For me, the case for G_d begins with me. I am and I know that I am.
I know I once wasn't and sometime will not be, perhaps.
Now, all things including me had to come to be. Let's say all things including me came to be by an automatic process of elemental combinations;
still, whence the elements and why the process?
Better yet, why me?
So complicated as I thinking me from elements I can see and not see!
Okay, beyond imagination and beyond belief. What came to be needs me;
or else it isn't or isn't known?
I, of course, am all that see, that think, that wonder, that care.
Together we are and we make to be what is; as far as we know, that is.
But I and we are made! Or else we wouldn't be;
or know we are and what we are.
The case for G_d, you see, is knowing who are we;
for we don't know unless we are told.
But hearing requires a willingness to hear, to know.
So will in us is some of the key to who we are and who made me.
And being told requires a will; just random data can tell us nil.
Of who we are that is, and who is.
The case for G_d is thus revealed to be a hope for such a will.
A will to make, a will to tell, a will to know in me.
The will in me to accept and see
the will in all that made us be.
John
5/17/2008
