El comunismo es un desmadre

                 Hace un rato, conversaba con mi hermano chavista (¡Sí! Tengo uno q no quiere ver el error). Le preguntaba si recordaba la casa que mi madre tenía en las afueras de Maracay (Pta. Palmita) y no dijo sí, ni no.

-¡Mamá! No votes por la oposición -le dijo a la vieja en el cuarto.

-¡Tú si tienes bolas! -le dije. ¿Tampoco recuerdas la casa que ella tenía en Higuerote, que se la invadieron y quitaron?

-¡Mamá! Si votas por la oposición, nos van a sacar de esta casa y nos van a echar a la calle.

-¡Coño! ¡Qué mentiras! ¿Por qué no sacaron a los que invadieron la casa de Higuerote, cuando también se quedaron con las cosas de ella? ¡Habla paja!

-La oposición es la que miente. Ellos están al favor del imperio, y nos van a quitar todo.

-¿Por qué mi mamá tuvo que vender la casa de Maracay? La robaban a cada rato y, por el hecho de dejarla sola, la robaron más de una vez... ¡Pregúntale a mi tía, pues! Ya que no me creees.

-Si una casa está sola, hay que meter a la gente... ¡Eso sí es JUSTICIA SOCIAL!

-¡Guevón! ¿A costo de tu familia y ajenos? Si la casa -vacía- fuera la tuya... ¿Tú vas a dejar que se metan unos malandros o a los que les venga en gana? ¡Eso lo decía Chávez! Y, cuando en televisión dijo: "¡Métanse! El pueblo necesita casas..." Los Hijos de P. comenzaron a invadirlas o a robárselas... Pero tú no tienes casas.

-¡Mamá! No votes por la oposición -dijo a la vieja, en su cama- ellos son mentirosos oligarcas.

-¡Sí pendejo! La oligarquía son ustedes, chavistas. Tienen 17 años "mandando" y, en lugar de construir, lo que han hecho es arruinar. Tu madre (y mi madre) perdió dos de sus casas y, aunque lo ignores, centenas de personas perdieron negocios, casas, empresas y tierras productivas (y ociosas)... El comunismo es un desmadre... (Coño é madre)

http://historico.tsj.gob.ve/decisiones/scon/marzo/142-9310-2010-09-0067.HTML

http://www.eluniversal.com/opinion/130608/sigue-siendo-delito-invadir

http://eltiempo.com.ve/venezuela/tribunales/tsj-argumento-que-invasiones-ya-no-son-delito-en-venezuela/39480

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcFmNXDBGQA

http://sistemadejusticiavenezolano.blogspot.com/2012/09/la-invasion-la-posesion-y-el-derecho-de.html

http://delitodeinvasion.blogspot.com/2013/04/el-delito-de-invasion-en-venezuela.html

Soledad o Auto-determinación

No soy la persona indicada para decir de qué estamos hechos ni qué son las necesidades de cada persona. Toca a cada individuo procurárselas y resolver cada uno de sus conflictos y, aunque la «sociedad» cree sentirse con derechos para criticar o para pretender estandarizar lo que cada ciudadano debe o ha de hacer, pensar o decir, en su doble moral mojigata no produce una solución y, las pocas que existen, han sido hechas de iniciativa propia, de la misma manera como nacieron alcohólicos anónimos y otras organizaciones que van más allá de la auto ayuda grupal.

Evolucionamos por inercia. La escuela y ese proceso de socialización familiar que nos saca de casa expande la necesidad de comprender, de conocernos y determinar quienes somos, en cualquier grupo. Si éramos introvertidos, la interacción, con otras u otros, nos saca de nuestros esquema y, al cabo de varias décadas, lo que fuimos ya no somos y, si volvimos atrás -también- fue otra decisión que no siempre estuvo en el deseo, sino que fue consecuencia de muchas cosas, trascendentes algunas de ellas.

A la edad de 10 o 15 años nadie proyecta su vida para quedarse solo ni cómo ha de vivir los años pensionado. A los 5 años de edad nadie se figura cómo ha de vivir en la viudez, ni cómo ha de emplear el tiempo libre en su retiro. Esos días la vida es bella y, aunque muchos extrapolaban cómo verse en sus sueños, no todos los realizaron y, los que los tuvieron, van despertando de ese letargo a otras realidades: La soledad u otra compañía.

Entre los 15 a lo 20, uno puede descartar y re-seleccionar la gente que toma y a quienes recibe pero, de los 40 a los 60 años, uno aprende a no ser tan selecto, se es más noble aunque -también- podemos estar endurecidos y amargados.

¿Hiciste tú tu sueño o vas de camino?

Conozco a un viejito cuyo carácter es grato. No conozco su interioridad o rasgo secreto pero, a pesar de sus ochenta, sigue siendo alegre y jocoso, al punto que -aunque engañe o auto engañe- su ánimo no decae y, en medio de otros viejos que haya en ese ancianato, yo prefiero estar con él, y me gusta escucharlo.

Ese sitio donde lo conocí es sepulcral. No es un sitio siniestro pero, es un lugar aislado -paisajísticamente  bonito- bien decorado (muy cerca de mi casa) pero es un camposanto de gente viviente. 

Los viejos viven en su mutismo, como ignorándose sus propias penas. Algunos de ellos sufren la vergüenza personal que ocultan, la de mojar o ensuciar sus pantalones o faldas (sus esfínteres no son jóvenes). Los suyos, quienes les llevaron, raramente les visitan y, en un sentido, fueron abandonados antes de tiempo a la entrada del camposanto, como quien quien caminará y muere, un día a la vez, a cada paso.

El viejito que yo aprecio -distinto a todos ést@s- sigue siendo lúcido, locuaz y, cada vez que ve a una mujer bonita en las visitas, le pone el ojo, como el cazador a su presa ¿Uds creen que ese viejo todavía dispare certeramente?   ;)

Cada vez que habla, puedo escucharle sus cuentos. El número de sus hijos e historias es largo y, la verdad, no me atrevo a prestarle mucha atención pues, no sé si juega con sus fantasías o su triste realidad: Como todos, un día va a morir como yo.

Lo malo de nuestra juventud, lo malo de los errores que cometimos, fue disparar -a siniestra- sin elegir a la persona correcta. Yo querría, por ejemplo, volver con Dinorah D. o, con cualquiera de aquellas que no supe valorar (cuando ellas sí me valoraron) ¿Tan tarde es? ¿Manejaría yo los efectos colaterales de sus pasados? 

¿Están disponibles -e iguales- aquellas personas que desdeñé sustituyéndolas al antojo de la oportunidad -por sexo- con otras «mejores» o «más» sexys?

«Se cosecha lo que se siembra»

¡Pendeja juventud, la mía! (¿La tuya?)

