Spirit of Word

So then a third derivation of question arises. What is the secret? What must I do? How can I attain the fruit and the blessing? Who is the watchman? Where are the doors? What do the keys look like and what is the password?

First, there is no secret, other than as I am earless to hear. However, I do not care which side of the argument you fall on, if you perceive yourself in receipt of something there is some condition by which you feel you attained the answer to the above questioins, and that others must meet the same or similar condition in order to realize the same blessing. But this may lead us to presuppose that we all have the precise same experience, personality, intellect, and spirit, which we know we do not.. If we can at least agree that we are in possession of very personal experiences with God, we can see how it follows that our experiencing God individually is not of exclusionary of us from commonality with all others who have experienced God, but the most sublime addition to our own individuality within the group of those having experienced God and a ready made testament to those who have no experience with God. I will stop here for a moment to state that the preceding statement only reflects the timbre of how I came to know Christ and receive salvation exposing a time in which I did very little, from within a desparation and realization of need, other than express hope and receive faith and assurance of salvation from God through His only begotten Son, my Lord Jesus, and manifested toward me, and within me, by the Holy Spirit.

At some point we are chosen. It is not the intent of this essay to investigate the mind of Christ as to the choosing of followers nor that timing, but rather to uncover something about what it is that informs us we are His. By defiintion, he already knows whether, or when we will respond or not, so the purpose of a set of recognizable conditions by which we experience a saving knowledge of Christ must be for our own and other brethren's edification as well as the beacon call to outsiders to join Christ with us. Or, do our actions not speak louder than our words? So then, the statement "If you don't trust Christ above all, you don't trust him at all" should reflect in our walk, ur behaviour after we have received that Holy Spirit as guide and comfort, power and endurance, knowledge and hope, and the freedom and the discipline. And while I would like to say that I am always focused on God, targeted, I know that many times it is He who has proved to still be aware of me and my need despite my unexhibited trust in Him. What is the meaning of the spirit of the word?

Fallen down upward? Stinging, Staining, Stinking

Today, begins a series of essays addressing questions which have come into my life in a most disruptive manner. Questions deriving from what has been described as a situation where one person calls a rose what may in fact be a used tail wipe. And we all know the law of the roses--if it aint a rose, it might be a flower, or something. But the question is, does it stink to high heaven? Sumpin' does.

As I enter the Gates of Heaven, how will I be received? Note that I said after I enter the Gates of Heaven. The pass through the Gates is Jesus. So, for the sake of this argument we will assume that the judgement seat is under the Needle's Eye of the Gates, much as we can imagine Mordecai's seat, or the seat where Boaz went to find settlement.

Some conversations have been concluded, the facts and truth revealed, some judgement passed, but now because of Jesus' advocacy on my part, I have passed through the Gates and in I come! How am I received?

Well, let us look to the first to live and choose, and the first to realize inadequacy and guilt, and first then to receive cover and consequence. Adam, given (by God himself) breath, duty, challenge, sustenance, companionship(help meet), fellowship(face to face), honor, and limit and promise, to everyone's despair, fell, revealing his nakedness. In his despair he tried to hide his nakedness, and for that nakedness was given cover by the shedding of blood, but made to live in flesh outside Paradise, by sweat and frustration. As he had frustrated God's plan for Paradise and caused the Word to sweat, even die, so he received. Did this please God? How was he received through the gates--all we can say is as he lived. Would I have liked the opportunity to reside in Paradise? Wouldn't you? Because of Adam, all must live in flesh outside of Paradise. Life is burdensome and deadly. Man 'O' man, do I hate to sweat! It stings my eyes, it stinks my pits and it stains my shirts.
Stinging, Stinking, Staining sweat. But if I had been there instead of Adam, no different outcome can I imagine. I have had the proof and the test and failed many times.

Thank God for the cleansing flood, the blood of Christ shed on a tree, the bruised heel of Victory's march, that pays my ransom and grants me entrance through the gates. Through the expression of honest humble gratitude I act differently, better, closer to Christlike, I treat others with dignity and respect and care, then as I return to Paradise I become honored in the honor I have tried to give. And as is evidenced throughout the scriptures the attitude of trying, of being ready and willing, of being at my best possible condition, brings a surety to my self, and or as Peter said in NLT from BlueLetterBible.com

2 Peter `1:

3 As we know Jesus better, his divine power gives us everything we need for living a godly life. He has called us to receive his own glory and goodness! 4 And by that same mighty power, he has given us all of his rich and wonderful promises. He has promised that you will escape the decadence all around you caused by evil desires and that you will share in his divine nature.
5 So make every effort to apply the benefits of these promises to your life. Then your faith will produce a life of moral excellence. A life of moral excellence leads to knowing God better. 6 Knowing God leads to self-control. Self-control leads to patient endurance, and patient endurance leads to godliness. 7 Godliness leads to love for other Christians,* and finally you will grow to have genuine love for everyone. 8 The more you grow like this, the more you will become productive and useful in your knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 But those who fail to develop these virtues are blind or, at least, very shortsighted. They have already forgotten that God has cleansed them from their old life of sin.
10 So, dear brothers and sisters,* work hard to prove that you really are among those God has called and chosen. Doing this, you will never stumble or fall away. 11 And God will open wide the gates of heaven for you to enter into the eternal Kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

to repeat 10-11 in the literal Bible


10. Therefore rather, brothers, be diligent sure of you the calling and choice to make, these things because doing not at all you will fall ever.
11. so For richly will be furnished to you the entrance into the eternal kingdom of the Lord of us and Savior, Jesus Christ.

