The word "Establishment" seems to be one of many the buzz words in play today. Nearly equal though is the quieter buzz word that's left standing in its shadow the word "Anti-establishment".
Another word be the vagueness found within the word "Politically" correct.
What if common Sense were seen as something intangible that must be "Created"?
Not to suggest something that's made in a Lab, Test tube, warehouse or on some assembly line, but such a thing manifest as the result of positive interaction between people and their conclusions which then manifest as the essence of those conclusions they've mutually "DRAWN"?
We're living in a world where the invisible "They" we all like to refer to as we explore talking points has also become the dumping grounds for our emotions. Such a place which includes many of the things we don't agree with.
As we talk or converse we also flirt with this "Third Person". This third person who conveniently never seems to be available or there in the moment to defend themselves, further emphasize or expound on what they've "Supposedly" said!
This format of conversing doesn't fit together with words such as "Heart Felt, Compassionate, Understanding, Considerate and last but not least "Thoughtful" and leaves much more to be said about the essence of humanity encrypted within a face to face transfer of thought(s).
It's easy to assume everyone else that's part of our conversation(s) knows exactly what we're talking about as we try to populate and in turn polarize the atmosphere with our words.
Take for example a husband and wife conversation within an otherwise neutral day that turns "South" into an argument without any supposed "Early notice" when a simple question such as "What do you want to eat for dinner" gets placed on the table?
Really, is it true though to suggest there was no "Early notice" or would it be more accurate to clearly state that this was there all along and simply waiting for a place to happen?
Keep in mind within this example it applies to two people who claim they love each other through vows taken, yet imagine if the spirit of what I'm suggesting were to take place between two people who've yet to confess any type of coherent, long term and favorable devotion towards each other?
Yet NOW you have two people who are still choosing their OWN methodology as to how both are now somehow trying to "Cope" with this thing (relationship) they have since taken upon themselves and enjoined in?
SO what's the easiest escape plan should things not work out where no one is "Willing" to find agreement? How long does agreeing to disagree work within a lasting marriage? That is before the real essence of the DISAGREEMENT later and makes the choice to resurface some where else?
You know that obscure :"Somewhere Else" such as another argument that started out about something Totally different?
Obscure to mean where someone see it as a need to pick a fight in order to "Eventually" get heard? One where the results of any supposed real fight is pain? Away from which any Normal human would also look to escape from? Does it make "SENSE" to you?
Back to the dinner in question, "They" start out talking as if they're on the same page, but let something as simple as "Where do you want to got eat" come up and one of the two might easily find themselves sleeping on the couch either that or silently staring at the back of their mates head or out the bedroom window all night long.
More often though, isn't it true that if a talking point stays on the table for very long what usually gets fleshed out or maybe "Flushed" out is the not so obvious "Us vs Them"?
What about what's in their Heart?
The substance of the heart of ones heart everyone hopes to be able to find that on one occasion can easily be expressed yet in another moment of time the right words are not available or are no where to be found?
How much of this mystery truly has to do with the type of atmosphere, sense of their awareness of their OWN presence that is IN ORDER to where they CAN find themselves "Able" to express what's in their heart?
When any two people honestly sit down in an attempt to converse, like it or not we each give away tiny tid bits about ourselves. These things may be encrypted, yet they're most definitely in the air we move around with the sound of our "Voice" and with the added punctuation of our not so silent body language.
Herein lies the danger in trying to rely too heavily on someones words alone via texting or email. It all boils down to a form of comfort in My opinion. That comfort being what each person CAN handle or accommodate within their own logic Tree"?
Some might argue with, "But what about hand written letters throughout antiquity"? The medium where people for centuries found themselves able to convey trustworthy thoughts regardless of the miles that separated them?
I'm firmly of the opinion, "A person CAN find out more about what they may or may NOT know about a person best when they're NOT present. Meaning many of those things "Said" we suggest to ourselves we "Know"! That is until the strength and weight of the undeniable comes along and whispers to us otherwise.
My argument is that today people are NOT weighing not only the words of others by the same standards "They" used to but also "They" are NOT weighing their own words by that same standard before the jury pool has been seated.
We have more people (another form of Media that may of may NOT be just) telling us today not only what everyone has said, but their intentions and motivation for having said so as well.
In this type of frame work not only is there barely enough room for the personage in question, much less what may or may NOT be true that concerns other Narratives being offered.
What ever happened to the age old phrase, "I don't know ask them, they are of age and can speak for themselves"? Why the need for so many other opinions today before a person is believed?
