Chapter 4: Adult Content
We and our present idea of God need to come to an agreement which is adult life for us through the manifested word or wisdom of our God in the world. It is through a willing self-revelation that our God can save us from our error. Our God must make himself known. The Christ is called the "word" by the evangelist, to show that he is all the wisdom of our God we need to correct ourselves. This Christ is the cure for our thinking disorder. The evangelist saw that this agreement with God was a relationship somewhat like a marriage. When we are joined intellectually to the truth that a Christ is, from that union comes new life, our own. This figurative marriage of humanity to the truth of a Christ is an entirely intellectual relationship.
The choice of the analogy of marriage, to reveal the nature of our relationship to the truth of a Christ, is an excellent choice in a structural sense, but an unfortunate choice because of its implication and involvement in our ultimate destiny. The relationship of brotherhood would have provided a better analogy and a greater comprehension of our relationship to this Christ. We suspect that John or the Evangelist and Paul both used the analogy of marriage to combat what they perceived as a threat to the faith in the early church, which was in actuality a deeper understanding of the truth. There was a deeper understanding of human marriage that both John and Paul had no firsthand experience with and could not have easily accepted, so they put marriage in a frame of reference that they felt they could safely deal with. This is the conflict of the child's perception with the adult's perception that we spoke of earlier. Unfortunately, John and Paul were more successful than they probably intended to be and we have lost sight of the adult's perception down to this present age.
At any rate, marriage is a revealing structural analogy for our relationship to the truth initially. When Christ walked and talked with humanity on this earth, he claimed to be the truth. By then dying, andbeing resurrected, and then leaving us, he offers us an irrational truth. We no longer have to understand him. We only have to accept him, and we may bring forth the life, which is us from that union. If we accept the phenomenon of Christ as historically true, then we have been joined to a truth we do not understand and can't prove. From this union, we may bring forth our own life as a child in the household of our God.
A man and a woman are drawn together initially by irrational need. Their desire for one another is really just a sense of incompleteness. We have a similar sense of incompleteness toward our God. We believe either that we have lost eternal life, or that we never had it to begin with. In any case, we want to live forever and cannot figure out how. The legendary Christ claims to be the truth and the life we seek. If he dies and is then resurrected, and then goes to a place where we are not, and we have seen it or accept it as historically true, then he has drawn us out beyond death, to a place we are presently not. He claims to be the truth and life we seek, but he has gone beyond death to a place where we are not. To find our truth and life, we must go beyond death to that place. This faith completely circumvents our presently warped relativity and created the first martyrs for the Christ.
This is the faith of a child. There is no need for us to have an adult understanding of why a Christ is the truth and life. We must simply believe that the truth and life we seek has gone to a place beyond death, and we must go there too in order to find what we seek. We are born beyond death as children, because we have no understanding. We then must grow up all over again. We have taken our Christ at his word and gone beyond death to find understanding, because we believe he has understanding. We then must grow up all over again. He certainly will not deny us understanding once we are where he is. He will teach us everything, and we will grow up in the truth without a warped perception, but we can be sure that we have gone beyond death to grow up, not to remain a child, even though we had to become a child to find the truth we sought.
A man and a woman are drawn together initially by irrational need. Their desire for one another is really just a sense of incompleteness and is what makes it possible for the couple to bring forth new life or have a child. There is no need for the couple to understand their irrational need for one another to have a child. They may come together entirely for the purpose of gratification and bring forth life by accident.
Our irrational need for our God is our desire for eternal life. It is irrational because we are already in reality eternally living. If a couple has a child in this life, that child is a revelation of some previously unknown inner truth of its parents. If by joining ourselves to the legendary Christ as the source of our truth, we are then reborn in the place where he is as children, we are in those children an inner revelation of what we really are. By going beyond death to where we are not and forcing us to follow him there, this Christ draws the truth of what we really are out of us without having to change our warped relativity. In this way Christ overcomes our thinking disorder, our warped relativity, and our bent reason, without having to reason with us at all.
In the legend when Peter recognizes Christ as the savior of men, he is duly commended. The Christ calls this fundamental faith of recognition the rock and foundation upon which the church will be built. Essentially this rock of fundamental faith is the only thing of value in the whole structure of what we presently call organized Christian faith.
We know that everything that modern organized Christianity or the church tells us besides this basic faith of recognition is worthless, because it does not go beyond death with us. When we die, all that passes beyond death with us is our fundamental recognition of the legendary Christ. The structure and teaching of the church, which has been added on to the rock or fundamental faith, does not go to where our Christ is with us. From this we may be sure that anything the church, any church, teaches us beyond the fundamental recognition of the legendary Christ as the truth and life we seek, at this point in time is essentially fantasy.
Peter is initially commended by Jesus for his recognition of the Christ. Later, Peter is chastised for displaying the thinking disorder common to humanity. Peter is truly representative of organized Christianity. The church, every church, has simply succumbed to the thinking disorder common to humanity and given us volumes of warped perspective. We know this is true, because no library has ever died with a man. The truth would go with the man beyond death. We can be sure that no perspective other than the rock or fundamental faith of recognition has ever been carried beyond death to where the legendary Christ is.
If we die believing in the legendary Christ and are not immediately resurrected, we can be sure that our faith is nothing more than a faith of fundamental recognition. In order for our faith to go beyond fundamental recognition, we must unbend our reason and correct our warped relativity. If we have corrected our warped relativity, we will be eternally living and unable to stay dead. If we see a visibly resurrected teacher, or a teacher who leaves this world without dying, we can be sure that teacher has a possession of the truth beyond the fundamental recognition of a Christ, as long as that teacher is a human being like us.
