Repeaters for the Devil's Radio

"Believe nothing of what you hear, and only half of what you see." old proverb

Malicious gossips wouldn't manage much harm if many others weren't complicit by being:

1) So Gullible (accepting accusations without evidence.)

In many places and times, a lot of innocent people have been killed because bad gossip swayed neighbors into believing someone was a witch/wizard with an 'evil eye' that's causing all the problems or 'must be the one who did it' when the only 'evidence' was a preponderance of wagging tongues . This is actually why trials were instituted in every civilized society (and mob 'justice' outlawed.) If there is no evidence that can bring the accused to trial, then the most common reason will be because the accused is actually innocent, no matter what 'everybody' has been persuaded to believe

The 'logic' doesn't have to be any better than this...



It says sad things about the state of our society that people have gone back to believing rumors as a primary source of news. Given the propaganda issues with some mainstream sources, and the way local news sometimes just seems to get ignored by the official newscasters, I understand why word of mouth is proliferating. Just make sure your local 'news' actually has credible eyewitnesses and evidence. For those who believe in God, I STRONGLY recommend praying for discernment as to what is the real truth - especially before you act on a rumor in any way! It could be a FrameUp

2) So Judgmental - so ready to internalize a bad word and turn on others, especially friends, family, neighbors...

Any accusation making the rounds effectively acts as a social demotion in most groups. It doesn't need to be all that credible for former friends to shun you. The real message (if your enemy has spread Malicious Slander far enough and didn't get enough flack back for it) is that the herd/flock is turning on you, which means your enemy has more social support and it's safest to dump you.* Since this is a kind of treachery, people feel best about themselves if they 'officially' believe the Demonising Lies. (Cognitive Dissonance) This is why even when you can prove it's a lie, you may have a hard time getting a fair hearing to Clear Your Name. If they accept the truth, then they have to choose between openly turning on you because it's socially expedient or championing your now unpopular position, becoming controversial, and risk being tarred with the same BS brush used on you. The most common compromise position is for a 'weak friend' to continue friendly communications, but only if you agree to keep their support a secret. Eventually most of these either make up their mind to truly remain a friend or stop talking to you, lest the others find out...

In this situation, the best you can be is a Hero With Bad Publicity

* [If you are ever fully ostracized, this enemy's next goal will likely work toward using the group's Moral Myopia to create a Torches and Pitchforks scenario (the virtual version often uses hackers.)]

3) So Ready to Become Repeaters for the Devil's Radio -

Those who are willing to 'back up' a lying jerk are the worst. In some cases they initially back such stories as just juicy gossip, figuring others are solely responsible for discerning whether there is anything to it. They usually tell themselves that since they didn't start it, they are just passing on what's going to go around anyway, but every repetition makes it seem more real to other listeners. This is what pushes incredible assertions past 'the tipping point' into a contagious social agreement - this is what makes even ridiculous hoaxes seem so believable. Not surprising that socially adept bad-mouthing persons/cliques push rumors enough times, in enough places (or just often enough from the same person), their rubbish tend to be accepted as truth. There's no Snopes to prove or disprove their accusations about private people.

The repeaters may even reason that you must deserve it, since Ole Crocodile Tears is a 'nice person.' Well, NO, O.C.T. is NOT a nice person if he/she is trying to get you to say ugly things you don't personally know are true. I don't care if Ole Crocodile Tears says they are 'warning' you about them. That's just a clever ruse to make their little drama sound less selfish/evil and make you feel like they care about you while messing with your head. SEE: Wounded Gazelle Gambit. All you Really Know is that O.C.T is upset with them/thinks they are bad/dislikes them. The result is always that they want you to do their dirty work. *rolls eyes*

God regards the repeaters as slanderers too

Being an easy tool of a slanderer doesn't say good things about you.

Be careful about who you let bend your ear.

Remember: "A clean conscience makes a soft pillow."

