Who told you?

Yet another long scribbling, but as I've said before I just write sometimes until it stops flowing.

Can one know the "Truth" without also "Knowing" what Love is?

1 John 4:8-9
Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love . This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him.
NIV

What resides at the core of "Unbelief"? Is it simply everything the word "Doubt" attempts to convey?

Who are the enemies of truth going to be as those that were found "Willing" to spend their lives not only "opposed" to the absolute pursuit of "Truth" but also opposed to others finding the "Truth"?

Others to mean lives lived outside of your own that are also enjoyed while making more than an attempt at allowing themselves to be governed by the Truth?

Man might suggest that he has spent his lifetime attempting to discover the truth about himself and his creator, yet how would he know beyond doubt at some point in the future?

How can a person expect to discern the truth IF they ever were exposed to it? Exposed to it without specific concern(s) being revealed for all that they are to include future implications?

Concerns that have been deemed worthy of finding out, which ONLY Truth can comment on once brought into its light?

Who better to ask about the importance of truth than "Truth" itself? Yet the question still remains, "where does one find the "Truth"?

John 8:42
"If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here. I have not come on my own; but he sent me.
NIV

John 3:21
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

John 18:37
Jesus answered, "You are right in saying I am a king. In fact, for this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth . Everyone on the side of truth listens to me."     
NIV

The very fact that you are now reading this as if a concern might very well prove to be evidence in the future that "You were at least told with regards to what lies ahead". Enough that you can NOT plead ignorance that's also found to be "Believable" while standing face to face with the truth.

Who is it that determines what "Sin" is?

Maybe better asked, "Who will get to enjoy the results that are NOT being truthfully considered as Sin or sinful behavior?

Who can be truthful in their assessment concerning what Sin is and how Sin will ultimately be defined?

Much could be said about ultimatum's?

Rom 8:13-15
For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live, because those who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God. For you did not receive a spirit that makes you a slave again to fear, but you received the Spirit of sonship
NIV

Isn't it simply too easy to just say "I believe" in a savior without naming that savior?

Isn't too easy to confess that you believe in the "Need" for a savior yet remain opposed within your heart to said change that truth requires in order to be "Found" believable?

How far and how long will your actions carry the weight of what you do say that you believe?

Isn't it much more about what proves that you do "Believe"?

Enough to where IF someone else were observing you they would also conclude, "This person believes what they say with all their heart"?

Is it a simple matter where our actions align with what we say? I suppose that would depend upon all that your words and actions attempt to justify?

What is it about the "Power" or maybe the allure of being in agreement with someone else before we too become convinced of what we say we believe?

Was this life and all that it holds in store based on the hope that unless others come to fully understand why we do believe, said "Hope" then becomes that much harder to find?

Has anything consumed you to the point where you feel trapped by that same thing?

What is it that tries to diminish or maybe wear down what we say that we also "Believe"?

Enough that is to where anyone that's listening to what you do have to say, would then consider you to be "Believable"?

I think that what many believe about  Jesus as their "Christ" (savior) forget, is that He as God does in all  truth "Listen" to us.

I believe because He does listen so intently above and beyond what most consider as the ability to listen (hear), He can then see the truthful specifics of the identity we're busy attempting to stake as if a "Claim".

Such a claim that does mean enough to Him, that He in turn investigates our "Claim" made. Investigate to mean, whether or NOT our words (talk) and our walk (actions) match our claim "Being Made".

As if to suggest that as we approach His throne He also already knows if we are either "For" or "Against" Him.

I believe He intimately knows all about the facts which have concerned us to date.

Having loved us so much that He does NOT only want us NOT to Lie to Him, but even more not to lie to ourselves to where we enslave ourselves to the corruption he knows reside in the depths of our personage that are NOT "For" Him.

All of which gravitates around the intimacy which most people deeply desire concerning the essence and intimacy to where we truly Know the person that does speak for How they've aged (matured) within a specific environment.

Why? Because I do believe the One that did create you and I is also divinely "Intelligent".

John 10:27
My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me.
NIV

This is one relationship where Honesty is the only "Policy" in terms of one that will yield the return you also hope for.

Ps 119:152
Long ago I learned from your statutes that you established them to last forever.
NIV

Ps 130:3-5
If you, O LORD, kept a record of sins, O Lord, who could stand?
But with you there is forgiveness; therefore you are feared.

I wait for the LORD, my soul waits, and in his word I put my hope. 
NIV

One thing the Lord does understand better than the mind of our own soul, is what a "repentant" heart actually does look and feel like when in his hands.

If the Lord were examining your physical heart, how might it feel in His hands? Calloused maybe? Dry and tough to the touch or soft, sensitive and responsive to His own touch as He examines it?

Rev 2:23
Then all the churches will know that I am he who searches hearts and minds, and I will repay each of you according to your deeds.
NIV

How often have you assessed a conversation with someone which then proved to be a "Waste" of your time? Where does what they say to you usually end up?

Not that you or I are Lord over much of anything, yet don't we act as if "Lord" over what we choose to believe?

What would you suppose happens to the words Jesus speaks when we toss them out as if they're not applicable or needed day to day?

What does that prove when we do toss them aside?

Do we consume what He says (words) and then allow our bodies alone to determine what is waste and what is considered of nutritional value?

Even if we were to borrow from an earthly expression "You are what you eat" we can catch a glimpse of what we consume for the benefit of our heart as what we believe then does have an affect on who we become.

Mark 7:19
For it doesn't go into his heart but into his stomach, and then out of his body.
NIV

Mark 7:14-15
Nothing outside a man can make him 'unclean ' by going into him. Rather, it is what comes out of a man that makes him 'unclean 
NIV

Do we consume what he says in our hearts enough to where His words become alive and active as His spirit within us then dominates our flesh vessel? Not willing to spill a single drop of His words that were intended to nourish the mind of our spirit?

If Jesus ate His fill of only the words of Our heavenly father enough to where those words became flesh, is that to say what He ate (words) became visible in his flesh?

The western world has become notorious for being considered a "Consumer" nation, yet what do we consume and what does our bodies then speak through our appearance?

Have you ever been frustrated when you've shared your thoughts with others and they turn and begin to quiz you as if asking "Who" it was and how that you came into the knowledge of what you're attempting to share with them?

Why is it that somehow or in some way in order to be considered "believable" such findings always seem to require tracing out or tracking down the original source of such information?

Questions such as "where did you hear that from" or "What book did you read that in or who was it that told you this"?

Did you experience frustration as if what "You" are saying is NOT considered believable unless you can prove your source of information?

Why does finding ourselves to be "believable' when sharing with others usually boil down to being more about the credibility of the "source" of your new found knowledge?

What could possibly interfere with what you do "Say" in your attempt(s) to share with others?

