God votes: the word ‘with’ tops them all

Relationships… (please remember that I like to think, but thinking is in my head, that I really both know what I write about and incarnate it…)

Incarnate. God with us, you shall call his name Immanuel: so begins Matthews Gospel; ‘I will be with you to the end of the age’: so ends Matthews Gospel, the Gospel that is self-consciously written as the fulfilment of all that has gone before. All of the before was to lead to ‘God being with us’ and it was never to end but simply to increase.

The incarnation was not something done TO us. I have tried to stay clear of that in my relationships. Maybe there is a time when we need to do something TO someone as there is no alternative, but sadly most often the TO aspect is a strong me (powerful) / they (object of my power).

The incarnation did have some element of FOR us. The cross certainly did, and the cross is part of the journey from the incarnation. Jesus, being in the form of God; Jesus because he was rich became poor for us. Yes there is a FOR us element there, and I am thankful for that.

But really the incarnation is a WITH scenario. ‘I am one among you’ so undercuts the Imperial model – that system that claims it is FOR us but really is only doing something TO us in order that we can be there FOR the Imperial system.

WITH is a challenge. I am pondering why I have many who offer friendship but I am not truly friends to anyone. I think there is something here that I am missing. WITH. I guess a WITH scenario opens up all kinds of possibilities. Maybe I should explore that… or if not I could continue to write about it.

3 thoughts on “God votes: the word ‘with’ tops them all

  1. I think that there is a way we journey ‘with’ others particularly other believers, when we may not actually be in conventional ‘friendship’ with them. We learn from others we connect with in different ways too but we are not always going to be friends with them in traditional sense for practical reasons often – distance, time demands etc. but in a relationship which may even transcend that . We learn what unites us and what divides us but either way we can still walk ‘with’ them. Like pilgrims journeying together towards a common destination perhaps, wayfarers who for a time strengthen each other . The fellowship of the Camino came to me. The hymn ‘he who would valiant be’ also comes to mind. Pilgrims is the word I’m thinking of for sure. I think you’re really great at facilitating that journey and I am sure you are also a great friend too to many people . I hope I have not missed what you mean.

  2. Whoa, big use of the 4 letter word here Martin. . . the ‘w’ word. With. That implies that we believe other people are functioning moral agents and can be persuaded to compromise and work with. That we give them the benefit of the doubt in relationships until proven otherwise. Of course my mind goes quickly to systemic issues with this one. . .
    How does capitalism which promotes competition negate working ‘with’?
    How do different political systems promote or negate working ‘with’?
    Who are we working with? Other humans? Other species? The planet itself?
    How does that change our lives?
    And where is the threshold for walking away due to abuse of power? There are folks who are pretty lost down the road of never working ‘with’. At what point are we actually morally required not to work with them.

    I had a job interview last week. The group is looking to transform the organization. There has obviously been some resistance. They asked me how I would handle that. I told them that the rule in community organizing is that there are no enemies at the table. You must find a way to work with everyone who is a stakeholder. Again, that does presume that you are not facing violence or abuse. But the rule is to work with people so that all can enjoy the changes and transformation. I may get the job on that answer. We will see.

    Anyhow, love this 4 letter word. We need to let loose with it more often.

  3. Computer define : “FRIEND”…

    Someone you favor, or love from “freond” (Old english)

    “Sadeeq” in arabic, from the root word for “truth” someone who tells you the truth.

    “Have I become your enemy by telling you the truth?”-Saul/Paul/Antioch dude.

    I suppose when God votes…His WITH places a certain demand for the truth…”You are my friends if you do what I command you”…pretty steep entrance requirement there unless there is a “WITH” involved.

    I can’t really define any real friends that won’t tell me the truth…and unfortunately truth has broken more relationships than I care to count…maybe I’m not with it enough.

Comments are closed.

Perspectives