PLOT
Eddie informs Dagny that McNamara, the contractor for the Rio Norte Line, has suddenly retired without explanation. After a night of sex, James tells Betty Pope he is going to put Dagny in her place at the Board Meeting. James finds out Mexico has nationalized the mine and the railroad. James takes credit in front of the Board for minimizing TT's loss by running fewer and poorer quality trains. The "Anti-dog-eat-dog Rule" is passed as a measure of "voluntary self-regulation". The Phoenix-Durango (Dan Conway) has 9 months left to operate. Orren Boyle takes credit for the Rule and tells James that it's his turn to deliver. Dagny offers Dan Conway help to fight the Rule. Dan decides to retire. Ellis Wyatt delivers an ultimatum to Dagny, "Get me service in 9 months or I'll take you down with me." Dagny promises service in 9 months. Hank agrees to deliver the rail in 9 months, instead of 12 months, at a higher price.
SUBPLOT (loose ends)
The United Locomotive Works has still not delivered the engines. They have no reasons for the delays and no idea when they will be available.
Halley Background - Dagny goes home and listens to Halley's Fourth Concerto while we learn about Richard Halley and his retirement.
Francisco d'Anconia - Dagny reads in the paper that Francisco is in NYC "to witness the farce". Mrs. Vail took a shot at her husband and told the newspaper of her romance with Francisco during last New Year's Eve. Orren and James believe Francisco has a way to get their money back, because he's never lost, but they can't get an appointment with him.
Next Post
Table of Contents
Wednesday, December 20, 2006
Tuesday, December 19, 2006
AS 1:3 The Top and The Bottom Application
PRACTICAL APPLICATION (worth rereading)
This chapter is worth rereading just to refocus the mind on the core themes, because they are all linked here. To that end, I will save the examples for when they are explored in the following chapters.
One technique mentioned in this chapter is the sole topic of a best selling book "First Things First". When James tells Dagny to run more trains on the San Sebastian Line, Dagny replies with: "Which runs do you wish me to cut and on which of our lines -- in order to get the Diesels and the steel coaches?"
This comes from a realization that resources are finite and must by prioritized. Despite what James' side of the scale believes, "you can't do everything" and "you can't do something from nothing". Until the line can make money, it can't justify itself. Accomplishing a task implies that I'm not working on something else. What do you want me NOT to do? THAT is the most effective way to deal with people (bosses) that overburden you. People who overburden you are not in touch with reality. They flee from reality. Your making them decide "what not to do" makes them face reality. If they are on the positive side of the scale, they will make a decision. If they are on the negative side, they will evade and ultimately leave you alone. Most likely they will find someone else to overburden.
Also, there are three sections in this chapter. Each section involves a meeting. Look at how they differ:
Section #1
Jim, Orren, Paul, and Wesley (Rearden's man) give us an example of passive aggressive people talking to passive aggressive people. Consequently, the discussion is filled with contradictions.
Notice the setting: "The ceiling was that of a cellar, so heavy and low that people stooped when crossing the room, as if the weight of the vaulting rested on their shoulders. There were no windows..."
The symbolic representation of the entire conversation is given with this description of the setting: "The place was entered by way of narrow steps that led down, as if descending deep under the ground."
In reality: "This was the most expensive barroom in New York and it was built on the roof of a skyscraper."
Four passive aggressive people have a contradictory conversation in a setting that required narrow steps that seemed to lead underground when in reality they were as exposed as the roof of a skyscraper.
Section #2
Jim initiates the conversation with Dagny. The last time they talked, Dagny initiated it and won. This time Jim initiates and still loses. So now we know that it doesn't matter who initiates the conversation between a passive aggressive person and an excellent person...the excellent person will always win if they remain excellent.
Notice the setting: "She had always felt that the concourse looked like a temple. Glancing up at the distant ceiling, she saw dim vaults supported by giant granite columns, and the tops of vast windows glazed by darkness. The vaulting held the solemn peace of a cathedral, spread in protection high above the activity of men."
This room is physically at ground level, yet it is filled with active people and the ceiling gave the room the feeling of a cathedral. The first setting was physically in the clouds, but filled with inactive people who were appeared to be supporting the weight of the ceiling.
Furthermore: "To look at that statue whenever she crossed the concourse, was the only form of prayer she knew."
"The statue was of a young man with a tall, gaunt body and an angular face. He held his head as if he faced a challenge and found joy in his capacity to meet it. All that Dagny wanted of life was contained in the desire to hold her head as he did."
This is Dagny's "worldview" or "religion".
Section #3
Eddie talks to a day laborer who he treats like a priest or God...it is Eddie's confessional. We see an "average" person talking to an abstract person who seems to just ask questions. So, the conversation is one-sided and not adversarial. This is the most middle of the road conversation possible...it is completely factual.
The setting: "The cafeteria lay underground. It was a large room with walls of white tile that glittered reflections of electric lights and looked like silver brocade. It had a high ceiling, sparkling counters of glass and chromium, a sense of space and light."
This room is physically underground, yet had a high ceiling, and a sense of space and light...everything the first setting should have had but didn't.
This is the exact opposite of the first section in every way...
SUPPLEMENT
Some say AS shows exaggerated examples, what I've been calling a -5 or -6. In reality, these examples are the logical end of anyone who starts venturing down the negative side of the scale. Like the group in the bar, they are full of excuses. Deep down, these people know it and try their best to hang out in the middle because it's comfortable in the short-term. In reality, this only delays the inevitable: the need to pick a direction (positive or negative) and pursue it. That is, demonstrate integrity. The middle is ALWAYS evil. Out of all the Biblical references regarding the dangers of not pursuing a direction, this is the most famous: "I (God) know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would that thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth." (Bible)
"Then he (Nat) pledged his wife as security for a loan from a millionaire who hated him and admired her beauty." This is strangely familiar to a situation that arose in "The Fountainhead". While "The Fountainhead" is a great book, it is a junior version of AS, in my opinion. Reading both made me realize that Ms. Rand was not fully attaining her goals in "The Fountainhead". Consequently, I believe she didn't quite attain her goals in AS. She got an order of magnitude closer, but things can ALWAYS be better.
Next Post
Table of Contents
This chapter is worth rereading just to refocus the mind on the core themes, because they are all linked here. To that end, I will save the examples for when they are explored in the following chapters.
One technique mentioned in this chapter is the sole topic of a best selling book "First Things First". When James tells Dagny to run more trains on the San Sebastian Line, Dagny replies with: "Which runs do you wish me to cut and on which of our lines -- in order to get the Diesels and the steel coaches?"
This comes from a realization that resources are finite and must by prioritized. Despite what James' side of the scale believes, "you can't do everything" and "you can't do something from nothing". Until the line can make money, it can't justify itself. Accomplishing a task implies that I'm not working on something else. What do you want me NOT to do? THAT is the most effective way to deal with people (bosses) that overburden you. People who overburden you are not in touch with reality. They flee from reality. Your making them decide "what not to do" makes them face reality. If they are on the positive side of the scale, they will make a decision. If they are on the negative side, they will evade and ultimately leave you alone. Most likely they will find someone else to overburden.
Also, there are three sections in this chapter. Each section involves a meeting. Look at how they differ:
Section #1
Jim, Orren, Paul, and Wesley (Rearden's man) give us an example of passive aggressive people talking to passive aggressive people. Consequently, the discussion is filled with contradictions.
Notice the setting: "The ceiling was that of a cellar, so heavy and low that people stooped when crossing the room, as if the weight of the vaulting rested on their shoulders. There were no windows..."
The symbolic representation of the entire conversation is given with this description of the setting: "The place was entered by way of narrow steps that led down, as if descending deep under the ground."
In reality: "This was the most expensive barroom in New York and it was built on the roof of a skyscraper."
Four passive aggressive people have a contradictory conversation in a setting that required narrow steps that seemed to lead underground when in reality they were as exposed as the roof of a skyscraper.
Section #2
Jim initiates the conversation with Dagny. The last time they talked, Dagny initiated it and won. This time Jim initiates and still loses. So now we know that it doesn't matter who initiates the conversation between a passive aggressive person and an excellent person...the excellent person will always win if they remain excellent.
Notice the setting: "She had always felt that the concourse looked like a temple. Glancing up at the distant ceiling, she saw dim vaults supported by giant granite columns, and the tops of vast windows glazed by darkness. The vaulting held the solemn peace of a cathedral, spread in protection high above the activity of men."
This room is physically at ground level, yet it is filled with active people and the ceiling gave the room the feeling of a cathedral. The first setting was physically in the clouds, but filled with inactive people who were appeared to be supporting the weight of the ceiling.
Furthermore: "To look at that statue whenever she crossed the concourse, was the only form of prayer she knew."
"The statue was of a young man with a tall, gaunt body and an angular face. He held his head as if he faced a challenge and found joy in his capacity to meet it. All that Dagny wanted of life was contained in the desire to hold her head as he did."
This is Dagny's "worldview" or "religion".
Section #3
Eddie talks to a day laborer who he treats like a priest or God...it is Eddie's confessional. We see an "average" person talking to an abstract person who seems to just ask questions. So, the conversation is one-sided and not adversarial. This is the most middle of the road conversation possible...it is completely factual.
The setting: "The cafeteria lay underground. It was a large room with walls of white tile that glittered reflections of electric lights and looked like silver brocade. It had a high ceiling, sparkling counters of glass and chromium, a sense of space and light."
This room is physically underground, yet had a high ceiling, and a sense of space and light...everything the first setting should have had but didn't.
This is the exact opposite of the first section in every way...
SUPPLEMENT
Some say AS shows exaggerated examples, what I've been calling a -5 or -6. In reality, these examples are the logical end of anyone who starts venturing down the negative side of the scale. Like the group in the bar, they are full of excuses. Deep down, these people know it and try their best to hang out in the middle because it's comfortable in the short-term. In reality, this only delays the inevitable: the need to pick a direction (positive or negative) and pursue it. That is, demonstrate integrity. The middle is ALWAYS evil. Out of all the Biblical references regarding the dangers of not pursuing a direction, this is the most famous: "I (God) know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would that thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth." (Bible)
"Then he (Nat) pledged his wife as security for a loan from a millionaire who hated him and admired her beauty." This is strangely familiar to a situation that arose in "The Fountainhead". While "The Fountainhead" is a great book, it is a junior version of AS, in my opinion. Reading both made me realize that Ms. Rand was not fully attaining her goals in "The Fountainhead". Consequently, I believe she didn't quite attain her goals in AS. She got an order of magnitude closer, but things can ALWAYS be better.
Next Post
Table of Contents
Monday, December 18, 2006
AS 1:3 The Top and The Bottom Plot and Comments
PLOT
James Taggart, Orren Boyle, Paul Larkin and Wesley Mouch have drinks in an exclusive bar in NYC. Wesley Mouch is Rearden's Washington man. Orren says the reason he couldn't deliver the rail is that he doesn't have access to enough iron ore, while people like Rearden have all the iron ore they need. The group is counting on Paul Larkin to convince his "friend" (Hank) to help everyone else. The conversation turns to the San Sebastian Mines, which all four have invested in heavily. Francisco d'Anconia, a man who NEVER fails at a business venture, is running the project. James learns that Dagny is using inferior equipment on the San Sebastian Line. James learns from Dagny that she has reduced the runs to one passenger train everyday and one freight train every other day because the railroad can't pay for itself and TT has desperate needs elsewhere. Dagny believes the Rio Norte Line will pay for the other lines.
