How absurd does it sound for atheists to claim that a Jew-hater allegedly followed Jesus (who is a Jew?!)

The fact that atheists even try to CLAIM Hitler was a Christian shows how underhanded and intellectually dishonest the atheists can be.

I know the Godless try their hardest to deconvert Christians, and to attack Christianity at large, but the “Hitler was Christian” argument has no basis whatsoever in reality.

Those that use the argument to attack Christians are actually just showing either: a. their own ignorance, b. they are possibly parroting something they were told. or c. That they (the arguer) don’t care about honesty, as long as the argument fools a few who don’t take the time to examine what they are propagating.

If their was a god why did he create us in the first place? If their was a god why does he not save us form ourselves?

He could fix the world. But sadly god is a made up being. 

But don’t let that sadden you. Living is great thing. You get 1 chance to experience the world and do what you want to do. Experience your life the way you want to.

But what happens when we die? What do we see for the rest of eternity? What is non existence? Is life really worth living?

I believe yes, life is worth it. Many people are atheists. They do not go around shooting people and taking drugs because they know when death comes, that they will be dead. Their is nothing else to it. 

I have a long time until I may die of old age. I will live my life, when my time comes I will know that my life was worth living and that I lived to the fullest.

I can die knowing that I lived how I wanted and I will be happy, no matter what non existence is.

Cover of WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE DIE

The philosopher claimed that animals are not capable to learn, they cannot think, they follow their instincts, and he’ll always give you the Pavlov’s dog example, he believes that animals do not have feelings, do not have and do not evolve.

So I asked him about this video

How did happen if animals do not have feelings? If the lion followed his instinct, the dear would be eaten!

This is just one from many videos out there showing that animals do have feelings, they are just like us but have a lower IQ.

When I ask the philosopher about these videos, he tried to avoid answering to the question and gave other arguments about other cases.

Then I asked him: “If you don’t think that an animal can think and if you don’t believe that he can evolve, then you don’t believe in Darwin’s theory of evolution, am i right?”

and he said: “yes, I don’t believe in that theory.”

that shocked me, how could philosophers not believe to this day in scientific theories. I didn’t want to continue arguing with him, what’s the point of arguing with someone who prefer philosophy on science? I remembered Steven Hawking saying that philosophy is dead.

Maybe philosophy is dead, but science is based on philosophy.

And until we discover what created the Big Bang, we will still believe in God and Philosophy will not die

How to end the article? Science and philosophy, they both have their strength and weaknesses:

Science VS Philosophy, you decide who wins…

I would like to present a plausible theory about how this struggle between the two will be ended. Christians will tell you the answer is the second coming of Christ. Atheists will have you believe that only the cold embrace of death will relieve believers of their “delusions”. I think neither reason is going to be the end of this debate. Christians sometimes forget and atheists deny that there is another power working behind the curtain to bring great change. This change, I believe, is going to be the end to the age old debate of Christianity versus atheism; or put differently, belief versus non-belief.

The power that I speak of is known to Christians, although many believers are moving in the direction of believing that Satan and his demons are nothing more than a myth to frighten people. This is where I will probably lose those of atheistic or different religious beliefs. I don’t expect you to read something you don’t want to, but I can promise you that what I have to say is not conjured out of thin air. Whether you believe that there is a great evil behind major world events or not, any rational and observant person will realise that the world is changing very quickly and that this change is seldom one for the better.