Have you ever considered if Jesus was frustrated when He walked the face of this earth as a man while attempting to share His message to humanity? As if some were suggesting in their denial of who He was much like hearing, "And who made you King over all that is to be considered righteous".

John 5:31-32
"If I testify about myself, my testimony is not valid. There is another who testifies in my favor, and I know that his testimony about me is valid.
NIV

How was Jesus' testimony validated by another as the "One" which sent Him in order to testify?

John 10:24-26
The Jews gathered around him, saying, "How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly."

Jesus answered, "I did tell you, but you do not believe. The miracles I do in my Father's name speak for me, but you do not believe because you are not my sheep.
NIV

One of Jesus' temptation was to see if He would attempt to justify/prove himself (prove His identity as well the power of His true identity). What is it that defines "Who" a person is?

Is it what they're capable of which defines them or is it the "Why" they do what they do that defines them?

There are many smaller banners which fly under the guise of ones said "Faith" yet there will only be "One" banner that stands the day our creator comes to reconcile the fullness of His original intentions for having created all things.

Most earthly household(s) where there are several children, there will also at some point in time be fighting and bickering among themselves. Some could conclude it's do to over crowding, envy or the conflict of their uniqueness as each comes into close proximity with the other(s).

The question still remains though, "Is that all there is to their petty differences & attacks against each other"?

How similar could that notion prove to be in terms of a world where there are numerous designations of said "Faith"?

What do you believe and what are the limits of what you do believe? What do you have faith in? Is it that your faith resides as the totality of what you do believe?

Enough that is, that "What" you believe motivates you to act or restrains you from acting (outwardly) at any given moment or while in the midst of any specific set of circumstances?

As the household and its members continue to grow together why does there seem to be the need for strategic maneuvers as the wit of each allows in order to find favor enough to where the individual eventually gets things their "Own" way or maybe better said "Get things their way based on their own terms"?

Today even the fathers and mothers have employed such tactic's in order to get their children to respond the "Way" they want their children to. I'm not talking about disguising green food products so they'll eat them either.

Has it all become more about self esteem rather than "Esteem" for our Lord and Savior Christ Jesus?

How can you teach esteem for Christ if it's not more than obvious to those you're attempting to teach?

What are your terms when or if you attempt to approach the Lord as your "Creator" with either limitless questions or petitions made enough that He then will act in your favor and or on your behalf?

Better yet, what Good is a lesson that is being taught if one never learns to draw upon the simalar circumstances through which most all lesson are truly "Taught"?

Could our own frustration be as simple as "We're poor listeners". Thought to be poor, because of all that we individually want as we then fail to see the goodness wherever we find ourselves as believers in Jesus as our "Savior"?

As believers we need to know why we do what we do as well why we're willing to endure and for the sake of the Only one that is Good.

What the world around us does to include the results of our own formulated thoughts and actions actually do present the circumstances in which we then participate.

As Lord He is our savior and for all the right reasons we must somehow desire to know what has Him to be considered as if Good. God works for the "Good" which may not always agree with what we consider to be "Good'.

Rom 8:28
And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose.
NIV

1 Peter 2:20
But how is it to your credit if you receive a beating for doing wrong and endure it?
NIV


3 John 6-8
You will do well to send them on their way in a manner worthy of God. It was for the sake of the Name that they went out, receiving no help from the pagans. We ought therefore to show hospitality to such men so that we may work together for the truth.
NIV

"I love You" is found between the lines

The age old saying, "You came into this world with nothing and you'll leave it the same way" is not exactly a rich statement especially if trying to describe a life that's been lived with purpose.

In one context that statement might sound true, yet is it an accurate assessment across the board while discussing everyone involved in this event called "Life"?

If this life were only about acquired wealth and its "Potential" to influence I might tend to agree, yet I'm of the strong opinion there's something more.

Influence can mean a multitude of different things to just as many different people as does the understanding of a cause and effect.

I once heard the statement, "You can place a million dollars in the hands of 100 different people, yet it's the person that understands value that will make anything more out of it than what it already is".

Does simply leaving wealth (prosperity) or property behind for the benefit of another guarantee that it will maintain its intended purpose?

I'm of the opinion that everything in this world has a voice. I'm equally of the opinion everything that does speak can only truly be heard if the one listening accepts the reasoning behind what's is being said.

Some have taken hold of an even greater suggestion in that  life "Is all about Family" yet once again is that all there is to this life?

I suppose it would depend upon how one defines family.

The word of God attempts to express for our benefit the value of being right (righteous). In terms of a family and assuming God is in possession of the ONLY wisdom that is also true and at all times it is his children that will then prove Him to be righteous through obedience.

Obedience is not a bad word despite mans efforts to make it as such. We all obey one opinion over another at any given moment of our lives yet each life bears its own fruit.

It's one thing to tell your earthly father that you love him only then to do something totally contrary to his wishes for you. The heavenly Father however tells us and holds the expectation for something different in terms of our expression of Love towards Him.


John 14:15-17
If you love me, you will obey what I command. And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever— the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him.
NIV


John 14:23-24
Jesus replied, "If anyone loves me, he will obey my teaching. My Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him. He who does not love me will not obey my teaching. These words you hear are not my own; they belong to the Father who sent me. 
NIV

The corrupted mind of humanity has become addicted to being right in all matters that pertain to life and said "Godliness". That is to suggest that man looks to stay in control of his own summation (comfort) concerning all things created. The likes of which he (man) did NOT create.

I can say with some degree of regret there have been a few personalities in my life that I've had to "Choose" to relate to yet only because of the significance of the blood bond we shared. Even further admitting on more than one occasion I thought of asking for a DNA swab test.

For some history plays its own role as the center piece while attempting to identify with the exactness as to "Who" their family members are.

It's easy to simply say "Our children are our future", yet what does that mean? Our we suggesting such a future that holds said benefit(s) doesn't require defining as if the reason(s) why? I'm of the opinion a "Gambler" is considered as such, because they have zero respect for the cost placed at risk.

Does that future include only you and yours as if active participant(s)? How will your life that is lived fit the larger picture of truth that over shadows all humanity as ordained by its creator?

In terms of an active participant in the future, in what capacity will your memories serve? That is to suggest more than a picture that stirs fond memories which eventually finds itself gathering dust in the bottom of a cardboard box?

Be truthful as we've all seen them as that box that eventually migrates to that dark corner in the attack or basement once it's journeyed two generations beyond your own existence?

Lets rewind the video of humanity a few centuries now and take a look at a matter the Lord God considers as wickedness.

If everything has a beginning point in time, then how might the first recorded murder play out with respect to future generations which also includes you today?