SUBPLOT (loose ends)
Cigarettes - In all of Ms. Rand's books, the positive side of the scale smokes. She gives the reason in the speech by the cigarette man. Don't make me write more…
Nat Taggart Background - An explanation of circumstances behind the Nat Taggart Legend is given.
Halley - "She (Dagny) loves the music of Richard Halley. Outside the railroad, that's the only thing she loves." Eddie Willers
COMMENTS
This chapter actually gives away the book to a second time reader in much the same way that "The Sixth Sense" is given away early the second time its viewed. I'm going to flesh out a couple points for clarity and that's it. There's too much in this chapter and it's too early.
Confessional - Eddie (humanity) needs to deal with his struggle "in the middle" of the scale by going to confessional. Yes, it's a device. The plot will get more complex and this device helps order the importance of events. For the sports fans among us, it reminds me of the "Game Reset (Summary)" used in a TV broadcast of a basketball game. Eddie goes to a day laborer at TT whenever he's stressed. He can trust this person because they are on the same side and the guy's job is insignificant. "He could talk as he did not talk anywhere else, admitting things he would not confess to anyone, thinking aloud...” Think of this person as Eddie's priest or God. I can't resist one more quote (from Eddie): "Motive power -- you can't imagine how important that is. That's the heart of everything.... What are you smiling at?" Eddie, I think God knows all about that!
Dagny Background - The only subject she loved in school was math, she felt excitement in solving problems, and she was eager to meet another, harder test. She did the work long before she was granted the title. She felt talent was becoming rarer every year. She had fits of torture longing for a friend or an enemy with a mind better than her own. She did not have time to feel pain. For this she was called conceited and selfish. Clearly, her side of the scale is focused on challenges, not comfort. "He (the statue of Nat) held his head as if he faced a challenge and found joy in his capacity to meet it. All that Dagny wanted of life was contained in the desire to hold her head as he did."
Scale - Paul Larkin is somewhere in the middle. He likes Hank, but he also hangs around James and Orren. "The proper course is always, in my opinion, in the middle. So it is, I think, the duty of society to snip the extremes, now isn't it?" This statement is hypocritical on its own merit for using an extreme word ("always"). However, this group does a good job of being in the middle and focusing on blame. Just a sampling:
"The only justification of private property is public service."
"Afterall, private property is a trusteeship held for the benefit of society as a whole."
"On the other hand, there's the blight of unbridled competition."
"Now he (Orren) headed an enormous concern which had swallowed up many smaller companies."
"Since I hold the purse strings, I expect to get my money's worth and at my pleasure."
"It's private property, the last piece of it left in Mexico, and that does seem to make a difference."
"All of them had invested heavily in the stock of the San Sebastian Mines."
When the San Sebastian Mines are a success, how much are they going to share with society? Wouldn't nationalizing benefit "society" more? Why are they against nationalizing? My favorite...
Orren (agreeing with James): It's my absolute opinion that in our complex industrial society, no business enterprise can succeed without sharing the burden of the problems of other enterprises.
James: I wish they'd fire that bartender.
Next Post
Table of Contents
James Taggart, Orren Boyle, Paul Larkin and Wesley Mouch have drinks in an exclusive bar in NYC. Wesley Mouch is Rearden's Washington man. Orren says the reason he couldn't deliver the rail is that he doesn't have access to enough iron ore, while people like Rearden have all the iron ore they need. The group is counting on Paul Larkin to convince his "friend" (Hank) to help everyone else. The conversation turns to the San Sebastian Mines, which all four have invested in heavily. Francisco d'Anconia, a man who NEVER fails at a business venture, is running the project. James learns that Dagny is using inferior equipment on the San Sebastian Line. James learns from Dagny that she has reduced the runs to one passenger train everyday and one freight train every other day because the railroad can't pay for itself and TT has desperate needs elsewhere. Dagny believes the Rio Norte Line will pay for the other lines.
SUBPLOT (loose ends)
Cigarettes - In all of Ms. Rand's books, the positive side of the scale smokes. She gives the reason in the speech by the cigarette man. Don't make me write more…
Nat Taggart Background - An explanation of circumstances behind the Nat Taggart Legend is given.
Halley - "She (Dagny) loves the music of Richard Halley. Outside the railroad, that's the only thing she loves." Eddie Willers
COMMENTS
This chapter actually gives away the book to a second time reader in much the same way that "The Sixth Sense" is given away early the second time its viewed. I'm going to flesh out a couple points for clarity and that's it. There's too much in this chapter and it's too early.
Confessional - Eddie (humanity) needs to deal with his struggle "in the middle" of the scale by going to confessional. Yes, it's a device. The plot will get more complex and this device helps order the importance of events. For the sports fans among us, it reminds me of the "Game Reset (Summary)" used in a TV broadcast of a basketball game. Eddie goes to a day laborer at TT whenever he's stressed. He can trust this person because they are on the same side and the guy's job is insignificant. "He could talk as he did not talk anywhere else, admitting things he would not confess to anyone, thinking aloud...” Think of this person as Eddie's priest or God. I can't resist one more quote (from Eddie): "Motive power -- you can't imagine how important that is. That's the heart of everything.... What are you smiling at?" Eddie, I think God knows all about that!
Dagny Background - The only subject she loved in school was math, she felt excitement in solving problems, and she was eager to meet another, harder test. She did the work long before she was granted the title. She felt talent was becoming rarer every year. She had fits of torture longing for a friend or an enemy with a mind better than her own. She did not have time to feel pain. For this she was called conceited and selfish. Clearly, her side of the scale is focused on challenges, not comfort. "He (the statue of Nat) held his head as if he faced a challenge and found joy in his capacity to meet it. All that Dagny wanted of life was contained in the desire to hold her head as he did."
Scale - Paul Larkin is somewhere in the middle. He likes Hank, but he also hangs around James and Orren. "The proper course is always, in my opinion, in the middle. So it is, I think, the duty of society to snip the extremes, now isn't it?" This statement is hypocritical on its own merit for using an extreme word ("always"). However, this group does a good job of being in the middle and focusing on blame. Just a sampling:
"The only justification of private property is public service."
"Afterall, private property is a trusteeship held for the benefit of society as a whole."
"On the other hand, there's the blight of unbridled competition."
"Now he (Orren) headed an enormous concern which had swallowed up many smaller companies."
"Since I hold the purse strings, I expect to get my money's worth and at my pleasure."
"It's private property, the last piece of it left in Mexico, and that does seem to make a difference."
"All of them had invested heavily in the stock of the San Sebastian Mines."
When the San Sebastian Mines are a success, how much are they going to share with society? Wouldn't nationalizing benefit "society" more? Why are they against nationalizing? My favorite...
Orren (agreeing with James): It's my absolute opinion that in our complex industrial society, no business enterprise can succeed without sharing the burden of the problems of other enterprises.
James: I wish they'd fire that bartender.
Next Post
Table of Contents
Friday, December 15, 2006
AS 1:2 The Chain Conclusions
PRACTICAL APPLICATION (worth rereading)
Hank and his family - This chapter demonstrates how to deal with people who are on the offensive, especially when they use sarcasm. Hank doesn't agitate them intentionally. He looks Long Term and always assumes his family has a positive motive. The reason the book is so long is that Ms. Rand does such a thorough job of identifying every known reason in each scene. (Think back to Dagny's questioning of Owen Kellogg.) James took several evasive actions in the first chapter and we saw how to handle each one. In this chapter, the family has a negative interpretation for Hank’s good actions; we saw how Hank handled each one. One example, instead of nailing Philip when he had the chance to, he recognizes he has won and works towards the long-term.
"A fool utters his whole mind, but a wise man keeps it until the end." (Bible) Try this the next time you have a debate: When you have more than one reason that supports your point, give all your reasons EXCEPT your strongest. If your opponent is excellent (as Hank assumes) then they will know you are stronger because you didn't have to state the obvious. If your opponent is not excellent (emotional), they will pursue the only opening you've given. Now they are trapped. They have committed themselves to their weakest position. Their confidence is shot. Besides, they have tacitly agreed with all your other points. Even if they did try to "go back", they are now wary of pursuing your other points figuring you must have even BETTER reasons. Also, they will destroy their credibility in wanting to go back in the same way that a chess player would if they asked if they could have the piece you just captured back so they pursue another course. In a negotiation setting, this is death. Finally, I NEVER give all my reasons in a debate and it causes confusion on the other side because they "fill-in" my argument and credit me with intentions I never had, causing them to pursue a bad angle.
SUPPLEMENT
I don't want to spoil the book by showing the answer to the "riddles" ahead of their proper time. However, I think I can make mention of this quote from CSL-MC because Ms. Rand's eventual reason is much more detailed and complete.
Hank is clearly supporting these people and thinking the best about them, YET they seem to hate him more. Why? Is this so unusual? People think what the Germans did to the Jews is unbelievable. CSL-MC says it was the logical end:
"The worldy man treats certain people kindly because he ‘likes’ them: the Christian, trying to treat every one kindly, finds himself liking more and more people as he goes on -- including people he would not even have imagined himself liking in the beginning. The same spiritual law works terribly in the opposite. The Germans, perhaps, at first ill-treated the Jews because they hated them: afterwards they hated them much more because they had ill-treated them. The more cruel you are, the more you will hate; and the more you hate, the more cruel you become -- and so in a vicious circle for ever."
Will Hank be able to bring his family back from the negative side with more kindness?
Next Post
Table of Contents
Hank and his family - This chapter demonstrates how to deal with people who are on the offensive, especially when they use sarcasm. Hank doesn't agitate them intentionally. He looks Long Term and always assumes his family has a positive motive. The reason the book is so long is that Ms. Rand does such a thorough job of identifying every known reason in each scene. (Think back to Dagny's questioning of Owen Kellogg.) James took several evasive actions in the first chapter and we saw how to handle each one. In this chapter, the family has a negative interpretation for Hank’s good actions; we saw how Hank handled each one. One example, instead of nailing Philip when he had the chance to, he recognizes he has won and works towards the long-term.
"A fool utters his whole mind, but a wise man keeps it until the end." (Bible) Try this the next time you have a debate: When you have more than one reason that supports your point, give all your reasons EXCEPT your strongest. If your opponent is excellent (as Hank assumes) then they will know you are stronger because you didn't have to state the obvious. If your opponent is not excellent (emotional), they will pursue the only opening you've given. Now they are trapped. They have committed themselves to their weakest position. Their confidence is shot. Besides, they have tacitly agreed with all your other points. Even if they did try to "go back", they are now wary of pursuing your other points figuring you must have even BETTER reasons. Also, they will destroy their credibility in wanting to go back in the same way that a chess player would if they asked if they could have the piece you just captured back so they pursue another course. In a negotiation setting, this is death. Finally, I NEVER give all my reasons in a debate and it causes confusion on the other side because they "fill-in" my argument and credit me with intentions I never had, causing them to pursue a bad angle.
