What Does it Profit a Man?

"For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?" (Mark 8:36)

"He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it." (Matthew 10:39)

These two verses of scripture were embedded into my soul from an early age.  I first heard Mark 8:36 in Catholic primary school, and though a mere toddler at the time, it made as much sense to me then as it still does now. I later came across Matthew 10:39 while reading the Gospels in my mid teens. I built a wooden cross (because it was said that Jesus was a carpenter), typed out Matthew 10:39, and nailed it to my cross as a reminder that "no man is an Island":

No man is an Iland, intire of it selfe; every man is a peece of the Continent, a part of the maine; if a Clod bee washed away by the Sea, Europe is the lesse, as well as if a Promontorie were, as well as if a Mannor of thy friends or of thine owne were; any mans death diminishes me, because I am involved in Mankinde; And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; It tolls for thee. (A poem by John Donne, 1624)

These principles, if we can call them such, are actually abundant in the natural world, and no more so than in the Worker bee

A worker bee is any female (eusocial) bee that lacks the full reproductive capacity of the colony's queen bee; under most circumstances, this is correlated to an increase in certain non-reproductive activities relative to a queen, as well. Worker bees occur in many bee species other than honey bees, but this is by far the most familiar colloquial use of the term.

In essence, worker bees live to ensure that the Queen survives and reproduces, even though there is no apparent "reward" for them, other than the continuation of the species. This is a "law" of nature, and part of the process of evolution. No bee is an island, just like no man (or woman) is an island. Though we may seek individual-expression, rewards for "excellence", praise (which includes what Jesus critically called "the honour of men"); to "stand out" above our peers, we are actually dependent on virtually everything that surrounds us, from our parents, to relatives and friends, down to every goodwill smile and gesture that motivates us to be "better [or successful] people". Even without "mainstream approval", rebels and renegades depend on the approval and support of "worker bees", because humans are "tribal", realising their dependence upon the "tribe" for survival. Which "pockets" survive may not so much be a "divine process" as a "necessary process", and it can be random. Millions of species have gone extinct, and continue to go extinct right now (which could induce one to thinking that "providence" is very capricious), and while it may all seem meaningless, the "greater cause" is the survival of life on earth.  We advocate "causes" when we believe that those "causes" are not only beneficial, but necessary to continuation, to individual and group survival.

Our sun is supposed to have been formed some 4.6 billion years ago, which is quite astounding considering the average human life span of some seventy years. The sun is estimated to have a life of about 10 billion years, so we are about halfway through that cycle, before it becomes a "red giant"  and we will have been nothing more than a tiny speck in time in that enormous cycle. In a hypothetical life of seventy years, we are not even a tenth of the blink of an eye in cosmic terms, or as the Bible phrases it:

For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withers, and the flower thereof falls away: (1 Peter 1:24)

If you're feeling a bit musically sentimental, perhaps Neil Diamond's I am, I said expresses our yearning for individual recognition, but the truth is we always were, are, and always will be "part of the process", never the process. Buddhists and Hindus refer to the concept of "self" as an "illusion", or Maya  , and if clinged to, this illusion brings great disappointment.

Each person, each physical object, from the perspective of eternity, is like a brief, disturbed drop of water from an unbounded ocean. The goal of enlightenment is to understand this—more precisely, to experience this: to see that the distinction between the self and the Universe is a false dichotomy.

This isn't meant to be a curb or disincentive to individual ambition, which is healthy if one realises that such is only "part of the process" , and not an end in itself. Joan of Arc was not martyred "just" for a "cause", and in her incredible courage and death all humanity is ennobled and motivated by this act of selflessness, faith and devotion, because we are "programed" for survival, and even in the death of one, the survival and hope of many is ensured. We especially like heroes and heroines who espouse our particular "causes", which is why legends like Che Guevara live on.

We like to almost "worship" heroes as extensions of our better selves; to project ourselves into their place, all the while believing, even if it is a misguided belief, that this is what's "best for humanity".  It's the "survival gene", or even "meme", and survival contests are not rare - all, supposedly, for the "common good", from our individual perspectives.

So there's a lot more to life than basic sustenance and "animal instinct", and one thing I believe we've learned from history is that while individualism has flourished, it is never far from a "greater cause". We idolise our heroes and heroines because we see in them the virtures we cherish, and want to emulate. Life is far more than eating, drinking and being merry, and financial security won't necessarily bring peace of mind. We can horde riches and live in pompous style while ignoring the plight of the needy and the "less fortunate", which seems to be pretty much a rule rather than the exception in history. But one day, sometime in that 10 billion year sun cycle - our blink-of-an-eye existence will come to an end, and we ultimately be faced with the question:

"For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?" (Mark 8:36)

Some Venues Are Not Good for The Soul.

One of them is the Mormon Discussions Board (hereafter MDB)*. Having said that, I still occasionally venture back to feel degraded and worthless. I have to admit that an unintended blessing of this is humility - realising that I'm no better than others, and just as inclined to hypocrisy and pretense. As hard as it may be to bear, it's medicine for the prideful soul if the dosage isn't overdone. Other than that, it's a venue I largely avoid, because too much medicine of any kind can make one very ill. Being there, or even contemplating going there, gives one the opposite of the "burning in the bosom" feeling, more like getting ready to go to the dentist.  It's not long term therapy for the soul, and can sap faith in oneself and God.  Very quickly.

On avoiding dangerous venues, I'm reminded of a dream I had while I was on my mission.  I dreamt that I was on a tropical island, much like the one I was born in, and I saw a jetty which led to a most appealing blue waters. My first inclination was to walk along the jetty, then dive in and enjoy the cool, crystal clear waters, as I did so many times in my native country. As I reached the end of the jetty, and just before I was about to dive in, I saw that the water below was infested with crocodiles. (This is actually a phenomenon one can experience in North Queensland and the Northern Territory, but thankfully I've never experienced it.) A dark shudder went through my soul when I realised how something so seemingly appealing can actually be fatal - and then I woke up.  

There's no doubt that MDB can provide much needed therapy for some, at various stages of life and loss of faith. Indeed, I once found it helpful when I felt negative and rebellious, and also during a brief time when I was going through very likely the only time in my life I ever had a "does God exist?" stage, so I really shouldn't begrudge others who seek commiseration and justification. It's a place where you pour out your soul in anguish, a cry for help and understanding, and others who have been through similar experiences reach out to you. However, if one is not careful, it can become an exercise in self-justification, and therefore not very therapeutic. It reminds me of a C.S. Lewis quote, “Friendship is born at that moment when one person says to another: "What! You too? I thought I was the only one.”  Although it was recommended but though I've never had it, I suppose "divorce therapy" is very similar, to repair souls suffering great emotional loss. These are real phenomena, whether one loses faith in one's religion, or experiences a severing of marital and family ties.  The pain may continue for many, many years, if not a lifetime.

One thing I've learned, from both divorce and in times of loss of faith, is that always, there are regressive and overly negative situations that should largely be avoided (no need to tell us how absolutely awful your "ex" was, forever and a day). And there is a time of arrival (or speaking of negative message boards - departure), so to speak, a time for change, a time to "stop bitching", and move on (how many times did I hear that immediately after divorce), to look at life from more positive perspectives, instead of constantly dwelling on the negatives. Reading uplifting literature, savoring inspiring life stories, listening to inspiring music, and mixing with faith-filled people, seems like much better long term therapy for wounded souls. During the end of my regular, almost obsessive posting on MDB, I was deeply inspired by 16 year old youth solo around the world sailor Jessica Watson. Every day I followed her progress as she blogged, from the Indian Ocean (I was a latecomer), through the treacherous Southern Ocean and round the capes of Tasmania, and then her triumphant entry into Sydney Harbour. Many said she could never do it, that her parents were reckless and irresponsible, and some even went as far as saying she was as good as dead, and would never return. As the airwaves filled with gloom, doom, criticism and negativity, day by day Jessica and Ella's Pink Lady slowly sailed towards Sydney.  This still inspires me so much that even now, nearly three years on, I am choked with emotion thinking about it. When I contrast those feelings with the gloom and negativity of MDB, where everything negative is directed at Mormons and Mormonism, it dawns on me that there a much larger world out there, beyond our concerns, fears, and even our losses. There are positive people fighting against enormous odds everywhere, and as the poem Desiderata so eloquently states:

"... the world is full of trickery. But let this not blind you to what virtue there is; many persons strive for high ideals; and everywhere life is full of heroism."

