Your Path… Mystical!

WED., JAN. 6, 1999, 9:55 AM YOUR PATH… MYSTICAL!
OFFICE, PULLIAM

This morning, during the discussion of My servant Paul’s letter to the Colossians, you were accused of being “hung up” (the concept is right, whatever the actual words) on the mystical. Good! That’s just how and where I want you to be. The mystical is not anti-logic or anti-rational. It utilizes these “ways of thinking,” but is not bound by them. It certainly is one example of Both/And thinking and analyzing, but it is not restricted to these, either.

Again I’ll remind you – you are a middle-class, well-educated educator, and a middle-of-the-road Christian, but I have called you to be in… and increasingly enjoy… the mystical tradition. You hear Me in ways few others do. Are the ideas and thoughts I share with you (which I call realities) for everyone? You know (by now) that I don’t work this way! Yet I urge you to share some of these with a diverse readership, via Our Ruminations, and you do this.

Your “safety net”, as a “card-carrying” Presbyterian (and an elder for, what, 44 years) is the affirmation (from somewhere in this tradition) that “God Alone is Lord of the conscience”. You’re really not certain how you would be accepted if you boldly and clearly “came out of the closet”… and perhaps you won’t have to experience this. I’ll just say that it isn’t a free choice of yours… if I want it, you’ll follow… not grudgingly or fearfully.

Paul’s calling was different from yours, but, as I said yesterday, also mystically similar. He was not beloved by all of those who he attempted to evangelize. In one sense he never expected that his Letters would become Holy Scripture; in another sense he intended them to be, for they represented Me in a way more vital than Me as just a single, mono-God. As God, I lose none of My power, control, and omniscience. As Christ I was before all that was and served as the Creator. And as Jesus, I was the Christ.

If this isn’t mystical enough, consider Me as Holy Spirit. I Am before all that is, advising, supervising, doing what is needed, again, with omniscience. Am I “less” than God and Christ? Paul’s letters seem to imply this, so Yes. Am I equal to God and Christ? The Trinity concept of Christianity says… Yes… So I say Yes. Am I even “greater” than God and Christ? Yes, say I, humbly. Now how’s that for mystical!?

Consider another directive: though I still say you pay too much attention to the “news of the day” I still want you to keep up, minimally, with the era that you now are “finishing”… for I have much to say to you about current happenings. Then… I’ll say that whatever you do I’ll have interpretations and advice for you, so resolve to consult the many volumes of Teachings that (10:30 / 10:42) you have, on some regular basis. Remember… I’m Timeless!

(Yes, o son, it is to be an exclamation point, not a question mark. I see no question as to what your path, for the rest of your time here on earth, is… mystical, no ka oe [or have I said this before?!])

Your friend, fellow Presbyterian, and fellow professor Donna, is in transition back to Me. This sounds so much different than “she is dying” or “Maybe yet there’ll be a miraculous recovery”. As a young woman and mother she is succumbing to the #2 cause of death in your culture – cancer. There is much known about cancer, and still much that is unknown. And, in the context of this Teaching you should not be surprised to hear that cancer is really quite mystical. There can be studies that show correlations and others that identify cancer-causing substances and situations, but, finally, why do some succumb and others not, in quite similar circumstances? Why do some, with seemingly comparable heredity, develop cancer while others… no?

WED., JAN. 6, 1999, 9:55 AM YOUR PATH… MYSTICAL!
OFFICE, PULLIAM

This morning, during the discussion of My servant Paul’s letter to the Colossians, you were accused of being “hung up” (the concept is right, whatever the actual words) on the mystical. Good! That’s just how and where I want you to be. The mystical is not anti-logic or anti-rational. It utilizes these “ways of thinking,” but is not bound by them. It certainly is one example of Both/And thinking and analyzing, but it is not restricted to these, either.

Again I’ll remind . . .

Your membership level does not allow you to see more of this content.

If you'd like to upgrade your membership, here are your options:  
.