Saturday, October 8, 2011

receiving light

Awake oh sleeper,
arise from the dead
and Christ shall give you light.


As observation
I find the saying
significant
in that
Christ is light
and the resource
of light in our life;
When we
dwell in the shadow,
we are
dead
to the light
of Christ,
which
has been
before the
manifestation
of this world;
While we yet sleep,
we see not the light;
The receiving of light
is an
arising
to the light.

The light is eternal;
It changes not;
As Christ is eternal
and has no variable of being.

Our world is "shadow"
whereas the world of
God is light.
Our world is temporal
whereas the world of
God is eternal.

We strive to find that realm;
The realm within;
The light within;
As though any other thing matters.

The world about us is mostly
"shadow"
(avoiding the word darkness);
It is consumed by things in the wings;
wanting in the making;
coveting what might be;
delerious of that which is not.

Rehearsing again:
Catholic (church);
Protestant (Bible);
Socinian (reason);
Quaker (experience).

Each is addressing
some form
that brings
man into
the
"perfection"
of the
saints.

This is attained
in the
Light,
as the Light
is both
eternal
and
perfect.

Each
fragment
of
Christendom
is attending
to achieve
that light,
though they may
call it
by
different
names
while
measuring
the desired
result
equally
different.

Three
of the four
do not
believe
in the
complete
absolvement of
sin.
As such
I feel
that
the light
is held
quite
out of
view.

The sleeper
becomes
unconscious
to the light;
Equally,
whether
Hebriac
temple
worship
or
systematic
reasoning
(whether science or scripture),
subscribes to the dead letter
of law and reason.

I believe it was
Descartes who
coined:
The leap of faith.
The Latin translates to:
I believe because it is absurd.

To science and similar humanistic reasoning,
Light within is absurd;
To similar rationalizing
through theology
expressed via
proving the
Scripture
by the
Scripture,
is again
absurdity.

With church
worship
sin is covered
through a
collective
of righteousness
that is accessed
through
the continual
coming to
the altar.

This cannot release one
from the sin or
embrace the
inner light.

The path to
Light
is through
Christ
out of the
slumber
and
death
march
of this
present
world.

The awakened
receive
Light
and will
seek it
more.

The
unawakened
seek not the
Light
though
it lies
within
every man
by one
measure
or another.

We can
use the talent
or lose
the talent.

We can awake
or sleep;
we can arise
from the dead
works or
remain
among
the
dead.

Receiving
the
Light
is as simple
or as difficult
as reaching
out to
accept the
gift of
God.

Query: Am I awakened to the Light within?

Sunday, October 2, 2011

new life- new wineskin

16 Noo man peceth and olde garment with a pece of newe cloothe. For then taketh he awaye ye pece agayne from the garmet and the rent ys made greater.
17 Nether do men put newe wyne into olde vessels for then the vessels breake and the wyne runneth oute and the vessels perysshe. But they powre newe wyne into newe vessels and so are both saved togeder.


This saying of Jesus
is one of the many
which show
the need
of a new life
with the
new birth.

In thinking of
a man,
a writer of
much greater
skill than I,
expresses
this thought
at length in
his tract
"No Cross -No Crown."
That writer is
of course
William Penn.

Where advances
are often
double-edged,
that one can
"Google"
and download
the tract for
the reading,
lay upon
the better
edge
of the
technology.

The cross
is an inward
crucifixion
of the
secular world.
The man
must take up
the cross
and
follow
the
Lord Jesus.

The new birth,
is the death
of the old
secular
being;
The death
of
the former
ways of
the world.

The man
is baptized
of the
Spirit
of
Christ
within;
Tis not
of an
outward
ceremony;
Tis of a
new
life.

Within
the much
weakened
Christendom
is the
indifference
to let go.

None have left
homeland,
field,
crop,
cattle,
family,
countrymen
for the
kingdom
of
God
and not
found
a hundredfold
better.

Yet
the
Christian
world
clings
to the
secular.

Thee cannot
patch
the world!
Thee cannot
pour the
new
wine
in the
old skin!

The skin will burst ;
The garment will rend;
The loss
at the end
will be
greater
then the
gain
at the
beginning.

