Being a Wise Virgin
I tried to talk some common sense to the Statesman forum today but received the usual negative response. Here are some of the things I wrote.
A poster makes a good point that we cannot help everyone. It would be nice if we could but such is not the reality at present. The parable of the ten virgins teaches this principle. As the signal came to meet the bridegroom it became apparent that only five of the ten had enough oil in their lamps for the journey. The five who lacked asked them to share. But the five with the oil said that if they shared then all would run out part way through the journey and none would benefit.
This applies to us. We need to share what is wise, but if we borrow and spend too much we will run out of oil [money] and we will not be able to help ourselves let alone others.
Here’s a thought. If everyone did their best to help their family and loved ones there would be little need for social programs.
A poster insisted I was wrong and that I didn’t want to help the poor. To this I said:
Another totally false accusation. If a person borrows on his credit cards, goes bankrupt and then loses his power to help others he then becomes one of the needy asking for help himself and no one benefits.
Helping people with other people’s money, and borrowed money at that, is not real help and, like the parable of the virgins, none will reach their end goal.
I’m a big believer in helping people, but I believe in helping people with resources I have, not with resources I have to borrow and occupy.
We are losing our power as a nation to help people because of irresponsible financial decisions. If we get ourselves back on a good foundation then we will be able to help more than ever, and it would be from our abundance rather than borrowed money that belongs to our kids.
You accuse me of being greedy and you are not, and your claim for being generous? You want to give away other people’s money. And who’s money is that?
[1] Borrowed money
[2] Our children’s and grandchildren’s money.
Some generous guy you are.
Another poster asks: “Who are you to be the one who chooses which “virgin gets the oil?”
JJ: You need to argue with what I say, not with what I do not say.
The virgins with oil in their lamps had the full vessel of oil not because someone chose that situation for them but because they worked hard to obtain the oil. The five wise virgins chose for themselves. No one chose for them.
The five foolish virgins that didn’t see the need to gather the oil at that time suffered because of their shortsightedness.
The point of my post had nothing to do with some bureaucrat, or some other person, deciding who gets oil and who does not. The choice is already made. If you have earned money you have done so because of choices you made. Let me illustrate the point I was making in a parable so maybe you can understand.
Caroline has two kids, Jim and Jeff. Let us say that Jim wants to see Lady Gaga when she comes to town and the ticket costs $200. He works hard and saves up $300 figuring he might need a little extra. Jeff also wants to see her but he has no money and asks Jim for $200. Jim says, “I’d love to see you go, but if I give you $200 then I will not have enough and will not be able to see her.”
Jim has a perfect right to deny Jeff the loan or gift, you would think.
The mother, Caroline, thought she would even things out and forced Jim to give Jeff $150 or half of his money. Jim was upset and protested, “Now neither of us can go.”
Caroline replied, “Maybe your dad or one of or friends will supply the extra $50. Now get out of my hair.”
They each tried to raise the extra $50 but there was not enough time and neither of them got tickets and Jim was out $150.
The point is that there is a limit as to how much a person, group or nation can help other people. It may have been practical for Jim to loan Jeff $50 but too much sharing destroyed his goal.
Our nation should stick within its budget. Generosity crosses the line when you have to borrow and endanger the lives of future generations to do so.
The poster thought this statement was ignorant:
“If everyone did their best to help their family and loved ones, there would be little need for social programs.”
I don’t think so. It is indeed a true statement, but I realize there are many who do not want to help anyone with their own resources and want Big Brother to do it all instead.
A poster insinuated I did not understand the difficulty people have who may have to choose between food and insurance. I responded:
I was in that situation for over 20 years but I did not expect a handout from Big Brother. It was a no brainer in choosing between health care and food. We always chose food and chose good food so we stayed healthy and needed minimal health care for my family. When we went to the doctor, we just paid cash. Our medical costs were less than the insurance premiums would have been.
Did I see myself as a poor victim as many do today? Not at all. Today we have a victim mindset that is turning us into a nation of wimps.
So many people spend their health gaining wealth, and then have to spend their wealth to regain their health. – A. J. Reb Materi
Nov 25, 2013
Join JJ’s Facebook group HERE
JJ’s Amazon page HERE
If this parable were a valid metaphor for modern economics and wealth distribution, then 1 virgin would have 80% of the oil, the other 9 would have the remaining 20%, and several of those 9 wouldn’t have enough to light their lamp at all. The 1 with the 80% could easily assist in lighting the lamps of the others and still have plenty leftover. The parable actually assumes that all 10 virgins have an equal supply of oil available to them though, and 5 just neglected to bring what they needed. Does everyone have equal wealth when they start out? No, but the parable has it that way, so if you want to go by the wisdom of this parable, everyone needs to start out with equal wealth, so it’s actually a refutation of much of what you’re saying. It also shows that you’re not engaging the Bible genuinely, but instead just twisting it to validate your own beliefs.
> I was in that situation for over 20 years but I did not expect a handout from Big Brother. It was a no brainer in choosing between health care and food. We always chose food and chose good food so we stayed healthy and needed minimal health care for my family. When we went to the doctor, we just paid cash. Our medical costs were less than the insurance premiums would have been. Did I see myself as a poor victim as many do today? Not at all. Today we have a victim mindset that is turning us into a nation of wimps.
There is something called Stockholm syndrome, where victims basically embrace their victimization so deeply, that they sympathize with their abuser and accept their lack of dignity as a matter to virtue signal on. What you’re saying here reminds me of that. You’re still a victim, JJ. You bragging about not seeing yourself as a victim is, in itself, an indication that you are one of the most victimized people there is. You will, of course, deny this, because that is part of the coping mechanism. Know this though: virtue signaling about enduring poverty is about as wimpy as it gets.
