Tagged: Jesus
Agent K vs The Protagonist, A Joint Review of Men in Black and Tenet
I’m kinda loving my life right now. I recently rewatched Men in Black and just now finished Tenet. What do these two Science Fiction thrillers have in common, you ask? And is it true, Pete?
They both repeatedly make the point that the general mass of humanity doesn’t want to know how close the total mass of humanity is to annihilation at any given moment.
Who tells us this? And on whose authority?
Agent K and The Protagonist. Because they are the engines of hope.
Finally, are they right? Is it true? Is the world on the brink of annihilation and do people, generally, not want to know it?
Yes, with the caveat that “the brink of annihilation” can be taken to mean the whole enterprise OR simply one person’s death.
In other words, from the perspective set forth by Jesus’ Good Samaritan story, which includes the claim: “I am neighbor”, it doesn’t matter what happens to the world’s occupants once I am dead. What matters is that my ability to contribute to the world died. Here I mean to enlarge the defense of the concept of “not wanting to know” to include “because people, generally, also are not wanting to neighbor”.
Full-circle: Agent K and The Protagonist are certainly engines of hope for life, just as is the Good Samaritan. The key behavior among all three is proper action despite desperate circumstances.
The new question is, “Is there any reason to believe life extends beyond death?” And, if so, should we act according to that belief?
One (Actually) Interesting Question For Your Bible Study Group
I find professionally procured Bible Study questions to be, in a word, terrible.
Questions developed on the spot by well-meaning Bible Study leaders are, to be blunt, worse.
Why is it so difficult to ask meaningful questions of fellow Christians? I do not know. I think it has something to do with the idea that “no Christian should feel stupid or challenged in their faith”. (This sentiment, of course, being found nowhere in scripture or defensible as the cornerstone of strong faith.)
The following is one good question. Try it out, if you dare.
“In Aristotle’s The Athenian Constitution we find,
The earliest of these offices was that of the King, which existed from ancestral antiquity. To this was added, secondly, the office of Polemarch, on account of some of the kings being feeble in war.
(Italics mine.)
“In Paul’s First Letter to the Corinthians, we find,
Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are varieties of ministries, and the same Lord…But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for what is profitable.
1 Corinthians 12:4-5, 7 LSB
Are these two ideas reconcilable? If so, how? If not, what is the difference?”
Happy studying!
Everyone Who “Knew This Would Happen”…
…now owes the rest of people, those without the gift of foresight, what happens next.
Predicting moohammedans’ boom in America is now merely part of history. There is no rhetorical power in claiming, “I told you so.” The rhetorical power now in great demand is, “What happens next, Oh, Great, Divinely-Touched, and Accurate Doom-Foreteller?”
This isn’t a “you show me yours, I’ll show you mine” taunt.
My foresight says two, and only two, options remain available.
- Insufferable mediocrity until America is a caliphate.
- Actual religious war, which results in everyone losing, except “hope”.
How’s that for Negative Nancy, on this Happy Hump Day?
The Final Paragraph of 11th Edition Encyclopedia Britannica’s Entry “Gunpowder Plot”
(For purists, this is also the infamous 10th Edition’s entry; the 11th is the 10th with three extra volumes.)
Just now I was catching up on my CBS Psalms study from last week, where I date the Psalms as I read them—a new habit to illustrate to myself and others how much of the Bible is actually ever read—when I saw the date and mechanically uttered V for Vendetta’s, “Remember, remember the fifth of November.”
I then moved to teach my 3 yr old, J-, the poem. During this, my conscience showed its face and I thought, “What even was the big deal? And was it successful or not? And did V really like the plot?” Etc.
Here’s the aforementioned conclusion (keep in mind the “Brit” of “Britannica” were the victims of the plot).
So ended the strange and famous capital Gunpowder Plot. However, atrocious its conception and its aims, it is impossible not to feel, together with horror for the deed, some pity and admiration for the guilty persons who took part in it. “Theirs was a crime which it would never have entered into the heart of any man to commit who was not raised above the lowness of the ordinary criminal.” They sinned not against the light but in the dark. They erred from ignorance, from a perverted moral sense rather than from any mean or selfish motive, and exhibited extraordinary courage and self-sacrifice in the pursuit of what seemed to them the cause of God and of their country. Their punishment was terrible. Not only had they risked and lost all in the attempt and drawn upon themselves the frightful vengeance of the state, but they saw themselves the means of injuring irretrievably the cause for which they felt such devotion. Nothing could have been more disastrous to the cause of the Roman Catholics than their crime. The laws against them were immediately increased in severity, and the gradual advance towards religious toleration was put back for centuries. In addition a new, increased and long-enduring hostility was aroused in the country against the adherents of the old faith, not unnatural in the circumstances, but unjust and undiscriminating, because while some of the Jesuits were no doubt implicated, the secular priests and Roman Catholic laity as a whole had taken no part in the conspiracy. (Philip Chesney York, an Oxford man.)
****
A post-script for my dad who says he struggles to connect what I see as the “obvious” connection within my posts.
Beyond the bald facts (as presented here), the following questions remains, “What particular training did the Britannica author have which allowed him to make his claim? Was it secular? Or support of some branch of Christianity? And how does the Bible study I am engaged in influence me? Towards sinning ‘against the light” or “in the dark’? By what measure can that be answered?”
For me, the true “Christianity” prevails. “Nothing could have been more disastrous to the cause of the Roman Catholics than their crime,” being the key notion. Fighting may be part of the road to prevailing. But if the fighting causes Christianity to lose, the sin was designed in the dark.
Modern Prayer, From One Modern Dad, In One Modern Marriage
Of late, especially due to participation in a CBS (Community Bible Study) study of the Psalms, I have been hearing Metallica’s lyrics (as sung by James) more and more as prayers. If the reader can understand this concept, then they can understand that the following cryptic glimpse into my marriage is likewise more than a blogpost.
“In six years you haven’t learned that giving the kids snacks right before dinner ruins their appetite for dinner and sets in motion a painfully long pleading to finish, but you’re going to learn how to get rich at a three day everyone-knows-its-a-(un)Christian-scam conference on day trading?”
Western Civilization vs. Blacks
Steven Crowder, bless his heart, put out a two-part barbershop conversation with the topic “Black and White on the Grey Issues”. That was his first mistake. It’s not “Black and White”. It is “Black and Western Civilization”.
The reason I insist on this is because there are too many “white-looking” people who are not in Western Civilization and too many “black-looking” people who are not Black.
It is an ongoing conflict, and it is the conflict of our day.
Crowder learned, and demonstrated to all who want to see, the same feeling any of us members of Western Civilization have felt when around Blacks: the realization that “there is no common ground.” One soldier in my recent Vietnam War readings said it best when he described that they (Vietnamese people) are not from a different country, they are “from a different planet.”
It is at precisely this point that Crowder and others need to improve their game. Get over the shock. Quit being shocked. There is nothing in Western Civilization which came easily, came without tremendous work. Nothing in Western Civilization was or is “intuitive”. One of the distinguishing marks of Western Civilization, one of the reasons its foundation is so strong, and its power so lasting, is the sheer effort it took to build it. I want to be sure not to say “will” because I am not talking “will power”, I am talking actual work. Will power might help me lose weight, help me not get angry enough to hurt people, and might help me finish college. But will power is not “work”. And Western Civilization (which I would consider the actual and only ‘civilization’—the rest of people are in chaos, and the entire population, Western Civilization included, is therefore in chaotic need of leadership vis-à-vis civilization) is the result of work.
The above is ground-level fact. It is the given. It is the axiom from which anything that follows is derived. And what follows is not the axiom. What follows is opinion. And my opinion is that conversations which merely highlight the seemingly different planetary origins of Westerners and Blacks are not work. To use wordplay, the reason I believe this is in my experience (to include listening to converts) these conversations do not work.
Work, in the meaning I am attempting to promote here, is not merely illustration or illumination or revelation that the given is given. Work is not some ‘raising awareness’ to the fact that there is no common ground.
What is this work, then? Well, according to the great tradition of the men who bestowed Western Civilization upon the occupants of Earth, work is the creation of common ground.
