deepundergroundpoetry.com
THINK OF THAT TEST.
THINK OF THAT TEST.
All wounds are pain, and no one likes
to suffer pain and its harsh strain.
Up there, God asks about my wounds.
I say,"l had some in my life."
I put them all in front of Him
but feel they are too few and slim.
I beg His mercy to accept
my humble injuries on land.
I'm so ashamed of what l have,
but ask His kindness to forgive
what l could not do in life's time
to be the brother of His Son.
My Lord, do not be hard on me.
I've done my best for this hard test.
My trivial scratches are too few.
Forgive me, Lord, for what l show.
BY JOSEPH ZENIEH
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
____________________________________
.
All wounds are pain, and no one likes
to suffer pain and its harsh strain.
Up there, God asks about my wounds.
I say,"l had some in my life."
I put them all in front of Him
but feel they are too few and slim.
I beg His mercy to accept
my humble injuries on land.
I'm so ashamed of what l have,
but ask His kindness to forgive
what l could not do in life's time
to be the brother of His Son.
My Lord, do not be hard on me.
I've done my best for this hard test.
My trivial scratches are too few.
Forgive me, Lord, for what l show.
BY JOSEPH ZENIEH
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
____________________________________
.
Published 4th Aug 2022
All writing remains the property of the author. Don't use it for any purpose without their permission.
likes 1
reading list entries 1
comments 24
reads 303
Commenting Preference:
The author encourages honest critique.
So what God wants to see before we're allowed entrance to "up there" is how much pain we've endured?
And here I thought it was based upon the fact that when the King (in the form of little ones) was hungry and you gave him something to eat , when he was thirsty and you gave him something to drink, when he was a stranger and you invited him in, when he needed clothes and you clothed him when he was sick and you looked after him, when he was in prison and you came to visit him.
See Matthew 25:31-40
31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’
37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’
40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’
Your God is a sadist who wants to see people suffer. Can you point to any text in the New Testament that justifies what you say he will do when people stand before him?
Sorry, this prosaically rhymed piece of yours is theological rubbish and has no basis in any of the Biblical stories of what God tests people over when he puts them to the test to see if they are worthy to enter his rest.
And here I thought it was based upon the fact that when the King (in the form of little ones) was hungry and you gave him something to eat , when he was thirsty and you gave him something to drink, when he was a stranger and you invited him in, when he needed clothes and you clothed him when he was sick and you looked after him, when he was in prison and you came to visit him.
See Matthew 25:31-40
31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’
37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’
40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’
Your God is a sadist who wants to see people suffer. Can you point to any text in the New Testament that justifies what you say he will do when people stand before him?
Sorry, this prosaically rhymed piece of yours is theological rubbish and has no basis in any of the Biblical stories of what God tests people over when he puts them to the test to see if they are worthy to enter his rest.
This is what you see in That Who sacrificed Himself for the sake and love of people and for their redemption as the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit are one.
5th Aug 2022 2:09pm
5th Aug 2022 3:12pm
And you say you are a native speaker of Engliish? Can you tell me why you suppose THAT refers to a thing? Then, please tell me what nationality you are.
5th Aug 2022 3:17pm
5th Aug 2022 3:29pm
Return to any dictionary you like and look up THAT as a determiner. You will find out that it can also be used for people. Stop it, Baldwin, l think l know who you might be; therefore, l don't take you seriously. I will not tell you who you are. You tell me.
Yes, "that" can be used for people but only in certain grammatical circumstances of which your sentence is not one
And BTW, the Cambridge dictionary contradicts your claim.
"This, that, these, those as pronouns
Referring to things or ideas
We normally use this, that, these and those as pronouns to refer to things or ideas:"
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/grammar/british-grammar/this-that-these-those
So does Longman since you have not already referred to Jesus in your notice.
"that1 /ðæt/ ●●● S1 W1 determiner, pronoun
1 (plural those /ðəʊz $ ðoʊz/) used to refer to a person, thing, idea etc that has already been mentioned or is already known about"
https://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/that
and "that who" is a solecism.
In any case, the real issue is that you have wholly misrepresented what that God of Israel is determining when he puts people to the test . You have made him out to be a sadist.
And BTW, the Cambridge dictionary contradicts your claim.
"This, that, these, those as pronouns
Referring to things or ideas
We normally use this, that, these and those as pronouns to refer to things or ideas:"
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/grammar/british-grammar/this-that-these-those
So does Longman since you have not already referred to Jesus in your notice.
"that1 /ðæt/ ●●● S1 W1 determiner, pronoun
1 (plural those /ðəʊz $ ðoʊz/) used to refer to a person, thing, idea etc that has already been mentioned or is already known about"
https://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/that
and "that who" is a solecism.
In any case, the real issue is that you have wholly misrepresented what that God of Israel is determining when he puts people to the test . You have made him out to be a sadist.
