Today is Good Friday. A lot of Catholicists were out in force engaged in a lot of religious show biz, but all I could think about was the number of people who were out there actually doing the thing Jesus did.
My meditations today were overwhelmed by that. I thought about the ways I could do it, but my showing was sadly quite piddly. This week is my spring break, and I mostly just spent the afternoon riding my bike on the local bike trail.
Along the way I passed a lumber yard, and in it were a dozen guys sawing and hammering. A bit further down I passed a construction site. There were another dozen guys there putting in the foundation for some large edifice. All of them...
Offering themselves this day to make sure people have buildings for something important.
There were about a dozen other people I saw or engaged who labored at something today. Sure they get paid.
When Jesus sacrificed Himself, when He died on that cross, He got paid.
He got paid with the love of those who wholly recognized what He did that day.
But the crazy thing is that He did it knowing full well that it was possible -- wow, that
No one would ever give a damn about it.
That is, He loved knowing no one may reciprocate.
He went to work on Good Friday to open the gate to God's love, forgiveness, salvation, and eternal life only because He loved, and knew He may not get a paycheck when it was all done.
He did it anyway.
And still, what meager paychecks He gets. Our woeful efforts at loving in return. Eeyuh. And it isn't as much how much we love Him, but how much we show His love to others.
I wanted to share something I'd been thinking was the core issue about that same-sex marriage thing that had been captivating the nation all week. As the week ends I see that the country doesn't want to get into it -- many are actually sharing how uncaptivated they want to be about it. I am just sensing how frightening they consider it all to them. I'm seeing reports that conservatives and Republicans, the political entities that would do the most to challenge this stuff in the law, are running a thousand miles away from it.
I'd thought the core issue is related to another of the claims the homosexualist supporters make. It is, following the theme of my post at the beginning of the week:
When they say "Homosexual couples can raise a child just as well as a heterosexual one can, sometimes better," they usually use terms like "gay" or "lesbian" to work over the culture to get them to buy into the normalcy of it all, but then also...
But then also...
How do you effectively answer that when it sure does seem that there are indeed instances of what seem like perfectly fine upbringings of children by homosexually-minded couples?
The issue there merely comes around to what those couples are doing with a key part of their beings: their sexuality. We just take it for granted that they're regularly doing homosexual things in bed at night. Why? How did so many of us just buy into the idea that what someone does with their sexuality is just no big deal?
What I'm getting at is that we'd have no objections at all if there were two brothers, or two sisters, both living in the same home, not sexually active with one another at all and otherwise very healthy mentally and emotionally -- no one would have the slightest objection to them taking care of young ones. But there is a serious and very well-justified concern about two individuals of the same sex rearing children while they are indeed brazenly abusing each other through their sexualities.
Yes, I know many will screech, "But homosexual activity is just not a bad thing!" And many others will reply, "Yes it is" but -- sadly, as I mentioned -- it seems so many of those many others just don't want to have anything to do with it.
This leads to the real core issue. It's not that those other things aren't important, they are. They are all a critical part of the core issue.
But that issue has to do with who exactly it is who is molding the thinking of whoever holds whatever beliefs there are about these things. I am convinced those who endorse and even celebrate homosexualism have been told to do so in so many ways by people sworn to get them to believe precisely what they believe, even to behave in precisely the ways they want them to behave. Those same forces are molding the thinking of those whose excoriation of homosexualists in the public square is understandably considered bullying.
All you've got is ::ouch:: the culture war raging full blast. A lot of World people over there, and a lot of other World people over there, all slobbering over what they could get for themselves. Fighting some more to the glee of those operatives, many of whom -- the more visible ones, the Obamas and the Francises and so forth -- can bound in to beam about how great they are at making everything all better again.
I was reading Scripture tonight and would you know it, my eyes fell on Psalm 128. What an amazing passage, especially related to all this. The very first verse is extraordinarily telling.
"Blessed is are all who fear the Lord, who walk in obedience to Him."
