I Lied

I lied to my daughter, whom I worship. If you knew her, you would too. I mean, you'd worship, not lie. Or maybe lie too. They go hand in hand. I told her the job application was going well, that I was busy writing. I *was* writing, but not the application. My answer was intentionally misleading so I recruited her involvement - making the lie all the more damnable. I don't know. Maybe all lies do that... "You were a fool to believe me."

For Christians, sins are bad (some, very bad) but we are saved from its effects (hell, let's say) through faith... and maybe some good works. This is an area of debate, likely because the exact number of good works is not specified. Or maybe because someone once offhandedly quipped, "rotten food for hungry people doesn't count." We can't get the quip out of our heads. Any case, sin IS forgivable. But in one verse, Matthew 12: 31-32, (that's 2, but still - not a real popular idea) the Apostle tells us that there is an "unforgivable sin." Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. This makes some folks (this author?) uncomfortable so they say it was added by backslidden heretics in the 3rd century to support the dogma of Apostasy. To support *that* they say that it just doesn't "sound like" Mathew. I think maybe Mathew just had an argument with his ex-mother in law. I don't sound "like me" when I'm around her (MY ex-mother in law). Any case, there are some that argue these verses actually mean we should emulate Jesus... wear sandals everyday. Others argue that "of course we should emulate Jesus" and He drank only from a gourd. Gourd drinking's the thing. I'm joking, of course, but there ARE disagreements. Some are sillier than others. Jesus did and said a lot of things but he didn't specifically address the unforgivable, the "Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit." Sheep, goats, fig trees, Pharisees he covered, but nothing on all that. Seems to me that he didn't like phonies, in fact had some rather harsh words that didn't exactly "sound like Him," but nothing on the unforgivable (well maybe once).

Thanks to the technology of the printing press, you now know these questions and arguments exist and might go on forever. We can, when faced with matters of eternal life and hell (we must if we really care at all), consider the opinions each of these opinions present. We must be clear on things like the faith and works, unforgivable sin, efficacy of indulgences or nailing Satan in the head with an ink bottle. Let alone words nailing to a door (that immediately get rained on, smear, and get completely unintelligible) and so on. The complexity must be carefully considered by the serious Christian pierced by the Light of the Word, Tried by the Spirit, Tested by their Fruits. Complex denominations, schisms, branches, animosity, wars, torture, and men's clubs (drinking away the complexity) may or may not result. This is important stuff. There might be too much ground to cover. What to do?

Well... the pope's ex-cathedra infallibility has been called into question. More recently called into question is the infallibility of Holy Spirit infused interpreters of scripture. Several of them have been found to be in disagreement amongst themselves and sorting out the Spirit's contribution has been problematic, disrespectful, and perhaps blasphemous. Issues with declarations attributed to lesser respected spirits are suspect as well. Extreme mediums, clouded clairvoyants, proof deprived prophets, rock readers, doomsday describers, helpless healers, paranormal prestidigitators -- not one has collected The Amazing Randi's One Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge. You'd think a charlatan could retire on a million. But James Randi is dead now, so "I can't do the challenge! I would if I could!"

So back to the Holy Spirit for a bit. These tired eyes have seen tongue speaking, hand raising, prophesy proclaiming Holy Spirit people , laying hands on ( freshly praised infused hands) and then publicly shaming, a wheelchair bound believer who clearly (we were assured) lacked enough faith to get his ass out of the wheelchair. I might not understand enough of the secret ways of the Spirit to properly understand that event - so I will understand if you aren't moved by it. They could have been a few hands short, or whatever. So, I'll share another vision. Perhaps it was *my* lack of faith, crossed arms, somewhat disapproving posture, or inappropriate vantage point (I had circled away from the pressing throng) that causes me to misunderstand (to this day!) the wink I got from a preacher who was otherwise occupied with the casting out of demons from my friends. And I probably misunderstand the time my lukewarm presence likely dampened the spirits ability to extract enough funds from my seat-bound friends in order to launch the hospital ship on its way... to wherever, I can't remember. Likely cause of the funding delay? the unacceptable smell of my offering of faithlessness. What other explanation could there be? My friends and I had been instructed to remain seated (spirit says) until enough love offerings had been procured. The transfer was likely made, in short order, when this faithless spirit signal jamming sinner stood up and, not being immediately transformed into a pillar of salt... walked out the door. With demons, Without wheelchair, empirically verifiable walking was observed. I know this to be a fact because a damning comment was announced by the microphone wielding, stage elevated hospital ship stockers. And I was just being considerate! The comment was ignored (or so I hoped). Withered leaves collect at my feet. Memories make my heart ache and as the poet said, "You've Never Seen Everything." Eventually, I had seen enough. So enough reverie, back to the important topic... Wikipedia, or whatever this essay is supposed to be about.