A esa edad no se oye a nadie; sino a la lujuria, al ego vanidoso, y a las ganas de hacer lo que podamos, o lo que el momento permita o venga en gana. 

¿Estás consciente de que la juventud -y esa fuerza hormonal- se acaban, juntamente con los encantos temporales y que ciertos deseos nunca cesan? ¡Hoy quiero y mañana también!

Hoy te desean, mañana te rechazan: Lo mismo que tú sembraste, lo mismo que tú hiciste, alguien te lo hará saber...  ¡Mañana!

La vida devuelve la moneda con la que hoy pagas o das.

A.T.

Cheaters

Few days back I was watching one of those TV reality shows where they are helped to be match made. The stress was above the way they looked, the clothing they wore instead of the inner and hidden being, who often takes some time to evolve from one place to another (or tossed by sudden things).

You can see today´s fashion is showing ladies´ dandy legs the more while -as new thing for men- those shows challenged men to express their visual sex appeal, as something women always sought but; after some minutes of TV program was broad-casted, a couple had been setup as if they were really matched and liked each other in a normal arrangement. They hugged with wet kissed publicly, and soon after one of those men in the show (who was left alone) asked the same woman another man had liked and kissed in the mouth. (What? I said.)

To my surprise, meanwhile I was working on a computer, the new man who was left alone hugged and kissed -that woman- the same lusty way the previous man did...

Wow! What would be your personal concerns?

As far as I know me, I would not kiss a woman recently kissed in the mouth by another man.

Ppl are entitled with their human rights to do whatever they are please (as long they do not bother other ppl around them) but, I would never kiss a woman recently kissed in the mouth, in such a way I watched, at distance as witnessing.

In my mind I saw the picture of a cheater.

In my memories I saw MP kissing another man I never saw, but I was well informed she cheated on me in a party so, why would I be engaged (and screwed up) within a relationship starting with cheaters? 

Just to please me for an hour in today´s loneliness or lust? 

To endanger myself with any STDs I don´t know who has got?

No, thanks! That´s not the old ways I belong.

A.T. (Oct. 2015)

EXPERIENCIA VIVENCIAL

Hablan de FE (a). 

Hablan de OBEDIENCIA (b). 

Estoy en el punto coyuntural de oponerme a cualquier forma de pensamiento político o religioso que me hable de SALVACIÓN y OBEDIENCIA.

Según yo (Antonio Toro) LA FE es EXPERIENCIAS VIVENCIALES recíprocas, y bidireccionales (de arriba a abajo / de abajo a arriba). 

Si alguien, cualquiera me suena a la gente del Sanedrín judío o católico, me encrispo pues, si Dios NO se autorevela por sí mismo, como lo "hizo" antes, la Cristiandad tiene una fe de segunda mano y, tras más de 4.000 años repitiendo el mismo cuento (por centenares de "enviados espirituales") el asunto NO me interesa.

A) Si la FE o la "salvación" no son un aspecto palpable de la eternidad vivencial con DIOS, en la tierra.

B) Si ambas cosas no comienzan desde aquí -en el now y ahora- no tienen importancia para mí.

 La gente, la iglesia, la veo y la tengo todo el tiempo en la calle, a cada rato. 

En cuanto al "Sí" o al "No" de la "Salvación": 

a) Si no es relacional. 

b) Si no es experimentalmente tangible y vivencial, no me importan esas cosas en nada; como tampoco me interesa ir a iglesia alguna "a darme golpes de pecho" (como tampoco me gusta que caigan a trompadas con sus trillados sermones).

Tengo más de 20 años leyendo, lo que tú -apenas- te grabas y repites."

A.T.

We´re living in sins!

Have a look on this and tell me... Is it a tricky monologue? :P

       Certain day, a casual talk between friends became a religious unresolved issue no one knew… :P

-Next time, when someone tells me “I love you” (if she is old enough) I will be compelled to ask her discretely, if that said really would mean sexual exclusivity; otherwise, I have no way to know if that was mere emotional rhetoric.

-I have heard that some believers believed that having sex with an unmarried woman (who is not actually a virgin) is not a real sin...

-The sinful relationship is when we´re:

• Having sex with no real love, without the inherent responsibility
• Dishonoring GOD´s commands and
• Dishonoring the person WHO ACTUALLY could have fallen in love with you.

That sin is not "loving" their souls or bodies. The spiritual sin is “sex” with lust. “Love” being done without love -purposely and repeatedly- bypassing what TRUE LOVE is. Sex must be committed to one partner and, it´s known the way it shouldn´t be done. (Deut. 22:25-29)

-Ah! - That´s just another theory. He! He! :P

- “Spiritual” lies are also common sins inside many religions, and these are worst than uncommitted or occasional sex. Just because lies are frequent -they tend to be recurrent- Am I stubbornly blinded to see those things well?

-I would have liked more you´ve told me which sins are not sins. He! He!

-Look at what I already said above, first.

-I will grab some of items of that theory and, later on I will do what I want.

-Let´s say WE have GOTTEN MARRIED to have sex, legally... Was it an act of LOVE, or a convenient legal arrangement to lay down in bed?

-Unfortunately, that is part of the marital agreements.

-Jesus saw a Samaritan woman who had had five (5) men and NONE was her “legal” husband... What was Jesus´ real concern with her, promiscuity or keeping the law?

-He didn´t approve that type of relationship.

-So, Did He invited HER to be married?

-Yes!

-Since you´ve believed it in that way: (1) Would you marry a man who lives another place you are not? (2) Would you marry a man you are not sure if "HE" would give you whatever thing YOU need, evenly on the bed and inside a new home?

-Probably not.

- (1) Once a woman is NOT virgin, she is more aware of her sexual needs (2) Once a woman has indulged -herself- in masturbating with toys (BIG toys) her sexual needs are quite different than an innocent virgin who, probably, had ignored those needs that she never explored willingly until marriage.

- Is it adultery a sin? It is! And if Jesus came here while we are "playing" with it, we could be sent directly the hell.

-Are you aware of those two points (“1” and “2”) that believers have tried to ignore "by following the Bible"? Of course, adultery is a sin (like coveting) but Jesus never belittled (by using any discriminative adjective) that Samaritan woman He met. Was she an ADULTERER? No, she wasn´t! She was a fornicator, simply... However, emotional adultery is a big sin hidden inside people´s minds and, it has caused many couples had experimented sex outside their own beds. Because OUR minds can lie to our bodies, and to our core human needs.

-And what´s the point?

-That Samaritan woman had had 5 men, at that time. Did she?

-I don´t know! I was not there.

-Are you saying Jesus lied?

-He never lied!... She said she had had five men.

-It wasn´t the Samaritan woman who told that! It was Jesus... He foretold that before she opened her mouth but, what was it that Jesus wanted her (and me) to know (and do) before being indulged in sex?

-I don´t know, you tell me.

