I actually haven’t deviated from my stated intent to file three posts following specific themes. It just turns out I get to make one of the same points using a different object lesson. This should be the last lesson from this source.
*********
Be arrogant if you must. Be ignorant if you must. But don’t be arrogant and ignorant. This is a John Immel original aphorism. I accept royalties.
In some Christian circles, the accusation of arrogance is worse than the charge of misogyny in a National Organization of Women Conference. This stems from the fact that in these circles, Pride and Arrogance tend to be synonymous, and Pride becomes a catch-all spiritual failing: tossed within an utterly erroneous notion that humility is manifest in self-deprecation, self-doubt, and self-destruction. Whatever… This all ends up being “Method and Manner” fraud.
Arrogance is nothing more than the assumption of superiority and anyone who has worked to achieve any level of expertise or mastery, by definition, has earned that assumption. This does not preclude weakness, or inabilities, or failures. Indeed, someone who sets out to be a true master of any discipline works relentlessly to be aware of their weakness so they can remedy and overcome. The road to mastery is nothing more than an iterative process of increasing self-awareness.
Self-AWARENESS is an encompassing state: a macro vantage point over the sum of self; the ability to place all of one’s abilities, skills, talents, expertise, greatness, weaknesses, ignorance, lacks, intemperance, and ignobility in context to reality.
By way of contrast, self-ABSORPTION is a prohibitive state: a micro vantage point with no sense of the sum of self–a willful ignorance of self in context to reality.
My aphorism is designed to identify this state of self-absorption. Being arrogant and ignorant is the worst of all worlds. If one does not know what they don’t know because they are unwilling to ask (or more insidious, willing to HEAR), they can never, ever, find an effective solution to any life problem. This kind of SELF is narrow in perception, and indulgent in action.
We all know people like this. To some degree, we were all like this: think teenager. Think adolescence. Most parents know to bite their tongue and wait out the stupidity, praying to God that eventually self-awareness will spring eternal. If not, maybe God will let us eat our young.
We tolerate such self-absorption out of teenagers, sort of.
- Their willful ignorance: the belief that they know everything while making no effort to know anything.
- Their belligerent evasion: purposely hiding behind hostility and indignation when confronted with error.
- Their argumentative legalism: playing the strict literalist game when linguistic games suit, and flat ignoring the violation of basic principles and common communication intent.
- Their lip service to forgiveness: the demand for moral absolution while demonstrating no willingness to change conduct or attitude.
- Their conduct blank check: the fundamental expectation that others must pay for their moods, intemperance, laziness, inability, and lifestyle.
- Their relational presumption: the belief that they can act however they want because Mom and Dad are obligated to suck up their intemperance.
- Their moral equivalency: “Well, yes, I’m sorry but you did THIS. So you are no better than me.”
- Their petulant emotionalism: the endless manipulation of feelings-criticisms are catastrophic hailstorms of excrement and compliments are disproportionate sonnets of love, beauty, and butterflies.
We grant grace to all of these self-absorbed failings because we understand it to be a developmental stage–a finite period of time where young psyches work to get that macro vantage point on self. We wait for the emerging self-awareness because we believe the developmental cost will be far exceeded by the relational value a healthy, productive, valuable adult can contribute. In this environment with this expected outcome, love, and forgiveness, and grace, and mercy spring from a deep, deep well.
It is from this expected outcome, this deep, deep well, that God approaches us.
Inasmuch as we see people seeking the path to self-awareness, we are willing to embrace them on the path. But our energy shrinks to a dull ebb when we realize that arrogance and ignorance are combining to create the perfect storm of self-absorption and the inevitable self-indulgent outcomes.
Injustice grows exponentially when the self-absorbed, self-indulgent soul can demand moral absolution in the name of Christianity. When “Forgive Me” is uttered in belligerent command and moral absolution is the required response, mercy and grace have lost their meaning. When any person can write a moral blank check with the expectation that someone else MUST cash it, values, and justice, and proportion, and boundaries have been reduced to ash.
This is exactly how Christian Forgiveness is currently being taught: that the magic words of “forgive me” are sufficient to the cause. And if that doesn’t get the immediate moral absolution, the next bit of sanctimony is the moral relativism of “We are all just dirty rotten sinners.” The overt proposition is “You are not any better than me, so someday you will need someone to wink and nod at your bad stuff too.”
Any unwillingness, any hesitancy to immediately declare all actions pardoned, any intemperate outburst exonerated, and all intimacy restored is met with sanctimony: “How un-Christian,” or “How unloving,” or “How hardhearted.” The result: people are browbeaten into accepting circumstance and relationships that are vicious, unhealthy and destructive.