My best try at this passage tells me that if I have actually believed in the Creator of my Salvation then I cannot help but do those things which give evidence of that belief and salvation. So then I will be received as I lived, else how have I have accepted the Son and rejected the Spirit with which He offered His life-in service to die.


So yes smitty, it does matter what I do once the blood of Christ covers me, but no smitty, it was not good that Adam fall. To state such feels antithetical to the Holy Spirit of Hope, Peace, Joy, Love, Goodness, Kindness, Temperance and Meekness.
Who is raised that I must see

His bronzed skin at the height of tree?

His frozen stance upon some crain"!

His esteem we must behold,

His story yet goes so untold,

E'en in the brightness of his light,

How can I be so cold,

Such 'til yet to be so quiet.

Especially when grappling

one must be gentle but firm.

In a comment to a post herehosted by Dr Rick Davis, on multicultural expression within the anecdote of the local church I commented the following in response to comments to my on leading comment:


I would only ask, if perhaps in our zealousness to be faithful in our understanding and use of the language, through Baptist anecdote, we might not be attributing to that faith(LDS), strictures, which are not there other than as some of their own members have misunderstood or mistated them, and herein is the point that makes that anecdote they use a false one in my understanding, because rather than further explanation I end up with further confused questions. As a good disciple of "What is free choice without free thinking?" I submit that Jesus in our own New Testament has suggested the need for labours and the reward for those labors,ayaaahh ooh nooo-
do not misquote me, I am not saying that salvation comes as a result of my accomplishing anything other than accepting Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour, and that as best I can glean from reading the entire Bible, Genesis to Revelation, without the apochrypha, God and Jesus and Spirit are One yet Each distinctive(perhaps perichoretic circumincession unveiling a panentheity), to say much more than this, as regards the Three in One, becomes my personal anecdote and susceptible to the limitations of my experience and intellect or else God's supersession. Does God speak to you? He seems to say that we are to reach out to even those we detest, re: the Samaritan woman.
After she leaves...read it in John 4:31-42, speaking to His desciples, He is not hungry-His meat is [for]doing the will of God.
The fields are ripe to harvest, the reapers should get busy and harvest so that fruit in life eternal may be enjoyed for both the sower and the reaper. see also 2Peter 1:1-11 and Galations 5:18-25. Not to forget James. All of this I bring not to further dischord but to hopefully find some way of reaching into a culture whose anecdote, as evidenced by its growth of membership and the demeanor of that membership, has some sort of appeal, that we as Baptist and Christians would do well to effect a calm and respectful conversation with its proponents so that we might, by the presence of Truth, some degree of right living and the Holy Spirit, encourage them to be weaned away from what are becoming more and more obviously, thank God for good science, false concepts.

Theologianly thinkin test

Link

You scored as Anselm.



Anselm is the outstanding theologian of the medieval period.He sees man's primary problem as having failed to render unto God what we owe him, so God becomes man in Christ and gives God what he is due. You should read 'Cur Deus Homo?'

Anselm 100%
Karl Barth 73%
J?Moltmann 60%
Augustine 60%
John Calvin 53%
Charles Finney 53%
Jonathan Edwards 47%
Friedrich Schleiermacher 47%
Martin Luther 40%
Paul Tillich 20%

Still on Hiatus

I had thought I might write some today, but time is pressing and the connection is skipping, so I will try, and return, to the treatise on community as a needs , desire and expectations realization at a near point in the future.

Time out

I will take some time out to celebrate a friend from childhood's passing into the kingdom way ahead of my schedule for him.

Spirit edified

If we acknowledge the propensity of humans to refer to the presence of spirit as evidence of the presence of at least a mystery, we are open to an examination of spirit function and manifestation in life and community for the purposes of describing its possible origin. To find a vantage point as regards some manifestation which reveals the function of spirit, we will approach the subject from two directions, in order, the individual’s perseverance and the group’s congeniality.

