Jonathots Daily Blog
(4299)
“Summarize that.”
“Make it shorter.”
“Fewer words, please.”
“No one will read anything that long.”
“How about just a tweet?”
I, for one, believe there’s a certain amount of charm in finding fewer words to express ideas. But sometimes, we just want less because we don’t want to hear more.
I smile when I hear writers begin articles with, “There’s so much to say…”
There may be much to say, but there’s a great need to scrunch it together and pitch it to the American public in a way that mingles thoughtfulness and good cheer.
You may or may not agree. But even though I realize great books have taken hundreds of chapters and billions of words to express eternal ideas, I must tell you, the appetite is gone for such mental munching.
So I need to be concise. Like:
“Take care of things and things will take care of you.”
The minute I start adding an explanation to this, I will probably lose my audience.
Another example:
“If you’re gonna to be mean, you’re gonna get mean, if you know what I mean.”
Once your head stops spinning from the overuse of the word “mean,” maybe you’ll get a good chuckle. But will it inspire you to stop being nasty to the world around you?
How about this?
“Don’t start a war if you aren’t willing to die.”
That may get a few “oohs and ahhs” from readers. But absent the recitation of the history of war’s futility, it might fall on deaf ears.
I did find one exception. It’s a premise that needs no explanation—an idea that does not require a series of verified testimonials.
Of all the things that have ever been said and all the things that have ever been written, this is the only principle that really needs to be followed.
“Blessed are the merciful for they shall obtain mercy.”
For the sake of our discussion today, let us transform it:
To get mercy, give mercy.
We all need mercy. It’s why we invented the phrase, “unconditional love.” But you see, love without mercy is not only conditional, but is doomed to be temporary.
Mercy is what love becomes when we find out the truth about each other.
I love the definition of mercy:
A decision to become compassionate when it is in our power to do harm.
No word sums up the basic daily, fluid need of the human race more than mercy.
Love works beautifully when mercy is honored.
But love becomes discontented, frustrated and wounded if judgment is used instead of mercy.
It disappeared for a while during the Dark Ages.
Inkles of it sprouted to the surface, welcoming in the Renaissance.
Rephrased, it showed up in a document proposing freedom: “All men are created equal.”
Another hundred years and it’s found in an inauguration speech: “With malice toward none and charity for all.”
Unfortunately, in our time, mercy is deemed weakness.
But only mercy has the power to open the world to the freedom of living a lifespan without being killed in a war.
Isn’t that amazing?
Throughout the entire history of humankind, there were always wars to interrupt the lifespan of young men who might have lived to be old and wise but perished in combat.
War is foolishness when mercy is available.
Mercy does not allow our enemies to walk over the top of us—but mercy is fully aware that in defeating them, we more than likely will have to live with them afterwards. We should act accordingly.
There is no statement that is better suited to the human race: “give mercy, get mercy.”
Give mercy to the Earth and protect Mother Nature. You will get mercy.
Give mercy to your husband or wife and you will get mercy.
Give mercy to the animal kingdom and only deplete their ranks by what you absolutely need. You will get mercy.
Give mercy to your enemies for their clumsy attempts to frighten you. You will get mercy.
This is our universal slogan: Give mercy, get mercy.
Having the ability to inflict pain and harm, we choose mercy.
And because we choose mercy, when pain and harm come our way and we are due punishment, she has permission to step in and save us.
Jonathots Daily Blog 
G-Poppers … November 3rd, 2017
Jonathots Daily Blog
(3479)
G-Pop has discovered that flipping through the history pages often provides a wind of discovery.
Even though in 1857 the telegraph was available in major towns throughout the United States, no one had a unit in their home–and certainly not in their children’s bedrooms.
Eventually the telephone became quite popular and was not just located in the midst of the community, but each person had one in their house. But rarely was it placed in any area but the living room or the kitchen.
Likewise, when the radio became the craze, there was a big family unit, usually located near the fireplace, where everyone would gather to listen to the shows, indulge in entertainment and giggle or shiver together. No one even thought about buying a radio just for Jimmy or Sally’s room.
The television set–what an advancement. Certainly there was disagreement among family members about what shows to watch, especially with the limited number of networks. Still, the new box remained in the family room, with very few people being able to afford a second unit elsewhere in the house.
We were locked into one another. Some people might even say “confined.” We were dependent–often inter-dependent with other families and communities. We were forced to have meals together because the possibility of having the instant gratification of fast food or warming something in a microwave was decades away.
And then came the cell phone. At first it was a novelty used for emergencies. But as the Internet came floating into the Cloud, a merger was formed in which the cell phone could become a computer and bring the Web into anybody’s possession who held the magic piece in his or her hands.
At this point, for some reason or another, we made a major decision that it was wrong to prevent any family member from having his or her own communication device. We decided we didn’t need to share anymore. We concluded that being privately entertained or informed was adequate. We have now reached the point that children of seven or eight years just assume they should have their own.
We lament that folks seem to be glued to their tiny screens, never making eye contact with one another. We even have television specials which suggest that we’re losing personal contact with our fellow humans.
But most of us never see those shows or hear the reports. We can quickly tune away from them to something much more intriguing.
G-Pop knows that if he were to suggest that we’ve actually hampered our ability to understand one another through our cell phones, he would be considered an old fogey–except that the term “old fogey” is also out-dated.
G-Pop supposes he could become adamant or evangelical to see cell phone use tamed to such an extent that human communication would once again be possible.
But he realizes there’s no need to fuss about it.
Sooner or later we will need each other, and a text, a YouTube, an Instagram, a Pinterest or a Tweet will just not cut it.
Share this:
Like this:
- G-Poppers
- G-Poppers--social commentary offered in a grandfatherly way.
on November 3, 2017 at 5:42 pm Leave a CommentTags: cell phone, evangelical, family room, fast food, fireplace, G-Poppers, history pages, instant gratification, Internet, Jonathan's thoughts, kitchen, living room, microwave, networks, old fogey, Pinterest, radio, telegraph, telephone, Television, text, the Cloud, the Web, tiny screens, Tweet, United States, YouTube