Gatekeeper Society

Yep!
Some communities figure that having a 'gatekeeper' mentality will ensure that only the best will be within their group. They believe this will maximize the enjoyment of those encouraged to remain, and foster community growth of the best kind. It may be well meant but it just doesn't seem to work! Such societies regularly fail everywhere: be they online, planned developments, elitist communes...whatever!

Using an elitist principle seems to bring out the worst in human nature, and proves stifling even to 'valued members' - since all they do must pass muster with (be seen as valuable by) the ruling elite. The tendency for the rank and file is to become hierarchical and competitive, which is never a welcoming environment for newcomers. Older members tend to flaunt their seniority anyway, add in a filter that declares regular human attributes unacceptable and you create a recipe for a dwindling group, a number of whom will be acting out in unpleasant ways.

I've seen the noble intention of inviting the noble/creative/intelligent into a protective environment derail into judging members as ugly internal politicking heated up. Skilled manipulators will tend to defame as 'unworthy' -members who don't support their goals of control and/or could prove to be competition. You would think that a person's personality, ethics, or skills would be evident, but people are easily swayed (primed) to agree, especially when they are trying to get along too hard. I think the problem is that so many 'good' attributes are subjective, and may even be defined by political/racist/ageist/religious leanings or even what appeals to someone's mouthy power clique as opposed to being based upon a mutually agreed upon set of parameters.

In time, even the 'gatekeepers' may be derided to suit someone else's bid for power. Any snarkiness or inner ring games already available will be used. The battle for power can be an ugly one, even in an alleged meritocracy. Only when courteous behavior is the rule do you have a reasonable basis for banning such games. If any excuse exists to permit rude behavior, it will be used. In fact, the excuses may be planned well in advance of the attack.

This is why I say the judgy opposite approach can create many bad feelings, fracture community spirit, and limit creativity, because people may fear to show anything they aren't sure will be appreciated.

Having a welcoming spirit, gentle ways, and a loving - enforced- code of conduct works far better. Trolls can be evicted fairly and everyone else learns to play together nicely. Then a sharing atmosphere encourages not only the obviously smart, extroverted, creative types, but also the hidden talents shyly scribbling in the corners. Besides, even the most creative types appreciate a well-mannered audience. IMO Kindly, courteous freedom is the only path that works.

[Another post that FB is not allowing through, so I am repeating it here. Photo from https://www.facebook.com/Gr8tful4Hisgrace]

Response to "Listening to Young Atheists, Lessons for a Stronger Christianity"

=============================================================
Another post not going through FB - at least not yet. My family checked and only I can see it 2 hours later, even when I set it to public.

later: Okay... so *I* can see the embedded FB post when I am signed in to my blog but when my family checked it, they only saw the title... Oddly, I don't have to be signed into my FB account, just my blog to see it. [I can also see the original FB post on my own timeline.]

Enough about the technical hiccups ~

Here's what I said about this article

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

It's an interesting article. I could see where a lot of these kids were coming from.

When I had serious questions, I found answers in Bible study, some books, and in prayer, but rarely did I get much help or support from people I met in mainstream church services. People often don't even really visit with one another in those buildings, and relationships are often shallow - for years, unless you look up each other on your own time. Serious questions are often considered awkward (at best.) Seriously, I value real Fellowship, but it's not always so easy to find. I knew it once, and I found Jesus to be real, so I don't judge Christianity by the failing churches I've seen.

[I wish more churches really did 'fellowship' when they got together, talking in practical terms how they interpret scripture and honor Christ, encouraging each other and praising God, rather than the 'floor show and go' that usually dominates the proceedings.]

I also don't judge those who weren't as blessed as I have been in that regard, and figure agnosticism, atheism, paganism or other beliefs systems must be the answer. I just hope they find Jesus too. The Blessed Hope of the Gospel of Jesus Christ is a LOT better than any alternative! My life wouldn't have been worth living without God's active support. I want the nice people I've met to share this advantage that's made all the difference for me.

