which came first: the chicken or the egg: or the butterfly wings before the earthquake

A thought process on the 'Reasonable calculation of the sum total of all past interpersonal and observational interactions'.

Say what?

Let’s start with the postulate that our characters and mannerisms become, in most cases, more predictable to others over time: even if we somehow manage to remain blissfully or ignorantly unaware of the smell that our own lives give off: the longer we persist along a chosen path: and the longer we adopt certain mindsets: artifacts and traditions: the more the path and the mindsets, artifacts and traditions that put us on the path in the first place: actually become the predictable path:

That is to say: they eventually become our predictable path:

It goes something like this:

The path we take becomes us: as much as we become the path we take: sure, there are random events that we cannot predict: but if folks know us on any level at all: beyond the superficial: with the added benefits of time and some well won relational real estate: the folks in our lives can probably predict with some degree of certainty how our response and actions to most events will play out: if there's any kind of discernment at work in them: they'll spot who we are in us.

Do, our lives in fact give us way? Or should I say: Our lives do in fact give us away?

For our actions speak louder than our words.

Our words vary from the sacred though to the profane, the erudite through to the superficial bombast: but our lives, as lived out in front of the interwoven-ness and inescapable network of mutuality that is life on this planet: tell a far more accurate story about us.

You can tell me I can trust you: and of course you tell me with words: I will eventually find out if I can trust you: Because I will start from a place of trusting you: for that is my own personal modus operandi: and then you will either be found wanting: or not: by your own words and the statements you make about yourself: for as time passes and your MO reveals itself:

Your actions will either irrefutably reveal themselves to be in synch with your words: or alas, and more importantly: reveal where your life and any resultant actions reveal themselves to be at significant odds with what you have spoken ‘to be so’ about yourself: you might fool yourself: but you are less likely to fool anyone with a modicum of discernment: or street smarts.

For generally speaking, the range of viable options and responses we are capable of choosing: tends to diminish over time.

For instance: God revealed to Jesus some very predictable aspects of Peter’s character: Jesus, being no fool: knew about Peter anyway: He had worked with the fisherman for the past three years: and had Peter’s character ‘banged to rights’: so Jesus was able to say to Peter in an uncomfortable blessed assurance of His awareness and understanding of the man before him: ‘you will deny me three times’: Jesus knew this to be so:

Simply because He knew Peter.

He had seen Peter’s love, heart and emotions worn on his sleeve: the aforementioned superficial bombast through to the declaration of love for his savior spoken by the fisherman: Jesus had also seen the trust in Peter as he got out of the boat and attempted to walk on water: Peter's actions were, over time, giving him away: so the prediction of the denial, could be called, form Jesus perspective: either:

‘A reasonable calculation of the sum total of all past interpersonal and observational interactions’.

Or: if you prefer: divine foreknowledge.

Either way: Jesus hit the ball out of the park when He called out Peter on that one: accurately calling what was soon ‘to be so’: and as we all know, for Peter, the soon ’to be so’: became the ‘and it came to pass’.

Anyone who knew Peters character as perfectly as Jesus did: and Jesus would ultimately know Peters character better than Peter would know himself: could make the ‘reasonable calculation of the sum total of all past interpersonal and observational interactions’: and work out how they would play out under such highly pressurized circumstances as those surrounding, say, the crucifixion drama:

The drama in these circumstances could have easily been orchestrated by God: or the unfolding drama in the circumstances could have been the 'stuff' that God would choose too work ‘with’ and ‘through’ as He turned the terrible into something altogether magnificent: the way back to God: which makes Paul’s statement: ‘everything works together for the good of those who love Him’: actually be found to be true: and not just a trite cliché.

Jesus made a public spectacle of the powers and authorities by ‘nailing them to the cross’: the curtain was torn in two: the way back to God had just been bridged by the forsaken divine calling out to Fatherly divine: my God, my God, why have you forsaken me?

