We've all heard the transparency word thrown around a lot lately. The thought of it landing at our front door, so to speak, is somewhat frightening. The thought that we're already transparent before God is considerably more concerning or it should be. My desire is to be right. One of the major roadblocks is assumption where it doesn't belong. A conclusion derived and conceived, aided by an assumption, may make for a tantalizing consumption, but can deliver undesired side effects to a persons ethical constitution. If there's a hill to die on, and many have already died on, don't make it on an assumption. I can't just assume I'm alright, when I know I'm not. I need the substitutionary atonement that Jesus provides. I want to be right. That's my desire, but more importantly, I want to be right with God. That's the hill I'll die on.
Friday, April 17, 2026
Assumptive Consumption
Some times I awaken with a thought that leads me on a sort of rabbit trail chase with hopes of catching some sort of resolution. Idolitive creedal worship bordering on the fringes of fanatical reasoning for the sake of exclusion of reasonable inclusion seems to be more of a marketing ploy that employs somewhat intimidating tactical methodology betraying objective reasoning. Pick and choose this day whom you will serve. Radicalize to employ means of marginalizing competing ideology; many times to the point of dying for. I can find myself definitively saying there are beliefs worth dying for with the obvious implication that this implies the obverse. I've seen that this will steer many people to simply employ an "I'm not religious stance", all the while betraying their position with religious zeal. What do I have to believe to bring peaceful resolution to my soul? We all long for it, but how can we achieve it? When do we pick up the sword and when do we lay it down? Is there ever a point when being right can be blinding reason all along; or to be right for corrective rational or just right for elevating an ingratiating ego? When does motive dominate or interfere with objective rational? Can being right for a wrong reason still be justifiable?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment