On God

On God

God is Goodness. He can give good, but cannot need or get it. In that sense all His love is, as it were, bottomlessly selfless by very definition; it has everything to give and nothing to receive. Hence, if God sometimes speaks as though the Impassible could suffer passion and eternal fullness could be in want, and in want of those beings on whom it bestows all from their bare existence upwards, this can mean only, if it means anything intelligible by us, that God of mere miracle has made Himself able so to hunger and created in Himself that which we can satisfy. If He requires us, the requirement is of His own choosing.

It is a poor thing to strike our colours to God when the ship is going down under us; a poor thing to come to Him as a last resort, to offer up “our own” when it is no longer worth keeping. If God were proud He would hardly have us on such terms: but He is not proud, He stoops to conquer, He will have us even though we have shown that we prefer everything else to Him.

It Doesn’t Affect You, But It Does

A Fantastic Read on the subtlety of groups or individuals using "As long as it doesn't affect anyone else, it's fine" line repeatedly or isolated.

The opening paragraph in the essay:

The libertarian ideal that everyone can do what they want and anything not affecting others in the strictest 1st degree will not have a depreciative or dilatory effect others, and thus society, is based upon a blind faith that the way, the truth, the light, of Randian enlightenment can not, and will not, be snuffed out a la Anthem because the choices of others does not, in the strictest 1st degree, command another.
But this is based on an overly idealistic view of mankind. It is the idealistic view that once a great evil is purged, that a true utopia will arise once properly established; it is the idealistic view shared by Communists, Progressives, and other assorted socialists.

It seems the collective elite class mindset is set upon faith that man will one day wake from his slumber and claim the elusive wisdom he's been chasing for centuries.

At this juncture in our epoch, civilizations and moral codes do not simply arise out of nothing. As the Political Hat writes further:

It is something that must be conserved. It calls not for magicians to alchemists who can bring forth purity of essence from some invented and contrived trick. It calls for stewards to keep and protect our civic inheritance, and to protect society’s evolution from the hands and machinations of intelligent design by unintelligent designers.

Adherence to a social contract or laws is essential as anarchy isn't a viable means of any rule. Perhaps it has its place for a short time as Mencken wrote, "Every normal man must tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats". But it is not sustainable.

...because this necessity itself is a part too of that moral and physical disposition of things, to which man must be obedient by consent or force: but if that which is only submission to necessity should be made the object of choice, the law is broken, nature is disobeyed, and the rebellious are outlawed, cast forth, and exiled, from this world of reason, and order, and peace, and virtue, and fruitful penitence, into the antagonist world of madness, discord, vice, confusion, and unavailing sorrow.

The classic cycle of societal ills goes like this:

• A right is articulated, promoted, and sanctioned as "legal" and becomes "protected". 
• Once "legal" how can it possibly be immoral and how could anyone oppose this? Do you zealots really want to take away someone else's freedom? 
• You're a bigot because you want to criminalize this beautiful, legal, and protected "right" 
• You're discriminating against a class of citizens and you should feel bad. 

He further writes:

such Leftist viewpoints presume an oppressor and oppressed dichotomy. Thus, any dissent is considered proof of evil and oppression.

Dissent is not tolerated and is caricatured as fringe, extreme, and narrow minded, amid the other colorful characterizations of the "anti" crowd. The virtue signalling from the milquetoast people afraid to not conform the outrage du jour is omni-present.

We are still told that such eventualities are always “crazy” and will never come to be, despite that fact that they always do. As Lord Melbourne noted:

“What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.”

True to its core, predictions based on even a cursory look back at history eventually come to pass. Social engineers, bleeding hearts, and well to do individuals, as well as the state. come to find out the genie they massaged cannot be put into its bottle.

From an appeal to tolerance, when out of power, to crushing dissent when in power, certain truths become manifest:



Calvin and Hobbes ever astute commentary on absolute power. So, in the name of equality we see exercised special privilege and power for the select few.

The pretense that such demands don’t affect the lives of others now has been abandoned, replaced by two options: (1) get over it and get in line; or (2) be pushed to the margins of society, losing your reputation—and possibly your career—in the process.

“In version 2.0 of the New Regime, even if you can point to a direct, immediate, and significant intrusion on your life, your opinion is irrelevant (and perhaps bigoted) when compared to ‘social progress.’

Often heard in the midst of this howling is the appeal to the calendar. "It's the 2000's! It's not your grandparents' world anymore. We are progressing as a society!" C.S. Lewis wrote succintly, "Truth is not determined by a calendar". I don't look at what decade or year it is to determine if something is just, fair, or moral.

In an awesome paragraph, The Political Hat writes:

Because “no man is an island”, natural societal tendencies towards tolerance, which a just society that had not only the liberty to choose as they will but the virtue to choose correctly can endure, is turned against such liberty and virtue to destroy both and institute some crazed intelligently designed utopia created ex nihilo and developed en vacuo by self-evidentiary unintelligent designers. It is a fallacy of first principles.