I am not going to give a complete breakdown of the concepts of secret societies, nor am I going to go on at length about that “tin-foil hat” subject of the new world order. If you’re willing to work with an open mind and let the facts speak for themselves, then you will be surprised what you will discover about these topics. My focus will be on one deceased individual that contributed a great deal to the changing world situation we see today. His name is Albert Pike. I won’t go into a long description of who he was and what he did in this article. I wish to focus on a specific letter that he wrote in the 1870’s to an Italian Revolutionary leader by the name of Giuseppe Mazzini. This letter detailed a plan to instigate three world wars. Keep in mind that this letter was written at least 40 years before the first world war. I will give the relevant excerpts of the letter below:

“The First World War must be brought about in order to permit the Illuminati to overthrow the power of the Czars in Russia and of making that country a fortress of atheistic Communism. The divergences caused by the “agentur” (agents) of the Illuminati between the British and Germanic Empires will be used to foment this war. At the end of the war, Communism will be built and used in order to destroy the other governments and in order to weaken the religions”

Any student of history will be able to recognise these described conditions that clearly indicate the rise of the Communist Soviet Union, as well as the framework for the war on the western front.

“The Second World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences between the Fascists and the political Zionists. This war must be brought about so that Nazism is destroyed and that the political Zionism be strong enough to institute a sovereign state of Israel in Palestine. During the Second World War, International Communism must become strong enough in order to balance Christendom, which would be then restrained and held in check until the time when we would need it for the final social cataclysm.”

Once again you can see from the above the clear references to the conditions leading up to the Second World War. The establishment of the state of Israel is described and also the further strengthening of communism (Cold War?). This also strongly suggests the rise of atheism, since communism is a pro-atheistic system.

Below is the extract that this article is based on. Please read it carefully and consider what it is saying and try to relate it to what is happening in the world right now.

“The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the “agentur” of the “Illuminati” between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Muslim Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other. Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustion…We shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil. Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view. This manifestation will result from the general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time.”

“The war must conducted in such a way that Islam and political Zionism mutually destroy each other” To me this perfectly describes what is happening in the Middle East at this very moment. You may have heard of possible war between Iran and Israel. The real crux of the matter is contained in the last couple of sentences. If we are to take this letter seriously, then it would seem that Christianity is in for one hell of a ride. Atheism, being used as a tool for Christianity’s destruction, won’t escape annihilation either. What is even worse is that it seems that a Satanic world religion will emerge from the ashes of the war between Christianity and Atheism.

At this point you have either written me off as a complete lunatic conspiracy theorist, or you have started to think about what is presented above. If you are unsure what to make of the above, then I wish to present the following question to you. How can a letter written at least forty years before the first event described (i.e. world war one) manage to predict it with such accuracy?. The only logical conclusion is that the writer of this letter (Albert Pike) had some foreknowledge of these events.

In conclusion, what does this letter mean to any of us in the 21st century? Well, it would seem that Christianity and atheism are both going to be targeted for destruction. I can’t force anyone to believe what I believe. I am simply interested in the truth. For me the truth is that there will be great oppression (as evidenced by this letter) before the end comes. As a Messianic believer I believe that this has been prophesied in Scripture long ago. So it may seem a dark situation, but I have hope for the better future promised beyond that.

But this is more than a discussion of Barak Obama.  It is a discussion on how to vote for offices from President to Dog Catcher. 

In case you were sleeping in November 2008 the United States elected an Afro-American as president for the first time.  To me this was not a momentous event because we were told in the 1990’s that Bill Clinton was the first black president.  I am still trying to grasp what that meant or what is significance in the religion, race or ethnic background of a president.  JFK was the first Catholic president but he abided by the constitution and Protestants were not beheaded during his tenure in office.  Likewise when a Jimmy Carter a Southern Baptist was elected we didn’t burn Catholic Churches. 

So why do I so vehemently oppose Barak Obama?  I will give you two reasons, one political, one moral.  I saw this man as one who pressed for political goals I cannot agree with, the primary one was socialism with some sidebars like worshipping the environment and ignoring the constitution.  On the moral side I detest his view on abortion, his willingness to lie, cheat and steal.  This is his background as a ‘community organizer’ and things like ACORN and Pastor Wright have underscored that.  He has sat in a church that preached hate for twenty years.

But let’s put that aside for a time and look at what God says.     

Deu 17:14  When thou art come unto the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, and shalt possess it, and shalt dwell therein, and shalt say, I will set a king over me, like as all the nations that are about me;

This is writing as if it is the children of Israel talking in the first part.  “I will set a king over me.”  I believe government to be a necessary evil that as time goes on the necessity becomes less and less and the evil more and more.  Thomas Jefferson said, “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”  At one time I was sure he was wrong.  I am not advocating revolution but I am no longer sure.  Every time I see a tyrant trying to remove guns from the citizens I worry more.  Barak Obama vowed early on to push this process.  Whether or not he is a tyrant is open to discussion.  That he wants to further this process is a fact. It moves him toward the tyrant category.

Deu 17:15  Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the LORD thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother.

The questions of Obama’s birth aside, there are several important things that clearly set him aside from “our brethren”.   He spent much of his younger years outside the American influence, some with his dad who hated the US in spite of the opportunity it gave him.  Contrast this to children of Ambassadors and Military personnel who grew up outside the country with a family that taught the love for this country.  One of the ironies of this is that Michelle Obama carries that hatred and this may be the bond between them.  Brothers grow up in the same environment with the same background.  I would no more vote for him than I would for a white racist or a person raised in an environment steeped with a love for Communism.  Had his father kept him here I would not have this objection.  As an aside, I believe the birth certificate he presented some time ago is a fake or was altered to hide something so damaging to him that it could not be presented.  It may be his father’s race which is listed as African on the fake but is probably listed as Muslim Arab – the way he presented himself for his scholarship – which is a lie. The sins of the fathers come to mind.

Deu 17:16  But he shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he should multiply horses: forasmuch as the LORD hath said unto you, Ye shall henceforth return no more that way.

Here is a man who had very little and has become rich on the backs of other people.  His major source of income is from books which he got an obscene royalty for.  The book companies lost money on every one of them.  It is doubtful he wrote them.  But he has multiplied riches (horses) to himself.  Ten years ago he was shaking down businesses to finance his social causes.  Today he is heaping his own money to himself.  Michelle also benefitted from this.  Her salary doubled when he became a US Senator!  If this is not close to a payoff I have no idea what is. 

The aspect of returning to Egypt did not really come to light till recently.  He is more and more pushing us to return to the bondage of European socialism, the lands our fathers left.  One of the ironies of this is the Europeans are just now seeing the bankruptcy of that government.

Deu 17:17  Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away: neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold.

I have not seen him multiply the wives but as state and US Senator he did multiply silver and gold to himself. 

Deu 17:18  And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book out of that which is before the priests the Levites:

Here is one that I will have to stretch a little.  The book of the law to Israel was literally the Pentateuch.  It was religious and Civil Law.  In the US we have civil law which is based on the constitution.  Barak has repeatedly called the constitution a living document to be reinterpreted at will.  His disrespect for the constitution is probably the most damning of his failings.  

Deu 17:19  And it shall be with him, and he shall read therein all the days of his life: that he may learn to fear the LORD his God, to keep all the words of this law and these statutes, to do them:

Deu 17:20  That his heart be not lifted up above his brethren, and that he turn not aside from the commandment, to the right hand, or to the left: to the end that he may prolong his days in his kingdom, he, and his children, in the midst of Israel.

That his heart be not lifted up.  This is one of the things that set him more aside from past presidents than anything.  He is special.  Ask him.  This is far from the Ronald Regan who would not take his coat off on the oval office because of the men who were there.  It was reverence to them and a feeling that he may not be worthy.  One of the ironies of this, he may have been one of the most worthy to sit at that desk.  He had the humility toward his brethren.  If there are two humble me who held that office, he and Abe Lincoln were the hands down contenders.  I know Regan looked at Lincoln as the greatest.  I would bet if Lincoln had been able to see Regan he would have probably said nearly the same.

So when you choose a king, remember it must be from your own brethren, one who does not desire to heap wealth to him, one who does not want to take us back to the land of bondage, one who is not lifted above his brethren.  In 2008 the choice was clear.  We blew it. 