SUPPLEMENT
I don't want to spoil the book by showing the answer to the "riddles" ahead of their proper time. However, I think I can make mention of this quote from CSL-MC because Ms. Rand's eventual reason is much more detailed and complete.
Hank is clearly supporting these people and thinking the best about them, YET they seem to hate him more. Why? Is this so unusual? People think what the Germans did to the Jews is unbelievable. CSL-MC says it was the logical end:
"The worldy man treats certain people kindly because he ‘likes’ them: the Christian, trying to treat every one kindly, finds himself liking more and more people as he goes on -- including people he would not even have imagined himself liking in the beginning. The same spiritual law works terribly in the opposite. The Germans, perhaps, at first ill-treated the Jews because they hated them: afterwards they hated them much more because they had ill-treated them. The more cruel you are, the more you will hate; and the more you hate, the more cruel you become -- and so in a vicious circle for ever."
Will Hank be able to bring his family back from the negative side with more kindness?
Next Post
Table of Contents
Thursday, December 14, 2006
AS 1:2 The Chain Plot and Comments
PLOT
Henry Rearden pours his first heat of Rearden Metal. He makes a bracelet out of the bluish-green metal for his wife. He walks home celebrating the culmination of 10 years of research and development. Hank gets home and finds he is late for dinner with his wife, mother and brother Philip who all live with him. A business associate, Paul Larkin, is also there. Hank is met with sarcasm from his family. Hank presents his wife with the bracelet and is ridiculed.
SUBPLOT (loose ends)
Hank agrees to be available for his anniversary party on December 10.
Paul Larkin tells Hank it is very important for Hank to "stay on top of your image and your Washington man because the press hates you".
Hank gives his brother $10,000 for Friends of Global Progress, an organization for which Philip is fundraising. Hank once again is met with sarcasm.
COMMENTS
Hank (who was supposed to be played by Clint Eastwood in the film version proposed in the 70's) is clearly on Dagny's side of the scale. Hank's family is clearly on the negative side of the scale with James. In fact, this side of the scale's view of Hank is described in a similar fashion as in 1:1.
From 1:1 "If she were insane, thought Dagny, she would conclude that her brother hated to deal with Rearden because Rearden did his job with superlative efficiency; but she would not conclude it, because she thought that such a feeling was not within the humanly possible."
From 1:2 "...they (Hank's family) seemed wounded by anything he said, it was not a matter of his words or actions, it was almost...almost as if they were wounded by the mere fact of his being. Don't start imagining the insane - he told himself severely, struggling to face the riddle with the strictest of his ruthless sense of justice."
Scale - Hank is nicer to his family than Dagny is to James and yet, Hank's family treats Hank worse than James treats Dagny. Hank's distance on the scale from his family must be greater than Dagny's distance from James. The people on the positive side only get tired when they deal with negative people. Also, pain is a main theme. Hank and his side of the scale believe pain does not matter. They don't believe in comfort. If you listen to pain, your result is comfort. Let's put Hank at +6 and his family at -6 for now.
Next Post
Table of Contents
Henry Rearden pours his first heat of Rearden Metal. He makes a bracelet out of the bluish-green metal for his wife. He walks home celebrating the culmination of 10 years of research and development. Hank gets home and finds he is late for dinner with his wife, mother and brother Philip who all live with him. A business associate, Paul Larkin, is also there. Hank is met with sarcasm from his family. Hank presents his wife with the bracelet and is ridiculed.
SUBPLOT (loose ends)
Hank agrees to be available for his anniversary party on December 10.
Paul Larkin tells Hank it is very important for Hank to "stay on top of your image and your Washington man because the press hates you".
Hank gives his brother $10,000 for Friends of Global Progress, an organization for which Philip is fundraising. Hank once again is met with sarcasm.
COMMENTS
Hank (who was supposed to be played by Clint Eastwood in the film version proposed in the 70's) is clearly on Dagny's side of the scale. Hank's family is clearly on the negative side of the scale with James. In fact, this side of the scale's view of Hank is described in a similar fashion as in 1:1.
From 1:1 "If she were insane, thought Dagny, she would conclude that her brother hated to deal with Rearden because Rearden did his job with superlative efficiency; but she would not conclude it, because she thought that such a feeling was not within the humanly possible."
From 1:2 "...they (Hank's family) seemed wounded by anything he said, it was not a matter of his words or actions, it was almost...almost as if they were wounded by the mere fact of his being. Don't start imagining the insane - he told himself severely, struggling to face the riddle with the strictest of his ruthless sense of justice."
Scale - Hank is nicer to his family than Dagny is to James and yet, Hank's family treats Hank worse than James treats Dagny. Hank's distance on the scale from his family must be greater than Dagny's distance from James. The people on the positive side only get tired when they deal with negative people. Also, pain is a main theme. Hank and his side of the scale believe pain does not matter. They don't believe in comfort. If you listen to pain, your result is comfort. Let's put Hank at +6 and his family at -6 for now.
Next Post
Table of Contents
Wednesday, December 13, 2006
AS 1:1 The Theme Comments
COMMENTS
Dagny and James are opposites. One of the things that will help explain some of the more complicated events occurring later in the book is a scale. Imagine a scale that goes from -10 to +10. James would be at a -5 and Dagny would be at a +5.
_-10 ___-5______ 0______ +5____ +10
--------James------------------Dagny
Indecisive/Comfort -----Decisive/change agent
Avoids responsibility----Takes responsibility
------Emotional--------------Unfeeling
---------Weak -----------------Strong
(By the way, Jodie Foster was the run away winner on-line to play Dagny in the proposed TNT miniseries. Recently, Angela Jolie has expressed interest in the part.)
Eddie Willers is Dagny's assistant and his duty is to "be a bodyguard against any waste of time" for Dagny. Eddie Willers is at 0. Eddie represents the mass of humanity. When he looks at the world, he feels his days are numbered and he is at -2. When he's around Dagny he feels confident and he is at +2. His focus is, like humanity's, "whatever is right". When Eddie interacts with James, he ends up frustrated. He can't make any progress because James is too negative and evasive. James is a hypocrite. ("Nothing is absolute") When Eddie interacts with Dagny, he is energized and inspired.
Eddie naturally wants to know the reason, but he doesn't have the ability to piece it together.
-With the bum: "...yet the bum had spoken as if he knew that Eddie felt it, as if he thought that one should feel it, and more; as if he knew the reason."
-Calendar: "He thought suddenly that there was some phrase, a kind of quotation, that expressed what the calendar seemed to suggest. But he could not recall it."
-Later: "Eddie started. That was the sentence he had tried to remember: Your days are numbered. But he had forgotten in what connection he had tried to remember it."
Eddie Story #1: The Tree
"It had stood there for hundreds of years, and he thought it would always stand there." and "He felt safe in the oak tree's presence; it was thing that nothing could change or threaten; it was his greatest symbol of strength." and "The living power had gone, and the shape it left (appearance?) had not been able to stand without it."
Later on Taggart Transcontinental (TT) building: "It seemed to stand above the years, untouched. It would always stand there, thought Eddie Willers."
Eddie Story #2: The Best Within Us
When Eddie is asked by Dagny what he would want to do "he answered at once, "Whatever is right," and added, "You ought to do something great..."
Reread this section because it gets confusing...
Dagny: "What?"
Eddie: "I don't know. That's what we ought to find out. Not just what you said. Not just business and earning a living. Things like winning battles, or saving people out of fires, or climbing mountains."
Dagny: "What for?"
Eddie: The minister said last Sunday that we must always reach for the best within us. What you suppose is the best within us?"
I believe this is Dagny's response: "I don't know"
Eddie: "We'll have to find out."
Dagny...she did not answer; she was looking away, up the railroad track.
Back to "current" time...
"Eddie Willers smiled. He had said, "Whatever is right," twenty-two years ago. He had kept that statement unchallenged ever since; the other questions had faded in his mind; he had been too busy to ask them."
Eddie has all the pieces. He wants to understand...but he doesn't take the time or have the capacity (focus?) to put the pieces together...do you?
PRACTICAL APPLICATION (worth rereading)
Dagny's interaction with James is a detailed example of how to handle an emotional person. There are a lot of techniques demonstrated during their exchange. It's a real chess match. I've used this section several times to illustrate to others how to handle an argument. One example, emotional people need the energy of others to keep going. The worst thing a person can do is show emotion or energy to an already emotional person. Her use of silence is very strategic. I used this technique with dissatisfied customers and taught it to others. I LOVED dealing with 350+ pound illiterate, irate truck drivers who believed they got cheated out of $35 for a 2-minute truck wash. It was a challenge to talk them down. One of the keys was to be patient and not give them any emotional fuel.
Actually, there are three conversations to reread.
EDDIE and JIM
Eddie wants to make the issue clear for once and is convinced the only reason Jim won't understand it is if Eddie doesn't explain it well. Eddie uses facts. All Eddie does is state facts to Jim.
Jim wants to avoid responsibility. Jim uses every technique in the book: comparative thinking, jugmentalism, blame, rule out options, put down "good", try not to understand, play the victim, avoidance, appeal to the law (rules), attack...
I have seen people behave like Eddie and quote facts. I've seen the people they have quoted facts to put on the same amazing show that Jim put on....and the result is the same as Eddies.
"So he had tried hard, but he was failing, just as he had always failed in all of their discussions; no matter what he said, they never seemed to be talking about the same subject." and "This was wasted." and "Eddie Willers did not move. He did not answer. He stood looking straight ahead. But he did not see James Taggart or anything in the office." (James has moved further away on "the scale" referenced in the notes, to the point Eddie can't "see" him.)
DAGNY and JIM
Dagny knows that Jim can avoid her if she just states facts. Dagny wants the railroad fixed and the solution is to get Rearden Metal. Her method is to inform Jim the decision has been made and the only way to stop it is if Jim states his will...makes a decision! Jim wants to avoid responsibility...however, he has been put in a position where if he does nothing then the new rail comes in. If he stops it, then the delays are his fault.
Jim uses emotion to silence Dagny. Jim refuses to consider the line getting taken over by the Mexican government.
Dagny "names" Jim's evasive technique by asking: "How long do you intend to talk in order to evade the issue, Jim?"
By the end of the discussion, Dagny achieves her goals and walks past Jim's desperate attempts to rile her when he takes emotional shots at her. Dagny makes Jim state his will only after Jim utters a highly hypocritical statement: "NOTHING is absolute."
DAGNY and OWEN
Owen wants to keep his word to Dagny by informing her face to face that he is leaving. He says it is for a personal reason and answers Dagny's questions.
Dagny is completely contrastive...she askes every question she can think of. She never attacks Owen. She doesn't know the reason because she didn't ask every question.
The result is she was beaten.
Three discussions.
In the first one, Eddie is factual and Jim is intentionally evasive...evasiveness wins every time.
In the second one, Dagny takes a stand and Jim is intentionally evasive...taking a stand and sticking to it wins every time.
In the third one, Owen keeps his word and Dagny asks questions...the winner is whoever asks the right questions.
The first discussion was unprofitable.
The second discussion was profitable.
The profitability of the third discussion is still to be determined...but it was not unprofitable.
SUPPLEMENT
"But he (Eddie Willers) still thought it self-evident that one had to do what was right; he had never learned how people could want to do otherwise; he had only learned that they did." (AS 1:1)
CS Lewis begins "Mere Christianity" (CSL-MC) with this same thought. "First, human beings, all over the earth, have this curious idea that they ought to behave in a certain way, and cannot really get rid of it. Secondly, that they do not in fact behave in that way. They know the Law of Nature; they break it. These two facts are the foundation of all clear thinking about ourselves and the universe we live in."
Next Post
Table of Contents
Dagny and James are opposites. One of the things that will help explain some of the more complicated events occurring later in the book is a scale. Imagine a scale that goes from -10 to +10. James would be at a -5 and Dagny would be at a +5.
_-10 ___-5______ 0______ +5____ +10
--------James------------------Dagny
Indecisive/Comfort -----Decisive/change agent
Avoids responsibility----Takes responsibility
------Emotional--------------Unfeeling
---------Weak -----------------Strong
(By the way, Jodie Foster was the run away winner on-line to play Dagny in the proposed TNT miniseries. Recently, Angela Jolie has expressed interest in the part.)
Eddie Willers is Dagny's assistant and his duty is to "be a bodyguard against any waste of time" for Dagny. Eddie Willers is at 0. Eddie represents the mass of humanity. When he looks at the world, he feels his days are numbered and he is at -2. When he's around Dagny he feels confident and he is at +2. His focus is, like humanity's, "whatever is right". When Eddie interacts with James, he ends up frustrated. He can't make any progress because James is too negative and evasive. James is a hypocrite. ("Nothing is absolute") When Eddie interacts with Dagny, he is energized and inspired.
Eddie naturally wants to know the reason, but he doesn't have the ability to piece it together.
-With the bum: "...yet the bum had spoken as if he knew that Eddie felt it, as if he thought that one should feel it, and more; as if he knew the reason."
-Calendar: "He thought suddenly that there was some phrase, a kind of quotation, that expressed what the calendar seemed to suggest. But he could not recall it."
-Later: "Eddie started. That was the sentence he had tried to remember: Your days are numbered. But he had forgotten in what connection he had tried to remember it."
Eddie Story #1: The Tree
"It had stood there for hundreds of years, and he thought it would always stand there." and "He felt safe in the oak tree's presence; it was thing that nothing could change or threaten; it was his greatest symbol of strength." and "The living power had gone, and the shape it left (appearance?) had not been able to stand without it."
Later on Taggart Transcontinental (TT) building: "It seemed to stand above the years, untouched. It would always stand there, thought Eddie Willers."
Eddie Story #2: The Best Within Us
When Eddie is asked by Dagny what he would want to do "he answered at once, "Whatever is right," and added, "You ought to do something great..."
Reread this section because it gets confusing...
Dagny: "What?"
Eddie: "I don't know. That's what we ought to find out. Not just what you said. Not just business and earning a living. Things like winning battles, or saving people out of fires, or climbing mountains."
Dagny: "What for?"
Eddie: The minister said last Sunday that we must always reach for the best within us. What you suppose is the best within us?"
I believe this is Dagny's response: "I don't know"
Eddie: "We'll have to find out."
Dagny...she did not answer; she was looking away, up the railroad track.
Back to "current" time...
"Eddie Willers smiled. He had said, "Whatever is right," twenty-two years ago. He had kept that statement unchallenged ever since; the other questions had faded in his mind; he had been too busy to ask them."
Eddie has all the pieces. He wants to understand...but he doesn't take the time or have the capacity (focus?) to put the pieces together...do you?
PRACTICAL APPLICATION (worth rereading)
Dagny's interaction with James is a detailed example of how to handle an emotional person. There are a lot of techniques demonstrated during their exchange. It's a real chess match. I've used this section several times to illustrate to others how to handle an argument. One example, emotional people need the energy of others to keep going. The worst thing a person can do is show emotion or energy to an already emotional person. Her use of silence is very strategic. I used this technique with dissatisfied customers and taught it to others. I LOVED dealing with 350+ pound illiterate, irate truck drivers who believed they got cheated out of $35 for a 2-minute truck wash. It was a challenge to talk them down. One of the keys was to be patient and not give them any emotional fuel.
Actually, there are three conversations to reread.
EDDIE and JIM
Eddie wants to make the issue clear for once and is convinced the only reason Jim won't understand it is if Eddie doesn't explain it well. Eddie uses facts. All Eddie does is state facts to Jim.
Jim wants to avoid responsibility. Jim uses every technique in the book: comparative thinking, jugmentalism, blame, rule out options, put down "good", try not to understand, play the victim, avoidance, appeal to the law (rules), attack...
I have seen people behave like Eddie and quote facts. I've seen the people they have quoted facts to put on the same amazing show that Jim put on....and the result is the same as Eddies.
"So he had tried hard, but he was failing, just as he had always failed in all of their discussions; no matter what he said, they never seemed to be talking about the same subject." and "This was wasted." and "Eddie Willers did not move. He did not answer. He stood looking straight ahead. But he did not see James Taggart or anything in the office." (James has moved further away on "the scale" referenced in the notes, to the point Eddie can't "see" him.)
DAGNY and JIM
Dagny knows that Jim can avoid her if she just states facts. Dagny wants the railroad fixed and the solution is to get Rearden Metal. Her method is to inform Jim the decision has been made and the only way to stop it is if Jim states his will...makes a decision! Jim wants to avoid responsibility...however, he has been put in a position where if he does nothing then the new rail comes in. If he stops it, then the delays are his fault.
Jim uses emotion to silence Dagny. Jim refuses to consider the line getting taken over by the Mexican government.
Dagny "names" Jim's evasive technique by asking: "How long do you intend to talk in order to evade the issue, Jim?"
By the end of the discussion, Dagny achieves her goals and walks past Jim's desperate attempts to rile her when he takes emotional shots at her. Dagny makes Jim state his will only after Jim utters a highly hypocritical statement: "NOTHING is absolute."
DAGNY and OWEN
Owen wants to keep his word to Dagny by informing her face to face that he is leaving. He says it is for a personal reason and answers Dagny's questions.
Dagny is completely contrastive...she askes every question she can think of. She never attacks Owen. She doesn't know the reason because she didn't ask every question.
The result is she was beaten.
Three discussions.
In the first one, Eddie is factual and Jim is intentionally evasive...evasiveness wins every time.
In the second one, Dagny takes a stand and Jim is intentionally evasive...taking a stand and sticking to it wins every time.
In the third one, Owen keeps his word and Dagny asks questions...the winner is whoever asks the right questions.
The first discussion was unprofitable.
The second discussion was profitable.
The profitability of the third discussion is still to be determined...but it was not unprofitable.
SUPPLEMENT
"But he (Eddie Willers) still thought it self-evident that one had to do what was right; he had never learned how people could want to do otherwise; he had only learned that they did." (AS 1:1)
CS Lewis begins "Mere Christianity" (CSL-MC) with this same thought. "First, human beings, all over the earth, have this curious idea that they ought to behave in a certain way, and cannot really get rid of it. Secondly, that they do not in fact behave in that way. They know the Law of Nature; they break it. These two facts are the foundation of all clear thinking about ourselves and the universe we live in."
Next Post
Table of Contents
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
AS 1:1 The Theme Plot
PLOT
Taggart Transcontinental (TT) is a railroad owned and run by a brother-sister team. James is the president. Dagny is the vice president of operation. An ancestor founded the railroad. The conflict centers on the Rio Norte Line. It runs from Cheyenne to El Paso. It has been in need of new rails for over a year. TT has lost business to the Phoenix-Durango because of accidents and an inability to stay on schedule. Dagny wants to replace the rail with a new metal that's never been used before from their current supplier. Rearden Metal is lighter, cheaper and stronger than steel. James wants to continue to wait for his friend Orren Boyle of Associated Steel to deliver the order that was due over a year ago. Dagny gets her way.
SUBPLOT (loose ends)
Who is John Galt? - We learn this phrase is slang for "don't ask questions nobody can answer".
San Sebastian - A line that runs from El Paso to the San Sebastian Mines in Mexico. Dagny is convinced Mexico will nationalize the line and TT will lose $40 million. James doesn't want to believe it or think about it.
Halley's Fifth Concerto - Dagny hears a brakeman whistling a melody that sounds like a Halley concerto. The theme of the concerto is: "...that there was no ugliness or pain, and there never had had to be. It was a song of an immense deliverance." Dagny confirms that Halley didn't write a fifth concerto and is still out of the public eye.
Owen Kellogg - Dagny wants to promote Owen. When she gets to NY, she learns Owen wants to see her. He quits for a personal reason. Dagny tries to determine the cause but is unsuccessful. "For the first time in her life, she felt helpless and beaten."
Next Post
Table of Contents
Taggart Transcontinental (TT) is a railroad owned and run by a brother-sister team. James is the president. Dagny is the vice president of operation. An ancestor founded the railroad. The conflict centers on the Rio Norte Line. It runs from Cheyenne to El Paso. It has been in need of new rails for over a year. TT has lost business to the Phoenix-Durango because of accidents and an inability to stay on schedule. Dagny wants to replace the rail with a new metal that's never been used before from their current supplier. Rearden Metal is lighter, cheaper and stronger than steel. James wants to continue to wait for his friend Orren Boyle of Associated Steel to deliver the order that was due over a year ago. Dagny gets her way.
SUBPLOT (loose ends)
Who is John Galt? - We learn this phrase is slang for "don't ask questions nobody can answer".
San Sebastian - A line that runs from El Paso to the San Sebastian Mines in Mexico. Dagny is convinced Mexico will nationalize the line and TT will lose $40 million. James doesn't want to believe it or think about it.
Halley's Fifth Concerto - Dagny hears a brakeman whistling a melody that sounds like a Halley concerto. The theme of the concerto is: "...that there was no ugliness or pain, and there never had had to be. It was a song of an immense deliverance." Dagny confirms that Halley didn't write a fifth concerto and is still out of the public eye.
Owen Kellogg - Dagny wants to promote Owen. When she gets to NY, she learns Owen wants to see her. He quits for a personal reason. Dagny tries to determine the cause but is unsuccessful. "For the first time in her life, she felt helpless and beaten."
Next Post
Table of Contents
Sunday, December 10, 2006
Sovereignty
If sovereignty is a cause, then God could unilaterally make His will happen. He could initiate events that overcome the will of the individual. Some people believe God does this. However, this quickly results in several contradictions. First, isn’t this unjust of God?