Why do you write much. You mean it can be used, but you don't want to admit it. Can it be used for people or can't it? You are getting very boring, and making other poets hate us both.
I admit it can be so used, but NOT as the subject of a "who" clause. And you have yet to provide evidence that it can.
But thanks for avoiding the real issue here.
P.S. What's your evidence that I am making other poets hate us? Please produce it. Or are you prevaricating again?
But thanks for avoiding the real issue here.
P.S. What's your evidence that I am making other poets hate us? Please produce it. Or are you prevaricating again?
5th Aug 2022 4:54pm
"This is what you see in That Who sacrificed Himself..."
Baldwin, THAT is not the subject of WHO CLAUSE. THAT is the antecedent of WHO CLAUSE.
THAT here is an OBJECT OF THE PREPOSITION IN. It is not a SUBJECT. WHO is SUBJECT of verb sacrificed.
Baldwin, THAT is not the subject of WHO CLAUSE. THAT is the antecedent of WHO CLAUSE.
THAT here is an OBJECT OF THE PREPOSITION IN. It is not a SUBJECT. WHO is SUBJECT of verb sacrificed.
5th Aug 2022 5:04pm
"This is what you see in That Who sacrificed Himself..."
Baldwin, THAT is not the subject of [the] WHO CLAUSE. "THAT [sic "THAT"] is the antecedent of [the] WHO CLAUSE.
THAT here is an OBJECT OF THE PREPOSITION IN [sic "IN"]. It is not a SUBJECT. WHO is [the] SUBJECT of [the] verb sacrificed [sic "sacrificed"}
Wow. Not only can you not write properly grammared poetry. You can't write prose that is grammatically and orthograhically correct.
More importantly, "that" is NOT the object of the preposition "in" since what you are actually asking (without the required question mark) is "Is this what you see in the phrase "That Who sacrificed Himself ... ?". Nor is "who" the subject of the verb "sacrificed", unless you are asking the question "Who sacrificed himself?". "He/the one who" is.
Baldwin, THAT is not the subject of [the] WHO CLAUSE. "THAT [sic "THAT"] is the antecedent of [the] WHO CLAUSE.
THAT here is an OBJECT OF THE PREPOSITION IN [sic "IN"]. It is not a SUBJECT. WHO is [the] SUBJECT of [the] verb sacrificed [sic "sacrificed"}
Wow. Not only can you not write properly grammared poetry. You can't write prose that is grammatically and orthograhically correct.
More importantly, "that" is NOT the object of the preposition "in" since what you are actually asking (without the required question mark) is "Is this what you see in the phrase "That Who sacrificed Himself ... ?". Nor is "who" the subject of the verb "sacrificed", unless you are asking the question "Who sacrificed himself?". "He/the one who" is.
You have no idea about English grammar, and l have no time to correct you. Why do you put [the] between brackets?
5th Aug 2022 8:05pm
so you would see where the article should have appeared for your sentences to be grammatically correct.
5th Aug 2022 8:34pm
The article "the" which you have left out of the very places that it needed to be written for your sentences to be grammatically correct and to display proper English.
If God were to inquire of me
what wounds I bear,
what pain I have endured,
It wouldn’t be to see how mine compare
with those his son withstood
or to determine if I possess
some quota that some sadistic
pope or priest
decreed be the necessary price
to move into the bright “up there”.
He’d do so to assess how much
of healing that he needs to bring
unto my soul and flesh.
For god is all compassionate
and so wants all his mortal sons
to have release
from all their suffering..
what wounds I bear,
what pain I have endured,
It wouldn’t be to see how mine compare
with those his son withstood
or to determine if I possess
some quota that some sadistic
pope or priest
decreed be the necessary price
to move into the bright “up there”.
He’d do so to assess how much
of healing that he needs to bring
unto my soul and flesh.
For god is all compassionate
and so wants all his mortal sons
to have release
from all their suffering..
"I beg His mercy to accept
my humble injuries on land."
Only the injuries that you suffered "on land"? What about the ones you suffered while at sea or on a river or lake or while on a plane? I take it that you don't want God to accept those. And why do you think God might want your injuries, let alone might be glad to see that you've been injured?
BTW, your syntax allows the idea that "on land" is where you want God to accept your injuries. So thanks for the amphiboly.
my humble injuries on land."
Only the injuries that you suffered "on land"? What about the ones you suffered while at sea or on a river or lake or while on a plane? I take it that you don't want God to accept those. And why do you think God might want your injuries, let alone might be glad to see that you've been injured?
BTW, your syntax allows the idea that "on land" is where you want God to accept your injuries. So thanks for the amphiboly.
13th Aug 2022 7:39am
I am always struggling to be humble at the direst times. Your poem is a good reminder to keep going on the right track.
So you like what you take to be the message of this piece? I wonder if you'd go on to say something about how it is or is not written well.