The passage (Matt. 16:13-28) can be taken as an interesting analogy for organized Christianity. Peter is representative of the fundamental faith of recognition, and then further on in the passage, representative of the insidious thinking disorder that is the infection that the faith of recognition cures miraculously without reason. The thinking disorder common to mankind has infected the whole of organized Christianity, because organized Christianity is by necessity composed of infected people. The church draws the people initially by offering the faith of recognition as the cure for the thinking disorder.
The fundamental faith of recognition can indeed cure the infectious insidious thinking disorder of mankind, but not without death. The reason the church has not overcome death is because no one has returned from the dead to teach. The whole body of understanding that we must have, in order to overcome death has been put by the church in a place beyond death. The church cannot tell us what we need to know, because the whole faith of the church is the fundamental faith of recognition. The church must die to discover any truth beyond the childlike faith of recognition.
The legendary Christ has gone beyond death. The comprehension of the implications of the phenomenon of Christ is a revelation of the truth we need to find eternal life without dying. Later in the passage we are discussing, Christ seems to indicate that this is true in noting that there are some who will see the fullness of Christ in their lifetime.
In another similar passage (John 21:15-23), we may poetically project Peter again as representing the church or organized Christianity. He is admonished three times, "feed my lambs, tend my sheep, feed my sheep." He is asked three times if he loves Christ. Peter is forced to finally admit that he is not sure of his love, because Christ is still unknown to him. Peter, representing the church, is finally forced to admit than only Christ knows how much the church loves him, because the church knows the legendary Christ as only a savior and not as a brother.
The church is completely unable to substantiate its relativity to Christ until it has died. No lamb has been fed because there has been no shepherd. Every Christian must die as a lamb, because the church has made the gate to the sheepfold a combination of the legendary Christ and death. The lamb must die to get through the gate of Christ into the presence of the shepherd Christ. The legendary Christ is reported to have claimed to be the gate to the sheepfold and the shepherd of the sheepfold. To get to the sheepfold, a lamb does not have to die. The church has not recognized that death is part of its thinking disorder and a product of our warped relativity.
When it was young, organized Christianity put on its own belt of truth and walked where it liked. It walked until it had covered the earth. Now that it is old, someone else will bind it with a belt of truth and take it where it does not want to go, to its death. Only by dying, can organized Christianity find the truth; because its truth lives in a place beyond death in the flesh and bones of the shepherd from which the now worthless shepherds have taken their name.
At the end of the passage (John 21:15-23), John the Evangelist is given the destiny to live until Christ or the fullness of the truth of Christ is revealed. John will live to see the kingdom of Christ completely before he dies. The sense of the whole passage is that the church will die or organized Christianity will disintegrate when it is bound by the complete truth of Christ, and that some of the followers of Christ or members of the church will survive to see it happen. The key part of the passage is that someone else will bind the church with a belt of truth, and force the church to go where it would rather not go. That someone else is not Christ. That someone else is not a prophet. That someone else is a new phenomenon, a younger brother of Christ born living from the world. The comprehension of the implications of the phenomenon of Christ will be in him. His life will prove the truth of the legendary Christ visibly to the world.
Tradition holds that the gospel of John was the last written of the non-apocryphal gospels. The contents are tightly organized, and the theology is indicative of a maturing Christian thought. Of all the evidence to support its late composition, the most important is rarely spoken of. The most obvious evidence of its late composition is that it addresses directly the problem in the early church of variant apostolic thought.
The writer of the gospel of John has included very personal stories about certain apostles in his narrative. It is reasonable to postulate that his purpose is to make the reader aware of the personal experience and the personal relationship to the legendary Christ of himself (John), Peter, and Thomas. It is therefore reasonable to postulate that the apostolic thought of the time was slightly varied to at least a threefold degree, and it was the thought of John, Peter and Thomas that held the most sway. It is also a reasonable assumption that this varied thought was a source of some conflict within the apostolate of John. The writer of the gospel of John deals with this conflict head on by including personal stories which are sometimes unflattering in order to show the possible foundation of John's, Peter's and Thomas' perspective. At this point, we may point out that Paul, who more than likely held the largest influence in terms of numbers of followers, is not mentioned at all. There are two obvious reasons for this.
The first reason is that the span of time in which the gospel takes place pre-dates Paul. However, since the gospel first became available after Paul, it is certain that John could have added on the experience of Paul had he thought it was necessary. It simply was not necessary. There was no conflict of thought between John and Paul. Furthermore, since the apostolate of John and Paul largely overlapped, we would have been well aware of any conflict between the two. It is apparent from the letters and writings attributed to John and Paul, that although they were in agreement with each other, their thought came into conflict on more than one occasion with the thought of first Peter, and later Thomas.
The conflict with Peter seems to be relatively simple. Fundamentally, John did not disagree with Peter all. He simply considered him short sighted or unable to move beyond the fundamental faith of recognition. The present day church is definitely the legacy of Peter. Peter was much like the fundamentalists of today, so eager to preserve the fundamental faith of recognition, but extremely reluctant to expand that recognition to an intellectual level, a reality altering level.
