I did this so that....

Could the reluctance to accept that which is true also prove to be just the fringe of what you've refused to believe?

Could the refusal to receive what has been freely given prove to be the evidence of a reluctance to believe there is such a thing as freedom?


How long is the testing period before something proves itself as something that truly was free?


Could refusing what is truth prove to be all that man has misinterpreted as he contemplates the possibilities as the reason(s) for his own existence?

Instead could it be said the mind that chooses to remain in bondage to a lie has also refused to be set free from the weight of his own persuasion?

Said "evidence" still requires the interpretation which only truth can present.

Are any words to be considered true simply because they've been spoken or are such words accepted as truth because of the one which authored and in turn those words get proved?

John 8:31-32

To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, "If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth , and the truth will set you free."
NIV

What comes to mind when words such as Kingdom, Martyrdom, Christendom are heard?

The suffix "dom" suggest that the root word it's also attached to is a "state" or "place" of being.

The root word provides the frame as if the boundary of everything encompassed as each root word suggest.

When the word Kingdom is read or heard one might understand it to mean everything which belongs to the King. 

That same King whom also has dominion over everything within all that's been framed by the suggestion having added the suffix "dom".

Much like the word "World" which might suggest everything that's contained within its realized spherical presence that's made up of dirt, water and air and people.

Now let's revisit the word "World".

What if  the word "World" were used to describe a persons perception of everything that's contained within the common sphere which surrounds all humanity?

It might sound like, "Little Johnny lives in his own world"!

While using that notion as a launching pad, how could a world that also exist as freedom truly become realized by anyone from within the different cultures of that same spherical world?

Can freedom be realized while simultaneously being physically encompassed by something thought greater?

To suggest that a world that is real can exist within a world is not to suggest a world which has been dominated by the world which surrounds it?

That notion could simply be (quickly) absorbed into the definition as the state of rebellion to the more normal (commonly accepted) policies/dictates of the surrounding world.

Much like little Johnny's world which simultaneously exist within his own perception while physically existing within the greater world that's made up of dirt, water, air as well the presence of other person(s).

Picture an empty ladle that's been dipped into a bucket of water. As the ladle is submerged, it first displaces the surrounding water in the bucket and then is filled with a specific measure of water once pressed in further.

That image is how many consider the hand of God reaching down within humanity and then drawing out a chosen measurement (as if a ladle full) of people from the whole consideration of humanity.

The Israelites were and still are that chosen people, yet the height of that symbol as the entirety of its intended usage reaches far beyond the exclusion of everyone else.

His chosen people as the "Instrument" of choice was and still are being used for the benefit of so many more as if the lineage of those God would eventually call His own.

His own meaning "His" children.

When will all humanity know who those people are?

Rom 8:20-21
For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God.
NIV

Rom 8:18-19
I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us. The creation waits in eager expectation for the sons of God to be revealed.
NIV

Not until the creation itself accepts the truth for who He is as "The Son of God" that's been sent into the world to save it which then satisfies Gods original intention(s).

The passage below doesn't depict a physical blindness or inability to hear as if physically deaf. What they couldn't see, hear or understand were the depth of His intentions/purpose's for having been chosen.


Deut 29:4
But to this day the LORD has not given you a mind that understands or eyes that see or ears that hear.


Deut 29:5-6
5 During the forty years that I led you through the desert, your clothes did not wear out, nor did the sandals on your feet. You ate no bread and drank no wine or other fermented drink. I did this so that you might know that I am the LORD your God.
NIV

Why did he take this approach?

Because as God says above, I did this so that you might know that I am the LORD your God.

The perception of the individual within the nation of said Israelite's would be much like the laborer that's trying to install of a 470 mile long row of fence post that's also supposed to end up being "Straight".

realized expectations of it being built straight without being able to see, hear or trust the one that's watching over its construction?

It would be like the those who built the great wall of China with the full expectations of the entire wall ending up completely straight. Only centuries later to find out by way of satellite photo's that it was actually as crooked as a winding river.

Why? Because man since the beginning has proven himself notorious for taking the path of least resistance.

This above passage was spoken from God during the time when His "Chosen" people were also being lead from captivity (from Egypt). Later the picture painted shows the same Israelites circling the same mountain and the same surrounding terrain (wilderness) for 40 years.

He didn't (just leave them hanging) by telling them that they can't see, hear or understand, but He then tells them the reason why He had yet to give them the ability to see, hear and understand.

Now copy and paste that suggestion together with what those of us today have been told AND believe because we trust the author (Jesus) responsible for the words below in red ink we've also been freely given as the truth.

