but calls them out as an exception to the norm.  He takes my “yes”, feeble as it may be, and works with it.  He is empathetic to my conditions.  He validates my perspective and invites me to see His.  He calls me “friend”, and desires that we should “come and reason together”.  He is patient.  Persistent.  He works in correspondence with his nature of edifying, collaborative oneness.  And slowly, over time, though we are vastly different, we are working more and more fully, together.

 

OK, now think politics.

 

What if, in the realm of politics, our right(eous)ness is found more in the way we conduct ourselves toward others, than it is in the causes we are for or against and how passionately we fight for them.

 

What if, on the spectrum of politics as it relates to us Christians, right-ness (correctness) isn’t a place on the spectrum, or a side, or a wing, or a movement; but instead, it’s the act of being reconciliatory from whatever side we’re on.  Doesn’t this seem like a truer reflection of God?

 

You know this already: we are an either/or culture.  The world would have us believe that there is only black and white, and one is right and one is wrong.  We are setting our sights too low as we make our business about delineating–confining–rightness to one side.  Even we Christians sometimes feel it a concession far too “beneath us” (unholy, even!) to unite with those who oppose our worldviews… even though one of the most transcending acts of God’s love was to lower himself into our worldview for the purpose of holy unity.

 

Compounding our state of division, is a constant focus on certain platforms, sources, and outlets which regurgitate and perpetuate a bias toward division, and who parrot the rhetoric of the flesh’s comfort zone: polarization, “me = right”, “wrongness = over there”.  Some media worshipers (those who believe that the media representing one’s personal position is the full extent of Truth) assume that magnifying this method of polarization is actually virtuous.  The world is a dangerous place for non-thinkers.

 

Our positions and proximities may dictate our just involvement in fighting for a cause, but let’s not forget our ultimate identity in the process: respectfully collaborating oneness, in/under/like/through Christ.  If being “Pro”-anything is turning us into a hater of actual people, then we’ve lost sight of our true calling.

 

 

Ideals Versus Creation’s Ultimate Identity: The Christian’s Higher Calling to Sincerely and Respectfully Collaborate (Love)

 

The current status of much of the human race is: antagonistic, divided, angry.  There are several variables contributing to this, but ironically, this is the fruit of a generation preaching tolerance.

 

Well, we tried it.  Tolerance.  Perhaps it was a mistake, or maybe it was a necessary step in the process, but it certainly isn’t our ultimate destination.  How do we treat differences?  Our counterparts?  (Our opposition?)  With tolerance!?

 

Tolerance doesn’t work with humans—we can’t be lukewarm about differences.  It’s like prescribing apathy, numbness, and denial as the answer.  It’s like telling a husband and wife to begrudgingly coexist and hope for the best.

 

While those have helpful short-term benefits in shoring up further-destructive ripple effects, it is not the actual healing vaccine.  It’s like merely administering anesthesia to the eye instead of proceeding to also remove the plank from it so it may function as it was intended.  It’s a right “first do no harm” initial response, but there’s no final virtue in tolerance—there’s no bonding compound there.

 

If the ultimate, final goal is the “oneness” prayed for in John 17, then it’s time to evolve beyond an ideal of tolerating our differences.

 

It’s time to try loving our differences.

 

Ew.  But seriously.

 

I’m not talking about forsaking your own beliefs and jumping sides—no, we’ve been intentionally scattered to all sides so that we can represent each one well.  Neither is the opposite true: that we should coerce or require another to fully align with our beliefs (that’s not love—loving is neither predicated on agreeing nor is it initiated by coercion).

 

I’m talking about being a willing participant in God’s movement toward edifying, collaborative oneness in Christ, in the way that glorifies (reflects) the oneness we understand him to be talking about in John 17:21.

 

A few, immediate clarifications to help talk us off the ledge:

 

1. Collaboration, as modeled by our Template, is a two-way street. Yes, it involves immense sacrifice, but it’s done for the purpose of bringing about eventual, fulfilling oneness, and edifying give-take.  It’s based on a model of humility that all would be so-inspired—a lowering of oneself that all would be raised to their full potential.  It’s not intended to perpetuate a model of eternal, one-sided martyrdom.  Unity does not magnify under this model.