The new life
must
begin
a new.

Christendom
has also
fallen
prey
to the
usage
of the
old wineskin
and to
the
patching
upon the
garment.

The
Israelites
left Egypt
and yet
in being
brought
from
bondage
chose
to carry
with them
the
"treasures"
of the Egyptian
world.

Of those who
left Egyptian
bondage
only two adults
(Joshua and Caleb)
entered into
the land of
promise.

Many were
the prophets
that plead
the err
of patching
spiritual
life onto
the secular.

Jesus,
brought
the way
of
redemption
to an unbelieving
Israel,
that chose
Caesar
under the
lip service
of God.

Within
forty
years
they also
perished.

The disciple Paul
urged against
a "juda-ized"
wine skin;
The disciple
called upon
the gentile
to abandon
the former
way;
The mystery
of
iniquity
was at work
already.

By the close of the first century,
Gnosticism
was an established
force
that would eventually
drive the pure faith
into the
wilderness.

By the year three hundred,
"offices" and
similar
furniture
became a part
of the
"Christian"
religion.

By 606 a.d.
man would govern
"the church"
according to
will worship,
whims,
notions
of protocol
and ceremony.

While
Protestantism
claimed
to begin anew,
nothing of the like
would be a forthcoming
reality.

Protestantism
exchanged
the infallible
Bible
for the
infallible
church.

It offered
a renewal
where the man
need not the
cleric as intercessor,
but there with
stitched their
new life
upon the church
garment.

Worship
was and still is
based upon
the pleasure
of man.

Protestantism
burst at the
seams and today
even yet remains
a fragmented
disbursement
that ranges from
fundamental
to a form
of ritualistic
science.

I do not believe
in the dishonest
practice
of judging
a religion
by its
hypocrites.
My contentions
at this time
pertain to the
sincere and
devout.

In the midst of the
Protestant
era
arose one
George Fox,
who then
proposed
a renewed
form of the
ancient faith
in Christ.

The furniture
was left for
an inward
life and
worship.
The Religious
Society
Of Friends
became
very
successful,
and especially
so in the new
colonies of
America.

The so-called
Quaker
was at one point
the dominant
Christian
faith of
the colonies.

Again,
upon the
short list
of suggested
reading,
William Penn
held
uncompromising
Christian views.
His success with
the native
people of the new land
was not because he held
some wishy-washy
you go your way and I will go mine
grey world belief
that everyone was
a redeemed
man of God.
That is a retro-fitted notion
within the much
fractured
realm of the
society of friends.
There is that of God
in every man is not
equivalent to
every man is saved
by God's
grace through
Christ.

Between
this-ite
and
that-ite,
the
Religious Society of Friends
has become
no different
than
the
Universal (Catholic),
the
Protestant,
or often
the
Science religious sects.

That may be a hard saying;
I, realize that it is;
And yet it is no harder,
nor less true
than it would be
to others
of the past
in the same
predicament.

The Religious Society of Friends
went from the top seed (so to speak)
American faith,
to a minute
scattering
of perhaps
100,000 + or -.

That is no more or less
of a bursting of the
wineskin than
has been seen
in Protestantism.

Some of the
glass cathedrals
bear little difference
from the Broadway musical
only performed in the name
of worship.

So-called missions
bear little difference
from the political
action committees
of the secular
government.
Again,
posed as a religious
exercise.

Yes, religion is to be practiced in life.
No, religion is not to be worn as a philactery.

Our kingdom is within;
it is not without.

Our allegiance is to the Spirit of God within,
not to reforming the secular world without.

We oppose injustice;
we condone not the evil;
we set an example of truth in life;
but to suggest that we may
reform the secular is as naive
as a doctrine that we may
reform the
prince of the power of the air
himself.

I am not naive to the
writings and teachings of
Rauschenbush's social gospel.
There was a time in my life
when I thought this notion
to be so;
yet no longer
live I in that world
that leadeth unto the
bursting.

The social gospel
is flawed in that
it assumes the need
to change that mans
circumstance
that he may
become endeared
to the gospel.

