lyrics: God, you scared the devil out of me

God, you scared the devil out of me

I used to fear the devil            but now I know his game
I was a fool for his tricks and charms    but now I know his ways

I believed every word he said        like a politician on campaign
he told me what was wrong with my life    with damn good reasons for who to blame

he taught me how I should not be    and showed me how to be ashamed
he even validated my denial of Divine Mystery and praised my vain worship of pain

but now it’s the devil who’s scared of me

I told the devil that I loved him        oh you should have seen him turn and run
I said you’re a child of God but you know not what you do
you may think that you’re in charge     but even that God planned for you

his eyes went kind of hazy        like he was waking from a dream
he stretched out his arms and looked into the mirror
and here is what the devil said to me

I used to fear the devil            but now I know his game
I was a fool for his tricks and charms    but now I know his ways

4 Responses to “lyrics: God, you scared the devil out of me”

  1. judy osmundson Says:

    😉 wild, jr. I like it…;)

  2. jrfibonacci Says:

    Brandee Gudith-Brennan

    yes J.r. it’s like how spirituality blames the Ego for it’s issues.


    It’s all God’s Will. Blame is God’s will, blaming the ego, blaming the devil -whatever. The words blame, ego, devil, religion, and spirituality are all created things- figments of language, coded symbols (or “images” as in the classic first commandment re worshiping the mere images). Some models of language identify as god certain particular formations in language, such that we think we are whatever language says we are- but language is a set of constructed codes that can say anything, such as “this is not language.”

    God is what forms language. These words are formed by God- as are all of them, even “this is not language” or “I.” There is only the language of “I” (and the underlying neuro-linguistic patterns related to “I” or “Ich” or “Je”) because God says so- or only if God does.

    I use the term Divine Mystery for God in the song above, since the term God is so often associated with a mere creature of language rather than it being recognized as a reference to that which forms all things including language, synonymous with the Chinese word Tao… or what I call “the Divine Mystery.”

    The devil is the linguistic pattern which presumes as primary the alleged fundamental existence of the self, then the rest of life as some generally unrelated secondary phenomenon- kicking Life Itself out of one’s “garden” or “kingdom” and declaring one’s self as God. The Devil is fundamentally a divisiveness in language, the context in which accusation seems reasonable, and while the Devil posits it’s own isolated self as God, the devil also experiences struggle against the rest of life, which the devil experiences very sincerely as victimizing the devil, and thus with the issue of “being saved” (from Life Itself, from God, from the condemnation or shame which it projects as originating from outside it’s own language?) as the fundamental neurosis of the mind of the devil.

    • jrfibonacci Says:

      Peter Blake:

      So J.r. if all of this is “Gods Will” and God created all these elements you call linguistics etc, where does personal responsibility come in to play. If God is creating all this stuff, then I can just sit back, put life on remote control and write all the crap going on in my reality of to Gods Will huh?

      From within your equation, where and when do we take responsibility for what is being created in our personal reality? We each have our own unique reality of experiences do we not?


      Peter, while we are filtering experience through language and through a physical body- not that I am positing any alternative, but just not denying one either- then of course the filtering of language is interpretative from the context of personal associations and attachments and connotations and assumptions (AKA beliefs), just like the filtering and formation of visual images from the immensity of data available through the eye organs. However, just as there is such a thing as the ability to see, there is also the inability, called blindness.

      What if there was another channel of experience to which you or I may be metaphorically blind- similar to how dogs can hear sounds at a higher pitch than humans? You or I, operating in the ego process of language, have an isolated experience (and experience of isolation) in which no one entirely shares your experience, though anyone could share some aspect of your experience, such as that presumed fundamental primacy of isolation or so-called existential alienation.

      However, God might not experience the multitude of divided, isolated branches. God experiences all the branches as branches of the vine. The branches of Divine Mystery that we might call Jesus or Buddha may have been quite explicit about all of that, but when we read their words translated into English, if the translators did not really understand the simplicity of what was being communicated, then the communication may come out a bit garbled. That’s one reason I have so appreciated people like Douglas Harding ( and Tony Parsons and Wayne Liquorman (those last two are still alive as far as I know)- or perhaps you will get some access to the direct, experiential unity of God-consciousness through these words “of mine.” Again, perhaps they are all God’s words anyway- even yours….

      So, if your personal reality is also created by God, then God can certainly create personal responsibility as a phenomenon in language or in social systems of reward and punishment. Depending on how you mean the words “crap going on in my reality” you may be experiencing shame for your rejection of it (as crap). To God, it’s not crap, but merely branches. Or, if it is literally crap, then crap is just decomposing composites useful for fertilizing new compositions.

      It’s also distinctive to get that if God is the whole tree, and every branch is part of the tree, and you are a branch, then you are fundamentally Divine Mystery and all the linguistic formations that you as Divine Mystery may make about “me” (the egoic isolated branch) are actually also Divine Mystery expressing itself as particular branchings of the whole. Of course, this is not unique to any particular branch. In experiencing the whole tree as the unity of God, God notices that all of the human branches worship their own ego. Like in the movie “the matrix”- one may experience the various branches no longer so much as individualities but as particular patterns and programs- kind of like that in the word “formation” there are a bunch of letters which are each distinct patterns in themselves, but have no real meaning or function except in the entire sequence of letters to form the unity of a word: “formation.”

      Does the letter O have personal responsibility for anything? (Nor does it have shame!) No, but the letter O is essential to the entirety of the word. There is no such thing as the word “formation” without the letter O. That’s not quite the same as responsibility- more like privilege- but some other word may fit even better.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: