An Elegy for Uncle Jimmy

The Throne Room

Meredith L. Peel

I traveled to the Throne of God
bearing a burden of fiercest love,
and having loved and lost, I asked:
“What, my God, do you desire?”

Coupled with a fiery breath,
swift and loud came the reply:
“RIGHTEOUSNESS,” my God said.
My face burned; my heart fell.

Before a judge holy as He,
none could stand to plead his case.
Turning homeward, burden heavy,
His voice followed: “Ask again.”

Again to the Throne I turned,
with heavy heart, and trembling voice.
But once again I made my plea:
“What, my King, do you desire?”

“Faithfulness” - a gentler breath -
yet strong enough to carry off
those faithful ones I’d stowed away
within my burden of fierce love.

Once more I turned toward my home,
a lighter burden on my back.
To my surprise, pursuing me,
He called, “Ask once again, My child.”

And turning to the Throne I asked:
“What, my Lord, do you desire?”
A gentle whisper, His reply:
“Reconciliation.”

And at this word all who remained
in the great burden of my love
compelled me forward to His throne
to be released upon His feet.

And when at last I turned to go,
beneath my feet I saw a fire.
I cried out, fearing, for those souls
I had entrusted to His care.

Before my question, His reply:
“I desire that ALL of Mine
be reconciled, and be refined.
For holiness awaits all who
withstand My holy fire.”

My heart now still, His message clear,
my burden now at home with Him,
I wept with joy and sang my thanks,
ready now to be refined.

And passing over that great fire,
His spirit spoke these words to me:
“The heat is great,
My love still greater,”
and heart at peace, I returned home.

This Mystery

Having heard repeatedly that I need to get back to blogging, even though the book study has gone on hiatus, I am back at the drawing board. Fortunately, something of potential interest to my few readers has presented itself to me, so I pass on the mystery to you.
Sometimes we end up with connections to a person we have never met and will never meet through weird coincidences. I once bought a neat looking old book with a handwritten note in it stating who it belonged to and that she had died by her own hand. Flipping through it later I discovered that a clipping of her obituary was enclosed. A neat bit of history purchased for a few cents at a garage sale. I'm not even certain if the folks I bought it from were themselves connected to the woman. They lived next door to my great uncle in Baton Rouge, but I don't think they're still in his neighborhood, so I guess I will never know.
Of course, it's somewhat silly to say I'll never know. I suppose in this day and age, I choose not to know. The world is open to me. With this woman's obituary, I have an even greater opportunity to investigate her life than ever before.
Years later I purchased a suit of bedroom furniture at a used furniture store, and while moving it, I discovered something in the chest of drawers. We had all of the drawers pulled out and back inside the furniture, I found a certificate for a $25 US savings bond. I've sold the furniture since then, but I put that savings bond somewhere. I would love to try and find who it belongs to. If I remember correctly it was dated in the 60s. Someone might enjoy having that bond given back to them if I could ever find out who it belongs to...
But onto this mystery. Shortly before graduating from Samford, I was in the library looking through the discard books that are free to a good home at Auburn but cost 50 cents at Samford. I picked up a 1962 (first edition) copy of Steinbeck's Travels with Charley. Fresh off my thesis on Steinbeck's East of Eden, I was enamored with this author and I thought I would enjoy having an original print of this book. Truth is, the first time I've opened it was a few days ago. I had just finished James Herriot's All Creatures Great and Small and wanted a similar type of read. This seemed the logical choice.
Aside from the fact that I am thoroughly enjoying the book, I also unfolded a new mystery when I opened my copy of the book. In both the front and back cover, someone has handwritten the name Quimby in blue ink. This by itslef wouldn't be all that interesting, but inside was a postcard to a Mrs. W. E. Quimby of Blueberry Lane in Birmingham, AL. I know just where that is. The postcard is from the Saskatchewan Museum of Natural History in Canada and is postmarked 1963. It's from someone named Buff.
Maybe some day I'll trace this mystery and find out who these people are. Today I'm just using it to tell a story and take up space on my blog...

The Normal Human Life

I have already addressed my personal issues with the whole idea that conversations with God occur mostly in the heart of the believer, and I’ve also touched briefly on the idea that man was created expressly for communication with God. Now I would like to investigate one idea further.

On page 18, Willard states that “the normal human life God intended for us” involves “God’s indwelling his people through personal presence and fellowship.” This gets into two basic ideas that Willard will investigate more deeply further along in his book. The first is that the example that we are given to follow for our manhood is Christ; and the second is that nothing in creation exists apart from the thought and spoken word of God.

I know these are very intellectual concepts, but I’m hoping that in some small way I can make them a bit more understandable. Let’s take the first idea – Christ is the perfect example of what it means to be a man. On the surface, this seems like a truth that all believers recognize and apply in their daily living. After all, isn’t that the goal of every true believer – to do what Jesus would do? But look at the idea a bit more deeply, and I think we will sense a bit of a defensiveness against the concept. The point could be made that Christ was 100% divine as well, fully God and fully man indwelling a single human form. I think that the point that Willard is making here is that Christ, God and man indwelling a single human body, is exactly what God would have EACH of us to be. When we say that Christ acts within us, that we have Jesus in our hearts, that we belong to God even, we become vessels prepared for God’s indwelling. And this is perfection – what Willard refers to as “the normal human life God intended for us.”

