Answer to a "riddle" about God

I've seen this riddle or challenge to the reality of God's power a number of times over the years, including a mention somewhere today, so I figured I'd answer it since apparently a lot of people take it seriously. The riddle is "If God is all powerful, can he create something so heavy that he can't lift it up?"

The answer is "Yes he could, but it would not be real, it would be an illusion or lie. And since God is never untrue to his nature, he obviously would not do it as the creation would be bogus and not real, so it would be pointless and against his nature."

Let's break it down using logic. The question is bogus in the first place because it relies on a simple assumption that's just wrong. The question assumes, which most people don't realize, that God could ever be subject to the force of gravity. Um, duh. The reason something is heavy is that it has mass (it is an object made out of some material) and gravity is pulling on it. That's why something is heavy on earth (lots of gravity) yet on the International Space Station where there is very little gravity, astronauts can move huge "heavy" things with barely a finger tip.

So when you ask the question about God, it's a bogus set of assumptions since God is not comprised of any matter or energy, God does not reside in the 4 dimensional (3 dimensions plus time) world, and thus there is no part of God that is subject to gravity. God lives totally outside of the question.

So if he wanted to make you happy he'd have to create a robot or some other object made out of mass, put it in a gravity field, then give it something too heavy to lift AND, here's the problem, lie to you that this robot "is" Him. So obviously God can create any "test" scenario that a human comes up with, but he have to "humor you" to do so, and that means creating an illusion, to be polite, or lie to you. The Bible warns about testing God, that it's a really bad idea and not well received. But I know that many people ask this with genuine thoughtfulness, not realizing that the question itself is bogus.

It is human nature that humans always try to picture God as a living being that lives in a material/energy/time frame, and then can be "tested." Um, sorry, but God created the material universe by "standing" outside of it and obviously before the material world ever existed, since He created it! Any "ability" that people question about God is based on abilities that utilize matter, energy and time, all of which God created and exists totally outside of.

So it is not like God is "powerless" to create an illusion that you request, in other words, that a living body in the universe called "God" stands in a gravity field and can't lift something heavy. But obviously that is not really God because God lives outside of His creation and is pure spirit, no matter, no energy, no time sequence. With only a thought, a moment of His Will, God can do absolutely anything with his creation (the universe) or those he created in the pure spirit place of heaven (the angels) or outside of heaven (hell). He could make this universe disappear in a second, if he wanted to. He could make and label any human or animal "God" and then make it stand in gravity and be unable to lift something. But there IS no matter or energy, and thus no gravity or other forces, or ticking of a clock of sequence of actions, in heaven where God is God.

People who ask this question to erode faith and mock God demonstrate that they don't even have a sixth grade knowledge of either science or God. However, I understand that many folks, especially young people (Hi!) ask this riddle sincerely, because you've not received the how-to about using logic to answer questions and identify fallacious assumptions (bogus premises).

Hope this helps!

Writing, imagination, creative arts exercise

And, really, a spirituality exercise too.

Imagine that God Himself (not Jesus Christ, think only of God for this exercise) decides to give you a present of one day of God giving you a tour of the entire world, touching on the places and people that He both most wishes to view, and for you to see. What would that tour be like? What do you think God would select that He most wants to visit (and thus share with you) AND what He selects thinking you most need to see?

Hi young people, it's been quite a long time and discouraging, but I still continue to hope and pray for you. This imagination exercise is particularly for you.

Intrusive thoughts

Just watched a woman's description of shocking thoughts she had about her baby, such as smothering him, as a result of her post partum depression.

The proper term for this is "intrusive thoughts," which is well described in many Internet articles including in Wikipedia. It is a severe problem and is associated with many mental disorders such as depression, anxiety, OCD, PPD and bipolar.

The reason I am mentioning this today is that here is another example of where society as a whole has gone in a totally wrong direction, which harms rather than helps those with intrusive thoughts.

I agree that cognitive behavior therapy is a great help, but CBT is a matter of closing the barn door after the horse is gone. In other words CBT is used to wrestle with and hopefully subdue the intrusive thoughts, yet people remains saturated in intrusive thought stimulation without even realizing it. There are two main weaknesses in society that result in assailing people with intrusive thoughts:

1. Electronic media is a passive means of providing the viewer or listener with thoughts they would never otherwise have had. That's the whole idea of creativity and exposure to new and exciting stimuli, but the problem is that most people have not formed, particularly in childhood, the boundaries of thoughts that people used to have. In other words the past few generations are "thoughts wide open" due to their early addiction and exposure to electronic media. A huge part of normal human development is self awareness and self imposing of not only behavior but also thought boundaries, strong boundaries. The "let it all hang out" generations have damaged this necessary part of normal development. So people who grew up in electronic media times are programmed to have "all channels open to all thoughts, good or evil, wise or foolish, useful or bullshit" and thus are vulnerable to intrusive thoughts.

2. Excessive "spiritual" practices run the same risk, cultivating an undiscipled mind. In fact what passes for "spiritual discipline" in many cults and so forth (and even dabblers in mainstream religion) is actually not discipline in terms of discerning good thoughts and bad thoughts, but being, "open to the universe" and other such bullcrap. Listen, when normal people pray they know who they are and who they are praying to, that being the Almighty God. People who develop excess so called "spirituality" are like lint collectors, opening their minds to whatever crap is floating around out there. Mental crap that floats out there to be collected may be the undisciplined baloney of one's own unconscious mind, the crap thoughts of others via ESP, miasma from the gates of hell, and the urgings of one's own ego to be "special" and to "hear" things that "enlighten" you, but really don't exist. Folks, there is plenty of legit meditation and other spiritual practices, but beware, beware, beware because human ego like a magnet takes you places you should not go for your own good and for that of others.

When I was studying undercover people involved in so called "New Age" and other cult beliefs, I was in horror at the pride many of them had at working on broadcasting their sex thoughts via kundalini and other methods. And you wonder why so many children are beset by victimization. This is just one example of how you should not emit that kind of garbage (it hits more than you intended) plus it prevents you from having natural levees against intrusive thoughts later when YOU need protection.

I hope this helps. Too late, but what the hell.

An analogy you need to "hear"

If you destroy your sense of hearing, or that of someone else, that does not mean that the world stops making sounds. You, or that other person, simply have become deaf.

Likewise if you destroy your own or someone else's ability to hear God (as he actually speaks), that doesn't mean God has gone away. It simply means that you have committed spiritual suicide or murder. God is still there even if you destroy your own or someone else's organs of hearing.

This is why God insists that children be raised "in the faith." It is not an "adult option." Would you pour lye in your children's ears figuring they shouldn't hear anything until they are adults and can have "hearing aids of their own choosing" installed.

Wise up. Hell's packed already but has infinite capacity, expanding to need.

who is really in jail, on death row, enslaved?

Many people in this world who walk around thinking they are free, yes, even empowered, are actually the ones who are sitting in jail, the ones who are on death row, the ones who are enslaved. It is very easy to identify those who are really imprisoned from those who are not.

The more that one does not believe the truth, whether in religious or secular matters, the more one is actually in jail, on death row and enslaved.

There are those who tell lies and bear false witness, and those who believe and/or obey the lies and false witness. They are equally in jail, on death row and enslaved. Equally, there are those who don't lie but refuse to believe the truth. Unfortunately they too are equally in jail, on death row and enslaved. This applies to both God's truth and day to day worldly matters. I will give you simple examples so that you understand.

Suppose that there is a well known food toxin, something like salmonella, and there are three categories of people who react to that knowledge. Those who tell lies say it is not harmful, and thus no safe food handling measures must be taken. Those who believe and obey the lies therefore pass on the effect of that lie by not handling food safely and cleanly that others consume. Those who know salmonella is dangerous but refuse to think that it can happen to them allow this to continue and thus put themselves and others at risk.

All three of those types of people are in "jail" because they are imprisoned by erroneous actions (or refusals to do good) and thus limit their options for dealing with the situation. It is an apt criminal parallel because their refusals, whichever of the three types, endanger not only themselves but others, via their distortion of truth, denial of truth, or refusal to serve the truth! They are on "death row" because, just to stick with the example, there is a risk to life and health that they are refusing to deal with and thus it will eventually catch up with them, and in the case of a pandemic (just to use the example let's pretend a salmonella pandemic is possible), they and everyone else sit on death row, awaiting that pandemic. They are also enslaved because they are in service to the lie, rather than freed by the truth. The truth expands legitimate options and actions, while lies only cut one down to the chains of the lie's one option, which is inaction on behalf of one's self or others and, if one is part of the lying and enabling, "spreading the chains" for others to wear.

Here is the problem. I had given you just one example, an analogy, (since most do not actually dispute the problem of salmonella in theory, but MANY willfully do not follow hygiene and other protective practices on behalf of others). Put aside the analogy, now, and think of how MANY LIES every single person on earth is now subjected to collectively, in total, on a daily basis. One cannot even tell the originating liar from the enabling liar or the victim of lying because the entire fabric of truth in society and individual honor, morality and conduct has broken down and become in service to power, ego and money drivers. Children are on the third generation of being raised by more fiction than truth, in the home, in schools, on the street and via media "entertainment." Remember, it's not just an outright lie that is the problem, but withholding of actual quality education of truth and discernment that is the almost larger problem.

Back to the salmonella example. How can a child believe or not believe the risk and also the safety precautions if they have not the background education? Think of the list of things that a child must understand in order to do something like wash their hands and be careful not to eat tainted food. They have to understand what "dirt" (germs) is, they have to understand how dirt gets on or in them, they have to understand what being sick or well is, they have to understand that it is not something to immobilize them with fear about but that they can be safe, they have to understand how to clean with soap and water, and they have to understand timing (washing before one gets dirty is not helpful, for example).

So imagine a child that is told, and believes, that salmonella is dangerous and they need to avoid bad food plus wash their hands and for the sake of making a silly extreme point to illuminate what I mean, assume the child's been raised in isolation, not having any education nor have parents raised them with the list of necessary knowledge given above. What is a child to do with hearing "salmonella is dangerous?" Think someone named "Sally Nelly" is dangerous? Think that the salmon fish is dangerous? If the child does not understand you are speaking of dirt/germs, what they are, where it comes from, how it gets to them, how to solve the problem, and when/how to wash, they cannot do anything meaningful with a truth spoken to them at all!

That, friends, is the problem. We have a world that starts children out with cartoons and video games, and nothing about reality of life, and by reality I don't mean code words for the bad parts of life, but I mean all the goodness of how life actually exists. When you do not raise your children, and when you gain money or power through lack of service to truth, you not only enslave yourself and others, especially children, but you are all in jail and you are all on death row.

Even if you do not promote all that is so misleading in our culture, by taking up airspace with crap you are crowding out the opportunities and the motivation for people, especially young people, to learn what is really important and to be liberated by the genuine freedom of truth.

Here's another example. Suppose that a certain local political seat is always filled by people who meet in secret and decide who that candidate will be and fix the election so their person always win. Do those hypocrites go home and tell their children that they can "dream big" and maybe be President one day? They smirk as teachers, both enablers and well meaning ones, teach kids in school about the political process and try to "inspire" the kids, yet they know full well if one of those kids grows up and tries to run for office they are not on the preordained predetermined "win" list. The same with being famous, being made a "star," of "making a difference in the world." If young people don't even know the facts of the world, and how it operates, and how to choose from truthful options and choices in action, how can they "dream big" when they don't really understand the choices and the realities? Society pushes the predetermined winners, pretending it can happen to "anyone." Then for the one it happens to, fine, (except when they find out they now have obligations to the rainmakers), but what about the ninety-nine others out of a hundred who wasted their time, talents, their heart, and their love, to pursuing a dream that was never actually an option to them? If they knew the truth they could have actually done something else, far more satisfying.

Many people in society push "follow your dreams" and "give it your all," knowing that they will "award" that prize to one or two of their predetermined chosen, while letting those who believe this at large wither on the vine. Meanwhile people could have been doing what they have always done, which is to grow up in a truthful and well educated (though not of course pure or unblemished) society where they can always be aiming themselves at valid and authentic targets, instead of manipulated illusionary crap. Crap that enriches the bank accounts and egos of those who are on top of the total life lie pyramids.

Friends, and I call you that, even toward those who have persecuted me, stop thinking that I'm the one being controlled, limited, manipulated and in "jail." It is you all who are in that place, you all who are in jail, on death row, and enslaved. The more you believe the lying crap that is out there everywhere, the more you will lose your pursuit of genuine happiness in life, the more your life is likely to be foreshortened (and those you care about) and the more you have to consider that you may be on the path to eternal death, first as the living social slaves that you are, and after death, to the place where disbelievers and those who did not honestly serve God, in eternal exile from goodness and in torment. I really don't wish that on anyone, but I'm cheering both Darwin and God onward on this one, if you keep asking for it, that's what you are going to keep getting in life and in death.

Some suggested reading material for all

Read the article in Wikipedia found under Dissolution of the Monasteries, England and Wales.

Good idea to read it before any admiration of the UK or snickering at the Catholic Church.

My niece, tattling & her dad's beer can

Like every other generation before it I belong to a generation that bemoans what has happened to young people, and what they are doing to themselves.

I was reminded of this story from my life when listening to witness at church this weekend. The man bearing witness was struck by how several impoverished girls in an orphanage shared the remaining half bottle of his soda pop with a total of 15 other children, so each could get a sip. I observed the same type of thing with the Native American children I sponsored. But listen to what happened in my own family, back in the not so good old 1970's.

My brother and wife with their young child, my niece, was visiting grandma's house, where I still had a room. My brother being much older than I, when he went to college I moved into his room, had his furniture and the little knick knacks that he left for me. For example, he had a beautiful little ceramic of a fawn (that I still treasure, though I've not seen it in many years, as all my stuff is locked up in storage out of my reach). On the desk I had a beer can that my brother had used as a pencil cup, and I used it the same. It was cool, being of a brand of beer, Jaguar I think, with decoration of the same skin pattern.

My niece was fairly well grown, a child, not a toddler by any means. I was showing her around my room. In order to give her a feeling for how our family (small as it was) passed down the few things we had (we were poor and all my mom's stuff was lost in World War II), when we got to the pencil cup I told her how it was her dad's.

I was shocked, and still remember, how that little head whipped around to look at me with, to my amazement, dislike! Without a word she ran into the other room, squealing, "Dad! Dad! Aunt C has YOUR CAN!" running as fast as she could to, yep, you guessed it, "tattle" on me. Even when my bro came into the room and fondly reminisced about the can, she just glared at me, thinking only that I had stolen her precious dad's can.

Now, you might think that was funny, but it was quite a jolt for two reasons. One is that this was the first time I met a child that did not understand older sibling handing down to younger sibling his no longer wanted stuff. See, she had fine new bought things all her life. (She would later tell her grandmother that she didn't like staying in her house because she did not have a TV in every room). So I saw the first example of that very worrying and shallow, grasping trend in children, children who are old enough to know better. Second I had a premonition of where this mindset would lead her. And true, now she hangs out with celebrity tattle tales ha.

Parents, parents, parents... you are the generation that my niece belongs to. What are you teaching your children? If you were born into the way my niece was, how much worse is your children's generation? The Bible and good parenting teaches moderation, grace, good manners, appreciation, and being honorable (not tattlers) for a reason: it is not only the righteous and just way to be, but it is the way to avoid many physical and spiritual pitfalls in life. It is not healthy nor is it fair to not object when your little prince or princess has their fanny buffed constantly so that they think everyone else has "their stuff," where no matter what they have legitimately, they resent what others have, as small as it is.

So I'm glad there are still generous children who share rather than tattle, though according to the witness I heard on Sunday, I guess they are in Mongolia!

Message to young people

Just hi!

Just hi :-)

Chile aid donors

Before you give, especially you young people, read this article. Look up the AP story Chile military delivers aid but 1st to their own.

Read the whole thing, especially where gov't is refusing deliveries to desperate poor neighborhoods because they broke into stores to "loot" food, while they are delivering to people who have had food since the earthquake.

Hmm.

(And nothing like those "compassionate women who make better leaders" huh?)

message to young people

Hi again. Even if you don't hear from me for a while you are never far from my thoughts.

I want to share with you a worry that I have. This is particularly for those of you who are adolescents, teenagers, and young adults (in other words, the younger half of my "young people who are thirty and under" definition ;-)

I am worried that you have been exposed to far too much of the problems that adults must really be tasked with resolving. I am worried that far too many of you have been burdened by adult problems and concerns since you were very young children, and that this trend continues to worsen each day.

Let me assure you that I am not being condescending at all; I am actually being very practical and protective, both at the same time!

Those who know me well know that I feel that a reversal in priorities has taken place. Those adult things that I DO feel you should be involved in, young people, I feel you have been denied participation in and in fact have been placed in enforced infantalization. However, those things that I DO NOT feel you should be burdened with, you have had it forced upon you, while adults should be handling those matters.

I've written before about adult areas that I think you should have more participation in, and I probably will share more about those again sometime, so let's put them aside now so we can focus on the areas I think you should not be burdened with, and more important, WHY I feel that way.

There are several reasons why I wish that you, young people, were not burdened with things that adults, older adults, should deal with on their own. Let me list some of those reasons for you so you can see where I am coming from.

1) Childhood is the only time that you have for genuine, joyous, innocent play, agenda free learning/exploring and other activities. You will never have those chances again once you are either an adult or exposed to adult world and pressures. You can buy toys when you are an adult and you can goof off, but you can never have what you should have had as a genuine child.

2) If you have not experienced childhood the way that you are supposed to, as I describe above, you cannot really be an advocate and protector of the right of your own children or other people's children to have that ideal pattern of childhood in return. For one, you don't miss what you never really had (you miss something, there is a void, but you are not sure what). Secondly you are sucked into the "what was normal for me is probably normal for everyone else" assumption. So you will not really be a defender of other children's right to hassle free and agenda free joy and innocence, without stress, if you have not had that yourself.