-Joh 4:16 Jesus told her, "Go and bring your husband." Then, it goes: Joh 4:17 The woman answered, "I don't have a husband." "That's right," Jesus replied, "You're telling the truth. You don't have a husband. You have already been married five times, and the man you are now living with isn't your husband."

-That is not an acute translation! It doesn´t say "husbands" neither "married"... but men.

-Perhaps! (And I´m glad you saw and know it) But whenever I read "husbands" I read (instead of that) "men"; not those supposed "husbands" they said euphemistically... If she was actually "married", Jesus would have invited HER to come back to her 1^st HUSBAND (and, according to our religious mindsets, she would have been called a Samaritan "adulterer", instead).

-Ok! I´m listening.

-Since you are so fond of the Torah… Would you ask me to go back to my Ex wife, friend?

-I would, probably.

-Really? Look at what your "Jewish" friend here thinks. The Torah says: "Deut. 24:4 …her first husband who married her and divorced her earlier must not remarry her, because she was defiled, since this is detestable to the LORD. Don't defile the land that the LORD your God is about to give you as a possession. " I know nothing about her spiritual defilement but, I know anything about the emotional cost, the price to forgive a spouse sleeping with several men.

-Okey! I got it.

-Whatever is UNDONE should be undone. That Samaritan woman has NEVER been married. She wasn´t an adulterer, but a fornicator and many people are using that lesson to lead hurt believers to go back with those who have been divorced (and utterly defiled) just by laying down in another´s bed (it doesn´t matter they were a woman or man).

-I must reread the Torah, many times, while I am alive.

-Good! And I know that some hypocritical RELIGIOUS modifications were added to the “original” Gospel (and surely those religious euphemisms saying “husbands”; instead of “lovers” or “bedroom mates”). Don´t you think it so? Whenever you read Hebrews (13:4), inside one of those Paul´s celebrated letters, He said “bed” (κοιτη) to mean “sex”. Does a “bed” sins? Or sex is simply done on a couch and not in the minds of those who lust coveting sexually? These writers have used the Greek root of the known word for “coitus”, and there in Hebrews, it was used as "bed"; when Greeks surely understood it meant human "sex". I cannot deal -or believe- in those letters they´ve valued as “acute, inerrant and totally inspired” when I see something incorrect... Oooopss! That´s why I will not follow a church, nor any of their church leaders. I dislike hypocrisy and those religious euphemisms.

-I must follow the Torah!

-Just remember what Lot´s wife did... Don´t look back at whom you left. I have chosen to follow Jesus, particularly, each time I grasped what He probably said; because I´m not sure if He -ultimately- taught Israel like this: “Mat 28:19 Go to the people of all nations and make them my disciples. Baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit”… Why, in the Old Testament, God showed Himself as being One and, later on, when Jesus came down, He looks as He had said: God is “triune” or “We are three in One”.

-He is God! That way He said.

-I´m not sure Jesus is God, but a divine being God sent to live in a human body to accomplish His will and purposes here. But I respect whatever thing you´ve believed… I used to believe that Trinitarian way too but, if I´ve believed the teachings of the Old Testament, I needed to checked them with what The N.T. also said and, as long as Jesus was with those 12 men He chose, He never asked them to do that: “...in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit”. This is one of the an add-ons the RCC placed to trade with its syncretisms.

-Are you sure you still being a Christian? -She said so, without the proper intonation of a doubt.

-No! He never said I´m God, the Father... As many believers think He said. I´m being re-assured that I´m not a RCC´s follower. I'm against any creepy Catholic syncretism, though.

-Hmm! If you believed that, that way, you probably will be cast into hell.

-And why am I here? He asked. Why haven´t I been sent “there” each time I sinned by killing, stealing or lying to my neighbors? Why haven´t I been sent when I cheated on my ex-wife or with any of my teachers in the school? Did He want me to repent from “luring away” people by telling them what I thought or what I´m thinking? If I´m sinning for human lack of knowledge, has He missed what human kind thought several centuries before I was born? I´m not the only one longing for wisdom, particularly when cheap gospel sell the idea God needs me to be worshiped: He lacks nothing, while I have lacked everything about Him and me. How could I love an unknown person -an alien- without knowing who He is or what His needs are (regarding me) as a servant or as a living soul? I wish He was more close and personal.

-You´re asking too many things at the same time -She said. You don´t deserve that answer.

-That´s right! But if I tried to love a distant person in nowhere I know, if she whispered the same thing you´ve said without any doubt of reluctance: “You don´t deserve this nor that from me...” I would be assured she deserves nothing from a partner, not my attentions as a potential friend, just at least from me. Who am I to say: “You don´t deserve this nor that”. If I said that, no doubt it will show how selfish I am and, as far as I have read the Gospels, it says God wants to be worshiped, more than being obeyed or believed; as if that was His weakest side, the thing lacking in His strength (or inside His “humanized” needs). Am I being lied by what Jesus probably spoke? (...God is Spirit, and those who worship God must be led by the Spirit to worship Him according to the truth.) Jesus asked water to a woman. He naturally has needs but, He could have gotten Himself a glass of water, if He wanted (by doing a miracle) but this time He needed a servant… Can you tell me why? He already said: “...When he comes, he will explain everything to us."

-Where is it that in the Scripture?

-In John 4:24-25 -He replied-. I´m sure God is a Spiritual Being but, the flaw the RCC largely taught about that He needed to be worshiped... I don´t believed it. He has not that need and, if it was so, He is not showing up to get it, neither to tell me: I need you! (the way I need Him)

-Why don´t you believe that? Most of Christian believers worshiped Jesus, Won´t you worship Him, too?

-Good questions! Allow me to tell you that, if I wanted to be known or loved by those I liked, I would be in the predicament -or in the need- to let them know who I am, where I am or what I´m doing here. If I wanted to be heard, if I needed to be hugged or obeyed, I would have done something more than leaving some letters to be read (and dogmatically believed) BY FAITH. If I was online, thinking about those things my potential partner needed to know me, physically, I would have sent them some pictures, some articles written by me but, if I really needed to be known, as I am (Yes! As I AM) I would be in the dilemma to give her a phone call, to appear somewhere by giving the slightest token of kindness I could to show a friendly display… And, if she sees I am selfish, if she sees I´m reluctant to show up, unwilling to spend some time with her: Another person would come to give her fill!

-That´s another thing! Your are comparing God with your own ways to behave. I think you are wrong.