By way of example, take Western Civilization’s conception of the Universe as heliocentric. It wasn’t always so. But even in the beginning, Western Civilization was working to prove the Earth was the center and likewise to prove the regularity and order of stars and the moon etc. Furthermore, you can read the work for yourself—it is readily available. And due to this work—inaccurate as it proved to be—other members of the West looked around and allowed themselves the freedom to think, “Hmm. But that isn’t what I see.” And then the shift in understanding began. This is until Newton thought, “I want to measure rainbows.” Do you know how much work is required in measuring rainbows? I know you know because neither you, nor nearly anyone else, has ever done the work! But Western Civilization’s premiere member Isaac Newton did. And here we are, being slung around the Sun (at least until someone who wants to work even harder comes along and re-orients us). I could go on.
And yet, admittedly, this is where my wisdom peaks. I do not know how to create common ground. I have some ideas how not to create it, though. I mean, if gently pressed, I could teach how to create division. For example, it is assuredly not creating common ground to have no interactions with Blacks. But it is also not creating common ground, as I said, to have interactions or relationship with Blacks which hinge on the fact that we’re different from each other.
Most of you know that my efforts lie in church world. But I can imagine other avenues. The main thing, of course, is that before you attempt this “create common ground” lifestyle, you need to know with certainty into which group you fit. And, for today, my provocative send off is, I can tell you confidently that if you fear losing the conflict, then you are not in Western Civilization. (Don’t read this to indicate that I believe living without fear is the only or even the sufficient requirement for membership in the West. It merely is required.)
I’m sure I’ll have more to say later. Exciting times.
“Right Under Their Nose Rings”: LOL! Let’s Hope Bill Maher Just Became the Savior of Muslim Women.
Here’s the monologue, if interested.
In sum, Maher argues that the youth of the nation would spend their natural energy better if they called for the end of what he calls “Gender Apartheid”, but really is “Sex Apartheid”, that is, “Islam”.
Before he accomplishes this—and I cannot be more sincere in my hope that he does—he needs to address a simple fact which he did not mention in that monologue: Muslim women, en masse, are satisfied with their shitty lives.
Don’t get me wrong. I do not mean that all burqa’d women love life. I do not mean that I believe the majority would say that they are living their best life or some other Western, constant-self-evaluation BS. I mean that, like the poor, like the ignorant masses of humanity, especially considering access to the internet and books, these fully covered women have “outs” but do not seem to have the motivation or work ethic to take advantage of them. Again, I am not “blaming the victim.” Instead I am declaring that unlike racial apartheid, the so-called victims of sex apartheid haven’t indicated on any meaningful scale awareness that they are victims. In other words, I am leery of another Vietnam/Iraq/Afghanistan attempt at helping people who don’t know they need help.
In the end, if I could say one thing to Bill it would be this: “I wish you luck. More than luck, I want to record here that I thank you for your bravery and wish you safety and wisdom.”
Finally Figured Out The Kirk Memorial
Like a mathematician, it finally hit me when I stopped thinking about it.
There’s a scene at the end of many sci-fi movies, Logan comes to mind as a standout, where we are shown a kind of intended-to-be-provocative indication that pre-pubescent children are willingly going to take on all the responsibilities classically assigned to adults.
These scenes always compel me to respond with, “It’s gonna be far more difficult and deadly than the hopefulness the Hollywood director betrays, buuuut I wouldn’t bet against life.”
This is exactly how I feel after sitting through that nearly six hour memorial service.
Wow. There were a lot of young speakers. That was remarkable to me. (Obviously.)
Three other thoughts (and one conclusion) I had include:
1. I couldn’t help but watch with an international perspective, especially the government speakers. I wouldn’t claim to have my finger on the pulse of Europe or Tommy Robinson etc, but I have to believe it would be difficult for any of the remaining Westerners in Europe to find a single fault in the entire proceeding. And if I was them, I would be thinking—right now—“America is with us. Now is the time to push ahead.”