That's not even to mention Adam and Eve's neglect of how their decisions would affect future generations to come, but could this neglect be the essence and evidence of what the Lord considers as wickedness (evil) at play?

Most know the infamous question, "Am I my brothers keeper"?

How does the thought of somehow being the "keeper" of ones brother then play out in terms of  maintaining the respected personality that's somehow gets kept "Alive" at heart while finding its rightful place in the future? That is to suggest the persons potential to influence others?

Many try to relate to such a person as if only considering their own immediate relationship with that individual personality. What might Cain have also heard as God suggested if he could have found himself able to hear?

I often wonder if a portion of God's wisdom in the naming of Able was intended to point us towards him?

Meaning Able was able to hear God in specific terms in so much that he did more than listen in that he also performed well enough his actions pleased God.

Is the suggestion to "Listen" just some "Empty" or lofty metaphor that's useless or is there a deeper reality with regards to not only finding ourselves able to "Hear", but also how that same hearing was intended to affect what takes place in the future to come?

Gen 4:10
The LORD said, "What have you done? Listen! Your brother's blood cries out to me from the ground.
NIV

As food for thought, was it the act of murder which proved the identity of Cain or was it the sinful nature within him which caused him to act? 

What is a mans nature? Could it prove to be the father of his likeness having been evidenced by way of all his outward expression whether in word or deed?

Both Cain and Able were born of one and the same corruptible seed having come into this world by way of the same loins and womb enough that they can be called "Brothers". Looking at the consideration from that perspective expresses one thing, but how does one reconcile later as the Apostle Paul writes that Cain belonged to the evil one?

There was no other excuse as the likes of having a separate parent or step parent to blame in an attempt to excuse himself for what he carried out against his brother. Cain simply identified himself through words when he then ask in all truth, "Am I my bothers keeper"?

The "sharp" point the Apostle Paul later defines as not only "Who" Cain was but also how he (cain) acknowledged "Who" he belonged to. 

1 John 3:12

Do not be like Cain , who belonged to the evil one and murdered his brother.

And why did he murder him? Because his own actions were evil and his brother's were righteous.

NIV

Don't hate what was intended to be "Good" instead hate what is considered to be evil even if that means being critical of yourself when you see that which is considered to be evil trying to surface in YOU.

The following seems harsh, yet I think it a sign of great love even more so now on the other side of the proof of such a claim having believed that God gave of himself "His Son" for our sins.

Simply being told in advance of a coming wrath is not enough. Believing that the wrath of God is coming is what will lead you to the need of a savior.

What is the wrath of God coming to destroy after this season f mercy expires?

Said "Children of Wrath" which despise the instruction of the Lord.


Ps 50:16-23

But to the wicked, God says:
"What right have you to recite my laws or take my covenant on your lips? You hate my instruction and cast my words behind you. 

When you see a thief, you join with him; you throw in your lot with adulterers. You use your mouth for evil and harness your tongue to deceit. You speak continually against your brother and slander your own mother's son. These things you have done and I kept silent; you thought I was altogether like you. But I will rebuke you and accuse you to your face.

"Consider this, you who forget God, or I will tear you to pieces, with none to rescue: He who sacrifices thank offerings honors me, and he prepares the way so that I may show him the salvation of God."
NIV

Both brothers were intended to participate at a time in the future, but only as what they did or didn't do gets weighed on the scales of truth. As it is today we can't weigh their thoughts, yet we can weigh their actions in terms of how we respond. Only then is one able to see who their teacher (father) is.

Come to know who the father of all Goodness is and be reconciled unto Him. Come without holding a higher regard for the loins or womb through which you were brought into this world.


Eph 2:10
For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.
NIV

Humility that is true is not simply something else for you to master. Instead it was intended to master you.

1 Peter 1:3-9
Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! In his great mercy he has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, and into an inheritance that can never perish, spoil or fade — kept in heaven for you, who through faith are shielded by God's power until the coming of the salvation that is ready to be revealed in the last time.

 In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while you may have had to suffer grief in all kinds of trials. These have come so that your faith — of greater worth than gold, which perishes even though refined by fire — may be proved genuine and may result in praise, glory and honor when Jesus Christ is revealed. Though you have not seen him, you love him; and even though you do not see him now, you believe in him and are filled with an inexpressible and glorious joy, for you are receiving the goal of your faith, the salvation of your souls. 
NIV

Measuring the distance between what is real and what is true

Does a man stir the thoughts within himself or are they stirred by external suggestions presented?

Can a man dwell upon a matter before being prompted by what he's seen or heard of it?

How powerful is the desire "To Know"?

Is it as simple and harmless as the word "Curiosity" suggest or is it something more alluring much like a whole in a rain storm where water rushes in?

Why would someone suggest that "My curiosity got the best of me"? What is the best of you?

What of the statement, "You draw out the best in me"? Who has bestowed the best in YOU?

Where would humanity be without children that we can study in order to learn more about ourselves while observing them?

How important does pro-creation then become trailing on the heels of that consideration?

What comes to mind if one were to say, "Eye candy" or maybe "You've tickled my fancy"?

Why are some questions less important to others as compared to how they impact you?

What would you consider to be a lifeless thought?

What if speaking ones mind were considered a life giving action by way of breathing life into a suggestive thought?

What if everything that finds itself as an existence were the result of a question that's been asked?

How does one prove they truly believe anything they're told?

How does one prove what they've been told is also True?

How is one proved to be a liar?

Don't they have to be caught in a lie and would that not also suggest that a lie is a trap?

Is the trap of a lie not simply further entanglement of words?

Isn't staying focused really just not forgetting what you were just thinking about?

Aren't most familiar arguments the net result of not remembering the same thing the same way?

When "Dwelling" on a matter how deep did you have to dig before you grow fatigued?

If you take your mind off something where does what you were thinking about "Go"?

Why isn't being "Absent minded" considered the same as having an "Out of Body Experience"?

Why is "Critical thinking" emphasized as being "Critical" when you've devoted your thinking towards another person and their behavior?

Why isn't critique easily accepted? Who qualifies the critique enough that they are heard?

Is the arguable question, "Are you as equally critical of yourself"?

When does the good outweigh the bad whether thinking about yourself or others?

When you consider the Pro's and Con's of a situation when does the one considering become the "Con-artist" that's painting the picture?

Why is it when someone wants to make themselves bigger in their world they have to accuse or see the other person as if  living in their own "Little" world?

If it's hard to find someone that's right what are the odds of finding out that you're wrong?

Does simply making the law fix any problem or does upholding the law understand the reason as if the need for it?

If there's no room for an excuse what does that leave room for?

If striving for perfection were thought of as futile, where does that leave the thought for that which is considered perfect?

If being "Crazy" were defined as "Losing control over the mind of one's own thoughts" then why haven't over powering desires and emotions been outlawed?