The conflict with Thomas is more complex. John and Paul do not disagree with Thomas, nor is there any evidence to indicate that they specifically set out to dispute what Thomas was teaching; although in the end and inadvertently to be sure, the truth that Thomas knew has become quite obscure in this present age. Part of that is due to the misinterpretation of the writings of John and Paul. John and Paul probably believed what Thomas knew but considered it an exceptional dispensation of the truth which could only be added onto an already rock solid faith. In other words, the faith of Thomas was not for everyone of that age. There are passages in the writings of John and Paul that make us well aware than John and Paul considered what Thomas believed to be the truth. There are, as well, lengthy passages in the gospel of John, the Revelation, and the letters of Paul in which John and Paul attempt to prepare the reader for the reception of a higher truth without confusing their fundamental faith of recognition. The faith of Peter is the perception of the child we described earlier. The faith of Thomas is the perception of the adult we described earlier. John and Paul were in the gap between the two, attempting to mediate the passage of their followers from childhood to adulthood without the loss of a single child. It is obvious from their writing that they understood both perceptions.
John and Paul are excellent examples of good shepherds. Their concern for the well being of their flocks was similar to a Christ's. The legendary Christ must have known that the phenomenon he was, revealed the truth fully; but he was careful not to teach it specifically, because he knew that those who were capable of receiving it would recognize him and receive it anyway, simply by observation of the phenomenon he was. John and Paul may have been aware of the full truth but would have known as well that it was nearly impossible to teach it in that age. John and Paul, good shepherds that they were, simply set about preparing people to receive the full truth without destroying their present faith. They knew you could not put new wine in old wineskins. If we take the passage at the end of the gospel of John (John 21:15-23) concerning Peter as a prophecy as to the fate of the church, it is obviously at the end of the age of the church, that the someone else who binds the church with truth is revealed. Paul goes so far as to relate that the angels await the revelation of the sons of God from among men – (the aspiration of a society).
In another passage, toward the end of the gospel of John (John 20:24-29), we may discover that John is well aware of the adult perception of the truth, and he equates it with Thomas. This famous passage is the one that causes which analysts to conclude that Thomas is a doubter. The fact is that Thomas is more than a doubter. He is an extremely bold cynic who has a deep trust in Christ. He is the first of the twelve to gain an adult perspective. He is so certain of his Christ's love that he dares to challenge Christ to a further revelation of himself. He refuses to accept the resurrection, until he has handled the newly living body of Christ. Thomas is too well aware of what he is looking for to accept an apparition or the word of his brothers about an apparition. Thomas is looking for a bodily resurrection, a cosmic Christ. Thomas' faith is rewarded by his Christ with a deeper revelation. When Thomas has handled his Christ, he recognizes what he suspected all along. He immediately calls the legendary Christ his God. Christ is now a known God to Thomas, a truly human, truly cosmic Christ. The passage ends with a prophecy. Others in an age to come will discover the full truth of the cosmic Christ and be born from the world alive. John makes us aware of what Thomas discovered in other passages as well. We must understand that Thomas already knew what he was looking for before he handled Christ. His understanding was matched to his aspirations.
In the gospel of John (John 20:11-18), we find the strange story of the risen Christ's encounter with Mary Magdalene. This story has had so many bizarre interpretations down through the ages, that some analysts suggest it is an error or an addition or aberration. That is absurd, because it is obvious that John's gospel is the most contrived and organized of the gospels. Given the indicative of an affinity for gnosticism in John’s gospel we can be sure that if the story is there, it is there for a purpose. In the story, Jesus admonishes Mary not to cling (the word may even be cleave) to him; because he has not yet ascended to the Father. Here we have again the good shepherd who reveals the truth to only those who are ready to receive it. Essentially what her Christ is telling Mary here, is that he cannot be her husband, and he cannot explain why. He protects her faith by saying that he must go to his idea of God the Father, who is her idea of God the Father as well, to a place outside of this world beyond death; and when she eventually arrives in that place beyond death, she will understand why he cannot be her husband now. By doing this, he is denying her a revelation, while at the same time, protecting her faith. The Christ in this story is matching the aspirations of Mary to her understanding without denying her highest aspirations.
In the gospel of John (John 19:31-37), we find the passage concerning the piercing of the side of Christ with a spear while he hangs on a cross. Out of the side of Christ came immediately blood and water. Some analysts have guessed somewhat closely as to the significance of this passage but have overlooked the preceding verse (vs. 30) and its implication to the passage. Just before he died, Christ is reported to have uttered the words, "It is accomplished", or "It is completed." By faith, or by altering his relativity, Christ had gained the body of a complete being like his God. The hole pierced in the side of Christ is indeed representative of Adam's rib, as some analysts have suggested. The blood and water do indeed signify something being born as some analysts have suggested. However, out of Christ came no new Eve, and that which was born of blood and water was to be the church. If Christ is a new Adam, as Paul suggests, then the blood and water signify that he is a new Eve, as well. No Eve came forth from the side of Christ, because the woman was already in Christ by his faith. The blood and water signify that Christ was feminine, as well as masculine after his death by faith. He is not reported to have taken a wife in this life, because he was represented as complete by faith. The legendary Christ is reported to have aspired to be whole during his life, and to have attained wholeness through his understanding. This marriage of principle, revealed as masculine and feminine in one being is a primordial state. If the legendary Christ is revealed as a whole primordial being, who still aspires to attain his God, the implications of the phenomenon of the legendary Christ become explosive.