As a brief aside, it is this doctrinal insanity that keeps women in marriages where their husbands are self-absorbed, violent scum who repeatedly commit adultery: who alternately terrorize their families or abandon them with impunity. He stands in a pastor’s office and speaks the magic words, “forgive me.” With this enchantment, the woman is placed in an impossible position.
No matter how many adjectives we try to apply to this woman’s plight–loving, long-suffering, merciful, gracious et al–to make ourselves feel better in the face of profound injustice, she is further victimized by the self-absorbed, self-indulgent, useless piece of humanity, and then incarcerated by doctrines that are dehumanizing, unjust, and destructive.
It is true that God granted divorce because of the “hardness of people’s hearts,” but we have misunderstood who’s hardheartedness is the culprit. Divorce for “biblical” reasons is an act of self-preservation and self-defense against the violence of hardhearted action. (Make no mistake, adultery is personal violence of the most brutal soul-wrenching kind.) If the hardheartedness manifests in the person seeking divorce because of adultery, abuse, abandonment, why grant divorce at all?
Did I go to far afield with my last two paragraphs? Maybe, and then again, maybe not. The underlying theme of this post is what relational boundaries are people required to keep in the face of self-absorbed, self-indulgent, arrogant, AND ignorant conduct?
It is to this I will now turn my attention.
For those of you just tuning in…I’m not going to detail the sum of Paul Balluff and his wife, Me Love You long Time, interaction. You can find the bulk of their comments on Who’s Your Daddy, Reform or Not to Reform (in the last hundred comments), and Paul Balluff Lessons.
On May 25th, Paul Balluff found a pingback on the post Arena of Ideas. Here is what he said.
Paul B on May 25th, 2009 7:00 pm
Hey – I thought this using of other’s names was a ONE time thing, John?
Paul Balluff Lessons | spiritualtyranny.com on May 8th, 2009 3:28 pm
[…] adding their 38 cents worth. They don’t agree. They say so. No biggie. This is the Arena of Ideas where it is more rough-and-tumble than other living rooms. Someone might hand me my ass in my […]
How, pray tell do you have the gall to add my name to such a vile statement and call yourself a Christian. Oh, my mistake, maybe you aren’t.
Leave the profanity to your members and keep my name off these–if you want to toss out a pithy statement, please refrain from attaching my name to it.
For those of you who don’t know, a “pingback” is a blogging thingy that lets blog owners know when someone has referenced a post. Any time a hyperlink is posted, it “pings back” to the original. I do a lot of internal linking because so many of my thoughts are interconnected. Hence, the pingback from the post Paul Balluff Lessons to the post Arena of Ideas.
Anyway, onward…I of course was mystified by Paul’s reaction and comments because everything in the pingback was in the original post and presumably Paul had already read said post with said profane reference. A post with his name on it????
Ah, yes…silly me presuming that Paul actually read the post. He has repeatedly said that he makes no effort to follow the details of the conversation. Here is what he said when called to account by Juli.
Paul on May 26th, 2009 9:52 am
To Juli- I do not live on this or the other sites dedicated to those with a gripe to pick over life in or out of SGM. Therefore, I missed the Arena of Ideas and in a quick scan, thought that the above saying was attributed to me. I am man enough to say that I jumped to a conclusion that it was something that I had supposedly said – I was wrong. I hope you are woman enough to see how impolite you were in your response. (“you won’t get your ass kicked…”)
On a side note to all on these blogs- Had a good three-hour talk with Jim (SGMRefuge) last night. We left on excellent terms. As I hope can be said here.
John – same apology to you here -my bad
In Christ,
Paul
There is soooooo much here.
Your bad? Your bad what? Your relational incompetence? Your intellectual ineptitude? Your blogging presumption? Your utter lack of self-awareness? Your admitted willful ignorance? Your horrific doctrinal deficiency? Your nonexistent critical thinking skills? Your endless intemperance? Your ridiculous attempt at apology? Your feeble attempts at manipulation? Your pathetic sexist appeal?
Which bad thing are we talking about, Paul? The list is growing and growing and growing.
Frankly, I’ve seen teenagers with more self-awareness, and if not self -awareness, enough embarrassment at their own ill conduct that speaks to some self-consciousness.
Let’s see…am I saved? Hmm…well, if I’m not, maybe that explains a lot. But here is the thing. I’m not sure I see how that works out better for you?
If I am not saved, does that mean I get a moral and ethical pass? Does it increase YOUR obligation to overlook my conduct? So, as an unbeliever, does that mean I get to shoot you in the head and it’s just all good: leave your wife to forgive and forget? My conduct can’t be helped after all: I’m just an unsaved sinner? Right? It is by the Grace of God that such things don’t happen more often? Right?
Paul, you won’t follow this to save your life. You have shown no ability to follow a progression of thought, so I am confident this will sail right over your head. So, I am going to say it for those pastors sent to keep up with subversive material.
You guys suck at teaching your own body of doctrine. How is it that you can have a true SGM believer that can utter such inane doctrinal words? Come ON guys…my salvation demonstrated in using the word ASS? And not even jackass or stupid-ass or ridicule-ass.
How is it you have been so incompetent at teaching the doctrine of election? How is it you still have pew-sitters who CANNOT, for one second, remain consistent in their intellectual grasp of “Sound Doctrine”? How can comments, like Paul’s, be a criticism? If I am not saved, if I am not a Christian, there is not ONE thing I can do about it. So, my reprobate conduct is part and parcel of God’s Sovereign will.
He can parrot the SGM doctrine of pervasive depravity pretty good. He has absorbed the corresponding moral relativism that you all use to absolve yourselves of any and all relational failures…so how is it your pew-sitters fail to get the REST of the doctrine? From the way you advertise your doctrinal purity and monolithic presentation, this should be unacceptable. These pew-sitters should be getting demerits or something because they are NOT paying attention.
Anyway…
See, here is the insanity embedded in this whole dynamic. When it is something I’ve done, you get to rail about the quality of my salvation. Paul, when it is your manifest relational incompetence, you get to put on a Roseanne Roseannadanna act: “Oops…Never mind.”
Hommie John don’t play that game.
I can tolerate a lot. I have been more than generous with this platform. I have let you rail at liberty against the people and the content of this blog. I’ve let you and your wife accuse me of all manner of nefarious motives and actions. I have even let you justify yourself in an argument with Jim and Carol at www.sgmrefuge.com. That would be like me going to Dale O’Shields’ church and co-opting his mic to justify myself to SGM.
In all of this I have been (mostly) magnanimous.
I gave you ample time to explain the content of your lesson. I realize now you have none.
I even had flashes of letting you hang around for the comedic entertainment: as Jim is fond of saying: “That is almost funny.”
But what I cannot and will not tolerate is you presuming to give etiquette lessons to Juli. The irony in your thinking to define “impolite” is rich. And the further irony in your determination to make self-awareness a measure of your “man hood” makes me howl with laughter.
But comedic relief withstanding, that is the last straw. That is the single greatest manifestation of arrogance and ignorance that I can imagine.
You are not welcome here, Paul. There is no reprieve. I have no interest in further interaction. You are tedious, and have shown yourself willfully ignorant, arrogant, and thus irrelevant. Go co-op another blog to justify yourself if you must. But you have posted your last here.
The price of admission to this blog is both cheap and expensive. The price is self-awareness. You have no coin of the realm.
****
To all, If a comment sneaks through, ignore it till I get it deleted.


And Gracie… big High Five… Kirk is the real captain….
All thought… Johnathan Archer wasn’t too bad.
Janaway … Bleeeeaaaaaacccckkkk. Could anyone hide behind the prime directive any more often?
And who doesn’t like T’Pal??
err…who IS T’Pal?
wow…I am feeling so left out…haha
oh no-Not Star Trek….has to be one of the worst theme music intros in the history of Television. The theme song reminds me of Dental chair music….
sorry to be so fickle-but they don’t call me musicman for nothing…..
Musicman…ahaha..for some strange reason there are lots of Trekkie fans on this blog…..funny, we can all agree to disagree on all sorts of doctrines, but when it comes to Star Trek, it seems there are quite a few VERY distinct opinions..I find that hilarous.
I have to agree with you about the music, although…I have to say that anyone, even a non-Trekkie, would instantly recognize the music, and that means something. I prefer the Star Wars music myself…hehe
Just to set all you Star Trek newbs straight. The episode in question has an interesting history. Originally, that was the “pilot” episode of Star Trek and was called the “The Cage.” Later, the pilot was used in a regular Trek episode called “The Menagerie,” which was the only two part episode in the series. The buttheads (or Talosians) were from a planet called Talos IV.
Juli — T’Pal was the (politically incorrect) hot Vulcan lady on the series “Enterprise.” Also, the Eagle Nebula (or “Pillars of Creation”) is 6,500 lights years from Earth — so the images we see (taken in 1995) is 6,500 years ago.
Fascinating stuff. I am a Captain Kirk guy…
I remember the “butthead” episode!
Ah, too bad about the Eagle Nebula. Just my imagination that I see figures in there that aren’t…did anyone check out the hand in space? Spooky, huh?