 

2. Fully functioning, collaborative oneness includes calling out wrongness, but specifically with the hope and the spirit of the end goal in mind—esteemed togetherness. Compromise doesn’t mean that the boundaries for trespassing have moved; it means that collaboration has been prioritized.  Tuning all actions to this focal point (edifying oneness) is imperative, as it conditions our words and our frequency, and flavors our tone.

 

3. We do not have to collaborate with everyone. We just need to be willing to collaborate with anyone.  But God gives us who he gives us.  Remember Jesus, the Savior of Creation, through whom all things were made?  God only gave him 12.  Sure, Jesus had his mobs and his crowds and… well, all, but as for those whom God wanted Jesus to be daily and deliberately edifying and collaborative with?   Twelve.

 

4. This is not a petition that we should change the world—after all, God has already overcome the world. Also, we don’t own the world’s reaction.  This is a petition to change ourselves.  This is about being a willing participant in the working out of our own salvation.  Let’s ourselves strive to be a collaborative and edifying person.

 

When we collaborate, compassion meets wisdom.  Ideals meet strategy.  Justice meets mercy.  Freedom meets accountability, and “righteousness and peace kiss…”.  Provision meets sustainability and aptitude, so that deep need meets deep fulfillment.

 

With regards to politics, we are not inconsequential as citizens in this movement toward collaboration—quite the opposite.  Politicians may posture as leaders, but the privilege of a democracy comes with the burden that it is the people who need to change first—not the politicians.

 

So, if I may, here’s something that we the people could do to help enable edifying oneness.

 

As far as what to do, let’s consider reflecting, toward others, the collaborative process of salvation in our own lives.

 

As far as what not to do: let’s examine the words and deeds that come out of our own mouths which have only served to defile us as a people, and especially as Christians.  Christians, please reconsider that smug remark.  We tend to fancy ourselves cognoscentis given our prolific access to information, but God alone is the only source which offers absolute truth, and we need people on all sides to help us understand this, because God is that big.

 

Inserting a derogatory quip into a conversation or into a social media post is like airing dirty laundry or a hoisting the flag of immaturity or hypocrisy in one’s own front yard.  Especially if it is in the name Christianity.  It simply displays a lack of understanding of our own identity, and therefore God’s identity as well.

 

Inasmuch as it is up to us, let’s be a collaborative people, leaving the vengeance up to God.  The responsibility alone of becoming a person who could sincerely hope for unity with all under Christ is plenty enough to keep us busy at work—far too busy to be throwing stones at others.

 

There are a lot of right causes out there; and there are even right causes which currently oppose one another, prompting many to wonder, “Which cause is the most righteous?”  But righteousness is neither a cause nor a single ideal like tolerance.  Righteousness is Christ-in-us, working toward an even fuller measure of Christ-in-us.  This is God’s goal for us.  Eventually, Christ alone is to be creation’s identity, manifesting in infinite and diverse ways throughout all of creation.  Let’s be about this business and see how that affects politics.

 

If we can focus on that goal first and foremost, I wonder how that would influence our actions as we fight for good causes and/or address those who oppose us.

 

Reconciliation and collaboration require sacrifice which often poses as injustice and suffering, but it is the catalyst to becoming whom we’ve been created to be in Christ.  Sacrifice (lowering oneself for the sake of unity) is vital to our participation in the kingdom of God in this world.  It is the way out of our current, dead-ended, divisive environment (Philippians 3:10).  It is the way to participate in God’s ultimate glory (I Peter 4:13), because this is how we magnify the complete, perfectly-collaborative God.  This is what it looks like to work in correspondence with his nature.

 

Reconciliation is a miracle.  Even more, that we would want reconciliation—be assured that this will take a miracle.  But God promises he will give us our heart’s desires, so pray that he put this desire in our hearts.

 

Then, when the tides begin to shift, and we begin to collectively turn toward one another instead of on one another, we can be certain it was God who began a good work, who remains persistent, using all things to work together, that all of creation would reach its fullest potential—an edifying body of oneness full of Christ—like (as, with, in, for, under, and respectfully collaborating with…) God himself.

