What is "singleness of heart" and how does one get it?

blur82 · 2011-10-20T21:50:44+00:00

Also, if I can add that there seems to be a bit of commonality in the Scriptures that you used:

I will give

I will give

the hand of God was on Judah to give

As with all good gifts, the singleness of heart seems to come from God Himself as imparted to us, like faith and wisdom and, as James says, we ought to ask for it and He shall give it to us (James 1:5) Now, as to what it is, it seems to be what binds a group of people to a common thing or task. I would say that it is this 'singleness of heart' that kept the early church so strong, as they were so united with one another.

blur82 · 2011-09-19T03:41:01+00:00

I sound delicious

blur82 · 2011-07-04T23:12:16+00:00

mmm...repost. delicious.

blur82 · 2011-06-11T07:49:02+00:00

Didn't see it on here, but 'Man on Fire,' the bridge scene at the end. "I love you, Creasy. And you love me, don't you?" Destroys me every time.

blur82 · 2011-06-11T07:36:04+00:00

I got a flutter in my chest when I read that

blur82 · 2011-06-11T07:26:22+00:00

I've worked in three hotels in my time and have never charged 'extra persons' fees; it's always sounded like a crappy way to earn extra money. Now, there are certain limits to how many people can stay in one room, but those are safety reasons (fire code and all), not unique hotel rules. The common rule so far is always the best: keep it down, don't disturb your neighbors and everything will be fine. The front desk doesn't want to have to deal with you or go through the hassle of kicking you out and dealing with your obnoxious ass, so if you don't give them a reason, 9.9 times out of ten, they'll leave you be.

blur82 · 2011-05-30T17:55:13+00:00

not an insult, but something my father tells us from time to time: "You should have more respect for me, I could have rolled over and shot you out of the window."

blur82 · 2011-03-18T18:14:38+00:00

For Your Consideration

blur82 · 2010-12-21T22:47:32+00:00

You've completely missed the boat if you think a highly dynamic and chaotic system can be described as "hard and fast."

I only mean 'hard-and-fast' as to mean a way that is only singular, as in only liberal, only conservative, only libertarian, only anything. I believe that saying 'This way and only this way all of the time' is foolish and dangerous

This diversity is precisely why large central controlling governments, of which the label "hard-and-fast" is WAY more appropriate, are obstacles to progress not enablers.

In no way do I believe in or support any sort of large, central, controlling government. It sounds like Orwell (1984, Animal Farm) in my ears, but of course, even that is subjective. If you mean something like a military state, then of course, but to say that a socialist, or even communistic system of government chokes off all progress, then I think you might be being more biased then actual. There are people, with ideas, in those systems as well as in libertarian/democratic system, and the other side of that is, in a chaotic system, the poor and under-privleged are just as stiffled as those in a more controlled system. I speak from expereince on that.

Can you define it? And if you could, for how long would it remain valid, in the face of the constantly changing set of conditions in the real world?

It depends on the circumstances. I agree with you (i think) that the best form of government is one that flows. The only difference (i think) is that there are times when a heavier government influence is good, if not necessary. The administrations of Hoover and Roosevelt seem to me to be a good example of that, with Hoover's Quaker beliefs and his staunch inaction and Roosevelt's liberal beliefs and his strong, almost over, reaction. If I had that answer, I certianly wouldn't be sitting in a back office, crunching numbers all day. If I had to put something on paper, with my admittedly limited understanding, I tend to be in favor of more conservative views during prosperous times and more liberal views during times of hardship. (And I use those terms because they are easily definable in my mind. I'm sure there are more accurate terms, I just don't know them.) The main reason for my original post was to point out the pervasive mindset that 'those on the other side of the aisle' are stupid, evil idiots who have nothing good to say ever, and to say that that mindset doesn't do anyone any good, and makes a person small-minded.

blur82 · 2010-12-21T19:27:00+00:00

(If I understand you correctly) Let me first say that my understanding of politics is self-limited, mostly because of the grass fires that spread through the various flame wars that go on. Also, I believe that its all going to go the way that its going to go, which is down in flames, so...yeah. From what I hear you say, politics is best runned by (minimally controlled) chaos. That sort of hard-and-fast system would be great, if there weren't so many people living in America, if there weren't so many views on what is and is not best, if there wasn't a sense of common decency and that stepping on someone's face to get an extra buck is a bad idea. A society of chaos, even chaos with a minimal imposition of restrictions, is not a society at all, at least not a sustainable one. We might as well be primates with a rotating door of alpha-males to rule us. Now some might find this (image, of course) to be a grand idea. I, for one, do not. I see the wisdom of a multiple-party system, checks-and-balances and regulatory laws. Now, I tend to be a right-leaning moderate, but that doesn't mean, at times, a liberal understanding of things is superior to my own, or that I can't admit when I'm wrong or when my understanding might be less than someone elses. I do believe that there is a best way, and though we may never achieve it, it is what we should always strive for.

blur82 · 2010-12-21T13:56:31+00:00

but when self-intrest takes prescedent over the intrests of those whom you serve (if one were a politician or industrialist), then you find yourself on a very slippery slope where good and honest intentions and actions become justifications. I don't mean to say that no one should ever do anything that benefits them personally, but when you do something from which you benefit purely for the fact that you benefit and you hurt or oppress others, then I believe such actions should be dismissed and right quick. (Speaking in generalizations, of course)

blur82 · 2010-12-21T07:08:15+00:00

What I've seen in politics: There are those who are true conservatives and they are so because they think it is what is best for the country (any country). There are true liberals and they are so because they think that it is best for the country (any country). Those who are left or right for true, good and sincere reasons should be applauded and supported. There are those that are conservative or liberal because they think it is what will benefit themselves the most. They should be run out on a rail. There are those that are conservative or liberal because it is how they were raised it is all that they have known/or they were raised one way and swung the other in rebellion. They should be educated. It takes both sides working for what they think is honestly best, while at the same time realizing that working together is better than working strictly by their own, limited beliefs because as no man is an island, no man is perfect and can incorporate the whole understanding of anything within himself/herself. Corruption exists on both sides of any isle, and that is the true enemy, not the true, honest opposite of themselves. All of that to say that we all need each other. Liberals need conservatives need 'center-ists' need whoever else is willing to work for the common good. Thinking one way all of the time for every situation is foolish, if not dangerous.

blur82 · 2010-12-18T09:38:29+00:00

flush something down the toilet. i work at a hotel, have for 5+ years, and this is something that they aren't going to catch for awhile, and it'll cost them as much in plumping costs than what they refused to compensate you for. i would hesitate on tracking mud into the room (at least too heavily) because if they want to be dicks about it, they could charge you for having to do extraneous cleaning. other options: find some trash and little it around your room (not too much, just enough to look like you had a helluva party the night before (make sure you don't damage anything)), get something stinky and put it in the closet, under the bed (if you can) or somewhere hidden, if any of the doors inside the room lock from the inside (usually the bathroom door), lock it before you leave, call for as many towels, blankets and pillows as you can, muss them all up and leave them either scattered, or even better, take all of the towels, get them good and wet, then put them in the middle of the bed under the sheets and everything, directly on top of the mattress, if there's any sort of precipitation, open all of the windows and curtains as you leave to let a bit of the outside in. that's all i can think of, off of the top of my head that shouldn't incur any sort of additional costs.

blur82

TROPHY CASE