Does anger have and serve a purpose or is it more to do with the whom that particular anger doesn't serve?

If something is "Eating at you" then what is holding you back from feeding it?

What is frustration, is it simply the inability or failure to recognize the nature of what your emotion filled desires want or is it the indecisive nature of  your logic towards what is considered as righteous in Gods sight?

Do you use the imperfect history of the messenger that might have been sent to you against them in order to defend (justify) your own actions done today?

One who has come to you in response to repentance in an attempt to help You see what you're doing?

Will the nature of such a defense suffice having been presented as if another's similar behavior on the day when You alone are standing before the One that will judge all men?

How does the mind of a blind man operate once made able to see? Does he keep it to himself or does he try to tell others what he now can see as if the reward of the One that made him whole again?

Believing something said as if the truth is not only about "What" you've believed, instead it's because of "Whom" you've believed that will in turn establish the "Why" you have believed as if the "Truth".

The message presented by the ambassador that's been sent on behalf of the King will prove to have little strength (ability to influence) if the ambassador's King is not honored.

Matt 10:41-42

Anyone who receives a prophet because he is a prophet will receive a prophet's reward, and anyone who receives a righteous man because he is a righteous man will receive a righteous man's reward. And if anyone gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones because he is my disciple, I tell you the truth, he will certainly not lose his reward."
NIV

Man does not establish the truth, he can only acknowledge all that the "Truth" is, does and is forever capable of as if the person of God. Only then can your own heart be established as if the corrupt concerns which are of this world that have since been put to rest.

Where does the difference of a heart that is now the repentant heart come into play as if the evidence of what you have believed?


Rom 8:6-8
The mind of sinful man is death, but the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace; the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so. Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God.
NIV

How much is "Enough"? Is it a pound of flesh or a year of equal hurt?

Does the mind of the soul, the body or spirit decide when enough is enough?

Does the body have a mind as if a voice of its own and does that voice sit within a panel of three (spirit, soul and body) where there is no such thing as a tie "Vote" that's cast?

Who decides when the body will eat and how long will mere thoughts of food satisfy its hunger?

If one is constantly having to fight for their individual rights, will they ever experience freedom that is true?

What is the difference between your assumed "Rights" and your "Freedom which are then realized?

Who is it that establishes AND upholds your understood Right(s)? Your fellow man or the one which makes the "Law"?

Do laws oppose freedom or simply keep what freedom has assumed under control?

Is the animal considered "Wild" because of its environment or because of its nature that doesn't want to be under control while chasing freedom?

What is a perfect world, a place where there are no problems or a place where everybody is equally invested while looking for the right answers?

If you're looking for the truth, have you found it only when "You're" comfortable?

Is fools "Gold" the symbol of an empty bank account or assuming he's in possession of it while going in debt all over town?

If the body is destined for the grave, where does that leave the existence of your spirit and soul?

If cold were best defined as the absence of heat, darkness as the absence of light and death as the absence of life, how can one consider "Eternal Life"?

Is deception the simple matter of how YOU see and interpret the truth or is it that reality is not within your control which defines everything you may or may not be able to see?

Does discovering the truth require the unfolding of circumstance(s) before you know and then understand or is there a more accurate place where truth and deception face off in the cross hairs of your line of sight?

What if truth were defined as the absence of deception and that deception as such which labors to prevent you from hearing and then seeing what is True?

What is the difference between law that is written and the law of the spirit?

Can man discover the results of his own logic unless he's chosen to sit and reason with the God?

In an attempt to make use of his own logic, what has a man really learned once he reaches the end of his life given him and how long is his list of reasons for all that he's done?

Is it all really a matter of who you are as much as it is to whom do you belong?

Isa 1:18
"Come now, let us reason together ," says the LORD.
NIV

Rom 8:5-9
Those who live according to the sinful nature have their minds set on what that nature desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires. The mind of sinful man is death, but the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace; the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so. Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God.

You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ.
NIV

Revelation that's personal

I once heard, "A man is not able to understand who he is until he's been given the revelation of his real worth no matter where he finds himself".

Many walk the face of this earth unsure of who they are and as many more why they are here as the result of not knowing where they came from.

Because they do continue to maintain the ability to walk and present themselves as if survivors that alone seems to prove something to the fair amount of those who are willing to believe what their life story puts on display.

Some persons consider themselves as "Anchored" because they've embraced the personalities of those which have physically ushered their bodies into this world.

While others will consider themselves fortunate having encountered a parental "Mentor" as if the replacement of those that were found to be less enjoyable. To put it bluntly someone else to compare themselves to.

All the above can only hope to speak to the mind of the soul as well the condition of the body in which that same mind indwells. Some might even go as far to suggest both of the above more closely defines the remaining results of the mind of their "Flesh".

What if the question were posed, "How does one find his spirit if their spirit is something which can't be seen"?

Can a person prove their spirit or does their spirit prove them?

The following was once said concerning a specific people.

1 John 4:6
We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood.
NIV

Not to make too much of it but the author intentionally chose to express the spirit of truth with a capital "S" and the following with a lower case "s" (falsehood). Either way both are mentioned as a spirit(s) yet obviously each exist in two separate "Hoods".

Does simply speaking "Words" meet the requirements of having been spoken from the mouth of God as if the truth or does that consideration require something more?

Every voice that speaks always has Intentional motive(s). Intentional motive to mean the driving compulsion which caused the voice to speak in the "First" place.

When I say "First place" I say that to mean a voice as if, "One of authority".

I personally believe that all men come into this world from the womb more than prepared to ask the endless supply of questions his own imagination can dream up. He has so many questions about that which is true that he's destined for failure from the beginning unless He encounters and believes the truth.

Logic might suggest man can survive because he has, yet the question still remains "How and in what condition does he find the entirety of himself (3 part being) after the limits of time have elapsed?

Logic should also conclude that a persons body returns to the earth. Upon further investigation logic would also conclude the body then returns to its natural state (dirt/dust/ashes).

What could lead logic to such a conclusion?

Where do most all of our bodies get placed despite what we confess we believe with regards to being possessed by a spirit once we're dead?

Obviously most end up in the ground by some method, yet I can easily admit that some do  manage to live on the in the minds of others from inside a urn on a shelf or mantle.

I've attended many funeral viewings in my life time. Some of the more common statements heard are "They look so peaceful" or "They're in a much better place where they are now"!

Were they speaking about their physical body just before it got buried or were they also expressing the details concerning their soul(s)?

Are we as confident as they are where they now find themselves or is that a summation that's based on everything that caused them to be considered "Good" because their life exhibited all the good things we too might enjoy?


Luke 16:25-26
But Abraham replied, 'Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.' 