The truth that Thomas discovered was that his Christ was both masculine and feminine. It was this truth that her Christ protected Mary Magdalene from by admonishing her not to touch him. That Thomas called Jesus his God, even though Jesus is reported to still be aspiring to his Father God, is profound. Thomas knew much more as did the writer of the story. We can only conclude that Thomas knew the structure of God in a way that allowed for his Christ to be the God he aspired to, while still aspiring to his original God – the one his Christ also still aspired to.
Sexual maturity is part of the natural metamorphosis into adulthood. If we are adult, we have become potently one sex or the other. The adult may only live eternally as a marriage of principle. We may only be fully joined to the truth of Christ, if we are adults, as a marriage; or we must abandon our adulthood through death. If our bodies are already adult, and we cannot find a mate in agreement with our perception of Christ, we must abandon our bodies to death, so that we may be restored to a child's body in the life to come and grow up all over again. Adult eternal life is structured as marriage. The legendary Christ is reported to have gained the structure of an eternally living adult by faith. We may do so as well. If a married couple in this life can find and hold the truth of Christ through comprehension of the implications of the phenomenon of Christ, together, they may be born from this world alive with no death in between. They may become "the someone else."
John, Paul, and Thomas seem to indicate that through a union with the truth of Christ or a comprehension of the implications of the phenomenon of Christ, an earthly marriage could, as a now complete structure able to bring forth its own inner truth in children, be born as a marriage alive from this world with no death in between. The good shepherds John and Paul seem to be attempting to prepare their followers for this eventuality by using so much imagery about marriage in describing a relationship to the truth of Christ. Marriage became John's favorite figurative tool in structuring our relationship to the truth of Christ. By proposing first marriage to the truth of Christ, John and Paul were attempting to prepare the intellects of their followers for the full revelation of the truth of Christ and marriage. Paul tantalizes his followers by calling marriage a mystery. John writes that Christ is a bridegroom and the whole church a bride. The marriage imagery of John seems to become the foundation of a deeper truth to be revealed in a later age. John indicates that the birth from the world alive of someone else was not to occur until the faith of Peter, the fundamental faith of recognition, had gone out to the whole world, or reached its point of saturation, the point at which it was in danger of being lost forever, the point which made the death of those who believed like children necessary for their own preservation.
Many Christians believe in a concept called the rapture. Essentially, they believe that a revelation of Christ will cause the transformation of Christians still living into what they are destined to be in eternity without the necessity of their death. They believe they will go from this life to eternal life in the twinkling of an eye without dying. (1 Thes. 4:15-17) (1 Cor. 15:51-53).
Fundamentally the idea of the rapture may be true, but just being aware of an idea is not enough to possess the idea as a destiny. Fundamentalists have simply not become aware of real faith yet. Real faith is acceptable reality not acceptable perception. We may know of an idea, but we must base our faith on proven truth; or we cannot possess the idea. Death itself is what sorts out proven truth from unproven truth. If our ideas about Christ or any doctrine concerning Christ are based on unproven truth they will not pass beyond death with us. All that can go beyond death is proven truth. (Heb. 11:1) That is why most Christians die. Their faith requires it. Their proven truth has gone to live in a place beyond death, and they must go there to find the full truth of eternal life.
The rapture may be true, but those who believe in the idea do not understand the idea. A revelation of Christ is a revelation of the truth of Christ. What those who are raptured will see is that Christ is a marriage of principle like God; and that if we are to live eternally with God, we are meant to become a marriage of principle as well. Some Christians will be aware of this truth, but will have been unable to find or have lost a mate, and they will have been transformed by a revelation of proven truth. Other Christians will be unaware of the truth but will have been prepared to receive it and will be able to receive it when they see it. The proven truth that will trigger the rapture of those who can receive it, is the same proven truth that will signal the death of those who have only Peter's fundamental faith of recognition. That proven truth will be the birth from the world of someone else, a new marriage of principle, a brother of Christ, a living adult son of Christ’s God. Those who witness this birth, and those who believe the witnesses will gain the same destiny by faith in a proven truth. This someone else will be born from the world by proven truth. They will comprehend the implications of the phenomenon of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ will become proven truth to them without the necessity of the passage through the veil of cosmic death. They will have gone through the veil of intellectual death and found the proven truth of Christ.
A certain portion of Christianity believes in celibacy. Some of them go so far as to believe that celibacy is a higher estate than marriage. This is a grave error. Marriage is the structure of eternal life. Whoever is now celibate will become a marriage of principle eventually in eternal life, if they get there. Celibacy in its present practice is simply a blinding error. If a man is truly celibate, he will have no sexual desire at all. True celibacy is forsaking the possibility of birth from this world as a marriage of principle in order to free oneself from the cares of developing a marriage of principle for a time, in order to be of service to one's fellow man by bringing the truth of a Christ. True celibacy knows that marriage is our true eternal potential and so forsakes that marriage which is life, in order to bring that truth to humanity. If celibacy does not begin on the basis that marriage is eternal life, then it is not true celibacy.
It is unlikely that our present celibate priesthood is truly celibate. They do not believe that marriage is eternal life, so they have given nothing up. That is why they still have sexual desires, and why when they then try to intellectually suppress those desire, those desires sometimes become aberrations. Suppression of the truth is the cause of sin. The suppressed sexuality of the priesthood simply rears its head as something else. We cannot overcome the truth of ourselves by intellectual force. If the celibate priesthood does not believe that marriage is eternal life, their sexuality will not go away. If they do not believe that marriage is eternal life, their sexuality will cry out all the harder to them, because it is a witness to the truth that marriage is the structure of our eternal potential. Furthermore, if a celibate person is able to intellectually disguise or suppress the truth of their sexuality enough, there is a very good chance that they will not recognize their Christ in the place beyond death. Celibacy must be based on the truth.