What follows are all the things that happen when a man does that. It is all about his family and how prosperous it is, and how that extends to the community and to the nation.
And yes, that family is headed by a man and his wife.
That's what the core issue is. No no no, it isn't even about men and women happily married.
It is about faith in Christ.
It is about having a vibrant trust in a God who gave His life to provide everything anyone could want. And then from that having a love for others, that same love that Christ has, that same love that those guys working in the hot sun on a Friday have for those who need a building made -- and that same love for those who do homosexual things and those who believe those things are perfectly okay.
And doing that love even when they can't understand what it is really about, and they keep doing it.
We can only do it by Him.
How many actually do that? Don't get me wrong, I actually do think there are quite a few.
But I can't help but still think that this Sunday, March 31st, is Easter, the celebration of Christ rising to guarantee that eternal life for those who accept His free gift of salvation. A celebration of something that is so profoundly moving that one cannot help but be doing everything he or she does in life for someone else, just as Jesus did.
The day after that is, indeed, April 1st. About those who shrug off what Jesus did for them, there is that other verse.
"The fool says in his heart, 'There is no God.'"
Friday, March 29, 2013
Today is Good Friday. A lot of Catholicists were out in force engaged in a lot of religious show biz, but all I could think about was the number of people who were out there actually doing the thing Jesus did.
Thursday, March 28, 2013
Last night I caught the tail end of a PBS Newshour conversation between a gal representing the same-sex marriage proponents and a guy representing the traditional marriage proponents. What I caught was a verbal boxing match over the constitutionality and legality of the issue, and what struck me was how much the guy appealed to Obama as one who supported this claim or that claim they'd made, while the gal merely trumpeted all the same pap about certain lawful protections of one's supposed rights claims.
Here were two eloquent ambassadors duking it out in the culture war, showcased on national television as if it was Friday Night Fights. Thing is, they both belong to the same team.
They're both megaphone holders for the World System.
In one corner was the guy, representing the Devout Romanists, eager to denounce same-sex marriage, but doing so from the ministry of condemnation. In the other corner was the gal, representing the Radical Selfists, talking up the idea that people should be able to do aaaaanything they want and anyone who tries to stop them are bigoted narrow-minded intolerant homophobic Neanderthals.
Right there under the lights for all to witness, the only two options of belief about the way things should be, displayed in all their glory. Just those two. You're one or the other. That's them all right.
The problem is that they will never share the third way, well, sometimes I write those kinds of things in caps because The Third Way (there ya go) is a person, simply that -- He is simply Him.
There's that guy again. Huhyump. What's He got to do with it.
It is easy for so many to dismiss Him and what He says about these kinds of things. The Devout Romanists have their version of Him, often depicted as limply hanging dead on a cross. Other versions include the one who is just a statue or picture or mental image for us to give lip service to when in church, but really having no impact on things that really matter. The Radical Selfists have their version, one they either dismiss as a ponderous fairy tale or extend the slightest respect because some of the things he said were kind of like the things Gandhi or Martin Luther King Jr. said.
In fact I came across this piece written by Ronald Reagan's son, and the piece is quite telling. His call to have the church rise up and say something about this same-sex marriage thing is extraordinarily plaintive. Yes, homosexual activity is a cruel evil, and the now widespread celebration of it is just as wicked, but the fact is churches are pretty much impotent in having any impact because they themselves have sold out to the World System from which the culture war festers.
The amazing thing is that Reagan closes his piece with a call to churches to give up their 501c3's if it means standing on principle in all this.
Please excuse me for a minute: "Ahh-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!!"
Sorry, but I do feel it a bit when it comes to churches that say they're Christian but clutch their 501c3 obligations like, well, like a god. I'm not disrespecting them at all if they say they're Roman Catholic and live out Cain's agency of condemnation as good, dutiful little minions must. And if you are a 501c3 and accept all the goodies that come from it, you are doing the work of the Roman Catholic Institution. Sheez, so many are so intractably mesmerized by the World they don't even know what that means. "But we like the Roman Catholic Church! [Insert gigantic smiley face emoticon here]" I shake my head, but then, there it is. Can't disrespect them for doing what their heart truly tells them to do.
