Spelunking

"Oku no hitobito to onazi youni, watashitachi wa kami-sama ga ikiteorareru koto wo shite imasu."  For any missionary who served in Japan back when the six lesson manuals were being used before the introduction of Preach My Gospel, those words are indelibly imprinted in your memory.  "Like many other people, we believe that God lives/exists."  The following paragraphs went on to describe the characteristics of God in order to begin to give a foundation for what we believed.  These foundation principles set the stage upon which everything else was predicated.

As we propose that there is a God, it is absolutely essential that we define what that statement even means.  What is a god?  What are the defining characteristics of such an entity?  If this is to be the basis for your world view, shouldn't you know the answers to these questions?  There is an overwhelming lack of interest or discussion among many people of the world today.  Is it truly worship to give obeisance to an ephemeral quasi-concept that one hasn't even tried to grasp or comprehend?

One defining trait often given to deity is immense power, even omnipotence.  Can something actually be omnipotent?  What does that even mean?  No wonder ontology is such a shunned field.  Apparently simple questions quickly end up widening the tiny rabbit hole into a gaping, sucking maw.  One question leads to another, and another, and another....each of which seems to need an answer before the prior can be fully complete.  Do we give up in despair and proclaim the whole issue to be too complex, too vague, too unknowable?  How far down the hole do we even need to go? Should we let the priests and academics fight it out; just tell me a pretty message and make me feel good and I'll trust you that there is something behind the curtain?

I think it is absolutely vital to take a dip in the pool of being; swim around for a bit, test the waters.  Even if one does not wish to take a theological view of existence, at some point one must define the foundation of their principles.  Failing to do so inevitably dooms one to be a marionette tangled in the strings of the world stage, pulled hither and thither by the movements of actors.  There are few things more pitiful than an individual who has lost their agency because their blindness has uprooted them and they have been swept from any moorings that could hold them steady.

Jigging it

This is in response to Jacque's reply to my 'Partisans' post.  As it got longer, I decided to make it its own separate post.
--
We don't need a strong political leader, or leaders, as much as we need a righteously principled public who recognizes that there are some things that cannot and should not be compromised on.  As soon as politics becomes appeasement of the masses, the masses have declared that they wish to be slaves, and are quickly treated as such.

 Remember that king Noah in Mosiah was a very popular king who ruled by the adoration of his people.  They were stripped of their liberties, stripped of their property, stripped of their morals under his leadership and they reveled in their glory.  When Enoch was shown the world in the time of Noah (and the ark) and beheld their marvelous civilization - they attended the operas, flocked to the  art galleries, sipped tea and nibbled crumpets while discoursing elegantly - he beheld the Lord weeping and couldn't understand it.  Then the Lord said, "Let me show you their private lives," and pulled away the mask of the facade of their civilization. It was then Enoch wept bitterly and declared that they deserved to be wiped utterly from the face of the earth.

Again, and again, it is the cleansing of the inner vessels that is required, not the championing of a great leader.  Society is merely the shadow of the people, and if it is crooked and malformed, nothing can straighten it but by fixing that from which it is cast.  Right now in society we are merely shifting the light source and playing architectural games with the surface the shadow is being cast on to make it appear correct.  A whole other segment is gaining traction by proclaiming that the distorted pattern is so much better than the old plain one because it has so much more 'character' or 'individuality'.  Stability, peace, and prosperity have never been, and never can be built on the back of a hunchbacked drunken jester staggering to the broken tune of a malicious pied piper.

U Owe Me

Dear Taxpayer ___________________,

Because of [ ]lazy / [ ]broke / [ ]greed,  I need money for my [ ]excessive house payment / [ ]HDTV / [ ] smart phone / [ ]candy.  You must now give me $_______________.___ monies or the [ ]thug / [ ] gang / [ ] mean person will hurt you plenty and take it.

Thank you for your donation!  ;)

-Menacingly Yours,
_________________, tax consumer.

INSTRUCTIONS: check all that apply.  Make sure you go to enough people to get all you want.  Do not underestimate how much you need. 

Partisans

Perhaps the incident that finally pushed us into posting comments came from a statement made by an individual on Facebook and the replies to it.  An individual had read an article on a news site alleging certain positions and actions by a political party.  Said individual gobbled up the partisan rhetoric and the line of conversation immediately proceeded to, "Yeah!  Our guy is so good and those guys are so bad!   This article proves my position!"; the gist of it being that their guy was trying to solve all the problems and the other guys, by opposing him, were not solving problems.

One of the basic fallacies encountered here, other than that of partisan politics, which I am adamantiumly opposed to, is that opposition to problem solving means that you are in favor of the problems.  If an entire group of individuals opposes a proposed solution, a very diligent look needs to be taken at why they are hindering its implementation.  Even if based on partisan bickering, if a solid majority are not willing to back an action, an alternative needs to be found.

Much more distressing in this situation was that the proposed "solutions" to the "problems" are diametrically opposed to the theological beliefs those clamoring for them proclaim to support.  Only the very ignorant or the hypocritical can spout hosannas of praise for their church while at the same time slavering for implementation of political processes attempting to destroy some of the precepts that it holds most dear.