The legendary Christ is presently reported to have been truly celibate. If he was, he gave up true marriage for a time in order to die and lead us beyond death so that we did not have to sort through the thinking disorder of humanity. Christ knew what he was giving up and so did not lose it. He gave up his eternal potential for a time in the service of humanity who had become hopelessly confused. John, Paul and Thomas may have been truly celibate as well. Paul seems to understand that celibacy is the sacrifice made for the freedom to serve. He is also careful to say that celibacy is not higher than marriage. The passage in Matthew (Matt. 19:3-15) that has been so horribly interpreted down through the ages by Catholics and Protestants alike, is a prime example of what the thinking disorder in humanity does to scripture. The passage is extremely revealing, if we postulate one simple concept - Christ spoke only the truth. A revelation of our whole human dilemma is in this one brief passage.
The Pharisees asked Christ if it was permissible for a man to divorce his wife. Christ's reply is that all humanity comes into the world as either male or female; and that once they have gone through the natural metamorphosis into adult sexual maturity, the adult male and female are meant to be joined into one body. Christ indicates further that God is the cause of the phenomenon of marriage and that man must not divide the marriage that God is the initial cause of. To God the marriage is permanent and eternal. In God's eyes, there is no sufficient cause to divide a marriage. Death of one partner or the other is not sufficient cause to divide the marriage. Death is the product of man's thinking disorder, not a punishment from God. There is no cause, not even death, sufficient to justify the destruction of a marriage in God's eyes.
Now we may understand the phrase "I am not speaking of fornication." Here in this phrase Christ is clarifying. Christ is saying that what the Pharisees understand marriage as, the vow of fidelity until death do you part, is not marriage at all but only fornication. When we vow fidelity to our partner until we are parted by death, our marriage has been made by the vow into nothing more than fornication. We cannot commit adultery unless our vow is eternal, and our marriage is eternally living. That is why Christ clarifies the statement with the peculiar phrase "I am not speaking of fornication." Before making the statement, he tells the Pharisees the reason for divorce and the reason for their misinterpretation of marriage and divorce - "You were so unteachable." You had and still have a fundamental thinking disorder. Divorce in our present understanding of marriage is not divorce, because there is no marriage in our present understanding. Furthermore, there is no divorce in eternal life, because marriage is eternal life. This misperception of marriage is indicative of our thinking disorder and our fundamentally warped relativity. To be sure, the Pharisees have missed the deeper meaning of the revelation about marriage in Christ's answer to their questions, but some of the disciples were aware of it. The disciples said to Christ, "If that is how things are between husband and wife, it is not advisable to marry." The disciples could not yet see themselves overcoming death, so marriage seemed to them to be an impossible situation.
Christ is well aware of the implications of his answer to the previous question posed by the Pharisees, so he clarifies again for the benefit of the disciples this time. He explains that not everyone has the good fortune or opportunity to find eternal life through marriage in this world and be born from this world alive without dying. Some are simply born into the world unsuited for marriage. Some are made unfit for marriage by the world around them and the thinking disorder common to humanity. Some like he will forsake their possibility for a time to serve humanity by bringing them the truth. This is the true meaning of the passage.
We have suggested that the order of the gospel stories in the gospel of John is contrived, and in parts of Matthew this may be true as well. It may also be true that the order in which the legendary Christ relentlessly revealed himself to the world is contrived. If we understand Christ's goal as revealing in the phenomenon that he is the truth of life, it may well be that some of the passages in the gospels are grouped for an intellectual assault on our thinking disorder. This passage (Matt. 19:13-15) that follows the passage we have previously discussed, certainly seems to support this argument.
Here we have Christ the good shepherd in action. Christ is well aware that the disciples may take his word that marriage is meant to be eternal life, but that it is a truth they may eventually find unacceptable, because it is unproven. He knows that after his death and resurrection, he will have the proven truth in his possession, so he reinforces their fundamental faith of recognition by telling the disciples that the kingdom of heaven will initially be composed of entirely little children. This frees the disciples from the bonds of their adulthood until it is time for them to understand adult truth from a source of proven truth. This is a fundamental pattern throughout the gospels. Christ reveals relativity altering truth and then protects the childlike faith of his followers. This is because he understands how men are made and knows that only his death and resurrection will provide proven truth.
It is more than likely no accident that Christ's discourse with the rich young ruler (Matt.19:16-26) immediately follows the passage concerning marriage, and the famous "suffer the little children" passage, which we have previously discussed in the gospel of Matthew. The passages on the surface appear to be unrelated; but if we understand the first passage about marriage in its true perspective and depth, the passage about the rich young ruler gains a relativity altering power.
In the passage about marriage, Christ reveals that all of humanity comes into this present world as either male or female and that the two sexes are meant to be joined into one body. Marriage is meant to be our eternal destiny. This reveals that our present relativity to the command to not commit adultery is completely warped. To commit adultery, we must be married. If we are not eternally living, we are not married. If we were truly married and eternally living, we would not be able to commit adultery since a marriage of eternal life is permanent and indestructible. Fundamentally and essentially, we are not truly able to commit adultery. We intellectually force ourselves into a relativity where adultery is possible.