It is those churches who proport to contain people who have Jesus' name on their lips that think they have any impact on people's lives when they're just doing the work of Devout Romanists. They don't know diddly about what to think or say about homosexualism and just slink back while catatonically beholding a world of young people get sucked into the most wretched sexual enslavement.
And the appeals to the U.S. Constitution. How much "Christian church" people think that is their savior. It is pukifying. For one, it is quite ironic that the Supreme Court has been hearing these arguments about what is really at the core of this discourse: what is sexuality and how can it be governed, something that they absolutely cannot use the Constitution to do. Look at the abject confusion by all trying to define it describe it explain it comprehend it -- it is a joke! All these people trying to weigh a planet with a ruler!
What we do with sexuality is a moral issue. Nine old people in black robes can't do it. Ironically the Constitution does say something about the way people behave, though, and that is relevant. And just as ironically, if the World System is all there is, then same-sex marriage should indeed be legalized, because the law is wholly necessary to moderate people's sin. Homosexual activity and the widespread endorsement of sodomy is a sin, so yes, let's bring that law in here for this.
I'm almost waiting for a Supreme Court justice to ask, "So, is the homosexual activity that you want sanctioned, is it anything that is criminal?" If the proponents say no, then the justice should reply "Why are you here then?" If they say yes, then the justice should be replying, "Then what are we waiting for? Let's apply the full force of the law on this, and let's go to lunch for goodness sake!"
Jesus is not about any of this.
That is, unless the putrid body of death seen in it all brings people to Him, and to His love and mercy and forgiveness and salvation and joy.
In my last post I'd listed a number of brief things that get to the heart of what the same-sex arguments are missing. In my last webzine home page, I wrote about the meaning of the Constitution. I've also written a bit about the real deal with 501c3's.
Tuesday, March 26, 2013
Today the U.S. Supreme Court starts to hear arguments about same-sex marriage. The media are going to shine their cameras and shove their microphones in the faces of everyone involved, and their pundits and pontificators will beam about how splendid homosexualism is as well as sneer about how nasty the detractors are. All of this portends a government sanction of sexual immorality never seen before.
In looking at every argument made in favor of homosexualism or same-sex marriage, I discover a grave paucity of critical thinking about what sexuality and more importantly love and family really are. I've considered putting together a page on my webzine devoted exclusively to the details about this discourse, and that'll have to appear next month. For now I thought I'd get a bit into just some of those items with some attention to brevity. The challenge is to get right at what is what about these critically important things.
When they say "You should be allowed to love who you want," they are misrepresenting any one of the dozens of meanings of "love," and as such misleading people with emotionally charged language.
When they say "People should be afforded equal treatment," they are discarding the truth that there are thousands of ways people are legitimately not considered equal that do not abrogate the true meaning of "equality."
When they say "Same-sex marriage does not affect other traditional marriages," they are not taking into account how much the wholesale change of the foundational definition of marriage destructively dilutes the meaning of that institution.
When they say "Homosexuals (and the children that such individuals raise) are hurt by the attacks against them," they refuse to acknowledge that the reason homosexually-minded individuals and those close to them are hurt has much more to do with their acting on their own sexual dysfunction and the emotional and spiritual havoc it brings, and less to do with the bullying they so readily blame (though this author is 100% with them about how evil any form of bullying is.)
When they say "The whole LGBT status should be afforded wider acceptance, indeed it is almost a given that it should be already," they are appealing to a form of the argumentum ad populum fallacy, that as long as a lot of people are in favor of it then it must be a good thing. One does not follow from the other.
When they say "Marriage is a right," they are neglecting to recognize that no right is absolute for any given person or group all the time -- never. In this instance certain classifications of people simply do not have the right to get married, most notably children.
When they say "We need to end intolerance in this area," they can't see how they themselves are being intolerant of those who have solid arguments against widespread sanctioned homosexual behavior.
When they say "God and religion are irrelevant, especially to those who don't believe in them," they are confessing that many who support homosexualism are in fact godless and have no grounding themselves for the beliefs they have and the decisions they make. They indeed have another god, and the worship of a god that is "myself," "society," "science," or "the majority" is far more frightening than the biblical one.
When they say "God is understanding, accepting, and loving," they miss one of the most significant characteristics of God. He is not only merciful, yes, offering that freely and lovingly, but He is also just.
When they say "Most same-sex couples are just like the rest of us: normal, average, nice, hard-working people," they are duplicitous in cherry-picking the best looking homosexually-minded couples to constantly showcase, encouraging the sympathetic media to ignore the wickedly devastating effects of sodomy.
When they say "It is natural for homosexuals to be that way, they are born like that," they are perpetuating one of the greatest lies undergirding all of this: It is a given that some people must behave by doing sexually aberrant things to other people. It doesn't matter how much consent is involved, how thick the walls it happens behind, or how widely endorsed it is by millions. One hurting, wounded, confused person committing a sodomous act with another hurting, wounded, confused person is a crime against humanity.
When they say "Young people today, the so-called 'millennials,' are overwhelming in favor of same-sex marriage, so it is an inevitability," they can't identify the myriad ways young people's thinking is stunted by an educational system that not only refuses to teach them how to cogitate deeply and critically, but their benighted condition is deliberately made to be that way so World operatives can better mold their minds.
When they say "If you express disfavor you are seen as bigoted and narrow-minded -- indeed you are a homophobe," they are browbeating others with the same attacks that they censure, furthermore enlisting any and all worldly powers to silence anyone who has a legitimate case against their cause. It is huge the number of people I meet -- not just people who are like me -- who have principled, elucidating, heartfelt objections to homosexualism but will not say a thing for fear of being excoriated by the deputized thought police on the prowl throughout society -- it is harrowing.
When they say "We must fight as hard as we do because whatever government sanctions we can get are the things that will be what everyone must believe and do," they are oblivious to two key things: one, the fact that they themselves are doing just as much "forcing their beliefs" on other people (enlisting the substantial power of a sycophantic government to do so) and two, there is another option to the sin and death and worldly powers which so hypnotically influence their involvement in this evil.
He is Jesus Christ.
He frees from all sin, including both the sin of willfully engaging in homosexual acts and brazenly celebrating it. Thing is, homosexual sin is no worse than any other sin, and it is a sin that is just as hard to get out of as any other.
But that is why a God who gives His life out of His love for the sinner is required.
Thing is, you've got to turn from all that to Him, and let His forgiveness and freedom wash over you.
Because even if you don't get all this critical thinking down...
He'll still hold you in His embrace.
And love you with The Love.
I would still like to enable the "Comments" feature for this blog, but my computer inexperience prevents me from knowing what's going with Blogger which somehow keeps me from having it here. If you'd like to add a remark about this, I'd be happy to hear from you. You may visit my webzine and send me an email.
Thursday, March 21, 2013
The splendid film Despicable Me has a scene featuring little girls at an amusement park who play a shooting gallery game in order to win a big stuffed animal. The object is to knock over a spaceship zipping side to side. One of the girls makes a direct hit on the target, theoretically with enough force to score the prize.
Alas, the ship does not fall back to indicate a full "knocked over" achievement. After asking for the eagerly expected animal, the barker explains very smugly that the target had to be knocked over for the prize to be awarded. The adoptive father of the girl, the "Despicable Me" character named Gru who is an expert with nefariously utilized weaponry, steps back, pulls out some elaborate multi-barreled rocket launcher, and then utterly obliterates the entire shooting gallery. The spaceship target disintegrates amongst the rubble.
He then proudly proclaims, "Knocked over!"