Rauschenbush proposed
that in so-called
hells kitchen
his sermons
were in vain
when the church-goer
would trod
back into
the secular
world for the week.

Thus the birth
of the social gospel
that changes the
environment
that the man may
live unhampered
in attendance
to God.

I again
in brotherhood
with Penn
propose:
No cross,
No crown!

The inter-relation
of Christian
with anything
else,
simply does
not work.
It will eventually
unravel with the damaged cloth,
or burst with the old wineskin.

I am given to say:
A good apple never makes the bad one good ;
A bad apple always makes the good apple bad.

By that I mean the same thing.

Query:
Am I putting new wine in old skins?

Tuesday, September 27, 2011

pearls and swine

Geve not that which is holy to dogges nether cast ye youre pearles before swyne lest they treade them vnder their fete and ye other tourne agayne and all to rent you.

This Bible teaching has always grasped my attention.
I am not entirely sure why this day,
although occassions have arisen
that have brought it to remembrance
time and again.

It is with difficulty
that one
assesses
swine
(the unclean)
from the pure of heart,
but assess we ought.

When we love those who love us,
we do as the unbeliever
and fare neither
the better
nor
worse
for it.

We are taught to
love enemies,
do for those
who
despitefully
use thee.

Pray for enemies;
Turn the other cheek;
Go the twain;
Give the cloak;
Cast not pearls before the swine.

Thee hast either a contradiction
or a different subject application.

The first part warns of not giving that which is holy to the dogs;
The follow likens it to casting goodly pearls before swine.
Swine have no cognition of pearls.
The goodly value is wasted upon them
as regardless of the value
the boar given the
opportunity
will rend thee.

Bestowing
such a gift
upon a swine
is of no consequence,
it is of no value.

When the seeker
comes upon the treasure
of the field,
he sells all that he has to buy the field.

Thee hast sought, found and bought.
At no time
is the
asking
find,
sell all,
buy,
give the treasure for nought.

When the one
discovers the
goodly Pearl
he sells all
to buy the one.

Thee hast discerned the goodly.
Thee hast made provision to obtain it.
Thee has determined an action.
Thee hast made the buy off the goodly pearl.

The disciples were sent out,
without script,
without second coat,
and unto those who
received them not
they were to
"shake even the dust"
as a testimony
against
them.

Folk speak much of missions.
Folk assimilate much of the ancient.
Folk rarely embark such a mission,
it trod the ancient step.

The Christian
does not
lose
the
humanity;
Thee hast lost no
tender mercies;
Thou art
given to
a pledge of sorts
not to
expend
that gift
upon
the unmerciful
and unbelieving.
Thou mustn't
cast the
goodly pearls before
the swine.

The gifts of God
are not to be
thrown about
so as to artificially
bolster an
anti-Christ
world.

The dog is
anti-Christ.
The dog and the swine
are not the proper
recipients of the
holy gifts.

The dog would
drink of
the intoxicants
in the
treasured
vessels
while the
dance and
nudity
would proceed
over hallowed
ground.

One seeks, sells all, buys the treasure.
Another takes,
gives nothing,
and expends the treasure
on riotious living.

I do not give
goodly
holy
treasure
to the
dog.

I may not take the feeding
from the babe,
casting it into the street
where as the wild
beast and fowl
may devour
both the feeding
and eventually
the babe also.

Many greatly misunderstand this paradox;
the wise
give it
greater
consideration.

Because
modern
Christendom
has managed
to turn
almost
everything
on its head,
these words
likely
appear
strange.

In the world secular
many work places
are a resource
of mental
poison
as the words
are used against thee
to the support and
continuance
of sin.

The one makes all of the
contribution,
while the other
is the always
recipient.
Never reversed;
never changing;
the one gives
while the other
takes.

The taker
will use a
perverted
definition of love
to goad the giver on;
to rend and gore
that which is good
into something
evil.

The story of Job
is one example
of the satanic work
of punishing the righteous
with a perverted
trans-interpretation
of the good.

To the task
in the game of
turning the
tables,
American
politics
teaches
this evil
well.