As Burke noted:

“But what is liberty without wisdom and without virtue? It is the greatest of all possible evils; for it is folly, vice, and madness, without tuition or restraint. Those who know what virtuous liberty is, cannot bear to see it disgraced by incapable heads, on account of their having high-sounding words in their mouths.”
PH quotes another writer here:

Further, as James FitzJames Stephen notes:

“To me this question whether liberty is a good or a bad thing appears as irrational as the question whether fire is a good or a bad thing. It is both good and bad according to time, place, and circumstance, and a complete answer to the question, In what cases is liberty good and in what cases is it bad? would involve not merely a universal history of mankind, but a complete solution of the problems which such a history would offer.”

The cornerstone of the argument PH makes is capped here:

The private actions of two individuals in the privacy of a private bedroom in a private house, indeed, does not directly affect others in the 1st degree. Re-writing social norms, mores, and folkways, however, does unequivocally affect others by the tyrannical and conniving mutation of society, taking advantage of and abusing the natural tolerance of a society that has become so used to great liberty with the concomitant wisdom to choosevirtuously, in order to unintelligently design a utopia ex nihilo in vacuo that is antithetical and ablative of the very virtue and liberty that made such tolerance possible!

Yes, decent people are tolerant. And SJW's take advantage of that tolerance and push it to the edge by invoking the behavior we are to be tolerant of is now virtuous. And don't we want virtue in our society? Yes, so shut up!

A “private” right ceases to become “private” when it impugns in any way, shape, or form on others, particularly in an intentional, economic, and political way.

This is the elephant in the room. People say they want the state out of their private lives/bedrooms, but then look to the state to sanction the behavior in order to legitimize it. We cannot conflate "legal" with "virtue". They do not mix unless a society is also operating in wisdom, with an eye on the past and an eye on the consequences of such "rights".

Poverty Of Soul

From Billy Graham's Devotional, Day By Day

No man is more pathetic than he who is in great need and is not aware of it. Remember Samson? Standing there in the valley of Sorek, surrounded by the lords of the Philistines, “ . . . he wist not that the Lord was departed from him.” It has been truly said, “No man is so ignorant as he who knows nothing and knows not that he knows nothing. No man is so sick as he who has a fatal disease and is not aware of it. No man is so poor as he who is destitute, and yet thinks he is rich.” The pitiable thing about the Pharisees was not so much their hypocrisy as it was their utter lack of knowledge of how poor they actually were in the sight of God. There is always something pathetic about a man who thinks he is rich when he is actually poor, who thinks he is good when he is actually vile, who thinks he is educated when he is actually illiterate.

[Their chastisement will continue until it has accomplished its purpose] for My people are stupid, says the Lord [replying to Jeremiah]; they do not know and understand Me. They are thickheaded children, and they have no understanding. They are wise to do evil, but to do good they have no knowledge [and know not how]. Jeremiah 4:22

C.S. Lewis once wrote succinctly, "Of late, my moral history is depraved". Despair of my condition overwhelms my spirit at times. I'm well aware of it, yet I feel so hopeless in defeating it on my own. Continued prayers seem fruitless at times. "Lord, where are you, in the midst of this, fighting for me?"

Fly, you fool!

Harbaugh, The Master Coach

I'm so impressed by Coach Harbaugh's ability to turn off the negatives and be relentless in affirmation/positives. He doesn't dwell in negative or adversity. 

It's a great lesson. 

In reading the transcript of his presser from week 1, I was struck by it again and I share some tidbits below. 

Wilton talked about how your reassurance after that first play—what it meant to him. You’ve been through that a lot of times, that kind of thing. Talk about your approach there.

“Well, really my approach was I wanted to see what he did on the next series. It’s very difficult for a quarterback to throw an interception on a series and then come back and lead a touchdown drive the following series. It’s something I’ve always been fascinated in watching quarterbacks, and the really good ones can do that. They don’t think about, ‘I’m not gonna make another bad mistake.’ I mean, that’s what some do, but good ones don’t. I was just excited for that opportunity, to see what he was going to do on the next drive.

“And then to see him start the next drive on the two-yard line. I mean, that’s as much adversity as you can have for a quarterback starting a series, starting a drive: having thrown an interception on the previous drive—and the very first throw of the game—and then to find yourself on the two-yard line. But he responded in tremendous fashion to lead a touchdown drive, make big third-down conversion throws, to make as good a corner throw to Grant Perry as can be made. It can’t be thrown any better. The slant he threw coming off the goal line cannot be thrown any better. 

“Had total command and I think it speaks volumes and bodes really well for our team and bodes really well for his career as a quarterback to have done that, to have come back off an interception and then very next drive go on a 98-yard touchdown drive. Now he knows he can do it, and now we’ll expect him to do it. So, it was good for our team. Good for his career.”

The stats will probably show just how many freshmen played at the end, but you played freshmen early and often. Can you talk about your decision on adding freshmen onto the field so early?

“Sure. It’s been coming for weeks now. Really I’d say the last two to three weeks, last three weeks you could say—three weeks ago there were eight, seven or eight that earned it and knew that they were going to be tracking to be in the two-deep. Then it was less than a week later that it was probably up to 10. Then another week it was up again and up again and finally, I think I told Jim Brandstatter the other night, it’ll be 17-20 when it’s all said and done the way it’s going. They’ve earned it."