There is nothing heroic about constantly dwelling on our problems and misfortunes, or constantly dwelling on the perceived "evils of Mormonism" (or any ex-religion), and attacking others who disagree with us so we can feel justified. One very notable trait I saw in Jessica Watson, is that she largely ignored those who criticised and attacked her.  This young lady not only had a giant of a spirit, an unconquerable spirit, but was mature way beyond her 16 years.  This was no "little girl" sailing around the world to make a point to herself and others, it was an inspiring lesson in personal determination and courage. My other heroine is Joan of Arc. I suppose Joan could have written long diatribes about the evil English,  and the English domination of France, but she succinctly summed up her "divine" mission with, "I am not afraid...I was born to do this." The normally witty and sardonic Mark Twain went head over heels in his unabashed admiration of Joan, and it was noted of his Personal Recollections of Joan of Arc:

The author had a personal fascination with Joan of Arc. The work has a very different feel and flow from Twain's other works. There is a distinct lack of humor, so prevalent in his other works. This is a mature Twain, writing about a subject of personal interest to him. He was first attracted to Joan of Arc in the early 1850s when he found a leaf from a biography of her and asked his brother Henry whether she was real. In addition, Twain arguably worked harder on this book than any other. In a letter to H.H. Rogers he stated, “I have never done any work before that cost so much thinking and weighing and measuring and planning and cramming…on this last third I have constantly used five French sources and five English ones, and I think no telling historical nugget in any of them has escaped me.

This can be called obsession, but it's a positive obsession, ennobling and uplifting obsession which would benefit and enhance the faith of millions of readers for more than a century.  The normally cynical Twain was subdued by what he saw as true greatness, and true saintliness, and true boldness and courage. This is an example of a man being inspired to rise above cynicism and faithlessness, already so prevalent in our world.

It's fair to say that the "culture" of MDB hasn't changed, and if anything, it has become much more negative. MDB didn't change, I did.  With that change came many realisations, some of them already in scripture:

  22 Wherefore, he that preacheth and he that receiveth, understand one another, and both are edified and rejoice together.

  23 And that which doth not edify is not of God, and is darkness.

  24 That which is of God is light; and he that receiveth light, and continueth in God, receiveth more light; and that light groweth brighter and brighter until the perfect day.

  25 And again, verily I say unto you, and I say it that you may know the truth, that you may chase darkness from among you;

  26 He that is ordained of God and sent forth, the same is appointed to be the greatest, notwithstanding he is the least and the servant of all. (D&C 50)

23 All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not. (I Cor.10:23)

  

8 Therefore, in the beginning the Word was, for he was the Word, even the messenger of salvation—

  9 The light and the Redeemer of the world; the Spirit of truth, who came into the world, because the world was made by him, and in him was the life of men and the light of men.

29 Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be.

  30 All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself, as all intelligence also; otherwise there is no existence.

  31 Behold, here is the agency of man, and here is the condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning is plainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light.

36 The glory of God is intelligence, or, in other words, light and truth.

  37 Light and truth forsake that evil one. (D&C 93)

This has been my "spiritual journey", and my realisations, and I stand by my original intent and the title of this post, that "Some Venues Are Not Good for The Soul".  Life must be lived looking forward, not backwards, and it must be lived with hope, nor despair. 

*I'd rather not link to this board, but it can easily be found on Google.

Note: This is an edited and slightly expanded version of my original blog post at MDB: An Insider's View.

Australia's David Koresh in the Making?

4 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.

5 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.

11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. (Matthew 24:4-5,11)

List of messiah claimants.

Over 200 End of World Predictions since AD44.

Interviewer Rev. Dr. David Millikan.

Honour Thy Father and Thy Mother.

"Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee." (Exodus 20:12)

A few days ago, while waiting to hear from my boss whether the car would be on the road that night, after repairs, I sat down on my bed, and felt impressed to dig into a box of old letters lying nearby. I hadn't been in that box for years, and had forgotten exactly what I'd saved. When I opened it I saw a bunch of letters from my mother and father which were written thirty-six years ago. They always wrote together, with my father's typed comments first, then my mother's handwritten comments following.  In later years when my father was too ill, all the letters were handwritten by my mother. "Daddy is not very well", was a regular comment, but she'd always give me family news, or what was happening in their lives.

At the time I was serving a mission for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, more commonly known as the Mormons. I was only four months into my two year mission when I received this letter. I should explain that it was mission policy for missionaries to write their parents at least once a week, on "preparation day", which was the only day we had off to do domestic duties, like cleaning, laundry and shopping. So I wrote every week, more, I guess, out of sense of obligation, because normally I never write so often. I received some real surprises going over these old letters in response to mine. The first was their sincere gratefulness for every letter. I often wondered at the time whether I was burdening them with these letters, but any such thought was banished when I re-read their replies. They almost treasured them, and shared them with family. They particularly liked my "inspirational quotes", which I included in every letter.

One letter really caught my attention, dated September 7, 1976. I don't remember the questions I asked them that led to these responses, but they must have been "religious" questions and comments, which included a reference to reading the Book of Mormon. I'll quote my mother's reply first:

"To be honest I have barely scanned the Book of Mormon. I think you know my views of religious matters. I believe in God and pray to him, mostly for the welfare of my family. I don't go to church on a Saturday nor do I kneel down by my bed at night, but I do think he hears my prayers and answeres them."

I certainly did remember her views, because she explained them to me many times. The reference to church on Saturday was the Catholic Mass, when Catholics were given the new option of attending Church on Saturday evenings. But it was my father's reply that really jolted me:

"Reference the Book of Mormon, as I told you before I read it only once, but have not yet started it again. I hope to start sometime."

"Only once"? The passage of time must have really dimmed my memory, because I had completely forgotten this. The Book of Mormon is not easy reading, and I was in shock to re-discover that my father had not only read it "only once", but was planning on a second reading. The real irony of all this is that I eventually left the "Mormon" Church, but I've always had some kind of "spiritual belief" in the Book of Mormon, to this day.  

My parents were not perfect people, to use a well-worn cliche, but upon re-reading this letter I realised that I was blessed to have two wonderful people who brought me into the world, and raised me with discipline in a religious tradition (Catholicism) they felt would guide me through life. I haven't always met those high expectations, in fact less than more so. So I have no hesitation in echoing Nephi's declaration in the first chapter of the Book of Mormon:

"I, Nephi, having been born of goodly parents..."

In spite of all their human faults and failings, they were, and continue to be, a mother and father deserving of honour.

Taxi Drivers and "Runners": A Sad Case of Continuing Workplace Abuse.

It's amazing that in 2012 taxi drivers in New South Wales still have to put up with "runners" (fare evasion). The official rule is that we are not allowed to ask for money up-front. We can ask customers to show the money, but we aren't supposed to actually take it in our hand. It's apparent that even some NSW police aren't aware of this. Several years ago I had three girls "do a runner" (yes, they are increasingly becoming females) on me. The fare was $50.00.  I saw the unit they walked into, so I called and asked for police assistance. An hour and twenty minutes later, it still hadn't come. I rang three times, and on the third call the officer taking the call asked me: "Why didn't you get the money before you left?" Well, because technically it's illegal, officer, but it makes total sense, doesn't it? Who in their right mind would drive up a fare of $50 not knowing if the customer will pay? But that's how the law currently works in NSW.  