I've had a series of observations about things that remind me of the barker lying through his eye-teeth about the nature of things, to the extent that millions upon millions of people are kept on or put on a bullet train to their own destruction. I know the truth about each of these things, but like the little girl, I am stunned as I watch my shooting gallery pistol hit the target dead-on, but the <<plink>> of the impact simply does not knock it over as it really should.
On my home from work today I listened to an NPR report featuring an older gal sharing her touching story about the marriage she had with her long-time same-sex partner, one who died a while after they finally got married. It was peppered with pithy remarks about the joys of marriage and how delightfully wonderful her relationship was and all the accompanying platitudes about how same-sex couples should be having the same exact privileges as opposite-sex couples.
I weep for these people, all of them, homosexually-minded people as well as those who are being fed this crap by World operatives using the channels of media indoctrination. I could spend a lot of time on this, and I'm sure I will when the Supreme Court starts hearing arguments next week about DOMA and Prop 8. It certainly seems both of these are doomed with the media continually pounding down the argumentum ad populum that everyone is pretty much in favor of same-sex marriage these days.
What I can't fathom is how any right minded individual can so readily say that a man should not have a sexual relationship with his seven year-old daughter but in the next breath consider it perfectly fine for a wickedly exploitive older man to manipulate the sentiments of a confused, needy, wounded, lonely just-turned 18 year-old boy in order to sodomize him.
On and on the pounding of the most rank humanist philosophy goes, and when truth is presented it merely <<plink>> bounces right off the target.
Also today Barack Obama was showcased speaking a lot during his trip to Israel. In his expressed sympathy of the Palestinians he actually spoke to an audience of Israelis who cheered him when he asked them to put themselves in the shoes of a Palestinian child who wants to have his own home. Yes, you got that right, he was actually applauded. Meanwhile some Palestinian child is helping to load a mortar to be launched and dropped on some of their children somewhere.
Now, maybe I got that wrong. Maybe I missed something there. Forgive me if I did. But it seems to me that when the original partition happened in 1948, the country of Jordan was formed specifically for the Palestinians. Again, maybe I'm not sure, forgive me, but it looks to me like Israel is a tiny sliver of a country that is filled with industrious people building a strong nation while those in the countries around it are bitter, vicious people who just want Israel destroyed. Never mind that originally, as it says in Scripture, God meant for Israel to be established all the way out to the middle of what is now Iraq.
This morning a news report, in its "objectivity," referred to the "Israeli occupation." Um, am I missing something here?
And please, I'm not all an apologist for Israel. I'm not wholly convinced Israel is necessarily this divinely ordained eschatologically directed region that'll herald the Second Coming someway somehow. I really don't know how bad it is for "Palestinians" being wretchedly exploited by however many ideologically minded powers-that-be. What I do know is that all these people, all of them, Israelis and Palestinians and the Oscar-winning actors like Obama are having their strings yanked all over the place by Operatives who are sworn to keep them in a state of abjectly benighted reprobation.
This weekend I'd heard about a Chicago police officer who committed suicide because he simply could not handle the evil he was beholding on a regular basis. Chicago's violence is so bad that I'd heard there are two Sandy Hooks in Chicago every month. It should break anyone's heart.
The phenomenal irony was, on Sunday I watched a bit of Meet the Press, and regular host David Gregory was interviewing the archbishop of Chicago about the new pope. The first thing I thought about was, there is Chicago, a virtual killing field -- and this guy is on national television spouting the virtues of the Catholic Church? Where for cryin' out loud has he been in all this? Telling everyone how hard they're all working to fix things up golly gosh? How long has Chicago been around? How long has the Catholic Church been there doing stuff? How long has this dude been a fancy-robed extraordinarily powerful person in the mix of it all?
It was just ghastly.
That wasn't the worst of it. Gregory asks him about the priest sexual abuse situation. He actually said something along the lines of, "Things will get better when we accompany them. But one of the problems is that they won't let us accompany them." I'm not sure the exact wording, but I do know he said the word "accompany" a couple of times.
I can't say I wasn't simply dumbfounded.
For Gregory to be the principled, righteous-minded man he should've replied, "Are you kidding me? What the hell do you mean 'accompany'? Are you kidding me? What on earth does 'accompany' mean? You are complicit in the criminal sexual abuse of God-knows how many people and you're saying you need to accompany them? I can't believe what I'm hearing!"
But he can't say that because Meet the Press itself is the official mouthpiece of the Roman institution.
I saw an ad this morning on Bloomberg's business show -- it was for reputation.com. The whole angle was how your business could have all those "fake" negative reviews removed and how the best ones can be highlighted to really get your product revved up.
I thought, "Okay, how exactly does this work? Will this reputation.com service really know what the fake ones are, and if not, will they deceitfully remove the genuine negative ones? And can't they just as easily make up good ones or at best manipulate things so that the best ones are more inequitably pronounced?" Sure there shouldn't be fake negative reviews posted merely to criminally undercut a competitor. But it is just as dishonest to give the better ones greater weight.
Isn't this precisely what the entire Roman Institution does? Full-on manipulation of everything and anything we see and think and feel about things for no other purpose than to destroy us?
<<Plink>> <<Plink>> <<Plink>> <<Plink>>
Where is Gru when you need him?
Well, He's already come, in a way. But wherein Gru was a pretty bad dude at the beginning of the movie and had his heart radically changed by those girls to become a kind, caring, loving, giving father, this Guy started out as The One Who Loved With His Life.
He calls anyone who wants to love and be loved, to know and be known, to understand and be understood to come into his strong arms to be gripped by His gentle embrace. Careful, at the end of those arms are nail scars He got when He took the penalty for all of us pukes doing nothing different than what all these people were doing as described in this blog post.
The crazy thing is this.
He is coming again, but then He'll be more like the Gru who got a tad ticked off when the barker wouldn't honor the full meaning of what happened at the shooting gallery.
Yeah, I confess, I know I must be merciful because I've been shown mercy. And I do forgive, for forgiveness has been given to me, not just by God but by a whole lot of people who shouldn't be giving it to me. It is indeed not for me to judge, and I pray about that and work to live that out by the power of Christ every day.
But I also feel it. When I observe the things I observed recently, I do feel it.
And deep inside I cheer on Gru when he summarily blows away the shooting gallery.
It may be <<Plink>> <<Plink>> <<Plink>> for now, but there will be a time when it will be
Friday, March 15, 2013
Since I spend some time watching the goings-on of the Roman Catholic Church, simply to know what's happening so I can meaningfully introduce devout Catholicists to the way out of that body of death, I imagine I ought to put in a few words about the latest papal selection.
The thing is that the things people say about it are never much different from the things people say about any such event. One of the more notable ones this time relates to the new pope's silence, or inactivity, or uncomfortable dismissal of the ugliness that occured when he was a Catholic leader of some stripe during Argentina's "Dirty War," which loosely refers to the purging of government undesirables in 1979.
I guess my response is, yeah? So?
For one, the Catholic church has these kinds of accusations against all kinds of priests and prelates and it's all just blapping. For another, whenever the media blap a lot of this stuff as if it is really anything, then it means there are a lot of other things that are worse that they're working valiantly to keep us from identifying. This is the "partial hangout" function of the media -- it does wonders for the work of the Jesuits, and it happens all the time anyway. So what of it?
I don't for a second make light of the horrors of indiscriminately autocratic Argentina in 1979. Except that yet another thing about it is that the violence spewed by any potentate at any time in any region on the planet is sowed and nurtured by the Roman Catholic Church anyway. Yes! Good job, intrepid muckraking cadets! Good job seeing what Father Bergoglio was doing back in 1979! Fine, fine work!
But now what? He was doing what he was paid to do. And he'll be doing the same kinds of things as he fulfills his pontificate.
He's supposed to.
One thing I think about is how this will all play out what with him being the first Jesuit pope. That in and of itself may not be that big a deal except that he will bring his expertise at Sun-Tzuan arts of war into the job of being the World's preeminent sin manager. Pretty good deal I'd say.
Except that there's another dude who's very good at working the System for Cain's purposes, another guy who's a genius at executing summary military affairs and at the same time looking really wholesome by handling his own bags and riding the bus with the poor. That's the Superior General of the Society of Jesus, and I just wonder what he's thinking now that one sworn to see Christ in him is now holding office as the one to whom he must swear blood oath allegiance? This is hurting my brain!
And that's not the least of it! For there is uniquely a third party in this quasi-love triangle! The former pope, Benedict, who I heard is going to be engaging in top secret talks with Francis about baaad things going on that need to be looked at and attended to and all the rest of it. And don't think he is not in the mix of being a bad-ass enforcer himself, once having quite the reputation for running the current manifestation of the Church's Inquisition, now innocuously called the Institution for the Propagation of the Faith, I think it is. Something like that.
I'm sure they'll all smile their asses off and say they're committed to dutifully doing the Church's work and ya-da ya-da ya-da. And maybe they will. That's cool.
It's what the faithful want them to do.
Which leads to one last remark that I have to add. That has to do with who the faithful are, and what they're about. You'd think "the faithful" would comprise just those crazy ol' Catholics there cheering and smiling and doing things like waving the pope's flag around after the announcement Wednesday.
But that every single person without Christ ruling in their hearts is classified as a Roman faithful can be seen in another seemingly unrelated story, this one about the scathing report on J.P. Morgan Chase and its little "fumble" a year or so ago.
The bank lost, what was it -- I forget but I'm pretty sure it was in the neighborhood of $6 billion if I'm not mistaken. Today it was demonstrated that everyone knew about it and pretty much lied to everyone else about it and it was just generally ugly all around. Even top banker dude Jamie Dimon confessed that he did a very very very bad thing and it was very very very bad indeed.
Now we can rail and rant and rave and ralph our guts with the greatest revulsion at Dimon and this guy and that guy and any big shot on Wall Street who makes a mint doing all of this and yet...
We're no different from all the other shrills who protest this or that or whatever.
What of it?
Human sacrifice is what they do.
But here's the key thing.
No one ever seems to take the genuine, intimate, authentic, insightful look at
How many insist that people like Dimon do what they do and keep doing what they do so they can get their cut? How many people need Francis to get in good with so when they do major asswipe things, they'll be good?
Really, these guys only do what they do because a gargantuous chunk of the populace across the globe
Pay them well to do it.
Just FYI, I write about these things all the time on my webzine. The Chase fiasco? Happened before with Societe Generale a few years ago, and I wrote about that here. Of course the Chase thing seems to be much worse because that was here in the U.S, while the French bank's mishap, well, that's waaay out in France. And of course these things happen all the time anyway. It's happened before. A lot. It'll happen again. A lot. Whoever's responsible will have fingers wagged at them for a bit. Yawn.
I like how the Vatican wants to be in the mix of all this too, announcing a while ago that it is $19 million in the red. Ooo. Ouchy. $19 million. I still get a good chortle from that one. Um, if you knew that the Church has billions upon billions in assets as well as the undying devotion of billions of Catholicists, you'd get it.
Anyway, I don't want to seem as if this is all just one big joke. People being hacked up on the altar of rigourous World value extraction is repellently wicked. So yeah, there is a pretty cool way out, as I mentioned at the very beginning of this blog post.
I write a bit about Him here.
Would love for you read about Him. He's the only reason I do any of this. I always pray someone, at least someone will read this. Even if they don't ever come close to Wonderful Matters that they'd get it from somebody, somewhere -- someone who is Jesus With Skin who can share with them the truth about the World and what it does and why it does it.
And then take a moment to rapturously turn and walk into
Tuesday, March 05, 2013
My latest home page piece uses William Hogeland's Founding Finance as its text, and you'll see who the major players are when you visit my webzine.