In a similitude,
the persecutor
slaps thee on the cheek
saying "Jesus said turn the other cheek."
They do it again,
and again,
and again,
and again.

Suffering abuse
and continuing
to render the
good gifts
is not
a Biblical
principle.

God forgives
the truly
repentant;
God does not
forgive
the phony
sorry
hypocrite.

Thee
must
guard
against
the
Satan-Logic
that was
used against Job.
Job would not
curse God,
but owed
Satan
nothing.
Satan
sought
to
turn the tables,
using righteous
precepts
against
the
righteous
one.

Men were called upon
in times past
to serve in wars.
They declined
and suffered
for the cause.
They were not given
a license to
retaliate against
the persecutors;
They were not
given
bragging
rights
where-as
to foist
the self
as righteous
for a
cause;
They were not to
set an excuse
using a belief
simply for their
own preservation;
They were
not given to concede
the wrong,
working to
the comfort
of the evil-doer
that they might
prolong the same.

I believe the term is
passive resistance,
or perhaps
passive non-compliance.

One refuses the order;
The punishment for non-compliance
is accepted without the resistance.
At times the righteous
examples insisted
on not being exempted
of the consequence
for their
non-compliance.

Cyrus Pringle is one example;
Ghandi is another;
There are many,
some are known names
some are not.

Making a discernment
given a specific
situation
is a matter
that thee ought to
seek the higher guidance.

Caring unto the wounded,
making the meals,
cleaning the encampment,
it is compromise?
It is giving that which is holy into the dogs?

By creating a supporting role
regardless of how love oriented
it may appear to be,
remains supportive of the evil cause.
The specific
judgement
there into
is not
light tread.

I have lived
in the era
when these
United States
of
America
determined
for a season
that the people
of North
Viet Nam
were the enemy.
An enemy to be killed at will
because the yellow man
lived under a
government
that practiced
some form
of
communism.

These
United States
of
America
had a draft
of soldiers.
The young
were ordered
under
penalty of law
that the young
man would serve
to take up
arms against
the foe.

Some
became
conscientious
objectors.

Many protested
the war,
not because
they held religious
principle,
but because
they were
afraid of
the war.

This lot
would
no more die
for a good
than an
evil.

For the lack
of a better
term,
cowardice
was the objection
rather than the conscience.

This lot
decried
the war
while
upholding
addicts of
narcotics
who claimed
that they
could sing.

It was a horrible era.
So many sought sex
as though
they were born
to be an
animal.
So many
sought
intoxicants
of every
manner.
It was an era
of
unbridled
selfishness.

Somethings
are not
hard to
discern.

For the
free love
crowd,
Viet Nam
wasn't a
moral
issue;
It was self
preservation.

As such,
Christendom
sought
a common ground
to sell an
amoral
liberalized
evangelism,
appealing to the
times.

It has apparently
taken hold.

As such,
the holy
sacrifice
was
thrown
to the
dogs
and cast
before
the swine.

The swine don't care how compromised thou become;
The swine don't care how hindered thy prayers are;
The swine don't care of the degree under which thee becomes degraded and weakened in faith;
Given the opportunity,
the swine
will rend
thee.

The negligence
if not the
misunderstanding
of this principle
has lead to
the weakening
of religious faith
and not as many
suppose to the
strengthening
thereof.

Lending support to an evil
does not lessen the evil or
lessen the time of the evil;
Support does what the word implies: it supports.

Furthering the understanding
consider the holy,
given to the dogs.

I oppose war.
I do not pray for the state.
I do not pray for prisoners.
I do not pray for soldiers.
I do not pray for battles or successes.
I lend no support to this cause of my own volition.
Caesar takes his usury from my employer.
That usury is expended into many Caesar projects including war.
Caesars image is on the coin.
He may take at will his usury for his causes.
With the remainder that has not been confisgated,
over the which I have control,
none of it goes to wars
or other Satanic causes for that matter.
To do otherwise is to cast pearls before the swine.

I do not support unrighteous causes
financially,
with labor,
with support,
with prayer,
with hopes,
with empathy.

If a cause
does not fit
my narrow minded
view,
the cause
and subsequent
shareholders
are the dogs and swine.