When you get on a bus or train, when do you pay? At the destination? Flying interstate? When do you pay? On arrival at the destination airport? When you go to Mc Donalds and order a meal, when do you pay? At the exit? What if you're ten cents short, do you get your meal? The worst fare evasion I've had so far was two in one night, totaling $96.00.  Who in their right mind would work for an employer who told them "you might be fully paid this week, or you might be $96.00 short, we're not sure yet"?

Seeing money in someone's wallet isn't good enough either. Do you think that's going to stop them "running"? You'd have to be very naive to believe that. People with hundreds of dollars can still "do the bolt". People don't always do "runners" because they're short of cash, it's just an easy way to save some more money.

What do I call this? I call it consenting to open and blatant workplace abuse on the part of the government. I thought slavery ended two centuries ago? Is that too dramatic a term? What else would you call working for nothing? Charity? I don't mind working for charity, as long as I can pay my bills from the money I earn from my "real job".

As usual, this is all going to fall on deaf government ears, but it was worth a try. 

Anecdotal Near Death Experiences.

"Seeing is believing."




 From time to time I have customers in my cab who've reported near death experiences. It happened again last night. The man told me that 20 years ago he was hit by a car, and "pronounced dead". This "death" lasted nearly 30 minutes, he said, and he "woke up in the morgue" (which I suppose could have been a hospital morgue where corpses are frozen). It's not the first time I've heard accounts like this (and it won't be the last). One of the more intriguing accounts was several years ago from a World War II veteran who fought in Papua New Guinea. The account I heard last night was very similar, so my mind went back to the veteran.



Curious as usual last night, I asked, "did you see anything when you were dead".



"Yes, I did. I saw a light, and I was drawn towards it".



"Did you see God?"



"No, but there was a light"



"Was it a good or bad experience?"



"Very good. I was very happy. I wanted to stay there and not come back to endure all the pain and suffering here."



"And what happened after that?"



"God, or the light, told me that it was not my time, and that I had to go back because I had not finished what I was sent to earth to do. I was not a believer before that, but I am now."



The veteran I spoke to several years ago also seemed hazy about distinguishing "the light" and God. He was adamant that he'd not "seen God", yet in the same breath would turn around and describe God and "the light" as the same thing. His certitude of life after death was as firm as the man I spoke to last night. Not a shadow of doubt in either of them.



I've read far more about NDEs, and NDE accounts, than I've heard firsthand, but the firsthand accounts always make me wonder more. Reading and hearing firsthand are not quite the same thing. The latter has a greater "thought-provoking" impact, and this is what motivated Dr. Raymond Moody to write his book Life After Life


This isn't a subject that occupies my mind 24/7, but it never fails to make me think a lot more about the possibilities when I do hear such experiences firsthand.

A Good Friday Tribute (2012).

"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."(Hebrews 11:1)

"The just shall live by faith." (Romans 1:17)

Here is a man who was born in an obscure village, the child of a peasant woman. He grew up in another village. He worked in a carpenter shop until He was thirty. Then for three years He was an itinerant preacher.

He never owned a home. He never wrote a book. He never held an office. He never had a family. He never went to college. He never put His foot inside a big city. He never traveled two hundred miles from the place He was born. He never did one of the things that usually accompany greatness. He had no credentials but Himself...

While still a young man, the tide of popular opinion turned against him. His friends ran away. One of them denied Him. He was turned over to His enemies. He went through the mockery of a trial. He was nailed upon a cross between two thieves. While He was dying His executioners gambled for the only piece of property He had on earth – His coat. When He was dead, He was laid in a borrowed grave through the pity of a friend.

Nineteen long centuries have come and gone, and today He is a centerpiece of the human race and leader of the column of progress.

I am far within the mark when I say that all the armies that ever marched, all the navies that were ever built; all the parliaments that ever sat and all the kings that ever reigned, put together, have not affected the life of man upon this earth as powerfully as has that one solitary life.

The Tenerife Air Disaster - 35 Years on The Fascination Continues.

One of the pleasures of blogging is the surprises it brings. While I tend to focus on science, metaphysics and other "esoterica" like Ufology, near death experiences and the supernatural; what some might call "weird science", or "fringe science" (I like to explore "unconventional" ideas), my blogs on aircraft crashes have received the most hits, and have ranked in the top ten in Google searches. This isn't because of any ingenuity or uniqueness on my part. Indeed, I didn't produce nor do I own the copyright to these videos, and they could be removed at anytime. So I'm not an innovator, but a "repeater".

Having acknowledged that, and the fact that there's still a huge public fascination with "man-made" disasters (witness "Titanic fever" as April 14-15 nears; the 100th "anniversary" of the sinking of the Titanic), and in deference to other posters who've brought these videos to the public, I thought readers might be interested in the following absorbing documentary on "The Crash of The Century".

What's so fascinating about the Tenerife disaster in particular, are the almost eerie circumstances that lead to the deaths of 583 people. An air traffic diversion because of a bomb threat; air traffic congestion at the small Los Rodeos airport, not used to such a volume of traffic; the KLM captain's decision to refuel (which would ensure everyone on board perished in the flames); the Pan Am's (parked behind the KLM) inability to maneuver its wing-span around the KLM by just 12 feet; sudden deteriorating weather conditions with fast descending low-lying clouds only minutes before ATC (Air Traffic Control) clearance for all stranded aircraft to leave Los Rodeos; the misunderstanding between ATC and the Pan Am on which taxiway to exit (caused by "mutual interference" on the radio frequency); and last but not least, the KLM captain's impatience and decision (because of KLM rules and deadlines, which could leave them stranded in Tenerife overnight) to override ATC instructions, and the desperate plea of his co-pilot that they did not have ATC clearance to take off. Speeding down the runway with the 747's engines at full thrust, and with very limited visibility, there was now no option for the KLM once the Pan Am came into sight through the misty runway - get over the Pan Am, or crash into it. The rest is history.

When Villains Become Mythological Heroes.

I suppose most have now read of the capture and arrest of fugitive Malcolm Naden.

Malcolm Naden, the ghost who walked - straight into a police trap


Naden eluded police for nearly seven years, supposedly "living off the land". Police say that his "bush skills" were overestimated, and that his most frequent mode of survival was "break and enter", which included copious amounts of beer, and a stack of porn magazines was found in one of his deserted campsites. Nevertheless, the "villain" has some "claim to fame", in that a $250,000 bounty was placed on him, and "It was the first time since Ned Kelly such a reward had been announced by the government". Kelly himself still remains the subject of much debate, hero-worshipped by many; despised as a common criminal and "police-killer" by others. One thing we know about Kelly is that he was intelligent and articulate, as evidenced by his Jerilderie letter, considered to be "one of the most extraordinary documents in Australian history". Some similarities to Naden cannot fail to escape notice. Like Kelly, Naden is most certainly articulate, and apart from having a black belt in karate, he was a loner who read a lot, including the Bible and the Apocalypse, which some have described as "religious fervour". Had Naden lived in the 19th century, his evasion of police, by itself, would have highly ranked on the bush-ranger odometer. Without sophisticated modern technology, he may never have been captured. The NSW Police force, a virtual army of police armed to the teeth with tracking devices, sniffer dogs and weapons, took nearly seven years to nail him.

One local in an area where Naden frequented said that she wouldn't turn him in if he "visited" her. She said she would give him a cup of coffee and some food, and bid him farewell, but never turn him in to police. When asked about him shooting a police officer, her reply was, basically, that the police were the aggressors "hunting him", when he only wanted to be left alone. This has been described as a fairly common phenomenon, known as "grudging admiration", and it probably stems back to the mixed emotions Australians feel towards Ned Kelly - that he's a hero or villain, depending on one's personal perspective. Many of us like "crime stories". We love to read about what motivates criminals, and even the details of their criminal acts, as long as it remains in fiction, which, ironically, reflects reality.