One of Hogeland's most prominent players who I didn't address was Herman Husband, a fascinating character who could be considered one of the United States' genuine founding fathers if he wasn't so eccentric. A rabblerousing Christian man bent on getting things done in the world the way they should be, he was as much devoted to gospel things as he was to getting civil government to behave.
He had extraordinarily prescient ideas about how society should arrange itself for the best interests of all, and his passion for biblical principles motivated him to persist in his industrious causes. His adventures through pre-revolutionary America and its founding are engaging reading -- I can't see how his story would not make a fine major motion picture feature.
For the most part his attempts to reform everything were met with profound defeat, but he labored on and was almost always holding some local civil position, if not representing his region in more august legislative bodies.
One thing that struck me was his recognition of the U.S. and its power to carry out legitimate value extraction policies using the greatest force to do that led him to call the newly minted federal government "The Beast."
True enough. His proven knowledge of biblical references demonstrates that this meant something very specific. In my own survey of biblical truths, I am convinced The Beast is Rome and all its subdivisions, from any temporal government assigned to ruthlessly enforce the law to all ecclesiastical branches assembled to put a smiley face on that task. These include the overarching institution the Roman Catholic Church, as well as any organization contracted with the System such as 501c3 tax-exempt non-profit corporations -- virtually every "Christian" church in the U.S. is one, dutifully doing Rome's work.
Wow. So many people devoted to The Beast. That woman who rides her, by the way, that's Jerusalem, God's beloved, prostituting herself to Cain's legacy embodied in Rome.
I'd imagine there are a few out there who do trust in and believe on and love by Jesus Christ. I think there are quite a few, by the way, I'm not so dismissively provincial. In our lunch Bible study we were reading in the seventh chapter of Revelation, where it says a huge multitude worshipped Christ, one consisting of people from all nations and tongues and which couldn't be counted .
But it is so hard to see them when listening to what comes out of the World's blowhole.
For you see, the media are spending gobs of time covering the new Pope's selection. What other religious leader gets this much attention? That should say a lot. I've heard countless supposedly Protestant evangelical pastors and leaders glowingly say that the Catholic church is Christian and the Pope is all Christian and everything is great.
Wow wow. It breaks my heart. Where are those who see Rome for what it is? Herman Husband saw it, but sadly he was the forebearer for a whole slough of other folks who see it but just jump right in and rant and rail and remonstrate against it.
So yeah. There're your "Rome is bad" folks who still work within the realm of the System to try to change it -- there're about a bazillion of them, bitter, cantankerous, sad people. There're your "Rome is okay" folks who shrug a goofy shrug or even work out some warm fuzzy about it -- there're another bazillion of them, misled, lost, and also very sad people. (All will screech back at this assessment with the greatest vitriol about how happy they really are. Hmm.)
Where are those with the most accurate perspective on Rome?
The one that humbly suggests that it is indeed very bad as the proper authoritative very bad-ass law enforcer necessary to keep rotten people from allowing their rottenness to kill too many others? The one that also puts forth that it is indeed very okay in that it is supposed to be there doing its summarily condemnatory work?
And where is the view that there is an alternative to the body of death? It is one that holds that those in the embrace of Christ have absolutely nothing to do with it at all. It is the one that responds to the question "What of Rome?" with the answer, "It is doing what it is doing, managing the sin of all who ask it to do so, and left to its own it will do that very proficiently, and quite frighteningly actually. It has nothing to do with Jesus Christ, however, Who will return for His bride and will give her one of the coolest wedding gifts ever, a New Jerusalem. You want to talk about the Pope, about Rome, about its practices? You want to talk about Obama, about Washington, about its duties? You want to talk about any World institution and the evil it does to constrain evil? I'm not the guy to ask, because that's not my domain.
"Sorry, but my interest is reconciliation. Graciously sharing Truth with hurting, wounded, desperate people longing for true forgiveness and salvation."
Again, I invite you to visit my webzine for more. Even more importantly, this place.