Do you agree with me that it displays all sorts of grammatical and conceptual faults and that it makes God out to be a sadist? What are your criteria for assessing whether or not a submission shows poetic art? Or do you not care whether it does or doesn't as long as you like its "message"?
Do you agree with me that it displays all sorts of grammatical and conceptual faults and that it makes God out to be a sadist? What are your criteria for assessing whether or not a submission shows poetic art? Or do you not care whether it does or doesn't as long as you like its "message"?
13th Aug 2022 11:58am
13th Aug 2022 12:18pm
Dear Boyana,
By my wounds, l mean feeling for those who are in pain like the Pharisees, for whom Jesus died to show the way of happiness. Happiness comes from love, not from washing hands and following the laws. One can follow the laws without loving, but cannot love without following the laws. The wounds we have come from LOVE. We can't avoid having them. Thank you again, Boyana, for your understanding, and sorry for your limited thoughts, Baldwin.
By my wounds, l mean feeling for those who are in pain like the Pharisees, for whom Jesus died to show the way of happiness. Happiness comes from love, not from washing hands and following the laws. One can follow the laws without loving, but cannot love without following the laws. The wounds we have come from LOVE. We can't avoid having them. Thank you again, Boyana, for your understanding, and sorry for your limited thoughts, Baldwin.
"Dear Boyana,
By my wounds, l mean feeling for those who are in pain"
Where is this indicated, let alone hinted at, in your submission, especially since you proclaim that you are ashamed of your wounds and how paltry they are? And why should pity/sympathy wound you?
" l mean feeling for those who are in pain like the Pharisees, "
Where in the New Testament is it said that the Pharisees were in pain? What text in the NT will you twist in order to make it say they were?
"for whom Jesus died to show the way of happiness."
Where in the Gospels does Jesus or the Evangelists say that Jesus came or died to show the way to happiness? No one gets crucified for showing this. Moreover, the testimony of the NT is that Jesus "came" to call Israel to adopt a challenging and, to some offensive, way, of being what God had called it to be as his covenanted people during a time in which the fact that it was under duress from the policies of the Roman imperium made it increasingly difficult to do. He did not consider his mission as involving showing the way that individuals might find "happiness". It was to proclaim, offer, and, along with his disciples, embody a public way of life that, if adopted, would allow his nation to avoid being destroyed. As has been noted by G.B. Caird, we do not understand Jesus unless we recognize " that from the outset of his ministry Jesus was concerned with questions of national policy:
What does it mean to be the Chosen Nation of God? How can Israel preserve her character as the holy nation in a world overrun and controlled by pagans? " .... and that his primary intention was "... to bring into existence the restored nation of Israel, promised in the Old Testament prophecies"
Once again, you show yourself far too under-informed on matters biblical to make the claims that you do.
https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/emwl/jesus_caird.pdf
By my wounds, l mean feeling for those who are in pain"
Where is this indicated, let alone hinted at, in your submission, especially since you proclaim that you are ashamed of your wounds and how paltry they are? And why should pity/sympathy wound you?
" l mean feeling for those who are in pain like the Pharisees, "
Where in the New Testament is it said that the Pharisees were in pain? What text in the NT will you twist in order to make it say they were?
"for whom Jesus died to show the way of happiness."
Where in the Gospels does Jesus or the Evangelists say that Jesus came or died to show the way to happiness? No one gets crucified for showing this. Moreover, the testimony of the NT is that Jesus "came" to call Israel to adopt a challenging and, to some offensive, way, of being what God had called it to be as his covenanted people during a time in which the fact that it was under duress from the policies of the Roman imperium made it increasingly difficult to do. He did not consider his mission as involving showing the way that individuals might find "happiness". It was to proclaim, offer, and, along with his disciples, embody a public way of life that, if adopted, would allow his nation to avoid being destroyed. As has been noted by G.B. Caird, we do not understand Jesus unless we recognize " that from the outset of his ministry Jesus was concerned with questions of national policy:
What does it mean to be the Chosen Nation of God? How can Israel preserve her character as the holy nation in a world overrun and controlled by pagans? " .... and that his primary intention was "... to bring into existence the restored nation of Israel, promised in the Old Testament prophecies"
Once again, you show yourself far too under-informed on matters biblical to make the claims that you do.
https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/emwl/jesus_caird.pdf
I have reversed myself
and newly claimed
it's all the feelings that I have
for others soaked in pain
that cause my wounds
and brings me shame
although I can’t say why it’s so.
If I were smart,
this pity that engenders blots
upon my name
and lacerates
my body and my soul
I would
for preservation’s sake
forgo.
and newly claimed
it's all the feelings that I have
for others soaked in pain
that cause my wounds
and brings me shame
although I can’t say why it’s so.
If I were smart,
this pity that engenders blots
upon my name
and lacerates
my body and my soul
I would
for preservation’s sake
forgo.