2. I also couldn’t help but put on my “I’m a devout mohammedan” hat and try to decipher what these beautiful people were going off about. In that vein, the promotion of monogamy and the idea of responsible young men is where I would have been most bothered and intrigued. I mean, seriously, that I think, whatever the intentions of the various speakers (and whatever Kirk himself would have intended), I am a sucker for the idea that some challenges (“be a better/real man; it’s worth it”) cross all barriers and cause contemplation on the matter. What would a polygamist mohammedan have in retort? “Naw, dawg. Starting with our mommy, god gives his people many women to take care of us savages and the kids so we can play the oppressed victim and destroy beauty.”
Nope. They have no response because their Old Testament ways are barbaric and have been superseded for millennia.
So, I say, perhaps with too much hope, that some of them, obviously second generation that have lived among us for their entire heathen lives, were genuinely challenged and intrigued by the monogamy part of the speeches.
3. I also tried to watch with an “I’m Black and constantly affronted by every whitey who doesn’t say the words I want to hear (‘Free Kobe’ ‘Hands up, Don’t Shoot’ ‘Black Lives Matter’ etc)” hat. From this perspective, I thought the stage had too much red—definitely Neo-Nazi. The entire event was too white—this means it was a White Christian Nationalist rally (aka Lucifer in the flesh). “Of course they use Ben Carson”. And “sumpin’ ‘rong wid her eyez” while Erika spoke. In short, I would not have been impressed by any of it and I would not have felt welcomed by any of it. And I would not have been moved by any of it, even if Rubio, Kennedy, Hegsdeth, and Vance did share the same Gospel (in the same words) that my pastor has used on me.
****
My concluding thought is, “I felt it on 9/11. I felt it as I participated in OIF. I felt it years later at an evangelical seminary when the apologetics 501 class introduced me to the ‘kalam cosmological argument’, even admitting it was developed by mohammedan theologians. And I felt it while living up in Somalia/Minnesota. The singular and definitive conflict of our generation is Western Civilization vs Islam.”
F@&$ Iraq. F@&$ Afghanistan. F@&$ getting Bin Laden.
This memorial service was the first counterpunch.
Reading Log 9.20.2025
The Aliens vs Avengers are better than Alien: Paradiso, but both are tremendously better than this random Batman comic.
Not sure what to say about Musk. Fascinating on every level. I guess main takeaways are he has a habit (from the beginning) of using all his money always—ie re-investing profits into new ideas/products. That appeals to me. And it is eye-opening to read about so many individuals who seek out money. I have never really thought about life like that. But Musk has money and is willing to use it to pay for what he wants to build.
Oh, and the part about flying home from Russia without a rocket and his data-based decision to build it himself for cheaper anyhow is the stuff of legends. Archimedes, you wild man of naked street running, watch out!
Plato is always a treat. Apology and Crito are a delight to read, at times laugh out loud funny, and also terrifically on point. For example, Socrates is on trial for his life. The charge: corrupting the youth. (Sound familiar yet?) His defense: the god (not biblical Yahweh, just some general concept) told him (Socrates, not Kirk) he was the wisest man—which he couldn’t believe. So he then decided to roam the country trying to find someone wiser. (Note: Plato wrote this about Socrates over two thousand years ago. Do not think about Charlie Kirk!) But no matter to whom he inquired, he always left disappointed because while they, in fact, weren’t wiser than him (Socrates), they thought they were wise. Socrates considered this as a worse state than his own, because where he wasn’t wise, he knew he wasn’t wise. Anyhow, in the end, he loses the case and was essentially forced to commit suicide. What can you do? It begs the question: What is an uncorrupted youth?
This final volume from Father Meier is excellent for the same reason the previous four are excellent. Meier states his destination and the rules of the road, and then works steadily towards it. This strategy allows the reader to do something even the Bible itself doesn’t: we get to assess his work. Put another way, Meier gives you everything you need to disagree with him. The only real criticism, then, is to discount his destination (an acceptable-to-all historical Jesus) or his rules of the road. (And feel free to do so.) But I love his destination and even if I didn’t agree with his road rules, I agree with the concept and so his portrait of the historical Jesus is fine by me.