Other Articles by Ralph Brandt

·         Casting Out Demons

·         Black Hawk Down

·         Being Criticed For The Gospel

·         I Count All Of This As Dung

·         Slicing And Dicing The Word Of God

·         Blind, Bound And Going In Circles

·         Because He Lives

Novels by Ralph Brandt

The Study

The Perfected Astronauts

Christy

The Night Sniper Chapter 1: on the Beat

The Handshue Sect 1

Karen: Chapter 1 – The Attack May 9, 2008

Alpha Four Chapter 01: Two Autopsies Mar 11, 2008

Laura Chapter 1 Jan 23, 2008

Jan Chapter 01: School Days Mar 6, 2008

Denise Chapter 01: Success in Hollywood Feb 29, 2008

Jesus gets on better with some Pharisees than others, at least for a time. When a leading Pharisee, called Simon, invites him to dinner, Jesus gratefully accepts.

Simon is rather shocked when Jesus turns up at his house accompanied by an un-named woman with a notorious reputation as a prostitute. Simon sees the lady wash Jesus’ feet for him and then dries his feet with her hair. She then deodorizes his feet with some very expensive exotic perfumes, and kisses his feet too.

Imagine your reaction if a dinner guest exercised a foot fetish ritual at your house with a friend like this.

Simon understandably raises a few objections, countered by Jesus on the following grounds. Jesus argues that a man in debt to a tax collector would feel more respect for the tax collector if his debts were written off and forgiven. Jesus has forgiven the woman for her past indiscretions and she shows great loyalty to him for it. The former whore is forgiven more than a financial debt. Her crimes would normally see her denied entry to Heaven, so divine forgiveness absolves her of the consequences of her past indiscretions.

Jesus is making it clear that he is supporting the under-privilege, criminals, poor people, etc. The big problem here is that the feet washing hints that her profession may well still be being practiced, with Jesus himself potentially benefiting from it, directly or even financially.

Jesus actually criticises Simon, his host, for offering no water, perfume or kisses. Had I been Simon, Jesus would have been asked to leave the house quite quickly.

A few commentators assume this mysterious un-named lady is Mary Magdalene, but she does not appear until much closer to the crucifixion.

Arthur Chappell

Jesus, Christ, prostitute, perfume, Pharisee, hospitality, kisses, Arthur, Chappell, Bible, Gospels, atheism, doubt, forgiveness, tax,

I say new, but let’s be honest, religionism is as old as Methuselah.  Religion and politics have always been tiptoed around by tactful party goers, and why?  Because ignorance ruins what could otherwise be a fruitful conversation of intellect and/or dirty jokes.  This brings me to my first point.  

Religionism is no better than racism.

A few hundred years ago, the dark skinned man was the white man’s bling.  Part of the reason slavery was so popular, was the idea that people of a different color weren’t actually considered as full people.  They saw them as inferior.  However we’ve gone through many years, many triumphs in civil rights, and quite a few celebrities on the Wheaties box.  Now, racists are tsked at just as much as the poor smokers banished to the balconies and front porches of America’s social gatherings.  Of course it still exists.  We still acknowledge it in our comedy, but even shows like Family Guy and American Dad often admit how wrong it is.  If someone tells a racist joke, people are told how horrible they are, even if they are laughing when they do it.  Racists are pretty much lumped in with pedophiles, wife beaters, and telemarketers.  So why can’t we have the same disdain for religionists?  It’s as if the masses think that just because it’s a person’s religion, that person has the right to be bigoted about it.  Well…yeah…they do have the legal right, but then, so do racists and we have no problem telling them off.  Religionists have killed a lot more people in the last 50 years than racists have.  Remember Al-Qaeda are religionists, which brings me to my next point.

Terrorist and Muslim are Not Synonyms.

When an extremist group commits a travesty, people tend to attack the entire religion.  Obviously they feel the best thing to combat religious prejudice is to be an even bigger religious bigot.  Nevermind that their own faith likely has extremist factions that commit violence on a regular basis.  