As has been noted in other papers and demonstrated via the life process played out in the real world, individual living things have a great inclination to survive, and work very hard to do so. As was noted earlier in this paper, in order for an individual to survive, it must first satisfy its physical nurture and security needs. This trait of individual life to focus on feeding can be observed especially at feeding time in large groups of young mammals. They squirm and grunt and learn to growl and fight and snuggle determinedly, even single mindedly, ever closer to the teat where succor is found. The sight could hardly be described as sharing or friendly until all mouths are aligned with their own spigot of nourishment. So it would seem that a force has drawn even blind, traumatized, insensitive, inexperienced units into contact with the nurture source, the very thing that they need. Depending upon physical endowment of strength and quickness and determination, a youngster will successfully find that resource for which it yearns and grow, or become runted and possibly die. To state the obvious a spirit of survival drives these individuals as much as any physical sensory stimulated response, for these early infants could not know from experience where nor what is needed.

Part of survival even of the individual is regeneration. Regeneration requires community formulation of at least 2=>3. The successful construction of this formula in communal terms then guarantees at least one more generation of the gene pool, perhaps as valuable a pay load to present downstream as we can carry. When the gene pool is regenerated then community is given a chance at continuance. But why would the singular individual feel drawn to community? Raising the standard definition of 'resource for need fulfillment’ to better describe the traditionally accepted understanding of people interactions, though the detail would be daunting, even overwhelming for this article, we can better observe that humans have at their core an engrained selfishness which can be overcome, evidenced by their ability to develop acquaintance, comradery, alliance, friendship, partnership and marriage. Marriage, then, yielding children and the beginning of extended family, is that regeneration of the gene pool which accomplishes the 'successful community'. Although I am unable to set myself outside this petri dish and make absolutely unaffected assumptions and conclusions, it is logical to believe that there must be some outside force influencing the behavior of selfish, obstinate individuals to do things, which, at least on cursory glance, and to 'a priori’ thought by those individuals, would seem counterproductive to the self so involved. It is in hindsight that the community is seen as beneficial, and often for reasons unfathomable to a purely materialistic mind set. Spirit is able to goad us into action whereby we are made, if not more obviously complete, at least more comprehensive through time. The effect then of this comprehension is more life. If the assumption from evidence found in the behaviours of young is accepted as indicating a selfish person, then from whence do the selfless characteristics issue that are required to rear selfish young to selfless maturity?
Mustn't it be from outside ourselves?

Drawn Together

What is it that draws us together? Surely our individuality and competing interests, our dependence upon the same sources for need fulfilment, our natural character and tendency would at or during our interface with each other, separate us through greed in fear or at best diffugient and alone. But no, partly by resource concentration, are we physically drawn to the same space. Other than resource availability, and need fulfilment, what determines our common arrivals and departures. Coincidence?

Who is it that feeds at the same time we do? Kindred Spirits? Competing interests? Happenstance common arrivals? Predisposed entities? Whoever it is, the fact of their presence in a want satisfying resource rich zone, means that they have, or are, or will probably partake of the same resource we partake.

The common arena, the condition of common want fulfillment, the tendency to arrive in common and individually at places which contain the substance for which our physicality strives in necessity, forces our behavior toward each other at this common site to be defined as consensus. Consensus, even cooperation, in their broadest understanding, propose a dichotomy: amity in all its various forms vs animus in its distinctive manifestations; a dichotomy which helps us to place a handle on this topic of the esoteric community. The dichotomous approach gives us a pendulur reference by which to arrange our awareness into a communication that leads to consensus, "Do I stay and feed?(Comfortably?, Warily?)", "Do I aid and inform others?(sincerely, in subterfuge", "Do I flee?(as quickly as possible, slowly and ceremoniously)", "Do I stay and fight?(briefly, to the death)", and the capitalist "Shall I profit?(what no parenthetical?)".

This is the context in which we find spirit a part of life. Not to be so anxious as to accept that there is spirit without first investigating the facts, we might simply, though, consider the reference throughout much of history to spirit as an indication of its vernacular presence there. Then, to hear today of the ‘team spirit’, the ‘spirit of cooperation’, the ‘spirit of meanness’, the ‘spirit of the law’, and the ‘spirit of life’, as non exhaustive examples of its broad acceptance in current vernacular. Even in the words such as amiable and animus is hidden the thought of a spirit which precepts and contains and projects the definition of those words. These understandings of spirit, then, give us descriptions of a tangible spirit. There are tomes and traditions of culture, rooted in antiquity and verdant yet today, where ‘Spirit’ is understood as more than feeling, sense, emotion, or intuition, rather as encompassing and an entity, a being, a person, even a god.

As you receive so shall you give

I almost put off the essay portion of this lesson today, too long. I had never read 2 Peter for the purpose of public explication. I was told by my pastor, Dr Randy Rogers, that this book was not commented upon until the third century. The rest being largely commented upon often and much earlier. Some have said this fact brings into question the authenticity of Peter as author. Methinks perhaps another explanation likely. That being, that others may have encountered, as I did, the sense of a very personal, poignant, direct plea by Peter,as he prepared to put off his tabernacle, for readers to inculcate, to adapt, that which they spoke, into their daily walk. A call to not just say but to do. If we are going to use God, let us try to use Him up! Let us hide His word in our hearts that others may see Him fully!