3) When the brain is formed, with both its intellect and its emotions, if you do not lay down tracks, so to speak, that are based on childhood joy, freedom from stress (as much as possible), and certainly free of adult concerns and problems, then you do not have access to the strength and serenity that comes from those brain pathways as an adult. As far as the brain is concerned (both intellectually and emotionally), a childhood that is rooted as much as possible in joyous and innocent pursuits and environments is a treasure that sustains you during adulthood, one that can be referenced if not relived. Having a joyous and innocent childhood free of adult pressures leaves a person with more serenity, fortitude, perspective and positive aspirations. A boot camp type of childhood oddly enough does the opposite of what many think because rather than increasing resilience, fortitude and ambition, it erodes at the fundamental spirit that is the basis for all of those desirable attributes.

4) A joyous and innocent childhood based on freedom from adult agenda actually stimulates the economy and lifestyle in the home, schools and community in additional directions than simply where adults focus their attention. The problem with children being younger and younger consumers of adult priorities and products is that the economy and the spiritual priorities become narrowed as emotional and financial investment is made more and more in adult priorities.

Let me give a simple example. This may not be an actually factual example since only God knows what "could have been." But let us speculate together so you can best understand it. Years ago the neighborhood playground was "the" place for children. It was fun, safe and a regular routine for visiting. One could safely assume that as the years go on and more and more children are born that more and more playgrounds would be built (maybe even one every few street blocks throughout the land!) and enjoyed. But we see that has not happened for several reasons. Put aside for the moment the obvious problems of many children not being born due to abortion and broken families/less marriages and so forth, and of crime and blight, including child predators making playgrounds unsafe and thus unused. Focus just on the economics and the community landscape. If more and more children are in the home exposed to and participating only in adult activities, limitations, worries and concerns, fewer and fewer children need and desire playgrounds and so fewer are provided as they are a low priority. That is simple supply and demand economics.

Do you see what I mean? There is both a mindset and a practical penalty for children being hemmed in by adult priorities. Children forget or are never exposed to the joy of a genuine, safe, regular playground (mindset) and as a result, that experience is given to fewer and fewer (the practical penalty). Instead of more and more playgrounds being built, USED, and kept safe, we have adult activities (video games, for example) pushed further and further down the age groups. There is less variety in both a child's experience and also in the resulting environment and economy as a whole.

5) Burnout. Quite simply if you are having to clad yourself in armor to fight adult problems, you will get burned out, depressed, bummed out and plain old tired, way, way, WAY too soon.

6) Anxiety. There are few things more frustrating than worrying about things that you genuinely cannot change as of yet, if ever. This is one of the things that irates and inflames me the most, especially when you look at bogus concerns thrust on children such as "climate change." What the hell are kids supposed to do about that (bogus as it is) but worry and be sad and anxious? Trust me, adults don't even know what to do, but they point children in one false direction after the other and cause them great anxiety, while they sit on their fat asses and do nothing about genuine environmental problems, such as sanitation and pollution, and also the wise provision of natural spaces for species to adapt to any climate change or whatever that might genuinely come along.

7) Ego trips and inflation. When adults feed you the constant line that "you are special" and that "you can make a difference" and you "can change the world," that is simply a lie and it gives you a fat head for no reason. Children cannot change the world, "for the better" or for otherwise. I am not being pessimistic or denying your impact. Children, your impact is to become human beings, to grow up as loved and normal children, to discover your own likes and dislikes, and then, as adults, to start to learn "the ways of the world." When children are hocked to collect dimes for a cause so they can "make a difference," you are letting adults off the hook for solving the problem. Look at Haiti. Their situation has sucked big wind for decades and all adults do is leave a big fat mess and then when something like the earthquake hits, they put guilt trips and inflation of ego on children and make them collect dimes to buy someone poor a shirt in Haiti, rather than getting their fat or bony asses around a desk to actually solve the problems of that country. And meanwhile you children grow up with a false idea of how much you personally can change the world, while not being made known of how you can contribute in the right way and the right time when you have more knowledge, resources and control.

Sigh.....................................................

Let me leave this with you to think about. It's tough to become aware of a problem without an easy solution, as I'm not really giving you "action items" in this blogging, something you can do, except for one thing to start. I suggest you work on craving adult things far less, and nurturing the classic activities, play, joy and serenity of childhood as much as you can. Reject being drafted into adult concerns as much as you can.

I realize that is difficult to do as many of you are stuck in very tough adult situations. I'm extending a hand of comfort to you (both hands actually) with this blogging (and ranting a bit too, I admit, heh). Do not have "grown up" and "adult" agenda thrust upon you without you at least thinking about it in your mind, and resist the guilt trip as much as you can. If your caregivers and teachers try to raise your anxiety levels about world problems (or crap going on in your own house), try to counterbalance it by 1) realizing it has always been a tough world and those problems will still be there when you are older, so what is the hurry for you as yet a child and 2) deliberately increase your time and attention investment in classic play or other joyous/exploring/learning activities appropriate to your age.

I hope you have found this helpful and be assured of my constant affection and concern for you.

understanding God: failure to pray in school

I'm not going to mince words. When prayer was taken out of the public schools (and the ability to discuss the Bible), God promptly withdrew many blessings from the United States, both as a community and all individuals. And yes, that includes from those who not guilty of the actual decision, including the students who are deprived of prayer/discussion in school. Why is this? Why is this "fair" for God to punish all? I'll use scripture in a second part to this, but first an analogy, because I know that this helps these modern generations the most in making the first steps toward understanding, repentance and correction.

A father dispenses a generous allowance to his children. So his kids line up in front of him once a week (after dad has received his paycheck) and he hands each child their weekly allowance. Two things happen. One is that each child thanks their father. The second is that the child tells their dad at least one thing good that they did with the last week's money. (For example a daughter may have spent money on clothes, and dad doesn't want to hear about that, but tells her dad about the dollar she gave to a charity for Haiti). So dad has only two conditions for the generous allowance: one is that each child thank him as he or her receives it, and two that they tell him the one charitable or wise thing that they did each week with even the smallest portion of the money.

One day the Supreme Court, in following all the previous courts, decides it is "mean" and "cruel" that the father expect 1) thanks from his children as he dispenses his money to them and 2) requires them to spend at least a dime or something for a wise and/or charitable action. The courts have all ruled that this is a cruel thing to do, as it is "forcing" children to "thank" the father for something they already were going to receive! Also, it is "unfair" that those "evil" charities and wise actions receive a percentage of the allowance. I mean, how unfair is that? Those kids would be giving a portion of money in good or wise actions only to the places they know about locally! How unfair is that to some charity that exists maybe halfway around the world and tattoos kangaroos? Why don't they get the money? So the courts rule that dad cannot receive thanks from the children, and they cannot donate a percentage of their money to a good cause because it is "unfair" that they are not having a list of every good cause in the entire world.

So the next paycheck day dad is sitting at his home desk and the kids line up. Glancing up at the local policeman with a gun in his holster staring at him, dad hands each child the allowance and the child, also looking at the policeman with the gun, silently takes the money and silently leaves.

***

That is what happened when school prayer and the ability to discuss the Bible at all was taken out of the schools. The courts ruled that children were not allowed to in a school premise (their place of "work" if you think about it) address and thank God, even briefly. Further, the ability to do good was taken from them because it was "unfair" to learn how to do good from the Bible, and it's so meeeeeeeeaaaaaaan that the neighbor's children might have to actually listen to a few words of what Christians do and believe. In other words, don't do ANY good with the allowance if one is selecting only from one's own list because goodness gracious, that's so "exclusionary" and "mean."

Now realize the man with the allowance is God. He now has a man with a gun telling his children that they cannot thank him and that they cannot use their own judgment to give a portion to a wise use or charity. What will the man do? What are his responsibilities?

***

Back to our analogy. The man stops giving allowances to his children at all, so the man with the gun and the courts that sent him will get the hell out of his house.

That is why this analogy is so apt. The moment school prayer and Bible mention was taken out of the schools, God stopped that particular allowance. Period. So the children suffer through loss of the allowance and the wise/charitable funds expenditure recipients also lose their financial blessing. This is the bottom line: without school prayer and Bible mention in schools, God withdrew from ALL that particular form of blessing he had been giving to the nation and to individuals.

This does not mean, of course, that there is no blessings anymore, but think about it: besides 1) one's personal relationship with God and 2) one's worship community's relationship with God, what is the third largest relationship with God? In the "public square" and workplace, which for many are the schools. God basically cut off one third of the blessings allowance to the United States when school prayer and mention of the Bible was prohibited.

***

Young people, I bet you are pissed off reading this, as you should be, if you understand and believe my analogy, which you should understand and believe because it is the cold truth. Yet, all children (say nothing of teachers, etc) have lost one third of the blessing allowance from God that had been previously dispensed, whether you as kids agreed with that decision or not. (Most of you don't remember the time when prayer and Bible mention was OK in school, say nothing of the olden days when it was a fundamental part of education and daily activities as your mind and character were grown in schools, your place of work).

What can someone do who has been cheated of this? Use the analogy for a minute.

1) The dad can stop giving the allowance, but put it in a bank for the kids to get when they are older. Yikes because how do they buy what they need when they need it now?

2) Dad can move out of the country that has that law. That's not practical or cool either but I mention it because I'm telling you, boys and girls, men and women, it would be better to quit the public schools and attend a private/parochial school where Bible and prayer are allowed. Young people.... what is being cool in a "free" and "hip" school mean when you are cheated out of your blessings from God? But that is a solution that is full of pain (leaving classmates, football teams, etc) and often not practical (can't afford to pay for a nearby parochial school, etc).

3) The children can silently keep taking the money and find a way to thank Dad when the cop has gone away. But it still means that cop is standing there every day in your home, censoring the family. They become persecuted refugees in their own home during allowance time.

4) The children can obtain knowledge, understanding and righteous indignation about this treatment of Dad, and all dads and moms in this situation, and start to use the laws of the land to combat and reverse what has been done. That is what you ought to do. And trust me, even you kids who are uncomfortable with Christian or other religion ought to fight for reversal of the prohibition of school prayer and Bible mention. Why? Because you were riding the draft, to use a sports and aeronautical term, of the benefit of the daily school prayer and Bible mention, even if you did not believe. Yes, all of you benefited, just as the charities benefited from the children's donations, even if they didn't know Dad or support his occupation whereby he got that paycheck!

Young people, and older people.... how can you have genuine freedom and spiritual blessing when a minority of people, with force, removed the source of one third of your routine blessings from God? Sure, you "still have" God in your silent heart and in the "allowable" places such as churches, but huh? Why is THAT OK? It's not. That's like saying that you will thank God for your allowance "someday" when it is "safe" and the "coast is clear." But if Dad keeps giving you the allowance with the armed cop in the room censoring you, is he teaching you the right thing by continuing to do so under coercion? No. And that is why God will not do so either.

God doesn't "continue" to bless schools and all who attend when an armed cop has muzzled everyone because quite simply it is teaching everyone that behavior, faith, goodness and freedom don't actually matter, as you will "get the goodies anyway" and that just is patently false in not only being faithful to God but in life. It took little time for people to accept the banishing of God from the public schools, sadly, shockingly little time.

Young people, your parents did not silently protest what was done by giving you "extra prayer time" once you got home from the prayerless school, did they? And you didn't come home and say "Hey mom and dad, we can't pray in school anymore, or mention the Bible, so let's have that five minutes we were deprived of in school each evening here at home, or in the morning." Very, very VERY few of you even went guerrilla and underground to protest and compensate for what was taken from you. You "adjusted" and very quickly even started to agree it was "fair" not to pray in school.

Want a good cause? I sure suggest this one.

PS What would I have done? I'd have had the daily prayer in protest each day right outside the school's grounds, just one inch over the property line I'd have parents and children gather before school for the daily prayer that the school denied. And I'd have done that nationwide and year after year until this egregious ban was withdrawn.

understanding Bible: sin definition case study

I started out planning to blog about something else (which I will), but I came across this historical information that will help you in your faith & reasoning development. In the past few postings I've mentioned how the Bible states that even foolish thoughts, and then of course obviously mean and unrighteous thoughts, are sins, even if no one takes action on them. I explained that and gave the scripture references in previous posts some time ago.

Well, I know that one of the things you need to think about is: how has accurate and complete understanding of the Bible diminished so much over the two thousand years of Christianity that my explaining the Bible has this information has become a news flash? Something that very, very, VERY few pastors and other moral leaders know about or if they do, even mention? Why does no one warn their flock that even foolish thoughts are considered by God to be sins?

Before you, or anyone, can answer that question, you need to "fact find." Young people (yes, hi there, I think of you fondly as always), the scientific method and the use of problem solving logic means that like a detective, you trace how far in history from the time of the Bible writings to the present that awareness of this particular admonishment in the Bible exists in both the religious and secular consciousness.

Thus I want to give you an example of how, while leafing through my prayerbook, I came across written evidence that just over three hundred years after Jesus Christ lived that people still knew full well and embraced the Bible teaching that foolish and sinful thoughts are actual sins. So while I'm not planning to spend time studying this for you, I thought, hey! What a perfect example to show you how to reconstruct how modern thought has gone so wrong. So the first step is to trace since the time of Jesus, using impeccable written factual sources (not imaginings of false prophets and 'psychics') what people actually thought and did regarding the topic that you are studying, in this case how the Bible states that foolish and sinful thoughts are sins, even if no actions follow.

Here is some background of the person I am going to quote. Ambrose was born around the year 320 AD (and thus was born nearly three hundred years after Jesus Christ was crucified and resurrected) into a upper class family in the Roman Empire. Ambrose's family had been Christian for several generations. Ambrose had in his family tree, in fact, a Christian martyr, St. Soteris. Ambrose and his family received classic legal education, so they were well educated and prepared for high civil office, so Ambrose became a lawyer and a governor. When a local bishop died, Ambrose was sent to help sort out arguments among the people about who should be appointed bishop in the place of the deceased. As he addressed the crowd on this subject a child in the crowd called out that Ambrose himself should become bishop! The crowd agreed and the two arguing sides with their respective candidates fell into agreement about Ambrose (who was shocked and did not want to be the bishop). He was well on his way up the lawyer and government "career ladder," and was still studying and deepening his own individual faith. But because the people wanted him so badly and basically drafted him, he was baptized, received the holy orders of priesthood, and was consecrated Bishop of Milan (Italy) all within a month of time! He was very obviously a pious and sanctifying man from the start (the people's instinct was correct!) He gave to the Church and the poor his considerable personal wealth, he sorted through the problem of the genuinely poor from those who were shams, he studied scripture and doctrine for twenty three years, was a prolific author and being a priest, as all bishops are, Ambrose celebrated Mass (the Holy Eucharist) every day. He even raised the three grandchildren of a friend.

With that as background, seeing this was a holy man who didn't even in fact seek out fame or a livelihood due to his sanctity, here is what he wrote, with his opinion of his own sinfulness! This is a long prayer he wrote that he recited before celebrating the Holy Eucharist (the "Lord's Supper") in daily Mass and I include here the opening of the prayer and the places where you see evidence of the realization of those times that all people are considered prone to sin, including of mere thoughts that are foolish or unworthy:

O Gracious Lord Jesus Christ, I, a sinner, presuming not on my own merits, but trusting to Thy mercy and goodness, fear and tremble in drawing near to the Table on which is spread Thy Banquet of all delights. For I have defiled both my heart and body with many sins, and have not kept a strict guard over my mind and my tongue....

...To Thee, O Lord, I show my wounds, to Thee I lay bare my shame. I know that my sins are many and great, on account of which I am filled with fear. But I trust in Thy mercy, for it is unbounded...

...Hearken unto me, for my hope is in Thee; have mercy on me, who am full of misery and sin, Thou who wilt never cease to let flow the fountain of mercy. Hail, Thou saving Victim, offered for me and for all mankind on the tree of the cross...

Remember, O Lord, Thy creature, whom Thou hast redeemed with Thy Blood. I am grieved because I have sinned, I desire to make amends for what I have done. Take away from me therefore, O most merciful Father, all my iniquities and offences, that, being purified both in soul and body, I may worthily partake in the Holy of Holies...

...I purpose to partake, may be to me the full remission of my sins, the perfect cleansing of my offences, the means of driving away all evil thoughts and of renewing all holy desires, and the advancement of works pleasing to Thee...

Do you see how often this obviously holy man (remember, the crowd proclaimed him when he had no clue of wanting to leave a high career for the sanctified priesthood) emphasizes and repeatedly confesses and asks for help for his sins of thoughts????

If you ever wonder what holy people confess to God, that is what it is. Truly holy and sanctified people continue to "renew all holy desires" by acknowledging that all humans have foolish, evil and sinful thoughts. This is the genuine humility before God that ALL believers should have, which is the acknowledgment that even the holiest of people have, due to being broken vessel human beings, regardless of their level of faith, have to mindfully struggle against having even silly and mean or vain thoughts, say nothing of how profound a sin that thinking, even idly and fleetingly, thoughts about sinful matters are.

So, young people, and others, this is how you can see that no, we don't "lack evidence" of "what the church was like" and "what people believed" "back then" in "Biblical times." This lawyer/governor who became priest/bishop only a few hundred years after Christ left plenty of written evidence of his thoughts and what the people believed, and what they retained of their understanding of the Bible, both Old and New Testament. The notion that even idle, foolish and sinful thoughts are actual sins (as the Bible states) was a hot forefront belief several hundred years after Christ.

Thus, young people, and others, you now have a piece of your investigation, if you were doing so, that for certain in the four century that the knowledge that bad and foolish thoughts are sin was well known and frequently meditated about and prayed regarding, including DAILY by this Bishop of Milan, Ambrose.

Those of you new to studying the saints, let me explain that they were not tucked away in a corner. Ambrose, while he was living, was studied by many who would become great saints themselves. Further, while there was no email, ha, or post office, there was indeed snail mail and these people were all in correspondence. So if you continue your investigations you will see that a writing by a priest or bishop was never a "personal" so called "interpretation of scripture." This was the prevailing belief, kept intact from Old Testament times and the times of Jesus, that foolish and bad thoughts are indeed sins.

