Why did God decide that it was okay to make tigers so large?
When did he come to the point where it was okay to put such smell in a skunk?
How did he think that biting flies were a good idea?
Who told him to make women so beautiful?
If I had a choice, and I could do it again, I might choose otherwise. We might all be hairy and sharp and have angles and rough spots and pee standing up. If I had a choice, I might do it over.
No one should have so much power without a license.
--John Plantagenet
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
I will make you cry tears of blood. Get ready to be depressed.
Dance in the Full Moon
O, the Frailty of Memory
Pride Goeth Before a Fall
Hindsight
My Serial Mistakes
- Top40 (46)
- NaNoWriMo (19)
- Sherlock Holmes (8)
- Thomas (7)
- Alesia (5)
This is Your Fault
-
I remember him milking the cow who's teat had a tear. She was healing, but she still let her milk down every morning because she didn...
-
"Frikin gorgeous." "Yeah." "And you know, she's about my age. That's what gets me really annoyed." ...
-
I'm in the business of relentless optimism. My friend's boat broke down five miles from the ramp and a storm whipped us backwards, s...
Sheeple
licensing
No, the stuff on this blog is not free. It is not yours. You may not have it. It is mine, mine alone, all mine.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
I am licensing this with Creative Commons (no derivatives, no commercialization) because I'm such a nice guy.
So feel free to post this whenever wherever you want, as long as you give me credit and a linkback, you don't make any money (even ad revenue) from it, and you don't change it at all. It would be nice as well if you gave me a heads up, first.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
Hmm. Job?
ReplyDeleteNo. Captain uxorious himself: John.
ReplyDeleteYes, but doesn't it sound like for what God chastised Job?
ReplyDeleteIt sounds like it, I guess. Questioning.
ReplyDeleteBut at the same time, if we never question, we will never have the answers--we'll be weak when the devil attacks.
So I think, anyway.
Well, God challenged Job back when Job questioned Him, but then He blessed him twice as much as before.
ReplyDeleteDavid questioned God, too, and he was called a man after God's own heart.
I always say that the best barometer of how much a person respects me is whether or not that person goes to me to talk about something I say or do that he or she doesn't like. If we're mad at God and go yell at Him, I think we're better off than if we're mad at God and run away.
Not talking honestly is what kills relationships, after all.
Well, having things that need talking about is probably ACTUALLY the thing that kills relationships. Mute people can have relationships too.
ReplyDeleteI don't think it's having things that need talking about. I think it's the lack of communication.
ReplyDeleteGod asks us to talk to Him. If we can't have a successful relationship with the most perfect Being in the universe without communication, how can we expect to have a successful relationship with anyone else, anyone who doesn't already know everything about us, without communication?
Pardon my non-political correctness. But I believe mute people talk with their hands? Yes? Even Helen Keller had lots to say to the world, and her life became better when she learned how to give and receive information from the outside world.
Ya ya sure. But I think my point still stands. Dudes have relationships predicated on standing on a riverbank merely fishing, grunting, and drinking. That is a relationship. Sure, it may not transcend the level of other people's interactions, but the fact that they don't have anything to talk about means they don't need to talk.
ReplyDeleteHaving issues about which to talk (and not talking about them) is more properly a relationship killer than is just not talking.
I'm just saying. Going to the root of the cause will find the purer reason. It's like saying someone got cancer because they smoked. Well, ok. But they got cancer because their cells mutated and their immune system couldn't weed it out. Root cause.
Robby, you could never have such a relationship, could you? I mean . . . you talk a lot.
ReplyDeleteYes, dudes don't talk much, but they talk when it counts.
How exactly does one not have issues?
Hmm. Interesting that you compare it to cancer. It sounds like one of my rants on sin. But anyway . . . I honestly, truly believe that the only root cause of a failed relationship is giving up. My parents have had so many issues that they had to work out, and I thought there was no way that they could make it, but they did. They chose to.
My sister has a great relationship with her husband, and they've weathered just about every difficulty a couple can face.
It's not the issues that kills. There are always issues. There will always be issues. I have issues with God, but I am learning to go to Him with them, just as David did-- just as Job did. Has there ever been a person who didn't have issues with God? But we work through those issues.
That doesn't mean I pray constantly or have this running monologue in my head (that's because I'm an English major), but when I need to talk to Him, I do. I think this is true of human relationships. If you have an issue with a dude, and you don't communicate to him that you have an issue (whether with words or not), then there's a problem. I mean, unless two people are exactly alike in everything they are, want to be, and do, there will be issues. Unless you're Gandhi or something. Oh wait-- he had issues.
I might not ever be able to have such an issue, you're right. Shame on me for saying it. But I seem to find women who don't communicate as freely as I do, and that's disconcerting.
ReplyDeleteDudes are just as guilty of not talking when they should as women are. I think this is something that everyone can work on.
And how to not have issues: Never let your relationship grow. I mean, I don't have any issues with some of my friends, and it's mostly because I only hang out with them for lunch and when I cross their paths. No issues. No NEED for communication. But if you're working for that, all you'll have is shallow, meaningless relationships.
And giving up is a big part of why some relationships don't work. But in order for "giving up" to be so deadly, there needs to be an issue that the giving up is letting through (Unless the "giving up" becomes the issue). The apathy is not usually the thing that kills relationships (I still hold). It is the fact that you have an issue and you let it go unaddressed. BUT YOU HAVE TO HAVE AN ISSUE FIRST!
See what I mean?
You may find women who don't communicate as freely as you do, but that doesn't mean either style of communication is wrong as long as the communication happens somehow. But . . . can you understand each other? I think that's what matters.
ReplyDeleteI know many dudes who don't talk but have a great understanding of each other, and many dudes who talk constantly (case in point, my dad). But I honestly believe that there are supposed to be differences of personality in the world. They don't always work in a successful relationship, but God made people different for a reason.
I don't know. I want to say stuff that I can't articulate here.
Yes. "Never let your relationship grow."
I see what you mean. But I've seen people give up on a relationship without any major issues-- they just . . . got comfortable . . . and realized they were just friends who kissed sometimes. So . . . yeah, you have a point. I think our points aren't diametrically opposed.
I assume I know your example already.
ReplyDeleteI was thinking of more than one, but probably yes.
ReplyDeleteI don't know. I mean, if two people are happy without talking much, then good. If one is happy without talking while the other is miserable, then that's a problem, yes? If one is happy talking a lot while the other is miserable, then that is also a problem, yes?
But how will the other person know to shut up (and not be hurt by the request) if the other doesn't ask honestly?
Passive-aggressive notes.
ReplyDeleteBut more seriously, I accept your premise but deny it's scope. Obviously, communication is dreadfully important. But I just don't think it's the root cause of a dying relationship. For my money, the death is always traceable to a conflict. Not a conversation. Conversations are ABOUT problems.
It's like "the love of money is the root of all evil." spending your money on an electronic dog milker is not the root. It's the love of having more money.
Fascinating argument.
ReplyDeleteDoes this mean that Adam and Eve would have sinned had the snake not reasoned with them?
I would like to think not. But I can't guarantee a thing, Janelle.
ReplyDeleteSeriously, I don't think so. But part of me is afraid they would have sinned.
I don't have an answer to that, but the question struck me, and I thought . . . maybe it would strike you, too.
ReplyDeleteI heard someone say, once, that Eve sinned because she stayed and talked to the serpent.
I heard another someone say that she sinned because she left her husband when she knew she shouldn't.
All I know is that somewhere along the line, she doubted that what God/her husband? told her to do was best, and then she acted on that doubt.
Was she afraid to ask? What would have happened if she had?
Does this mean that everyone has issues, even in perfection?
(I honestly believe that God would have answered their questions/doubts at the right time, at the perfect time, if they had waited/asked/trusted. I don't think the sin was curiosity. But I don't know.)
I think that the main cause of her sin was disobeying God. But I could be wrong.
ReplyDeleteYou know, tricky root causes.
Well . . . WHY did she disobey God?
ReplyDeleteIs that an important thing?
Because I think we disobey God in different ways, but we do it all for the same reasons, which makes me think the reason for the disobedience is the main cause. But I'm not 100% sure on this. Clearly.
We're delving into the part of the discussion that is pure speculation. I'm not willing to engage in egregious fact-making, so you are free to go on yourself, if need be.
ReplyDeleteWas there a part of this conversation that wasn't pure speculation?
ReplyDelete