I do agree that it's important to be real, and down-to-Earth about how believing Jesus changes your life. The search for authenticity in Christianity was what birthed the 'Jesus Movement' that I knew growing up. I don't agree that you have to proselytize continually to be real. If you are seriously applying Christ's teachings to your life, it becomes obvious enough. Believers should be willing to discuss why they believe and how it affects their life choices, and brave enough to face possible flack for not bending farther (to get along), but insisting on talking about Our Faith with those who are not expressing an interest in listening tends to backfire. Living the Gospel is (in my opinion) often more important and effective than constantly preaching it. I expect the Holy Spirit to give me the words when He wants me to speak on Kingdom matters. Isn't that part of what was promised to us?

Confident Expression

http://www.wimp.com/speaktypography/



I /naturally/ speak 'with authority.'

From the time I was a toddler, so I am told, I knew my own mind and valued my opinions enough to just say what I thought. Given that my self-esteem was going to get a lot of shocks from my bad situation(s), I thank God He made me so confident of my own identity and self-worth. I truly believe it was His Provision for what I would be up against. Because of His Grace to me, I became a voice for Him. Though sometimes victimized, I am and always was, far more than just a victim. By His Grace, I pray I always will be.

Sometimes being myself isn't appreciated. lol

Most people on joining a group naturally do a kind of 'initiate's dance.' They quite reasonably recognize they are 'low man on the totem pole' and actively defer and mimic the local authority.

I can't do that. I understand how it works but the behavior is unnatural to me. Seriously, it comes off unpleasantly artificial when I've tried. Some even thought I was mocking the usual process!

So, I just aim for being respectful, dealing with others on equal terms. People see my confidence and know I could be a natural leader, which makes some current leaders nervous, but I never come in with the idea of taking over. [I don't want that much of a headache. True authority comes with a lot of responsibility, and I don't shoulder that load lightly.] Unless I like the current leadership, I may not even stick around. If I *do* decide to join in, then I believe in you, and I will support you. Don't worry so much!

I was continually criticized in one group online for seriously holding opinions. How dare I know my own mind! How non-hive of me! Hey, those convictions/ideals/beliefs/interests weren't approved by our clique! You better be willing to justify them effectively or we'll snark/ridicule you off the thread!

The implicit idea was that if I defended what I'd researched, speculated, liked, or believed, I'd then be granted respect for my variations. Too often the other side reneged on that deal. Now I don't feel obliged to defend facts I've quoted or philosophical/religious ideals. I did the work. I considered the question open and all questioners equal. I came to a conclusions based on evidence and experience. You can too. If you really want to know more from me, better approach me with respect, or I'll tune you out. You're just not going to get anywhere with me by  offering snarky/contemptuous 'challenges.'  I've dealt with too many closed minds to waste my time trying to ping pearls of truth off pigheaded skulls. I'll respect you IF you respect me!

Unsurprisingly, a lot of other people in that group who were trying to fit in sounded like... the alternative. It was total submission, and suppressed free communication. It was an indication of how little respect was shown to independent thought that people felt like it was safest to express their beliefs/opinions/interests in uncertain tones, so that if an empowered 'other' challenged them, they could surrender the mental ground immediately and avoid being thought 'controversial.' [Controversy is ssooo subjective, referring to real trolling sometimes - but also used as shorthand for societal nonconformity.) Those who didn't surrender right away sometimes adopted a 'begging' tone, asking the other to mercifully consider their position. It rarely worked.

This is how people become sheeple.

Not me.

A Donation Has Been Made In Your Name…

(A Modern Indulgence)

 

Making donations in lieu of remembrances at weddings, funerals, christenings, birthdays, and even Christmas has been catching on. When it’s a prearranged convention within the social circle or family, especially in a really wealthy family/set that can get anything they want for themselves anytime, this can be a reasonable, even a good thing to do, but I’ve been seeing references online to other situations.