I hope that you have found this helpful both in further understanding what I have been reminding people about what the scriptures actually say, but also as you can see that you don't have to imagine and make stuff up, but you can look at written agenda-free evidence to deduce what people knew and believed, and how the word of God is preserved, and when parts of it started to fall out of public consciousness. Here we have filled in the blanks of several hundred years, knowing that the early Christians were keenly aware of what the Israelites knew and what those who followed Jesus knew, which is that God states that foolish, bad, mean and/or sinful thoughts are indeed actual sins, whether actual action follows or not.

Faith case study: importance of intentions

Hi and especially to young people (!) I have you in mind most particularly and affectionately as I thought of this idea for a blog this morning. I'm going to concentrate on this case study with you because I think it is more important that you understand than my listening on radio, twitter, news to the verbal and mental diarrhea that spews unabated, it seems. *sigh* So I continue to listen but with only one ear (because listening to the crap helps me to understand how urgently I must explain sanitation over and over again, ha).

Here is the case study I want to present to you today. The purpose is to help you try out through faith and logic (reasoning) why two basic truths exist. One is that God knows the intention of a person's heart and soul in everything that person thinks, feels and does, and that intention makes a difference to God. For example, a person can present themselves as the most lovely and spiritual person on the outside, but if they are full of mean crap on the inside, all the "good deeds" and "popularity" and "spirituality" of the person on the outside is pointless because God knows that the person is insincere and even malevolent on the inside, and that person will be judged accordingly. Thus some really "sweet" and "popular" people on the outside do indeed end up in hell, since God knows the motivations of their heart and soul.

The second truth, then, is related to and indeed derivative from the first truth. As a result the Bible clearly states that having an evil heart is sinful (by evil I mean not only flat out evil but also a begrudging, mean, lying, hypocritical and bullying heart, say nothing of being idolatrous) but the Bible also states that all bad thoughts, including ones that are simply foolish, are sins. I blogged about this a while ago, citing the scripture, and commented on it, check and see if you can find those postings under the label "sins," in case you've not read it before, or need to take another look. I'm sticking to doing a logic case study so I'm not going to cite previously cited scripture in this particular post.

So here I am going to give you the case study: Why if, in theory, two people advocate the same action, does it matter if one person is evil (or has evil intention) while the other person is faithful to God and has good intentions? In other words, let's say these two opposite people each agree on some government policy decision... why does it "matter" in the health of their soul, where one will be favored and blessed by God, while the other will not?

As a corollary to this, remember this is a favorite argument of atheists who are "moral" "ethical" and "peaceful." They figure if they advocate the same good things as the believers that they are "the same" in intention and thus in worthiness. Let me tackle this one first as a prelude to the main case study.

Here's the problem with intentions in the atheist example. Bad intentions can hide the truth from you, which affects things in both a specific decision but also one's whole life. Here is the analogy to understand that. Suppose two people, one atheist and one a believer, each rent an apartment from the same landlord. These two people get together on their job (let's say they are peace activists) and they work together on some good project to promote peace. The atheist would argue that because he or she agrees (without the "need for religion") with the believer on a good sound project to promote peace that he or she is as worthy and ethical and moral as the believer work partner. OK, so after work they go back to their own apartments, and the rent bill is due. The believer goes to pay the rent, handing the landlord the cash. The atheist ignores the bill because he or she does not believe the landlord exists. When the atheist is, after repeated bills from the "imaginary" landlord is finally thrown out into the cold, the atheist says, "Hey, how come you aren't throwing out the believer?" The atheist thinks that "equivalent" ethical actions means they are in the same position as the believer, and that of course is not true because the atheist in our analogy thinks that the landlord does not exist and he or she can just ignore bills for their monthly rent. This is an example of how an alliance of actions (the peace project) does not yield equivalent results, because of the intention of each person differs, not only their conscious inner thoughts but of course the entire context of their life and faith philosophy. Interestingly the analogy implies that the atheist renter would continue to not believe in the reality of any landlord, so where would he or she turn to, in our analogy? I guess he or she would find shelter in houses of those who also do not believe in landlords. This is why a person can continue in their whole life without believing in the reality of God, while still doing "equivalent" "good deeds," and only find out there is a landlord indeed when it is too late and he or she had died and is judged unworthy of heaven, and thus ends up in hell. All the "good deeds" and "good intentions" mean naught because the atheist refuses to acknowledge existence of the landlord and pay what is due.

So that is the first part of the case study. Here is the secular part of the case study. I am thinking of this secular case study (as I write it here) so that everyone, regardless of the condition of your faith (or lack of it) or religion/spirituality can understand the practical "bread and butter" secular life reasons that intentions DO matter even in "equivalent" ethics and deeds. To keep this easy to understand I'm going to choose a commodity that is not controversial, such as alcohol, and instead use an imaginary candy, a sweet, a dessert, as the analogy.

Suppose there is a very successful candy, a wrapped single serving sweet, that is found to contain an incredibly high amount of sugar, fat, and thus a HUGE amount of calories with each bite. Let's say that one of these candies had 3000 calories in it, more than most people should have in all their food in a day. So a whole bunch of people with various intentions get together and advocate that this candy be banned. On the surface it seems that everyone is in agreement with a "good cause" to "protect the public" from an "unhealthy" food. They pass a law banning this candy in whatever country or state that they have this influence. Now, let's think about why differing intentions can lead to vastly different results (and worthiness, both in practical life and in spiritual matters) by making a list of people and their intention frameworks and their implications. I'm just going to do a few here to show you how it is done, and you can think of some of your own! :-)

1. A woman is a nutritionist and really, really, really believes that this candy would destroy the health of many people, so she favors the ban.

Here intention is good, but one sided. If it tasted so wonderful and was such a popular sweet, could she not have used her nutrition expertise to help the manufacturer develop a sweet that tastes the same but has less calories? Or suggest to them a way that a person could once in a while have the sweet, but on high activity (like sports or exercise) days? By having a scolding and forbidding orientation, even though there is "good intention" (to preserve some ideal of diet and nutrition), it would never occur to her to have both, by using her expertise to modify the product and avoid a ban of such an innocent and fun sweet.

2. A man is an "expert" in consumer safety, and feels the sweet is just one of a list of things where the public must be protected from "unintended dangerous consequences."

Ahhh.... interesting. The "professional" "consumer safety" guy. Here is it nothing personal, because he's not against the candy and only the candy. He is against anything that the public is "ignorant" of possible "dangerous consequences." Again, many people would think that is a worthy calling. But is it? It sure is when there is a clear and present danger, such as toys that could choke a young child. His "intention is good," most particularly when he is indeed protecting the public from a built in hazard in a toy or product that could harm a child, for example. But he has two blind spots due to his intentions. One is that he stops thinking about each item and rather view them as a continual conveyor belt of "danger" that a continual conveyor belt of "ignorant" public might be harmed by, and thus he is in the taboo business, of looking continually for things to ban. So he has the error of thinking that all items he considers are dangerous deserve the same banning remedy AND he assumes a continual level of public ignorance (none of them are ever smart enough to pick their "dangerous" product). So his intention while certainly "good" on a certain level (dangerous toys for young children, for example) but is very slippery because it has made a factory of demonizing both products and the intelligence of the public.

3. A woman pretends to be a "concerned mother" and "homemaker." She secretly holds stock in a competing candy and sweet company.

Need I say more? That is obvious where the hidden intention is to hurt the successful competitor of a company whereby she holds a hidden financial stake. But let's examine this because my not so hidden intention is to tell people that they are harming themselves when they do not come clean with their own intentions. This woman would justify, I suspect, her advocacy of banning the sweet under consideration because she would say, if confronted, word for word, the following: "Well, even IF I didn't hold stock in the competitor company, as a mother and a homemaker I'd be against that unhealthy and dangerous candy!" Oh my. "Even if." Really? Only God knows how people would have behaved under alternative future scenarios. She is kidding herself, perhaps even honestly fooling herself, actually thinking that she'd be hoisting the banner and flag of advocacy against that product if she didn't have a dog in the fight. Odds are that if she did not have stock in the competitor product that the whole dangerous sweet controversy would have, in that "alternate future," just been a news story that she sees on TV or in the newspaper and like dozens of other stories, leave it to other people to sort out and act upon, as she'd have other interests and concerns. Having the competitive stock makes her more sensitized for both sinister (hurt the competitor company) and innocent (she's paying attention to products of competitors and news about them) reasons. There is no "even if" because humans are not single line entities where everything in their life goes the "same" "even if" "just one thing" were "different."

4. A wealthy woman really believes the product is dangerous and puts her money into the cause of having it banned.

So she is sincere in believing it is dangerous..... and she has the money (and thus influence) to do something about it. Hmm. Sounds good so far, right? A celebrity or an industrialist or media figure "putting good money to the cause!" Maybe so. But here are the different forks in the road of different intentions. 1) She has lots of money and thus bans it for everyone else, but stockpiles the candy for herself, figuring that it's a "dangerous" treat that "she can handle." 2) She really does believe it is dangerous and doesn't want the candy, but her success in this power play goes to her head. She looks for other "causes" that she can provide the money as "fuel" to muscle through people's agendas, both "good" and maybe "bad" ones. She gets hooked on being a power maker. The problem is that she becomes hooked on the power she has rather than the genuine worthiness of the cause, because of her intention to "make a difference." How many times do we hear those words: "I have the money to 'make a difference.'" Automatically that attracts such a person to causes that are able to be purchased, and in all innocence may not see causes that just need a pair of hands and a willing and open heart. Her "good deeds" become skewed and ultimately blinded and invalid because the motivation, the intention, is to use money and power as a lever.