Whether we like it or not, I think there will be an on-going public fascination about Malcolm Naden. The media have already reported on his first decent meal in seven years - a "Maccas" breakfast. No doubt, some will want to know whether he ate a bacon and egg McMuffin with BBQ sauce, and thousands, if not millions, will want news and information about how he coped with nearly seven years on the run, and what he encountered as a "bushman". How did he deal, for example, with an abscess tooth, or food poisoning, or an snake bite, and did he really live off "berries" for a time. This has all the makings of a future book, perhaps when Naden is finally released, if he doesn't get life imprisonment.

As morbid as it may sound to many, Malcom Naden may well become another Australian "bush-ranger" icon, Australia's "Aboriginal Ned Kelly".

Contemplating Old Age and Death.

Wretched, ephemeral race, children of chance and tribulation, why do you force me to tell you the very thing which it would be most profitable for you not to hear? The very best thing is utterly beyond your reach: not to have been born, not to be, to be nothing. However, the second best thing for you is: to die soon. - Aristotle, Eudemos
Greek critic, philosopher, physicist, & zoologist (384 BC - 322 BC)

"Live fast, die young, and have a beautiful looking corpse" - James Dean.

At the age of about ten I nearly died. After breakfast one Saturday morning, the first day off from the school week, when I was due out "to play", when windball cricket was in vogue (and "kids" played outside rather than inside) and Internet technology about 35 years away, I developed a severe abdominal pain. It was so bad that I had to lie down on the living room couch, while my worried parents were pretty sure what the problem was - appendicitis. The signs were there several years earlier, diagnosed by the family doctor as potential future threat. Notwithstanding the diagnosis, my parents decided to take me along on a sea trip to England in 1961, when I was six going on seven. I vaguely remember asking what would happen if appendicitis flared up while we were midway in the Atlantic. I recall my father saying something, in effect, that I could be operated onboard of necessary. In adulthood, I became a bit skeptical about this answer, and I was too young to know all the details, but maybe there was indeed a "medic" on board, and lower grade operating facilities. Whatever the truth, my parents were led to believe that help would be at hand should I develop apendicitis. As luck would have it, there was no emergency and all went well, but the "demon" struck on this Saturday morning, in the safety of our living room. I was nearly unconscious from the pain, but I do remember doctors and nurses hovering above me before the anaestethic took effect. The next memory was waking hours later with a very sore side, and being told what happened.

I was "lucky" that the finest surgeons and operating facilities were at hand to save my life. Some forty-seven years later, I think about a brother I never met, who died of rheumatic fever six years before I was born, when he was just 16 years old. A gifted artist (I've seen his work) and athlete, the bells tolled for him at that tender age. I read his personal diaries, in his own handwriting, long after his death, and in some ways felt a kinship, but I've never accepted the family "theory/belief" that I was a "reincarnation" of him. He was far more gifted, talented and gregarious, in fact so much more so that I've often wondered why he died at 16, and I'm still going at 57. (I am, incidentally, not a believer in the "only the good die young" saying. Lots of wicked people have died young, and lots of good people have lived to ripe, old ages.)

In that time, not alloted to my late brother, I've pondered a lot, and even sometimes wished we could have swapped places. But for some reason I was the one destined to "live", but in that "living" I've realised the truth of Aristotle's quote (above). So in all of that "living", I honestly don't feel that I am "more blessed" than my late brother. The length of life is not what counts, but the breadth of life. My eldest son, in his early 30s, remarked to me the other day that "getting old is scary". I felt the same way in my early 30s. When I hit 30 I thought I could sense "death's door". At 57, I'm far more resigned and less worried, because I've realised that no matter how many "treasures" we may store up on earth (which even includes personal relationships), they will be completely worthless when we die, especially if one takes the atheist perspective!

If a man loves father or mother, or sister or brother, or family and friends, more than me, said Jesus, he is not worthy of me. As radical as that may sound coming from a "God-botherer", there's quite a bit of wisdom there that even Mammon can profit from. Make friends where you can, when you can, and in all the ways you can, and build up treasures on earth while you enjoy your sojourn here, especially when your faith in "God and Superstition" fails. As the Bobby McFerrin song goes, "Don't Worry, Be Happy". If there's one thing that this imperfect and sinful 57 year old has learned from life, it is that "I have seen all the works that are done under the sun; and, behold, all is vanity and vexation of spirit". (Eccl.1:14).

There must be, in short, a "reason", and if there no reason, no "plan", no purpose, then one might as well be, in Aristotle's wisdom - never to have been born.

Professor Daniel C. Peterson: Defender of the Faith.

20 Wherefore, ye must press forward with a steadfastness in Christ, having a perfect brightness of hope, and a love of God and of all men. Wherefore, if ye shall press forward, feasting upon the word of Christ, and endure to the end, behold, thus saith the Father: Ye shall have eternal life. (2 Nephi 31:20)

Often misunderstood, much maligned, and even subjected to an Internet stalker for some five years (going on six now) because of his "apologetic views", Dan Peterson is still uncompromising. There was a Nephi; there was a Moroni; Joseph Smith told the truth about his visions and the translation of the Book of Mormon, backed by first-hand witnesses who never denied their testimonies.

On a very personal note, let me here confess that I'm an ex-Mormon, and have not believed nor fully practiced Mormonism for some 25 years now. I have no intention of returning to Mormonism, but if anyone can persuade me it's really worth a second thought - then that person is Daniel Peterson. Robert Louis Stevenson wrote:

Bright is the ring of words
When the right man rings them. (Songs of Travel and Other Verses [1896])

Languishing in unbelief, aided by an unwillingness to surrender the flesh and its pleasures, and tainted by heartless religious bureaucracies more, it seems, interested in statistics than charity, my faith literally went into a Black Hole. Professor Peterson reminds me that there's far more to "Mormonism" than any of this, including our loss of faith. Implicit in his faith is the sacrifice and redemptive atonement of the most mentioned name in the Book of Mormon - Jesus Christ.

I hope you enjoy this interview, as much as I have, and the insight it gives into a "Mormon apologist".

http://mormonstories.org/?p=1904

Parallel Universes.

First many thought that Europe was the only continent. Then some thought that the sun revolved around the earth. After Copernicus and Galileo put us in our place, the idea of other solar systems and galaxies became more popular. Then came the unthinkable – parallel universes, the multiverse, and the concept of eleven dimensions. Will it stop there? Probably not.

"A REALITY that would be impossible to imagine, even for the possessor of the most tortured and surreal imagination." This does not refer to a horror film, or a war veteran's recollections, but to the world revealed by science, according to physicists Brian Cox and Jeff Forshaw.

To those uncomfortable with quantum theory's picture of wavelike particles that are simultaneously everywhere, their message in The Quantum Universe is clear: tough. Scientists are, they tell us, "not mandated to produce a theory that bears any relation to the way we perceive the world at large", although you might comfort yourself with the thought that even Einstein found quantum mechanics disturbing.

- New Scientist.

1O LORD our Lord, how excellent is your name in all the earth! who have set your glory above the heavens.
2Out of the mouth of babes and infants have you ordained strength because of your enemies, that you might still the enemy and the avenger.
3When I consider your heavens, the work of your fingers, the moon and the stars, which you have ordained;
4What is man, that you are mindful of him? and the son of man, that you visit him? (Psalm 8)

Part 1:


Part 2:


Part 3:


Part 4:


Part 5:

President Obama’s Address to the Australian Parliament (17 November 2011).

Part 1 is Prime Minister Gillard’s address. Part 2 is Opposition Leader Tony Abbott’s address. President Obama’s address begins at Part 3.


Part 1:


Part 2:


Part 3:


Part 4:


Part 5:

The Problem with Bats, Birds and Beasts, or: A lesson About Extreme Attitudes.

'He that is neither one thing nor the other has no friends.'

“The Bat, the Birds, and the Beasts” is an ancient fable attributed to Aesop:

The Bat, the Birds, and the Beasts.

A great conflict was about to come off between the Birds and the Beasts. When the two armies were collected together the Bat hesitated which to join. The Birds that passed his perch said: "Come with us"; but he said: "I am a Beast." Later on, some Beasts who were passing underneath him looked up and said: "Come with us"; but he said: "I am a Bird." Luckily at the last moment peace was made, and no battle took place, so the Bat came to the Birds and wished to join in the rejoicings, but they all turned against him and he had to fly away. He then went to the Beasts, but soon had to beat a retreat, or else they would have torn him to pieces. "Ah," said the Bat, "I see now,

"He that is neither one thing nor the other has no friends."

Some entertaining counter-wisdom in support of the "poor", indecisive and divided Bat (Alert: tongue-in-cheek post, but with a message to hardliners of any ilk; those who insist that if you’re not on their “side”, and completely share their attitudes and worldviews, then you’re not only wrong, but unworthy of their so-called “friendship”):

Collective unity is not the result of the brotherly love of the faithful for each other. The loyalty of the true believer is to the whole — the church, party, nation — and not to his fellow true believer. True loyalty between individuals is possible only in a loose and relatively free society.

Eric Hoffer, The True Believer, Section 101

We do not usually look for allies when we love. Indeed, we often look on those who love with us as rivals and trespassers. But we always look for allies when we hate. – Eric Hoffer.

All mass movements avail themselves of action as a means of unification. The conflicts a mass movement seeks and incites serve not only to down its enemies but also to strip its followers of their distinct individuality and render them more soluble in the collective medium. – Eric Hoffer.

The uncompromising attitude is more indicative of an inner uncertainty than a deep conviction. The implacable stand is directed more against the doubt within than the assailant without. – Eric Hoffer.

Those who see their lives as spoiled and wasted crave equality and fraternity more than they do freedom. If they clamor for freedom, it is but freedom to establish equality and uniformity. The passion for equality is partly a passion for anonymity: to be one thread of the many which make up a tunic; one thread not distinguishable from the others. No one can then point us out, measure us against others and expose our inferiority. – Eric Hoffer.

Avoid popularity if you would have peace. - Abraham Lincoln

I am not bound to win, but I am bound to be true. I am not bound to succeed, but I am bound to live by the light that I have. I must stand with anybody that stands right, and stand with him while he is right, and part with him when he goes wrong. - Abraham Lincoln

Peace is much more precious than a piece of land... let there be no more wars. - Anwar Sadat.

There can be hope only for a society which acts as one big family, not as many separate ones. - Anwar Sadat.

It is the individual only who is timeless. Societies, cultures, and civilizations - past and present - are often incomprehensible to outsiders, but the individual's hunger, anxieties, dreams, and preoccupations have remained unchanged through the millennia. Thus, we are up against the paradox that the individual who is more complex, unpredictable, and mysterious than any communal entity is the one nearest to our understanding; so near that even the interval of millennia cannot weaken our feeling of kinship. If in some manner the voice of an individual reaches us from the remotest distance of time, it is a timeless voice speaking about ourselves.

Eric Hoffer, Reflections on the Human Condition, aph. 183 (1973)

The less justified a man is in claiming excellence for his own self, the more ready he is to claim all excellence for his nation, his religion, his race or his holy cause.

Eric Hoffer, The True Believer, Section 9

Every extreme attitude is a flight from the self. – Eric Hoffer.

And finally,

“With friends like this, who needs enemies?”

War and Violence Still Ravage Our Planet.

“Indeed, history is nothing more than a tableau of crimes and misfortunes.” - Voltaire.

Maybe we need to ask why. At the risk of offending the rationalists and so-called “secularists” and “humanists” (I’m actually not against any of them), may I offer a bit of 2,000 year old wisdom (and excuse me for quoting the KJV):

1 From whence come wars and fightings among you? Come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members?
2 Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not.
3 Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. (Book of James, chapter 4)

Don’t get me wrong. Sometimes “pro-active” wars are necessary, against such dictatorial and self-serving regimes as the now, and thankfully, late Muammar Gaddafi, who for 42 years ruled Libya according to his own whim, and it’s probably not beyond speculation to say that not even one-tenth of his abuses have yet come to light. These are the types of people who cause wars. The exploiters for personal gain, and cabals of “authorities” who use the common people to further their nefarious and self-serving designs and agendas through their "regimes".

I wish that war would end, like most people, but I don’t see any relief from it as long as political and religious tyranny continues.

Fighting persecution in Iran.

Aussie Troops Want to Stay in Afghanistan.

"DIGGERS have warned they will be needed in Afghanistan beyond the Government's 2014 withdrawal date."

Adelaide Now

One thing I have to say about Australian soldiers is that they are brave; extremely brave. This reputation has been developed from two world wars, and also the Korean and Vietnam wars. Australian soldiers often volunteered to fight “other peoples’ wars” in foreign lands far from their native soil. I’ve been dubious about this (especially a war started by America), but recent commentary has made me think twice.

In July this year, the death of the 28th Australian soldier killed in Afghanistan was reported:

His loss takes the death toll of Australian Diggers in the Afghanistan war to 28.
The deadly mission was a deliberate operation by about 30 Australians and 50 Afghans against a known insurgent stronghold.
They were backed by close air support from coalition fast jet fighters and Apache attack helicopters, which hit the enemy several times with bombs and cannon fire.

A second Australian commando was shot in the upper body about 10 minutes later and 1km from where Sgt Langley was killed. It is understood that more than 10 insurgents died and many more were wounded……

General Hurley said he often asked himself how frequently soldiers could be sent to Afghanistan.
"I don't think you can actually relate this to the number of tours; it is the difficulty of the operation," he said.
Australia plans to withdraw troops from Afghanistan in 2014.
Another senior officer said the army was vigilant and alert to the risk of battle fatigue, and was closely monitoring the troops.
"We have people who understand the organisation and its people who can stand back and keep an eye on things, watching out for tell-tale signs such as medical or mental health problems," the officer said.
One commando, who asked not to be named, said that the job involved multiple deployments and they loved it.
"They have the fire in the belly to go back again and again," he said.
Australia has the third largest special-forces task group in Afghanistan.
Its troops have killed dozens of senior Taliban leaders and hundreds of enemy fighters.

Source: Another of our best has fallen in Australia's worst year yet.

Of course I can’t verify the accuracy of the following comment to SBS, but someone claiming to be a ex-soldier (ADF) wrote:

The public have no clue what is going on in Afghanistan. All they see is the bad news that comes out from the injurys and deaths, they never haere any of the good news like how a medic saved a baby. This is what soldiers do! this is what we are treained for. Since we have been in Afghanistan a huge difference has been made. Majority of the locals love us there, we have helped them in so many ways and if we were to pull out now they would back to square one. I boost a massive NO to pullong out.

Prime Minister Gillard appears intent on staying ground (until 2014, so far anyway):

Sapper Robinson, who was on his second tour of Afghanistan, had been taken to Tarin Kowt hospital for treatment but died "despite the rapid application of first aid and his evacuation ... the soldier succumbed to his wounds".
Air Chief Marshal Houston paid tribute to the popular soldier.
"Though nothing will ease sense of loss I want this soldier's family to know that their loved one, his mates and their Afghan national partners were undertaking vital work in Afghanistan yesterday," he said.
"I know our soldiers on the ground are incredible and incredibly resistant, they believe they are making a substantial difference. They believe they are winning."
Speaking from Alice Springs, Ms Gillard said the soldier was a brave man doing important work.
"It is with a great sense of sadness that I offer my condolences to the family of the young man killed in Afghanistan," she said.
The death of Sapper Robinson comes a week after the deaths of Lance Corporal Andrew Jones, 25, and Lieutenant Marcus Case, 27, and two weeks after Sergeant Brett Wood, 32….