Second, what happens when God’s will doesn’t happen? If God is able to unilaterally initiate His will, then when it doesn’t happen, He must be choosing for it not to happen. In effect, it is His will for His will not to happen. That is definitely a contradiction.
We see proof throughout the Bible that God can’t unilaterally initiate His will. For example, Jesus tells in the Lord’s Prayer to pray that God’s will is done on earth as it is in Heaven. If God is able to unilaterally initiate His will, why would He need us to pray for it?
We’ve already seen that God’s can make His will happen in response to justice. It looks as if God’s sovereignty is an effect, not a cause. We saw this in the previous post when we answered the hard question.
In a previous post, we covered the interaction between Moses and Pharaoh. In Exodus 7:3, God says He will harden Pharaoh’s heart. People look at this verse as proof that God unilaterally initiates His will. As if God reached into Pharaoh’s heart against his will and there was nothing Pharaoh could do about it. They believe sovereignty is a cause.
Actually, this verse occurs after Pharaoh has expressed his will and initiated an injustice. God is actually telling Moses that He will harden Pharaoh’s heart as an effect of Pharaoh’s initial expression of his will. God’s sovereignty is an effect, not a cause.
EVERY interaction between God and humans can be explained with justice. EVERY time God moved on someone’s behalf, moved against someone, or refused to move, the reason can be understood by determining where the person stood relative to Justice. Unfortunately, people don’t have this understanding, so they reference “predestination” or “sovereignty” and that only leads to more contradictions.
Here are more updated links covering this topic:
Calvin
Modern Calvinism
Omnipotent
Sovereignty
Second, what happens when God’s will doesn’t happen? If God is able to unilaterally initiate His will, then when it doesn’t happen, He must be choosing for it not to happen. In effect, it is His will for His will not to happen. That is definitely a contradiction.
We see proof throughout the Bible that God can’t unilaterally initiate His will. For example, Jesus tells in the Lord’s Prayer to pray that God’s will is done on earth as it is in Heaven. If God is able to unilaterally initiate His will, why would He need us to pray for it?
We’ve already seen that God’s can make His will happen in response to justice. It looks as if God’s sovereignty is an effect, not a cause. We saw this in the previous post when we answered the hard question.
In a previous post, we covered the interaction between Moses and Pharaoh. In Exodus 7:3, God says He will harden Pharaoh’s heart. People look at this verse as proof that God unilaterally initiates His will. As if God reached into Pharaoh’s heart against his will and there was nothing Pharaoh could do about it. They believe sovereignty is a cause.
Actually, this verse occurs after Pharaoh has expressed his will and initiated an injustice. God is actually telling Moses that He will harden Pharaoh’s heart as an effect of Pharaoh’s initial expression of his will. God’s sovereignty is an effect, not a cause.
EVERY interaction between God and humans can be explained with justice. EVERY time God moved on someone’s behalf, moved against someone, or refused to move, the reason can be understood by determining where the person stood relative to Justice. Unfortunately, people don’t have this understanding, so they reference “predestination” or “sovereignty” and that only leads to more contradictions.
Here are more updated links covering this topic:
Calvin
Modern Calvinism
Omnipotent
Sovereignty
Friday, December 08, 2006
Answering the Hard Question
God is ALWAYS completely Righteous and Just. The last post explained Righteous. Previous posts have explained Just. So how do we answer the hard question:
How come God’s will doesn’t happen?
Basically, God can’t unilaterally make His will happen. (Jesus says in the Lord’s prayer for us to pray that God’s will is done…so that is another proof that God needs some “help” getting His will done on earth. However, we have seen God can make His will happen in response to justice.)
The person prays and believes it is God’s will for them to do something.
God has lined up others who are a part of this plan.
The person follows God.
Then someone else in the plan can choose to act apart from God’s will and wreck the whole thing.
(Example: God leads a person to take a job. God had set it up with several people. After the person takes the job, one of the people decides to do their own thing and wreck the plan. The person loses the job and now wonders why it all went bad even though they were following God’s will.)
The downside is that the person begins to doubt their ability to hear God or even the existence of God. They also begin to wonder what they did wrong. Processing this can take years if they don’t have a non-contradictory model for God.
The upside is that the person can realize it wasn’t their fault, forgive (state they will not try to get their justice), and move on. Justice says they now have even more value because they handled suffering they didn’t cause…and they can now get an even better job.
They may have only had enough justice to get a job that was a “3” out of 10. Now they are able to get a job that is a “6” out of 10.
EVERY interaction between God and humans can be explained with justice.
EVERY time God moved on someone’s behalf, moved against someone, or refused to move, the reason can be explained by understanding where the person stood relative to justice.
Unfortunately, people don’t have this understanding, so they start talking about predestination or sovereignty…and that only leads to more contradictions.
Your answer to this question PROVES what you believe is God's Nature...
Tomorrow we will look at “sovereignty”.
How come God’s will doesn’t happen?
Basically, God can’t unilaterally make His will happen. (Jesus says in the Lord’s prayer for us to pray that God’s will is done…so that is another proof that God needs some “help” getting His will done on earth. However, we have seen God can make His will happen in response to justice.)
The person prays and believes it is God’s will for them to do something.
God has lined up others who are a part of this plan.
The person follows God.
Then someone else in the plan can choose to act apart from God’s will and wreck the whole thing.
(Example: God leads a person to take a job. God had set it up with several people. After the person takes the job, one of the people decides to do their own thing and wreck the plan. The person loses the job and now wonders why it all went bad even though they were following God’s will.)
The downside is that the person begins to doubt their ability to hear God or even the existence of God. They also begin to wonder what they did wrong. Processing this can take years if they don’t have a non-contradictory model for God.
The upside is that the person can realize it wasn’t their fault, forgive (state they will not try to get their justice), and move on. Justice says they now have even more value because they handled suffering they didn’t cause…and they can now get an even better job.
They may have only had enough justice to get a job that was a “3” out of 10. Now they are able to get a job that is a “6” out of 10.
EVERY interaction between God and humans can be explained with justice.
EVERY time God moved on someone’s behalf, moved against someone, or refused to move, the reason can be explained by understanding where the person stood relative to justice.
Unfortunately, people don’t have this understanding, so they start talking about predestination or sovereignty…and that only leads to more contradictions.
Your answer to this question PROVES what you believe is God's Nature...
Tomorrow we will look at “sovereignty”.
Thursday, December 07, 2006
Righteous
Righteous means God is “right, correct”. Righteous defines God qualitatively. Every other attempt to qualitatively describe God either limits or contradicts Righteous.
Well, we instantly see the rub in getting closer to God: How do we intentionally become more righteous? How do we become more right and correct in more situations? Our need to become more righteous is most likely not news to you. However, our focus on intentional righteousness is what makes this discussion different from every other examination of this issue.
The ways we are told to become more righteous are the same abstract answers we always get. We aren’t told what makes God Righteous so that we can replicate it our lives. We are given ambiguous directions that only result in frustration. For example, “read the Bible” or “trust God more” or “be more like God”. When we understand what makes God Righteous then we can know how to intentionally apply the principles in every application we encounter. What makes God Righteous?
The best way to answer this question is to look at the opposite result. What are the reasons we are not right or correct in our decisions? Every incorrect decision is actually the result of at least one of two causes: 1) Not having enough of the right data and 2) Not interpreting the data objectively.
God certainly has access to ALL the data. That’s why people say, “God is all knowing”. How many times have you heard someone say, “I didn’t know about that” when they were being corrected? One of the ways to become more right is to know more. For example, when we have a crisis, we need to focus on getting more information rather than reacting emotionally. So we see that our righteousness depends on our knowing and thinking more, not less.
The other reason God is Righteous is because God is objective. How do we lose our objectivity? We lose it when we focus on proving our point rather than being open to learning more. We saw the way to combat this was through contrastive thinking.
The first sign of lack of objectivity is the appearance of apparent contradictions and the individual’s response to them. People who have lost their objectivity will fight for the existence of contradictions in their beliefs, even though it proves the belief is wrong. In fact, we try to allow contradictions in the areas in which we are comfortable and don’t want to change. We saw this when we covered growth vs. comfort.
We can intentionally increase our ability to be right by learning more and becoming more objective. Again, this requires thinking. This is God’s way of thinking. However, we have our own way of thinking. Now we see why God’s ways are so much higher than our own. This is not easy to do. It doesn’t come naturally because it is not in our nature, so we have to do it intentionally.
Notice: Right exists whether we realize it or not. In fact, the most damaging thing that can occur is for us to believe we are right and NOT ACTUALLY be right!
God has all the information and can correctly interpret the impact of the data because God is objective. I call this Big Picture and Long Term. God understands what will happen in all cases (Big Picture) over time (Long Term). Doesn’t that set God apart from us? We only see the moment.
God can be ALWAYS completely Righteous...
Next Post
Well, we instantly see the rub in getting closer to God: How do we intentionally become more righteous? How do we become more right and correct in more situations? Our need to become more righteous is most likely not news to you. However, our focus on intentional righteousness is what makes this discussion different from every other examination of this issue.
The ways we are told to become more righteous are the same abstract answers we always get. We aren’t told what makes God Righteous so that we can replicate it our lives. We are given ambiguous directions that only result in frustration. For example, “read the Bible” or “trust God more” or “be more like God”. When we understand what makes God Righteous then we can know how to intentionally apply the principles in every application we encounter. What makes God Righteous?
The best way to answer this question is to look at the opposite result. What are the reasons we are not right or correct in our decisions? Every incorrect decision is actually the result of at least one of two causes: 1) Not having enough of the right data and 2) Not interpreting the data objectively.
God certainly has access to ALL the data. That’s why people say, “God is all knowing”. How many times have you heard someone say, “I didn’t know about that” when they were being corrected? One of the ways to become more right is to know more. For example, when we have a crisis, we need to focus on getting more information rather than reacting emotionally. So we see that our righteousness depends on our knowing and thinking more, not less.
The other reason God is Righteous is because God is objective. How do we lose our objectivity? We lose it when we focus on proving our point rather than being open to learning more. We saw the way to combat this was through contrastive thinking.
The first sign of lack of objectivity is the appearance of apparent contradictions and the individual’s response to them. People who have lost their objectivity will fight for the existence of contradictions in their beliefs, even though it proves the belief is wrong. In fact, we try to allow contradictions in the areas in which we are comfortable and don’t want to change. We saw this when we covered growth vs. comfort.
We can intentionally increase our ability to be right by learning more and becoming more objective. Again, this requires thinking. This is God’s way of thinking. However, we have our own way of thinking. Now we see why God’s ways are so much higher than our own. This is not easy to do. It doesn’t come naturally because it is not in our nature, so we have to do it intentionally.
Notice: Right exists whether we realize it or not. In fact, the most damaging thing that can occur is for us to believe we are right and NOT ACTUALLY be right!
God has all the information and can correctly interpret the impact of the data because God is objective. I call this Big Picture and Long Term. God understands what will happen in all cases (Big Picture) over time (Long Term). Doesn’t that set God apart from us? We only see the moment.
