Understanding Disorder

When we consider physical reality prevalent at the expense of realization of the actual predominance of spiritual truths, we're not walking in a way which is balanced or given to truth.

Personally, I have so often struggled and fallen prey to a tendency to proceed according to what seems desirable without first seeking (and waiting upon) the Lord's direction--forsaking prayer, forsaking waiting upon the Lord's leading in favor of acting upon impulse and inclination, then making mental amends with such obvious discrepancy (in terms of obedience) by rationalizing that "surely it's not a big deal."

If it weren't indicative of a pattern of behavior, maybe it wouldn't be as big a deal--but, either way, sin is sin. And Lord has been so merciful as to allow an instance of this to presently be enough a thorn in my side as to have finally forced me to realize how consequential is this practice. I really hadn't thought it a big deal to make substantial decisions--so long as no one except myself was directly entailed--without seeking His direction, first. It's terrible, though. Sin may not always have an obvious traumatic effect, but I've been told again and again that even if not physically visible in the lives of others, the disorder it works is pervasive, regardless. Which makes for all the greater burden. So I'm the more deeply sorry for having acted without seeking His direction in the matter concerned. Whatever is His will, then.

Because, largely, the problem as it presently stands is one which only clearly epitomizes the core problem with obedience, on the whole, even of that tendency as has led to this present conundrum:

If something can be rationalized in process or post-hoc, then is legitimacy established merely inherent that such ability to rationalize legitimacy?
vs.
If the most obvious survey of stated terms conveys an explicit and concise meaning, then isn't the most explicit meaning the one which constitutes legitimate interpretation?

Two different matters, these. And, when vacillated between, they are utterly devastating in ways which I hadn't previously realized (and still am only vaguely aware). I committed the first error very blatantly, months ago, and am now suffering because I'm attempting to proceed according to the second tenet in a scenario which otherwise is apparently wholly ordered according to the ideology inherent the first.

The problem really is all about relativism versus absolutism. Can fundamental relativism be reasonably derived from absolutism? Or, in an absolute reality (i.e., one which exists), is the only possible proper derivative that which proceeds faithfully and diligently according only to an utmost consistence with such as are foremost and preliminary precepts as constitute the very nature of such truth's source--put another way, is rightness only truly so, so long as the utmost spirit of all truth is never deviated from, in both interpretation and practice?

Can I both do what I see and think is right according to my own understanding and simultaneously consider myself obedient to God, when He's made it very clear I'm to forsake my own understanding in favor of fully trusting and obeying Him?

And these are things...they are things which can't easily be related in word, alone. Because the spirit is so much deeper, more encompassing, it's difficult to convey even a sense of what it would mean to forsake understanding, so to trust God fully (which I'm still learning, quite obviously). Perhaps that such difficulty in conveying meaning is where confusion easily arises, though (as carnal understanding is still so heavily relied upon, that is):

Consider this:

God is so much more vast than we are--attempting to mentally reconcile what seem to be "apparent" contradictions (on our scale) in His ways and nature, when considering the workings of the universe and (more usually) individual instances in the lives of one another...if using only our own understanding to gauge these things...is an inherently illogical way of proceeding: Can the finite encompass infinity? Truth is, if we were to see and know all things fully in context of who and how He is, we would realize there are no contradiction but only such greater, deeper, and more expansive complexity to all which goes on that we are, even preliminarily, incapable of beginning to seriously understand how all things relate, as our finite perspectives are incapable of grasping (in all directions, time-wise and space-wise, simultaneous) such intricacies as are involved in this creation spoken from One who is eternal. Which is where forsaking our own understanding in favor of explicitly and implicitly trusting God simply must come in, as the only reasonable course.

Along which line is why walking according to the spirit is vital and non-negotiable to loving and obeying Christ, thus truly walking with Him, abiding in His love.

Just as, even with this present thorn of mine, insight has been gifted unto contrition, for having acted without truly, prayerfully seeking the Lord's will at the outset of matters...

...then it's all the more humbling to realize that my own traipse into such a relativistic (self-exalting, moreover) ideology doesn't deserve deliverance from receiving the same in kind, as response (whereas things mean what they mean, except when they're reinterpreted according to convenience). I am guilty of this, for having first acted without prayerfully seeking direction.

This action on my part wasn't an instance which required immediate action or involvement--I could have refrained from even entering the matter, could have delayed until a point of receiving clarion direction, as is at least (thankfully--not per my strength, but only His grace that it would be so...as evidenced all the more clearly, even now) often the course in matters which are moreso perceived as possible pursuits rather than vital activities.

I could have refrained from ever becoming involved had prayer preceded action, and yet I chose to act impulsively. I rationalized my endeavor as being well-intentioned enough as to warrant sufficient justification for proceeding, expecting that the Lord would surely make a way regardless my inherent incapabilities. I figured everything would be fine, because I meant well and had hopes of good to come as a result of endeavoring a particular course.

But it's still beyond me. And incapabilities have mounted. So the difficulty of withdrawal especially evidences my error for having attempted again to chart my own course. But this so much strikes as an instance of the same tendency to rationalize in process or post hoc (to the exclusion of seeking God's express will), as has ever taken hold of mankind: Regardless what explicit conditions most obviously exist, when it comes to application and interpretation of truth, it seems there's tendency to reinterpret regardless what's actually stated:

To add to or take away from whatsoever truths otherwise are express, explicit...rather, to interpret according to one's own understanding.

Just like Eve did, in the garden. She reinterpreted God's edict, according to her own understanding. Or otherwise, her restatement of His edict would have matched precisely to His. But it didn't. It was revised, according to what she considered implicit. Rather than clinging to the simplicity of only restating God's actual word, she added to it--even if unknowingly. At what point did sin begin, then? At what point did it actually occur?

Was it at point of express reinterpretation of God's actual words, as altered per the lens of personal understanding? Or was it upon further rationalization of such an understanding as then expanded to alter perception of reality, unto a decision to proceed according to those such cumulative rationalizations as constitute carnal understanding (which implicitly stands in direct opposition to the will of God)? Because, either way and any which, the decision was finalized and taken to heart before the action was accomplished. Those last thoughts prior to actually taking the bite...were just further rationalizations for acting, after having decided upon the course. Surely this which I am about to do will be fine, surely it's reasonable, and surely I'm justified in proceeding because...

There's such danger there.

In all things, when it comes to carnal understanding.

Problem is, we're not capable of saving ourselves or keeping ourselves from error, but so much our many tendencies are to strive to do precisely those things (save ourselves, save the world, save one another), despite the inherent illogicality and sheer impossibility of attempting. We cannot even know God, so to know truth...in our own strength, but only in Christ, as Christ gives revelation--even as per His Spirit's revelation of the truths in Scripture. And if we cannot know truth except for divine intervention, then what hope would we expect to have of bringing it to bear on circumstances, unto healing, reconciliation, salvation...except also for divine intervention?

Current consideration of this just does convict me of sin for acting upon my understanding in a not-insignificant matter, to the exclusion of seeking (unto receiving) His guidance, first and foremost. I have no excuse: He said to seek Him first, to forsake my own understanding, to be led by the Spirit. And I did the opposite of all those things, in an instance which is yet playing out strangely through finances. And it'll only be by grace that I'll refrain from proceeding similarly in future instances of temptation, on this count. He's capable, He's faithful, and I know He can. I pray that He will--that prayer will ever more and increasingly unto always and unfailingly be the first and constant pursuit, upon possible action in any direction (and in all instances, regardless).

None of us have excuse, on that count, really. But so often, when matters regarding "waiting upon the Lord" are discussed with others who know Christ and who are seeking to know and obey God's will...there seems immediately and hastily appended a warning, as though waiting upon His guidance to act might entail absolute refrain from doing any or all things necessary.

