Nathaniel Laiet

Ok. Here’s my true scenario. Choose your reaction and we’ll go from there.

~~~A motorcycle rider has two young ladies on the back of his bike. So naturally I’m watching closely. All of a sudden he does some tricky swerve. The girls nearly fall off and he merely continues as though nothing happened.~~~

I’m 100 meters behind him on my own motorcycle.

How would you have responded in your mind (or heart). How did I respond?

A. What was he thinking? Doesn’t he know that he has to girls on his bike and he should drive more sensibly!

B. What were his reasons were for swerving like that?

If you guessed ‘A’ as my thought, you get a gold star.

Yes, ‘A’ was what I was thinking about for exactly 3 seconds before my bike hit a gaping hole in the road.

Second thought. “Yay, now I have a case study for my theory (which I didn’t apply in this instance).”

“People (generally) have a reason for what they do”

So I try to remember this theory when I see people do what appears to be stupid.

If I’d remembered my theory in this instance, I wouldn’t have had to replace the inner tube in my motorcycle wheel.

Dear God,

Why is it that You must give us such a large learning curve?

When I was 16, I remember a time with friends.

Our singer in our jazz band had just told us that she had no parents. And I couldn’t stand the silence.

Trying to diffuse the situation, I said “Haven’t you read that book? Where do I come from?”

She looked at me, and I’ll always remember how her eyes narrowed and her face contorted when she said “They’re dead, you moron.”

She left quickly and my friends all just looked at me, while one of them drove the nail through my coffin saying “I can’t believe you just said that!”

It wasn’t until many years later I learned that my reaction to shock is to make a joke, hoping to diffuse the situation.

If only I had known, when I was 16 that people in shock react differently; me included. Then I could have avoided saying something so stupid.

Those 30 seconds were the most painful in all my life.

But God, through that experience, I’ve always tried to react slower and understand others emotional needs better.

So perhaps I needed to make such a blunder to learn that?

God, you always did know more than me.

~ Nathanial

Dear God,

Often I wonder why You leave us handicapped.

During this era on earth, logic, science and philosophy are what rules mankind’s thought.

Now man believes that utilizing these forms of research and thought together will bring us to full understand of everything.

I’ve heard it said “A fact is just one man’s theory until another comes along with a better one.” The new theory replaces the last ‘fact’ and the new theory becomes our new ‘fact’ (consider the world being flat, for instance).

Indeed, even scientists in the same field with the same education don’t always come to the same conclusion. But each of these men believe their findings to be written in stone because their findings cannot be disproved with the knowledge we currently have. They must be proved with time, but the world is moving faster, information flows faster and no one allows time to test our findings before quoting them as fact any more.

And God! I am unable to prove your existence any better than they can prove their findings from their ‘observations.’

For that is all science is really; a person’s observations and extrapolated ‘thesis’ (thesis: position/intellectual proposition) from their observations.

So God, I know You. I’ve experienced you. But I can not prove You.

And in taking all of science, mathematics, and logic (and the many other forms of thought processes which many seem to know nothing about), I can not absolutely disprove You.

Why must You handicap me so, by making Yourself improvable and at the same time so necessary to my life?

But then I realized that even science is a form of faith. For every thought must be based upon an initial assumption.

So God, this is why I’m perfectly happy to use your word as my basic assumption. Because every other form of thought also requires an assumption. But I like your assumptions more, for none of them are bad. They are all wholly good.

But then, that’s based on the assumption that I know what ‘good’ is.

Ciao for now,

  ~ Nathaniel