Luke 16:27-28

"He answered, 'Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my father's house, for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.' 

NIV

Many are comfortable with knowing where the body ends up because they can "prove" where it lies. Many are comfortable assuming they know where their soul will end up. Yet few are willing to acknowledge the depths of all a mans Heart, Mind and Soul truly means to God.

You are aware the above consideration could require a life time (however long that might be) to get to know? There are some who do get a late start in this process and one of which includes myself.

I sometimes have to view the "Everything" that is and is also found to be within my heart, mind ans soul as if something I truly don't or maybe "Can't" fully fathom.

It's as if I had to come to the realization that if I don't fully know myself at any given moment there must be an even greater possibility that I alone don't completely understand the importance of being forgiven of all wrong doing(s).

Especially so if I alone am not the judge or law maker which determines what is right or wrong.

Once the soul realizes what ALL means in terms of forgiveness, that can only soul only then begin to realize ALL that Love is capable of.

Many have have fallen in love with who they assume they are outside the consideration and need of a Savior, yet how many have fallen in love with "Who" the Lord says we were to the point we now live as if He did Save of from the intentions of something greater?

John 16:27
No, the Father himself loves you because you have loved me and have believed that I came from God.
NIV

Matt 22:37-39
Jesus replied: "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind .'   This is the first and greatest commandment.
NIV

What's amazing at times is that man will acknowledge just about every evil spirit on every evil corner as long as that same spirit remains one that isn't deemed as one that has effectually influenced his own personage?

Is that denial or lack of knowing who God truly is? That is to suggest we can pick and choose or deny what the spirit of God is said to performs as while taking up an inhabitants while in this world?

Why can't it be just that easy in order to determine which spirit is of God and which spiritual expression(s) God not only defines, but also considers to be from the presence of all that is "Evil"?

Who doesn't want to consider eternal life as a Good place to end up? Who doesn't want to consider themselves as somehow making it there?

How easy it to see your self there if all you have to do is produce the names and faces of those thought to be less deserving than YOU so that you make it in?

All these are simple questions, yet what is the truth concerning the entire consideration which pertains to a "Life" which gets to enjoy the length of eternity as if a personage?

If life is all about reward how rewarding does the thought of eternity seem while knowing that true life is something that's only found in Christ Jesus OUR savior?

Notice I didn't suggest only my savior, but OUR(s)?

Hot, Cold or Luke warm, how do you like your truth served?

Would it be a fair and accurate statement, "Everyone has their own taste"?

How might it also prove to be that just as many have and hold to their own interpretation as to all that truth is at any given moment?

The word genre' when used in artistic circles suggest the essence of ones own personal taste.

Imagine trying to find the art work of Picasso and Rembrandt in the same art gallery where Railroad art is the headline attraction?

Even better imagine trying to find Chitterlings on the menu of a fine French restaurant?

Would the enjoyment of a specific genre' suggest that all other opinions outside of our own are of lessor value or would it be more accurate to say ones own personal interest (opinion) dictates the value of art?

We've all probably heard "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder", yet does that saying maintain its consistency with respect to the person which desires in earnest to discover the truth?

I suppose it would depend upon just how beautiful truth is to that individual?

Having either forgotten, over looked or just devalued the thought of what the Lord detest, where has that lead any of us? As if taste testing the different genre' of belief systems which can be found among humanity?

Far too  many seemed to have placed more importance upon what their own preferences are instead of investing their time seeking out the sweet savory smell as to what the Lord enjoys.

The Lords appointed author of Proverbs uses the expression of something being considered as sweet. That inference can also interpret "Fancied, liked or enjoyed" dependent upon its surrounding words.

Some refer to the surrounding environment of a word as its "Context".

Allow this question to be asked if you will, "What is the context of this single text below from Proverbs 13:19"?

Can what is being expressed through words stand on its own merit (authority) or does it need your opinion being added before you accept what's been said?

Once again I suppose it would depend upon the truth and who YOU believe establishes every consideration as if the only "Truth"?

Prov 13:19
A longing fulfilled is sweet to the soul, but fools detest turning from evil.
NIV

The person reading this can make some sense of it based on how they relate to the words they understand, yet what about those words they don't seem to have a grasp of?

My point is that 100 different people could be asked to define the words in bold print above, yet how many differing understandings (interpretations) might be expressed as their response?

As if to ask, "What is a longing in specific terms? What is a soul? What is evil?

Now lets ask the last word a little differently as, "What do you consider to be evil?

Basically, does man suggest that each word requires it's own judge (interpreter) before there is a mutually understood power to be found within a given word?

In order for each word to be mutually understood that notion then requires two or more coming into agreement, yet is THE question "Who have you agreed with"?

The point I'm trying to make is, "Do you see how adding the single word "You" changes the whole dynamic of the question being asked? As if to say, "The question asked is only governed by one opinion which is  your own (alone)"?

If you'll allow this question having also set to the side your personal thoughts concerning religion the way you've historically understood it, how would you interpret what you read, "What is being suggested through the use of the words you see below"?

2 Cor 2:14-16
For we are to God the aroma of Christ among those who are being saved and those who are perishing.

To the one we are the smell of death; to the other, the fragrance of life. And who is equal to such a task?
NIV

What all religions seem to enjoy fighting over (even to the point of death at times) is, "The Who and or What is it that defines the ONE true God"? The same God that hung the stars, divided the oceans, gave shape and form to earth as well populated its surface with different creatures.

Basically, who can establish, reinforce and who gets to wield this authority as if to speak for an otherwise invisible God?

If you were to manage your thoughts to where you do believe in the 'Need" of a savior, what is your opinion of the person that exalts their own opinion above ALL others?

The opinion whose hope is to deceive not only ones self but others? To deceive in such a way as if to somehow alter the outcome of the future by way of exalting their own valued opinion today?

Such an opinion which requires others to agree (be popular) as if it gives strength to it. Where then is there room today for the opinion that will prove itself to be righteous as if leading to the final outcome?

Feel free to now reapply what YOU choose to believe concerning this Life, Death and Eternity?

Can you see how each can also be differently defined based on what we each hold as an opinion that we believe which then dictates how we handle each of the above considerations (life, death, eternity)?

Many have a deep longing to taste a sweet eternal "Life" after their physical body dies because that thought provides the comfort of somehow being found as if they were "Right", while others see death as simply the dark matter where all lights go out.

What if you were to consider that a mans Soul never dies whether you're found right or wrong?

How would you then find the need to understand not only what a mans soul consist of, what happens to that Soul AND "Who" then determines (Judges) what happens to that Soul once the body does die?

I think it safe to assume that most at least believe that our bodies all eventually die as each then finds some degree of comfort in knowing where their bodies will then rest in a grave or in a urn on a fireplace mantle.