God can be ALWAYS completely Righteous...
Next Post
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
Fully Man, Fully God
God is Righteous and Just. God’s lack of a free will is not actually a quality of God; it is a result of being Righteous and Just. This doesn’t mean God can’t make choices. It means God can’t choose to act apart from His Nature.
The non-contradictory definition of “free will” is “the ability to act apart from one’s nature”. Again, God can make choices within His Nature. God cannot act apart from His Nature which is Righteous and Just.
We humans aren’t Righteous and Just, even though everyone aspires to be. This is just one aspect in which we are made in God’s image. However, what makes us human is our free will. We can act apart from this fleshly nature when we let God act through us. (grace) Free will is the essence of our human ability and the ultimate cause of our mistakes and need to think.
So here is the model we have for God and humans:
GOD MODEL.......HUMAN MODEL
1. Righteous ......1. NOT Righteous
2. Just ...............2. NOT Just
3. NO Free Will....3. Free Will
If we stop at this point, we can objectively see the complete disconnect we have from God. God is Righteous and Just; we are not. We have a free will and can act apart from our nature; God cannot.
The only way for God to bridge this gap between His Nature and our nature was for there to exist a Being that had a free will and chose to be righteous and just in everything He did. Doing everything ALWAYS completely Righteous and ALWAYS completely Just would PROVE to us this Person is fully God because He could ONLY do this if His Nature was the same as God's: Righteous and Just. This would make the person fully man because He has a free will. He could choose to act apart from His fleshly nature and follow His Spiritual Nature.
This is WHY Jesus is able to be fully man and fully God. (Some people think Jesus is fully man and fully God because His Father was God and His mother was a human. They think this is the reason WHY. Notice, Jesus’ Father being God and His mother being a human would only make Him half man and half God if it was the reason WHY. Jesus' Father being God and His mother being a human is the HOW. There is a HUGE difference between the HOW and the WHY. For more understanding as to this powerful and subtle tool, please read the link titled, "Right-Right vs. Right-Wrong".) This Person provides the only way for man to have fellowship with God. This is the Jesus Model.
GOD MODEL .......JESUS MODEL........HUMAN MODEL
1. Righteous........1. Righteous..........1. NOT Righteous
2. Just.................2. Just..................2. NOT Just
3. NO Free Will.....3. Free Will...........3. Free Will
This is WHY Jesus is the only way to the Father. This is also WHY Jesus existed from the beginning and through Him all things were created. He had to be able to knowingly choose to bridge this chasm (because of His free will) before He was physically born into our world. Jesus is the physical embodiment of Righteous and Just. Jesus Physical nature gave Him a way to be tempted to be sinful. Jesus Spiritual Nature (Right and Just) was due to being begotten of God.
God is intentional and lacks contradiction. It is our free will that allows us the option of acting apart from our nature which is not right or just. Our nature causes us to try to live with apparent contradictions and avoid acting intentionally. We have a free will and can choose to act according to our nature or not; God cannot.
Some prominent pastors and ministries have stated that Jesus was UNABLE to choose to do wrong. This would mean Jesus did NOT have a free will...AND that Jesus was NOT fully man. Be careful! These people are stating Jesus was unable to bridge the gap for our Salvation. This is deception. Worse, this is a contradiction of the most famous Old Testament prophecy concerning Jesus:
"14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
15 Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good." (Isaiah 7:14-15)
It ALL begins with understanding God's Nature. I don't understand HOW anyone can teach God's Word when they deny God's Being.
Everything comes back to Righteous and Just.
Next Post
The non-contradictory definition of “free will” is “the ability to act apart from one’s nature”. Again, God can make choices within His Nature. God cannot act apart from His Nature which is Righteous and Just.
We humans aren’t Righteous and Just, even though everyone aspires to be. This is just one aspect in which we are made in God’s image. However, what makes us human is our free will. We can act apart from this fleshly nature when we let God act through us. (grace) Free will is the essence of our human ability and the ultimate cause of our mistakes and need to think.
So here is the model we have for God and humans:
GOD MODEL.......HUMAN MODEL
1. Righteous ......1. NOT Righteous
2. Just ...............2. NOT Just
3. NO Free Will....3. Free Will
If we stop at this point, we can objectively see the complete disconnect we have from God. God is Righteous and Just; we are not. We have a free will and can act apart from our nature; God cannot.
The only way for God to bridge this gap between His Nature and our nature was for there to exist a Being that had a free will and chose to be righteous and just in everything He did. Doing everything ALWAYS completely Righteous and ALWAYS completely Just would PROVE to us this Person is fully God because He could ONLY do this if His Nature was the same as God's: Righteous and Just. This would make the person fully man because He has a free will. He could choose to act apart from His fleshly nature and follow His Spiritual Nature.
This is WHY Jesus is able to be fully man and fully God. (Some people think Jesus is fully man and fully God because His Father was God and His mother was a human. They think this is the reason WHY. Notice, Jesus’ Father being God and His mother being a human would only make Him half man and half God if it was the reason WHY. Jesus' Father being God and His mother being a human is the HOW. There is a HUGE difference between the HOW and the WHY. For more understanding as to this powerful and subtle tool, please read the link titled, "Right-Right vs. Right-Wrong".) This Person provides the only way for man to have fellowship with God. This is the Jesus Model.
GOD MODEL .......JESUS MODEL........HUMAN MODEL
1. Righteous........1. Righteous..........1. NOT Righteous
2. Just.................2. Just..................2. NOT Just
3. NO Free Will.....3. Free Will...........3. Free Will
This is WHY Jesus is the only way to the Father. This is also WHY Jesus existed from the beginning and through Him all things were created. He had to be able to knowingly choose to bridge this chasm (because of His free will) before He was physically born into our world. Jesus is the physical embodiment of Righteous and Just. Jesus Physical nature gave Him a way to be tempted to be sinful. Jesus Spiritual Nature (Right and Just) was due to being begotten of God.
God is intentional and lacks contradiction. It is our free will that allows us the option of acting apart from our nature which is not right or just. Our nature causes us to try to live with apparent contradictions and avoid acting intentionally. We have a free will and can choose to act according to our nature or not; God cannot.
Some prominent pastors and ministries have stated that Jesus was UNABLE to choose to do wrong. This would mean Jesus did NOT have a free will...AND that Jesus was NOT fully man. Be careful! These people are stating Jesus was unable to bridge the gap for our Salvation. This is deception. Worse, this is a contradiction of the most famous Old Testament prophecy concerning Jesus:
"14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
15 Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good." (Isaiah 7:14-15)
It ALL begins with understanding God's Nature. I don't understand HOW anyone can teach God's Word when they deny God's Being.
Everything comes back to Righteous and Just.
Next Post
Tuesday, December 05, 2006
Model For God
According to Strong’s Concordance (which lists all the words used in the Bible and their Hebrew or Greek definitions), “Holy” means God is clean, sanctified, and pure. Notice, these several definitions remind us of the abstract definitions on the Ladder of Abstraction. In modeling, the definitions have to be specific, especially when we are beginning our model. We will need a definition that incorporates these “effects” of God being Holy. The reason God is Holy is because God is right and fair. God is Righteous and Just.
God is ALWAYS completely Holy. We will see this means that God is ALWAYS completely Righteous and ALWAYS completely Just. (We will look more closely at the definitions of these words in the following posts.) In fact, God is confined by the principles of Righteousness and Justice. God can’t do everything. God can only do what is Righteous and Just. Actually, every religion believes God is Righteous and Just.
If a religion states God is anything less than this, then their God can’t be a Creator. (In polytheistic religions, this would only have to apply to one of the Gods: their God of Creation.) If the religion believes anything in addition to this, their concept of God will lead to contradictions.
The proof that we have lost our way is our inability to present a non-contradictory model for God. A.W. Tozer in "The Knowledge Of The Holy" says it well:
"Before the Christian church goes into eclipse anywhere, there must first be the corrupting of her simple basic theology. She simply gets a wrong answer to the question, “What is God like?” Though she may continue to cling to a sound nominal creed, her practical working creed has become false. The masses of her adherents come to believe that God is different from what He actually is; and that is heresey of the most insidious and deadly kind."
Let me be clear about this: God has a lot of characteristics (e.g., loving, merciful, compassionate, sanctified, clean, etc.). However, all of these characteristics are a result of Righteous and Just. None of these characteristics outweighs Righteous and Just.
Also, CS Lewis, in his last book ("The Discarded Image") was focused on modeling. He even refers to the model that incorporates everything we know as the Model! In his last book, CS Lewis presents two rules for Modeling:
LEWIS' FIRST RULE OF MODELING: The Model must be made up of specific causes that account for ALL the observed effects without contradiction.
LEWIS' SECOND RULE OF MODELING: If more than one Model accounts for ALL the observed effects without contradiction, then we must embrace the simpler Model.
The Model for God (God is ALWAYS completely Right and ALWAYS completely Just) meets BOTH of Lewis' Rules for Modeling. This Model accounts for ALL the observed effects of God without contradiction AND it is the simplest Model.
Lewis explains how a Model is discarded:
"It will have to be abandoned if a more ingenious person thinks of a supposal which would 'save' the observed phenomena with still fewer assumptions, or if we discover new phenomena which it cannot save at all." (Page 16)
Basically, if the Model violates the First Rule (can't cover all the observed effects) or loses under the Second Rule (a simpler Model that fulfills the First Rule is discovered).
Lewis also explains that the idea that God is incomprehensible is a man-made conception that occurred 800 years AFTER Christ!
Lewis on Pseudo-Dionysius (died 870 AD):
"His writings are usually regarded as the main channel by which a certain kind of Theology entered the Western tradition. It is the 'negative Theology' of those who take in a more rigid sense, and emphasise more persistently than others, the incomprehensibility of God." (Page 70)
Lewis knew we needed to have this Model. Tozer warned us that not having this Model would cause the church to lose her way. Both of these men died in the early 1960's. By the mid-1960's, people were claiming God was dead because no one could give a non-contradictory explanation for God. The church in America responded in 1969 with the Godless Christianity Movement and the Jesus Movement.
Basically, the church in America said they would "go without an orthodox explanation for God" AND because they couldn't explain God they focused everyone on Jesus...who is actually HARDER to explain because He was fully man and Fully God. In order to understand Jesus, you STILL need a Model for God AND NOW you ALSO need a Model for man!
In April 2009, Newsweek ran a cover story, "The Death of Christian America" in which they trace the cause of the church's problems to the decision to create the Godless Christianity Movement! WHY do people STILL fight the need to have a Model for God? Isn't this obviously a spiritual issue?
Some of the biggest questions people have about apparent contradictions with God occur when they value these characteristics as equal to or higher than Righteous and Just. For example, “If God really loved us, why does He…?” This worldview answers these questions and explains the true non-contradictory meaning of faith, grace, love, truth, etc. by showing how they are a result of Righteous and Just.
This is a good place to summarize contradictions and God. A well-known example people use to prove a contradiction exists is to say, “Can God make a rock so heavy He can’t lift it?”