I don't do "favors."
Ask of me in plain speech
or ask not at all.

"Would you do me a favor" isn't a question.
It is swine looking to trample goodly pearls and rend me.
The non-question falls outside of speaking truth.
It is always loaded with deception
as the asker feels me less than honorable
to do upon my word
without worldly
chicanery.
I have always thought
less
of the asker
for having reverted
to such
a manipulative
device.

A term that may not have been spoken
for a hundred years:
bow and scrape
also comes
to mind.

Giving reverence
to a man;
The respect of persons;
Holding of one above another
based upon position,
lineage,
birthright
or other similitude
May at times also giving the holy to the dogs.

Men quote the Bible,
and yet pretend that
they have never
read:
Call no man father, rabbi, master...

Titles are very prominent today.
The title implies one is greater,
the other is less.

Jesus cited specifics
of that which
is holy (names, titles, attributes)
of God,
and giving
to the dog.

Perhaps
it is time
to relearn
what
bow and scrape
means and why
holy men of old
would not have it.

The passage
comes to mind
now and again.
It is reflective;
It is very easy
to remember;
It is worthy of
the mindfulness.

Query: Am I casting pearls before the swine?

Thursday, September 22, 2011

Troy Davis and the death penalty

Troy Davis
was a man
that I have
never met.

Many may
argue the
details:
Was he
or
was he not
guilty?

I don't
know the answer.

If he was
guilty
he would have
a penalty.
What ever that penalty would be,
I can at no time concede that any man
or body of men
possess the right
to inflict a
penalty
of
execution.

I have never
favored
the "death penalty"
at any age
or time in
my life.

Regardless
of innocence
or guilt,
the execution
of this man
in Georgia
sickens
me.

The death penalty
is absolutely
contrary to
the teachings
of Christ.

Which teaching one may ask?
All of them!

It is contrary
to all of
civilization.

It is nothing more than a form of murder.
Murder
blindly
carried out by a
government
does not make it less so.

To suggest that the execution
of Troy Davis
brings
"closure"
to the victims
really begs the question.

One statement was to the effect of
executing an innocent man is the risk we take
in an adult world.
Not in my adult world!

No man should be executed
regardless of innocence
or guilt
in an
enlightened
world.

Capital punishment:
It is immoral.
It runs against every fiber
of my being.
It is against
every belief
that I hold dear.

When shall this killing cease to be?

From the Tyndale translation:
20 For I saye vnto you except youre rightewesnes excede the righetewesnes of ye Scribes and Pharises ye canot entre into ye kyngdome of heven.
21 Ye have herde howe it was sayd vnto the of ye olde tyme: Thou shalt not kyll. For whoso ever kylleth shall be in daunger of iudgemet.
22 But I say vnto you whosoever is angre with hys brother shalbe in daunger of iudgement. Whosoeuer sayeth vnto his brother Racha shalbe in dauger of a cousell. But whosoeuer sayeth thou fole shalbe in dauger of hell fyre.
23 Therfore whe thou offrest thy gifte at the altare and their remembrest that thy brother hath ought agaynst the:
24 leue there thyne offrynge before the altre and go thy waye first and be reconcyled to thy brother and then come and offre thy gyfte.
25 Agre with thyne adversary quicklye whyles thou arte in ye waye with hym lest that adversary deliver ye to ye iudge and ye iudge delivre ye to ye minister and the thou be cast into preson.
26 I say vnto ye verely: thou shalt not come out thece till thou have payed ye utmost farthige.

...
29 Wherfore yf thy right eye offende ye plucke hym out and caste him from the. Better it is for the yt one of thy membres perisshe then that thy hole bodye shuld be cast into hell.
30 Also if thy right honde offend ye cut hym of and caste hym from the. Better yt ys that one of thy membres perisshe then that all thy body shulde be caste in to hell.

Sunday, September 18, 2011

city upon a hill

Ye are ye light of the worlde.
A city yt is set on a hill cannot be hid. - Matthew 5:14

From the well known,
as it ought to be,
sermon on the mount,
these words come to us.

Sometimes
in the still
of the night,
or on a quiet morning,
a remembrance
of oft quoted
sayings comes
to the fore
of my thoughts.