To be sure: upon completion of these five volumes, you will never again believe Jesus was hippie-like. You will never again believe Jesus was some wise sage, like Confucius etc. But more importantly, for every stupid thing that you hear non-believers say about Jesus, you will have excellent evidence of where they are wrong. Never forget, the goal with these folks is not some stunning delivery of “you are wrong”, but “I bet you’d reconsider if you had better information. Do you have a second to chat?”
I threw in Metallica’s Load Album book for kicks because (1) I did read it. And (2) it has some pictures that were tremendously nostalgic. (Metallica re-released Load remastered recently.) “Hero of the Day” is far richer, more “Simple Man”, than I ever remember noticing. You will not be disappointed to reinvestigate both.
The Infrequently Discussed, But True (If Mean-Sounding), Reason For Some Blacks’ Inability to Understand the Context of Kirk’s “[Black Women] Do Not Have the Brain Processing Power” Claim
Faithful readers know (and should be able to predict) what this post is going to assert. To them, I say, “Thank you for paying attention.”
To the rest of you, please pay close attention.
We’re all watching with amazement as Black preachers lead the way in calling Charlie Kirk a racist. The particular phrase these men use to defend their claim is in my title.
Now, every good little literate “whitey” knows how to call up the full conversation/debate from which the phrase came and determine for themselves the context within which Kirk uttered his assessment. That’s step 1.
Step 2 for those of us who were pretty sure Kirk was not a racist, but have been wrong before and so wanted to check for ourselves, is felt utter confusion (not me, mind you) at how even our “black friends” are siding with these ignorant preachers instead of the plain meaning of the English language.
Here’s what is going on. There is no need to be confused.
Bluntly: Some Blacks (maybe most) still believe in incantation. Incantation, recall, is context free.
To flesh this out a bit, let’s review what incantation is all about. In short, the phrase “abra cadabra” (that we all know from some Disney movie we all watched years ago) is a phrase that we, as children, used to magically turn objects into other objects. Or the like. For us, it was a game. We usually had a wand or our finger cocked in a special way as we said it. “Abra cadabra, and POOF!, you’re unfrozen.” Sometimes it was in finding oneself holding what appeared as a wand which caused our utterance of the phrase. Like we’re in a gift shop, see a stick with a star at one end and suddenly are inspired to grab it and tap our unwitting friend on the head and say, “Abra Cadabra, you pay for Starbucks after we’re done here.”
What were we doing? We were playfully using what people in antiquity seriously used, that is, we were incanting. Even as children we knew it wasn’t merely the phrase but the specific sounds, the way we said the phrase, that mattered. In fact, this feature of incantation often explained why the change didn’t happen. “You didn’t say it right!” we would explain. Again, as children, we knew that you couldn’t achieve the intended result by an all business-like or all medical-assessment-like utterance of the phrase. No. It had to be said a certain way. Plainly, it had to be uttered intoned with belief.
The point here is that we (the confused, literate whites) don’t believe incantation works now that we’re adults.
But many Blacks, of all ages, do.
And that is how even your “black friends” do not budge when they are shown the full context of Kirk’s remarks.
For many Blacks, there is a distinct evil associated with such a phrase (“black women do not have the brain processing power”). The context doesn’t matter any more than it does for abra cadabra.
By way of another example, Shakespeare’s “Double, Double Toil and Trouble” comes to mind as something similar in Western culture. Did the witches’ prophecy actually cause MacBeth’s troubles? No. Now, it’s true that there was a coincidence, but this is merely a cerebrally fun feature of great storytelling. On the whole, though, while we servants of the West would never think twice about saying, “Double, Double, Toil and Trouble”, our Black neighbors (keep in mind they also don’t know Shakespeare—and this is not coincidence) believe there are certain things you just don’t say. Again, this is not because of the meaning’s of the words, it is because of an exceedingly old school (Old Testament and older) belief in how human speech works vis-à-vis the invisible world.
Please don’t let the NSFW part of my claim cause you to miss the actual significance of my claim. You are now no longer confused why many Blacks don’t care about context. But this clarity does not reveal the solution to the larger problem that still remains: Many Blacks don’t care about context.
What can be done?
I have no idea.
Captain’s Log 