John 17:25-26
"Righteous Father, though the world does not know you , I know you , and they know that you have sent me. I have made you known to them, and will continue to make you known in order that the love you have for me may be in them and that I myself may be in them."
NIV

The complexities (corruption) of today's world have lead much of humanity to suggest that there's nothing that is also free.

How can this be said especially in western cultures while claiming to live within the state which claims to be the status symbol of  freedom?

Is it that we don't understand all that true freedom is or that true freedom can't be realized until it's been received as if it is Free (no charge)?

Could it be because those that say they believe in Him (Jesus) have not realized the reason God sent His son Jesus as our only savior (hope) as if true freedom?

In truth, can the man/woman of today claim ignorance as could the Israelites before God made it known to them the "Why" He caused them to endure as the entirety of all they went through?

Have said Christian's today become people much like the Israelite's (fence installers) which don't know (understand) why they're also considered a people that are free while still in the midst of a surrounding world that continues to inflict so much pain?

 "Freedom" was intended to be enjoyed, yet why is it that so many refuse to accept the entire unfolding of such a great love shown which (how freedom was paid for) provides this Freedom which only comes by way of having received the truth?

Without being able to understand where the roots of that same love stem from, how can anyone maintain the hope that's needed from day to day?

Enough to then find themselves able to truthfully comprehend this declared freedom from the hand of God that is said to be Love from which freedom also came?

Now consider those in the future which may or may not find themselves pre-pared for all the trials they might endure?


How much will our decisions and actions today prove in the future that we too love them as much as the Israelites proved?

How did they prove their love?

By maintaining their belief and otherwise blind trust in the living God which is over ALL humanity which also "Looks" to somehow enjoy their very breath that's been Given while finding hope within their existence here on this sphere of dirt, water, air.


Those which you have yet to see, hear or understand (comprehend) as the reason why the truth not only can set you free, but also affords them the possibility while enduring their existence in an otherwise cruel world at the same time.

He used those in our past to now show us what we must continue to do. He said this on their end of the project;


Neh 8:10
Nehemiah said, "Go and enjoy choice food and sweet drinks, and send some to those who have nothing prepared. This day is sacred to our Lord. Do not grieve, for the joy of the LORD  is your strength."
NIV

He has since made known to humanity the presentation of His Son as if the Only reason why should we choose to do as anything we do while simultaneously considering what we do is also Good.


John 3:16
"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
NIV

The commentary of Jesus His Only Son was;


John 16:33

"I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world."
NIV

Today (and not only on Sunday's) is that day and will continue to be until Our Lord decides to close the book where time as the world we now live in then ceases to exist.

He has blessed you in heavenly places by way of your faith in His grace, now receive it as something that is Free, because He does Love You.

That is to say regardless of what the surrounding world might otherwise suggest that you can somehow purchase by your own goodness as any realized Freedom which has attempted to present itself "as if" the Truth.


These are the words from the mouth of the one which paid the price as if our only hope of reconciliation with The God that is supreme.


Luke 18:19

"Why do you call me good ?" Jesus answered. "No one is good — except God alone.

NIV

Feeding the Fish

In my pursuit of the reasoning as to why common knowledge is in fact not as common as it used to be, I also discovered a quieting set of words, "Lexical Ambiguity".

Ambiguity of words or phrases is the ability to express more than one interpretation. It is distinct from vagueness, which is a statement about the lack of precision contained or available in the information.

Context may play a role in resolving ambiguity. For example the same piece of information may be ambiguous in one context and unambiguous in another.    <------I found this interesting, yet it sounds more to me as would a 76 year old person trying reason with the opposing opinion of a 16 year old.

Wiki-P went on to say...

The use of multi-defined words requires the author or speaker to clarify their context, and sometimes elaborate on their specific intended meaning (in which case, a less ambiguous term should have been used). The goal of clear concise communication is that the receiver(s) have no misunderstanding about what was meant to be conveyed. An exception to this could include a politician whose "weasel words" and obfuscation are necessary to gain support from multiple constituents with mutually exclusive conflicting desires from their candidate of choice. Ambiguity is a powerful tool of political science.

The wordsmith from antiquity instead might simply suggest today, "Words which have found themselves at the mercy of present day reasoning"

Do words really evolve enough that they require continual adaptions made from one generation to the next?

Within this generational filtering of sorts, does a word stand the risk of losing the essence of its original content?

Does the so called broadening of one's thinking (process) also require the invention of words in order to accommodate a differing perspective?