The second idea that this gets at is that nothing exists apart from the thought and spoken word of God. Willard will go more in depth on this idea later – referring to creation and the fact that God called into being (with spoken word) each object in existence. This idea of nothing existing apart from the mind of God is one I think we will not fully be able to grasp in our finite minds, because it is about God’s infinitude. It is a concept that confused me as a teen, because logic would move us towards the ever popular “I think therefore I am” – so do we exist only in the mind of God? This calls into question the very reality of our existence (we are a figment of God’s imagination). However, I think the only proper thing to realize when we get to this point in our musings is that the mind of God is infinitely greater than the finite mind of man. While what I imagine has no substance or structure, in fact, ceases to exist the moment it slips from my mind, what God imagines IS.

Anyway, that’s a lot of heady stuff for this morning. I am hoping it might instigate a bit of conversation or thought…

Still Reading

I am torn between going ahead and commenting on what I've read recently a bit further into the book, or sticking with Chapter One until we exhaust it. I have read ahead some and jumped back some, trying to let the information in one chapter influence my re-reading of a second chapter. It occurred to me that I ought to read this book this way because Willard answered my first blogged question shortly past the point that I had read to when I wrote the blog.

For now I will try to stick with a discussion of the first chapter before moving on.
Let me say this, I don't always contaminate a book with a lot of hi-lighting and handwritten notes, but this book begs to be marked in. I find when I go back to blog on a point, I need to have the hi-lighter guide my way through all of the script to find the points I wanted to write on. So I am going back over my hi-lighted points of chapter one, and then will begin to address the discussion questions (or those I feel would be good for a blog) at the end of the chapter.

Lord I Believe (Lord Help My Unbelief)

An interesting point Willard makes in HG (not going to cite at the moment because I don't have the book in the room with me, but I'm sure it will come up again) - he says that to believe that God no longer speaks to us in the ways in which he spoke to folks in the Bible is to not believe that God is who He says He is. Early in my reading, I have found myself thinking that he would confirm my idea (and one shared by many that I've spoken to on the subject) - that God no longer uses the methods found in scripture to speak to His people. I went through this elaborate logic path to basically conclude that the presence of scripture and the Holy Spirit are sufficient for this day and age and that the presence of angels and visions and dreams are unheard of today.
I find that in my heart I harbor a great spirit of skepticism, and I realize that some of this has to do with that idea I shouldn't have and don't want to have, that I know it all. It is all too easy for me to assume that I can reason out the modern times and what I know of church history and of theology and conclude that the God of the Bible is not exactly the same today as He was then. Willard would retort that this is a blasphemous thought. If God gave us scripture as our guidelines for living (and this is what we say we believe), then we must believe that who He is in scripture is who He is today. And if who He is has not changed, then the way He relates to us has not changed.
This is a fascinating thought that I want to continue to revisit and to search out for myself, because if it is true - if God still speaks to His people through angels and His voice and visions and dreams - then this opens up the possibility that anyone (myself included) can have REAL conversation with God. And Willard says this is exactly what God wants. And in my heart that seems to be true - conversation is essential to any relationship.
Anyway, that thought excited me in the midst of some really intellectual stuff about space and time and physics, so I thought I would point out the bit that I understood... (I think)

Recovering from my Biases

"If we give primacy to forms of communication that God does not on the whole prefer in relation to his children, that will hinder our understanding of and cooperation with his voice" (HG, 27).

Something I did not consider in my initial response to Ch. 1 was the fact that I was probably allowing my own biases to completely shape my approach to the idea of Hearing God. As I have continued to read, I have been confronted with the fact that God is always speaking - but I am not always listening. I am noticing that the problem is me, not God. That often my motives for wanting to hear God are selfish and impure. And often I approach God with a spirit that has it all figured out. I assume too much - God is "supposed" to act in this way. I almost tend to go to Him with the idea that He is only there to confirm what I have already figured out for myself. How arrogant of me to assume that I know the mind of God! Or perhaps it's not that I KNOW what I want Him to say, it's that I WANT to hear a specific something so much, that I tune out His true word. Ever the skeptic, I am the child that comes to ask my father for bread, all the while expecting to receive a stone.

Willard does confront the issue later in the book that the fundamental issue at the heart of hearing God is a matter of what we believe about God. If our view of God is skewed, we will never hear Him. This makes me think of Jesus' time, when everyone was looking for the Messiah to be a valiant warrior and someone who would overthrow the government. They totally missed the One that God sent. Now I am having to confront the erroneous ways in which I view God. And trust me, there are a lot of mixed messages swimming around my head...