I am not "old."
I am not young either.

Through my years
I have been
involved
in so many
things;
I have been
involved
in so many
directions.

The
glorious
lighted
city
to the which
Jesus
spake
is necessarily
contrasted
against the
vain glorious
cities
of the world.

Detrimental
places
where I want not
to be
need not be
the extremes
of living.

I don't need
a war torn
example
or one
of grave
persecution.

Our own
world
is dark
enough
that we
might seek
the
higher
purpose
and
light.

The details
of
who,
what,
or why
need not
to be
forth
coming
to
understand
that things
are often
as they are
because
men
create
their
own
cities
under which
they choose
their
abode.

I have been involved
perhaps a lifetime ago
with
people,
places,
and things of the
world
political.

I have pondered the change
of which men speak
and rarely
achieve.

Those of
the way that it has always been
and the way it will remain
rose up to keep their claim
thus all remains
as it was
from as long as
anyone can remember.

I have been
involved
in the
world
religious.

Those of
the way it has always been
and the way it will remain
rose up to keep their claim
thus all remains
as it was
from as long as
anyone can remember.

Change
to the
many
is
fear.

Unknown fear;
Abiding fear;
Fear of failure;
The fear of change.

The world abode
as it has been
represents neither
civility
nor
progress.

The world secular
is not light,
but rather
represents
darkness.

It represents
the devil we know,
and is upheld
by an imagined
"devil"
we don't.

Because something
is
unknown,
that doesn't
make it the devil's workshop.

Light is to
step
beyond
the bounds
of
safe.

It is why the way
is so
notably
different
from darkness.

Friends of old
were a peculiar people.
That isn't so much anymore.

The world religious
has become
homogenized.
There is no
standing out,
and thus no
outstanding
attributes
that separate
one religion
from another.

When folk spent their time in schooling,
whether secondary,
college
or other
studies,
the highlighter
becomes an implement
to the students
learning
experience.

Should a word be highlighted,
one notices and sees the
emphasis;
When paragraphs are
similarly marked,
the emphasis is
not so much;
When the whole of the page is highlighted,
nothing is.

When everything is emphasized,
nothing is.

In the depth of darkness,
a small glimmer
is intense.
That sliver of light
within darkness
is fully seen.
It cannot be missed.
It cannot be mistaken.
It is light,
not only breaking the darkness,
but defining it.

The light cannot be hidden
as the city that is set upon the hill
remains for all to see.

Most will say
What city?
What light?
These I cannot see!

To find the city,
to find the light,
one must ponder
to do so.

Before there can be find,
there must first be seek.

Before one may see light,
thee must first see darkness.

The science of today has become the religion.
Was it because of all of the turmoil of the 1960's?
Was it when so-called musicians instructed the masses?
Was it from the "liberal" theology,
when religious institutions secularized?
It was likely a combination of a lot of things
rather than any one thing.
I don't know that there is an answer.

The religion of American society
goes beyond its
"God is dead"
theology.
It proposes that God
never was.

The teaching is placed
again and again
upon the media
and often
publically
funded.

Science
wants
proof
of God.

If I cared
for science
or gave it
any regard,
I might
seek
to appease
that notion.

But I don't.

Faith is the substance of things hoped for,
the evidence of things not yet seen.

Too many will peal open a Bible
and set to prove
what they believe
why
and
wherefore.

Nay!
I say,
here is light!
One may say
Where?
I see it not!
To this I reply,
Look more closely!
Should one not see light,
it is not the light that lacks,
but the dimness of the eye.

To see light,
one must want to.

If Jesus came to you this day
and said
lay aside your net,
come,
follow me.
Would you?

If you knew the presence
of Jesus at a certain time or place,
would you come?

Have ye oxen to yoke?
Have ye a new wife?
Have ye the objection ready?

Science kills and destroys;
A true religion breathes life where life has not been.

Friends wait upon God in worship.
The gathering is with Jesus in the midst.
(Or at least it used to be).

I guess what I am saying is that friends need to re-find their roots.
Should Jesus be in the midst of worshippers,
why not forsake all to find thyself in him?