 

This one is for the Drama Geeks, because nothing makes the rest of the population more uncomfortable than a dramatic monologue.  The following is a conversation between two people, but the script was written for just the one part.  Anyone know if there’s a name for that kind of thing?  Anyway:

 

The Seer: A Conversation-Monologue

 

Hello, my friend!  It is so good to see you.  Please come in!

 

(The Seer welcomes the Visitor in)

 

I’ve been looking forward to today.  May I take your bags and coat?  I’ll put them right over there.

 

(The Seer takes the bags and returns to the Visitor)

 

Oh, I’m so glad you’re here.  I know how much trouble it can be, but I am so exited you came.  Would you like to look around?

 

(Pauses for the Visitor’s reply)

 

Of course—you’ve had quite the trip.  Please, take a load off.  Have a seat—there’s a great view of the town square from here.  Feel free to put your feet up.  How was your trip?

 

(Listening to the Visitor)

 

I love people watching, too.  And you’re exactly right, this town is known for a little bit of everything: artists, philosophers; teachers, students; liberal, conservative; new and old…  There wasn’t always such a broad spectrum, but we’re the better for it.

 

I’ve had this place forever—just off the square, to be close to everything.  I’m glad you found the entrance.  It’s fairly modest because I wanted people to feel comfortable approaching it; but you’d be surprised of the irony: it’s such a simple door, that no one seems to find it in the first place.

 

I know you’ve got some questions, but would you like some tea first?  Cucumber water?  Anything you want…  Kombucha, coffee, lavender soda…

 

(A pause to listen for the Visitor’s request)

 

I sure do have an orange blossom + lemon verbena spritzer with a dash of elderflower-infused simple syrup, and a sprig of mint and blackberries for garnish.  Made with fresh ingredients just this morning!

 

(Silence while the Visitor looks around and then asks some questions about the interior)

 

Why thank you, yes, that boarder is a frieze, carved quite awhile ago, but I meant to tell a timeless-togetherness type of story with it.  No, no—I didn’t do it myself.  My favorite artist did it for me.  Actually we sort of did it together.

 

The parquetry flooring?  Yes, painstakingly chiseled and polished and fit together perfectly—so many different shapes and pieces of wood and yet there’s not even the slightest gap between each one—only lines which compose a most beautif—

 

(Seer is interrupted by a question)

 

My favorite artist did it!

 

(Another question)

 

Oh, that mosaic took quite awhile.  I love how big it is.  Isn’t it the most beautiful thing you’ve ever seen?  All those colors…  It was done by my f—

 

…How’d you know?  Yes!  My absolute favorite!

 

…Who?  Well, all kinds of people.

 

…Yes you can too have “all favorites”.

 

(The Seer chuckles endearingly at the youthful, shortsightedness in the Visitor’s retort)

 

Now.  Would you like to stay here, or would you like to move onto the terrace?  There’s a fantastic view of the countryside.

 

(Visitor chooses)

 

Wonderful!  Come with me.

 

…The tile was hand-painted—

 

…No, no!—I absolutely love that you notice all these things—and ask about them, too!

 

…The hallway, yes, real gold in the gilding.

 

…For sure.  The favorite.  See that painting?  Look closer.  See those brushstrokes?  Each one, confident.  Definitive.  Purposeful.  I love it.

 

(They walk down a hall, lined with artwork toward a room whose exterior wall consists of single-lite double-doors)

 

Let me open the doors for you.

 

Ahhh…  do you smell that?

 

…Well, let’s see, it’s a combination of grass, fertile dirt, lavender, the bread being baked in the shop on the square…  And also, very faintly, since the breeze is coming from all the way over that mountain range, it’s carrying a bit of an alpine smell.

 

(A pause to take everything in.  They sit at a table)

 

I agree.  Very peaceful.  But… you still look tense.

 

…I don’t know, something about your shoulders, your heavily creased brow, your clenched teeth…  your… knuckles, yo—

 

…OK, I’ll stop.  How about, you start?

 

…Those are lemon trees.  Lemon trees!  That’s what else you smell.  Now THAT is my absolute favorite fragrance….  And olive trees.  By the way, I have some olives—

 

…Yes, fresh Buffalo mozzarella and feta, too.  Tomatoes from right down there, and some fresh figs.  I just happen to have a platter piled with all of those things on the credenza inside.  You enjoy the fragrance of those citrus blossoms while I grab the platter.

