John 2/3

So, I left of at John 3:8

Nic says, and I'm assuming he's speaking without guile or cynicism considering how Jesus responds, "how can these things be?"

Jesus is like "you're a smart guy, a religious professor, but you still don't get it? This is reality, We talk about what we know and what we've seen, but you don't think it's true" Is Jesus speaking in the royal we here? It seems so, because this is a sort of (gentle?) accusation against the religious teachers of the day. He says that he told Nic about earthly things and he wasn't getting it, how would he understand heavenly things. So, salvation is an earthly occurrence, as real and natural to God as birth is to us.

He says that no one has gone up into Heaven except the guy who came down from heaven, himself, the Son of Man. I'm not entirely sure about this part, except that I know that all of John is Jesus as God, and surely it is a heavenly trait to be able to dwell in and leave heaven at will. Then, on the tails of claiming to be God he refers to Moses and gives prophesy of his crucifixion.

Maybe, he says that he knows that Nic won't get it, but then it's like, "don't you get it, I'm God, I know about Heaven because I've been there, and like was prophesied, I'm going to die. (and then we go into those oh-so-famous verses) "because God so loved the world." This is directly connected to statements about Jesus imminent death, and to heavenly things that Nic won't understand. God gave his only Son. CS Lewis talks about it like Jesus steaming forth from the father, always a product of him always will be, a constant state of coming forth while being bound with. So he was the first born of all creation by his essence of coming forth from the father, but there was never a time when he was disconnected nor a time when he did not come forth from the father, so he is first Born and also God, From the father and equal with the father. It's whoever believes in the Son will not perish but have everlasting life. One thing you see throughout the Bible is that when people realized that Jesus really was who he said he was, they were usually on bended knee before him. Like that scene in the last episode with the 9^th doctor on Doctor Who, where Rose comes out of the TARDIS carrying the entirety of the time vortex inside herself and she says that she sees all that has been and all that will be and that she creates things and ends things and alters time and the Doctor, seeing her and knowing what she is, drops to his knees before her. There's a lot of "you really are the Son of God." And then people follow him. So, then, believing isn't simply acknowledgement, believing is "getting it," is realizing that this is a big deal, this is something to dedicate your life to. It's also not about just believing in 'God' but in Christ. The Jews believe in God, but they don't know Christ.

Then he says that God didn't send him here to condemn the world, but to save it, through him. This was the manner of the salvation God was offering to everyone. He then says that whoever believes is not condemned, but whoever doesn't is already condemned. So, there's the duality of believing is a changing of mind, saves you, but you're also damned beforehand when you don't believe. You were already condemned, but you can be un-condemned through belief in Jesus Christ. Then he says "and this is the judgment." Maybe "and this is the truth that is declared after all the argument are set forth," "the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their deeds were evil." He already knew that most people would reject him, because they preferred their dark hidey holes, where things weren't exposed, because next he says "for everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come into the light, lest his deeds should be exposed." I know that when I read this I think 'oh, but people do evil in the light all the time now.' And they didn't before? They sacrificed their children to idols, they reveled, they fed people to lions, they soothsaid. All in the light of day, all government sanctioned. But this is what they do, they defend it, they get defensive about it, they don't want it examined or looked at. I think that is a kind of hiding in itself. I think this hiding becomes particularly clear when the gospel is brought into account. Then people want to leave, or they become almost violent in their defense. See, the world is dark, so they do their deeds in darkness, but the gospel exposes them and they don't like that. They prefer to do their deeds in darkness at light of day, rather than be exposed. "but whoever does what is true comes into the light, so that it may be clearly seen that his deeds have been carried out in God." Those who serve are not shy about the light. They want others to know, not of his or her own deeds but of God who made them happen. How significant that we want to hide our own evil in darkness but we wish for light on deeds that are not ours alone when we do what is true.

Also, I assume someone else was there since it got written about. Either that or Nic converted and later told an apostle. Though, I assume that the timing of Nic's visit would probably put Jesus with his apostles.