First of all, every contradiction is set up from assumptions or premises. What is the assumption or premise this contradiction is based on? God can do everything. The contradiction doesn’t exist because God CAN’T do everything.
Even the Bible lists things God can’t do. For instance, the Bible says God is eternal. This means God can’t cease to exist. When posed like this, it seems obvious that when we present something God can do that is beyond us; it sometimes implies His inability to do the opposite.
The Bible also says God can’t lie. (Numbers 23:19, Hebrews 6:18) God’s nature is Holy. He cannot act apart from His nature and be unholy. God can only do what is Right (Righteous) and Just. This leads to another truth about God: God does not have a free will. God can’t do just anything.
Next Post
Here are a list of verses from the Bible showing Right and Just...
Moses' final statement about God after being His Friend: Deuteronomy 32:4. The first three verses are an epic introduction to this conclusion:
"4 The Rock, his work is perfect; For all his ways are justice: A God of faithfulness and without iniquity, Just and right is he."
Job 8:3
"3 Doth God pervert justice? Or doth the Almighty pervert righteousness?"
Isaiah 9:7
"7 Of the increase of his government and of peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of Jehovah of hosts will perform this."
Isaiah 16:5
"5 And a throne shall be established in lovingkindness; and one shall sit thereon in truth, in the tent of David, judging, and seeking justice, and swift to do righteousness."
Psalm 33:5
"5 He loveth righteousness and justice: The earth is full of the lovingkindness of Jehovah."
Psalm 72:2
"2 He will judge thy people with righteousness, And thy poor with justice."
Psalm 89:14
"14 Righteousness and justice are the foundation of thy throne: Lovingkindness and truth go before thy face."
Psalm 97:2
"2 Clouds and darkness are round about him: Righteousness and justice are the foundation of his throne."
Psalm 99:4
"4 The king's strength also loveth justice; Thou dost establish equity; Thou executest justice and righteousness in Jacob."
Jeremiah 9:24
"24 but let him that glorieth glory in this, that he hath understanding, and knoweth me, that I am Jehovah who exerciseth lovingkindness, justice, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these things I delight, saith Jehovah."
Jeremiah 23:5
"5 Behold, the days come, saith Jehovah, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and he shall reign as king and deal wisely, and shall execute justice and righteousness in the land."
Jeremiah 33:15
"15 In those days, and at that time, will I cause a Branch of righteousness to grow up unto David; and he shall execute justice and righteousness in the land."
Isaiah 5:16
"16 but Jehovah of hosts is exalted in justice, and God the Holy One is sanctified in righteousness."
Those verses concerned God.
Here are the verses concerning People...
Proverbs 21:3
"3 To do righteousness and justice Is more acceptable to Jehovah than sacrifice."
Genesis 18:19
"19 For I have known him, to the end that he may command his children and his household after him, that they may keep the way of Jehovah, to do righteousness and justice; to the end that Jehovah may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him."
2 Samuel 8:15
"15 And David reigned over all Israel; and David executed justice and righteousness unto all his people."
1 Kings 10:9
"9 Blessed be Jehovah thy God, who delighted in thee, to set thee on the throne of Israel: because Jehovah loved Israel for ever, therefore made he thee king, to do justice and righteousness."
1 Chronicles 18:14
"14 And David reigned over all Israel; and he executed justice and righteousness unto all his people."
2 Chronicles 9:8
"8 Blessed be Jehovah thy God, who delighted in thee, to set thee on his throne, to be king for Jehovah thy God: because thy God loved Israel, to establish them for ever, therefore made he thee king over them, to do justice and righteousness."
Job 29:14
"14 I put on righteousness, and it clothed me: My justice was as a robe and a diadem."
Job 37:23
"23 Touching the Almighty, we cannot find him out He is excellent in power; And in justice and plenteous righteousness he will not afflict."
Psalm 37:6
"6 And he will make thy righteousness to go forth as the light, And thy justice as the noon-day."
Psalm 37:30
"30 The mouth of the righteous talketh of wisdom, And his tongue speaketh justice."
Psalm 106:3
"3 Blessed are they that keep justice, And he that doeth righteousness at all times."
Psalm 119:121
"121 I have done justice and righteousness: Leave me not to mine oppressors."
Proverbs 1:3
"3 To receive instruction in wise dealing, In righteousness and justice and equity;"
Proverbs 2:9
"9 Then shalt thou understand righteousness and justice, And equity, yea, every good path."
Proverbs 8:20
"20 I walk in the way of righteousness, In the midst of the paths of justice;"
Proverbs 12:5
"5 The thoughts of the righteous are just; But the counsels of the wicked are deceit."
Proverbs 21:15
"15 It is joy to the righteous to do justice; But it is a destruction to the workers of iniquity."
Proverbs 31:9
"9 Open thy mouth, judge righteously, And minister justice to the poor and needy."
Ecclesiastes 3:16
"16 And moreover I saw under the sun, in the place of justice, that wickedness was there; and in the place of righteousness, that wickedness was there."
Ecclesiastes 5:8
"8 If thou seest the oppression of the poor, and the violent taking away of justice and righteousness in a province, marvel not at the matter: for one higher than the high regardeth; and there are higher than they."
Isaiah 1:21
"21 How is the faithful city become a harlot! she that was full of justice! righteousness lodged in her, but now murderers."
Isaiah 1:27
"27 Zion shall be redeemed with justice, and her converts with righteousness."
Isaiah 5:7
"7 For the vineyard of Jehovah of hosts is the house of Israel, and the men of Judah his pleasant plant: and he looked for justice, but, behold, oppression; for righteousness, but, behold, a cry."
Isaiah 28:17
"17 And I will make justice the line, and righteousness the plummet; and the hail shall sweep away the refuge of lies, and the waters shall overflow the hiding-place."
Isaiah 32:1
"1 Behold, a king shall reign in righteousness, and princes shall rule in justice."
Isaiah 32:16
"16 Then justice shall dwell in the wilderness; and righteousness shall abide in the fruitful field."
Isaiah 33:5
"5 Jehovah is exalted; for he dwelleth on high: he hath filled Zion with justice and righteousness."
Isaiah 56:1
"1 Thus saith Jehovah, Keep ye justice, and do righteousness; for my salvation is near to come, and my righteousness to be revealed."
Isaiah 59:9
"9 Therefore is justice far from us, neither doth righteousness overtake us: we look for light, but, behold, darkness; for brightness, but we walk in obscurity."
Isaiah 59:14
"14 And justice is turned away backward, and righteousness standeth afar off; for truth is fallen in the street, and uprightness cannot enter."
Jeremiah 22:3
"3 Thus saith Jehovah: Execute ye justice and righteousness, and deliver him that is robbed out of the hand of the oppressor: and do no wrong, do no violence, to the sojourner, the fatherless, nor the widow; neither shed innocent blood in this place."
Jeremiah 22:15
"15 Shalt thou reign, because thou strivest to excel in cedar? Did not thy father eat and drink, and do justice and righteousness? then it was well with him."
Ezekiel 18:5
"5 But if a man be just, and do that which is lawful and right,"
Ezekiel 45:9
"9 Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Let it suffice you, O princes of Israel: remove violence and spoil, and execute justice and righteousness; take away your exactions from my people, saith the Lord Jehovah."
Hosea 14:9
"9 Who is wise, that he may understand these things? prudent, that he may know them? for the ways of Jehovah are right, and the just shall walk in them; but transgressors shall fall therein."
Amos 5:7
"7 Ye who turn justice to wormwood, and cast down righteousness to the earth,"
Amos 5:24
"24 But let justice roll down as waters, and righteousness as a mighty stream."
Amos 6:12
"12 Shall horses run upon the rock? will one plow there with oxen? that ye have turned justice into gall, and the fruit of righteousness into wormwood;"
Habakkuk 1:4
"4 Therefore the law is slacked, and justice doth never go forth; for the wicked doth compass about the righteous; therefore justice goeth forth perverted."
Zephaniah 3:5
"5 Jehovah in the midst of her is righteous; he will not do iniquity; every morning doth he bring his justice to light, he faileth not; but the unjust knoweth no shame."
Romans 3:26
"26 for the showing, I say, of his righteousness at this present season: that he might himself be just, and the justifier of him that hath faith in Jesus."
God is ALWAYS completely Holy. We will see this means that God is ALWAYS completely Righteous and ALWAYS completely Just. (We will look more closely at the definitions of these words in the following posts.) In fact, God is confined by the principles of Righteousness and Justice. God can’t do everything. God can only do what is Righteous and Just. Actually, every religion believes God is Righteous and Just.
If a religion states God is anything less than this, then their God can’t be a Creator. (In polytheistic religions, this would only have to apply to one of the Gods: their God of Creation.) If the religion believes anything in addition to this, their concept of God will lead to contradictions.
The proof that we have lost our way is our inability to present a non-contradictory model for God. A.W. Tozer in "The Knowledge Of The Holy" says it well:
"Before the Christian church goes into eclipse anywhere, there must first be the corrupting of her simple basic theology. She simply gets a wrong answer to the question, “What is God like?” Though she may continue to cling to a sound nominal creed, her practical working creed has become false. The masses of her adherents come to believe that God is different from what He actually is; and that is heresey of the most insidious and deadly kind."
Let me be clear about this: God has a lot of characteristics (e.g., loving, merciful, compassionate, sanctified, clean, etc.). However, all of these characteristics are a result of Righteous and Just. None of these characteristics outweighs Righteous and Just.
Also, CS Lewis, in his last book ("The Discarded Image") was focused on modeling. He even refers to the model that incorporates everything we know as the Model! In his last book, CS Lewis presents two rules for Modeling:
LEWIS' FIRST RULE OF MODELING: The Model must be made up of specific causes that account for ALL the observed effects without contradiction.
LEWIS' SECOND RULE OF MODELING: If more than one Model accounts for ALL the observed effects without contradiction, then we must embrace the simpler Model.
The Model for God (God is ALWAYS completely Right and ALWAYS completely Just) meets BOTH of Lewis' Rules for Modeling. This Model accounts for ALL the observed effects of God without contradiction AND it is the simplest Model.
Lewis explains how a Model is discarded:
"It will have to be abandoned if a more ingenious person thinks of a supposal which would 'save' the observed phenomena with still fewer assumptions, or if we discover new phenomena which it cannot save at all." (Page 16)
Basically, if the Model violates the First Rule (can't cover all the observed effects) or loses under the Second Rule (a simpler Model that fulfills the First Rule is discovered).
Lewis also explains that the idea that God is incomprehensible is a man-made conception that occurred 800 years AFTER Christ!
Lewis on Pseudo-Dionysius (died 870 AD):
"His writings are usually regarded as the main channel by which a certain kind of Theology entered the Western tradition. It is the 'negative Theology' of those who take in a more rigid sense, and emphasise more persistently than others, the incomprehensibility of God." (Page 70)
Lewis knew we needed to have this Model. Tozer warned us that not having this Model would cause the church to lose her way. Both of these men died in the early 1960's. By the mid-1960's, people were claiming God was dead because no one could give a non-contradictory explanation for God. The church in America responded in 1969 with the Godless Christianity Movement and the Jesus Movement.
