nathanael.ink

about history? will it matter how long you have known me? will it matter if our eyes are not level? if you have grown short and I tall, the shortcomings of us both.. there is never enough. sometimes blood, the blood which we know runs under the skin of family, sometimes it has a stronger bind, but as time progresses the world makes it weaker. I could see, and argue, a point that the Lord has one method of working which would appear to aid this separation.. but anyone not satisfied with the immediate will quickly see the difference between the two rejections.   anyway

I begin thoughts sometimes, and am thwarted, sometime abruptly, but most often when I reach a thickness. a thistle, a thorn, a pain as temptation, tempting me to think it and feel wronged by God, myself, or logic itself. And while I am often a fool, I am not always.

I think people come and go in unhealthy increments. though, what do I know, my greatest feeling of betrayal came from a woman who, relative to time, I had hardly known. and perhaps the easiest leaving I have seen is after a length, where by the end I simply thought “.yeah, I thought so”

perhaps it is all in the knowledge. I had not know her enough to know or be prepared for her unruly crave and how it might come so quickly against me. while a longer friend, when honesty is a part, it is must easier to see the line, or pattern, and forecast, prepare for, fear for, what might wait ahead for himself, and myself. No one sees anything coming, only formulas put to work on history.

and on those grounds, I attempt an irreconcilable thought; that two history’s trailing two separate persons, but tangled at all, is reason enough, to tangle again.

one argument(of the many) I’ll address is “but nathanael, it was disaster, we will only be creating disaster again”

the point is not in what is created, but that creation happens at all. a turn of events occurs. while I demand it is unknowable, still I see the likelyhood of disaster, yet still it is not the outcome that ought to matter, but simply that is occurs at all. that something is created, disastrous or not.

now, perhaps an easily revocable extremist argument “so nathanael, if I have been abused by someone, you think we should meet again based solely off the existence of  ‘history’ between us?”

negative. I admit, if there is a clear and obvious wrong or reason given, or even a lawsuit in place. by all means, never see each other again.

but, I also mean to address normal friendships, not just ‘dating’ or whatever nonsensical names you want to put on it, on a intimate relationship.

I think, there ought to be clear reasoning expressed as to why what you saw in someone, is either not there, or no longer appealing. some shift, must be clear. for, in the existence of a previously acceptable relationship, which now distances. change must have occurred. no doubt. but, we owe it to ourself, to discover, and to our friends, to express what that change has been. because when someone is left with only the space where you were, it is instantly a battle of self-abuse.

we have birthed a society which thinks no one NEEDS to know WHY, because they’ve already decided nothing else can be done. and I say.

regardless. there needs to be expression. honesty. and honesty which is developed into reasoning, and “I just don’t know, it’s just not the same” should not be aloud. bare with me,  ON THE GROUNDS  that something, has changed. if it for no other love than for love of wisdom and knowledge, a reason ought to be sought out.

..now, marriage, is a whole separate issue. which I cannot begin to address, as, my knowledge of it. is 100% fragmented.

but

let it be known, I do not enjoy. the leaving of things.