"It's very important that all Australians grieve with the families of all of our soldiers who have made the ultimate sacrifice in Afghanistan," he said.
"We need to understand though that there is no such thing as casualty-free combat.
"What our troops are doing in Afghanistan is important for our nation, it's important for the whole world."

Julia Gillard and defence chief stand firm on Afghan mission after another Digger killed

World opinion, 2011: Wiki

Australian Army Battle of Derapet (Helmet cam):





Can't see the enemy? Forty Australian and Afghan soldiers were up against 100 Taliban, and one Australian soldier was killed.

Back From Temporary Retirement.

However, I've decided that my posts will be much shorter from now on. That reduces the effort I have to put into research and writing, editing and re-editing, and it also reduces "reader fatigue". I know when I look at a blog and see inordinately long posts I immediately become turned off. So to kick the ball rolling again, some quotes about writing:

The role of a writer is not to say what we all can say, but what we are unable to say. ~Anaïs Nin

And by the way, everything in life is writable about if you have the outgoing guts to do it, and the imagination to improvise. The worst enemy to creativity is self-doubt. ~Sylvia Plath

It is impossible to discourage the real writers - they don't give a damn what you say, they're going to write. ~Sinclair Lewis

The good writing of any age has always been the product of someone's neurosis, and we'd have a mighty dull literature if all the writers that came along were a bunch of happy chuckleheads. ~William Styron, interview, Writers at Work, 1958

Note: This post has a July date (when I last posted), because I've edited it.

Today's date is Tuesday October 11, 2011.

Why I am an Agnostic Theist Moving Towards Christianity and “Jesus Rediscovered”.

“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” – Mahatma Gandhi.

"These people honour me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me.” (Matthew 15:8, NIV)


Agnostic Theism

Agnostic theism is the philosophical view that encompasses both theism and agnosticism. An agnostic theist believes the proposition at least one deity exists is true, but per agnosticism also believes that this proposition is unknown or inherently unknowable. The agnostic theist may also or alternatively be agnostic regarding the properties of the god(s) they believe in…..The classical philosophical understanding of knowledge is that knowledge is justified true belief. By this definition, it is reasonable to assert that one may hold a belief, and that belief may be true, without asserting that one knows it....Christian Agnostics (distinct from a Christian who is agnostic) practice a distinct form of agnosticism that applies only to the properties of God. They hold that it is difficult or impossible to be sure of anything beyond the basic tenets of the Christian faith. They believe that God exists, that Jesus has a special relationship with him and is in some way divine, that God should be worshiped and that humans should be compassionate toward one another. This belief system has deep roots in Judaism and the early days of the Church

Many people seem to believe that the term “agnostic theist” is a contradiction in terms. The English biologist Thomas Henry Huxley first coined the term "agnostic" in 1869, though the concept goes back to well before the time of Christ. Huxley wrote , attempting to explain this concept:

When I reached intellectual maturity and began to ask myself whether I was an atheist, a theist, or a pantheist; a materialist or an idealist; Christian or a freethinker; I found that the more I learned and reflected, the less ready was the answer; until, at last, I came to the conclusion that I had neither art nor part with any of these denominations, except the last. The one thing in which most of these good people were agreed was the one thing in which I differed from them. They were quite sure they had attained a certain "gnosis,"–had, more or less successfully, solved the problem of existence; while I was quite sure I had not, and had a pretty strong conviction that the problem was insoluble.

So I took thought, and invented what I conceived to be the appropriate title of "agnostic." It came into my head as suggestively antithetic to the "gnostic" of Church history, who professed to know so much about the very things of which I was ignorant. To my great satisfaction the term took.

Richard Dawkins apparently considers “temporary agnosticism” as acceptable, but “permanent agnosticism” as unacceptable. In other words, given enough learning, time and effort, one should “naturally” be led to atheism, and to avoid this conclusion is “fence-sitting, intellectual cowardice”. My counter-argument to that would be, well about people like Antony Flew? As another example, let’s imagine an old man who lived in a village all his life, and claimed to be atheist. What if he had a miraculous heavenly visitation, or some kind of miraculous or supernatural experience which convinced him to reconsider his atheistic view? Dawkins would consider this “impossible”, because he (Dawkins) operates on a fixed paradigm; one that can never, and should never change once one “knows” all “the facts”.

Michael Shermer , another “supernatural denier” (I’m parodying Dawkins’ “history deniers” here), has recently written:

In all fields of science there is a residue of anomalies unexplained by the dominant theory. That does not mean the prevailing theory is wrong or that alternative theories are right. It just means that more work needs to be done to bring those anomalies into the accepted paradigm. In the meantime, it is okay to live with the uncertainty that not everything has an explanation.

Shermer apparently doesn’t even realise his absolute dogma here, so let me make it clear to the reader: “It just means that more work needs to be done to bring those anomalies into the accepted paradigm.” In other words, if something doesn’t fit into a naturalistic paradigm (i.e., nothing supernatural can ever occur), then we have to “work” to bring it into “the accepted paradigm”. In other words, both Shermer and Dawkins will define for the rest of us intellectual trilobites what “reality” is, and anything outside their paradigm is “nonsense”. One good thing about modern atheists is that they don’t believe in stake burning, but they totally fail to see how their dogma is in spirit indistinguishable from medieval inquisitions about what is “acceptable” or “unacceptable”.

I don’t know what the rest of you folks think, but I think the “scientific” dogma pedaled by the likes of Dawkins and Shermer are just as hollow as the dogma pedaled by the Church. Bear in mind that I’m not denigrating science, per se, only the idea that we can find absolute truth in science, and if you look very carefully at what I have quoted so far, you will see that this is indeed what both Dawkins and Shermer advocate, that one can only find truth within certain “acceptable paradigms”, and one that must totally discount the possibility of the supernatural, and their devoted disciples love them for it, almost to the point of worship. The amount of recorded miraculous and supernatural phenomena they have to deny, through all recorded history, to maintain this dogma, is nothing short of mind-boggling! Perhaps the least they could do, to be objective, is to be agnostic regarding things for which there seems to be powerful witness evidence. But no, they must ridicule and deny any such possibility because it doesn’t fit their “acceptable paradigm”. “I didn’t see it happen”, to them means, “it cannot happen”.

Let me put a whole new light on Eric Hoffer here:

To most of us nothing is so invisible as an unpleasant truth. Though it is held before our eyes, pushed under our noses, rammed down our throats- we know it not.

The Passionate State of Mind, aph. 59 (1955)

For though ours is a godless age, it is the very opposite of irreligious. The true believer is everywhere on the march, and both by converting and antagonizing he is shaping the world in his own image. And whether we are to line up with him or against him, it is well that we should know all we can concerning his nature and potentialities. (The True Believer)

.

It is startling to realize how much unbelief is necessary to make belief possible. What we know as blind faith is sustained by innumerable unbeliefs.(Ibid.)

The truth seems to be that propaganda on its own cannot force its way into unwilling minds; neither can it inculcate something wholly new; nor can it keep people persuaded once they have ceased to believe. It penetrates only into minds already open, and rather than instil opinion it articulates and justifies opinions already present in the minds of its recipients. The gifted propagandist brings to a boil ideas and passions already simmering in the minds of his hearers. He echoes their innermost feelings. Where opinion is not coerced, people can be made to believe only in what they already "know." (Ibid.)

Now on to why I remain an agnostic theist. The main reason is that I believe that we are infinitesimally small and insignificant creatures who live on an obscure planet in the Milky Way Galaxy, and cannot possibly comprehend “ultimate” truth in the universe, much less “ultimate” truth in a theoretical multi-verse

I believe in God, not because I “know” God exists, but as per the above definitions of agnostic theism. I believe that in this state of existence, almost as mere microbes in a possibly boundless multi-verse, we can no more comprehend its designs and purposes any more than an ant can comprehend a super highway being built above it, or a dog can understand Newtonian physics, which, incidentally, was Darwin’s real position:

With respect to the theological view of the question; this is always painful to me.— I am bewildered.– I had no intention to write atheistically. But I own that I cannot see, as plainly as others do, & as I [should] wish to do, evidence of design & beneficence on all sides of us. There seems to me too much misery in the world. I cannot persuade myself that a beneficent & omnipotent God would have designedly created the Ichneumonidæ with the express intention of their feeding within the living bodies of caterpillars, or that a cat should play with mice. Not believing this, I see no necessity in the belief that the eye was expressly designed. On the other hand I cannot anyhow be contented to view this wonderful universe & especially the nature of man, & to conclude that everything is the result of brute force. I am inclined to look at everything as resulting from designed laws, with the details, whether good or bad, left to the working out of what we may call chance. Not that this notion at all satisfies me. I feel most deeply that the whole subject is too profound for the human intellect. A dog might as well speculate on the mind of Newton.— Let each man hope & believe what he can.

(Emphasis added)

Dawkins would have you believe that Darwin would be atheist if he were alive today, yet the man known as “the world’s most famous atheist”, Antony Flew, converted to theism several years before he died. This should alert everyone to the fact that the issues are not quite so simple and clear-cut, and that even the most intelligent atheist may be forced to reconsider lifelong personal dogma.

I was raised Catholic, but converted to Mormonism at the age of 20. I “officially” abandoned Mormonism in 1987, yet I still retain a healthy respect for the basic teachings of all the world’s religions. I do not see exclusive and absolute truth in any of them, but because of my biased Catholic upbringing, I have to admit that I’m very biased towards the man known as “Jesus of Nazareth”. Even though doubts surround the historicity of Jesus, I personally see in his teachings the solution to many the world’s social ills. I’m not about to endorse Malcolm Muggeridge, especially his support of Mother Theresa, but I think this is worth nothing from his book Jesus Rediscovered

It is with the utmost trepidation and diffidence that I have collected together these miscellaneous pieces all directly or indirectly concerned with my attitude towards, and feelings about, the Christian religion. They do not set out to present a coherent, or even consistent, statement of faith. I am well aware that they are often contradictory, repetitive and imprecise; I have deliberately refrained from trying to trim and prune them into conveying an impression of coherence and consistency which would falsify my own actual mental state. All they represent and it's little enough is the effort of one ageing twentieth-century mind to give expression to a deep dissatisfaction with prevailing twentieth-century values and assumptions, and a sense that there is an alternative propounded two thousand years ago by the Sea of Galilee and on the hill called Golgotha.

What I marvel at is the number proclaiming themselves “Christian”, who have not even read the Gospels, much less the New Testament, and who have not, it appears, the faintest understanding of what Jesus really taught. His message was, primarily, one of forgiveness and love, as exemplified in the parable of the prodigal son; his condemnation of Pharisaic rule-living at the expense of the spirit of the law; his willingness to accept “publicans and sinners”, not to justify them, but to let them know that God loves them, and that they could probably live far more productive lives, and not least of all, that he was willing to die to save the repentant . When some of his disciples wanted to call down fire from heaven to consume the unbelievers, his response was, “you know not what manner of spirit you are of, For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. And they went to another village.” (Luke 9:55).

In my opinion, many of the Christian religions created are only poor mimicry of the Jesus we read about in the Gospels. But it may be better to have poor mimicry than total unbelief, though I’m sure some will disagree. So, yes, I do have to confess that I have an “agnostic theist” faith in Jesus too. I cannot prove that he even existed, and I can prove nothing to the satisfaction of the skeptics. All I can say is that I think he did possess “the words of Eternal Life”, and that “the first shall be last, and the last first”, and no one can take their salvation for granted. The “idol-worshipping” Roman Centurion had more faith than the “chosen ones” who rejected Jesus.

I suppose, like the aging Muggeridge, I’ve sort of “rediscovered Jesus” (and, ironically, at about the same age), and I have done this not only because of my scriptural readings and re-readings, but because of practical life-experience. We fail and fail, time and time again, yet in Christ there is still hope of redemption; redemption from the misery and despair that mortal life can be. He is willing to give us all a chance at life, even Eternal Life, when everyone else has given up on us.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (John 3:16)

And a thought from Mormon scripture:

16 For behold, the Spirit of Christ is given to every man, that he may know good from evil; wherefore, I show unto you the way to judge; for every thing which inviteth to do good, and to persuade to believe in Christ, is sent forth by the power and gift of Christ; wherefore ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of God.

17 But whatsoever thing persuadeth men to do evil, and believe not in Christ, and deny him, and serve not God, then ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of the devil; for after this manner doth the devil work, for he persuadeth no man to do good, no, not one; neither do his angels; neither do they who subject themselves unto him.

18 And now, my brethren, seeing that ye know the light by which ye may judge, which light is the light of Christ, see that ye do not judge wrongfully; for with that same judgment which ye judge ye shall also be judged. (The Book of Mormon, Moroni 7)

To be real frank, I see little hope for humanity, and our long term survival, unless we learn and inculcate the teachings of Jesus. One can look for all the evidence for or against this man; his very existence, or even his teachings, but I would agree that, 2,000 years later, "no man ever spoke like this man" (John 7:46).

Link: Irrational Atheists on the Loose?

A Response to Channel Seven’s Today Tonight’s Report “Cabbies on Notice”.

Today Tonight’s Report:

Cabbies on Notice (You may have to scroll down to find it, titled “Cabbies on Notice”.)

The first thing that alarmed me was the title of the show, “Cabbies on Notice”. We see graphic on-board camera footage of a knife being held to a taxi driver’s throat, and they title it Cabbies on notice? What viewers saw in that footage is neither common, nor exactly rare. I’ve been a night-shift cab driver for just over four years now, and have had the opportunity to talk to many drivers, some veterans, some relatively new to the industry, but I never fail to be amazed at the number of stories of verbal and physical abuse suffered at the hands of the public. My anecdotal estimation is that at least 70 to 80 percent of drivers I have talked to experienced greater or lesser forms of physical abuse. Every single one, including me, has experienced verbal abuse, almost always from drunk people. Lesser forms of physical abuse include unwanted touching, and things like “friendly” punches or a tap on the head. The public has no right to touch any taxi driver, in any way, except in the form of a handshake or a soft “I like you” tap. Yet it sometimes goes well beyond this. Most taxi drivers are male, at least among night-shift drivers, because it is too dangerous for females to work at night, so it appears that some feel it’s “okay” to “touch” a male driver when they will not do it to a female because of possible legal consequences.