Let’s do a short list of extremist organizations:  IRA, Hutaree, The Lord’s Resistance Army, etc. – Christian terrorism; Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hesbollah, etc.  - Islamic terrorism; Gush Emunim Underground, Terror Against Terror, Defending Shield, etc. – Jewish terrorism.  

Of course if you mention these extremists to someone of that religion, they claim that no  *insert their brand of faith here* would ever act that way, so they are not real *whatevers*.  The same people will then go on to tell you how all Muslims (for instance) are terrorists.  They’re oblivious to how the leaders of Islam claim that terrorists could not possibly be Muslim.

http://www.islamfortoday.com/terrorism.htm

http://www.islamagainstterrorism.com/messages.htm

Religious Antagonists claim that religion is the biggest killer of all mankind.  It’s arguable, but not accurate.  Atheism has had it’s share of mass slaughters as well.  The real killer isn’t actually religion or the lack thereof, it’s of course, our new racism.  Let’s not become terrorists in the fight against terrorism.

Nazi Germany had the Jews to demonize, today we have Islam.  It’s everywhere in the media, because bad news sells, but even CNN had to admit to over-dramatization of Islamic terrorism in the media.

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/01/06/muslim.radicalization.study/

Despite the facts, we still have legislative attempts at the state level to “Keep Islam out of our Government,” even though we are already protected at the federal level by a little something they must have forgotten, called the FIRST AMENDMENT!  The same people who support this type of asinine legislation are the ones complaining when their religion isn’t plastered all over the courthouse lawn or in our schools.  This brings me to my next point.

Putting God in schools and courts violates the freedoms our founding fathers fought for.

Many who happen to be in the most popular religion in the area (state, country, etc.) tend to forget that there are other religions (or even states, countries, etc.).  Fighting for the rights of our fallen war heroes to have their own religious symbols on their tombstone is seen as an attack on Christianity for some reason.  Yeah, how dare they whine about having their freedom to exercise their religion, taken away!  (Note sarcasm)  

People tend to forget that our founding fathers weren’t altogether the most religious.  Thomas Jefferson once referred to religion as “that abomination” and published his own version of the gospels with all elements of divinity, angels, or anything supernatural taken out of it.  Thomas Paine wrote very openly against religion.  Ben Franklin openly admitted doubt that Jesus was the son of God.  I could go on, but the point is, we are not in a theocracy as much as fundamentalist America wants us to be.  Thank whatever eh?

Cover of The Jefferson Bible

One fairy tale is as good as another.

The most important thing to remember about religionism is the arrogance in the belief that one person’s unproven spirituality is somehow more valid than someone else’s.  Religionists ignore the fact that their own beliefs are just someone else’s mythology.  The things that are called mythology are still practiced as religions today.  Greek mythology is now called Helenism.  Ancient Celtic Druidism combined with some other European mysticisms to make today’s Wicca and yes, there are some religions that support the belief in fairies.  Neither of those beliefs are less than our most popular religions.

Prejudiced types don’t have enough humility, even if their religion preaches positively in favor of it.  How can one person claim to hold a perfect, absolute truth?  Science doesn’t even have all the answers.  A theory DOES represent that which is MOST certain, given the current observable information.  Theory, by no means should be used in the same sentence with only (except this one of course).

If we could keep in mind that our unproven spiritual faiths have exactly as much merit as what we call mythology, then we might not be so arrogant and ignorant to be religionists.  We do not have to be bigots to have faith in something.  Faith is the strong (not necessarily 100% certain) belief in something without proof.  If we really want to bring America or even the world together, we need to stop pushing our religions on each other and start bringing awareness of religionism like we do for racism, bullying, and setting our clocks back.  

Religionism, like racism, causes people to to look at other people as inferior, or…not a full person.  That is way too dangerous a thought, because people act on what they think.  Think about it.