When reading this passage I became aware of many of my own shortcomings as pertain to the discrepancy in my life where sincerity and 'See I do as I say' is the tool which most "hear" from afar, so that my voice, my speech is drowned and faint. This letter forces me to introspect, to peer deep within, and I do not want to tell you all the things that fall on my heart as I read this first chapter and realize how many times I have said "well I am just human I can do no better, after all Jesus is forgiveness". I remember now that I have a Holy Father and He has Given His Holy Son that I might live within the Power and Protection and Enlightenment and Encouragement---as well as the Forgiveness of the Holy Spirit. If as the 20th verse of chapter one says 'no prophecy is private' then let us begin to call upon this power to deliver, this promise of protection, this spirit of enlightenment, and realize, manifest the encouragement publicly and loudly at least as often as we do the forgiveness. We have hidden God in our hearts and speak of only a part of Him? Who are we to hide God's face from others. People did not write about 2nd Peter because it wasn't there, they did not write about 2nd Peter because they were ashamed of the disuse/misuse/abuse of power it reveals in the reader! This is a personal onslaught by God through Peter against the weakness within and evil about his friends of the time and his readers today. This is the meat and potatos of scripture, folks. So hold on tight, and if you should wake with a fright in the night call out to Jesus with all your might and He will bestow upon you His Light!

Peter begins his last letter, with a standard greeting, but one directed at the growing number of believers. He refers to those believers in the King James as 'them that have obtained like precious faith'. Then he gives a blessing that as their knowledge of Christ Jesus grows so should their grace and peace. This increase in grace and peace is in accordance with that which God is able and wills to do for us, His faithful, and includes the things which pertain to this life as well as those things spiritual and eternal. We are given those things that we need here, now, so that we might be able to focus on those divine things from above. Avoiding the lust and corruption of the world and attaining unto the glory and virtue of the Father.

Along with this undertaking we, being sincere and earnest, are to add to this faith we have first received, acknowledged, then developed, virtue, add to this faith virtue, and to virtue knowledge and to knowledge temperance, to temperance patience, and patience godliness, and godliness kindness, and to kindness love. If we have these things, and abound in them then we will not be unfruitful or lacking in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.

On the other hand, if we have not diligently applied ourselves to the aquisition of, and application of, the increase and growth of faith through virtue, knowledge, temperance, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness and love, then we are blind and forgetful of the price of our atonement and always stumbling and unsure and an afright, a wall, to others who would draw closer to God. We should rather be diligent and work toward those things noble and uplifting of the Divine nature as have been revealed and given us-ward, making our calling and election a certainty in our minds so that we might not be a stumbler nor an idget. As we have been diligent here, when we arrive through the Gates of Heaven, then, we will be given that entrance into eternity. Due diligence.

Would I be negligent if I did not mention here, now, to you these things which help to secure your faith in your own mind and encourage your faithfulness, even though ye already know the things of which I speak. If yes, then I shall not be negligent to speak these things and often so that we may be reminded and encouraged toward our diligent doing.

At this juncture, Peter, refering to his body as being in a tabernacle which he will soon put off, begins to segue, from the exhortation for his readers to work hard at spiritual growth, to what was for most of the original readers of this epistle, a reminder, and, to later readers of the gospels, a summation of Peter's personal witness and testimony of the Christ, Jesus our Lord and Saviour. Here, I am reminded of that hymn we all know 'I Love To Tell the Story'. The last verse especially poignant here--"I love to tell the story for those that know it best, seem hungering and thirsting to hear it like the rest, And when in scenes of glory, I sing the new, new song, 'Twill be the old, old story, that I have loved so long."

Peter uses his impending death as a reason for the impetus, the fervent exhortation and admonitions of this book. He is indicating that there is not much time left for him personally to do that which God has for him to do. He is repeating many things which his readers have already heard, but as the song states, we relish in the rehearing. We can take this as a message to each of us today, for surely as each day passes we are ever nearer that time when we no longer are able to convey to our family our neighbor our friend, acquaintenance or stranger, those things which God wants them to hear and believe.

These two books of Peter make it more plain than nearly any other scriptures, the importance of our being as separate in body as we are separate in spirit from the chains of sin. This passage also demonstrates to us the effectiveness of telling the story as we have experienced it so others might hear and know God's presence and power and promise.

Peter reminds us of the closeness to our Majesty he had. He was there when the voice from heaven said "This is my beloved Son In whom I am well pleased!" And again the voice was there on the holy mount at the transfiguration of Jesus. We do well to take heed of these words of Peter concerning Jesus and the light He offers us through Peter.

The chapter concludes by stating no prophecy is of a private nature for it comes from the Holy Ghost to men God has chosen for the task. I think it seems obvious to the reader, this writing of Peter tells us in no uncertain terms we are to do those things which please God for if we do not please Him here we will not please Him when we enter the Gates.