Before going any further, I think it is imperative that I fully acknowledge the public complaints about taxi drivers. I am sometimes appalled at the way rude taxi drivers treat their customers, and there’s no valid excise for this providing the customer is polite and doesn’t warrant “reciprocal” treatment. Let’s get technical here. Sometimes a customer’s initial words and manners can upset a driver, especially when they refuse to give a destination address and say “just drive!” Sometimes they will even refuse to say which direction, and then blame the driver for going in the wrong direction. Then when the driver retaliates by either kicking them out or becoming equally arrogant, Channel 7 and other media will probably report it as “driver abuse”. We need to look at both sides of this complex issue. Are there rude and renegade taxi drivers? Most certainly, and maybe some of them have developed this temperament because of their increasing cynicism to the public in general, but if that is the case then maybe they should be looking for employment elsewhere. Fortunately, most people are decent and respectful (although a bad Saturday night could cause that perspective to temporally waver), and I think this is what keeps most drivers hopeful for humanity in general, that the majority of customers will be polite, and even sympathetic to a job most admit they will never do, even for a “hundred grand a year”, because of having to deal with the public and other associated risks. However, my observation remains, that a minority of drivers are ill-tempered, rude, and unsuited for the job, yet they can bring a bad name to all of us. It takes little effort to be polite to people, and in 95 percent of cases the politeness will be recompensed. Just as the public renegades and abusers are in a minority, so are the rude and renegade taxi drivers. This is a “human problem”, and it extends not only to taxi drivers, but to all people who have to deal with the public. Service station attendants are at as much risk (or even more) of verbal abuse, attack or robbery, perhaps even more than taxi drivers are. I don’t particularly see us taxi drivers as “martyrs” for a single cause. Dealing with the a moody and often unpredictable public just isn’t an easy job.

I agree with Mr. Michael Jools (featured on Today Tonight) , president of the Australian Taxi Drivers Association, who points out that it’s not always drivers who are at fault, but I also agree with his observation that the taxi industry needs to be “cleaned up”. Let’s address the points made on Today Tonight regarding taxi drivers:

1. Poor street knowledge.

Long time and experienced drivers will obviously know their way around better than a driver who’s been in the job one week, or even one day. Sydney and Melbourne are big cities, and not even the most experienced driver is going to remember every street. Because taxi driving is a high turnover industry, because of risks and poor pay, and encourages novices seeking to earn a dollar, perhaps they will have to reply on a GPS to start with. It takes time to become experienced, but if the rewards in the industry aren’t sufficient to motivate long term employment, then the public will have to keep dealing with new drivers who don’t know their basic way. Knowledge tests are not all they are made out to be, because only practical experience will enable a driver to remember streets, and he/she has to do that “on the job”. Maybe the government could create greater incentives for drivers to stay in the industry, and become experienced, but so far they have done pathetically little. There simply has to be greater rewards for time and investment in the industry, and this won’t happen until the financial incentives are there. If the government is willing to foster a three year “graduation program” for taxi drivers to learn all of Sydney, for example, and subsidise this, then maybe “poor street knowledge” complaints will reduce? They have more important priorities, it seems, like running free buses at taxpayer expense.

2. Bad Driving.

Yes this is also a problem. Being a former driving instructor I’m a bit pedantic about this, but erratic taxi drivers who constantly break the law, I’m afraid to say, are far too many. The obligation to observe road rules is written into the taxi laws, and customers are far more observant of this than I suspect taxi drivers are aware of, hence the complaints. Make no mistake, they (customers) will observe whether drivers obey the law, and they will expect it because drivers have their life in their hands, and driving at 80 kmh in a 60 kmh zone will not go unnoticed. Something not included, yet, in obtaining a taxi licence, is passing a basic RTA road rules test, and maybe that should be implemented into obtaining a taxi licence. In essence, bad or unobservant drivers should be weeded out. People are paying for this transport, and they deserve the highest safety standards attainable.

3. Rude Tempered.

As I stated above, drivers who cannot handle dealing with the public may be in the wrong job. Not wanting to sound like Big Brother, but maybe psychological assessments for the suitability of taxi driving should be done. Someone with a short fuse might not qualify. As far as I’m aware, no taxi training course comprehensively covers how to deal with stressful situations; how to administer first aid, and how to deal with, for example, schizophrenia and other mental problems of customers. I know this comment will probably attract more “bureaucracy”, but the fact is that taxi drivers have to deal a multitude of human psychoses, and have no idea where to begin dealing with them. As beginners, as far as they are concerned, all they need to do is “remember streets”, but are not taught how to deal with “real life” problems.

4. Refusing fares.

Unless a person is affected by alcohol, drugs, or acts abusively, a taxi driver is not supposed to refuse a fare. Apart from those specified grounds, it is illegal to refuse a fare, no matter how short or unprofitable. Tell me about it, like the night I waited one and a half hours on a rank only to get a $6.50 fare when the three cars behind me all got M24s, or out of area jobs worth no less than $240.00. You win some, and you lose some, but a taxi driver’s first obligation is to serve the public, and creating a good public image will increase confidence in the taxi industry, thus leading to more patronage, and a better overall result. I honestly can’t think of any situation where my losses (short fares) weren’t made up for in gains (long fares). Yes, we are “in it for the money”, but we are also a service industry which provides a vital community service, and sometimes that community obligation is more important than “earning money” (in the short term). Some drivers, apparently, don’t understand this, and think that every fare should be profitable for Number One.

5. Lack of cleanliness.

Some people take pride in cleanliness, others don’t, and they don’t reflect well on the industry in general. Some mutual respect is expected here, too. If you leave your empty beer cans, and your empty champagne bottles to roll around the back floor before the driver discovers it, he may be left with the blame. After you munch on your “Maccas” (which, incidentally is illegal, since eating in a cab is illegal, but your driver may tolerate it because he doesn’t want to offend you), then make sure you clear up your mess before leaving the cab. It’s the same as smoking. I’ve been asked a zillion times, “can I smoke?” Okay, so you want to smoke, but what about the next customer who complains about a “smoke smell” in the cab. The driver is left to deal with that because you think that you have “rights” without responsibility for the next person who enters the cab. READ the laws; smoking is not allowed in cabs. Don’t think you can get into a cab and do what you like, including “pissing up” on grog and behaving like bogans and not expect the driver to become upset. Would you like someone invading your office, farting, belching, cussing, and maybe even calling you a “moron”? That’s basically what we taxi drivers have to put up with, and yet Today Tonight says in the most tabloid fashion, “Cabbies on Notice”.

6. Poor English.

In this regard, I offer the following You Tube video:



While it is true that many cab drivers are not exactly versed in Fowler’s English, many of them are new migrants just trying to earn a living, like everyone else, and as I said, it takes time to learn. They are not going to know Sydney, or Melbourne, like locals who’ve been driving for 20 or 30 years, and all you have to do, to help them gain some confidence before they learn, is direct them if they are unsure of the way, or be patient while they use a GPS. If this really bothers you, then maybe you should ask why the turnover in this industry is so high that it is always requiring new recruits and not retaining most of the old ones. The experienced Aussie driver in the video was just spreading more vain stereotypes, and frankly, was just racist. If the Afghani driver spoke with an Aussie accent, he would have sounded more convincing, but as fate would have it, he was just an innocent abroad, on his first day cab driving, and just like you and me, trying to earn a decent living in an extremely difficult job.

The problems and challenges in the taxi industry will not be solved by biased, parochial, and even racist, attitudes. That the taxi industry needs improvement is without question, and in my opinion one way to do that is by tougher screening checks and even the possibility of subjecting applicants to appropriate psychological tests to determine whether they are capable of working in this high pressure industry. Not a thought I particularly relish since I’m rather “anti-bureaucracy”, but it seems to me that public complaints about the general state of the taxi industry may well justify this approach. That we in the taxi industry need to “get our act together”, seems unquestionable, but this cannot be done through shallow, racist, biased, and irresponsible approaches. How about, for a start, we stop talking about “ethnic drivers”? And realise that for the past 30 or more years “ethnic drivers” have been the very backbone of the taxi industry in Australia. They were prepared to make the sacrifices of working two jobs until they could survive on one, and to put in the “hard yakka” that most mainstream Aussies were unprepared to do. Their enormous contributions to this country, and many of them have come from oppressive regimes, has not been met with the respect it duly deserves. Anyone hear of the saying "fair go"?


Related link:



Link posted 11/4/11: City's mean streets turn on cabbie at Kings Cross