So in the darkest moment of the darkest day: Jesus: whether fully aware of it or not: was confirming that all things do work together for the good of those who love Him: as insane as that sounds to us: especially when we ourselves have just been trampled underfoot by some idiotic diatribe or callous action aimed in our direction by another: it comes nowhere close to the idiotic mindsets and resultant actions stemming from such mindsets that Jesus had to deal with: and respond to: and ultimately surrender to: throughout the crucifixion narrative:

But in nailing Him to the cross: we eventually find out in Colossians that the powers and authorities had been made a public spectacle of themselves: and were in fact also somehow nailed to the cross: the point is this:

Everyone eventually overplays their hand:

The enemy had just played the worst hand of all time: in the nanosecond that he thought he had succeeded in playing his best: and actually killing God: it turns out that he had defeated himself: his last best weapon: death: had been eternally defeated: where o death is your sting? where o grave is your victory? nowhere mate: that’s where:

So the questions I would like us to ponder given the above are these:

How much of the above crucifixion narrative did God the Father orchestrate, via divine foreknowledge? And how much did God ‘improvise’: that is to say: work with and through the circumstances, the personalities and the characteristic traits of all who took part: to bring about what He wanted to bring about: redemption.

Knowing the characters of all the players in the drama: and knowing the fact that character becomes: in most cases, more predictable over time: the longer folks persist along a chosen path: adopting a certain mindsets: the more the path and the mindsets that put them on the path, become the path itself: so as much as they become the path they took: the path they take becomes them.

I know this sounds like a riddle: bit it isn’t.

So if God knows us on any level at all: and if He does, it will be well beyond the superficial: then He can probably predict with what we can call divine certainty how our response and actions to any events will play out:

For our lives do in fact give us away.

Our actions do speak louder than our words.

Our words are mostly pollen adrift on the breeze.

But our lives, as lived out in front of the interwoven-ness and inescapable network of mutuality that is life on this planet: and our lives as lived out within the interwoven-ness of the divine narrative and interaction with man: tell a far more accurate story:

God has your number: and He also has mine.

God revealed to Jesus some very predictable aspects of Peter’s character: as we said earlier: Jesus knew them anyway: He had worked with the fisherman for the past three years: so Jesus was able to say to Peter ‘you will deny me three times’: knowing this to be so: simply because He knew Peter. I've said this before: but as it's starting to sound a little bit too much like the 'red pill or the blue pill' from the Matrix: it warranted repetition.

Jesus had seen the manifold character traits that made Peter who he was, at work in him from the time he said ‘come follow me’: so the prediction of the denial, could be called: either ‘reasonable calculation of the sum total of all past interpersonal and observational interactions; or 'divine foreknowledge’:

But either way: a no-brainer.

So the questions are:

How much does God orchestrate?

Is it all sown up?

Is it all a done deal?

Or how much does God ‘improvise’ with and through the machinations and orchestrations of fallen man to bring about what He intended to being about in the first and final place?

Is it possible for man to throw God a curved ball: Or not?

Or is the reality more akin to this:

Man throws a curved ball: but God knowing beyond a shadow of a doubt about all of our idiosyncrasies and characteristic traits can ‘foreknow’ the curved ball about to be launched: because He knows us better than we do ourselves: and then ‘work all things together for good’ just as the ball is thrown: for He saw your curved ball coming before you were born: and He also saw it within the sum total of your interactions and this ability we refer to as divine foreknowledge.

Or He saw the curved ball, because: a reasonable calculation of the sum total of all past interpersonal and observational interactions’ regarding yourself: was, and is possible: and while you may have thrown the ball: or you may not: and either did throw it: or didn’t: God, sustaining all things: can deal with the possibility of many possible realities simultaneously:

Knowing that whatever events transpire: He will bring heaven too earth: and He will bring eternity to here.

Final point: if the future is 'closed' rather than 'open': in the sense that all that is ever going to happen to us: or all we are ever going to do: is already cast in stone in eternity: what's the point of life?

I don't want to be awoken from my slumber one day to find out I was just following a script that I didn't even know existed: but apparently did: and was written by some writers with whom I'd like to have a word: and it also turns out that I was, and am also currently powerless to alter the script because everything about me: the 'reasonable calculation of the sum total of all of my past interpersonal and observational interactions': made, and continues to make my path all the more obvious: all the more predictable and all the more knowable over time:

Did I paint myself into this corner, by my actions: or am I living in this corner because God ordained it to be so? Is it 'either/or', or is it 'both/and'?

While Jesus works 'all things together for ultimate good': even though now for a little while, from time to time: the 'stuff' of live is on a Newton's cradle swing of 'magnificent to mundane' and all points in between: Jesus just left Chicago.

You might not see Him in person: but He'll see you just the same.

Thanks to Gregory Boyd: and to all the folks who have ever walked into and out of my life: and helped me discern: and to make sure that I never turn into a teacher who forgets how to learn.