The perspective which then becomes more relative or in reality is it just a form of new math where the more finite measure has been discovered which until now had not stretched what's already been established?

I once read somewhere about early space travel as to just how vague science can be. The thinkers of that epoch would do their math while trying to extrapolate the proximity as to where a space vessel launched from earth will hopefully land on the moon.

Through trial and error they discovered the importance of not only the decimal but also the value of mapping as to how each harmoniously labors within their final estimation(s).

Their harmonious purpose being, the heart of their concern as the more precise location as to where their launched space craft might actually land on the moon.

How did they (short term) resolve their fuzzy trajectory math formula?

They simply increased the length of the landing strip to somewhere near 500 miles long which was broad enough to accommodate their fuzzy math.

I can hear the landing confirmation from that space craft now, "Roger that NASA, we're Right on target"!

Now try to find a home for the words Ignorance and or Stupid in the above scenario?

How often has history proved necessary for those two words to somehow evolve?

Some might argue that their answer would depend upon context, yet I suggest that if the essence of man hasn't changed what has beyond his self reasoning?

One of the main obstacles within the pursuit of any science is that it doesn't first truthfully consider it's own limitations.

Limitation(s) to mean the very reason as to why any said science has yet to obtain the answers each also pursues while assuming those answers are also available.

The medical industry as a "Practiced" science holds the lead in this thought in my opinion. If not then why the need for medical malpractice insurance?

The mandate for medical science came out of the gates very strong. So much that during its industrial birthing it also maintained a written creed. A creed where all its practitioner's mutually upheld the mission statement as the betterment of their fellow man.

Believe it or not, but at one time Doctor's were not that well compensated for their efforts.

The same corruption which founds its way in enough to corrupt the heart of the otherwise innocent laws of economics's, has now become the same essence as the diseased heart which now thrives at the center of the Medical industry.

I also stumbled upon this (thanks Wiki-P) in my quest to know more.

James F. Wells, Ph. D., in his book, "Understanding Stupidity,"^[10] defines stupidity thusly, "The term may be used to designate a mentality which is considered to be informed, deliberate and maladaptive." Dr. Welles distinguishes stupidity from ignorance; one must know they are acting in their own worst interest. Secondly, it must be a choice, not a forced act or accident. Lastly, it requires the activity to be maladaptive, in that it is in the worst interest of the actor <--- (Now that's a mouthful), and specifically done to prevent adaption to new data or existing circumstances.


Try applying the thought of Lexical Ambiguity to the word "Actor" as used above?


The last time I checked that when someone ignore's established facts at some point they also had to consider those same facts leading up to deviating from the real worth which was at one time contained in them? 


What does someone wager whenever they hedge their bet against absolutes in life? Is it the thought that, "Maybe those said absolutes weren't entirely "True"?


In my thinking this should shed some light on the phrase, "On the brink of destruction"


Does that qualify as Ignorant or the mindset of the rebel of sorts?


In light of the Fight or Flight philosphy which over shadows humanity, where would the thought of stupid then find itself as it bears down upon the post event reasoning as if an investigation?


I wonder if there's a word which expresses, "You've been sold a poor rendering of the NOT so obvious things in life"

Etymology as a part time endeavor is quite the task by the way if you ever find yourself bored out of your skull or if watching paint dry doesn't cut it for you.

If people individually attempt to convince humanity that we're ALL evolving into something closer to "who we've mutually assumed we are" as a broad brush stroke, I have only one question before I get in that vehicle.

Where are we going?

It's one thing to state we're ALL one nation that's under God which is in fact true, yet it will be an entirely different reality within another day that not ALL remained willing to subject themselves to the dominion as if the fullness of His authority.

The ambiguous reasoning birthed from academia will always conclude there's something more or something different being conveyed through words.

Whereas true wisdom come down from the Lord of ALL creation will ultimately decide as the need for all things to reach their expected end.

In a season where one can find Free Will, that person should not ignore or misinterpret the intentions for which that same mercy was also shown.

Anyone can choose to say they were never In-formed which could prove to be true.

Yet having been In-formed is the active work by choosing not to Ignore the divinely understood benefit of Gods words which He sent, which also became flesh so that He did dwell among us as Jesus.

What was the intent?

To not only provide the symbol of His Love having been expressed and extended towards you, but also to provide the example as to how His words are capable of becoming flesh and dwelling here on earth.

Will you receive Your Savior that was sent as Gods Son or will you turn away together with the world that's been filled with snide remarks which have seemingly become nothing more than a mysterious riddle as the result of unbelief?


John 3:16-21

"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 


Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.   This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God."    
NIV