-Yes! I´m wrong. Each time I needed to be in a relationship I needed to interact with people. If I ever wanted friends, I needed to show I was THEIR friend, being close to them and, whenever I wasn´t present, I gave them a phone call, at least. Just to show anything more than an icy old-fashioned letter and, if distance and time never met, that friendship would get cold (void and empty). This is what I feel each time I read: “Rom 6:23 Sin pays off with death. But God's gift is eternal life given by Jesus Christ our Lord.” What kind of eternity I want if this huge distance already exists between Him and me, now? I don´t want to be loved by God, but just by the person I dreamed my whole life, and I never met her alive (perhaps in my dreams) and, if God really needs me “to be worshiped” (as Jesus said to the Samaritan Woman He met) He surely would have done anything of what I have done: a) Approaching to those I have liked, physically. b) Each time I had the hunch I had found the woman I liked (or a person I could be liked) I did the best I could to be sure I had found the exact person I thought I needed to love. I never wanted a fan! (Except those days of “hot” seasons). Ha! Ha! Ha!

-YOU cannot compare your feelings -and those emotions- with God´s!

-Why not? Doesn´t the Scripture says “men were created in His image and likeness”? (Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness...) No doubt I need no one to worship me but I´m sure I always wanted a woman who would please me in everything I thought I am.

-It seems you “know” the Bible, but you don´t understand it well.

-Sure! I don´t understand it. That´s why I agreed with you when you said I was wronged.

-Listen! ”Image and likeness” there, that moment and instance, is connected to dominion and spirituality; but not that we´ve been made like God´s feelings or His physical appearance.

-I don´t know God´s creative scope nor His limitations when making men´s hearts but, as far as I see, in that verse of Genesis, He seemed to talk to another “beings” (or, perhaps, He was thinking to Himself) but, what concerns me -here- it is He had a dream: He had His project achieved and, as a Creator, He gave His “image” His feelings. He showed what his feelings were -that moment there- by blessing Adam with something he “earthly” lacked, as long as he was modeled out from mud but, when God gave him His breath -His spirit- that piece of “soil” got a new-brand shape, to breathe with his own Human Soul. I think we reflect the nature of our Creator (or creators), one way or another. Although, I don´t believe we´re Body, Soul and Spirit. I´ve believed I was lied, because I´m sure I am a Spirit dwelling in a body. I´m a living soul and that soul is my very spirit of life, but I´m aware you´re not dualist, like me. Can we cope with being doctrinally different? I don´t need people´s approval and, when needing answers, I wish God gave me His exact answers, not more men´s theories (like all of these, that I have already shared with you, here).

-You are out of your mind! His faith is well founded.

-I won´t contradict you, though. Some people might call it holy “faith”. Don´t you think God is something bigger than aliens? I was used to say that I wasn´t afraid to affirm that people have made the Bible something bigger than the One who inspired men to write it down.

-Hmm! If you were not my friend, I´d think this talk had finished several minutes ago.

-That´s your right! And it is my privilege to talk alone but, let´s ponder these few Biblical facts: a) Adam was made with earthly “mud” (elements of the ground). b) God (and the agents He got involved) were not humans; unless His image and likeness were cloned elsewhere, somehow, as I think it is in us. c) Angels kept on visiting human race on earth, evenly God left (or set us apart) far away from that unknown or lost “Paradise”.

-Stop it! You are out of your mind.

-Am I? You have “Faith”, but I´m a nut reading what the Bible says… Have you read that God´s children kept on visiting humans (to marry their women)? That´s on Gen. 6:2. Each time I heard preachers talking about this THEY explained “Angels cannot marry women… Just because they are spiritual beings” but, is that Biblical record mistranslated, as also happened to a defiled “bed”? Coitus is the exact word for marital sex, and Genesis 6:2 also talks about “intergalactic” or “multidimensional” sex.

-You are crazy! God's sons were men, not angels.

-Sure! I'm crazy. God came down here with His sons and, before men were created, angels were first in His creation... Did God asked a sword to guard His tree of life, without a serving angel?... I have believed I needed to ignored those things they said I should… If I needed to “know” what an angel is, I can compare what the Scripture taught and, here few “concepts” are (in case you needed, to read another day): “Gen 6:4 The Nephilim were in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of God came unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them: the same were the mighty men that were of old, the men of renown.” Will you mind telling this crazy man, they had no sex to get children? If that wasn´t “intergalactic” or “multidimensional” sex, or something wicked and evil in their union, why God grieved and regretted before He destroyed the earth with water? I can bet one dollar that, when a bunch of demons (a Legion) asked Jesus permission to enter into the body of pigs, they never imagined Jesus would get rid of two problems, by throwing one single stone away.

-Job had mentioned, several times, God´s children in Job 1:6, 2:1 or at 38:7.

-Oh! Thanks, dear friend! You have read it (and there´s more about them).

-Wait! Before you keep on talking about aliens, tell me more about that stone thrown by Jesus.

-Wow! I´m glad you heard it. Jesus visited a Goyim area near Kersha (It wasn't the exact Gadara). There was a demon possessed man there and after that “Legion” left him “flying”, 2.000 pigs were drowned into the sea lake: Waters! Same way God got rid of Nephilims, and wicked ones, in ancient days. Don´t tell me it is a figure that “means baptism alone”... It also means Jesus permitted that huge herd of pigs were finally got rid of, with those evil spirits inside. That part of the Gospel reminds me those days of Noah, where sinners died drown out with “spiritual” beings having had sexual intercourse with men´s daughters. It´s known that Jews were not allowed to consume unclean food like pigs but, Goyim people in that area got them to feed Romans and their homes.

Antonio needed to know if he was lied. It's easy to talk to words when they are left on a screen on a wall, mute and unnoticed.

-What I dislike from this Biblical account is its several contradictions. Matthew says they were two men demon possessed (Mat 8:28, 33) while Mark and Luke said it was one (Mk 5:18; Lk 8:35). So, to my dull understanding, I can infer: a) Two or three different men saw (and wrote) that “biblical” incident differently. b) Only one of them could have been an eyewitness, while the other “author” (or written sources) could have been a hired writer making an imperfect copy, a simple odd version.

If you want to make a transcendent story, if you want to write down real facts and a sharp history, you would do the best to make things clear. How do I know that truth? Can I get it by comparing complementary sources? (Here is my sigh)

-It hurts me when I see “a little” mistake like that. If God had actually inspired those writers -literally- such faults shouldn´t be evident there, particularly when I expected an acute account from actual eyewitnesses. But, I´m sure THEY worked separately, out of common agreement, in different times/places and not certified by an organized “writer” association. Each time I have compared both accounts -if those were “originals” enough- I could see they´re well harmonized, except for two or one single man who “missed” the information which another writer saw (or that happened when one man unnoticedly ignored it when delivering the final version he wrote).

-Where is faith, if that was correctly done?

-You, as a lawyer or judge, need proofs, verifiable evidences, to deliver a long lasting verdict and, those who have inherited Christianity from a second-hand source always have been in the need of something bigger than “It is written...”. Beside that, the O.T. always asked two witnesses to judge things well, as it happens when you read Chronicles and Kings, in the O.T.