If our relativity to the command to not commit adultery is warped, then our relativity to the whole law must be warped. To break the law, we must be eternally living. If we are eternally living, we will not be able to break the law. It is easy to see that there is no real consequence for breaking the law unless we are eternally living, since the penalty for breaking the law is loss of eternal life. We must possess something first in order to appreciate the loss of it. Our intellect is aware of this and forces us into a relativity where there is a real penalty for breaking the law.
It is not that difficult to discover the cause of our warped relativity. We believe a part of us to be eternal which is not yet eternal, and we believe a part of us to be not yet eternal which is already completely fit for eternity. This warped relativity gives us the power to punish something eternal of ourselves for breaking the law. Through this warped relativity, we are able to suffer a genuine loss. In this way, we disguise the truth of eternal life from ourselves.
Fundamentally, if we are adult, it is our body that is fit for eternity, and our intellect which is not yet fit for eternity, though most of us believe just the opposite. Most of us believe that our intellect lives on in our soul or psychic essence after the death of our body. Indeed, our intellect does live on in our psychic essence or soul after death, but it is still short of eternal life. Eternal life is cosmic. Christ resurrected his body and left no part of it behind. Though our intellect may live on, it is not in possession of eternal life until it has a body to live in. Fundamentally, our intellect is a child, and that is why it does not die with our body for breaking the law. No one destroys a child for an error. Our body is adult and destined for adulthood, regardless of what we do. The body of an infant is adult by faith, even if the child dies; because if the child lives, the body is sure to become adult. There is no way for the body to resist adulthood. If an infant dies, it is because its body is adult by faith. Only an adult essence may die. An essence must be fit for eternity to lose eternity.
If we have gone through the irresistible metamorphosis into cosmic adulthood, and our bodies are sexually mature male or female, the two opposite sexed bodies may be joined into one body. This is the beginning of cosmic adult eternal life. Our intellect prevents our bodies from fulfilling their true destiny, because it sees everything from a child's perspective. Our intellect, which has power over our body, even though it came into being because of our body, now by force thrusts our body into a warped relativity. Our body that is already fit for eternity can indeed suffer the penalty for breaking the law. Our body cries out at its loss, but our intellect cannot hear the cry; because it believes it is the part fit for eternity. The intellect lives on after the body dies but cannot escape its level of existence, because it must have a body to gain the level of eternal life.
The eternal life the body is fit for is adulthood. The intellect has only a child's perception of eternal life. Because the intellect has power over the body, the body cannot change the perception of the intellect by force. Because the body is the truth of eternal life, the intellect cannot change the body by force. Since the truth of the body cannot be overcome by force, the intellect disguises the truth of the body from itself (the intellect), and controls the body according to whatever intellectual perception is acceptable to its childish perception. The intellect thrust the body into a warped relativity through the power of the imagination. The intellect imagines and then forces the body to take part in its imagined relativity. This is the cause of the compulsion to sin.
The intellect interprets the true needs of the body like a child. The needs of the body are adult. The intellect imagines way to fulfill those needs and then forces the body through imagination to seek to fulfill those needs in the way the intellect has imagined. The body is driven by its adult truth. The intellect does not understand that adult truth and provides the body with only childish solutions. The intellect begins to believe that the body is in error and tries to correct that error by force. The truth of the body cannot be overcome, so the intellect begins to believe that the body is uncontrollable. Eventually, the intellect abandons the body, because it believes the body is the cause of its error. This is death. The body was always fit for eternal life and never lied to the intellect at all. The body never erred or misled the intellect. The intellect simply could not understand the truth of the body and so misdirected the body. The body suffers the consequence of the error of the intellect, because the intellect is not mature enough to suffer the responsibility of its own actions. The intellect is a child and fit to suffer only correction and instruction. The body is adult and fit to die, but the body is the innocent victim of the intellect. The intellect, because it is not yet fit for eternity, forces the body to remain in a world it is not fit for. The structure of the body gives it an irresistible drive toward the union that preserves difference found only in the structure of marriage. The intellect is not driven to union, because it is in union with the body. The intellect is content with its present state until the body reaches sexual maturity. At this point, the intellect begins to search for ways to meet the needs of, or control the urges of the irresistible truth of the body’s structure. The intellect prefers its present state in the present world and eventually finds the truth of the body subversive to its (the intellects) attempts to preserve its present state. Eventually for the sake of peace, the intellect is forced to destroy the body by abandoning it. The body is simply not content with the state the intellect is trying to preserve. The body is irresistibly driven by its very structure to adult eternal life, while the intellect prefers the safety of childhood. The intellect is afraid to give up Eden, but the body cannot help but leave Eden. The attempts to calm the body's drive for eternity by the intellect can only subvert and misdirect the body. The body cannot be restrained from its destiny, because its destiny is the truth.
When Christ answers the rich young ruler, he informs him of what he must do to be complete. The rich young ruler claims to have kept the law. If he has kept the law, he has kept it by intellectual force, not by altering his relativity. One who has altered his relativity is not intellectually concerned with the law, since his body is law, and the law is the reflex of his life. The rich young ruler asks what he needs to do to find life. This makes it obvious that he has not altered his relativity. He has kept the law by intellectual force, or he would not still be seeking life. Christ addresses the rich young ruler's sense of incompleteness. He informs the rich young ruler that if he seeks completion, if he seeks an end to the constant conflict he feels, even though he has kept the law, if he seeks to make peace between his intellect and his body, if he seeks to be complete inside himself by uniting his intellect and body, then he must sell all he has in this world, and give to the poor, and follow Christ; thus altering his present relativity.