Overall effort on that side of the ball was outstanding. You know, it was dominating there really at the beginning for sure and throughout the game. Don Brown has a great, great saying—I love it—which is ‘solve problems with aggression.’ Our team played that way today.”

Does it boost them up when you stop them after that interception?

“Definitely. It definitely does. The encouraging thing—I’ll say it again—our coaches worked our players as much as can possibly be done, and I thought it really showed out there, and it really showed in the mental part of the game. Watching our defense go through the first half and even into the third quarter where there wasn’t a mistake made—I mean, there wasn’t an alignment mistake made, a stance-alignment mistake in the first half or the first part of the third quarter. It was very impressive. Everybody knew exactly what they were doing. It really showed. It just showed. The meeting time and the practice time really showed in our guys.

“And then, again, the players are willing to do it. The ones that love football, they love doing it every day. It was something very interesting Michael Jordan said to the team Friday night. I think it resonated with everybody. He got good at basketball because he practiced. There’s such great carryover to football because you get good at football by playing football. And he said, ‘If you love it, then you want to do it every day. Then you want to do it as much as you can every day.’ He said, ‘It’s like eating ice cream. If you love ice cream, then you’re going to eat it every single day.’ That’s what resonates with me. That’s what our football team has been doing for the past month, and it was just good that they went out and showed that today.”

Does O’Korn and Morris and Malzone all getting a drive mean that the competition for the backup quarterback spot is still ongoing or have you settled on a backup?

“We’re just going to keep going. Just keep going and—it’s a very good positive. Very good positive. Some of those clichés you hear about if you have three quarterbacks you don’t have any good quarterbacks, that’s never resonated with me either, so…just continue to keep going, keep having at it.

“They’ve all commented how good it’s been, how helpful it’s been [that] there’s so many people in the mix. There’s people pushing Wilton. There’s people pushing John. There’s people pushing Shane, and they’re pushing each other. It’s like, I mean, it’s pushing each other higher. They’ve all commented on how good that’s been and, again, I think that showed today.”

On Michael Jordan being with the team:

First of all, Michael Jordan was fantastic with the team. He spent 45 minutes and really connected with them. I mean, really toldthem things that they could take away and apply to their own game, advice, tips. It was real. About playing your first game, about playing your first college game. 

“Chris Evans asked the very first question of Michael Jordan: ‘What was it like playing in your first college game?’ And Michael talked about it, how he wanted to do everything right, he didn’t want to make mistakes, he didn’t want to screw anything up. That’s how he approached his very first college game, and he said ‘Trust your training. Trust the practice that you’ve had and that will carry for you, and continue to get better every day.’ 

“That warmed my heart when he talked about every single day trying to be better than the day before. A lot of things. Talking about pressure. Talking about the pressure moment, what he leaned on, what he thought made him effective in those moments. Talked about being a great teammate. Can’t do anything without your teammates. And pushing each other in practice to make each other better. Same things I think our team has been seeing for the last month and the last year. Same things they’ve been hearing. 

“They were listening a lot better to Michael Jordan than they were to me. It was good. He was loose, he was funny with them. They couldn’t get enough. It was great. It was a real honor to have him sharing our sideline. 

The Remnants

Nehemiah was a cup bearer. Among the duties of the cup bearer was to taste food and drink before the king did, to see if it was poisoned. If it was poisoned, the king's life would be spared. If it was not poisoned, the cup bearer enjoyed a sample of the good life. But, the cup bearer was also a trusted confidant, dependable, and insignificant enough to be present for important conversations and meetings.

Cupbearers held important positions within political organizations of the ancient Near East. The position was one of high trust: the king could easily be poisoned through wine, and the cupbearer could overhear private conversations during a meal, including those with other heads of state.

Nehemiah and King Artaxerxes knew each other well enough to catch moods, body language, and tone. So when Nehemiah's body language indicated trouble, the king called Nehemiah on it and wanted to know more:

And the king said to me, “Why is your face sad, seeing you are not sick? This is nothing but sadness of the heart.”

Although this was no manipulation on Nehemiah's part, it opened a fearful door for Nehemiah. The conversations with the King most likely never roamed to personal issues. So, when the king asked Nehemiah about the troubling body language, it made Nehemiah "very much afraid" (Nehemiah 2:2).
Making it no less leg-shaking was the Queen's presence. As she looks upon Nehemiah with a probing eye, he feels that, too.

Nehemiah responds in the classic manner of praise and affirmation, then citing the issue or problem, to the request or solution offered. One thing Nehemiah does, separating most of our pleas, requests, and hopes, is he prayed first.

So I prayed to the God of heaven. And I said to the king, “If it pleases the king, and if your servant has found favor in your sight, that you send me to Judah, to the city of my fathers’ graves, that I may rebuild it.”

The King doesn't hesitate by granting the request, Rather, he asks, "How long will you be gone and when will you return?" Nehemiah asks for protection as he travels across provinces