We all thought just alike, sort of

Working to establish a definition of community, we move from looking at the building blocks of its structure as physcal entities within an entity, and the general patterned appearance of that super-entity, to describing how mentality works as an individual moves toward community, and then, how a group-mentality works within community. This platform, as a subsidiary of the array being uncovered here, gives us the vantage of turning from the dominating focus on physicality, toward that more nebulous effect of living we call thought process. For the purposes of this sub-section we will separate inspiration as spirit for the next essay and deal, as exclusively as the subject will allow, with the effect of the physical upon the bio-chemistry regimen of thought. Not to be overly technical then, bio-chemistry will be described as it can be observed from accomplishments along a continuum from inception to nexus for manifestation of community accouterment(s).
Awareness, trying not to be deceptive when I say "Simply put", is a necessary prequel to all other thinking. The degree and scope of our awareness is always a result of the effect of stimuli involving the senses and it is often factored through discipline. Discipline, by definition, indicates a dependance upon tradition. Tradition must, wrongly or rightly, arrange ideas or objects according to their potential appropriateness and detriment to success. Success being reliant upon spirit will be investigated at a later writing. Here, suffice to say that success must evidence itself in birth, growth, and regeneration.
In a social entity, the tradition of communication is one of the ways in which awareness moves toward ubiquity. The tradition of communication manifests itself as a language which is dependent upon voice, common morphology, geography and experience and observed but uniquely endowed, desirable or undesirable, conditions upon individuals or groups within the group with needs. This grouping of increasingly diverse constituents, partly through language, then develops, via consensus and time, a system of responses to stimuli which, as a broadly accepted practice, becomes culture(succession) or extinct(failure).
Consensus springs from authoritative agreements that something either belongs or does not belong as a part of the formulation of the community. Consensus is then a political tool whereby a community with wants moves through awareness, communication, and agreement toward regeneration.

Biblical Authority

Cruising the pages of blogdom I found an interesting discussion on Biblibcal authority and truth at
Here
So being enamored of the truth I could not help but resond as follows:

Bill

I think what I am reading you to say is that things, for example, such as how the world was created fall into an abstract truth because I am unable to see the truth other than as a statement that God spoke it into being. On the other hand, how and that God provided for my realization of His supremacy and love is an absolute and singularly detailed for me. But it was a personal encounter such that as many thousands upon millions have experienced the Epiphany in their own personal ways, then as a corporate understanding it, God's revelation, becomes abstract truth. So that when I say an elephant looks and feels like a tree trunk and you may say a shower, we both are true and wrong.

Jacob/Esau/Rebekka/Isaac, on the other hand demonstrate that God will make good on His promises whatever deceitful deal we have worked


RobeFRe

Theoblogian excerpts and comments

I have elected to comment here on my site as opposed to the original,
>theoblogy,
because the discussion there is of a very technical nature, where, rather than big words being used and misused it is the names of authors, ancient and modern, being flaunted about as if they were common household cleansers, so I will finish what I began earlier, to whit:

What can I say that better serves to confuse the issue than these excerpts from the poster and commenters

I. Tony Jones states: options available to Christians in a globalized/pluralistic/postmodern society: liberal accomodationism, conservative retreatism, Hauerwasian sectarianism, and the newcomer: Milbankian (Radical Orthodoxy) withdrawal into the liturgy.

These all seem at once the same option, and as if I am a bit and piece of each one of the differences attempted. Yet again the redundancy!

II. Again Tony Jones: the ability to maintain a "robust doctrine of God" (Steve's words) and a robust understanding of pluralism...is there a way to negotiate a healthy, dialectical relationship with culture and maintain an orthodox doctrine of God?
!st Peter indicates that there is a correct way, but perhaps the best way to consider health is in eternal terms, though striving to maintain the best lifestyle as we can, re Daniel in Babylon.

III. And Tony Jones again: Among practical theologians, there have been a couple major avenues for navigating these waters. Among the University of Chicago theologians (Tillich, Tracy, Browning), there has been an evolving "correlational" model in which theology and culture stand in a dialectical relationship. Tillich said that culture asks the questions and theology provides the answers; Tracy and Browning amended this by saying that each asks questions and each provides answers -- i.e., theology and culture stand in a mutually critical relationship.

I know that I may be a bit sophomoric or worse here but people ask questions and apply disciplines and populate culture. I especailly love it when people ask ‘what is your point?’, to what degree are theology and religion interchangeable?


IV. Tony Jones then states: theology trumps all other disciplines when it comes to issues on which theology is uniquely articulate.

Sorry Tony, and I don’t think that this changes much of the rest of your essay, but idiocy trumps all other disciplines when it is uniquely articulate.

V. Steve B. posits a spirit of fallibilism as necessary to a relationship with others when corresponding upon a subject, in case his box has been incorrectly built by himself.
As humans we will have blind spots and weaknesses but God’s revelation needs only our flexibility in view of others hardness of conviction in order to draw as God himself did the outsiders in through compassion. Flexibility more than fallibility would seem to be a better ideal for me now if it is yo perhaps you are right in using the word fallible. Wink wink nod nod


VI. And Steve b. again: I know what is at stake when I surrender (explicitly or implicitly) my theological convictions on ultimate matters to another discipline
Sounds like you think you have peered through the gates of Hell into the Dark abyss of an unHoly Ghost!

VII. Dlw writes: do both biblical and practical theology.

If it is not Biblical how can it have anything but temporal practicality, and thus no real pracicality?

VIII. An anonymous commenter, Tim Keller, I believe said: the way to a post-modern, post-secular theology

unless any ole who ‘ll do ya, isn’t that through Jesus Christ?

IX. Steve B then wites: The believer, in evaluating state and society, employs a standard of common grace to which she holds others...accountable

This works to place man in control of God’s gift to others, which grace as with any grace elicits only one of two reactions that being acceptance or refusal. God made grace common.

From Place to Place

Just as the previous paragraph avoided the aspect of limited human influence upon the physical environment other than in world changing natural habitat degrees, Demography of more than one will be used to describe the categories of groupings of humans by numeric parameters on a continuum from rural to megolapolitan and not as an exposition of intricate sociological intrigue other than as to predominant economic activity.

A brief chart of the major divisions of population are as follows:

CTGRY Rural<=Hse=Vill=Twn=Cty=Metro=>Megalo
TYPE
Scn/hunt/gthr Ag Dstr/Serv Mnfctr
[______I________I_______I_______=>
0-1====<5=====~200====>2000======>
POP/sqmi./Csqmi

The types listed in the chart above are proposed as characterizations of the primary economic activity. While they are generally exclusionary in the diminishing size direction, they are not generally exclusionary in total but rather usually additive and inclusive in the increasing size direction with anomalies as per specialized conditions from dense population centers toward rural population centers.

We can see by the numbers that the least populated community is one of a maximum of 100 people or less living in a 10mi x 10mi area. The greatest size being somewhat vague as to specific size, and generally as population centers grow together or expand beyond the base size of the sample area used they become considered one unit. The term Megalopolis is one coined to describe specifically that area between Chicago and New York and other areas in Europe, Africa and Asia where population centers of expansive area and hpgh density have emerged with cultural and social characteristics unique to communities of that size. So here we have an initial look at the strata of human community as nodal entities involving varying numbers of individuals.
Pathway(s) indicate to us the existence of communication. Pathways also help us to analyze the direction, type and amount of communication flows within communities and from one community to another. The term Pathways is used because it would have been an early form of other early forms of commutation used largely by individuals and sometimes by groups, that is still viable today, whereas, smoke signals and drumming are not, save in very isolated and infrequent situations. From microwave and satellite to radio, telephone and facsimile, and computer based internet information communications to the more traditional modes of conveying bodies and packages along roadways and rail and in ships, maritime as well as air, and today even rocket travel becomes more and more approachable, yet footpaths are making a comeback largely as intra-community pathways for recreational and health purposes for individuals so inclined, but also have some revival as inter-community modes of conveyance in areas such as Appalachia and Europe, and have remained in use as significant but diminishing modes in developing regions of the world. Pathways indicate to us the existence of communication by their evidence of movement of individuals between individuals and nodes of population which are limited and delimited in part by the physical environs upon and within which they exist.

Becoming Social

Social interaction is a necessary condition of community by being the action through which life is replicated and in which life is experienced, within varying degrees of social integration. To avoid the argument of chicken or egg as regards individual or society in order
to focus on the conditions and conditioning we know exist, seems the direct tact in developing a more cohesive understanding of the physical relationship of individual and society.
The physical parameters of social life can easily be delineated as non-human Geography, Demography of more than one, and Pathways of communication. Admittedly this limits our scope to that which is quantifiable by the five senses and generally verifiable through test and sample.
The reason for characterizing Geography here as non human is to avoid the confusion which might follow from the etymologically studied application of the word which reveals its true characteristic as an ‘overriding through sifter’, an umbrella word which also has more specific meanings and exclusionary applications. So to use the more exclusionary application and specifically meaning those attributes in the physical condition of life which, although they may include aspects modified by man, do not here include the writings and other recorded musings of men other than as they have been manifested directly and substantially on the canvass we often refer to as Mother Nature. In other words the section of the list concerning the needs in life as individuals become social includes human earth writings larger than Rushmore or Stone Mountain, and perhaps larger than Aswan Dam and the Dust Bowl and smog. An inclusive but not comprehensive rendering of the list: Astronomy, Topography, Meteorology and Geology seems fairly complete and at least example enough to indicate the area of community influence which is underlying all, though in many respects, especially as ‘the world grows smaller’ diminishing in its obvious direct influence but without which there is void.

More on Demographics of more than one, and Pathways of communication
later


RobeFRe

theo

RobeFRe said in response to a comment 'God of Person before God of group?'at Theo


most always by record as read

Adam
Enoch
Abraham
Moses
Samuel
Daniel
Mary
Matthew
The Samaritan Woman

All these had personal relationships with God who then sometimes used them to minister to the group.
Since the veil was wrent in two the relationship seems meant to be even more intensely personal again. I would say God of Person then God of Group. The role of group being fluid as to the individual need for relationship with God.
The organized group being unwieldy by size and need for tradition would generally be able to maintain the record of truth over time in better stead than the individual. But I am sure that this is not my blogspot, so I relinquish the floor for the purpose of a heightened personal, individual as well as group, relationship with God.

Spirit above, spirits within and spirits without

As we move from the physical through the intellect into the Spiritual, a universal question becomes evident–Why?. Why do we exist? Why do we continue? Why do we change? Why do we seemingly quit? Why do we not continue? Why do we suffer?
Inspiration is the key to beginnings. Begin, begoing?, begone. Why start? Why not stay? Why did we not stay? Because we were moved to move! Motivation, so many words to describe this precept, encourages us to change. To change position. To change placement. To change perspective. Inspiration as a key opens the door to understanding the source of ongoingness. Remembering that a rabbit sometimes goes on by being very still and quiet. Inspiration is a progenitor of instinct and concept. Many things we consider concepts were actually given to us, inspired in us from outside of us. Inspiration grabs us by the nape of the neck and points us in the direction we need, like blinders on the head of a draft animal it focuses us, it gives us our escape. Why are we not more inspired? Perhaps our vision of ourselves has disjointed that ability to see outside our box, to hear from beyond our self.
Concept, our vision of our self, is more an ongoing assimilation of outward conditions with and into the inward processes that make us distinctly our self. It is an important operand in the formula of life. This Concept is something which, though affected by outside forces, is a mentality wholly our own as individuals. It is our own as a part and parcel of inalienable rights, responsibilities and consequences. We make our bed, we read our life, scribble the borders, and crib our speech. But we do not live in a vacuum. Concept is derived from our experience. Concept, from the early years of dependance upon parentage, where it is very similar to its inspirational source, and through the sliding scale toward maturity--trial, rebellion, serendipity, and adaption--becomes personal. It is that thing which most ably describes who we think we are and thus who we are. It determines what we think is important and what we expect. What we expect is determined by whether we are continually looking inward or striving to see beyond our horizon. If our concept is valid then our interaction flourishes.
Vision describes that ability to discern and focus upon the significant influence. Although our vision helps determine our direction, timing and interaction. A part of our vision must appreciate our inner talents, limitations, and potentials. With experience, training, and a concept that is developed with vision in mind, vision improves, experiences become more in accordance with expectation, and inspiration can be more readily assimilated into the process of conception.
These three, inspiration, concept and vision, while similar and often interchangeable in usage, must, as the precepts described here, be independent, yet unavoidably synergistic to one another. This enables the self to be centered yet outgoing while resilient concerning the elliptic influence of living within earthly constraints.

RobeFRe

How I imit God

To start with a usable typo in the title can be a serendipitous rush. But why should'nt I tackle both the question of how I imitate God and how I limit God, both of which may precourse how I emit God and so the thing gets rolling. I was making the usual rounds, checking my lists, you know, when I stumbled upon the
Saecula
titled 'The Holy Father'. Anastasia, the author wonders in print why she dislikes Calvin and loves Foucalt. I, not knowing much of Foucalt, and limited Calvin other than by religious exerience in a Southern Baptist Church, think anyone, Calvin, Foucalt,or else, trying to limit God, is working very hard at making a god they can easily imitate and therefrom something they are familiar with, and so I see that perhaps both Foucalt and Calvin are the same in ways we have very little method of proofing much less proving.

First, God is not a something I can define completely and is independent of that which I define Him by, other than as He has made known to me and I have realized tested by the similar recounts of countless others and His immaculate Word. On the other hand God is more than I will ever recall and has never allowed me to be completely cognizant of His toal essence. I believe this is in part the lesson of the Garden and the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. While we can never know His intent in placing that tree there, we can surmise that perhaps He intended to take that fruit, much as my grandfather would take an apple, when I was young, and peel it, slice it into small pieces, and feed me just enough to sate a hunger and leave me a desire, a curiosity, to consider more a viable alternative. Having not allowed me to overstuff myself on sweet juicy pulp, or to choke myself on tough untenable skin, the experience was pleasant and an edifice to all concerned.

In further support for this supposition is that, assuming the fruit was tasty, surely Adam and Eve overindulged upon its unfamiliar savor and substance, accumulating discomfort rather than satisfaction, which manifests itself today in reflexive preventive effort, as the tendency of the church to resist scientific facts and adversely to adhere to superstition.

It is dangerous to determine that God is no more than what I know or might know, and it is likewise dangerous to assume that any and thereby all description of God is healthy. In the Garden, Eve was sincere but wrong in saying that to touch was to die, for surely Adam was to care for that tree as well as any other. Satan on the other hand though misleading was correct to say 'surely you will not die', if we assume he means that God will provide an out(but will you take it?).