Over the objections of beer distributors and men's clubs, another technology arose that should put an end to squabbling and strained thought. From Albert Gore's internet comes the story of that pinnacle of technologies, prophesied by Douglas Adams, unprecedented in scope and breath, the resurrection of the glorious stature of the library of Alexandria... Wikipedia. For the Christian, this is like having the Council of Trent, the College of Cardinals, and the Magistrates of Salem all rolled into one convenient web interface. For the rest of the fallen world it's actually better than that. Any thinking (or not; Buddhists for example) person with an internet connection can participate. Summary: Contributions are pureed in a word processor and distilled into collective truth. Details: Contributions, perhaps "arguments" in the best sense of the word, ("Best sense" refresher - Does not include condescension, animosity, screaming, commercials, stock ticker, etc. Does include dialog, discussion, compromise, consensus, reciprocal consideration, humility, and ego softened reconsideration) are conducted behind the public face of each topical page ensuring (yes, I said it... "ensuring") that edits to the content of the topic are complete, reflect remaining controversies and disagreements fairly, are free of commercial interest, are descriptive in tone, an so on. The edits to a page are largely made by experts who are furiously interested in how the subject of their interest is portrayed in the most accessible format never conceived by Alexandrians. Experts will do this, go figure. Real experts, if you believe in that sort of thing (Siri apparently does) don't lie. Incidentally, the Wikipedia project is NOT funded by endowments, granted by governments, or captured by corporate control. You can google that. And yes, Wikipedia's asking for donations is legit. Every year more than 80 million bucks accumulate from 15 dollar (on average) donations given by readers like you.

Wikipedia exists in nearly 300 languages across more than 45 million articles. Projects reach more than 1 billion devices a month. More than 200,000 editors contribute to Wikipedia every month. Read 15 billion times every month, about 6,000 times every second, Wikimedia sites are accessed by more than 1 billion unique devices. Because they have a strong commitment to privacy, (or are just too damn lazy and that's doubtful) they don’t track unique visitors to Wikimedia sites. Huh? Right I know. Weird. Even if you've never contributed you can read it, or parts of it.

Most non-experts just read parts. Incidentally, there are churches springing up that are quite adamant about the actual definition of "unforgivable sin." They preach to anyone that has ears, "if you don't contribute to the Wikimedia, in some fashion, you WILL go straight to Hell"... so they say. Sometimes they elaborate... hell's unquenchable fires are fueled by the time dried, crackling books of learned, but incompletely enlightened, scholars and prophets. The fire, an unrelenting reminder of conscious and hardened resistance to the truth, will, shortly after your oh-so-immanent-and-inevitable demise, bring you face to face with the truth... for all eternity. But hell, that's just some crazy splinter faction churches located in Maine with smattering presence in some justice obsessed, retribution minded third world countries. Me? I'm a "part reader" of the Wikipedia. I haven't read it all and certainly not the commentaries. But I would say a fair approximation of truth is distilled in what I've read so far.

Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is conscious and hardened opposition to the truth, "because the Spirit is truth" (1 John 5:6). Conscious and hardened resistance to the truth leads man away from humility and repentance, and without repentance there can be no forgiveness.

That's not actually from the Wikipedia. Turns out Wikipedia's dedication to the truth has resulted in a page that is very complex and really doesn't give a definitive answer. I'm not sure if I've done the eternal sin or not. I think I might have and, truth be told, I'm a bit scared.

I read a book (truth be told, I listened to it... some of it) by a guy who writes about how consciousness might have evolved. Both his writing of the book (demonstrated above) and my "reading," were probably a waste of time. People generally think it is God who allows us think about our thinking. This is what separates us from animals. Or whatever. Depending on your take on "truth." I recently started to notice something. People often think of themselves. People, it's safe to say, are "self involved." Some might even say "self-absorbed." (This is getting pretty close to non-safe conversation so I won't say "Self-Obsessed." People should keep observations like that "to themselves.") Any case, I think, and I'm just sayin - some people, from my observations, and I could be way off here, this is just my opinion... are pretty self-consumed - as I see it. Being enchanted with *self* consciousness, people are not usually thinking about what they really should be thinking about. Namely...me. I'd just like to take a moment here, and state for the record, "this really hurts." I've also noticed that every morning my adorable girl sends me a new "heart" emoji. You'd think that would be enough, but I want more.

Bad thought happens. Bad action often follows. Following that, some people apologize... they say "I'm sorry." Sometimes, truth be told, people mean it. From the silent center, the heart of hearts, the apology comes from so deep down It's a vertigo infused space. The dimly lit subterranean cave. A corner of the eye place - occasionally noticed - where thought, spreading from a single drip, echoes up. Birthed in a mirror-still-pool now mysteriously disturbed. Around mysteries in ancient pictographs, vaguely evocative smells, far away sounds, the touch of faint breeze, a silence is broken. In this vulnerable moment, the whole world seems to be teetering, holding its breath.

Some people take advantage of this vulnerable moment to exact the burnt offering they are entitled to - considering the original infraction. Apology is insufficient. In fact, now and for the foreseeable future, it is so grievously deficient and irrelevant that it will be completely ignored. In fact... it will be shamed. I'm sorry provokes the words "you should be!" The definitive tone and simultaneous stare at your subterranean space adds, "because I see you better than you do." Did you ever do anything like that? Tell me the truth young man. Tell me the truth young lady.

JUDGEMENT Right