Time Out For a Brain Adjustment

brain mind head adjustment
In the past couple of days, I have been prompted to revisit this from my more recent money book, Are You Worried Yet…:

What I saw was a choice between two kinds of “time-shares,” two places to rest, two places to live, even a choice between two kingdoms. How can we leave the one, without entering the other?  Getting out of Babylon, it seems, is a call to every one of us, but where are we to go if we are given no alternative? Does “the gospel” consign us to some kind of mental holding pattern until Jesus comes back? Why should people living in darkness want a piece of that action?

We need to live in the Spirit’s alternative to Babylon; we need to live there now. My experience tells me that this is well within reach of the faith once delivered to the saints, and still available even in our own day. What we are presently calling “church” isn’t fooling anyone, except perhaps ourselves.

Continue reading

Posted in --, J.Ferris: Reposts with Notes | Leave a comment

Even Kings Had Never Heard of IT!

“…and kings will shut their mouths because of him. For what they were not told, they will see, and what they have not heard, they will understand.” Isaiah 52:15

What was it that had not been told? What was it that they had never seen? What was it they had not heard? What was it that they were to understand? For that matter, do we understand it yet?

Before Jesus died – before He had the skin torn off His back – before he had His beard ripped out, and a crown of thorns planted into His skull, He had said:

“Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.”
John 15:13

Until the day that Jesus died, no one had ever seen a love greater than that! What kings got to see on the day He died was a love that was good for enemies:

“For if, while we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life!” Romans 5:10 NIV

The King of all kings was about to found a kingdom on a love that was good for enemies. No one had ever seen, heard or understood anything like that before, and that is what we need to understand!

By Jay Ferris, originally posted on March 26, 2011

Posted in --, J.Ferris: Reposts with Notes | 1 Comment

As A Little Child

As A Little Child
This morning, as I thought about the aversion to meaningful/lasting relationships, the following two verses of Scripture came into alignment for me:

“Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.” Mark 10:15 KJV

“Moreover your little ones, which ye said should be a prey, and your children, which in that day had no knowledge between good and evil, they shall go in thither, and unto them will I give it, and they shall possess it.” Deuteronomy 1:39 KJV

This verse from Deuteronomy pretty well nails the problem – “… knowledge between good and evil.”

Let’s call it “childhood wounding.” It seems that it is happening at a younger and young age as we see the end of the age approaching. There is all kinds of child abuse, all of it in the context of relationship. We hardly need to go into the details to make our point here. For the present it is enough to say that “wounded” and “offended” people are very reluctant to re-engage intimate relationships, whether with those who have hurt them in the past or those who are likely to hurt them in the future.

The Kingdom of God is all about relationship(s). If we cant get past our wounding, our offendedness, our “…knowledge of good and evil,” we are just not going to enter in. This is the conversation I would like to have here for the next few weeks – months.

We need to get real about the offenses and the wounding, and discover how to move beyond all that. Otherwise the best we are able to do, where “entering in” is concerned, is some kind of Christianized religious white wash.


For more reading on this subject, see The First Commandment With Promise

By Jay Ferris, first posted on
Posted in J.Ferris: Reposts with Notes | 5 Comments


The day He died, Jesus had the best view on the hill.

Among other things He saw that day, He saw His mother standing beside John, “the disciple He loved.” He gave them to each other that day – John to her as a son, and her to John as a mother.

But the beholding I would like to share about here is our own beholding; what we need to see in connection with the day He died.

Pilate presented Jesus to the crowd and said, “Behold the man.” Jesus was wearing a crown that day.

Many years before that day another king wrote: “Behold …” – Well, perhaps you might want to read it for yourself in Song of Songs 3:11.

While you are there, please note the context beginning with verse 7.

And here are a couple of clues that might help with your own beholding: Jesus said that these Scriptures were all about Him, and, another way of understanding Who this passage is about is to remember that king Solomon was also the Son of David.

Jesus began to put the solitary in families even before He died.

By Jay Ferris, Originally posted March 3, 2011

Posted in J.Ferris: Reposts with Notes | 6 Comments


baby born in hand smaller
I am presently having some difficulties with my desk top computer, so am writing this on an iTouch, (small keyboard – big fingers :-/). This just to say that this will have to be very brief.

