Really liking this song right now:

I miss coming home from work during daylight. Chowon has worked 4-8 for the past few months, picking me up from work afterwards, and now I'm at a client site where I'm working long days. The sun's warmth is a commodity I can't purchase with the payment that this job provides.

Today I was struck with a sort of epiphany. Nothing I write here will likely communicate the weight that it carried for me when I received it, and my readers will probably be like, "I knew that 10 years ago". This is basic Bible stuff... also, I don't think I can do better than explaining it in terms of general principles.

Adventure is both a gift from God and a desire of the flesh: to see a treasure and lust after it, to fall in love with a jewel without knowing its quality, or to imagine an alternate life which is impossible to achieve by any moral means, are things which tempt us to say, "God, why did you give me the ability to desire those things which I should not have? Isn't the ability to experience pleasure a great gift you've given me? Didn't you handcraft our desires to be for things which would enable us to glorify you just by doing those things which we, your image bearers, would want naturally? But it is clear that you want me to strangle my own heart; to deprive it of the nourishment in good feelings that you enabled me to desire and long after. Why did you pave the path to happiness with heartache?"

It is rather the case that God has established right means to satisfy each desire, but that those means are not easily intuitive, requiring us to exercise all of our faculties to both discover them and then acquire them, therefore best glorifying God by achieving satisfaction by necessary means of every single power of which we are capable. I earn my wine with the sweat on my back, which I only have because God protects my health; I protect my marriage with every Fruit of the Spirit, which I am not capable of in myself but can only exercise because the spirit grows a fruit-bearing vine within me. These days I feel like those two things are all I do at all. I sacrifice sleep here and there when I feel like I can, in order to squeak out things like this blog. The other day I made time and carved some pumpkins at like midnight, because holidays are a gift from God, and my thoughts on Halloween are a whole other topic (but in short, I think it's a Christian holiday which we took from pagans, and whenever we fail to acknowledge that part of its history we give it back to them).

All that to say that searching and knowing God is the method by which we can actually satisfy those longings and desires, but in the meantime we do have to shut down the easy path to immediate, empty, and temporary fulfillment by defeating our flesh. What is it that I want when I see that thing, except for the joy of the adventure and the discovery of unknown pleasures? God is infinite, infinitely mysterious, infinitely joyous, and infinitely beautiful, but he has made himself discoverable; how can I look to any other source of beauty for fulfillment? He is capable of satisfying the desire for struggle and discovery, but I have to focus all my faculties in order to even turn my heart towards that thus-far only-hoped-for, only-promised outcome.

As I write, I'm remembering atheists who I've spoken to. I imagine, because they have expressed as much, them reading this and saying, "how pathetic that he needs a god in order to justify resisting immoral means to pleasure". How foolish that the atheist would hesitate or blush because of purely imagined and non-imminent moral convictions; you deny your nature by denying your flesh, and you ignore the gifts that evolution has supposedly given you by denying your nature. How arrogant that the atheist would hope to achieve greater happiness later by denying his/herself now, when we have no control over the random-chance environment about which we understand so little, ignoring the constant threat of cosmic death looming in every corner of the nothingness about which we have subjected our inexplicable and perhaps entirely unaccompanied consciousness. To now think "but nobody can live that way" is to make my point exactly. To otherwise think, "but life is more beautiful that way" is a wishful and subjective assertion in the godless universe. I believe in truly objective standards of beauty, a consistent atheist cannot.

"He's by the librarian"

Here's that second poem I wrote about my wife. It has a similar style to the last one.

--------------------

My wife is a forest in autumn
Her leaves are drawn by the very hands of God

Her beauty is unmatched
All her features compliment one another

The sound of her voice stirs my emotions deeply
The birds harmonize with her

I will walk in this forest
I will learn every tree

She drops her leaves gracefully
And softens my path

When rain dampens her cheeks
It strikes mine also

Soon God will make the rain to snow
Turning our sorrow to new joy

My love for you is not changed
I love you in all your ways

--------------------

I've been thinking about a potential objection to "the text is king" idea for temporal law keeping: that the Bible is subject to interpretation in such a way that the law cannot be consistently enforced.

I'm blogging on my phone again, so I'll try to be brief. The Holy Scriptures are perspicuous. Words have limited meanings, and language offers a semantic domain. It's noteworthy that the moral and legal codes in scripture are broadly agreed upon across denominations. What people significantly disagree about is the means for salvation, the nature of God, or the best way to worship.

To clarify, I'm not suggesting that we become like the puritans, who, though they had other good qualities, were wrong in that they made laws in addition to the scriptural code, and I think a case can be easily made that their laws were harmful.

Spitefully ignoring the irony which eclipses this otherwise excellent poem, I want to share a passage from Paradise Lost, book 5. In this chapter, the devil has assembled all angels under his command and used the authority and prominence given to him by God to incite his audience to rebellion. One angel from among the crowd rebels against Satan in order to return to God. This is the angel Abdiel giving his monologue (the first part is the introduction to the monologue). Abdiel's name means "Servant of God".