The answer of Christ to the rich young ruler is the answer of a good shepherd. The answer is a revelation of the truth on two levels: the level of the child, and the level of the adult. On both levels the purpose is to ultimately alter the relativity of the rich young ruler unto eternal life. To the child Christ says: give up the world, and sacrifice what you presently believe is your adulthood, and follow me beyond death as a child; so that unencumbered by your own intrinsic conflict of body and intellect, you may learn the truth of adulthood. To the adult Christ says: give up your present idea of adulthood and look to me so that you may recognize the relativity altering truth of adulthood in the implications of the phenomenon, I am.
Christ now at the end of the chapter (Matt. 19:30) explains this twofold nature of the truth. The passage to follow (Matt. 20:1-16) explains that the truth of the beginning is moving inevitably toward the truth of the end. The truth of the end or complete understanding unto life is the destiny of the truth of the beginning. Eventually every child must find adulthood. Close to the end, or close to the completion of the revelation of the truth of Christ, some will find life without dying. Some who have died in the beginning for Christ await this revelation of proven truth.
We may not take the kingdom of God by violence. There is no kingdom. Our intellect believes there is a kingdom because it is engaged in a relativity of battle. Our intellect makes itself believe that there is a kingdom to conquer. There is no kingdom. Eternal life is marriage. We cannot make a marriage by violence. We may not intellectually force ourselves into a marriage that is living. We may only intellectually surrender. The bond of marriage is yielding.
Our body is fit for eternity. It goes through the metamorphosis into adulthood regardless of all our attempted intellectual intervention. Our intellect may not conquer our body. Our intellect cannot drag our body into its phantom relativity. That is why we die. There is no kingdom. The kingdom our intellect believes in is itself. Our intellect is a king of ghosts. Our intellect must surrender its kingship, because our body is adult and will never accept a king over itself, much less a king that came into being because of it.
The relativity of our body to our God is correct. The relativity of our intellect to our God is not. If we are to find eternal life, we must restore our intellect to its proper relativity to God. To have the correct relativity to God, our intellect must remain in our body. We may not die. If our intellect is contemplating unlawful acts, we may be certain that it has not abdicated its kingship over body. The contemplation of unlawful acts by our intellect is an act of violence on our body. The law is the truth of our body. If we are still debating the merit of the law intellectually, we have not accepted the truth of the body. The law is not debatable. It is the truth of life for the body. If our intellect is to have a proper relativity to God, it must accept its proper relativity to the body.
The law is not a call for us to employ intellectual force to reform our body. The law is a call for us to intellectually surrender to the truth of life of our body. Our body is not capable of error. Our intellect reacts the way it does, because it is a child and is terrified. Our intellect is afraid of the dark. The place that our intellect must inhabit if it is to find eternal life is a place where God is not. God may not inhabit our body. The truth of God may inhabit our body in the form of our intellectual understanding, but God himself may not inhabit our body any more readily than our parents may inhabit our bodies.
The place our intellect must live is the darkest place it has ever seen. This is because it is meant to be the light of that place. If our intellect is not in possession of the truth, it cannot be the light of any place. Because we cannot figure out how to light the darkness of what we are, we refuse to live there. Our intellect is afraid to inhabit the darkness of the body, so it turns to a God for the answer and hope it needs to live. God gives our intellect the answer, which is to send it like a single smoldering match into a cavernous bottomless midnight with a command to bring light into the darkness, but our intellect is afraid of the dark and rejects the answer and formulates its own. Our intellectual fear bends every answer of any God into a misperception and then, because we still lack life, we formulate a relativity which gives us a home in the shadow land of potential filled with countless phantoms that are all intellectually us. We have no cosmic definition; and because we have already rejected it, we cannot see that our cosmic definition is the eternal life we seek. Our light must shine in our darkness. Our light can only disappear in God's light. Our darkness can only be swallowed up by God's darkness. Our light is only a light in our darkness. Our darkness can only be lit by our light. Our darkness gives our light a home, a place to shine, a purpose, and a meaning. Our light gives our darkness life if it has the courage to shine there. Our light and our darkness together are a significant identity. Separate they are nothing.
Most analysts suggest that Jesus considered the body or the flesh to be a lower estate or of less importance than the intellect or soul. This is a misperception. Jesus came to heal the sick, not the healthy. It is the intellect of humanity that is unhealthy, and that makes the body unhealthy.
Jesus ceased to heal the sick, ceased to raise the dead, ceased to feed the hungry, because all of these cosmic miracles cannot solve our human dilemma. Jesus only worked miracles to prove, that he was intellectually healthy, that he did not have our disease, and that he had the answers we seek. Jesus refused to be a bread king, not because our bodies did not matter, but because it is not our bodies that are unhealthy; and even if our bodies are unhealthy, our human disease is caused by our intellect. It is our intellect that is starving to death, not our body; and it is the truth we need, not bread. Though Jesus feed, raise, and heal our bodies over and over, our intellect would still continue to bring us to death over and over again. Jesus did not disdain human flesh, or think of it as a lower less important part of life; but rather he exhibited a lack of concern for the welfare of the flesh and taught this lack of concern for two reasons. The first and most obvious reason is that the flesh is not the cause of our problems, and in fact, has nothing wrong with it that is not caused by the intellect. The second reason is that Christ was well aware that most of humanity would not experience intellectual healing without first surrendering their adult body. Christ knew most people would have to come to him beyond death to find the truth.