A disection of John 3 as much as I am able

My father says that Jeremiah is the most difficult book for him, or that's what he said last night, because it's a real book, he said, and the prayers were real. It's about God smiting people, and suffering and fear. Apparently Jeremiah got sawn in half or something.
So far...I don't know what book is the most difficult. Maybe Song of Solomon, because it goes so counter to what I know of love, and existence, and makes me to hope for things. Sometimes it feels like being hopeless is better. But it's not, is it?
John starts with Nic, who has apparently heard that Jesus is doing a lot. I'm guessing he was speaking for God more and doing more miracles than the average messiah claimer. Nic was a leader, and probably known for his learnedness and piety, not some peabody assistant, and Jesus not only caught his attention but impressed him enough that he believed that it was, in fact, God who sent him.
So, then the teacher calls Jesus, who's had no seminary training, teacher and says that God has to be working through him. Then Jesus says to him he needs to be born again to see God's kingdom. This also implies that Nic, though seeking, wasn't born again. I also want to point out here that once Jesus started his ministry he was proactive, and even as far back as the wedding his mother knew what he was capable of. He trashed the temple, he did all these miracles, and then he told Nic what he needed to do before he even asked.
Nic, who no doubt had seen Jesus do, or heard of him doing, some pretty wild things, was probably envisioning this guy pushing him back into the womb. He also wants to be born again. He understood that that was something good, something he wants. He asks "how's that going to work, since I'm old?"
So, Jesus tells him that baptism with water and the Spirit will be what sends him to heaven. So, does that mean that you have to be physically baptized to be saved? I'm sure the Church of Christ would say that, but there are plenty of other verses that don't include baptism in requirements for salvation. Could the kingdom of God mean something other than Heaven and citizenship in God's family? Like, could Nic only need to evolve his faith that next step? To accept that the savior had come rather than reject his claims? If he was predestined did God know that he would hear and accept? Did he even accept? Because it never says that later.
He says that Nic shouldn't be surprised about the born again thing because the wind blows where it will. Basically, "why are you trying to figure out how this works, somethings just happen that way and that's the way it's willed and you don't get it but that's the way it is. So, being spiritually born is....lost my train of thought....something that you can't get. You feel it's effect but beyond that you can't really get it.
Thus ends verse 8.

I finally put out my resume

Yeah, and it only took me five months to do it. Geez, I feel like a shmuck. I just needed the proper motivation, and the confidence to put myself back out there, and that wasn't going to happen until it happened. Well, now it's happened and I'm having to fight not to freak out. Like, really freak out. I've gotten my fist handful of job offers. Right now they're not looking too hot. One was for 2.2-2.3 million won a month. That's better than my last job. My lowest possible pay would be 2.2 million won a month. I worked for 2.1 last year. I'm more experience and more educated this year. I'd prefer 2.4 though. I mean, I'm really going to do it. No lying around in my parents' house forever. I'm getting another job and I'm getting a life again. And, since there seems to be about as much possibility of finding a husband here as there is abroad (next to none, thank you), I might as well go abroad, where at least I have a life, and a purpose, and something to distract me from that yawning whole where I'm-a-wife should be.
So far only Korea has offered a job. I am considering shoving aside my work loyalty and finding a job, and then finding a better job. Though if I did find a better job I'm sure I'd be sufficiently guilty about it that it would hardly feel like a better job for months. Different people pay their penance in different currencies. Mine is quite obviously the currency of guilt. I think it's absolutely possible that, were I to hate a man and wish him dead, and then he died and I was accused of his death that I would plead guilty of the murder even if it wasn't my own hand which had done it. Or, I'd be sorely tempted to, except that then a true murderer would go free and that would be on my conscience too. It's difficult to say what I would do...
The advantage to such a thing is that it makes me a very loyal employee, and relatively easy to manipulate if you know how I feel. This is why I try not to say that I feel guilty about things, people like to use that kind of stuff against you. I've also found that they get upset when they try to use it and fail. I do have points I will not bend on, no matter that I feel so guilty that I can imagine Hell licking at my heels. People don't usually get that either.
All of this is brought about by my reminiscing about my last job. I certainly hope the new one is less stressful. I hope I am better able to cope with the stress. Something besides migraines would be nice. Indigestion, for example.
Well, I think that's all for now. I have to go figure out how to look brilliant in print.

One Book Review a comment and three Partials

So, I finished Hunting Ground by Patricia Briggs. I give it a "Hey, that was a pretty good book!"

I particularly like...the characters. Really, I think her characters are more likable, believable, and forgivable than many other characters. I like that Mercy isn't an all tough as nails bady bad ass girl. I like that she can be feminine sometimes. Quite frankly I don't think most women are half as bad ass as characters like, say, Anita Blake, and while it's fun to pretend that you could be like her because then you'd be in control and you'd be safe in a world that routinely victimizes our sex, there's also a disconnection, because most of us really aren't like that. Some of us not even a little. So, I like Mercy. I like that she has a job. So often characters don't have jobs and I, due to a recent theory, think it kind of subtly influences the idea that if you're special and have an interesting life than you shouldn't have a job. It may also be a writing cop out. I will make the exception in this book, with Anne, who is a massively real character and who I adore. Sometimes being a home maker or a husband-helper isn't a bad thing. That can be career enough in itself.