It is said God didn't create a single man and his woman. It is said there was a parallel “creation” where there were more men and women... If that was so, some men were created by God and, those men who lacked their mates (Children of God) would have found their companionship in that paralleled human hood we know nothing about, except by speculations about Gen 6:2

-Jesus said that, those who had faith without seeing Him will be specially blessed. (John 20:29 (...) The people who have faith in me without seeing me are the ones who are really blessed!" )

-Of course! Thomas needed something bigger than a thing called “faith”. A reasonable doubt is a need, sometimes. Particularly when you would play a role in a court, when a man's life is under a trial.

-Sure! But human life is not a tribunal and stubborn minds need exactitude.

-God wants to be loved with all men's might. He wants to be loved with our souls, strengths, volitional mental faculties and human minds... Did He also said this: “Mat 13:16 But God has blessed you, because your eyes can see and your ears can hear! ” As long as I have these organs functioning, as a man chained to this human body seeking the true to judge some “evidences”, I won´t trust anymore in lying men, such as Jeremiah once said (Jer 17:5, 7). No one is like God and, my whole life I lied and was lied. I´m tired of secondhand spiritual experiences. If God is personal being and real, like a Father, I long to meet Him personally. I want to see He is real like those UFO I saw -when I was praying- side by side with Mónica, several years now.

-What? Do you believe in UFOs and things like those?

-God is not an earthly human being. Jesus neither His serving angels were... Don´t you believe in them, like “angels” God has sent? I won´t quote Jeremiah´s vision but, if you don´t mind I shared what I already said -at least- have a look on Matthew. How many stars have you seen pointing out people´s ways and places? (Matt. 2:9 (...) And the star they had seen in the east went on ahead of them until it stopped over the place where the child was.) How many of those STARS have you seen stopped above your head or certain places?

-Ha! Ha! I´m not saying you are crazy... Ha! Ha! It is you, alone, who said it.

-You´ve believed in X-mas, when you were a child. You´ve seen the star your parents placed on the top of those X-mas trees they brought home for you and, you never knew it represented the “star” (the UFO) those wise men saw, before they met the actual place where Jesus was born... It wasn´t a comet, but good! You´re smart while I´m dull.

-How do you know it was an UFO?

-How do you know it wasn´t? If that report is acute enough, you´ll know the Maggi never saw a star, but an Ovni. Herod asked his workers about it, and that sign was seen (and followed) from the West, not from the East. When Elijah was taken by a chariot of fire, they were not horses, but an UFO (2 Kings 2:11 (...) Suddenly, some horses and a chariot came and separated Elijah from Elisha. The horses and the chariot were like fire. Then Elijah was carried up into heaven in a whirlwind.) Is that portion of the Bible lying with a rhetoric figure of speech?

-I wasn´t there! -She said jokingly- I don't know it for sure.

-Yep! And those who believed it, without seeing it, are also blessed with that truth other people have seen, privately or publicly. Do you also disbelieve the Apostles saw Jesus being served by angels, coming up and down? (John 1:51) Whenever Jesus comes back, He won´t be down here in “a cloud”, but in an UFO; the way He was taken up by angels (Luke 21:27; Acts 1:11)

-No doubt you have celebrated the “Annunciation” more than me. Ha! Ha! Since Luke 2:15 talked about angels.

-The sad thing of man-made “traditions” is that conventional picture showing those “facts” occurring the same X-mas night; when it happened at different intervals of time.

-Hmm! I don´t mind you would elaborate something more about that theory.

-Angels appeared first than the Maggi visiting Herod home. If you compared the Gospel account, you might feel the hunch I felt when the UFO disappeared the moment “the Maggi” visited Herod´s palace to get “additional” protocolar information from astrologers. They followed the sign by night but, getting nearer the wrong place (Herod´s wise men) the “star” disappeared, so they had nothing to prove -as real- against the Lord´s life. It was an important moment in Heaven and at Jesus´ earthly life: Jesus was recently borne incarnated, and He needed to be understood, more than being known (as it was a biblical setup, just for us).

-I´m afraid I´m falling asleep.

-Before your bedtime arrives, allow me to remind you that those who believed there´s no need to marry a divorced woman to have sex (as you mentioned “their” theory of no sin) I can recall a man who, after receiving money for a deal of his trade, he paid a “prostitute” to be sexually pleased.

-That´s sin! And I know what a sin is.

-Of course you do! We all are sinners, even emotionally… But one day certain man needed physical release (since he was has no wife) and -since he lacked credit card- he wanted to lay down without paying in cash.

-What? I think you´re kidding. Ha! Ha!

-He told her something like this: “...Permit me to join with you...”. She asked: “What will you give to me, to enjoy me...” and, if this is properly recalled, he said he left his wallet… and willing TO PAY, he promised a young sheep (Gen 38:17)

-Ha! Ha! I never read that… But keep it on, Antonio.

-That woman was not a fool (she regretted the idea of being fooled) so she asked: “Will you give me a pledge, until you send it to me?”

-Hmm! I´m not afraid to say there was mutual consent of adults. Both were trading sexually, without any further commitment than a future payment.

-And don´t tell me that, those days, there was no law to keep on: “Your “Yes” be ”Yes” and your “No” be “No”, because love is love and sex is sex.

-She asked for a warranty! She didn´t want to be fooled.

-And Judah needed sexual release, since he lost his wife (and have no credit card).

-She responded, "Give me your ring and bracelet, and the staff that you hold in your hand." (Gen. 38:18)

-More than a promissory note, more than a check and a token of “love”, she wanted safety and a pledge to be sexually available that moment. Is it too old fashioned? Who would take care of children, society or women alone?

-That´s a personal choice affecting society -she said, as a judge- It belongs to parents to take care of their children.

-But society, as a bulk, plays like the victim whenever I denied each homeless children their dued parental care.

-What´s your point, Antonio?

-Do I have to take care for another man´s kids? If I´m engaged, if I fell in love with a woman, am I obliged to take care of her whole house and previous children?

-You have your own answers! I don´t know what you would do.

-Of course! If I had the chance to fall in love with a virgin, if I knew she would be faithful enough -to me- I would marry willingly but, if I needed a woman sexually, if she needed me to feed her children, that´s not a loving relationship, but an agreement of sexual consent with mutual benefits. Love cannot be traded with money or anything convenient. True love is not seeking things selfishly.

-But we all need things to raise a family. A woman needs a caring man!

-Men need loyal women who sexually belong to one single man. I cannot say all women belong to one single man, but I´m assured the last one I loved wanted me to take care of her 3 children and; when she also wanted me to seek for her children´s approval, I had to tell her she was all wronged; because my deepest concern was being approved by her love solely and, if I fell short from being sexually or economically (not being big enough to satisfy her expectations or human needs) I would understand I lacked what she needed but, after witnessing she kept on having some flirts with other men, I knew she had lived like those who always sought their BBD. If she had found another man she liked, as soon as she could, I would be kicked out in the back. So that marriage she asked me was to receive a brand-new golden ring, not a pledge of my love and that would have given me no real right of sexual exclusivity, since I knew she still behaved like a prostitute, trading things and paying with sex.