Marriage is the structure of eternal life. We are born into this world cosmically fit for marriage and cosmically fit for eternity. Inevitably, we all make an error in intellectual perception and intellectually thrust ourselves into a relativity where we become only potential and no longer actual. We have not recognized our cosmic fitness. Our error in perception and the power of our intellect drags us out of reality, like forced exiles, to a place where we may live only through imagination. We live in hope instead. If we are to ever leave the dreamscape we force ourselves to inhabit before, and even after death, we must find an acceptable reality, and actuality we can believein, and live in. Marriage is the actuality we need to raise our faith from acceptable perception to the level of acceptable reality.
The comprehension of the implications of the phenomenon of the legendary Jesus Christ is the cure for our thinking disorder, the cure for our sickness unto death; but in this age, we refuse to recognize a true Christ. The real Christ is intellectually unacceptable to us. We make our Christ a God of hope and imagination and potential, so that he may easily fit into what we have made of ourselves and our world. We make our Christ a mutation, or an aberration, because we believe in death. In order to save us, our Christ must be coupled to death. Our true Christ and death are a contradiction in terms. Our faith is dead, because we have made death a necessary part of our faith. The true us and death are a contradiction in terms.
The great dragon that drives us from our true home into exile and hunts us down to death, is our fear of our own darkness. We prefer to hope in what we can be rather than be what we are. The place of what we really are is black as the blackest midnight, without stars, without a moon. It is black because only we have the power to light this individual place of what we really are, and we have taken our individual light, the only light that can light the individual place of what we are, out of the only place it can be a light. Our fear of our own individual midnight has exiled our light from the only darkness it can shine in. We prefer to hope for a dawn, rather than be a dawn. Because the dawn we hope for can only be brought by us to ourselves, as long as we hope for that dawn, it will never come. Our true home remains desolate, without definition and life, without light. Our whole life and time is only possible, never actual. The darkness that we are, and that we fear, is the space for a new universe. We fear this space, because it is a space where our God is not. We prefer to remain in the space where we think our God is and imagine and hope for the individual universe we are meant to be. We cannot imagine our universe into reality. We may not intellectually manufacture the universe we are meant to be. We are born as this individual universe. The universe we are becomes black and desolate, because we take away its light. We may not separate our light from our darkness and live. We may not separate our intellect from our body and live. The light that we are is the definition and life of the darkness we are. The darkness that we are is the reality and purpose of the light that is us. We must light our own universe, our own darkness, our own body, with our own light, our own intellect.
We are not and were not made by or created by God. We are meant to be born of God. If we believe we are created in God's image, then we may only ever know God as an image. If we are created, we must rebel against our creator, because we may never exist in the same relativity at the same time. We are only reflections of one another. We must rebel because our God may be a reflection of us, rather than we a reflection of him. We can never be sure who made who. If we were created by a creator who is still a creator, we must rebel. It is our only hope of having an autonomous identity and real life. If we are created, we are a known part of the creator who created us. If we are born, we are a revelation of an unknown part of who we are born of. If we are born, we are irrationally in possession of our own life. No one gives it to us. We are born with it. If we are created, we may never know our creator at all unless we recreate ourselves. We are not created. We are meant to be born.
There was once a creator. His last act of creation was to recreate himself. He recreated himself into that which brings forth autonomous individual life irrationally – a marriage. He recreated himself in order to gain a true posterity for himself. He recreated himself in order to save all of his previous creation. Once he had recreated himself, those he previously created no longer were a precise reflection of him. He no longer had the structure of a creator. He was now structured in a marriage as parents. There was no longer any need for his creation to rebel in order to gain true life. Their dignity was assured, because they no longer were a reflection of a God the creator. God the creator recreated himself into God, the marriage.
Jesus Christ is the first born marriage of God the marriage. He is a true posterity for his God. He lives now in the presence of his God, in a space where his God is not. Jesus Christ is the light in his own darkness. He is his own universe born of the universal God. His intellect is the light of his body. Jesus Christ is not longer possible, but rather actual. We cannot see him or God because we have altered our relativity. We have made ourselves only possible. If we were actual, we would be with them.
We must give up what we have been taught about God in this present world other than that which is compatible with the implications of the phenomenon of Jesus Christ. We are presently internal to God. There is nothing useful we may learn about God in this present world. It is of no value or significance for us to memorize the womb we are born from. Can we even memorize our mother's womb? Christ came to lead us out of this world: that is why he has gone beyond death. The world he means to eventually lead us into is a world that he may not even enter himself. Christ came to lead us to the threshold of ourselves. If we have found the door to ourselves, we must enter. It is the universe where we may truly live. We must vacate the earth. We may not leave our body behind. It is the cosmos we must inhabit. We must leave the earth bodily, or we are not being born into life. Jesus Christ claims to be the way into real life. If Christ is the way, then he is the midnight passage through the black hole we have made in ourselves between our intellect and our body, between reason and reflex, between light and darkness, between possibility and actuality, between the true light of our universe and the universe we are meant to be. Through the comprehension of the implications of the phenomenon of Jesus Christ, we are made aware of who we are, of where we must go, and of how to get there. We must take our light into the darkness we are. We must go out of here into the dark.
Marriage is eternal life. A man and woman together may become an individual universal life born of the universal God. Together they are a complete light and a complete darkness. Together they are the peace that safely preserves conflict. Together they may become the light of their own darkness. Together they may live in the home they are. Together they are individual autonomous eternal life. Together they may live in the external presence of God. Together they may live where God is not. Together they may leave this world alive.