A young, relatively poor bride griped online that some of her better off relations donated in the one or both of the couple’s names rather than help them setting up their new household, and expected to be treated very well for it at the reception. She found this infuriating, but didn’t know how to say so graciously.

Similar non-voluntary donations occur almost daily. A mother got a card saying a donation was made in her name in lieu of a bouquet of flowers (or any other remembrance.) No home-cooked meals. No visits. No handmade gifts. Just that card. She tried to sound happier about it online than she obviously felt. I wonder how long she cried…

Someone ‘randomly’ donated to a Christian mission in a relative’s name. Notice came from the ministry itself, trying to thank the only benefactor they had on record. Because there was no notice, no card that said someone was doing this, the poor lady was very concerned that her bank account had been attacked in some way. Thankfully, this seemed not to be the case, but it was thoughtless indeed not to have sent some communication explaining the donation in her name. It made the ministry look like scam artists to her family, until it was finally remembered that this was a ministry that she had supported in better years. That alone can have serious repercussions for a ministry!

Perhaps the person was thinking of this verse:  

 ‘When you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing -  so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.” (Matt 6:3-4 NIV)

 I would say to them that while it’s good to give anonymously, it’s not good to impersonate someone else in the process. If the 'giver' doesn't even know what’s going on, they have reason to be concerned! Some causes say a lot to others about the values the giver supports. Unfortunately, many missions/foundations don't look too hard at the purported identity of the giver (as long as the check clears.) The potential for abuse is obvious. In this case, the choice was fine, but the method was not. If this was to make up for something some soul did or should have done, it backfired, since the 'secret giver' sinned against her again by worrying her unnecessarily. It still didn't mend past matters between her, the 'generous' Impersonator, and God. Remember:

"So if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift."  Matthew 5:23-24 ESV

 Or maybe somebody just thought it would be funny...

I have actually seen people say that they think it is clever to fulfill a social obligation by donating in someone’s name, especially when they don’t really like the person.  I could see that if you are being  manipulated by societal expectations (rather than by personal/familial connections) into giving to a much wealthier person that this could satisfy requirements, especially if the usual gift would definitely be encouraging them in sin. Often, however, its just a way to maintain appearances while indulging your spiteful side. There's nothing really loving about making a display of charity to strangers in lieu of caring for your friends and family.

People pretty much know they aren't being loving when they 'use' donations this way. A grouchy relation threatened on the ‘net (where I happened to read it) that they were going to give some little kids’ Christmas money to a charity because this person was angry with the parents. Again - he was indulging his anger, saving face with his family/social set, but certainly not trying to love his relatives with this decision. Its one thing to be too broke. Its another to be lashing out while pretending you aren't.

Other people have threatened to donate resources seriously needed by blood kin, stating plainly that they felt this would be more ‘blessed.’ (Usually this is accompanied by a lot of judgmental garbage.) Certainly it’s been easier to get a tax reduction or public praise for such an action, but the Bible plainly speaks to this particular type of 'donation.'

3 Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? 4 For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’^a and ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’^b 5 But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is ‘devoted to God,’ 6 they are not to ‘honor their father or mother’ with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. 7 You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:

8 “ ‘These people honor me with their lips,

but their hearts are far from me.

9 They worship me in vain;

their teachings are merely human rules.’^c ” Matthew 15: 3-9 NIV

This scene was also reported in Mark 7: 9-13

9And he continued, “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe^c your own traditions! 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and mother,’^d and, ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’^e 11But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is Corban (that is, devoted to God)— 12 then you no longer let them do anything for their father or mother. 13Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.” 
Mark 7: 9-13 NIV  [my thanks to biblehub.com]

I believe Jesus Christ was saying here that claiming that you gave "to God" does not remove your obligations to anyone in your family, your kids as well as your parents. I don't believe that the Bible supports 'donating to God' or 'the good of mankind' as an acceptable substitute for any who have real claims on us.