-That´s not fair! If you´ve loved her, you wouldn´t say that, against her.

-She told me she prostituted once, and I loved her knowing that part of her past life but, since I observed things closely, I knew I couldn´t please her well. She still missed a man who was more achieving -sexually- than me (she told me his name). I knew she still missed another cheating man she loved (by economic reasons) who served her to buy shoes, clothing, food and medicines I could not afford to give the moment she needed them. Her daughter loved that man as much as she could and, the reasons seem to be economically and emotionally. Randy gave her good sex but, the other man, gave her the money she longed and, before she knew the provider was a cheater, she loved him for being a dad to her 3 children she brought along... She got divorced from a military man (who also cheated on her) and, when she needed help to raise “alone” her 3 kids, she met that Arabic man she finally loved… She got so hurt (and broken hearted) the moment she knew he was another cheater in her life; but she needed him to keep on receiving money. He was a good provider! She regretted having known she had no sexual exclusive right (that man had lovers) and, whenever she knew she lacked sex, she “lived” with Randy, but this man was lazy to provide her economically.

-Hey! You´re telling me her PRIVATE life. That´s out of my concern… I will not tell you anything secret in the nearer future.

-Of course! That´s why we´re being lied. I don´t care what people did but, if I´m engaged in a love relationship, I do care what they do. What if I got AIDS? What is she likes to have more than one man in her bed the moment I´m gone? What if I´m not pleasing her sexually? But I was thought to be used economically, or at any other odd convenience.

-I already told you that matchmaking needs some particular agreements.

-That´s right! But I wanted real sexual exclusivity, if I found a lover. I don´t want to lick a cunt another man had ejaculated. I don´t want to love a woman who still longs for another men´s wallet or dick. I don´t want to be wronged twice! I have a heart which has been torn severely and, I know the picking up of those broken pieces takes time; either it belonged to a woman or a man.

-What? Have you given your “heart” to men? -She looked puzzled, this time.

-No! I just meant my heart worths the same joy a woman´s deserves. If they have felt hurt, men also felt hurt. As long as I lived, my whole life I have given my heart twice. It was hurt severely and, after picking up my broken pieces, I´m aware love hurts but, if I knew who was the best woman I should have loved, I surely would too; but life has shown me there´s nothing sure. If God really wanted men (or women) to be married, He´s not doing a job of matchmaker. If He really wanted humankind married twice (after they´ve learned several painstaking love lessons) He should be leading people to meet His best options and -perhaps- divorced ones (those having children). But these are not the best choice to pick from: Virgins were the best!

-Why are you saying that discriminative argument to me?

-Two people, sometimes, are hard to make a simple agreement (Amos 3:3). Just imagine you had to deal with somebody´s else kids. Think you need their approval to love a man you think you needed… The moment you feel a man demands you to cope with people (his children) those you don´t like spontaneously, you would feel “He is bossy”, “He´s controlling” and love is free. That love sets you free willingly, not by an obliging force.

-You surely regret her accommodative attitude. Did she ask you to wear something in fashion?

-Do religious “leaders” ask people to follow up what God said? Or what it seemed more convenient to bless their daughters and mothers?

-You would tell me… Don´t you?

-But I don´t know it! I wish I knew God personally. If I meet Him, I can repent of those sins I willingly did but, as far a I knew what love is, I always chose the wrong woman, like Samson did.

-Your theory is “Promiscuity is better” than being married?

-My theory is God never told me who I should have loved endlessly. Samson married goyim people outside his beliefs and race but, Moses married an African woman and, the Sephora he chose never cheated on him. Did she?

-Hmm! I see you´ve been hurt.

-What was the reason that Samaritan woman had had to having 5 men? She had sexual intercourse with previous 4 men and, that day He appeared to tell her “You haven´t lied...” (Jn 4:17) He probably gave her the clue she needed to quench her life thirst. Both men and women, wished they knew who they should have married. Once a person has lost their virginity, each explores that sexual area developing “habits” or “longs” no ones knows and, the moment they have laid together in bed, the moment they´ve lived like “married” couples, they have started to know how their lives could be complementary (or not). If I have given´t my last lover anything she needed -I don´t know- I would have remained with her but, her children were a pain in the leg. If I could have pleased her sexually (and economically) I would have married her to satisfy that “social” expectation but, since she wasn´t alone, I remained alone.

-Wow! Are you castrated?

-No! But I´m not the same man I was when I was 32 years old. I never told her my turn off was the upsetting presence of her children watching me (to get their blessing), the recurrent need she has I was approved by her two sons, and by her demanding daughter. None of them was economically independent from their mother! They needed a provider, not a man with a parental role or figure. Can I say my children also needed a provider more than a dad? I´m not an achiever, either it was economically or as a love partner. I don't know how to buy that love.

-Wow, Antonio! Are you telling me that? Aren't you ashamed?

-Sure I'm not! The moment I felt pushed to do things I don´t want to do spontaneously, I leave them emotionally. I liked -and loved- that woman but, when I realized she wanted me to be of her personal use (another convenience she's got); when she asked me to buy her a bed another man could use any moment I was outside, I knew I chose wrongly. I´m glad I learned it soon and, if she was alone outside, she wouldn´t have an impediment to do other things she wanted: Although -at home- her children were a light deterrent to do more things wrong.

-I don´t agree with you! -she said, upset- I won´t listen to you, anymore.

-Okey! I forced no one to be heard and listened and, I´m not sorry for having confessed what I thought and saw. Each time I´ve loved -as a Christian- I wanted to give my best but, something deep in me must be wrong, that I was wronged… In that sense, I´m sorry: I don´t know how to make things worked better and, the moment God (or Jesus) had told me: “Marry her!” I would but, since I´m falling short often, I have no other way than fornicating so, my sin would be marrying a person I do not love assured and completely. I care nothing what a church says! The moment they have realized how cheating on hurts, the moment those legalistic “leaders” knew their wives gave -some of them- children whose parents weren´t them (biologically) they would know the burden forced marriage set on men. If God ever wanted men to be married, He should have assumed the role of matchmaker and -in my life- I couldn´t see Him well. That´s all my fault! I did everything wrong (to be wronged).

-Ha! Ha! What a remorse you have.

-It is! Just think of Tamar: She asked the ring on that cord Judah had around his neck; she asked anything she would use to prove he was loyal and trustworthy but, such a man simply needed a physiological sexual release, someone to feel he was alive -as a man- and, that chance he had (that day) was with a black widow he knew “killed” two of his sons. Ha! Ha! What an irony! He simply “slept” with his daughter-in-law... I never paid someone for sex but, if I had “to feel” I was loved for being the person I am, I think I will remain being the same hermit.