In light of what I have just posted where aiming at the truth is concerned, I need to say a word or two about “family” or “families.” It is written God “… puts the solitary in families.” (see Mark 10:29, 30) It really should not require rocket science to point out that a “family” is not the same thing as a “brotherhood.”  It does not say God puts the solitary in brotherhoods. There is a significant difference between a brotherhood and a family. Two very important differences have to do with reproduction and nurture.

Under the present circumstances that is all I want to say about this for the moment, but in the days of this writing, this has become a critically important truth for me, where relationships that come from God are concerned.

Please think on these things!

Posted in J.Ferris: Reposts with Notes | Leave a comment

Compatibility With God

The problem with being a created child is that created children are incompatible with God. God is hoping for begotten children. This, it seems to me, is a big area of misunderstanding. It shouldn’t require a power point presentation to explain the difference between an adopted child, and a begotten one, (even a chimpanzee can be adopted). Yet these two are seen to be the same thing by most believers.

Here is how I have come to understand the difference as used in the New Testament record. Adoption has to do with a legal transaction. You just can’t go down the street walking off with other people’s children. That is illegal. The fact is, according to “the Law,” in our flesh, we are/were so incompatible with God, it would have been illegal for Him to adopt us. At the cross, God took care of the legalities, (Ephesians 2, and Colossians 2) making it possible to adopt us. Having done so, He poured the Spirit of His only begotten Son into our hearts so that we too would be begotten children, children compatible with the fellowship of  The “Godhead,” Galatians 4:1-7

What we need to get is the magnitude of our inheritance in Christ. It is enormous – wholly other!

Yes, I’m going someplace with all of this. I’m heading for the oneness that Jesus prayed and died for, John 17:21.


Originally posted February 23, 2011

Posted in J.Ferris: Reposts with Notes | Leave a comment

What Is God Hoping For?

Today’s new post by Jay Ferris is more lengthy, and might need a more careful read.  If you wish to print it,  or read it off-line, here is a link to the article in PDF format: What is God Hoping For


Hebrews 11:1 tells us that, Faith is the substance of things hoped for…”

Hope is the raw material without which faith has nothing to work with – to make substantial. Elsewhere we are told that this “… faith works by love…” :-) (It doesn’t work without love either.)

What I want to focus on here today is the matter of hope. What are you hoping for, or more importantly, what is God hoping for? Wouldn’t it be nice if we could all get on the same page as God where this matter of hope is concerned?  To do so, I would like to take a look at hope from the vantage point of Romans 8:20:

the-creation-of-eve“For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope…”

What is God hoping for? :-)

Why would The Creator frustrate His own creation? 

And having frustrated it in hope, what was He hoping for?

Romans is careful to tell us that neither the creation nor created things were responsible for the frustration, but the Creator Himself. 

When did this happen? What happened?  And Why?

Romans 8:24 asks the question, “Who hopes for what they already have?” 

To frustrate a creation, one must first have a creation, so the creation must have already been created at the time it was subjected to frustration. It must have been before “the fall.” The frustration was already in the garden before “the fall,” and was a contributing factor leading to “the fall.”

What was God hoping for, is another way to say, What was it He did not already have? Why did He neglect to create what He was hoping for? Was it an oversight on The Creator’s part? We think not. It could only be there must have been something The Creator could not create – something He was hoping for that frustration could facilitate.

The answer is at once simple and profound. Here are a few of many verses we could have chosen that help us find the answer:

“This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him.” 1 John 4:9 

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. John 1:1, 2 

“For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. Romans 8:29 

“The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. Scripture does not say “and to seeds,” meaning many people, but “and to your seed,” [Gen. 12:7; 13:15; 24:7] meaning one person, who is Christ. Galatians 3:16

Speaking of His own death, Jesus said: “Very truly I tell you, unless a kernel of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it remains only a single seed. But if it dies, it produces many seeds. John 12:24 

As I understand it, The Creator subjected His own creation to frustration, because He was hoping for something that could not be done by “mere” creation – and that was divine reproduction. That reproduction would be necessary to produce, many sons of God, many brothers for His Son, and, the glorious liberty of the children of God. Glorious liberty is the fruit of the salvation package, (“being saved by His life” Romans 5:10). With this new heart, we are able to do anything our hearts desire. How FREE IS THAT?!?!?!!! :-) 

That is Gloriously FREE!!!!