Yet, they'll not truthfully consider or acknowledge "What does man know beyond doubt about where the soul goes?

I urge you to investigate where your soul goes after the bodies death yet more importantly to investigate beyond all doubt. Why? Because when your soul does meet with its eternal destination the only choice(s) which matter then are the ones you've already made.

Until you know beyond doubt, most people's faith has been based on fear. A fear of all that you don't "Know" beyond doubt while "Choosing to believe" all that you've been told about all that "Love" is and does.

The powerful question should be, "Who told you what you've chosen to believe about ALL that Love is"? Based on what authority has such an opinion found itself powerful enough to remove any doubt(s)?

Is what you choose to believe only a simple matter about whether or not you've believed a lie about what does take place after this life OR is about the lie you've believed concerning ALL that Love is, has already done and is prepared to do?

How will you know and what will be the undeniable evidence once your Soul does pass over the next realm?

People love the analogy where they'll paint "All Men as being equal" yet they'll allow the thought that each man chooses their God differently.

There's a difference between what is considered a God having been created in the "Imagination" of men as opposed to The God as the creator of ALL things both great and small.

What if the qualifying question before all mankind were as simple as, Which God in the mind of men also defines all that Love is and does as if the Only God that is True?

Would that notion then cause YOU to then be the judge which makes the over riding decision concerning your Soul's destination? Would that not assign you as the one which determines who the One true God is?

There are very few descriptions of a man while considering all that God is. There is one that that assumes they are the God of their choices made, there's one that chooses to fear God and there is the one that has been brought to maturity having discovered the true nature of their creator.

The latter now being evidenced by the realization that man is truly nothing without finding himself to be in agreement with the God that is also True.

There's a lesson to be learned from everything God has created and that includes ourselves (Man) having also been created in His likeness.

Rom 1:20

For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities — his eternal power and divine nature — have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse . 

NIV

The hearts and minds of men have become consumed with the concern that others are judging them. How does that square with YOUR own consideration for everything which truly defines not only who "Your" God is, but also what your God has done for and through your fellow man which He also created (made)?

Is the God you serve FOR you AND your eternal benefit at all times or do you perceive your God as if only FOR you at differing moments?

Is your God a mystery never to be understood? If so, then what purpose would living life then serve and how could you ever have a true hope of being "Understood"?

Is Your God hard to reach when you have need to make contact with? Does He always confirm what you believe about Him or does Your God let you down because of what you didn't know about Him?

Once the evidence of either of the above does arrive, do you then find the conclusion as if your opinion to be in "Agreement" with Your God?

The way a man gets to know his true God is to willingly allow that same God to mold and make YOU like Him.


1 John 4:16-17
And so we know and rely on the love God has for us.

God is love . Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in him. In this way, love is made complete among us so that we will have confidence on the day of judgment, because in this world we are like him.
NIV

If not then how can you call your God Lord of heaven and the earth in which you exist as the God that Loves you?

If every man could have or maybe find himself capable of creating his own God, would it not then make it clear why there seems to be so many differing Gods in the mind of humanity? Enough to where such a broad exception then accommodates everything that is not like God?

As if multiple Gods which then approve of the many different things man seems to enjoy doing while assuming he alone is right?

I encourage you to become not only a reader, but also a believer. Not everything man sets his mind and heart to do is justified as if he alone is righteous in ALL that he does.

Who will approve of what you do as the direct result of what you also believe?

Every religion has its own written doctrine which has been penned (scripted) by the hand(s) of men, yet one opinion will choose not to believe because of what has been written by mere men (alone).

As such that is "Written" which then proves itself to be trustworthy throughout every episode that's been presented by humanity.

So is your opinion of God one that is "Right" only because of what you've based your opinion on or is YOUR God one that is considered to be true

Is the existence of your God one that is based upon what you've been told about Him and choose to believe or is your opinion of your God based on how he's proven Himself to be righteous in ALL that that's been said about Him?

With respect for a God that is true, that consideration leaves zero room for the opinions of man that might otherwise look to project Him as anything but the "Truth" concerning everything He also created.

Rom 3:21-26
But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify.

This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.

God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished— he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus. 
NIV

Don't expect others to honor your God given right of passage

Encouragement is not simply fluffing another's "Ego" with flattering words. Such an ego as if a set of scales where someone already knows within their heart such flattery is not true.

Encouragement that's true follows suit with teaching the hungry man "How" to fish when you're not there.

Man being part spirit also comes from the womb with some degree of spiritual intuition. That's not to say it will always be accurately applied, but still we all come wired in such a way. Enough that is that we can all at minimum recognize the truth when we hear it.

What we each do with what we hear is a completely different Novel being written.

When could someone insult this spiritual ability as if they were somehow able look into a matter concerning that which is True?

I might suggest, "How can a person weigh or measure the depth of a matter if they don't believe certain things also have a very "Specific" weight or standard against which to measure?

Prov 20:10
Differing weights and differing measures — the LORD detests them both.
NIV


Mic 6:11
Shall I acquit a man with dishonest scales, with a bag of false weights ?
NIV

What is true and does matter, is speaking only what God has said about another being enough that they're given the opportunity to one day "Realize" the truth within what you've said.

Does the question then arise, "How will I know with enough confidence in order to speak or how can I know what God has said concerning another"?

My answer, "Because of the what you believe to be true which He also spoke about YOU"!

That thought should cause us to mine out what He has said concerning His children and His desires for all those that have not received Him as if their (Divine) Father.

What many shy away from even today some 2.000 years beyond Christ visitation is what the Apostle Paul made mention of concerning that which is from the mouth of God because it is true. 

It points us towards the type and shadow of a very specific form of suffering that also accomplishes Gods desires for us as His children while being formed into mature children (Sons) which are His (that know beyond doubt that they DO belong to Him). 

It's also the least understood process when the thought of suffering cost us nothing in the form of all that we so selfishly desire within an immaturity that so easily can blind as if to prohibit us from seeing the greater depth of that which is True.

Phil 3:15-16

All of us who are mature should take such a view of things. And if on some point you think differently, that too God will make clear to you. Only let us live up to what we have already attained. 

NIV

Matt 7:12

So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets. NIV

The only increase in another persons life which will prove true comes by only by way of the Lord and that being the Holy Spirit.

In economic terms closing (finalizing) a deal takes time. That being said, many find themselves only as good as their last deal that was made within that understood and afforded economic environment..

Finding yourself in agreement with another in the moment is not the end of the matter. Coming to final terms in contractual matters can take much sorting or fleshing out.

Why? Because the results of any dispute which could arise can then be interpreted by a third party that also understands the binding words within the contract (agreement) that was mutually drawn up.