Friends,
having borrowed notions
from Protestant acquaintances
think of missions
and
evangelism.

While a simple
notion,
will not the light
found of the city
draw more
than any
preaching
can?

Ye are light!
Ye are the light of the world!

The sun,
the stars,
the moon
are illuminaries;
Day and night are separated by the sun and moon.
Light and darkness are separated by ye? Me?

Bringing our inner light
to the world
lumines
the world
from
darkness
into
light.

Every once in a while,
though not often enough,
we see a certain city,
set upon a hill,
cannot be hidden,
cannot be darkened
shining light,
over an otherwise darkened place.
In those times,
we know
the presence
and the meaning
of God within.

Query:
Am I a light in this present age?

Tuesday, September 13, 2011

morals, scruples and integrity

Too often folk try to find a rational resource to morality.
Too often they fail.

Morals
scruples
and
integrity
are from the
inside
out.

With many resources available
folks cite
the Bible
or perhaps
variant
Hindu
Buddhist
and similar
writings
for those of
non-christian
religions.

All of those resourced writings
contain
morality,
but to claim them as the source
places religion
at a dogmatic
and rigid
overpass
too often exercised today.

Morality became instilled within us
before we even knew simple language,
much less the reading of written language.

It may have been learned by experiment
as a babe learns to roll themselves over.
I don't know.
However we arrived at it,
we did.
It became
as much a part of our being
as eating,
breathing
or sleep.

Morality is both
unconscious
and
subconscious.
Our religion
simply
brings the deep internal
to the surface
where we rationalize things.
Our religion
brings
these things
to
light.

All men have a moral code within.
They may repress it
and
unfortunately
most do;
Repressed
or open,
it is there.

When we endeavor
to a higher calling,
this sense of God
bears witness
with our spirit
that we are the sons
of God.

A higher calling
demands
a higher
obedience
to the
moral
code
within.

The repressed
is released from
darkness to
light.

The chained
self repression
is unchained
elevating
the other
over
self
interest.

Where most men
seek the path of least resistance,
morality demands something more.

Integrity
calls upon one
to seek
the path of
greatest resistance.

Until one
finds
this path,
they will
not
find
their
true
self.

It is repression
that brings
men to bury this light
while denying
the power thereof.

At times
something may
yield this light
to the conscious self,
whereas
men then choose
to live in the light
or to repress it.

I don't believe that men need to be taught
not to lie;
I believe they know this inherently ;
Thus lying is a choice against nature.
The opposite side is
a realization that
truth
is
natural.

Truth is moral;
Morality is also natural;
Immorality is against nature
and thus incurs the consequence of actions.

If morality is natural
and I believe that it is,
then I must also concede
that
morality
is
universal.

Religion isn't morality
but all religions contain
a codified moral venue.

Morality is often discovered in religion,
while religion is not the origin
of moral scruple.

Our codified
written and verbal
sayings
bring to the
surface
the natural sense
of the moral man.

For man to be about
eating,
sleeping
and building
bigger barns,
he becomes lost
in himself.

He lives
against
higher
purpose
and is a
fool
indeed.

One gains the world
and loses his soul,
what shall he give
in exchange?

The question is no less
valid than it was
two thousand
years ago.

Query:
Do I make decisions based upon a moral value
rather than a rational one?

Sunday, September 11, 2011

ten years later

Having been away visiting my daughters
today is a day to rest and relax.
This day
I am reminded
marks the
now infamous
nine eleven
day.

Different folks
have different
impressions
and memories
of the event.

Having lived in a period of time
corresponding
to an event
does not necessarily
equate my experience
with another
more directly
involved.

I personally
knew
no one
who
died
on
nine eleven.

I have no Muslim associates
or family members.

I do know of a few who have gone to war.

Nevertheless, my reflections are from the outside.
So are the reflections of 99% of the American journalists and citizens since that time.

I was alive when the space shuttle Challenger exploded.
I saw the news,
the reports,
the pictures.

Some were directly affected.
The school children who watched;
Workers at NASA;
Families of those who perished.

