HOW TO PLEASE OUR HEARTS

Once again, you have misquoted scripture.  What, according to the Synoptic evangelists,  the voice from heaven (notin  our hearts)  actually said was "you are [this is] my beloved son, with you [with whom]I am well pleased" (Mk 1:11//Lk. 3:22// Matt. 317.

καὶ φωνὴ ἐγένετο ἐκ τῶν οὐρανῶν   Σὺ εἶ ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός, ἐν σοὶ εὐδόκησα.

καὶ φωνὴν ἐξ οὐρανοῦ γενέσθαι Σὺ εἶ ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός, ἐν σοὶ εὐδόκησα.

καὶ ἰδοὺ φωνὴ ἐκ τῶν οὐρανῶν λέγουσα Οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός, ἐν ᾧ εὐδόκησα.

See also the Gospel of the Ebionites  [in Epiphanius Against Heresies 30.13.7-8] and The Gospel according to the Hebrews [in Jerome  Commentary on Isaiah 11:2]).

I did not change the meaning, but l used  the words in a way to suit the meaning and the rhythm.

What rhythm does your rewriting of scripture cohere with?  

And was the meaning of the words of the voice from heaven so unclear that they needed to be changed to bring out the meaning behind them?

In any case, what makes you think that the meaning you changed the words of scripture in order to convey what you think it is happens to be the one that the Evangelists thought the voice from heaven was conveying, especially in light of what it commends Jesus disciples to do to be faithful to Jesus and to God in the parallel to that voice that's found in Matt. 17:5//Mark 9:7//Lk 9:35?

interesting topic--
I'm not sure God expects us to make the same sacrifice of Jesus...an enormous sacrifice, whose faith and selflessness dwarfs us.
I used to complain to God that He didn't understand what it was like to be a Man, that He didn't understand...blah blah blah...and then I realized that Jesus was God, had God been a Man.
A humbling sacrifice.
Enjoyed!

"interesting topic--"

Is the issue whether the topic (what ever it is) is interesting or whether  J-Z  has done poetic justice to it?

"I'm not sure God expects us to make the same sacrifice of Jesus...an enormous sacrifice, whose faith and selflessness dwarfs us."

According to Mark 8:34-35,  Jesus does indeed expect his followers to make the same sacrifice that he made.

34 Then he called the crowd to him along with his disciples and said: “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. 35 For whoever wants to save their life[a] will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me and for the gospel will save it.

whose cross?
Jesus's cross?
Or "their" cross?

Furthermore:  Jesus's sacrifice on the cross wasn't the important sacrifice.
More important than dying...the 3 days and 3 nights He endured after, death, which grants us something even more important than His death itself.
His blood, yes, is the ink of a New Testament, or contract with God, but the 3 days between His death and Resurrection, and what He endured for our sakes, is more important.
And that's something God doesn't expect from us.

I do not understand how being resurrected by God to a new and indestructible life could be considered a sacrifice.  It is a reward for faithfulness.  And discipleship does entail being willing to be put to death for the sake of the Gospel.

Very dear Mark,
It's a very deep subject to think about. It explains how great is Jesus to us, and how small we are. We have no hope to satisfy our hearts except through His help, and taking Him as the only hope and example. Your ideas help me a lot. Thank you for your real interest and love.

So what's the example he fleshed out and how is this to be shown publicly and biographically in believer's lives?

And how does Jesus' being commissioned to be god's vice regent who fulfills his role by being the Akedah the Suffering Servant snf who then goes on to call Israel to repent and become faithful -- even to the point of death -- to the ways of behavior he proclaims that God enjoins upon his people show us how great Jesus is and how small we are, especially if, in following him, "we" become what "we" are called to be -- i.e. the city on the hill, the light to the world,  and the priestly kingdom that will bring the created order to its intended destiny?

Some things are easy to obtain
while others are more difficult to gain
and seeking them deprives one of
enjoying days serene.

I wonder, though,  how knowing this
has anything to do
with God from up above
expressing his Isaiah born delight
through placing David’s
and young Isaac’s titles on
the dove touched Nazarene.

"He had not feared to tell the truth
in front of those who'd make His cross."

Leaving aside the question of what "the truth" was that Jesus was not afraid to "tell",  the implication of your statement is that the only persons Jesus told "the truth" in front of were Roman soldiers.  For after all,  they were the only ones who made crosses  and they were the ones who carried out his execution..  

And if by "those who would make his cross"  you meant those who wanted to see Jesus crucified,  your statement is untrue.  Jesus "truth telling" was more often than not addressed to his disciples, his sympathizers,   and to large crowds of people who ended up being indifferent to him

Once again,  your limited and biased understanding of what the New Testament says, as well as your gnostic and anachronistic  view of who Jesus and his mission was,  gets in the way of your writing anything but overly pious nonsense.

Dear Baldwin,
What do you mean by your two enigmatic messages? Are you mumbling to yourself? If you don't have the base to understand, nothing can make you understand.

What's enigmatic about them?

And speaking about not having the base to understand something ,  the one who here does not have it with regard to scripture (or Christology) is you.  
 
What you show you don't understand (and/or are ignorant of) with regard to the voice from heaven is not only that the evangelists present it as containing allusions to Ps. 2:7, Gen 22, and Isaiah 42:1 and therefore, and especially in light of what the description and function of the dove descending upon Jesus represents and connote was  happening in Jesus' Baptism,  was the commissioning of Jesus to the Messianic task of "bring[ing] forth justice to the nations" though a rejection of violence and domination,  but that when it occurs, Jesus has done nothing yet to please God.  In fact, he is put to the test immediately after his baptism to see if he will accept the task that  has been given him  and not reject the way of the suffering servant to fulfill it (Matt. 4:1-11//Mk. 1:12-13//Lk. 4:1-13), meaning that until he had passed this "test", and shown himself to be faithful to what God wants him to be and do and proclaim, he has not been approved by God.    
 
And, again, according to the evangelists,  the way that Jesus "pleased God" -- and the way that those who were/are "believers in" Jesus are also take up in their lives -- was that he embodied a way of being holy as God is holy that called Israel at a time of national crisis to change its ways of dealing with its national enemy and those its leaders considered to be unworthy of God's graces which caused it to be involved in what Jesus regarded as unfaithfulness to God -- i.e. sin.  
 
If you dispute this,  may I ask you to provide your credentials for doing so along the same lines that you cite your credentials for knowing English grammar?  Do you read Koine Greek?  Do you hold a (or any) degree(s) in Theology or New Testament Studies?  If you don't, why should anyone accept your understandings of, and claims about, what Scripture says or implies as informed let alone authoritative?

"If you don't have the base to understand, nothing can make you understand."  
 
Understand what?  
 
Here's another instance of you refusing to believe that you have  written something that is unintelligible and cloying, thereby claiming that the only reason someone doesn't understand what you wrote is that they  are dull of wit and lack the capacity to appreciate how skillfully you write.