Well with this new information I was given, when my suicidal tendencies started, I figured I had some sort of “insurance” that if I killed myself, my family would be taken care of because god would never let anything bad happen to them. And as for me, suicide was just a faster track into heaven where I wouldn’t have to worry about all this bullshit in life anymore. The three times I attempted suicide obviously didn’t work because I”m here right now. Of course I blamed it on god’s will and figured god was playing games with me. I eventually gave up the fairy tale and learned to deal with life head on. Now I know if I kill myself, there is no life insurance that will support my kids financially and I will become maggot food. Now suicide isn’t looking too friendly anymore.

The 1St Amendment of the U.S. Constitution

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The part relevant to this discussion is, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”.

Note that despite the fact that the tem “separation of church and state” is often used in association with first amendment that it appears not ware with in it. The phase is a actually based on a letter that Thomas Jefferson wrote to a Baptist church addressing their concerns of about the possibility of a state religion being established in the U.S. like the Church of England in Britain.

The problem is that there are those that want to eliminate all public religious observances and references. They try to use the establishment clause to achieve their goal.

The clause in question called says, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”. What is meant by this is that there is to be no legally established official religion of the United States like the  Church of England in Britain. In essence the idea is that the United States government and by way of the 14th Amendment the state and local governments must legally and officially be neutral on religion.

However these people are not trying to force government neutrality on religion but hostility. This rakes many forms but they include many violations of the free exercise clause which immediately follows the establishment clause and states “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” referring to religion. Include a public high school valedictorian being threatened with jail by a judge if she mentioned God or prayed in her speech. This also violates the next clause in the 1St Amendment which states “or abridging the freedom of speech”

What these people are actually trying to do is legally (by judges) establish the atheistic religion of Secular Humanism as the official state religion because if you ban references to God and religions observances from public functions in you are declaring the official government religion to be Atheistic Secular Humanism.

       First of all, religion is a natural phenomena that is created by humanity often in its distant past; therefore, it could be conceivable that since religion is a natural phenomena then so is the idea of God. The idea of God has taken an abundance of different forms and names in the diversity of religions throughout human history from Zeus and Jupiter in Greek and Roman Mythology, Brahma in Hinduism, Allah in Islam, Yahweh in Judaism, God in christianity, and many more. How can we truly know what God is or conceive if its actual existence when we don’t even know what “God” is or which conception is real? This is an inevitable fact because all of these claims on God are human creations; this all we can discern despite what the various practitioners claim about their religion. Ultimately, these variety of definations about the idea of God blur the conception and existance of God; therefore,  this makes the idea human dependent because it only exists as long as humans believe it.

    The conception of God in human religion is always dependent on one critical factor: belief. A person has to believe that God is Allah, Yahweh, Brahma, etc in order for their religion to grow and exist in society; so, what does this mean for the role of an omnipotent God in human society? To me, it means simply that if such a deity does exist then he is not omnipotent at all, but rather weak and needy. This is because if a God is all-powerful with the ability to create and destroy the world at will as well as provide humans with salvation or damnation then why is it so dependent on the neccessity of belief? What would a God, an often image of perfection, do with desiring the belief and praise of a race of imperfect and weak in comparison beings? This would then not only make God a weak God, but also a tormented deity. For what would a perfect deity and creator of the universe want with a race of imperfect beings? In other words, why would a perfect all-poweful god create a group of imperfect weak beings who naturally defy his laws according to christianity yet still desire their belief, praise, and love?

     Finally, what does this all mean? First of all, it means that we have the power to “kill” this idea of God. Because if we cannot know exactly what God is due to the diversity of conceptions about it and if its existance is dependent upon our belief, then we are not as weak as we appear. In fact, we are the ones who are the powerful and thus we could be God ourselves. Lastly, a quote from Friedrich Nietzsche sums up the human condition after the idea of God and henceforth religion is destroyed: ” God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightliest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will ripe this blood off of us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of the deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it? “