As though there are people who would refrain from eating, according to a "necessity to wait upon God's direction," if it were taken seriously that we're to wait upon Him. Or that people who would refrain from whatsoever other basic necessities, likewise, might in a moment be considered entailed in such a waiting.

This, though, as if there's a danger in waiting upon God. As though even waiting upon Him would be an impulsive, carnal act, which must be guarded against.

That indicates major weirdness, in terms of perception of what these things mean and in terms of who God actually is and how He says He intends to lead us and teach us. Weirdness is evidenced, in essence, as the very mentality which would warn against waiting upon God is actual evidencing a reliance upon a type of "fence law" method of pursuing and seeking to obey Him: warnings and restrictions are developed, established, and relied upon, in themselves, as a sincere attempt to refrain from sin and error per "established" methodologies, so as not to have to rely upon spiritual direction, empowerment, and moment-by-moment deliverance in the Holy Spirit (even as confirmed and received per heavy and constant reliance upon and reference to Scripture). These were things the Pharisees used to do, as to be able to keep themselves from "approaching" explicit sin: they'd describe things which would have to be transgressed prior to approaching actual sin, and ordain those things as also sinful...basically setting up a "fence" to try to keep themselves and others away from sin. Like with many of the traditions Jesus contested, they had gotten into such a habit of trusting their own understanding, they could describe the letter of the law to a "t," but failed to recognize the very lawgiver, incarnate.

Trusting our own understanding rejects acknowledgment of His faithfulness and sufficiency.

Such that, if it's really Christ whom we're seeking, there's no danger in waiting upon Him.
If it's the Christ of the Bible--who came incarnate--Immanuel, God with us...
...who died on the cross, bearing our sins...who lay three days in the grave, before resurrection to life which attests to His Sonship and also to our salvation in Him...
...to this Christ, who now and eternally reigns in heaven...

...if it's really Him we're seeking and serving...

...there's no a danger in terms of fringe madness:
His way is narrow. He keeps and guides His own, according to His good will and absolute sufficiency. He is the good shepherd.

So as far as particular distinctions, regarding what need be waited on in prayer and what He gives grace for to proceed regardless (according to what's already been established by Him or by what yet awaits another day for sanctification)...

...whichever of these ways, in waiting and acting: anxiety or confusion or uncertainty which incites in-process or post-hoc rationalization of a decision unto action shouldn't be a "thing" which constitutes any part of the process of obedience.

Anxiety isn't of Him, as it goes. Anger isn't of Him. Annoyance...pride...self-exultation...

...aren't of Him.

Obedience is.
Trust is.
Peace is.
Love is.

Repentance unto salvation is of Him.

Just as those who are His aren't given a spirit of fear, but of power, love, and a sound mind.

So, if anxiety is present, there's need to reflect upon who He is, the fact that His will is for good, and...in instances which don't require immediate action (things which are basic to survival would be ones requiring immediate action)...need for prayer until peace comes, prior to acting.

And if there is anxiety regarding matters which are basic to survival, that's fair indication of interference which isn't of God: There are a lot of attempted imposters, attempted interlopers, and those who would seek to destroy us, is all. So, if the matter regarding anxiety is central to health, well-being, or any of the like...don't listen to the anxiety, do what is necessary to survival, and pray to the Lord for deliverance from whatever is attempting to harm you. Anything which constitutes an apparent contradiction to what would maintain general well-being is seriously suspect--utterly evidencing need of strenuous testing and cross-examination of that such spirit, against the whole Bible, so to see whether it's of God. Because Jesus said to test the spirits. And John restated it. As to see whether it's of God, implicitly meaning that the Holy Spirit is also included in that process. The Holy Spirit is the only one I know which doesn't take offense at such prodding--no impatience, even, given that God's in control of time, too, so it's not a matter of ever rushing through things. He knows our frame. He knows we are weak and feeble and prone to inconsistency and faithlessness. He's long-suffering toward those who truly seek to know and obey Him. So, impatience and anxiety...not of God.