I particularly like the Charles. I like all of Mrs. Briggs main male characters. They are flawed but one thing they're not is entirely selfish. I found myself reading the book and wishing I could meet the real life version of this man, or of Bran, or Angus. I never felt such a sentiment while reading any of Laurel. K. Hamilton's books. Ok, maybe I wanted to meet her Nathanial, but that was just because the poor guy needed a hug or something. Nor was I particularly interested in meeting Christine Feehan's characters. I mean, realy, who wants to meet an overly possessive, super powerful, domineering, stalker. Soul mate or no, I'll pass on that.

I am impressed with Charles' patience in the book, and his intense desire to protect the woman he loves, to do what is best for her. I am equally impressed by Briggs presentation of his failure. There's a sort of give-and-take between the characters that I don't normally see in books, and I found myself thinking 'this, this is a relationship'.

I think my favorite parts of the book were:
"He let her play as she would for a while before catching her hands.
"Hey, lady wolf," he said breathlessly, " we need to wake up your other half before we take this any farther.""
and
"So you can tell me exactly what an Omega is - something that my lads haven't quite managed to explain satisfactorily yet. I would like something more than 'you make us happy,' which is the best they have managed so far. My lovers tell me that, and that is good, no? My wolf pack - who are mostly men, and I do not swing that way - tel me such things, and it doesn't sound too good to me. 'you bring us joy' is even worse, so I stopped asking. I need to know more, yes?"
His pained look was so exaggerated she couldn't hep laughing."

In the mean time I have also finished rereading Blood Bound. Maybe some time this weekend I'll pull out Moon Called and replace it with the others I've finished. Blood Bound is a good book but since I know what happens in the next, and have an idea of what happens in the book it felt a bit like a prelude. So, due to my bias I won't comment other than to say Mercy is one freaking lucky coyote.





So far I am about 50 pages into The Gargoyle by Andrew Davidson.

It feels like one of those things I had to read in my modern lit class. Well written and well researched, but that's where my compliments end. The story itself is not necessarily interesting, and the character has yet to make himself appealing or redeemable. It reminds me of that short story I read that themed: don't try to save anyone because you'll just make it all worse. I understand that my response could be in part to my world view, but really, he watches a man fight to get his life back after horrible burns and stay positive and he's offended and sarcastic and bitter. All I could think was ass hole. Really, an ex-porn star turned porn producer. A drug addict from a messed up child hood. A man who had no redeeming value whatsoever, and not because of his messed up childhood, simply because. Right no he has no empathy, no higher feelings than selfishness and self-pity, no self control, no interest. Something's got to happen or I won't be reading past page 100.
The real advantage to the book is that it's written in flawless 1st person so reading a few pages gets me in the mind set of first person before I start working on my own stuff.

In light of the disappointing nature of the previous book I've also started Reserved for the Cat by Mercedes Lackey. Apparently it's the fourth (fifth?) in a series, but at this point seems to easily stand alone. I'm on page 16. A cat and a brownie have been introduced and our main character just got fired from the ballet. So far it is neither good nor bad, nor interesting, nor boring. I picked up the book because Jody Lee did the cover art. I suppose this is the result.






I'm also about half way through Mastering your Metabolism by Julian Michaels. Apparently I have failed to master because I've gained nearly 16 pounds since I first started reading the book. Of course, it would help if I actually followed it's advice. :-p The book itself is good, thorough, informative, and not difficult to follow. My weight gain is due to moving to the US from Asia and then Europe, moving back in with my parents, and showing a lack of self-control and self-discipline. Though, since following the book's suggestion to go with Organic dairy and meat my cycles have decreased in intensity and I have less leg hair. Interesting.

A Quote for when the Heart Grows Faint

" What are you to yourself? worthless? vile? empty?

What is Jesus to you? precious? lovely? all your salvation? all your desire?

What is sin to you? the most hateful thing in the world?

What is holiness to you? most lovely? most longed for?

What is the throne of grace to you? the most attractive spot?

What is the cross to you? the sweetest resting place in the universe?

What is God to you? your God? your Father? the spring of all your joys? the fountainhead of all your bliss? the center where your affections meet?

Is it so? Then you are a child of God!

Those low views of yourself ... that brokenness, that inward mourning, that secret confession, that longing for ... more spirituality, more grace, more devotedness, more love, does but prove the existence, reality, and growth of God's work within you.

Cheer up, precious soul!

That soul never perished, that felt itself to be vile, and Jesus to be precious!"
(Octavius Winslow, "Evening Thoughts")
(Found it on Boundless.org)

Sometimes it amazes me how smart people were hundreds of years ago. All we usually hear are the bad things, or, conversely, the idea of "the good old days," but it wasn't like that. There were good things and bad things, stupid people and brilliant people, greedy people and amazingly gracious and humble people.

I am particularly grateful for this wise person, who lived so long ago, because this quote has settled much of the turmoil that totally dominated my heart in the last couple of months.