Surely there's a Righteous response EVERYONE can agree with floating around out there somewhere that's JUST waiting to be heard? Some might even refer to it as "Common Sense"?
Others might even relate to this answer as "True Wisdom"?
Today there's rarely a clean and clear delivery of words that ALSO find themselves without the need for some form of validation (bias) being mixed with them (words).
I've heard of a "Horse or Dog" whisperer what claim they know what's going through an animals mind, but what about a "Human Whisperer"?
I fully believe there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with "News" in and of itself yet only when it's NOT been tainted with "Bias or Slant" of any kind.
The dispensation of unbiased news these days is nearly "Impossible" to find. Why is this? You simply can't find this "Medium" on any Radio or TV network these days.
We might claim we're ALL speaking the same language, yet TRULY are we? The day when we ALL do speak the same language what will it sound like? "Common Sense" maybe?
Many side show reporters are attempting to try and sound like they are without bias and that by way by way of Trashing "Everyone"!
Usually all this type of horse play (no pun intended) is turns out to be is a ploy to try and get everyone to switch over and listen to them.
How easy is it to learn to loathe a "Politician", yet how many personalities have failed see what they have to say is beginning to sounds much like a "Politician". sw
My suggestion is? Refuse to be someone else's experimental project. Stop investing in conversation that's obviously NOT going anywhere or getting you them anywhere that's also 'Meaningful"!
Especially if the word Meaningful were being viewed as though it were an additional "Sense" that's full of the willingness aware of all that is held in Common.
The acknowledgement of having One and the same creator is The Best place to start looking don't you think? Who better would know than the one that did create "Man Kind"
Such a place might not only "Prove" to be where "Common ground is found, but a ground that is solid as a "Rock" and can be built upon.... Just saying!
SW
Wednesday, June 22, 2016
Tuesday, June 21, 2016
Donald Trump in harms "Way"
Whether you believe it or not that heading alone could spark a riot if it were to fall into the hands of those who know exactly how, where and when to go about stirring up conflict.
Hatred is something that's not hard to find in this country and more so of late. You don't need a license or permit to stir up "Trouble" All one needs is a microphone and people that are "Willing" to take the time to listen.
What is Hatred? Is it more than an emotional response? Why is hatred not being associated with the inability to Forgive and move on?
Nothing more than common sense and insight or exposure to people for any real length of time is needed in order to discover what makes people "Tick".
The advantage for entities such as the "News Media" they get paid to track, graph and extrapolate public responses relative to a multitude of talking points. What the Media loves to do is to "Troll" for "Controversy" yet without a public demand for "tat same controversy what are they left with except a bundle of sad stories chalk full of "Unfortunate" revelation?
What more often makes people "Tick' has everything to do with exactly how to go about "Ticking" people "Off"! A large percentage of people in this country are walking time bombs that are simply waiting for a righteous excuse to explode.This in my opinion is not only a national platform for the expression of "Frustration" but also something gone viral on an "International" level!
Some media personalities know this better than others and almost to a degree of exactness as to what gets a "Rise" out of the masses (Public).
In my opinion it should be considered criminal because they do know and that because they do have countless hours and have been specifically trained in this "Craft". Every "Industry" has veterans of a sort hence the name.
Take for example, why would a judge would hold a black Belt in karate more responsible/liable than some regular Joe who gets in a fight and breaks someones nose or multiple bones? Why? Because the Black Belt has been trained in the "Art".
You give a person in a crowd a Mega-phone and instantly they become the ring leader in the public perception, yet why? Because they can and are being heard above all other voices in the said "Crowd"....
Shifting to equality, much like the argument over the 2nd amendment, I say let those who presently enjoy the benefit of their "Personal freedoms" and as such because of the "Protection" afforded them through personal security details (we the republic pay for). If said "Leaders" do approve a ban Joe public the right to carry and own a gun, that in itself "Should" symbolize their own faith in public protection?
If a tax paying citizen feels threatened, why then should they not also find themselves able to call for a police detail to come and escort them from point A to point B? Why Not? It's all about affordability...
My opinion is if the environment is NOT deemed safe against the mentally unstable personalities assumed to be amid us with the boundaries of our national "Republic they (Law Makers) in turn should NOT be able to pass a law that's exempts only a chosen few.
I suggest instead of banning guns lets allow Gun manufacturers to help draft a law where any "Individual" MUST have completed a State approved training program. Years ago they insisted Deer hunters go through a safety course before they could get a hunting license. What was the reason?
Too many people were dying due to the mishandling of guns where people were getting sniped and mistaken for deer. Much of which was due to lack of experience and/or ignorance.
Not only would this create a paper trail of those who've been pre-qualified they could include a back ground check much like the I9 system that's in place for employers?
As long as other countries or private (for profit) entities that are beyond the reach of US laws, guns will always be found in hidden pockets of any society and more often those whose motives go beyond simply living the "American Dream!
Also under the terms of equality, this goes hand in hand with benefits (i.e Insurance coverage). If Law Makers approve and vote in ANY type of Socialized Insurance, they too MUST abide by the same by-laws they set in motion. We are talking about a "Representative" who ARE on a a payroll are we NOT?
When law makers are forced to be exposed to the "Same" things the general public are exposed to they then might rethink the value to their own policies...
On to "Protection, I personally "Love" the office all "Policeman" hold.
I value their office held yet I do NOT value every misguided soul that has wrongfully "Mismanaged" what should be considered a privilege. Having been Trusted to assume this same office in order to uphold the Laws the gun and badge were dispensed and intended to enforce?
The ones that do know better than others are those who are in places of power and enforcement. Why is it that those who do hold the guns also PROVE somehow to ultimately be the most dangerous factions in a society and that without making distinction between "Legal or Criminal" mindsets?
It's not the gun many don't Trust, instead it's the social mindset doesn't Trust that's are in possession of the guns. There's a reason people riot against Police brutality, yet is it only because they do have the guns or that some choose to mishandle the power that accompanies those same Guns and Badges?
Guns equate to "Power" in the minds of anyone who does understand not only the capability of a gun but such a persona motives as well, versus someone that is not armed with a gun
Division will takes its' toll on any social setting, yet until its understood exactly what causes divisions among ANY people especially when their motives are kept criminally hidden what else should be expected?.
To be contiued....
Friday, June 10, 2016
Symbols of "Glory"
1 Sam 15:29
He who is the Glory of Israel does not lie or change his mind; for he is not a man, that he should change his mind."NIV
con·tempt
He who is the Glory of Israel does not lie or change his mind; for he is not a man, that he should change his mind."NIV
con·tempt
noun
- the feeling that a person or a thing is beneath consideration, worthless, or deserving scorn."he showed his contempt for his job by doing it very poorly"
- disregard for something that should be taken into account."this action displays an arrogant contempt for the wishes of the majority"
- the offense of being disobedient to or disrespectful of a court of law and its officers.
Why is contempt for the divine nature of God failing to recognize spiritually all of who Israel is in the sight of God. sw
Heb 1:3
The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.
NIV
During war time a coward is said to hide behind a human shield, how much more the enemies of God. sw
All law breakers are guilty of one thing, they didn't believe in the wisdom, power and true authority which breaths "Life" into law that was provided for mutual benefit. sw
What if the word "Self" is just a universal expression as to who the "Great I Am" is NOT. sw
Finding it necessary to assign a different name or face should not alter the moral of the story being told. sw
In terms of a law that judges men fairly is to suggest that justice is blind, yet why is it so hard to comprehend the condition of a people many years later. sw
If any law that is written is considered to be flawless, how important does it become to accurately interpret the crime committed. sw
Waiting until tyranny has "Decided" to kick your door in will prove to be nothing more than a poor escape plan implemented "Too Late". sw
During war time a coward is said to hide behind human shield, how much more the enemies of God. sw
Contesting a "Will" is one matter, whereas putting to the test a "Living Will" its own approval. sw
If a spiritual battle is engaged for the benefits of its reward against an enemy that can't be seen, how accurate of a depiction is the image of blindfolded child swinging a club at a "Pinata". sw
The advancement of a perceived absentee and otherwise invisible God within an on going battle whose only hope of victory is found the exaltation of the One True God, why do so many abandon the thoughts of being in an ongoing battle that's waging?
A battle is being fought yet many don't even know they're in the middle of that battle. A battle as if to somehow determine who the rightful descendants of Abraham are in the sight of One God who is sovereign over all mankind.
This battle understood to be one whose victors will also inherit what was rightfully Given to Abraham.
A battle fought where only those who understand what's a stake can also see the battle lines being drawn in the sand. The territories of this battle are all who choose to engage in this battle who also know they only have two sides to choose from.
