Discernment, Thus Far Discerned

What does it mean to be called, but not chosen? What are the characteristics?

Is salvation conditionally secure or eternally secure? Or is that a false dichotomy?

The Lord never contradicts Himself, is all. He cannot deny His own nature, so is wholly consistent.

His ways aren't self-contradictory. Ever. Any seeming contradiction can only result from a lack of understanding: His ways are higher than ours, His thoughts higher than ours, and we can't possibly entirely understand them--to claim otherwise is to assert an equality with God, as sufficiently equipped to comprehend His infinitely transcendent manner: an impossibility, so effectively defaming Him by refuting His word: He is the one who has said His ways our higher than ours, His thoughts higher than ours. Infinite ways--by definition--can only (ultimately) be unfathomable, to a finite mind.

Yet, He has provided us with vast amounts of insight into who He is and how He is, through His inspired Word. And even more directly, in and through Christ. Still...assuming we're in a position to be able to sufficiently comprehend Him, as to pronounce absolute intellectual understanding of any of His more mysterious ways...seems as though it must entail assumptive references unto self-sufficiency, just per claim to have strictly intellectually discerned the mysteries of God.



I don't know, is the thing: All I can go with is what the Bible says and what the Lord makes clear. Reading, learning of certain matters, though--even doctrine--is sometimes accompanied by a Spiritual witness that something is slightly off, (thus requiring a deeper look, as to discern the Lord's truth in the midst).

Sometimes, such internal witness signifies wrong-mindedness or false response inherent of my own understanding of the concepts: Oftentimes, that's the case, in regard to doctrine--I have to let the Lord lead me away from prior-unconscious prejudices and out of faulty notions regarding concepts involved: a slow process, for sure.

That sort of situation is always the case when something read in Scripture raises any sort of offense or indignation--such response is now always accompanied by a Spiritual witness of wrongness, which must be given priority (unto discernment of what is wrong) despite any temptation to cling to emotional (self-justifying/self-preserving/self-centered) responses.

Also, whenever Scriptures are interpreted in such a way that they seem to entail contradictory concepts or commands, there simultaneously arises a Spiritual witness signifying something is at least slightly off: diligent, discerning study has always proven that my interpretation has been what's off-kilter, Never Scripture.

Having the internal witness of the Holy Spirit makes a big difference, in that way. Along those lines, in varying directions.

It's not the same as conscience. It's not the same as so-called "intuition."

The witness of the Holy Spirit is a living experience: ongoing, continual, always providing some amount of feedback, as unto further insight than would otherwise be experienced: even providing discernment between truth and almost truth, in such a way.

Conscience, alternately, only gives "feedback" when something has been done which rankles.

And "intuition" was only a periodic certainty of particular yet unexpected matters--not a constant source of direction, in all things. I still don't know what portion of "intuition" is of demonic origin, and how much of it derives from (inherently faulty, as apart from Christ) subconscious or unconscious perceptions which surface, periodically--there's probably a great deal of each.

Point being, the witness of the Holy Spirit, constantly guiding into truth, has been and is a necessary reality in the Christian walk (those who are led by the Spirit are the sons of God). I can't conceive of any other way to be kept safe from false prophecy, false teaching, and false doctrine: regardless whether falsehoods arise out of internal or external perceptions (ah, sanctification! Thank You, Lord, that You continue good work You began, until the day of completion!).

He continually clarifies, though: Particular matters that weren't much a concern, six months ago, are completely unthinkable, now. Truth is progressively revealed, is all, in accord with whatsoever prejudices and delusions have yet to be disbanded, over course of sanctification. And that is going to be different for every individual. The same Christ, though. The same Holy Spirit, for each of us. But differences exist between each of us, regarding what we must be healed and sanctified from...just as differences will exist in sorts of knowledge necessary to our function in the Body of Christ...and differences will be evidenced according to the diligence and discipline with which we apply ourselves to those truths, too, perhaps...this, according to distinctions in God's ordained, providential will for each of us.

As to the latter of those points, an example is constituted by Paul's descriptions of social/familial/behavioral characteristics of those who could be considered for roles such as bishop and elder: the point of listing distinct personal, familial requirements isn't as much a matter of the specifics listed (a worldly, as entirely pragmatic view), as it's a matter of requiring substantiated evidences of the necessary moral and spiritual characteristics possessed by persons potentially God-ordained to those ministries, as having been preordained to live in those such ways as may expressly evidence an uncommon spiritual and moral fortitude, they are already living lives (if perhaps superficially, seeming still yet) practically conformed to the moral requirements and spiritual responsibilities of the roles so described.

In regard to that example, however, it is not intended to imply that those referenced descriptors are thus exempted from being interpreted and practiced both literally and also according to an understanding of the Spirit in which they were initially proscribed...but...
...without discernment unto truth proffered by the Holy Spirit, the only interpretation possible is entirely literal, as solely intellectually, and potentially emotionally, derived.

That's the thing with false dichotomies. Obvious validity on either side skips and jumps its way to an assumption that such distinct possibilities must be mutually exclusive. Because a thing specifies one thing, it is often assumed that only what is specified is possible unto proper understanding. But, yeah--no. Lack of inclusion does not necessitate exclusion. Just because a=b, doesn't mean a/=c. Everything depends on so much more than what's readily obvious.

As, when it comes to God, there's always more than meets the eye--even the most discerning eye.

The only way to find resolution is to pursue Him with utter abandon.

Whether that leads to understanding certain mysteries...
...to unveiled depths of meaning in the seemingly arbitrary and mundane...
...to progressive revelations of the intricacies of knowledge interwoven throughout Scripture...

...He has said that those who seek Him with their whole heart will find Him...
...He has said that those with an undivided--a pure heart--will see Him...
.
..and in comparison to knowing Him--to seeing Him, as He is...
...desire for anything else is completely resolved into abject quiescence.

Then, unto a desire just to know more of Him.

One step at a time, is all.
As He leads.

The Lord bless you and keep you!