----

The Deitie, and divine commands obeid,
Stood up, and in a flame of zeale severe
The current of his fury thus oppos'd.

O argument blasphemous, false and proud!
Words which no eare ever to hear in Heav'n
Expected, least of all from thee, ingrate
In place thy self so high above thy Peeres.
Canst thou with impious obloquie condemne
The just Decree of God, pronounc't and sworn,
That to his only Son by right endu'd
With Regal Scepter, every Soule in Heav'n
Shall bend the knee, and in that honour due
Confess him rightful King? unjust thou saist
Flatly unjust, to binde with Laws the free,
And equal over equals to let Reigne,
One over all with unsucceeded power.
Shalt thou give Law to God, shalt thou dispute
With him the points of libertie, who made
Thee what thou art, and formd the Pow'rs of Heav'n
Such as he pleasd, and circumscrib'd thir being?
Yet by experience taught we know how good,
And of our good, and of our dignitie
How provident he is, how farr from thought
To make us less, bent rather to exalt
Our happie state under one Head more neer
United. But to grant it thee unjust,
That equal over equals Monarch Reigne:
Thy self though great and glorious dost thou count,
Or all Angelic Nature joind in one,
Equal to him begotten Son, by whom
As by his Word the mighty Father made
All things, ev'n thee, and all the Spirits of Heav'n
By him created in thir bright degrees,
Crownd them with Glory, and to thir Glory nam'd
Thrones, Dominations, Princedoms, Vertues, Powers,
Essential Powers, nor by his Reign obscur'd,
But more illustrious made, since he the Head
One of our number thus reduc't becomes,
His Laws our Laws, all honour to him done
Returns our own. Cease then this impious rage,
And tempt not these; but hast'n to appease
Th' incensed Father, and th' incensed Son,
While Pardon may be found in time besought.

Today I feel like complaining, but I don't have any complaints that I feel are worth mentioning.

I wrote another poem for my wife, but I'll post it later maybe. I've already given it to her.

I feel like I'm bridging the gap between blogging because I'm stressed and being too stressed to blog. I think that a hot cup of tea would be about right to help stave off the blues.

The time that me and Chowon have been apart is now about 4 weeks, and we have two weeks to go before I can return home for a week. It's not a really really long time, but she has made it clear that she doesn't like it. I'm glad that this business trip won't be 4 months, but only 2 months.

I'm blogging on the phone during my late lunch break, and I think my lunch break is done.

"If you are looking for their best interests, then they will not be offended"

I'm still traveling for business. Today I was going to attend an OPC church, but it looks like they got shut down. Instead, I attended a Methodist church -- I really like Methodists, and I'm led to believe that they are a saved denomination (so they must be Trinitarian, Sola Fide, etc), but I know little about their deeper theological ideas. All I know about them is that they emphasize the method: charity, outreach, etc.. And that is a good thing.

I took the "political compass" quiz today for fun. I thought that some of the questions pertained to particular aspects of a subject without acknowledging other important aspects of the same subject, betraying the author's assumptions about political stereotypes. When I read some of the questions, I thought "I don't agree with you, but I don't agree with the alternative that I'm sure you're expecting me to believe if I say 'I disagree'". However, I guess it wasn't too wrong in the end, placing me at near-center right-libertarian. Here's the results page.

I take some issue with the axes on this compass. I don't think they are an adequate means of defining political ideas....

...and actually, the more I've been thinking about these things, the more I think that the distinction between political ideas and moral convictions is artificial. I'm tempted to wonder if there is any decision at all which can be absolutely separated from moral consideration, but given that I believe that morality is a clear and absolute standard, the implications of that would mean that there is literally only one perfect way of thinking, feeling, and being..... and.... well..... ..... isn't that the case? Wasn't Jesus the standard of perfection in every way? (I'm talking about ways of thinking and making decisions. Physical distinctions are involuntary and are not a part of this consideration at all).

Now, it's important for me to note that it is possible for me to hold the view that there is only one absolutely perfect and correct way to be, think, act, believe, and prefer, without it being necessary that I know all the details about what defines that absolutely perfect and correct way. And, that said, I don't completely understand the correct way. I know a few things about it, like that it's wrong to murder and stuff, but I'm not about to tell everyone that they need to be just like me by any means (although I do intend to tell everyone that they need to be just like Jesus).

Anyway, back onto the political thing. I have very specific social, economic, national and penal ideas which are rejected by people on all parts of the left-right spectrum. I also have very specific ideas about authority structures which are rejected by both the left and the right. I want a third axis.

Uhm... some examples. Just a few quick ones.... don't try to use these to draw broader conclusions outside the meanings of the words themselves, alone and directly. Obviously these might leave some questions on your mind, so know that my ideal system isn't entirely represented by the following few paragraphs.