Can you think of others? I could but I'm bummed out enough at always having to point out the faulty spiritual and secular reasoning that so very many people follow, without thinking of even more for you here, ha.

So think of other ones. Here's a hint (think about people who are killjoys because they were deprived in some way in their childhood or whatever....they can and do kid themselves that they are protecting others, while just begrudging what they did not have themselves).

After you've added one or two other examples to my list, now imagine the wrap-up. All these people agreed to a single "good deed" of "consumer protection from a dangerous product."

A. All people engaged in the same activity and got the law passed, banning the sweet.
B. Each person had a totally different motivation and hidden intention.
C. If they were honest about their intentions, many of them would have changed their minds about the law in the first place.
D. Better alternatives than the flat out ban are never even considered.
E. Alternative better actions are totally missed, so there is a high "missed opportunity" cost.
F. When one is not honest about one's inner motivations and intentions, one becomes the willing or unwilling slave to those intentions, continuing to act in that intentions mindless "service."
G. Serving those intentions results in missing other sets of priorities as one seeks out repeated gratification of those intentions in all things.
H. Hypocritical and coveting temptations have a greater and greater hold.

So now by expanding this analogy into faith, it is not at all difficult to see how God at the time of their personal judgment will place in front of each of these people, who agreed on one action (the banning of the sweet), how worthy or not their lives actually were, and how widely divergent all of these people will be. Same action but different intentions yield not just later but in the immediate wildly different results.

Ha ha, I can't resist, so here's another example, if you've not thought of it already.

5. A lawmaker is the author of the law banning the candy. He thinks it is unhealthy and dangerous.

OK, sounds like a responsible consumer advocate legislator, right? Yeah, but what if he knows that it will get voted down? He is trying to look good for the voters by banning the "unhealthy candy" but he knows it is "win-win" because if it passes, sure, that "bad candy" got banned, but if he is voted down, "well, he tried to do the right thing" and that ends up in his campaign ads. So at heart he cares neither if the candy really is dangerous (or he'd try hard to get all the votes lined up in favor of his banning law) or if the dangerous candy ban loses, and people keep legally eating it.... he's "won" either way as he looks like either the victorious, or losing, "hero."

Now, think of those intentions in the faith context. Some of the people above are flat out lying, sinful, coveting hypocrites. How will God judge them? It will be quite obvious that they will be harshly judged.

So this case study shows you how 1) even if you omit God from the situation under discussion that the same action can and does result in wildly different outcomes depending on the totally individual conscious or unconscious intentions and 2) since God IS in this and every situation, God knows not only the worthiness of the intentions (their genuine or not benevolence) but God also knows all the subsequent life directions and implications of letting those intentions rule.

I hope that you have found this helpful!

Haiti: message to young people

While this writing, as all of mine, are of course for all people, I am thinking of your special gifts and potential to serve, young people, as I know that you wish to do.

First, I am so proud at the outpouring of donations that I know many young people are leading in the appeal for funding to help mitigate and eventually rebuild from the disaster in Haiti. You are able to see in this, which I wanted to point out to you, that millions of you donating a little can rock the world. Many of your parents and teachers thought that "good deeds" require big bucks, you know, millionaires who build hospitals to have their name written on it. Notice, by the way, that St Jude in Tennessee is not named the "Danny Thomas" hospital. (Read the story of how Danny Thomas founded this great hospital in perfect humility and prayer.) Anyway, I wanted to point out the obvious to you, dear friends, because you are having your first chance to see how millions of you with a few dollars, Euros or whatever each can create an outflow of goodness that is based in modesty and collective anonymity!

But we are all frustrated at the usual problems with actually getting even a first response of aid at all, after four nights of this disaster, to hundreds of thousands of people. Young people, for some reason the older generations act like every time a disaster hit, they are seeing one for the first time. They come up with the same old bureaucratic processes, the same old infrastructure "barriers," the same old lack of creative logistics, the same old lack of organized grassroot responses. Young people, prepare to sweep that all away, if you all hope to survive, thrive and serve humanity and, of course, God.

As you watch the coverage (and I congratulate CNN for the most continual coverage, for it IS important, and it's NOT a problem "over there") use this as a case study to prepare yourselves for this same model of grassroots leadership that you are using in texting your donations in small but numerous components.

Look at the people and think about all these disasters. What is always lacking? The basics for people clawing by bare hands to get to buried neighbors. That is the first thing people in any disaster need. I mean, am I the only person to think, how hard would it be to airdrop gloves, pickaxes, car jacks, sledge hammers, crowbars, just even the basics to help until the heavy equipment gets there (if ever). Is that a "duh" or what? Do we not admire the strength and calmness of the Haitians who have suffered such a devastation, yet are digging with bare hands day after day? Am I the only Einstein of the obvious here? Could helicopters not have dropped bags of these types of tools collected from average citizens who are concerned, like you? I mean, sheesh, if I had been running this show I would have had every person in a city with a spare hammer or tool take it to a collection point and had it choppered there within hours. Many more people would have been saved if even ONLY that had been done!

So young people, study what you see and think about how, for example, many small collections delivered immediately by air drop in waves would have had immediate benefit and life saving grace.

Think of this in the waves of need. Drop the darn tools that the victims-who are their own first responders-need right away, not the "ideal" that arrives days later if ever. People do not live buried until "the right equipment" shows up.

Then once you have a working system of rapid targeted collection points for a specific need, continue the waves of small but numerous potent deliveries. So the second wave could be of water, food basics, but also lots of tubes of antibiotic cream. Imagine if all the young people in Miami, or Dallas, or any place bought a tube of antibiotic cream and took it to a place that bundled it into sacks of several hundred at a time and then choppers dropped those all over the quake area. I mean, again, I know I am Captain Obvious here, but am I really alone in seeing this? I've been thinking this for many years (say decades) and I wonder who really is asleep at the wheel of the Good Ship Logic Clue Phone.

The military (and bless their hearts) have the long term serious delivery mechanisms, but they are warehouse/pallets/cranes to unload/prepackaged assuming a certain disaster/needing all sorts of port or landing strip capabilities... they are simply too hide bound, too rigid and working on a bureaucratic model that, frankly, writes off as unsaveable many of the people who survive, but are trapped, wounded, deprived, the initial disaster. The government and military (AND THE AID AGENCIES, DO NOT KID YOURSELVES) simply do not use hive mind and Internets (you young people know what I mean) to get the needed stuff collected by many individual hands and flung out of choppers or ATV's by many individual hands within hours of the need. We need to start thinking, as we should always have thought, that those who survive the disaster are BLESSED and before the serious infrastructure gets there, we have energetic young people send waves of targeted deliveries of what is needed within hours of the need.

I mean, sheesh, how much effort would it take for young people in Brazil, the USA, Cuba, Venezuela, Mexico... everywhere, to collect hundreds of boxes of retail antibiotic and bandages, throw them in knapsacks and have someone with access to air service drop it over there? Trust me, I would have had that done on day one (right after the tools, since we'd have tested how well and how many drop points we could identify with the first gloves and tools drop), and they would not have even had to call it the MaryMajor Good Samaritan ain't she wonderful air drop.

So while this is going on and all our hearts bleed for both the disaster and the many tragic missed opportunities, use this to observe and use logic, thinking about what you would need if you were in the situations we see so well covered today. Think about how you can study more about this, if for no other reason than to be well informed and ready if things happen in your own community. Learn how to use the tools, learn more about urban infrastructure, and observe how people with ready, even wounded hands, lacked even the most basic first response. I mean, sheesh, how many helicopters are there in the world, in that region? (Now, please do not take off across the Gulf on one on impulse after being fired up reading this, we cannot afford to lose a single one of you, believe you me). But see the logic of what I am saying and break away from the moribund and tard mentality of even the most "well meaning" agencies who are once again acting like this is the first disaster, first earthquake, first inaccessible disaster they have ever seen. It's like they have logic Alzheimer's or something. Why have we not had hundreds of private choppers all ready identified in areas who could do it, and better yet, some MadMax ATV drivers in the unaffected areas ready to receive drops and then drive them into the affected city? True, I was flummoxed trying to drive in the mud on the Navajo reservation, ha, but there are plenty of drivers better than me (like the Navajo friend who took the wheel of my rental car and she drove it with perfection!) Hive mind figures out how to get knapsacks of tools and medical aid collected by many, dropped by the daring and able, and driven by the modest and mighty into town.

I hope you have found this helpful, thinking of you, miss you and again, I'm so glad to see your response and concern.

How to hit "reset" & start again (3)

3. Stop promoting activities that focus on: over achievement, competitiveness and "you can make a difference in the world-itis" in children.

Children have been deprived of both their proper upbringing and their carefree childhood. This is true of white, black or any other race, boy or girl, rich or poor, advantaged or disabled. Children are pushed by their parents and/or caregivers, schools, peers and society at large to be every increasingly pressured and over achieving. As they grow older (and I'm still speaking of young children) they start to feel the burden (often self generated but as a result of external influences) to be "destined" to "make a difference" and "better the world."