And I vote “NO!” to Captain Archer. Janeway by far was the best Captain in a race between the two. Being a woman, Janeway used the Prime Directive a lot because she was a discerning woman. But, I guess you men just can’t stand tosee your male roles being led by a strong woman…hee-hee-…Juli, now I’ve done it! Someone is going to give me the Vulcan squeeze on the shoulder…
Prime directive because of discernment Hhahahaha….
Hyummmm… starship captain = Janeway
“Discernment” = prime directive
Prime directive = do nothing?
Starship captain = do nothing
hahahahahaa…
ehem
The Prime Directive is a way of life John…deal with it.
do nothing as a way of life? Huh?
I guess we are dealing with passivity as a way of life. And we are dealing with leaders using the “I won’t get involved” life motto. ….
maybe you are right, Dan … nothing to do about it. Just live and let live.
It’s….it is a Liberal plot to take over the world:
As you will recall, Star Fleet’s prime directive was never to interfere in the internal development of other planets. This was of course routinely ignored in any episode whose plot would have been stymied by it, but I think the general idea of a “prime directive” directed toward “others” is operating in the liberal mind. The Federation was made up of many races and cultures, and I doubt very seriously that they showed this extreme latitude toward each other, as it would have made “federation” impossible. They could quite legitimately conduct coups or discipline unruly planets or cultures of their own. But when it came to “the other,” they were determined not to judge. So the “prime directive” translated as “we hold our own to a standard; we refuse to judge ‘the other.'”
Or is this an example of the “Conservative Media Plot.”
Something to think about…
Otherwise, I got nothing….
I can’t believe that somehow, Star Trek and the prime directive have turned into a teachable moment…ahahah
not being familiar with the PD in the first place…this is interesting.
how does one define judging others? how does one define loving others? what do each look like? does it have anything to do with responsibility at all, or is that just an assumption we have made?
I’ve heard far too many people justify their lack of love and judgment of others by spouting out that they are “speaking the truth in love” and somehow that is the magic wand that is waved and absolves them of any offense or insult to the other person that has been rendered. And if the other person was offended, then they say it is because they are blinded…and if they try to defend themselves, then the one “speaking the truth” revels in the fact they are being persecuted for the cause of Christ.
It’s a lose-lose situation. You can’ t reason with people like this. Because they aren’t listening to you in the first place. And they don’t CARE about you in the first place. So if they aren’t listening and not caring, then how can they be loving you?
People aren’t stupid, they can spot an agenda a mile away. And if you have an agenda to change someone, what does that presume?
Juli,
It presumes that one does not accept the person as is. Good point. I love the verse when Jesus said that He did not come to judge the world, but to save it!
John,
You are funny. I can just hear your laughter when you post your opinion about the PD. However, I have to agree with Dan on this one. And don’t forget the times when the PD was over-ruled or ignored out of compassion. Damn the prime directive, I’m going to help these people!
Roddenberry would be so pleased that his creations are being discussed in the “arena of ideas”. Hee- hee…
Dan,
Some people think the Universe isn’t much older than 5 or 6 thousand years. I have no opinion on the matter, since I don’t understand it all. However, I still enjoy looking at the Eagle Nebula and picturing Jesus with His more interesting angel-types creating a star. Interesting how that part of the Nebula is so much larger than the teenie-tiny edge that looks like eagle wings, yet earth men chose to focus on that as a name.
I remember when the image first came out that there was talk of how the Nebula looked like Jesus creating a star, but that talk was soon hushed. Ah well, what do we expect from a world which discovered the planets in our solar system, and then named them after false Roman Gods? Ah, the infinite patience of our Creator…
I’m sure Roddenberry would be ecstatic. That was his leading issue with the pilot … he wanted serious ideas in his sci-fi but was concerned that the audience would not GET it.
His passion for ideas is why the original dealt with racism, Lt. Uhura, and the cold war between Russia and the US, et al.
He believed that one could tell those kind of stories in the sci fi context. What a brilliant visionary.
Yes, the “Great Bird of the Galaxy” is still with us in spirit.
Canary, however old the universe is (about 13.6 billion years according to the lastest scientific estimate), the fact is the Eagle Nebula produces jaw dropping wonder. To ponder the idea that something so violent at its base (the creation of new stars) can be so beautiful is mind boggling. BTW, what exits beyond the edge of the universe?
Juli — it presumes they know better or their truth as they know it is the only way to go. John has this right, there is no way for another person just casually looking into another’s life and being able to discern the whole truth. Human beings are complicated creatures and most people don’t want to be bothered by the details.