  But if any provideth not for his own, and especially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.1 Timothy 5: 8 Webster

Who are your 'own?' Your household, certainly, but this could also apply to fellow believers you know or have known. You are (allegedly) one in Christ Jesus. You can say you are donating to other believers generally when you pick a foreign mission field, but if this is in lieu of helping someone God pointed out to you in your extended clan, church, bible study, or community anywhere, you are in grave danger of crossing His revealed will. We cannot reach ALL our brothers and sisters on Earth, but we should certainly consider encouraging those God has made neighbors to us.

 But he replied to the man who told him, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?” And stretching out his hand toward his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers! For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother." Matthew 12:48-50

Some people even donate as a sort of penance to some other person, figuring to clear the sin debt before God this way. Now this can be a reasonable choice if the person/people they wronged are no longer available, as a tangible act demonstrating penance/contrition. However, if the injured brothers/sisters ARE available, and this is INSTEAD of apologizing or otherwise trying to mend the breach, God’s not necessarily going to be good with that. 

I see this particular use of ‘donating in your name’ as a modern indulgence, since what the person wants is their generosity with some mission or good cause somewhere else to count more than their sinful, hateful behavior in person. They are trying to buy sanctity, at their victims' expense. More technically, they are trying to buy an indulgence as it was understood by the less educated parishioners in the late medieval period.  Basically, they will give to their favorite cause, say their favorite prayers/praise (maybe,) do their favorite kind of ‘good works’ and all this will ensure that their sins towards others will be forgiven, forgotten, not even admitted to publicly, and no apologies necessary. Then they think, "I’ve done my bit, don’t bother me."

If this is where you are, and you think I am being unreasonable, may I ask you to reread Luke 10: 30-37. Imagine that YOU are the guy on the side of the road, bloodied and wounded. Would it make it all better if those who ignored your pain dropped a few extra coins in the poor box in your name? How about the robbers who hurt you? Can they just donate some good stuff to a cause they like and send you a postcard?

No?

You mean that's not the same thing as being a good neighbor to you?

Do tell.

Officially, using indulgences to ignore sins was never okay. Even indulgences back in those 'dark' days were supposed to be available only after the sinner had repented, confessed, and done some kind of penance. Indulgences could not officially be granted where there was no contrition, except when bought for those already dead (according to some.) This wasn't Biblical either, and was not a correct interpretation of what an indulgence was supposed to do. Eventually the Catholic Church made the appearance of this practice stop too, because then you had sinners cheerfully planning to pay for their mistresses, swindled relations, and brutal beatings of the serfs by arranging for indulgences to be bought as soon as they'd croaked. This kind of thing was what set off Luther's Ninety-Five Theses.

 "the Theses rejected the validity of indulgences (remissions of temporal punishment due for sins which have already been forgiven). They also view with great cynicism the practice of indulgences being sold, and thus the penance for sin representing a financial transaction rather than genuine contrition. Luther's Theses argued that the sale of indulgences was a gross violation of the original intention of confession and penance, and that Christians were being falsely told that they could find absolution through the purchase of indulgences."  Wikipedia "The Ninety-Five Theses."

I find it amazing that the whole Reformation was largely kicked off by the issue of people trying to spend money to save themselves - rather than really repent and treat their kin and neighbors well - and here we are, centuries later, with a slightly sublimated version that seems to be more popular daily. We are supposed to be providing for those we recognize as our own as best we can - first in our blood families, then in our faith families/friends, the poor nearby ('among us,') then to all rest of mankind. 

If anyone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen. 1 John 4:20 ESV

  “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others. Mathew 23:23 ESV

Where There's Smoke, There's a Hellfire Tongue...

People here like to say that "Where there's smoke, there's fire." Usually they are implying that if someone has been accused, they probably have done stuff to deserve it.