As far as all such testings and procedures and considerations go, still it can only be of Him that there's success in proceeding upon such a course. Which is whereby it's all the more astounding and wonderful to know He's given us Scripture with which to test and know these things, even as still known only according to leading of the Holy Spirit, then all the more ardently must we seek to see and know Him in truth, in the Word. The whole of Scripture.

We are to always remain fully submitted to His guidance, even in these ways, as seeking diligently through Scriptures to know Him and draw nearer to Him. And through prayer. Always, prayer. We wage war against wickedness, constantly, so we must draw near and stay near to Him. We must submit to Him, constantly.

Apart from Him, even our most well-intentioned motives are ruinous (how much more need we to seek His guidance, then), apart from Him and His intervention in all things. Whereas He...He works all things to good, for those who love Him and are called according to His purpose.

Even such that sin can be brought to repentance, yielding further sanctification, a deeper desire to submit in obedience, and a greater realization of absolute ineptitude in terms of what it means to keep His ways.

In our weakness, He's made strong, though. Our inability, our inherent incapabilities...when surrendered to Him...only evidence all the more clearly how great is His sufficiency, how vast is His mercy, and how wondrous the grace lavished upon us who surrender, as we are brought into the light of His love and shaped unto obedience to laws which once were despised.

None of us deserve mercy. None of us.
We all wandered from righteousness.
We all struggle against Him, even for having ever sinned...let alone for continuing to do so in any way, no matter how "seemingly slight" according to our minuscule understanding.

But no sin is small.
Any sin equates to an irreconcilable difference, except that Christ made way for us to be reconciled.
Even the "smallest" sin cost the highest price imaginable, moreover: God Himself took on flesh and bore that very sin, unto death, that it might be forgiven.

And yet, don't we tend to think of them along a spectrum? As though some were greater, some weightier, some more severe?

Some are more blatant travesties of morality, being overt and horrendous abuses of others, directly impacting us in the physical realm in obvious ways: traumatizing victims and even whole societies with the violence and depravity of given acts. Yet the price paid for that sin, unto reconciliation, was the same as paid for "white lies" told as part of one's requirements at work (perhaps oft even rationalized as acceptable means to an end).

Neither is good, as both constitute a rejection of God's goodness (and the perfection of His ways), is the thing. Before God, both are travesties: (and, incomprehensible as it may seem) He paid the same price for each of these. Each of them constitute irreconcilable difference, irreconcilable separation from Him, total rejection and despising of Him, apart from seeking mercy through Christ.

Even as, again--some sins are so heinous they can't bear mentioning, while others might be taken for granted as "the way things are," in a given culture. But the cost is the same, ultimately, and the havoc wreaked upon the earth and within society...ultimately, in many ways, has the same cumulative effect: disease, disaster, distress, disorder, and continually, increasingly...death.

Death of the spirit. Death to the soul. Death of reason. Death of morality. Death of conscience. Physical death. Manifest on varying of these such levels, to varying degrees, at varying intervals...but compounding, incrementally mounting.

Apart from Christ, that is.

So, looking at all things as though there's somehow an actual, manifest separation between our actions and spiritual well-being...is a very disjointed way of conceiving of reality. Eve fell prey to this, having evidently begun to rely upon her own understanding (to the exclusion of trusting God) in even being willing to contemplate the questions presented by the so-called serpent. In considering those questions, she effectively questioned God--undermining His authority, His sovereignty...the truth of who He is, what He had said.

God didn't suffer because of this, though. He is self-sufficient, whereas we are not. He doesn't need anything. We do. And we disrupted order, by questioning His sovereignty. The disorder wrought death. Spiritual and physical, ultimately.

Same goes, now. He created things according to His own order. He maintains them. We are part of that creation. We are subject to those laws. We are subject to the order we were created to inhabit. When we act against that order, we only disturb ourselves and those around us.

So, looking to ourselves to fix the disorder we've wrought...and those who preceded us have wrought...really makes no sense.

He is the only one who can restore order.

Looking anywhere else for answers is only finding further distraction, working deeper disorder.
Lord, have mercy.