Some were indirectly affected.
Industries dependent upon the space program;
Workers at NASA;
Workers of associated industries;
Products that were altered
for better or worse
due to a learning
in the midst
of tragedy.

I was not affected.

I was alive when Kennedy was assassinated.
I was in elementary school.
I remember the time and images.

This being a leader of the United States
may be a better parallel.

The wife and family
of course
were greatly
affected.

While a nation looked on
the shock
had an effect
that in a period
would disperse.
I will come back to the shock momentarily.

Because the structure of the United States is not of a royal nature,
the loss was of a president,
not a king.
The Vice President took over the role,
and inevitable policies continued to play themselves out.

Lyndon Baines Johnson
in taking over
did not create
the Viet Nam war
for example.
He inherited it;
He esculated it;
But did nothing different than Kennedy would have done
or that Richard Nixon did afterward.

None of these
were inherently
bad men.
Being a President
will inevitably place one in a
compromised
position.

Richard Nixon was raised in a Quaker household
but found himself
in the midst of
a war
and in scandal
that he could not
escape
the entrapment
thereof.

Many, many years ago,
I was involved in
the political
"scene" and processes.
Even as much as on a local level
I feel that the compromises
are too great
and too often
bidding.

The higher the level of government,
the more dominant and controlling
those compromises become.

I was alive and of an age close to what was then draft age in the now known waning years of Viet Nam.
I did know people who were affected,
those who were drafted,
those who were shipped into a war zone,
those who were killed.

Viet Nam was a war
that no one understood,
no one could define,
and that brought
a dividing
between folks
for a cause
that almost no one
understood.

That war was a separate event from the assassination
and subsequent policies of the 1960's.

The assassination itself,
though widely followed
had not as much of a real effect
as a perceived one
upon those living at that time.

The Viet Nam war did have,
as will any war have,
an effect upon all.

World War II did not start with the attack upon Pearl Harbor.
The war in Viet Nam did not start with LBJ.
That course was set many years prior to the events that led LBJ into the Presidency of the United States.
The war of the Middle East started long before nine eleven.

The war of the Middle East
it may be argued
tracing back to the creation of Israel/US
against the Arab world.

Many will say that this current conflict started with the "desert storm" tag line.
I disagree.
It started long before that surge to "free Kuwait."

Regardless of how it sounds,
many times truth has a chilling ring,
and its chime is as the scratch of the chalk.

Both Israel and the United States have a long history of war mongering.
The remainder are feints of justifications of the modern era of crusading.
If we would like to stop wearing the moniker of a war nation,
we must discontinue our actions subsequent to being a war nation.

Even if I accepted all of the stories of nine eleven as credible;
All of it begs the question against peace.

To the shock of a nation,
how can a people bear shock against violence,
while the creed of the living will is toward violence.

Our cities are of crime,
where crime is a fluid
enhanced and defined at will.
To lie and steal from the city coffer
is washed in shallow apologies.
Political, social and yes often religious leaders
exemplify polygamy and disregard to the value of others.
How often is a governor "sorry" for fornication?

There will be many speeches
and sermons
today about
peace and God
and the
need to love.

The well can not have both bitter and sweet water.
Words need to be fewer
and actions more.

The kingdom of Christ
is not an eye for eye
kingdom.

Generations come and pass,
and yet nations continue to rise
against nations.

These kinds of days
as it was ten years ago
bring forth the war drummers
while the peacemaker
is delegated to
disinheritance.

I will not recognize nor celebrate nine eleven.
There is nothing positive to be learned from it that could not be learned otherwise.
I refuse the "leadership" or "guidance" of atheists.
Any lesson that one may pose that I might allegedly learn
by the events of this day
I can (and mostly have) learned
from an ancient manuscript called:
the holy Bible.

Pertaining to the reflections of nine eleven: thanks but no thanks.

Queries:
Carriest thou a plowshare or a sword?
Can peace be grown of the seed of violence?
Dost thou feel the shadow of compromise before the darkness of concession?
Do I live for Christ or Caesar?
Art thou a peacemaker?
Do I believe in the power of the light within?
Is Christ thy councillor?
Is peace without or within?
What does peace mean to me?