Social ideas: I think that the government has no business telling a small business owner "you have to serve everyone who comes to buy something from you.". That means that a business owner should be able to refuse business to young, old, white, black, gay, straight, or annoying people at his own discretion, with or without needing to provide the reason. (I think it's morally wrong for a person to refuse business to some customer because of race, etc, but I think it should be the person's prerogative).

Economics: I think that it should be illegal for Americans to give loans to other Americans with interest; that if a person cannot pay off his loans on time then it should be treated as theft; that once every 7 years all debts should be forgiven and that business should be conducted with that in mind. I also think that there should be zero government handouts, and that taxes should be 100% voluntary. If you want someone to help you pay for some kind of government project, you should convince them that it's worth their money, and if they don't pay then don't include them in it.

Nationalism: I think that we shouldn't have any kind of border control at all. I think that citizenship should be defined by participation in the community, and that said participation should be clearly defined by things like public gatherings, community projects, holidays and communal celebrations on the local level. I think that local communities should vote for their local government, and their local government should tally their votes for national affairs, but that the primary focus should be localized.

Penal sanctions: I think that jail is an unjust, non-beneficial, and utterly ridiculous penalty for any crime, especially since bail means that all sentences are reducible to fines if you are wealthy enough. I think that the major and common penalties should be basically be the following three items, with a few exceptions: fines (with indentured service if you can't pay off the fine; which service ends when the debt is paid or on the 7th year, whichever comes first); whipping (with a literal whip, not more than 40 lashes for any one sentencing ever); and the death penalty (for kidnapping or stealing a person, rape, and murder). Furthermore, I think that penal sanctions should be executed by the civilian community under the direction of the local officials, and not by an organized policing agency (how this works out is a little complex, so maybe another blog for it).

Authority structures: I think we should have a more numerically careful distribution of judicial authorities (judges and districts). Also, I think that a clean set of laws should be established and then left alone, completely removing the legislative branch, so that the written law is understandable by the common man, and so that the written law is king; I think that the Bible is capable of functioning as said law book. I think that, while precedents can be considered in a court case, they are not laws, and so they are not binding on the judge or jury (except any examples given in the law book itself to help explain the intentions of its authors). To this end, every elementary school student should be taught to read and should be expected to read the law book at least once per year -- it should be small enough that they are able to do it more often than that if they want.

So, I don't think I'm really a libertarian, but I agree with them most of the time when we're talking about the role of the federal government, especially as it pertains to things which need to immediately change in the American federal government. The place where I disagree with libertarians is when we talk about the role of the local government, and the nature of a nation state, and the way that local and national governments should interact with one another.

"I forgive you."

Blogging from my phone tonight because I'm at a restaurant.

Fido, the pet spider at the bottom of my blog, died semi recently. The site that hosted him stopped being. Also I only feed him like once or twice per year.... I guess, as far as spiders go, he lived a long life.

I scrubbed references to the company I'm working for out of my blog because [can't tell the reason]. I wrote those posts before it mattered, but I want to be above reproach.

Anyway, still working for them, and it's awesome.

Oh! My food is here. Bye

Wanted to drop this short one here...

I call this one "The Course".

------------------

I am dust falling through the heavens.

I don't know if I will be seen or found.

My course is directed, not by me.

I do not make a sound.

------------------

Still on the cosmic theme, I guess. Predestination and temporal fulfillment are on my mind. God destines some to eternal joy, others to eternal misery, and the causes for each are plain. Earth is a protracted irony, with wicked men trampling the poor in their path to power and wealth, their path to damnation. This while the righteous give what they have to the poor, leaving precious little for themselves on earth. The only way a righteous man can have what he wants is for him to want nothing except what he already has, and in having that he gains an eternal reward beyond his expectations. Peace in the heart is a mystery that I cannot comprehend.

Btw, (I think I've complained about this before, but) I'm really bothered lately with YouTube's inexplicable algorithms for filtering and censoring conversations. I can't discuss a controversial topic online without either me or the other person losing our comments. And YouTube doesn't give you any warning when it filters your comment; as long as you are logged in you will see it and think that it posted without issue, but the person with whom you're speaking will think that you just never responded. What a ridiculous system, contravening the free exchange of knowledge, which invariably requires controversial interaction so that all arguments can be answered. YouTube is an irony; censoring free expression in the name of free expression..

In my daily life, I generally go to work, home, church, and sometimes the gym. Of those four places, church and home are the only two where I feel like it's culturally acceptable for me to express my beliefs about God openly, and in those two places everyone basically agrees with me. Where is the Areopagus? Where can I go to talk in person with people who disagree with me?

I wish I had an open-mic coffee shop nearby that I could go to... Some place where people could get up and have 10 minutes to vent their stupid opinions, and then have a 5 minute Q/A; a place where those same people could arrange for a time to have informal, optionally moderated debates on said opinions; what a cool place that would be. Someday, if I ever get enough money, I'm gonna open that coffee shop and call it Areopagus Coffee.

And, still on a Luvbird kick, here's another song of theirs that I like:


"I don't think anyone can really know."