Diving In Deeper

How Little We Know by Jay FerrisIn the image of what God was after in hope, he created the first Adam male and female.  I think I should also note that “male and female” was for image purposes and old creation reproduction only.  Image is not yet reality. The reality that is only found in Christ is “neither… male nor female…”, Galatians 3:28.

By the end of the 6th day, the woman was still in Adam. The woman had not been removed yet. What is needed to understand this, is not theology, but a basic understanding of the facts of life, i.e. “the birds and the bees.” Reproduction requires a father, a mother, a seed/egg, and chemistry. The “Us” that said, “…let us make,” and subsequently subjected to frustration what He/Us said, that “Us” contained the Father, the Seed, and the Chemistry (the “Trinity,”) but as of yet there was no woman – no human mother. (As I understand it, like the rest of the first Adam, she was only a created mother, not a “begotten” mother. Problem is, “created things shake,” Hebrews 12:27. Things begotten of Christ, The New Creation, don’t shake, John 8:35.

Now for The Creator to get what He was after, the woman had to be removed from the first Adam, and that removal subjected the whole creation to frustration. They were still in the garden after she was taken out, but they were now “less than” they had been at the end of the sixth day, when their unity was perfect, even intercellular, so to speak, (a union so perfect, so complete, that no words were necessary). Remember God called it all “very good” at the close of the sixth day. 

The perfect union would not have been vulnerable to the lie, but the frustration that comes from being “less than” is very vulnerable to the lie, and sure enough, they both “bought the lie,” (swallowed it) and were cast out of the garden.  “Less than” people make bad choices.  Romans 8 is talking to “more than” people, Romans 8:37.

Not to worry, Plan “A” was still good. It included the frustration, and in due time the woman would be put back into another Adam, even Christ, and there would be reproduction, divine reproduction, because He would also be put into her. The Seed required for that to happen would have to wait until Christ was cast into the ground to die, rise from the dead, deliver to the Father what the Father needed to keep His promise, and fulfill His hope, the hope that He had from the beginning. 

The reproduction began on the day of Pentecost, when a new generation, (one requiring the frustration of the old) would begin to reproduce. (Please be assured that I am not saying that everyone “born of women” prior to the availability of this Seed was or is hopelessly lost. While Jesus said that the greatest of the Old Testament saints was less than the least in The Kingdom of God, I do believe that there is room in the economy of God to fix that problem for people like John the Baptist, and Moses, and the others so well typified in Hebrews, Chapter Eleven.

And Even More Deeper!

Before wrapping this up, I need to address what is quite possibly another widely held misunderstanding: the assumed loneliness of the first Adam prior to the removal of the woman. If she was in the first Adam before she was removed – taken out of the first Adam, then how lonely could he have been?  In John 17 Jesus prayed that we would be one as he and the Father had been one before the world began. That also doesn’t sound very lonely to me. To break the essential oneness of the first Adam, so that one flesh now required interactive plumbing rather than intercellular intimacy, looks to me to be the defining moment of the frustration of the creation, rather than an improvement in the first Adam’s situation.

This suggests another look at the phrase: “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper as his partner.”  Perhaps it was not good from the vantage point of what God was hoping for, and not due to the first Adam’s loneliness … UNLESS… the loneliness was designed to reveal the heart of the Godhead. A case could be made that God was lonely before the foundation of the world, and wanted more than only one Son. That would be another matter. What troubles me here is the preoccupation with male/female plumbing as the highest expression of “one flesh.” (The cause of leaving and cleaving and one fleshing was the fact that in the beginning God had made them one – she was in the first Adam. That is also where we see her again in the last Adam.)  Again, it may well have been that it “wasn’t good,” because God needed a woman for reproductive purposes, and that reproduction, ultimately His own, Isaiah 54:1, Galatians 4:26, 27.

The point I am arriving to is the Everlasting Father wants begotten children, not created ones. And as I have come to understand Romans 8:20, this is what the Creator was hoping for in the frustration of His own creation. The result is that the whole creation is groaning, waiting for the revelation of the glorious liberty of His begotten children. The righteousness of God tells me that for this to happen, God needed a woman, even a wife.

In short, God is hoping for an intimacy in an expanded Godhead that includes us!  And that makes leaving, cleaving, and one fleshing pale by comparison.

By Jay Ferris, originally posted February 20, 2011

Posted in J.Ferris: Reposts with Notes | 2 Comments