 

(The Seer returns carrying a platter of cheeses, tomatoes, olives, figs…)

 

My pleasure!  I put some baguette chunks on there, too.  Still warm—I just picked one out at the bakery.

 

…Yes just now.

 

…I can be very speedy.

 

(The Seer offers the platter, and then eats an olive)

 

Mmm.  Exquisite.  Simple, and exquisite.

 

Indeed I do have gelato.  The finest quality, too.  But what do you say we leave some room for that later.  My hope is to leave room for something… more important.  We’ll get to the gelato in a bit.

 

…It’s OK, we can just sit together.

 

(Another pause)

 

I agree.  Computers can be very frustrating.

 

….And that pesky vacuum of yours, too…

 

Why don’t you tell me why you came today.

 

…I know, but I like to hear it in your words.

 

…..Hello?  Did I lose you again?  So many worries…

 

I have a tissue box here.

 

…I know, you don’t cry.  It’s not for you, it’s for me.

 

Tell me.

 

(The Seer listens.  And weeps).  Oh, my heart.

 

Yes.  She is …my favorite.  So delicate!  I love that you sing to her every night.

 

…My heart aches for your friend, too…

 

…Oh my, that is a lot of money.  That must feel overwhelming…

 

…So much pressure you put on yourself.

 

…I’ve noticed that, as well.  Why do you think you feel so low?

 

(The Seer listens intently, compassionately, and hands the visitor a tissue)

 

So many things.  So many, many things.

 

(More quiet)

 

I mean to tell you something about all of your worries.  I hesitate only because people don’t believe me when I tell them this, and that makes me sad.

 

May I tell you?  Oh, I hope you’ll believe me.  I have seen what happens with each one of your concerns, and I have such good news that I can’t stop smiling—even though right is…  Well, anyway, do I have you?  Right now?  If I tell you, will you listen?

 

Listen, now.  Here is the truth:

 

(Seer leans in, and says quietly):

 

It all works out.

 

(The Seer listens to the doubtful but hopeful questioning)

 

Yes, that works out.

 

…That, too.

 

…Something bigger happens there—so big that that becomes a non-issue.

 

…I’m intimately aware of that.  I knew it was coming, and I’ve had a plan since forever to make sure that that specifically would soon work out to even better than before you saw it seem to come to fall apart.

 

…You’re seeing it from the other side.  Yes, broken, but I can do far more with brokenness than without.

 

…I got it.  I have it completely.

 

It works out in the end!  It ALL works in the end.

 

…No, the “end” is different than the way you define it.  The beginning is different, than where you’ve pegged it, too.  It’s bigger than what you think.  But whether it works out here or there, does it make a difference to you if it finally does, once and for all?

 

…Yes, I understand.  Sooner is better than later.  But…  neither sooner nor later are relevant when—

 

(The Visitor seems to object)

 

…It will all be OK.  Please believe me.

 

…Ludicrous, yes.

 

…Not practical help—it would seem not.

 

…Ridiculous?  I’ve been told even worse…  but that doesn’t make it any less true.

 

This is the part where you become a little bit relieved, maybe?  Or… hopeful?  Perhaps you might be willing to entertain a teeny bit of joy in your heart about this?

 

…But I DO know.

 

…But I AM here.

 

…(Seer chuckles) Well, I’m even smarter and stronger than you.

 

(Silence for awhile)

 

It all works out in the end.  This is a promise and a guarantee.  Everything.  Every last bit.  Every tiny detail, every concern, every fear, every problem… it is finished.  Resolved.  It all turns into something else that will make you want to jump up and down and do flip flops.

 

But, my favorite one, in order for you to be OK while everything is being worked out…  You have to believe me, too.

 

Will you?

“What is good?  Who is right?” many ask.

 

“God alone”, some would say.

 

“Then who or what is God?” ask some amongst those.

 

A select few might pursue an answer—and might even be willing to lose themselves in the question—and ask, and wrestle, and contemplate, and persist, and be willing to learn, and might even allow themselves to change.

 

Their findings, though, would lead to a problem: God is a mystery, and a contradiction in terms.

 

He wants to be known, and yet cannot be fully known.  He sanctifies some, and yet loves all.  He implores us to endure, and yet saves the ones who surrender.

 

He is only, and yet all: two seemingly opposing concepts.

 

Even more, God is a Trinity(!) of … of what?  Spirit, matter, and oneness?  Purity, dichotomy, and reconciliation?  Authority, willingness, and medium?

 

More compounding yet, the beloved creation is created in this image: paradox—diversity—bonded polarity, which is reflected even down creation’s molecule!

 

“What then?” ask fewer still.  “What is right amidst mystery and paradox?”

 

The least of these remaining seekers might consider that the problem is neither God, nor differences; but rather their own limited framework which has not evolved to possess paradox—an immaturity which cannot grasp that “right” is not one solitary, isolated concept which can be fully contained or manifested individually; but rather it is all things, working together for the good of all things.

 

If the Triune God is good, then perhaps this is good: paradox collaborating sustainably, mutually, in a way that is both humble and edifying.

 

Perhaps “right” is not a place or a side on the spectrum; but rather the whole spectrum working together, toward more togetherness.

 

And then, the only thing out of step with “good” is a total disregard or devaluation of diversity; or fear and suppression of differences; or anything which fosters a fracturing of “whole”-mindedness; or an isolated or elitist nature…

 

The only one good thing to agree upon is God alone; and the way to reflect this good is not to demand sameness, or merely tolerate differences; but instead to embrace, with fierce respect and utter relief, seemingly opposing concepts, knowing that each completes the other—that one isn’t right without the other.

 

This is my political statement:

 

(I like the artist’s word for “opposite”.  They call it “complimentary, or complimenting”.)

 

Let’s not muzzle our complimentary counterparts with a derogatory label.  Especially if our definition of “right” has not evolved to embrace paradox.

 

Let’s not magnify destruction and division that exists on all sides by participating in it, ourselves.  Instead, let’s value the person who sees the same thing, but from a different angle—even more, let’s expect that what they have to bring to the table might be wisdom of a complimentary nature, and worthy of the honor of, at least, consideration.

 

Consider that valuing the complimentary (read: opposing) parties actually glorifies the paradoxical, Triune God (that is, if glorifying means “to reflect; or to magnify, or make bigger by participating in the same nature”).

 

We have been selectively and specifically placed at certain spots all over the spectrum—not to alienate or even stay put, but to balance and weigh in from our different vantage points, and to work with the whole, toward “good”, understanding that “good” = sustainable, humble, optimal, and edifying wholeness.

 

Wherever we’ve been put—wherever we are right now, let’s strive to exemplify this side of good.

“The Lord will never give you more than you can handle”.  This phrase has practically risen to scripture-status.

 

I have never found comfort in it.

 

Its origin is earnestness and hopefulness; but possibly, also, ignorance and denial.

 

The young, pre-suffering me used this saying to rationalize and categorize suffering away from me, because I surely couldn’t handle it.  And it compelled me to take it a step further—I judged people who were suffering, but weren’t handling it well.

 

Fast forward a decade or two, when hardships came.  To the me who was now suffering, this saying meant “I should be handling my suffering”.  If I’m not handling it I’m failing.

 

Fast forward another decade, post-crisis.  Now, “The Lord will never give you more than you can handle” sounds like a terrible thing to say to anyone, but I appreciate the good intentions.

 

Isn’t the Gospel message about God handling it?

 

May I make a suggestion?  How about instead, believing that God will never allow anything to happen that He can’t fully restore.  He’ll never give me more that HE can handle.

 

I know we know this, but life and culture have a way of dissuading our focus; and instead of hoping on God in our hardships, we easily promote hoping in ourselves handling it.

 

How about instead, banking on the hope that God will never let anyone go farther than where He can’t reach them?

 

Consider re-phrasing that unfounded but beloved proverb above, to: God will not allow even the smallest thing to happen, which He hasn’t intimately foreknown, and consequently provided a way for redemption.  And not just back to “how it was” redemption, but to ultimate, better than new, honorable and deeply loved status.