Anything being newly interpreted is just another step taken in the direction of finding justification you then hope to employ as the continuance of what you've already been doing which has zero regard for being considered right or wrong.

The end result(s) of a dispute of any matter will always undergo some form of arbitration which then holds both parties to an agreement accountable. If you can put that question to rest your more than part way to where you need to be.
.
In my opinion the reason why laws are written in such hard to understand languages is due mostly to a corruption already in the heart(s) we all seem to know that has the propensity to rise up at any "Given" moment should the temptation be given the right of passage enough that it overcomes.

Corruption being understood and seen as if "The ability to change ones mind in the face of a previously made agreement".

Basically the very reason from the beginning where lack of total trust in the character of the individuals involved is never thoroughly examined, otherwise why enter the agreement?

That is to suggest, otherwise a simple hand shake could suffice, solidify and maintain the original deal that was made.

A "Will" on the other hand has a much different heart beat.

In order to receive the dispensation(s) which presents itself by way of the "Will" having been predetermined, requires the recipient do not much more than to be able to prove their identity as the "Intended" recipient.

I once heard an analogy phrased as, "Finding food under the pillow of the orphan should come as no surprise". 

To complex of an example? Not if one knows the behavioral motivations that would cause an orphan to plan ahead for their next meal.

How long does it take to prove your true identity as such that can survive all other accusations to the contrary? Better yet, what would cause anyone to refute your identity being claimed in any matter?

What if it were all about your "Faith" as if to suggest your identity can only be proved by way of the one you have instilled your faith in? What if there is no other way to prove that you're a child of God? 

If it were clearly understood that testimony about you (that is also true) can not come from you? How would you then find yourself? Can any testimony be true that is not recorded in the place where such a claim maintains itself because it validates that which is True?

How difficult would it then be for a said "Child of God" to somehow prove such a claim if the realms of heaven are otherwise invisible to the other person?

Jesus was performing the humanly impossible (unable to explain) which also defines the essence of a miracle.

Jesus basically had His identity summoned as if from the high courts of humanity that also assumed that they understood and held the keys to Godly matters here in the earth better than any others as is recorded here below.

Examine closely how he responded when ask for His Identification?

Matt 21:23-25

Jesus entered the temple courts, and, while he was teaching, the chief priests and the elders of the people came to him. "By what authority are you doing these things?" they asked. "And who gave you this authority ?"

Jesus replied, "I will also ask you one question. If you answer me, I will tell you by what authority I am doing these things. John's baptism — where did it come from? Was it from heaven, or from men?"


Matt 21:25-26

They discussed it among themselves and said, "If we say, 'From heaven,' he will ask, 'Then why didn't you believe him?' But if we say, 'From men'-we are afraid of the people, for they all hold that John was a prophet."
NIV

The place where truth is the highest authority of the day which is also "Today" and forever will be should be the only thing that matters.

Such testimony can only be proved true as though it were an entry made about you within the books which also reside in heaven.

What was your last agreement made and were you true as if to yourself?

Being transformed and enjoying the process of being transformed can be worlds apart. One speaks to suffering and the other the denial of your self because you do "Know your right(s)".

On far to many occasions as said believers we've seemed to have fallen in love with the mystery of the words "All things being equal". Being "seen as" and considering only ourselves as something of greater importance is the root of our own corruption.

Either way those rights of others "Should be seen" as if they were your own. What are your God given rights?

If you don't know them how can you share in their benefits having been expressed as if "Equally"?

Man attempts to establish his own rights yet "Will" they hold and support his accompanying theories beyond the grave?

Making room for the enemy

This is yet another lengthy post so be warned you might want to get that cup of coffee before you start reading.

I'm glad you've stopped by to share a moment of your time. I pray that you'll be enriched having taken that time to share some of my thoughts.

In order for a person to judge someone as an enemy (offender) they must not only understand their own "rights", but also the importance of the sovereignty which governs and reinforces those same "rights" equally.

Man seems to have a sweet love/hate relationship in having established rules and laws. Somehow laws bring him comfort as long as he thinks himself innocent of NOT having violated those same rules/laws.

Many today also seem to enjoy unspoken laws which are supposed to define what a good relationship is and how it mutually performs.

There also seems to be a favorite past time man has and that being "Figuring a way around having the enforcement of those same laws also to apply to himself"? Enough so that is to where he always finds himself innocent of an offense.

What if there was only one "right" available to everyone?

One to where it's written as though "All men get to enjoy the thought of being innocent of any offense towards another"?

It's enforcement being, should this one right of another ever get violated it then becomes "Pay Back" time to those who've been offended?

Let's just say out of generosity we mutually decided to add that we're all entitled to what many have fallen in love with as "Happiness". That is to suggest "finding ourselves happy and at all times"?

If you could then somehow find a way to properly manage these mandated allowances you could then "Truly" enjoy the opportunity within the "Freedom" to pursue both?

I think where many might get lead astray would be due to their individual interpretation of the hinge word as if their "Freedom" to do so.

I think many assume the word "Rights" and "Freedom" are interchangeable in their use and once misinterpreted they get dragged kicking and screaming into the light of their individual and "Proper" context

What if all rules and laws were reestablished as if only your God given "Right"? How would they read if they were considered to be the conditions under which you then get to "Enjoy" the continuation of your endeavor to be found Innocent of an offense towards another person"?

How would you be found and if found guilty of offending someone else, how could you be cleared of the offense?

One last consideration, "What if the person of God were to be considered as one that you could also offend"?

If you were the only one determining whether or not something you said or done was an offense would the matter then all boil down to whether that someone was also a person that you want or are trying to have a "Close" relationship with?

The picture of an enemy and how one gets made should be starting to form right about now?

The easy choice would be to deny the offense ever took place. The second choice might be to try and hide the evidence that might prove you guilty and the third to somehow create a disguise for yourself so you could move about freely having been found guilty while trying to prevent being recognized by others.

What would be your plea be if all the above didn't work out like you planned and you were once again caught, tried and convicted? How many enemies do yo have now?

Do you serve time as if paying back to humanity what was stolen or do you serve the one that paid for and gave back to you the prior state of mind (freedom) as if you were once again  thought of as "innocent"?

Either way it gets asked the only one that can restore you through the process of extending forgiveness is the one that was considered innocent before your violated "Their" rights.

The completed cycle where repentance and true forgiveness meet in agreement looks nothing like it did before. One might suggest that forgiveness has its way while others the thought that having accepted the  repentance that was true lead to forgiveness.

Many serve time yet that's all they serve. Some abuse forgiveness and some make poor use of leniency (mercy) shown only to come full circle being found guilty as repeat offenders time and time again and are usually forever labeled as such by those that have been violated.

