& as such WHY U wonder THEY (fill in blank's) keep on & this & that misc else ie: like bullies in a classroom cuz it's past-2 date been CLEAR via Holy Bible-Holy Trinity's Holy Counsel conveyed thru individual's amidst U just what could-should have been done & maintained 'tight' ie: housecleaning BUT U STILL just sit-stand there pointing finger (s) at each other, deeming Holy Trinity as some butler-maid-janitor-super hero & worse - 'Well HE (God) ain't done nothing SO = HE must B okay with'; uh WRONG-THINK AGAIN = Jesus: 'MORE B in Hell than Heaven'; Woo Hah (a state or condition of excitement, agitation-anxiety or nervous excitement, or disturbance, uproar)! HAIL Holy Majesty-Master, retributionary Eye's of Fire, King Jesus Christ, eternal Son of Yahweh Jehovah Father God & 3 in 1-1 in 3 Holy Trinity & WITHOUT or NEVER QUESTIONING HIM , Yippee Ki‐Yay (an expression of joy)!

Anger's Bitter Fruit

September 03, 2023
by Pastor Chuck Swindoll
Scriptures: Numbers 20:1–13
So Moses did as he was told. He took the staff from the place where it was kept before the LORD Then he and Aaron summoned the people to come and gather at the rock. “Listen, you rebels!” he shouted. “Must we bring you water from this rock?” Then Moses raised his hand and struck the rock twice with the staff, and water gushed out. So the entire community and their livestock drank their fill. (Numbers 20:9–11)
Now, wait a minute! Did we miss something? Where did Moses get the okay to deliver that scathing address? The truth is, he didn't. Then where did it come from? From anger. Brimming with hostility and reacting in unbelief, he takes that rod and preaches an angry sermon to the people. His short fuse prompts him to take advantage of an opportunity to level these rebels with enraged verbiage.

I think there's even a hint of blasphemy here. "Shall we bring water out of the rock?" he asks. But Moses, when did you ever bring water out of a rock? Isn't God the one who summons water? True enough. But when you give in to rage, you sort of black out; you set aside your right mind and are driven by the unchecked emotions of anger. So the text states, Moses "lifted up his hand and struck the rock twice with his rod" (20:11, italics mine).

God had told him to speak to the rock; Moses struck it, not just once, but twice. And I frankly doubt whether he even cared if water came. He probably hoped it wouldn't. He was so angry, he wanted their throats to stay dry. He wanted them to choke and writhe in their thirst. "Do you think we'll give you water, you low-life scumbags? Hah!" So he belts the rock—Wham! Wham!—and much to his surprise, out flows fresh water. Scripture tells us that "water came forth abundantly, and the congregation and their beasts drank" (v. 11). Absolutely amazing! Amazing grace!

But that's the way God's grace works, isn't it? Have you ever acted in rash unbelief, and yet God went ahead and opened up the door in spite of you? Talk about ultra humiliation. It happens when you're out to lunch spiritually, when you're walking in the flesh and you know it. You know when it began, and you know the depth and intensity of your carnality, but God graciously gives you what is best anyway. It's remarkable, isn't it, this thing called grace? It was grace that brought forth that clear stream of fresh water for the rebellious Israelites, as well as for ill-tempered Moses.

Here is the latest Blackbird9's Breakfast Club Show

Tonight the host continues discussing The HAH (Hillz And Holez) Game and HAH-IRL.

"Blackbird9's Breakfast Club Episode 297: Pro Bearz Take Inventory For Quest 2023"
https://speakfreeradio.com/2023/01/05/00/blackbird-9s-breakfast-club-297-2/

Here is the latest Blackbird9's Breakfast Club Show

Tonight the host discusses The HAH (Hillz And Holez) Game. In the first hour, archivist Mr. Russell James stops by to discuss his latest “Aryan Archive” project.

"Blackbird9's Breakfast Club Episode 296: Starting Quest 2023 With A Bucket Of Rocks"
https://speakfreeradio.com/2022/12/28/22/blackbird-9s-breakfast-club-296/

Is Inflation caused by the Government "Printing" Money?

Well this admits that money is "printed." Which suggests that if it weren't printed it wouldn't exist. Which suggests that when you went to buy something with non-existent money, you'd be in a quandry. If money is important at all, one needs to consider this question.

Yesterday, though, I gave some prefatory remarks to the topic. Let me summarize those.

1. I read somewhere that eighty percent of circulating dollars is created by lending. If you want to discuss the quantity of money theory, we have to define the quantity of money. As the quantity of credit money is an ephemeral figure, I suggest we count only twenty percent of what we think the amount of money is.

Now, since whenever Federal Departments spend, current law requires this to trigger the pay-for of Treasury Bond auctions, the selling of bonds only to private entities mostly non-bank entities with non-banking sector customers, auctions in which the central bank is forbidden to make bids, forbidden to purchase, spending is not, to appearance, directly "printing money."

As the Federal Reserve's goal in subsequently purchasing some, not all, Treasury Bonds from their private owners is open market operations: an attempt to stabilize the general level of prices via guiding interest rates in the economy, and their goal is not "printing money," they have opportunity, but don't confess to a motive. Why then do we think they are printing money?" Suppose actually, then, that they are not. During the gold standard, the government allowed itself to print money whenever it purchased gold bullion; now, when has the government ever allowed itself to print money? And if we were printing money, whence comes the eighty percent of money that is not money but only credit, and whence comes our rolling, ever-worsening deflationary credit bubbles and busts, leading finally, now, to this worldwide political crisis.

2. Major inflation vs. two percent "target" inflation
Two percent inflation
Does the Federal Reserve cause inflation and deflation (price changes and price stability (hovering over their two percent target) by their actions, or are they just following the two percent price change with their actions? Causing by or following with. Since he Federal Reserve generally seems to not be looking at overall sectoral balances nor seems interested in providing long-term money supply, but instead seems only to be looking at interest rates with an eye to affecting prices (I hear a collective "Ah, hah!" from youn's, as you believe prices equals money supply), why would we think the central bank is, significantly, "printing money?" It doesn't appear to be their goal, so why would we think it? Now youn's will jump in and shout, "QE!" But that induces you to create the round about theory, the time-lag theory of money-supply inflation causality, to suggest that this year's transitive inflation is actually long term and created by the QEs which went on for years during a mildly deflationary period in American history with no apparent, upwards, price effect.

Major inflation (doubling of prices over a decade)
This is confined to people will say four, I say, three very specific time periods in the last hundred years. As these are specific, one can hardly build a general theory of inflation out of them. But since I've peaked your interest: World War I, followed by a stable-priced Roaring Twenties, followed by a halving of prices during the Great Depression to pre-World War I levels. In World War II, prices doubled again back to the price level at the end of World War I. Then, we have the nineteen-seventies. And I hear a collective, "Ah, hah!" And, "Amen!"