-That sounds disgusting! She was not a black widow neither a prostitute!

-Legally it is! He paid her “with a promissory note” to get sex and, that´s why I think we´ve been lied. I cheated on several times when I was pagan but, if I had no real rights of sexual and emotional exclusivity in marriage -as warranty- why do I need it? I never wanted children, I never planned to live a family life and, all I had as a want in life was sex (and someone I really liked endlessly). Marriage gave me nothing I lacked (except children) and, if currently people are free to do WHATEVER they want to be pleased humanly, what is marriage set for today? I have seen (and heard) several men whose children weren´t them, biologically. I know there are women who called their lovers to have sex whenever their spouses left home to work... I know there are spouses having love affairs inside their offices and working places so, what is marriage for? Is it a proven social convenience, not working any longer? Each time I heard it preached -as a thing sorting out situations of loneliness- I know I´m being lied… I spent 13 years in marriage. I enjoyed that but, I was wronged. God never told me “she is the one” and I have loved in vain.

We´re living in sins!

       

                                                                                  A.Toro           Sept 2015

Yo soy un perro

Después de 50 años de experiencia, si pudiera tipificar a la gente como gatos y perros, podría decir -con poco desacierto- que he sido más perro, que gato.

El gato es sensual, manipulativo, desgarradamente oportunista… ¡Se consienten a sí mismos! Pueden que sean hermosos, divertidos, ronroneadores, ágiles, precisos… Pero el perro siempre es leal, predecible, amistosamente respetuoso y, entre sus defectos, puedes verlos voluptuosos, lisonjeros. Pero valientes, si no cobardes.

Jamás un perro te levantará de tu cama por que él tenga hambre (el gato sí).

Jamás el perro se subirá a tu cama para despertarte (el gato sí).

Jamás te morderá la mano, a menos que juegue contigo (el gato te muerde o te araña, aun cuando sepa que l@s quieres) y, por más que quieras abrazar a tu gato o a tu gata, abrazarte a TI MISMO con ell@s, nunca será igual a la lealtad y a el amor que puedes hallar con los caninos.

¡Quiero a los gatos! Pero, yo soy un perro.

 

To Emily

“Your letter brought tears to my eyes.. all I've ever wanted was to have someone love me the way you do... maybe one day God will allow me to marry a man who loves me like you. ”

“I'm so sad.. I don't understand.. why every time I love people.. they leave me.. I don't know what I do wrong... ”

Well, I have no idea, little sister but, if we dare to share our thoughts and ideas -here- we could know (or learn) from our separated worlds or walks.

I don´t know you (1)

We have shared too little (2)

and what we´ve got -online- is but a few, but enough (3).

Yet, I´m aware you could be a catfish... :P

The Emily I loved was a short woman who reminded me Emily Brontë. I almost felt "she" was you (or you was "she").

When I read those letters (love letters) you wrote to "Leo", I think I knew the one I think I know.

As long as I read those letters you wrote to that "loved one", I think I knew your heart, your soul and I said to myself: "She deserved to be loved" and, without knowing it, I loved you and I felt hurt when someone hurt you, and left you. (We cannot change ppl´s choices) (we also have similar rights) so we´re entitled to love those we want to love.

By those days, I had no idea who you are (except by the PASSION you showed by writing).

Today I have no idea on who you are or what would be those reasons you could be left.

Being honest (more honest, because I don´t have needs to lie) I cared NOTHING if you were sick, handicapped or out of your mind: I loved you! With a passion I never felt or thought before.

I hated all who hurt you and left you. I´m glad I had the time to hide and, when you left CC, I got confused and, when you were unwilling or hindered to chat on CC´s room, when you said you were not permitted to talk on LIVE CHATS, I hate the family you had, I had the conditions you were "living" on and, if I had the money to go to Trinidad "to save you" I would have gone, because I would have loved you, no matter you had AIDS or walked on a wheel chair (a thing I was scared when you approached me on CC, using that nickname I never thought you would use). It was a deja vú I feared and, if I was younger, if I was there -negrita- I would have tried to loved you, even to propose you marriage; but I faced vasectomy to avoid children and, to my own regret, I chose to live like a church mouse (even poorly) so I have nothing to give any woman, except what I think what I have as my life.

Negrita! Long distance relationships are not good enough to live by or with.

We human ppl need living ppl, near doors.

You are the most beautiful woman I´ve ever met. I don´t mind if you are blind, "ugly" or handicapped to your own mind: I would love you, with my own (and, if Venezuela was´t what it is presently, I would take you HOME) but Venezuela is not a home: YOU are any man´s home.

If he takes you as you are, YOU ARE HIS HOME.

I don´t know how to help you but, if you tell me "what you´re doing wrong" I think we could find out.

Are you being picky?

Are you seeking a handsome boy "everybody" loves?

If you dare to tell me, I can try to help.

You are beautiful and, if you are that girl I saw on your CC avatar, you are ALSO beautiful in your external shape: I loved that hair I saw on those tiny pics. I loved the shape I think I saw when you showed me the moment when you was baptized so, what any NORMAL man would lack in meeting you?

I also think that man you recently fed, that poor and rejected one, would love you eternally.

Emily! You are the most wonderful young woman I have met online.

You might not be perfect like God´s angels, but you are a woman, and a beautiful woman and, if you need more help, get a psychologist: Something could be wrong in the way you´re approached but, for me, you are wonderful and, I have no way to tell you that so, if I had more means (youth + money) I would reach you, wherever you are.

Have faith!

Grow inside, and I hope to meet you in heaven. I don´t know you yet, as a whole human being, but I love you, anyhow.

How could I tell you? 

How could I hug you, the way I am? Hindered by time and distance...

God and time will tell. (Do not hurry! Life is eternal)

I have loved you, negrita.   <3>

A.T.

​ No pain, no gain! A worldly reward system.

You´ve probably heard that in a gym. You surely know what that means and it doesn´t matter that knowledge comes from worldly wisdom, since physically that´s a verifiable truth that has paid (and failed).

If you have a "warren" field in the country, if you don´t remove the weeds growing around so often, you won´t see the fruits of having it, except the solace and the bushes that are hard to get rid of there.

If you don´t have a frequent pain toil work over that soil, you won´t see the fruit of it and, above of all sort of worldly evils, some things like fatality and adversity have come along: All you´ve done there can be lost, the moment you expected an assured "abundant" harvesting...

I can cry over the milk spilled.

I can proclaim, sometimes, life do not have a deep rewarding meaning I´ve enjoyed.

No pain, no gain? And what it´s for?

The moment you´ve read about Job, what he faced in his life (losing all of value, having friends who seemed to be another burden and that wife) you can say to yourself: "What is life made for?"

