giving in

i apologise, first and foremost, that this, along with the next few posts, will be touching on some metaphysical questions that, though i ask myself now and again, i can never really answer. whether now is a good time to pose them (again), or isn't, i don't think is relevant - there never really is a good enough time.

in any case, there are a few ideas that i re-visit from time to time pertaining to religion, particularly revolving around:
1) effort-reward relationships and fatalism,
2) predestination in its various forms and sorts
3) the literalness of word (and spirit) in religion

and that which i shall touch upon today,

4) giving in.

when i find myself in such a dire state that conversations with God seem needed and even warranted (and, of course, it is only during the 13th hour of the most needful of times that we actually beseech any form of divine power), it is always in a very philosophical tone. i regret the air of haughtiness it involves (or at least portrays. to be honest, there is nothing beyond overthinking involved), but there's usually a few questions and postulations that i toss up in the air, contemplate for a bit and then leave for another time when i feel the world is closing down faster than i can find a reason for it to be worth any merit. and, for me, this is communion. this is religion. this is prayer and this is subservience.

but, i envy those who have taken it further than such simple logic. my doctrine makes it such that being one with God is limited by the confines of human prostation. even worse - mine. even by the simplest definition, this is flawed. it is cherry picking and turning a blind eye. there is more element of self-convincing than there is faith. and this is regrettable. those who i envy - they either have it so wrong in their simplicity that they cannot (or will not) see the logic i try to portray (and i do not even tout this as such an extension of thought, as i am humbled by so many others' ideals and practices), or they have seen past such human (my) error and fallacy to something that i wish i could.

being able to say that 'it's okay' and see that worldly gains (or losses) are but fleeting, and trivial. i cannot come yet to do this. and as much as i would like to understand how this is possible (not even to try to do it myself), i may not even want to. how can i even try, when i cannot even define what it is that i find myself lacking?

you must pardon the pseudo-existentialism. i do not attempt to impress or even partake in higher intellectual discussion on religion. that would be hypocricy, as the stem from which i question the given is not even religious in nature (as always, it is the longing for what i claim as deserving, but in all honesty, there is only laughable argument at best).

before the day comes, though, that i find myself at peace with simple devotion (and simple here also being far more spiritual than what i have now), i must confess to wishing that it were all fall into place, and i pray only that it begins with a simple one, a simple person, a simple wish, a tether, a hope, a miracle. and that is a dore.