What is the habitual offenders model plea, "If you'll forgive me and show mercy, I promise that I'll never do it again"

How would you then see "Laws" as if the enforcement of such a "Right"? That single right as if it were the only God given right to where we then pursue the cause and importance of the innocent?

As if one people that value and uphold all efforts which are "For" the consideration of  those that deeply desire to be found as if "Innocent"?

So by now you've reached the conclusion that we've at minimum have all at least lied.

By most standards that accepted notion levels the playing field which then makes lying not such a big deal, right?

Maybe the consideration of a lie being the "Minimum" or "Minimal" petty crime is the root cause of those assumed greater crimes?

How many times have you ever found yourself offended, yet only after further time had passed you realized that someone had violated what "You" understand as your own said "Right(s)"?

Maybe it was your right to free speech as if your were denied "Your" expression of "Self"? Was your being denied an act of theft?

Maybe later evidence surfaced where you discovered someone to be a "Liar"?

Having believed their lie(s) while trusting the person, the physical evidence of the lie(s) then surface. It surfaces as the net result (theft) in their having taken something such as your wife, husband, child, property, honor or for heavens sake "Your Trust"?

I'm of the opinion that a "Lie" is simply an instrument used by a thief in order to get close enough to you or your property to where it can be more easily taken from you. Often times so that it might appear on the surface as if by way of your own immediate consent.

Maybe a thought "Friend" that managed themselves enough to where they got close enough to steal from you?

My point is that enough time had lapsed to where more specific knowledge eventually came your way which then presented the "Entirety" of the matter in a much different light.

Is that different light such where you somehow place yourself in the shoes of someone else even if only for a moment?

John 3:19-21
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

Maybe you've found yourself commenting about the offense of someone that isn't in you inner family circle.

As if to suggest unfair judgement where someone else's child got off easy in your opinion in your saying, "If that had of been me or one of us, they would have given the electric chair".

Maybe you were watching someone else's child on TV that had been rightfully caught red handed in a crime where you then just blurted out, "THEY deserve everything they get"!

It's easy to assume specific rights we seem to want to enjoy trusting, yet what if we individually fail to uphold those same rights by way of not leading those offended to their own "Justice'?

It's easy to say "Justice has been served" when we read where a once convicted rapist then gets raped when sent to prison or maybe we hear where the early released murderer that meets with his early demise?

When I say "Upholding the Rights" I'm suggesting the "Full" benefit's of justice being applied equally to others and at all times only because you refuse to let yourself off the hook when you've been proved to be the offender?

How close to the precise definition of "Accountability" does that come?

I'm not talking about "True" innocence in the face of a false accusation, I'm talking about being guilty of the charge (accusation) being presented?

Why are liars allowed off the "Hook" of justice? Is it because those judging have been proved to be liars at another time or are we're simply "Making room" for our own future lies told by not finding all "Liars" guilty?

One of many phrases which seem to have lost potency today in western culture is, "God given right".

What if after you read this you only later discover that it might be you that is the poor and needy which finds yourself in need of those same rights?

One might also see why believers are called to visit those in prison as if by chance they were only imprisoned because they were found guilty as charged? What if there were a prison for liars and not just thieves and murderer's, rapist and pedophiles?

Is the root offense of violating some one's right that cut and dried? As if to suggest there's a difference between the convenience store thief that robbed at gun point over and above the banker that steals from his clients? 

Is the root consideration more to do with the potential for "Violence" for which one gets handled more severely having each committed theft by taking? Or the root of the "Offense" is never addressed as severe enough to try and exterminate it? 

Did they both realized a gain as the net result? Is the only difference in that the banker lied instead of use a gun in order to realize his net gain? 


Prov 31:8-9
"Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute. Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and needy." NIV

It's easy to wink at situations when others need their rights upheld and supported, yet what if it were you instead?

A right is only as valuable as is the strength of its own governance. That governance being the extent to which said rights are being enforced.

What if God were devalued in the mindset of such a culture? That to mean the cultured perception of a "God" which provides said rights to mankind?

Rights which get mismanaged so poorly that it produces very little esteem towards His (Gods) opinion concerning established governmental oversight? Does it all boil down to the enforcement or the lack there of to where tolerance being carried forward in time then becomes the rule of the day?

I'm of the opinion that the unrighteous law makers won't write into law the same law they think God will find as an offense unless they too are at least presently willing to walk the same white line.

Writing a matter into law is one thing, yet anticipating the possible end result of ones own future action(s) is an act where the LAW gets abandoned from inception. In doing so in such a manner those scripting said laws have simply made room for others to follow behind. 

The closet or open homosexual won't right laws that would undermine their self perceived rights. Nor will the thieves changes laws which could prevent in the future a realized "Illegal" monetary gain for themselves.

I digress though as this is not about politicians as much as it the essence and evidence of a corrupt mind.

Far worse, what if a culture/society devalued to the right to where God ceases to be the dominate influence within the thoughts/decisions being made within this culture? Is this not robbery of a different color?

Liars don't just wake up one morning and decide they're going to lie to the surrounding world in order to get what they want and neither did the thief that robs at gun point.

Simply put each just found their own method of manipulating their surroundings in order to take what did not belong to them.

So, maybe the real question is "How small does a lie start out and how big do they get? Big enough to rob from the people that come to THEM because they're trusted or bold enough to where they come to YOU at gunpoint?

Many choose not to believe in a God which completely understands the importance of justice served, yet why do they trust more in man that is living Proof of the injustice being carried out here in the earth?

The rules have not changed, yet mercy is still available prior to the arrival of the pronounced sentence already given.

Don't just live for today and all that it holds, Live for the cause of the One that was innocent yet found guilty as charged by the judgment and reasoning of humanity.


Matt 27:3-4
When Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus was condemned, he was seized with remorse and returned the thirty silver coins to the chief priests and the elders. "I have sinned," he said, "for I have betrayed innocent blood." 
NIV


Mic 7:
Because I have sinned against him, I will bear the LORD's wrath, until he pleads my case and establishes my right. 
NIV

Many having refused the thought of the importance of a prophet today have also thrown out the sound of the prophets voice that might otherwise remind them of an offense that was and still is considered to be against the Lord.


2 Sam 12:13
Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the LORD." 
Nathan replied, "The LORD has taken away your sin.
NIV

Be thankful that God is not the respecter of persons. It would be a bad thought that as Our God, that He could somehow find also himself deceived by the persuasive expressions of men. 

Men which allow themselves to be deceived by their own devices having convinced themselves they are also a friend of God because of what they "Say" having managed to also see and know themselves well enough to get close.

Believe in Mercy and trust in Judgement, yet don't seat yourself as the jury serving sentence until you've understood what causes people to find and appreciate all that True mercy is and becomes.