An otherwise invisible battle not only being fought in the heavenly realm, but one where all others who do NOT conform to one side or the other will either choose to be recruited, pledge their allegiance and fight OR become cannon fodder and collateral damage somehow caught in the cross fire (middle)?
Gen 13:15-17
All the land that you see I will give to you and your offspring forever. I will make your offspring like the dust of the earth, so that if anyone could count the dust, then your offspring could be counted. Go, walk through the length and breadth of the land, for I am giving it to you."
NIV
What could it be other than "Ignorance" that truly makes it possible for an enemy to remain invisible or so easily blend in. sw
Any sense that's founded only upon on what is presently acceptable and that because it can be physically realized, how can that also be an attribute held in common with the notion that also proves to be true of only One creator?
Enough that is that this sense referred to as a "Common Sense" is also something everyone not only has but chooses to apply and that because of the One from whom this "sense" also came from?
Without "Truly Believing" the One who is the One True God what is any religion until the One True God does reveal Himself for "WHO HE IS" as if the ensign of His authority?
In terms of trying to "Frame" the hope of ever finding ones "sovereign" authority that's also able to provide visualization, power and potential required for such a task ever to be discovered within the individual(s) will that only promotes itself. sw
How is "self" and its provision proving to be even remotely possible where someone other than self proves themselves able to lead you where you do not "Want" to go. sw
Why is that so few today are being found to be worthy enough in order to somehow dispense the powerful potential and direction words alone can then lead a person. sw
Is a strong "Will" always to be considered a positive attribute if its also not judged to be headed in the right direction. sw
Who in their "Unrighteous" mind would be willing to surrender such a great gift as their own will to someone other that self. sw
Will "Hope" prove to be the only evidence of everything else that also true and yet to be believed. sw
Why is it so important to know the "Ending" of a matter before the "Next" step is taken. sw
Truly what is any talking point about that is also without ulterior motive. sw
No one of sound mind speaks without the hope of being heard by someone, even its "Self". sw
Is it the intent of the sovereignty Gods words only to have someone read what God "Has" said or is His intent that "Self" find that it's possible to hear from God at any given moment and "Obey". sw
Motive is meaningless and remains nothing until it's been given the opportunity to pave its own way. sw
The "Heart", what a deep and beautiful metaphor, that is until it's content have been revealed that go on to define the type of heart being discussed. sw
The desires of the heart, who is that plants the seeds that also grow there. sw
If we can understand that plants can procreate and in turn grow, try then to justify to the farmer why rocks are considered lifeless while under the assumption two or more grains of sand simply found themselves joined together year after year. sw
Is there a "Real" reason why darkness can't cloak itself with darkness, yet it can blend itself in the presence of Light. sw
Evil, a moral majority doesn't get to "Enjoy" being associated with it unless there's some type of glory attached, hence the type of glory discovered in it's wide spread "Acceptance". sw
In a world of black and white darkness only has one source of contrast, yet where there's many colors there are also endless possibilities for shades of darkness to hide. That is until darkness overtakes the entire picture. sw
There is good reason why Race wars can never be won, yet there's also a reason why those who do not like salt find most food to be insipid without it. sw
There are many new doors being opened into this world that no one seems to be able to explain how or why. We see someone considered to be evil put to death, yet when we turn we find that we've only pruned its growth and now there's two additional branches.
Not to suggest the explanation is not available, but more importantly why the wisdom that can explain why such doors are left open is also being rejected.
Is it only about the reason those doors are being opened or what comes through those doors and why those doors are NOT being closed?
Personal comfort is not always this life's best guide. sw
The divine wisdom that tomorrow holds looks to redefine the limitations of yesterdays ignorance. Some might even go as far as renaming it "Revelation knowledge". sw
If wisdom were measured in degree's where would the young and the ignorant fit within that model while assuming the meaning of life is all about learning. sw
Man might come to learn the relative sciences which involve only this world, yet will man come to know the likeness of its humanity and his creator on a meaningful level. sw
If I were to offer an opinion today, exactly what is that would propel that same opinion (unaltered) into the meaningful and infinite depths of the future? That place where only Truth frames what will remain?
Some where into the future in terms the opinion finding a resting place within the realm of "Logic" (reasoning process) of collective and responsive individuals?
Perspective, either the words of The authors of the bible are the inspired (spirited) words of God or they're Not. The troubling part gets introduced by way of remaining undecided or denying the evidence. sw
Gal 4:8-11
Formerly, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those who by nature are not gods. But now that you know God — or rather are known by God — how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable principles?
Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again? You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you. NIV
Have you ever wondered about what it is that gives life to words? Or what it is that softens or reduces the impact of some of them?
It's one thing to consider words that God has spoken under the terms of a monologue, yet what about the essence (spirit) of His words suggest are to be "Adopted" as if they are our own?
Face it, people get bored with what they assume they know way too easy. Either that or they spend a majority of their available time trying to defy logic (what some might call "Common Sense").
What is common sense if not the divine use of those 5 senses working in unison towards One common goal? One analogy might depict a "Well oiled machine"?
There's a biblical example of a people that once existed who somehow found themselves able to come into agreement. This is (or should be) one of the most perplexing stories ever found recorded within the annals of divine mention.
Especially when truthfully examining where mankind today is (or NOT) in terms of not only coming into agreement, but even further "Remaining" in agreement long enough to realize maximum benefit(s)?
Not simply a different people found in antiquity, but a specific type of people who were later made (forced) to see things differently. Something that occurred beyond a specific event which took place by the command of God handed down to His divine servants that have oversight.
Finding ourselves as "Beings" who also find ourselves ABLE to TRULY see things from another perspective also requires not only understanding the creative mindset of another, but also the willingness to manage a perspective that was provided and intended as eventual "Gain" and/or profitability.
Some might also suggest "Provision". God does not suggest His people suffer from lack of Knowledge (vision) without reason does He?
Some might read the following from the perspective of someone who is afraid "Of' this certain type (coalition) of people or the results of what they're seemingly accomplishing as if they posed some type of threat to the one (God) who's about to make drastic changes in their lives.
Instead why not read this with the predisposition of a God that declares Himself the God that is "Love"? And that He works ALL things for the "Good" of those whose hearts are pure towards Him?
Based on what you think you know about God to date, (you've been taught to date) would God have come down and scrambled their language if what they were pursuing were found by God to be righteous in His sight?
Gen 11:3-9
They said to each other, "Come, let's make bricks and bake them thoroughly." They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar. Then they said, "Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves and not be scattered over the face of the whole earth."
But the LORD came down to see the city and the tower that the men were building. The LORD said, "If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them. Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other."
So the LORD scattered them from there over all the earth, and they stopped building the city. 9 That is why it was called Babel — because there the LORD confused the language of the whole world. From there the LORD scattered them over the face of the whole earth.
NIV
Rom 8:28-30
And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.
And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified. NIV
Common sense TODAY would suggest these TYPE of people could only build so far towards the heavens, yet that being based on what factors? Considerations only the scientific/math community alone might suggest?
Common sense today that would suggest certain things we know today that they may NOT have taken into consideration back then?
Let's be "Frank" (or Barbara if need be) for a moment, IF the majority of people within a culture do NOT borrow from the same source (5 senses which are the provision of Logic), why is it many still try and define such a thing as "Common sense"?
Who ultimately gets to decide if divine "Common Sense" act-ually did get the opportunity in order to prevail in the the life of any individual?
Another group might suggest that those who do NOT allow the combined usage of those same 5 senses to speak to them in order to help carve out decisions made in life "They" are then labeled as "Stupid" or "Ignorant".
Most will agree that all humans have 5 senses and those that are found to be extraordinary either have an extra intuitive and/or additional sense about them more often referred to as a Sixth sense.
Have you ever wondered why the spirit of Love is never factored in as One of those initial 5 senses? Especially among a people who declare and with purpose, "Christ In them"? A separate and called out people?
Take for example the aged secular adage which states, "Familiarity Breeds Contempt". Let's revisit this word "Contempt" and try to breath some life back into it.
The bible also makes mention of a woman who to me should nearly be feared because of who it is that's been "Scorned".
Some today would go contrary to suggest a scorned woman is one whose husband has made her "Mad" yet does that suggestion ever really get to the essence of the entire matter which can then speak to "Why" she is mad or easily made "Mad"? Not to mention the office she holds (wife)?
Some might even suggest the image of man who goes contrary to what his wife has suggested on ANY topic, yet is that also a true representation that also takes into account the counsel God gives to women?
con·tempt
noun
- the feeling that a person or a thing is beneath consideration, worthless, or deserving scorn."he showed his contempt for his job by doing it very poorly"
- disregard for something that should be taken into account."this action displays an arrogant contempt for the wishes of the majority"
- the offense of being disobedient to or disrespectful of a court of law and its officers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)