I usually respond that the fire is coming from their mouths, which is a reference to this verse:

And the tongue is a flame of fire. It is a whole world of wickedness, corrupting your entire body. It can set your whole life on fire, for it is set on fire by hell itself. James 3:6  NLT

 I wrote a post a while back that discussed "cognitive dissonance" in history, and in my mind I connected to the following verse, but I don't think I ever said so publicly.

Prov 26: 28A lying tongue hates those it crushes,
  And a flattering mouth works ruin. NASB

Alternate translations makes the point even clearer:

A lying tongue hates those it hurts, and a flattering mouth works ruin. NIV

A lying tongue hates its victims, and a flattering mouth works ruin.. ESV

 Its not commonly understood that those who mistreat others, even if it is 'only' verbally, will be prone to hate their victims. Their hatred can be as strong as if there had been a real incident to excuse it. Its not all that uncommon, but many people haven't recognized this behavior in action and don't want to believe that a 'quarrel' can be purely the product of mean-tempered gossip.

Prov 26:20 "Without wood a fire goes out; without a gossip a quarrel dies down." NIV
or
"Where no wood is, there the fire goes out: so where there is no talebearer, the strife ceases." KJ 2000

I wonder if following Christ's injunction to "Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which spitefully use you, and persecute you; (Matt 5:44)" simply opens us to more grace from Heaven. Well, I know it does, but I am wondering if there is a conditioning aspect as well. Both the Cat & Dog Whisperer have pointed out that putting animals in a physical position that usually reflects a good mood, improves their mood. Also associating another creature or activity with anything positive, makes it more acceptable to the pet. Humans like to think we are beyond such effects, but I wonder.

I say this, because the opposite is also true. I've had plenty of practice praying for those who have spitefully used us.  I know how much it can help the healing process. If you sincerely pray for your enemies salvation, if you consistently seek to do and speak what is true and kind towards those who have done you wrong, your anger towards them will pass. You will be capable of empathy towards the temptations and prejudices that beset them. You will be capable of complex objective thought when their name comes up, instead of blind incoherent rage. Aside from the spiritual benefits, this is a lot more useful when you are trying to work out what 'really' happened - and how to stop it. All those messages about forgiving others for your own sake? They are a lot easier to internalize when you followed Jesus' instructions.

 

 

Is this /really/ pure love?

Well love does tend to give freely, forgive easily, hope for the best for the beloved, and look to see the best in the loved ones.

~ However ~
The words in the pic could be a sideways way of demanding unconditional support of anything those you care about decide to do (no matter how unloving, sinful. or just plain rotten.) There do have to be limits somewhere, because even the best people will make bad choices sometimes. When you ask them to turn from what you see as doing evil, the basis of these words could be used to accuse you of having only 'conditional love,' talking with intention, giving of yourself in order to influence, and so on. Can you honestly care and not respond if what the loved one is doing is going to hurt them and/or others? Asking someone you care about to take a better course is an action of love, not a condition or an expectation that holds your love hostage. When you care, you do generally hope that the one(s) you care about will not seriously turn away from the ethics & decency that you valued in the first place. Speaking the truth as kindly as you know how can still be called the opposite, because it isn't praise and they didn't want to hear it. and so on...

Best to compare statements like this with 1 Corinthians: 13

1I f I speak in the languages of humans and angels but have no love, I have become a reverberating gong or a clashing cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy and can understand all secrets and every form of knowledge, and if I have absolute faith so as to move mountains but have no love, I am nothing. 3 Even if I give away everything that I have and sacrifice myself, but have no love, I gain nothing.

4 Love is always patient;
love is always kind;
love is never envious
or arrogant with pride.

Nor is she conceited,
5 and she is never rude;
she never thinks just of herself
or ever gets annoyed.
She never is resentful;
6 is never glad with sin;
she’s always glad to side with truth,
and pleased that truth will win.b

7 She bears up under everything;
believes the best in all;
there is no limit to her hope,
and never will she fall.
8 Love never fails.

