I would like to think there is help for an N—but I don’t believe there is. I think of the smear campaign—very deliberate lies meant to completely discredit someone, isolate someone. That is evil.
God is the only help—He can set the captives free. The captives of the N.
God is very clear in His word—there are evil people. Do not throw your pearls before swine. They will turn and trample you.
Ns have made a deliberate decision to live against God’s word and they have no excuse. Many are “Christians.” They know the Word.
Their evil is deliberate.
It is useful to understand how narcissists operate. It is also useful to understand how victims respond and why they respond in these ways. We can choose to try to help narcissists or to help victims. We cannot do both at the same time and the narcissists’ victims are not the ones who should be trying to help the narcissists.
Love never dies. Inspired speech will be over some day; praying in tongues will end; understanding will reach its limit. We know only a portion of the truth, and what we say about God is always incomplete. But when the Complete arrives, our incompletes will be canceled.
When I was an infant at my mother’s breast, I gurgled and cooed like any infant. When I grew up, I left those infant ways for good.
We don’t yet see things clearly. We’re squinting in a fog, peering through a mist. But it won’t be long before the weather clears and the sun shines bright! We’ll see it all then, see it all as clearly as God sees us, knowing him directly just as he knows us!
But for right now, until that completeness, we have three things to do to lead us toward that consummation: Trust steadily in God, hope unswervingly, love extravagantly. And the best of the three is love.
Syncope (/ˈsɪŋkəpi/ sing-kə-pee), the medical term for fainting or passing out, is defined as a transient loss of consciousness and postural tone, characterized by rapid onset, short duration, and spontaneous recovery, due to global cerebral hypoperfusion (low blood flow to the brain) that most often results from hypotension (low blood pressure). This definition of syncope differs from others by including the cause of unconsciousness, i.e. transient global cerebral hypoperfusion. Without that addition, the definition of syncope would include disorders such as epileptic seizures, concussion or cerebrovascular accident. Syncope is distinguished from coma, which can include persistent states of unconsciousness. This confusion still occurs in some literature.
Many forms of syncope are preceded by a prodromal state that often includes dizziness and loss of vision (“blackout”) (temporary), loss of hearing (temporary), loss of pain and feeling (temporary), nausea and abdominal discomfort, weakness, sweating, a feeling of heat, palpitations and other phenomena, which, if they do not progress to loss of consciousness and postural tone are often denoted “presyncope”.
Syncope is extraordinarily common, occurring for the most part in two age ranges: the teenage years and older age. Estimates of lifetime incidence of at least one syncopal episode include 40 to 50 percent of the general populace. Syncope comprises 1 to 3 percent of all attendances to emergency departments and 1 to 6 percent of all hospital admissions.
If observation is restricted to behavior, without any concern for the domestic interior of the individual’s consciousness, one may get an even stronger impression of the irrational and accidental character of certain unconscious manifestations in the individual’s behavior than of the reasonableness of his conscious purposes and motivations. I, therefore, base my judgment upon what the individual feels to be his conscious psychology. But I am prepared to grant that we may equally well entertain a precisely opposite conception of such a psychology, and present it accordingly. I am also convinced that, had I myself chanced to possess a different individual psychology, I should have described the rational types in the reversed way, from the standpoint of the unconscious—as irrational, therefore. This circumstance aggravates the difficulty of a lucid presentation of psychological matters to a degree not to be underestimated, and immeasurably increases the possibility of misunderstandings. The discussions which develop from these misunderstandings are, as a rule, quite hopeless, since the real issue is never joined, each side speaking, as it were, in a different tongue. Such experience is merely one reason the more for basing my presentation upon the subjective conscious psychology of the individual, since there, at least, one has a definite objective footing, which completely drops away the moment we try to ground psychological principles upon the unconscious. For the observed, in this case, could undertake no kind of co-operation, because there is nothing of which he is not more informed (sic) than his own unconscious. The judgment would entirely devolve upon the observer—a certain guarantee that its basis would be his own individual psychology, which would infallibly be imposed upon the observed. To my mind, this is the case in the psychologies both of Freud and Adler. The individual is completely at the mercy of the arbitrary discretion of his observing critic—which can never be the case when the conscious psychology of the observed is accepted as the basis. After all, he is the only competent judge, since he alone knows his motives.
Every time we try to establish a new belief, it would be useful if we had all the available evidence and the time to make a considered decision. But in much of life we do not have that luxury; either there is not enough time to examine the known facts, or there is not enough evidence, and we are forced to a decision. We have to rely on our beliefs to guide our actions, and James says that we have “the right to believe” in these cases.
James explains this by taking the example of a man lost and starving in a forest. When he sees a path, it is important for him to believe that the path will lead him out of the forest and to habitation, because if he does not believe it, he will not take the path, and will remain lost and starving. But if he does, he will save himself. By acting on his idea that the path will lead him to safety, it becomes true. In this way our actions and decisions make our belief in an idea become true. This is why James asserts “act as if what you do makes a difference”—to which he adds the typically concise and good-humored rider, “it does.”