In Spanish there is a popular saying: “El que madruga, toma agua clara”. It´s like saying: “Whomever goes out at daybreak will drink clear water”. What is it that to our emotional human reward? It is that, if we make some additional effort, life will compensate us, anyhow.

You want a particular new job. You want it because it pays a lot or, because you´ve liked all the chores involved in. You´re not alone in your hometown, there´re bunches of people in need seeking any job to survive, and some of them are more qualified or less qualified than you. You might need that you to improve your income, your status, to lessen the burden of your daily time or tu improve your curricula.

You want that particular job because you recently finish high school and you know that job will lead you to new achievements… In few words, you need to make great efforts to get it. If you are hired, you feel rewarded. If you are dismissed, you feel despised, ignored, as if nothing was enough, like if you were an underachiever.

You want the most beautiful girl in town. If you are handsome enough, you probably know you need some additional assets to get her attention quickly... A new hair style? New clothing? New friends near her town or social circles? A better economic status? You know what it´s lacked and what needed to get her so, you would walk another mile (Matt 5:41).

In general, if you wanted a better job or a person to hug you, you needed to walk farther and, perhaps, less than a mile but, you needed to give the best you´ve had.

Commonly, inside what it is expected inside Christianity, not all the believers I knew wanted a roommate just for “easy” sex, but for enjoyable “spiritual” fellowship. If you wanted a job, your aim could have been both, material and “spiritual”, since there are places or situations we do not like to live in: There are different types of conveniences to opt for something more or better. One things thinks to be sure: You needed or will need to make and effort.

Are you being diligent or anxious to achieve your earthly goals? (Matt. 6:27; Luk 12:25)

Diligency is good. It could be self motivating and holistically determinative but, being anxious and overstressed is not really sane.

How do you see Jesus those days He ran His earthly ministry?

• He loved His time praying before daybreak (Mk 1:35)
• He felt really compelled to spread the Good News around and soon (Mk 1:38-39)
• It seems He was motivated for His Father´s love (Matt 12:50; Jn 10:17-18; 15:10).
• He followed the law and behave accordingly to it (Lk 4:16; 14:5; Mk 2:27)
• He slept when He could and when it was needed (Matt 8:24)
• He assumed His ministerial role and often discharged from His apostles´shoulders some tasks of responsibility (Matt 14:22)
• He cared for people´s essential needs (Lk 4:38; 19:41; Jn 11:35; Matt 9:36; 14:16, 19-20)
• But He wasn´t anxious (Matt 6:34) except in the agony of the cross (Mk 15:34)

No pain... No gain!

He knew what He came here for (Mk 1:38)

He wasn´t living His life with those earthly material push (Matt 16:26) but within a lifestyle centered on God´s will, pleasing Him (the most).

Jesus said that, a life like that, will be utterly rewarded: “Mat 19:29 All who have given up home or brothers and sisters or father and mother or children or land for me will be given a hundred times as much. They will also have eternal life. ” (Matt 10:41-42; Lk 14:14)

But, is that the life I´ve been leading?

Family and teachers taught us to compete by defeating the “enemy” teams. If we wanted to be the “bests”, we needed to fight against groups -or individuals- by beating and belittling other people on our way, as if that was the conquering of this world, or as it was a life contest.

At the school we learned to work as individuals to develop our owns schemes. Teamwork was sought eventually but, each school team, always needed a leader and, that´s why you can see that word of “leader” deeply connected to the secularism of several churches, today:

Did Jesus called His apostles to be “leaders” or to be his “sent”?

This is how secularized churches gave some emotional relief or human reward to their “leaders”:

They gave them a high position  

They gave them a social status 

They gave them a gender role

The Lord Jesus said this I have to keep in mind: Mat 23:10 None of you should be called the leader. The Messiah is your only leader.

He reassured His chosen by saying: “Mat 23:8 But none of you should be called a teacher. You have only one teacher, and all of you are like brothers and sisters.”

At browsing the internet, I have liked these two examples I´d pick as a reminder:

What was the worldly reward the apostles expected when following the Lord Jesus?

Mat 19:27 Peter replied, "Remember, we have left everything to be your followers! What will we get?"

Mat 19:28 Jesus answered: Yes, all of you have become my followers. And so in the future world, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, I promise that you will sit on twelve thrones to judge the twelve tribes of Israel. (See it also Lk 18:28)

Those men served Him for a human and immediate reward: Be seated to rule over Israel.

They believed in God (Jn 14:1) but they also believed in actual worldly rewards.

They weren´t going to have just some fun. They left their jobs and towns to obey the One they saw as Master but, they also saw the “future” kingdom at a hand: “Act 1:6 While the apostles were still with Jesus, they asked him, "Lord, are you now going to give Israel its own king again?" ”

It was not that easy! They needed to endure it, until the last breath: “Luk 21:19 In your patience ye shall win your souls.”

Patience, here, means “cheerful endurance”. Even to death!

No pain, no gain.

You cannot eat without daily toils.

You cannot see your house clean , unless someone endures it or pays the price.

You cannot get an abundant harvest if no one has riped what some else has sown.

Each time I looked on Job´s life or at Lazarus the Lepper, I feel they felt bad and frustrated.

Each time I see a man sick and depressed, like that one who needed Jesus to be healed, I think of how they have felt (Jn 5:7).

Ok!

I know I cannot get certain things. Some miracles aren´t to be taken for anything granted but, if I received a gift, I should remember these words Jesus said for a man who was instantly healed: “Joh 5:14 Later, Jesus met the man in the temple and told him, "You are now well. But don't sin anymore or something worse might happen to you." ”

I deserve nothing I was given.

I deserve nothing I thought I had the right to get or receive (except I toiled or fought for).

When you get that job you wanted, you did your best and, sometimes, many people are doing (or have done) better things than you so, if they get what you missed, don´t feel discouraged or don´t see its negative side solely: Another person could be blessed too! It doesn´t matter how hard you´ve tried, you´re not the only person “worthy” to be blessed by their merits or by God´s will.

No pain, no gain?

Luk 9:23 Then Jesus said to all the people: If any of you want to be my followers, you must forget about yourself. You must take up your cross each day and follow me.

But look at Samson! How much money would you bet that he was handsome, as any of those actors Hollywood has hired to play those movies we have seen?

He wanted one wife and, as soon as she wished, he lost her in one single night. Where are those hopes he had? (Jdg 14:3) Where have gone that money he spent for a wedding?

God knew what He wanted from Samson (Jdg 13:5) and the end result was not his death, but the time he served in Israel (Jdg 15:20)

No pain, no gain.

Samson enjoyed that love relationship with the woman who betrayed and sold him out. He was sexually or sensually rewarded with Delilah but, was it a life to be endured and count on?

There´re too many rewarding things in life, but Jesus chose the best: Loving God. (Jn 15:10)

A.T.