The question of foreknowledge--predestination--is one best answered with scripture such as 1 Peter 1:2 while tempering that edge with the very story we used in the beginning. God is bigger than my complaint, He is able to overcome my objection, but how? Jonah was desperate, he called out to God for help and God responded. Was Jonah coerced into obedience? Suffice it to say he was convinced otherwise than he first decided. But what of Israel the nation? Over and over and over and again God was faithful and forgiving while His people were sinful.

As an individual I have my will but if I give up my will then I have made a choice. By giving up will I continue to make choices but in accepting God's Will then my choices are made for me and that Divine Will becomes my will and so I have the Free Will but then where is choice? My choice should be made already but if I make a bad choice, I must return to Divine Will in order to draw closer,again, to God. Bad choices are what separate us from the Divine Will, so forgiveness, through the sprinkling of Jesus' blood, is the only thing which allows us into to the Divine Relationship.

Now as to the elect, the chosen of God known from before the foundation of the Earth by God, how is it that God has said we must go therefore into all the earth teaching them whatsoever He has taught us and Baptising them in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost? He is sovereign and while determined that all be given the opportunity to reunite with Him, He is not deterministic, he gives us the opportunituy to ignore Him,

While we will find some seeming already in tune with God and having knowledge of Him and needing perhaops only to confess His Name and be baptised, there are many who are in much ignorance of Him and yet quite acquainted with evil and that way, so that it is through prayer and discipleship and example that we become able to demonstrate and tell that which God would have these outsiders know that they might have the opportunity to become in right fellowship and relationship with God.

Life Actuation

Mental dexterity defined as the processes involved in decision making necessary to accomplish a minimal material survival, assuming the base human experience, allows a detailed consideration at a later time of matters of esoteric intellect. For now, though, the most observable characteristics of the mind, the decisions action as a group, tends to cloak the operation and function of the first and second characteristics of the mind, those of perception and thinking. While even this most evident characteristic requires action to display itself, without the measured action of the first two, its effectiveness is limited and burdensome rather than liberating in scope. The effect of each upon the next in turn, and of the last result upon the next first observation, reveals a procedural ellipsoidal of arriving at a point by having been somewhere else useful, relevant and comparable. It is elliptical rather than cyclical by the law of deformation in material application: the growth, learning and progress of experience, internal changes, retractions and expansions from resultant adaptation and the eternal propensity of life to change its perspective, either actively or passively, while remaining generally focused upon a center. Body follows Mind follows Spirit.

Community Life is not to gather mess

So I have been looking around at the discussions by prospective and erstwhile PhD and D ‘whatever’ candidates; noting that many debatable points are raised yet very little meat is fed at the troughs. I find myself wondering what difference does it make that Hellenism influences the world today from a point so far in antiquity that one has to wonder if the Greeks could have been that shallow as to think that a rose by any other name could be other than a rose. One thing I rant about here is that the Greek’s typology misleads us all into the misunderstanding that love is anything other than that divine auspice which God has granted usward and in no wise is it anything other than that. Love is not lust, Love is not fleeting, Love is not without commitment. To the contrary, love is that thing which we take from God as if we starved and then cannot help but give it away as though we will never hunger again. The Greeks mislead us by claiming that this love or that love , love is something we share, the way we share it becomes the true descriptive and defining angle to use in explaining how we love. The object, then, is a major determinant in whether we use physical expression, and what sort of physical expression, as we relate our love for another to that other. This perspective lends itself to a less confusing understanding of relationships than trying to decide what kind of love we have for another.

The other moaning I have heard, is from those who surely know better, but delve into banal slighting of Brothers in Arms with Christ, whose only sin in the particular matter seems to be that they don't split hairs over motivation, but rather apply nuance to active onslaught against the wiles of the principalities of darkness manifested in our common and social structure(s).

Community life is to gether ness

Being together. Is that community? If there is togetherness then there is a relationship amongst units. Another implication of community is life. Living is being is life. And implicit in the word community is individual, a single unit. At the basis of living is a single life communing with at least one other single life. Community then is one communing with others. What is it that one commune? Basic to being is life, basic to life is an individual. But that individual is thwarted without community. The first need of life is parentage. An individual must both have parents and be a parent to fulfill the basic law of life. After life is established in an individual, then the who of parentage steps back in favor of the what of parenting. Birds, hens especially, begin to nest. Plants and many insects begin to store food as quickly as possible. The bounty of the Earth becomes evident. This relationship between living thing and place sets the tone and example for the order of all that follows. The one brought forth the other, the other maintains the former. It is a given that if one wants to be a helper, then he must find a way to help others. The former helps by providing, the other helps by pruning. The helped then must get something that they want, otherwise the helper becomes nuisance rather than help. The first need being life, then an understanding of life is helpful. So, to think straightforwardly, we begin simply: that is to say we look for the basic understanding through the barest example-the individual life. When the individual is observed to unveil his needs then we find legacy, consumption, assimilation, expulsion, security and ownership.