 

If even our Wounded Healer didn’t “handle” his own resurrection, neither should we put on that aspiration or criteria for coming out the other side.

 

Do you know someone who is suffering?  Believe instead these things about God for this person.  Hope in this about God for the person, more so than the wounded’s (or perhaps your own?) proper handling of things.

 

“Preach the Gospel.  When necessary, use words.” – St. Francis of Assisi.

Yes, my mind tends to think in cheesy billboard rhymes.  But it was the sound bite that downloaded instantly into my head when someone asked me to speak on “Finding God in Suffering”.

 

Plain and simple:  The Gospel message (that God will save those who profess they can’t do it themselves) is for receiving—not achieving.  In fact it is a contradiction in terms to attempt to achieve the Gospel.

 

In my beginning, I approached religion just as I approached any other merit-based entity.  I was good at earning things.  Meritocracy promoted a world order that made sense to me, and put me towards the top of that order.  I believed that God loved me here: in the light of my self-manifested goodness.

 

This logic was woven in my DNA.  It had nothing to do with how I was raised—I know this because my parents went to opposite extremes to tell me that I was marvelous and wonderful just because I was theirs—because I existed, because I was me.  I knew without a doubt that their love was unconditional, and had nothing to do with my achievements.

 

Boring.  A love that anyone could have didn’t seem very special.

 

Free love didn’t seem very self-edifying, right?  It had nothing to do with my awesomeness.  It had more to do with their awesomeness.  So I sought the other kind—the kind of love that values the things that young Me valued and possessed (good choices, self-discipline, abilities, high scores, etc.  All very noble, yes?).  A love based on this would reflect ME.  Would edify ME.  And I really liked myself.  In fact, I still do :).

 

I was good in the arena of this religion—Eugene Peterson calls it the gospel of “Salvation by self-help” (see his fabulous translation of Hebrews).

 

Alright.  Enter suffering.

 

Suffering removed the things of me that I valued–good and bad things.  I lost my valued ability to control things, to be admirable, to achieve goodness and worthiness according to the gospel of achieving.  With the loss of valuables comes the loss of perceived self-value.  This is suffering.  Or at least one form of it.

 

In that state of suffering I found God.  Or as some people say, God found me.  Or, I let myself be found…  I suppose any version of that is right.

 

Here’s what suffering (finally) did for me:

 

• It gave me an opportunity to consider a different Gospel: God saves. Not me.

 

• It separated me unto a place where I felt God’s pursuit of me. It put me where, eventually, I knew His divine empathy (something I could never have accepted in my non-humbled state).  It enabled me to experience these things that are relational qualities instead of merely doctrinal or religious ones.

 

• It produced a new hope in me: from personal success, to eternal rescue. I switched from hoping in me to hoping in Him.

 

Anyway, suffering is fertile ground.  I hate to even make a bulleted list, because it comes off as exhaustive, yet the beneficial dividends of suffering are infinite.  So let this only be an encouragement to patiently endure, with certain hope, toward your own list of the payouts of suffering.

 

As with everything in the Kingdom of God, the Gospel is wherever there is space for it.  Think Sabbath, communion, Nativity…  The things of salvation come to wherever space has been made for it, or to where a sacrifice has occurred.  (And sometimes it just comes no matter what because God is that good).

 

But for me, suffering created (gouged, gored, gutted, and crushed) space in me to RECEIVE the good news.  GOD saves!  Not me!  What a relief, because suffering also showed me my limitations, and proved that I cannot save myself.  To hope in this is futile.

 

Where I was once full of myself, as is the inherent way of the flesh-organism, I now had space to want something grander.  And that I could accept that there really even was anything grander, and want it, was the work of God alone, regardless of whatever evil-seeming means that realization came about.

 

It’s right there in the beatitudes.  Blessed are you who suffer.  Blessed are you who are unable.  For that which you cannot do for your own self will be given to you by God, eternally and infinitely.  If only you will RECEIVE it!

 

This is a perennial lesson.  I have learned this, I am still learning this, I will be learning this again.

 

Is to believe this:

 

God is sufficient for me regardless of the choices others make

AND

God is sufficient for others regardless of the choices I make.

 

Do you know how much better my life would be if I really believed that?

God help make it so!!!