Geez Louise, let's look at the facts. It's been two thousand years since Jesus Christ (who did change the world) and not a single generation of individuals have thought that he or she is "destined" to "make a difference" and "better the world" until the 1960's. Think about it. All of the advances made (the genuine ones, not the false ones) up until the 1960's were done by that vast nameless army of people who led ordinary lives, including ordinary childhoods. They did not have the array of media blaring at them (electronic babysitters and life attitude distortions) from the moment they were born. Most of them participated in the household or at work as children, learning the skills of mommy and daddy as they were still able to be children at play. Most of them realized that Jesus Christ changed the world, and that they did not have to do so again, being little saviors and "touching others for a difference." Children were allowed to be children yet, at the same time, they had worthy and genuine adult participation where appropriate.

It was an entirely different world, that world before the 1960's. Children's heads were not filled with "Baby Einstein" and pre-school "preparation...." if they knew how to count and read before they entered school it's because they read the comics with their fathers. Children did not have dance classes, competitive sports, and the whole spectrum of "talents" that are crammed into them at the earliest of ages. I don't even have to mention how body conscious and fashion conscious children at the earliest ages have been forced to become. Childhood has vanished and it is a pressure cooker instead.

Yet at the same time when children do start to have real concerns about adult family matters, they are not gradually involved in the way they used to, rather like apprentice adults. On the farm they would start to learn adult activities and cares, but at a level they could handle. It seems the only way adults today treat children like adults in training is to 1) sexualize them or 2) make them fend for themselves.

Children are kept in school far too long for dubious reasons. Yes, I agree that high school graduation is essential and yes I feel that college is a key to future success, up to a point. But what used to be a liberal arts education (or in some special schools, a science/engineering orientation) has turned into a combination of 1) social thinking propaganda instead of education and 2) turning out cooperative little cogs for whatever is the popular money making field of the day (does "computer graphics" and "web design" sound familiar?) High school children have far too much homework and not enough solid classroom learning. Parents are unavailable or unwilling to devote time to home study requirements. College has become a strange place of getting "higher" rather than higher education, and part of this is because children are infantalized regarding their participation in the adult world of work and decision making, so they cut loose as adults where they can, which is in going crazy. I graduated a semester early from university because I considered it such a total waste of my time, and I had an actual semi-serious curriculum, yet it was still filled with so much education time wasting. Professors just fill in their own blanks instead of teaching what needs to be taught.

Worse, in surveys conducted year after year, that track what professions or goals (such as being a parent) that children prefer, most recently children no longer "want" to be anything but "famous." So now we have higher education, however shaky its quality, and children increasingly want less of those professions and more to be "rich and famous."

I really want to address education separately, but I mention it here so I can show you the entire pattern of my concern. Pre-school children are raised believing they have to start accumulating talents, wonderfulness, and worthiness through endless activities and works, and that continues non stop until they are in their early to mid-twenties. They are put under great pressure to learn, achieve and even "play hard," and to be popular and "hot," while at the same time they are getting the crappiest education I've ever seen in my lifetime. If I were a young person today I'd want to put on my Doc Martens and kick just about everyone in the behind for this disaster.

I'm sick at heart and sick to the gills of reading about teenagers and younger committing suicide or having mental illnesses that everyone blames on everything but the truth, which is that they were put under too much pressure to "perform," from the earliest age. If you went back in time and spoke to anyone in let's say the nineteenth century, from the poorest person to Queen Victoria herself, and told him or her that you know that "your child will someday make a difference in the world" and that it is their "destiny" to be a great "achiever" and "contribute his or her talents to the world," they would not know what you were speaking of and would think you were mad (as in demented). Even aristocrats of that time did not grow up thinking they would "make a difference in the world." That's something you moderns have to get through your heads. Even the most privileged and influential people prior to this century did not grow up themselves thinking they will "save some part of the world."

Instead, people lived their lives. Some had callings, such as for the military, the clergy, or for professions like medicine. Most wanted and focused on having and supporting a family. No one was running around thinking that they had even a tiny responsibility to "change the world." They were the well balanced ones; what we have today is megalomaniac inflation.

I am not being too strong in that diagnosis. It used to be that an extraordinary person was one who raised a family and was a stable and reliable influence in their local town and community. Ordinary people who, like brick building blocks, form a whole are the ones who collectively "change the world," but change the world not in the sense of being some sort of over achieving superheroes in possession of "enlightenment" or "caring," but of providing the foundation, the grass roots, of children growing into well rounded and educated/skilled and/or able bodied adults.

I continue to be astonished as I see decade after decade of increasingly taking it for granted that someone is "the one," who "can make a difference," and that bull crap being digested by children. It is not a coincidence that this false and grandiose perception increases in direct proportion that humans lose their traditional faith and humility in front of God. Hitler was grandiose and he "changed the world," and was that a good thing? Excuse me for going with the obvious example but it's one that I know everyone from every culture can understand. How many people, really, "change the world," and for those that do, are those good changes? Historically the answer has been "no."

We have an example of a good person who changed the world, but his participation was unexpected, not "destined," and gained through just what I am describing: a normal, though well to do person, leading a well educated and well experienced life, and then responding to the call when his fortitude and commitment recommended him accordingly. That person was General George Washington, who led the Army of the Revolution and then became first President of the United States. He changed the world not because he became a general, or even the President, but because he fathered the ongoing birth of this great democratic republic, when such a deed in such a place was not only difficult but totally new territory. Thus George Washington "changed the world" not through agenda to change the world, but because an average, though financially advantaged, man had the character to step into a role that opened in front of him. He, like everyone else of those times, was not groomed and pressured and clucked over by helicopter parents telling him how he is "special" and "filled with gifts for the world."

Wake up people. Life is life and the world is the world, and it inches forward as the cumulative effect of billions of people simply leading their lives and making their choices. There are not these millions of prodigies, of indigo children, of "destined to make a difference" children, of whatever corn ball New Age label you want to give it, all waiting to give the levers they have been "destined to wield" to "change the world." Most people who think like that end up changing the world like Pol Pot.

So now let's leave the stratosphere and get back to reality. The "greatest generation," those who were adults in the 1940's, each and every one of them grew up thinking they were an average Joe or Mary, but with aspirations. These aspirations were to be well dressed, housed and fed, to have some sort of health care and education, to have a way out of the economic downfall of the Great Depression, and most of all, to provide something even better than they had for their children, and for their country. They did not attend dance classes, or T-ball, or take endless childhood "enrichment" classes (and I'm not saying not to do those at age appropriate times for fun and character building). What I am saying is that they were the greatest with NONE of those supposed "talents" and "gifts" "for the world."

Take the pressure off of children, child by child, home by home, school by school, for the love of Pete. More traditional solid education of liberal arts, faith and reasoning, and the basic skills, and more meaningful play and recreation, less isolation and fending for themselves by lazy, busy or absent parents, and less ridiculous notions that they have some sort of burden to "change the world." They don't and they can't. The sooner everyone regains that humility the better. Heaven is packed with people who did nothing else but live ordinary lives of simple goodness, none of them even saving a "hair" of the world's head, or offering even one "gift" of their "specialness" to the world. Sad to say the most special people alive today are those able to be ordinary Joes and Marys and who can actually raise a child to ordinary, well adjusted and optimistic adulthood.

New series: How to hit "reset" & start again (1)

A caller asked the radio talk show host this morning for a list of things to do, in order of priority, to start to fix the problems (they were focused on American politics) today. Yikes about the response (!) But as usual this gives me the idea of what people are honestly seeking, and how I can be helpful. So I'm starting this new series of blog postings for you.

As I thought about the caller and the talk show guy response, I realized that they have the wrong impression in the first place, so while in the shower thinking about this, I realized a computer or media example is the best to start people with, which is the idea of hitting "reset."

As you know, when you hit "reset," you aren't destroying the device you are using (like the TV does not explode, or the computer melt down). "Reset" starts the device over again from the last point where it worked properly. That is why this is the theme for the renewal (and I mean globally, and not just in terms of politics, of course, but all the joys and challenges of life) is "reset." I will help you to reset both your mind and spirit, and the human made institutions around you, back to the actual (or theoretical) place where it was last functioning truthfully, factually, logically, faithfully and agenda free.

So these suggestions will be both actual activities to perform, and also mindset and meditative orientations. I'm going to start with big fundamentals that will lay the best foundation first. All other advisers unfortunately give advice from within the error, rather than stepping back. So here are some of the first essentials, and I'll add onto this as I think of more each day.

1. Immediately eliminate all combative speech and strategy from all your activities (unless of course you are in the military). In other words, if you are advocating an action, or opposing someone else's action, continue to do so but not at all in a military or combative stance.

Example: "We need to fight the healthcare bill" and then attack strategies and tactics are used by both "sides" *wrong.*

Instead: "I believe the healthcare bill is a mistake in these areas or for these reasons...... I will continue to try to persuade others of the facts and logic of my opinion....." and then do so. If you cannot persuade then vote your conscience but do not demonize the opposition no matter what.