You say: The parable actually assumes that all 10 virgins have an equal supply of oil available to them though, and 5 just neglected to bring what they needed. Does everyone have equal wealth when they start out?
They all had equal opportunity to obtain the oil and prepare to meet the bridegroom. Because five did not take the opportunity then at the start they were not equal. Five had oil and five did not.
I did go by what was written contrary to your unjust accusation.
Saying I bean a victim of the Stockholm Syndrome is very bizarre. There was one to victimize me so that could not have been the case. We had good health and no victim materialized.
> They all had equal opportunity to obtain the oil and prepare to meet the bridegroom. Because five did not take the opportunity then at the start they were not equal. Five had oil and five did not.
That’s the point. The equal opportunity in this parable is not a metaphor for real life. That kind of thing is a comforting fairy tale to the virtue-signaling poor, but in reality there is no such thing as equal opportunity. You acknowledge this in your own teachings: “The more evolved want to serve where there is the greatest opportunity to move evolution forward. Of course, they have their personal interests and priorities, which are a factor but overall, they want to place themselves in positions where they can accomplish something of worth that will also produce a feeling of satisfaction and joy to themselves.”
> Saying I bean a victim of the Stockholm Syndrome is very bizarre. There was one to victimize me so that could not have been the case. We had good health and no victim materialized.
What are you saying? It sounds like you’re saying that if you can’t put a name or face on the abuser, it therefore must not exist. That’s actually pretty bizarre, given that you teach about the existence of unseen evil forces. Is the Dark Brotherhood not real now?
You’re a victim of the circumstances you grew up in. There is nothing wrong with admitting that. You’re not going to morph into a slacker or implode with feelings of “woe is me” if you admit that. You might lose the impression of stoicism, but that only impresses other repressed victims, so it doesn’t matter. So what if you had good physical health? The status of not having a serious medical issue isn’t exactly something to brag about. Only people with such a deeply repressed victim mentality set the bar so low.
Sometimes it appears that you disagree just to be disagreeable. Instead of seeing the principal, I was teaching behind the parable you try to make exact details match what you think is some true reality.
The principal is this: In the parable five virgins had oil and five virgins did not. If the five versions with the oil shared then none would have enough, and none would reach their destination. This idea teaches a principal and the principal is that if you take too much from those that have and give to those that have not then none will benefit. It’s like the man who killed the goose that laid the golden egg idea.
For instance, if we took all of Elon Musk assets and sold them and distributed to the poor then 150 thousand people would lose their jobs and in the end, no one would benefit; instead a disaster would result. That’s the basic principal and instead of arguing against the basic principal I present you just look for details to argue with.
In my mind, it is crazy for you to portray me as a victim when I was young because those experiences, I went through were very valuable and made me the opposite of a victim. Being a victim is a state of mind. Let’s hope you don’t impress brace that state of mind that you espouse.
The details I mentioned matter. Sometimes it appears that you gloss over relevant details just to make a narrative fit.
> The principal is this: In the parable five virgins had oil and five virgins did not.
It is difficult to bring extra of that which you do not have, in which case there is no equal opportunity here as you said earlier.
> This idea teaches a principal and the principal is that if you take too much from those that have and give to those that have not then none will benefit.
And I’m explaining to you the limitations of using parables as a map of real life.
> For instance, if we took all of Elon Musk assets and sold them and distributed to the poor then 150 thousand people would lose their jobs and in the end, no one would benefit.
You have a crush on this guy or something?
Elon Musk’s companies are publicly traded, so that doesn’t make any sense. If all shares of Elon Musk’s companies were distributed to the 150,000 employees, the jobs and assets would still be there. The engineers that make his companies’ success would still be around. The employees would benefit and be more motivated in their work since they would have a stake in it. Your molecular business idea would also be fulfilled. At no point does a transfer of ownership suddenly make what already exists disappear. Elon Musk could die of a ketamine overdose tomorrow, and his companies would still go on. New leadership would take over, better leadership for all you know.
This is the problem with trying to map parables to real life to the extent that you do. At some point, you have to look up from the map and examine the territory. You have a bad habit of trying to make the territory conform to the map.
> In my mind, it is crazy for you to portray me as a victim when I was young because those experiences, I went through were very valuable and made me the opposite of a victim. Being a victim is a state of mind.
“Being a victim is a state of mind” is something a victim says when they want to maintain an image of stoicism and strength. They don’t want to face the fact that being deprived of their dignity happens for no reason, so they make rationalizations for it. “I was in that situation for over 20 years but I did not expect a handout from Big Brother.” That’s not an accomplishment, just virtue signaling. “Did I see myself as a poor victim as many do today? Not at all. Today we have a victim mindset that is turning us into a nation of wimps.” That’s you making poverty into a morality contest because you need it to mean something, or just more virtue signaling.
So you grew up impoverished, did hard labor as a child, and you endured with the outstanding accomplishment of…good physical health and not asking for a handout. So what? You talk about this as if that were an accomplishment. It’s not, and no amount of virtue signaling about it will make it seem so.
> Let’s hope you don’t impress brace that state of mind that you espouse.
I don’t feel the need to make my ego the center of the universe by interpreting divine necessity in my experiences, whether those experiences be positive or negative. I’m not conceited and self-centered enough to do so. I also don’t feel the need to turn hardship into a morality contest. That’s a poverty mindset.
There is no problem for anyone but you (and maybe five other people on the planet) in using parables to better understand real life.
Yeah, I do have a problem with it. It has to do with this thing called critical thinking. It means thinking about things in your own terms instead of piggybacking on parables, slogans, and “nuh-uh.” You might want to try it some time.