Basically, the church in America said they would "go without an orthodox explanation for God" AND because they couldn't explain God they focused everyone on Jesus...who is actually HARDER to explain because He was fully man and Fully God. In order to understand Jesus, you STILL need a Model for God AND NOW you ALSO need a Model for man!
In April 2009, Newsweek ran a cover story, "The Death of Christian America" in which they trace the cause of the church's problems to the decision to create the Godless Christianity Movement! WHY do people STILL fight the need to have a Model for God? Isn't this obviously a spiritual issue?
Some of the biggest questions people have about apparent contradictions with God occur when they value these characteristics as equal to or higher than Righteous and Just. For example, “If God really loved us, why does He…?” This worldview answers these questions and explains the true non-contradictory meaning of faith, grace, love, truth, etc. by showing how they are a result of Righteous and Just.
This is a good place to summarize contradictions and God. A well-known example people use to prove a contradiction exists is to say, “Can God make a rock so heavy He can’t lift it?”
First of all, every contradiction is set up from assumptions or premises. What is the assumption or premise this contradiction is based on? God can do everything. The contradiction doesn’t exist because God CAN’T do everything.
Even the Bible lists things God can’t do. For instance, the Bible says God is eternal. This means God can’t cease to exist. When posed like this, it seems obvious that when we present something God can do that is beyond us; it sometimes implies His inability to do the opposite.
The Bible also says God can’t lie. (Numbers 23:19, Hebrews 6:18) God’s nature is Holy. He cannot act apart from His nature and be unholy. God can only do what is Right (Righteous) and Just. This leads to another truth about God: God does not have a free will. God can’t do just anything.
Next Post
Here are a list of verses from the Bible showing Right and Just...
Moses' final statement about God after being His Friend: Deuteronomy 32:4. The first three verses are an epic introduction to this conclusion:
"4 The Rock, his work is perfect; For all his ways are justice: A God of faithfulness and without iniquity, Just and right is he."
Job 8:3
"3 Doth God pervert justice? Or doth the Almighty pervert righteousness?"
Isaiah 9:7
"7 Of the increase of his government and of peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of Jehovah of hosts will perform this."
Isaiah 16:5
"5 And a throne shall be established in lovingkindness; and one shall sit thereon in truth, in the tent of David, judging, and seeking justice, and swift to do righteousness."
Psalm 33:5
"5 He loveth righteousness and justice: The earth is full of the lovingkindness of Jehovah."
Psalm 72:2
"2 He will judge thy people with righteousness, And thy poor with justice."
Psalm 89:14
"14 Righteousness and justice are the foundation of thy throne: Lovingkindness and truth go before thy face."
Psalm 97:2
"2 Clouds and darkness are round about him: Righteousness and justice are the foundation of his throne."
Psalm 99:4
"4 The king's strength also loveth justice; Thou dost establish equity; Thou executest justice and righteousness in Jacob."
Jeremiah 9:24
"24 but let him that glorieth glory in this, that he hath understanding, and knoweth me, that I am Jehovah who exerciseth lovingkindness, justice, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these things I delight, saith Jehovah."
Jeremiah 23:5
"5 Behold, the days come, saith Jehovah, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and he shall reign as king and deal wisely, and shall execute justice and righteousness in the land."
Jeremiah 33:15
"15 In those days, and at that time, will I cause a Branch of righteousness to grow up unto David; and he shall execute justice and righteousness in the land."
Isaiah 5:16
"16 but Jehovah of hosts is exalted in justice, and God the Holy One is sanctified in righteousness."
Those verses concerned God.
Here are the verses concerning People...
Proverbs 21:3
"3 To do righteousness and justice Is more acceptable to Jehovah than sacrifice."
Genesis 18:19
"19 For I have known him, to the end that he may command his children and his household after him, that they may keep the way of Jehovah, to do righteousness and justice; to the end that Jehovah may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him."
2 Samuel 8:15
"15 And David reigned over all Israel; and David executed justice and righteousness unto all his people."
1 Kings 10:9
"9 Blessed be Jehovah thy God, who delighted in thee, to set thee on the throne of Israel: because Jehovah loved Israel for ever, therefore made he thee king, to do justice and righteousness."
1 Chronicles 18:14
"14 And David reigned over all Israel; and he executed justice and righteousness unto all his people."
2 Chronicles 9:8
"8 Blessed be Jehovah thy God, who delighted in thee, to set thee on his throne, to be king for Jehovah thy God: because thy God loved Israel, to establish them for ever, therefore made he thee king over them, to do justice and righteousness."
Job 29:14
"14 I put on righteousness, and it clothed me: My justice was as a robe and a diadem."
Job 37:23
"23 Touching the Almighty, we cannot find him out He is excellent in power; And in justice and plenteous righteousness he will not afflict."
Psalm 37:6
"6 And he will make thy righteousness to go forth as the light, And thy justice as the noon-day."
Psalm 37:30
"30 The mouth of the righteous talketh of wisdom, And his tongue speaketh justice."
Psalm 106:3
"3 Blessed are they that keep justice, And he that doeth righteousness at all times."
Psalm 119:121
"121 I have done justice and righteousness: Leave me not to mine oppressors."
Proverbs 1:3
"3 To receive instruction in wise dealing, In righteousness and justice and equity;"
Proverbs 2:9
"9 Then shalt thou understand righteousness and justice, And equity, yea, every good path."
Proverbs 8:20
"20 I walk in the way of righteousness, In the midst of the paths of justice;"
Proverbs 12:5
"5 The thoughts of the righteous are just; But the counsels of the wicked are deceit."
Proverbs 21:15
"15 It is joy to the righteous to do justice; But it is a destruction to the workers of iniquity."
Proverbs 31:9
"9 Open thy mouth, judge righteously, And minister justice to the poor and needy."
Ecclesiastes 3:16
"16 And moreover I saw under the sun, in the place of justice, that wickedness was there; and in the place of righteousness, that wickedness was there."
Ecclesiastes 5:8
"8 If thou seest the oppression of the poor, and the violent taking away of justice and righteousness in a province, marvel not at the matter: for one higher than the high regardeth; and there are higher than they."
Isaiah 1:21
"21 How is the faithful city become a harlot! she that was full of justice! righteousness lodged in her, but now murderers."
Isaiah 1:27
"27 Zion shall be redeemed with justice, and her converts with righteousness."
Isaiah 5:7
"7 For the vineyard of Jehovah of hosts is the house of Israel, and the men of Judah his pleasant plant: and he looked for justice, but, behold, oppression; for righteousness, but, behold, a cry."
Isaiah 28:17
"17 And I will make justice the line, and righteousness the plummet; and the hail shall sweep away the refuge of lies, and the waters shall overflow the hiding-place."
Isaiah 32:1
"1 Behold, a king shall reign in righteousness, and princes shall rule in justice."
Isaiah 32:16
"16 Then justice shall dwell in the wilderness; and righteousness shall abide in the fruitful field."
Isaiah 33:5
"5 Jehovah is exalted; for he dwelleth on high: he hath filled Zion with justice and righteousness."
Isaiah 56:1
"1 Thus saith Jehovah, Keep ye justice, and do righteousness; for my salvation is near to come, and my righteousness to be revealed."
Isaiah 59:9
"9 Therefore is justice far from us, neither doth righteousness overtake us: we look for light, but, behold, darkness; for brightness, but we walk in obscurity."
Isaiah 59:14
"14 And justice is turned away backward, and righteousness standeth afar off; for truth is fallen in the street, and uprightness cannot enter."
Jeremiah 22:3
"3 Thus saith Jehovah: Execute ye justice and righteousness, and deliver him that is robbed out of the hand of the oppressor: and do no wrong, do no violence, to the sojourner, the fatherless, nor the widow; neither shed innocent blood in this place."
Jeremiah 22:15
"15 Shalt thou reign, because thou strivest to excel in cedar? Did not thy father eat and drink, and do justice and righteousness? then it was well with him."
Ezekiel 18:5
"5 But if a man be just, and do that which is lawful and right,"
Ezekiel 45:9
"9 Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Let it suffice you, O princes of Israel: remove violence and spoil, and execute justice and righteousness; take away your exactions from my people, saith the Lord Jehovah."
Hosea 14:9
"9 Who is wise, that he may understand these things? prudent, that he may know them? for the ways of Jehovah are right, and the just shall walk in them; but transgressors shall fall therein."
Amos 5:7
"7 Ye who turn justice to wormwood, and cast down righteousness to the earth,"
Amos 5:24
"24 But let justice roll down as waters, and righteousness as a mighty stream."
Amos 6:12
"12 Shall horses run upon the rock? will one plow there with oxen? that ye have turned justice into gall, and the fruit of righteousness into wormwood;"
Habakkuk 1:4
"4 Therefore the law is slacked, and justice doth never go forth; for the wicked doth compass about the righteous; therefore justice goeth forth perverted."
Zephaniah 3:5
"5 Jehovah in the midst of her is righteous; he will not do iniquity; every morning doth he bring his justice to light, he faileth not; but the unjust knoweth no shame."
Romans 3:26
"26 for the showing, I say, of his righteousness at this present season: that he might himself be just, and the justifier of him that hath faith in Jesus."
Monday, December 04, 2006
The Hard Question
This week, we will be answering THE HARD QUESTION.
“If it was God’s will then why didn’t it happen?”
Of all the situations we can find ourselves in, this one requires the greatest understanding of God and humans in order to determine our response.
Basically, the situation goes something like this:
A person believes it is God’s will for them to do something. They do it. The situation goes horribly wrong. The person is left with a series of questions.
“Was it God’s will?”
“Did I hear God wrong?”
“Isn’t God powerful enough to make His will happen?”
“Did I do something wrong to change God’s will?”
When people don’t get answers to these questions or get wrong answers, the effects can take years to overcome. Whether it is condemnation, rage, doubting the existence of God, etc. these effects can be avoided if people understand God and how He interacts with humans.
I have no doubt you know someone who has struggled with this question. This week we will give you the tools to help these people.
Tomorrow we will begin the background portion by presenting a non-contradictory model for God.
Next Post
“If it was God’s will then why didn’t it happen?”
Of all the situations we can find ourselves in, this one requires the greatest understanding of God and humans in order to determine our response.
Basically, the situation goes something like this:
A person believes it is God’s will for them to do something. They do it. The situation goes horribly wrong. The person is left with a series of questions.
“Was it God’s will?”
“Did I hear God wrong?”
“Isn’t God powerful enough to make His will happen?”
“Did I do something wrong to change God’s will?”
When people don’t get answers to these questions or get wrong answers, the effects can take years to overcome. Whether it is condemnation, rage, doubting the existence of God, etc. these effects can be avoided if people understand God and how He interacts with humans.
I have no doubt you know someone who has struggled with this question. This week we will give you the tools to help these people.
Tomorrow we will begin the background portion by presenting a non-contradictory model for God.
Next Post
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)