Somehow the modern world has gone completely astray by soaking everyone in combative and military frameworks. It is an error to think that not doing so makes someone weak and ineffective. Ultimate effectiveness is in the middle, in the peaceable approach to achieving real gains, including when there is a "right" and "wrong" being debated.

Young people, you have been saturated by your ignorant parents, ignorant teachers, and money grubbing society to view everything through a combative, warlike lens. But by peaceable I do not mean being weak, giving up your honest strong stance, or giving up when you are on the "losing" "side." (See what I mean? Even your supposed faiths/beliefs have been soaked with the "spiritual combat" attitude, with winners and losers.)

Practice each day, everyone, to eliminate any speech and thought that pits your opinions "against" someone else's. This does not mean to ignore injustice or error, of course. See, that's the difference. A Peaceful person recognizes "injustice" and "error" and attempts to remedy them; they do not remedy "injustice" and "error" by increased injustice of hostile and combative thoughts and actions toward the other party.

I will explain each of these from a secular (reasoning) viewpoint and then also from the faith viewpoint. Non-believers can focus on the secular reasoning alone, if they wish, as what I am saying applies to everyone (see, this is how to be genuinely inclusive, and not "us" versus "them").

The secular reasons for eliminating combative speech and thoughts except from actual military conflict is as follows:

1. No one human is ever 100 percent right about anything. If you "oppose" the other view you cannot recognize the valid aspects of their view and the error in your own.

2. If you make bitter an "enemy" in one forum, you have lost him or her as a partner in any future dealings.

3. There is an old saying "Two heads are better than one." If you work with a second person to solve a problem, a third greater result occurs as your thoughts build off of each other's. Thus even if you are diametrically opposed on a solution to a commonly agreed upon problem, even polar opposites in opinions about the solution can, with good intentions, work together and achieve a) a combined solution b) one person's solution but with the other's refinement and input c) you both think of something out of the blue you had not thought of before at all d) realization that some other factor or problem is hindering a unified solution, and so you can report back to others that another issue must be addressed before the problem at hand can be solved.

4. Combative thought takes away the dignity and human rights of the other person.

5. Combative thought eliminates your own effectiveness and dignity.

6. Combative thought and actions tend to militarize problems that do not fit a military model. In other words, you think less about solving the problem (let's say something like delivering milk to schools for children) and more about being combative (my idea is right, I want to impose an agenda regarding food policy on someone else, I want to win the federal contract, etc).

7. Combative thought in non-military matters dilutes genuine combative thought when it is needed in military situations. If everyone is a "spiritual" or "video game" "warrior," it is less obvious how and when to shift into the genuine urgency of a true military mindset when it is needed. In the old days men and women knew when to set aside the farming tools in the field, and when to march to war. They did not weed their fields during peaceful times thinking that it is a "war" between them and the weeds, or the insect pests, or the weather, and they certainly were not in "competition" with the neighbors. People lived in the reality of their world without military or combative framework until it was genuinely needed.

Now, here is the faith framework for understanding my advice and admonishment:

1. Luke 244:36 Now while they were talking of these things, Jesus stood in their midst, and said to them, "Peace to you! It is I, do not be afraid."

When Jesus is "in your midst," you do not have to be warlike or afraid.

2. Luke 19:41-42 And when he [Jesus] drew near and saw the city, [Jerusalem] he wept over it, saying, "If thou hadst known, in this thy day, even thou, the things that are for thy peace! But now they are hidden from thy eyes."

The Jews did not recognize Jesus as being the Messiah, working for their peace and salvation, because they ignored the scripture that prophesied a peace bringer and instead with their militaristic and combative mindset expected a "fighting Messiah." Thus the actions of the Messiah, right there in their midst, for peace, was hidden from their eyes.

3. Matthew 10:19-20 [Jesus speaking to the disciples preparing them to go forth] "But when they deliver you up, do not be anxious how or what you are to speak; for what you are to speak will be given you in that hour. For it is not you who are speaking, but the Spirit of your Father who speaks through you..."

If the disciples were combative or spiritually militant, they would not be able to turn themselves over to the Spirit through what God will speak for them. Combative mentality does not allow genuine guidance from God to flow.

4. Matthew 5:9 "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called children of God."

Peacemaking is a process so Jesus is referring to those who continually promote God's peace in their day to day lives, which is the opposite of a combative mentality.

5. Luke 7:50 But he [Jesus] said to the woman, "Thy faith has saved thee; go in peace."

Faith generates peacefulness, for to go in peace means to have a peaceful heart, not to be the winner in a war. The traditional salutation "go in peace" falls on deaf ears if it is said to someone who is combative.

6. Luke 9:51-56 Now it came to pass, when the days had come for him to be taken up, that he steadfastly set his face to go to Jerusalem, and sent messengers before him. And they went and entered a Samaritan town to make ready for him, and they did not receive him, because his face was set for Jerusalem. But when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, "Lord, wilt thou that we bid fire come down from heaven and consume them?" But he turned and rebuked them, saying, "You do not know of what manner of spirit you are; for the Son of Man did not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them." And they went to another village.

The disciples, with good reason, thought that a combative punishing reaction could be delivered by them onto the disbelieving (they believed in God but not in the authority of Jerusalem and thus they and the Jews discriminated against each other) residents for their rejection of hosting Jesus in his travels (a very rude thing to do to anyone). But Jesus points out the peaceable commission which is to save, not destroy, lives. Later Jesus would, of course, show the peaceable way wins, for he uses a Samaritan in his great parable of the Good Samaritan and he converted an entire Samaritan town through the intercession of the woman at the well. Peaceful problem solving and witnessing, not combative stances, yields genuine results.

7. Psalm 84(85):9-11 I will hear what God proclaims; the Lord-for he proclaims peace to his people, and to his faithful ones, and to those who put in him their hope. Near indeed is his salvation to those who fear him, glory dwelling in our land. Kindness and truth shall meet; justice and peace shall kiss.

This beautiful psalm written by "the sons of Core," recognizes that truth and kindness must meet and thus, within the context of God, "justice and peace shall kiss." It is not enough to have "truth" and lack "kindness." Combativeness in day to day life is antithesis of kindness, and without genuine kindness one will not have the joining of justice and peace in greeting (kissing is not intimate kissing in Bible speak but the kiss of genuine greeting as in a warm genuine handshake and embrace).

8. From the Qur'an 13:24 Peace be on you because you were constant, how excellent, is then, the issue of the abode.

Those who are constant in their belief in God have peace in their abode (home), both on earth and then upon death their heavenly home.

9. From the Qur'an 4:36 And serve Allah and so not associate any thing with Him, and be good to the parents and to the near of kin and the orphans and the needy and the neighbor of (your) kin and the alien [foreigner] neighbor, and the companion in a journey and the wayfarer and those whom your right hands possess; surely Allah does not love him who is proud, boastful.

Here one is instructed to be good to everyone (even the neighbors of your relatives, and the strangers who live in adjoining foreign lands, for example, and those who you "own," which means not only slaves but also employees and laborers) because God does not love those who are not kind but are instead proud and boastful. Combative attitudes come from pride and are a barrier to kindness; the Bible and the Qur'an certainly agree.

***
Thus, no matter how small the issue or the thoughts, recognize and weed out and discard combative and militaristic thoughts toward even those you have the most extreme disagreements. You must discard "us" versus "them" as the framework for your thoughts and actions, even when there is (and I would say especially when there is) vital areas of great disagreement. It is disagreement, not combat. It may be dislike of a person, but that person is not a military target. It may be refusal by someone to witness to truth and honesty, that may be stupid, meanspirited and even criminal, but they are not your "foe" on the "battlefield."

Stop thinking of people and situations as being enemies, opponents, "wrong," or evil. Stop thinking of them that way even in the minority of times that you do genuinely encounter someone who is evil and who bears ill will to you. Their wrong mindedness should not lead you into similar categorization, prejudice and demonization of them. This does not mean you have to agree with them or cave in on their oppression. If you have a combative attitude you miss all the other optional ways for dealing with them (including ignoring them, as Jesus did when he was rejected by that town, until the time was to approach them again, or they learn their error the hard and painful way, but not delivered by you in "combat" mentality).

Cultivate your talents in diplomacy, sharing activities that you can agree upon first (and ignoring the rest if you can), mutual problem solving, kindness (but not smugness) toward their lacks and most of all start to reject the continual diet of combative entertainment and confrontational social tactics (the admiration of "in your face" etc).

Understand and value the genuinely combative and militaristic where it belongs, which is in the armed forces in legitimate situations of conflict and security.

Understand and value that even your "worst enemy" is not your enemy if you refuse to make him or her so. Avoid their negativity but lead your life in trust that God will handle them for you when the time comes.

Certainly remove the combative mentality from all politics and resolution of social issues. It's "community organizer" not "community army vanguard." It's "a person who disagrees with your policy and values" not "the enemy on the other side."

If you do this first you will do a huge part in hitting that individual, community, national and global "reset" button.

A humor oriented suggestion. Don't "hate" those certain people (you know who we mean), be "exasperated." Works for me: I don't hate but I sure am exasperated.
:-)