....
11 When I was a child, I spoke like a child, thought like a child, and reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up my childish ways. 12 Now we see only an indistinct image in a mirror, but then we will be face to face. Now what I know is incomplete, but then I will know fully, even as I have been fully known.

13 Right now three things remain: faith, hope, and love. But the greatest of these is love.
1 Corinthians 13: 1- 13 ISV

INFJ Panda

Once again I get the INFJ result. I am (still) Panda! Watch me eat bamboo! LOL Oh well, at least I'm cute & cuddly! (in a friendly, roly-poly way :)

      Actually, the write-ups (including the friendship, work, strengths etc) do describe me very well. I am still puzzled by how much I regard as choices (like idealism) are said to be a part of this 'personality type.' Perhaps this quiz reflects a mix of nature and worldview? Apparently I am the rarest type too (only 1% of the population is estimated to be INFJ.) That might explain why so few people understand where I'm really coming from. heh

This is the direct link for my result http://www.16personalities.com/INFJ-personality

==========================================

The Arcane Front

Personality Type—Which are you?
[Full-size image: http://devsmt.wikispaces.com/MBTI

]

Take the test (Bryers-Briggs Type Indicator): http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/jtypes2.asp

Type Descriptions (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator: 16 Total): http://www.16personalities.com/type-descriptions

I'm an INTJ, which one are you?

ENFJ - sensitive, The Actor
ENFP - procrastinator, The Reporter
ENTJ - confrontational, The Pioneer
ENTP - dangerous, The Inventor
ESFJ - controlling,The Enthusiast
ESFP - lazy, The Ambassador
ESTJ - unemotional, The Director
ESTP - unpredictable, The Conqueror
INFJ - scared, The Empathic
INFP - avoidant, The Romantic
INTJ - impassive, The Analyst
INTP - vicious, The Observer
ISFJ - overworked, The Guardian
ISFP - nonverbal, The Peacemaker
ISTJ - impatient, The Pragmatist
ISTP - risky, The Artisan

 

Hidden In The Bubble

Paul Simon's Graceland album is still the best I ever heard from him, and one of my all time favorite cds. "Graceland" & "Call Me Al" are the most famous tracks from it, but he's actually got much better ones on there, most notably "The Boy in the Bubble" - which is an awesome title because it gets right into the way we naturally cocoon ourselves away from trouble, turning away and concentrating on the shiniest aspects of life.

Paul Simon's song hits on several levels at once, all of them fairly deep. Its a remembrance of the forgotten. Its a recognition of the disparity in life experience between those drinking in the frequent announcements of amazing devices and discoveries of our civilization and those struggling to survive on its fringes. Its the echo of all the times we feel threatened/scared of the threats in the news, and the way the reporters lighten up the reports of impending WWIII, disease, city bombings, lost lives of our soldiers, natural disasters etc with beautiful pics from the Hubble telescope or some cool dancing robot from Japan or the latest medical breakthroughs. Its all that and more, and the fact that a lot of the song's musical complexity is inspired by African folk music just seems perfect somehow.

Its been a lot of years since this album came out, since this music video was made, and it just amazes me that both are every bit as relevant now as when they came out, maybe even more so.

Maybe you saw Graceland on someone's "100 albums you should hear before you die" list? Yes, it really IS that good. Just felt like sharing.

Good Thoughts from FB

Just a selection of photo/thoughts from the feed I thought were worth saving. Many times the quotes are unattributed.

