Some things require very simple responses

Psalm 14:1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.

I have but one response - LMAO!

The God that no one knows

I saw God today. She was standing on the corner of Rivonia and Witkoppen, begging. Here, she collected tithes and offerings. She mumbled blessings and curses. None bowed to her, she was not in splendid heavenly kit. And she didn't have a building to attract followers(probably only a shack). She was black and torn and tattered with droopy breasts from breastfeeding her sun scorched baby. But if you looked closely, just for two seconds longer and lingered on her wrinkled eyes, behind her desperate poverty and uneducated gaze, you knew you were in the presence of greatness like no other. Thank you black tattered and torn lady, thank you for sharing with me.

[Expletive] the pen

At school we were repeatedly reminded by our proud and civilized teachers of the adage that, “the pen is mightier than the sword”. And it irks me that none considered or even advised us that this does not diminish the pen’s cruelty. The pen has too often stirred the sword and even defended its brutality vehemently. A skillfully wielded sword can win a battle but a pen in a determined halfwit’s hand can rally many swords to extend an empire. It makes me wonder what other “enlightened” methods we employ in our world that cause more harm than good? But then again, the pen was never intended to take the higher ground. If it is placed in context, the saying is born from an injured ego that resorts to the only resource at its disposal to strike back a punishing blow. The statement actually reads, “Beneath the rule of men entirely great, the pen is mightier than the sword”. So here is a man, constrained by the law and his burning anger, who seeks to deal a lethal blow but cannot use conventional means to do so. He harbors malice, has no intention of letting it go and finds an alternative form of retaliation. There is no forgiveness here, no noble higher ground, just malice finding another way to express itself.

Why then take a vengeful thought, hide its vicious intent and impress it on uninformed minds and expect virtuous results? There are many who have good intentions, but whose work bears no good because of the poison that infects it through such teachings. The world’s grief all too often is caused by taking that which is wholly poisonous, reducing or watering down its toxins and transferring it in less lethal doses. Consume enough of it however, and its effects are detrimental. So the pen, which is peddled as the sword’s virtuous alternative, is in fact its complement.

This reminds me of a verse that has always troubled me, "If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head." - Romans 12:20. This verse is quoted from the church’s propaganda machine – the pulpit – and suggests that performing a good deed for your enemy can bring discomfort to them. Am I the only one who sees the utter spite in this teaching? The heart chord of this verse is revenge. Revenge disguised within good deeds. How can anyone expect a malicious teaching to infuse purity and good values when it intends to injure?

Surely by performing a good deed we should require no reward? Is that not what makes the deed noble? Paul’s teaching impales every believer with a curse that fastens itself to all their endeavors. Purity has no agenda to distort reality. Virtue is not attained through ill gains. Purity and virtue cannot be entrenched using sinister teachings layered with polite, well-bred words that hide the negative force concealed beneath them.

All too often our disjointed lives result from our blemished perceptions of reality stamped upon us through the ignorance of our early guardians. Scrutinize every belief and viewpoint, no matter how cherished and noble, and if it holds even a smidgen of poison – rid yourself of it or at the very least acknowledge the ill effects it imposes on your life.

The future and the past right now

Apparently there are beings - human, divine, alien, spiritual or otherwise - that can see into the future. Or rather there is a force which certain beings can tap into which can let them see future events as though they were happening presently. The future can be replayed repeatedly if necessary as well. Looking into the past is also possible. And just like there is a force which grants access to the future, another or even the same force grants access to view past events.

Now I’m no quantum physicist or mathematician or philosopher or even an “A” student to be so sure that I can make sense of this, but it leads me to wonder if recollection (past) and prediction (future) are even possible or if something else is going on here. If someone can see into my future, how do they differentiate it from my past and present? And what exactly constitutes a future event? Is my future simply something which I have not yet done? I haven’t skydived, is that in my future? I haven’t tried to outrun molten lava and failed either, so is that a future event as well? And my past, is it simply that which I have already done? It seems to me though that if my past and future can be viewed now, that all time is in the present and runs alongside each other concurrently.

So, are past and future events being observed or rather are they just concurrently running parallel events? How else do you view an event that has not yet happened without insisting that the future instance manifest itself immediately? If my future or past can be observed right now, that surely makes not only me but all things omnipresent. Knowing the future is therefore irrelevant because at some level my future is nothing more than a memory of things still to happen and its surveillance by beings with agendas (benign or otherwise) is pointless.

I have yet to hear of a force that can replay the present though. Now would that not be something to behold? I’m not suggesting a Ground Hog’s Day where you somehow recall that the event has already happened, neither a Back to the Future scenario where the event is repeated with the intention of changing its outcome. Like in the future and the past, where those being observed are unaware that they are not a present day instance under observation why does there not seem to be a way to repeat the present without being aware that it is a repeat? Or would that make it merely a repeat of the past? From the look of things, the present seems to be more elusive than the past and future. Perhaps this is why people choose to dwell on memories and/or predictions rather than just being.

Bigger and better doesn’t make him god

For god to exist I must exist. For what is a god without a creation? God cannot bestow supremacy on himself without the existence of lesser life forms against whom he measures himself. The basic premise for our worship of god is that he is infinitely greater and more loving than what we are. Why then did he create lesser life forms when he had infinite power at his disposal to create a realm of equally powerful and loving beings? After all, nothing is impossible when infinite power is at your beckoned call. It would appear though that god has chosen to retain all power and the self bestowed title of the undisputed mightiest force in the known and unknown universe. He wields unlimited power which in and of itself is very impressive but does that warrant him crowning himself the alpha and omega, the be all and end of all? Is the real God here not the very force that is being harnessed instead?

Let’s go back to god’s creation. How can creation be considered inferior to god when the creator defines himself by creation itself? God pits his abilities against life that clearly is disadvantaged through his intentional design. Apparently in one incident according to the Torah, god corners a man named Job and asks him questions regarding the depths and expanses of the earth, the way of light and the place of darkness and about the stars and their constellations. He challenges Job’s knowledge from the anatomy of various beasts to god’s private thoughts. After god gives Job a good talking to, contrition and repentance are Job’s response. This dialog is used often to demonstrate the infinite creative power and knowledge of the god. It is laughable to think that god had not created this man with the ability to try his hand at these challenges and then ridicules him for not being able to do so. If Job had the ability to know and do these things and was still found wanting then by all means reduce him and insist on repentance. By using his creation as a measuring stick of his benevolence and power, god relegates himself to merely creator and lifts creation to the ultimate standard to judge a being by. What need then do I have for a god whose worth I determine by my insignificance. Like I said – Bigger and better doesn’t make him god

WTF??!?

i am the consummate mind

i am the truth in all things, even when the truth is a lie...

when i speak it must be so...

my opinions are truth...

your truth is subjective...

the only reason you exist is because i matter...

i matter only because your opinion says i do...

your opinion matters because i say it does...

i am the sum of you

This is prime example of what it means to ramble Virgilio style. I have no idea why I wrote it, all I know is that it makes sense to me. To sum it up...It speaks of how I believe we relate to one another: As much I exude comfort and content in my own being, I really do need external validation from people whom I deem significant enough to confirm my "awesomeness". When that validation is not forthcoming - it's sour grapes...i didn't need it in the first place.  Who are you anyway that your opinion matters. And besides, i am the sum of my interaction with you to some degree...so if I'm not all that...neither are you. 

Consider:

For religion to achieve it's objective of "reuniting" man with god,it must become a science.

If god is omnipotent, he is then terribly evil and equally good.

Eternity is not about living forever, it is living in the past, present and future at once.

Heaven and Hell are not places, they are a state of the mind.

Good does not always begat good, nor does evil always begat evil. Both are essential for life.

Jesus says the poor will always be with us. Jesus was talking about ignorance, not poverty.

Man must exhibit his goodness through selflessness. God exhibits his goodness through demanding man's worship.

'Do unto others as you would have others do to you'. Why must pride be the catalyst for compassion. It then is no longer compassion, it is a hidden agenda.

Death existed long before "sin entered the world through Eve". Just look to the stars.

If God could speak audibly to the Moses and Abraham, he must speak audibly to me.

IF God's presence is a consuming fire, it must then follow that it is not a destructive fire, but a regenerative one. For God is good and only good can issue forth from him - and that which we behold, we become! The wicked therefore have nothing to fear in His presence for it is not their destruction, but their rebirth.

Man is good because he loves his brother. God is good why? Because he loves us? I'd also love something I create and would demand that my creatures take care of each other. But just because I make that demand from my creatures, does that neseccarily make me good? God doesn't have a being equal to him to annoy and irritate him, so does he really know what it is to love a fellow(equal) being. Is this the curse of being God?

There is no free will (choice), there are only consequences.

God is not a being, God is an experience! To speak of God, is to speak of an abstract experience. An abstract experience????? What's that?

I wish to be a child again. It was when I was a child that I had a true understanding of the universe and it's functions. It is because of this knowledge that I could ask the right questions...and those questions all began with "Why?"