(photo below) from

"There is a difference between giving up and knowing when you have had enough"


quote from pic below is  ― Abbey Lee Kershaw

"Most people would learn from their mistakes if they weren't so busy denying them"

(both photos below) from

(photo below) from

Susan's Thoughts:: It is true that love is most important, but a working brain is also on the short list of highly valuable assets, whether used to help yourself or others. You don't have to choose between intelligence and affection/kindness.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Our understanding of life grows in ironic soil. We know happiness best after experiencing sadness. We value a presence the most in its absence. We remember the peace of silence when it is noisy and appreciate the vibrancy of noise in silence. We appreciate what we had the most when it is gone.
(I am paraphrasing several statuses with this one)

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

(photo below) from

Two things define you: your patience (perseverance) when you have nothing and your attitude (gratitude) when you have everything.
(photo below) from

(and who will help you repack with better stuff!)
 (photo below) from

every woman must also decide if she will walk in the the light of creative altruism...
(photo below) from

"What you are is a complicated girl with simple needs. You need your books and time to read, and you need a few friends and someone - not to take care of you but to care for you. If you have all those things, you'll always be alright."

― Brian Morton, Breakable You 

(photo below) from

(photo below) from

Yep! Show respect and kindness to friends, family, strangers, and even enemies (though the active kindness part has to be done with caution/wisdom.) Christ calls us to love our neighbors, just as Christ first loved us. Not one of us deserved such grace before His cleansing, healing, & redemption, so let us show what grace and mercy we safely can to those in our lives. (This doesn't mean you can't defend yourself from those who would hurt you.)  (photo below) from

(photo below) from

Poe Boy

[above photos from] Good observation. Its hard to be 'cool' if you deeply care - about any principles, God/faith, creature, person, cause, geek-dom, community(ies) or related company(ies) - most especially if you fear for their future success/safety/salvation/creative direction etc. The human heart runs hot! Conversely, its easy when there are no deep emotional attachments to be lighthearted about it. Strong affection, respect, and commitment can change the world, but very often the world prefers to keep its relationship options open. ;)


>The Art of Illusion! photo below from
>http://creativepixar.blogspot.com/

 "So, I told him my name again and get this guys! He gets all excited and says..." quoth the Raven Nevermore

Dream Home?

When the subject of dream homes came up, I often haven't had much of an opinion. I think I liked French Provencal for a while as a tween, and leaned toward Neo-Classical for years, but only as an ideal. I have seen the inside of enough well maintained Federalist-style homes to realize that too much formalism is not something I'd want to live with daily. I loved the big Victorian-era mansion/farmhouse where I lived as a little one (with our friends), and for years I thought that's what I'd go for if I won the lottery or something, but I also loved that old log cabin mill-house in the country. I have fantasized about about cave homes, island getaways, hobbit homes in the hills, big tree houses... (but never that weird giant wasp ball in Riven ;)

I've been thinking about what kind of home I'd choose lately (if it was all up to me and I had lots of money) - largely because a FB friend has been exploring the idea for herself and sharing a dizzying array of photos featuring idealized settings in various styles. The stone and log cabin-y ones appeal to me most right now, with the tree-houses taking a close second. You know, like this one...

[ photo below is The old red grist mill, near Eminence Missouri
like>>>Most Amazing Pics in the World for more pic......]

or this... [image below taken from]

maybe with a waterfall like this nearby ^_^
[photo below from]

 

[image above from Ray Kellett Photography taken off FB from]

and the inside would be relaxing, spacious, inviting, sturdy, with plenty of textural interest... 

[photo below - Cottage
http://dreamdecorator.blogspot.com/2013/04/cottage.html

 

Dream Decorators ]

[photo above from

www.wholesaleloghomes.com

 

Teton Heritage Builders]

[image above from Loghome.com taken from ]

 hhmmm... I would so like a house like this, especially with less of the 2nd floor lost and a metalwork chandelier. (I'm not into hunting trophies.) I really like the stonework, the log cabin esthetic, and the backdrop of woods and misty mountains. Very relaxing! 

[photo below from]

Outside there would be flower planters like this...
[image below from]

and benches out in the lush yard...

[this bench image from New Funny & Amazing Pictures @ http://pics15.com/random

]

and a enclosed garden with walls of stone, where the herbs and roses grow...

[photo above from Old Moss Woman]