text:
KPMG Institutes › US Manufacturing Institute › KPMG's 14th Annual Automotive Executive Forum post-event hub › Adapting transport & infrastructure for a driverless future
Adapting transport & infrastructure for a driverless future
Everybody wants the same thing: convenience, speed, comfort and safety.
Ted Hamer
Managing Director, Infrastructure, KPMG (US)
Mark de la Vergne
Chief, Mobility Innovation , City of Detroit
Richard Threlfall
Global Head of Infrastructure, KPMG (UK)
Zachary Wasserman
Head of Global Business Development, Via
KPMG's 14th Annual Automotive Executive Forum post-event hub
KPMG's 14th Annual Automotive Executive Forum - 2019 North American International Auto Show in Detroit
Ted Hamer, Managing Director, Global Infrastructure, KPMG (US)
The future of public transit requires a symbiotic relationship between traditional public services and commercial innovators to help citizens travel that last mile or two between home and job.
"Right now we're faced with a pretty dynamic shift in the way people get around," with bus ridership in most urban areas down 15 percent to 20 percent, impacting transit budgets, according to Ted Hamer, a managing director of Global Infrastructure at KPMG.
Meanwhile, the rise of the sharing economy is changing customer expectations, with mobility-as-a-service companies offering more paths from A to point B than the bus, on demand. All this is occurring during a significant decline in infrastructure investment and a projected increase in miles traveled thanks to shared and autonomous vehicles that will worsen congestion.
The microtransit option
Left to right: Ted Hamer, Mark de la Vergne, Richard Threlfall and Zachary Wasserman
The panelists delved into one potential part of the solution: microtransit, which offers flexible shared minibus or van trips on demand where and when gaps exist in bus and other public transit service.
As detailed in Accelerating mobility, KPMG teamed up with shared microtransit company Via to run simulations, and they concluded that microtransit options provide high time value of money, as microtransit is both convenient and cheap.
The data show that the average microtransit trip lasts only two to four minutes and is almost 70 cents less than bus service per trip.
At an average distance of only 3–4 miles per trip, microtransit can complement the bus routes that 90 percent of customers live near, and serve a societal role as well.
"As cities talk about mobility as a service and integrating all these different ways to get around, [they] can achieve not only economic and growth outcomes, but also really important social outcomes that shouldn't be lost on anybody," Hamer said.
In Detroit, for example, it's hard for a lot of citizens to get around, car insurance costs are the highest in the country, and there's a lack of regional cooperation and investment in transit, according to Mark de la Vergne, the city's chief mobility officer responsible for integrating new mobility technologies and services with transit and infrastructure.
"Detroit is a really good representation of the challenges with mobility and transportation, and how that can really impact an overall economy of a city," he said. Whether it comes to employment or access to healthcare, "the inability to just get where you need to go holds people back."
Public and private transit, working together
Zachary Wasserman, Head of Global Business Development, Via – On-Demand Transit
Via already offers approximately 2 million rides a month globally, and it sells contracted transportation services to cities and transit agencies. The company is about to launch two Federal Transit Administration-funded projects around Seattle and Los Angeles, according to Zachary Wasserman, the company's director of Business Development.
"All these different partnerships… are making the existing public transit infrastructure better for the people who use it, and we are bringing more people into the shared use mobility system by giving them a viable alternative to driving on their own," he said.
The next problem to solve is funding, and that's fundamentally a political question, Wasserman added. He said he expects to see one or more bills at the federal level creating new funding sources for transit agencies to own and operate their own microtransit systems, as well as some local ballot initiatives.
"In the next five to 10 years, this mode is going to migrate from the periphery of our transportation system to the core, and really become a cornerstone of our transportation infrastructure," he said.
Cities like Detroit are interested in these types of new solutions because they can't cover every square mile with the frequency customers are looking, even if they are investing in their transit system, de la Vergne added. For example, Detroit launched a pilot last year with Lyft to focus on the first and last miles while city buses run less-frequent late-night service.
Integrating new mobility solutions into the city
The biggest challenge is understanding how to put all the solutions together seamlessly in a true system, de la Vergne continued. Richard Threlfall, global head of Infrastructure at KPMG International, agreed, adding that that public leaders have to facilitate the entry of mobility solutions into a city environment due to capacity constraints.
"You can't just escape by putting drones in the sky, because capacity is going to be constrained there as well," he said. "The effect of [adding more shared mobility vehicles] is to bring everything to a standstill in our cities. We have to counteract that by finding modern technology, and ways of creating that shared transit environment."
Mark de la Vergne, Chief of Mobility Innovation, City of Detroit
Detroit takes a partnership approach to working with companies, rather than viewing their role as purely a government regulator, de la Vergne said. "This is the challenge for a lot of cities…. They've been doing planning or administering of paperwork and things like that, and not really thinking through how you actually take this from square one to implementation."
Transit authorities and local governments are struggling to work out the new regulatory environment they need to put in place to bring innovation into the city without negative impacts, Threlfall said. "'How do you get that balance right?' is a question I'm asked almost every day, wherever I go in the world."
De la Vergne added that companies are facing a similar struggle in trying to work with various governments and agencies "because they're facing 95 million different regulatory frameworks across the world."
Gary Silberg, the Americas Head of Automotive at KPMG in the U.S. and host of the conference, ended the session with some final words.
"The cities that have world-class, multimodal transportation will be the most innovative cities in the world. And the Luddites that are out there, who are trying to over-regulate and not let technology adapt, I think will be the laggards."
To access this panel's presentation, please click here.
To access the KPMG whitepaper on this topic, Accelerating mobility, click here.


text:
12 PM-2 PM
'We've changed a lot in the last two years' | James Horan on Mayo beating Dublin
James Horan says a mix of youth and experience was key to their three-point victory over Dublin at C...
Ann-Marie Donelan
10:23 PM - 14 Aug 2021
James Horan says a mix of youth and experience was key to their three-point victory over Dublin at Croke Park on Saturday night.
His mayo side beat the Dubs 0-17 to 0-14 after extra-time to book their place in the All-Ireland Senior Football Championship final.
The result also means that for the first time since 2014 the Sam Maguire will not be staying in the capital as Dublin's bid for a seventh consecutive title comes to an end.
Speaking to OTB Sports at full-time Horan acknowledged it was a big moment.
"We're delighted with today, delighted with the win and beating that Dublin team is a significant achievement for us so we're delighted.
Horan, who is in the third year of his second spell in charge of the Green and Red had particular praise for the younger members of his panel.
He felt these brought something extra to the game.
"Tommy [Conroy] is a special player but a lot of the younger guys today were excellent.
"Ryan O'Donoghue all the way through - his leadership, Enda Hession came on and I thought was very, very good, Bryan Walsh as well and Jordan [Flynn] came on.
"They really gave us an impact but Tommy, when he runs at you can be frightening.
"He got us a few crucial scores and then after that some of the Dublin guys backed off and gave us a little more space to play the ball so he can have a big impact in games."
Time and time again, year after year Mayo have suffered so many heartbreaks against Dublin.
There were missed frees, own goals as well as penalties - so what made Saturday night different?
Horan thought the mixture of youth and experience was what got them over the line to bring this incredible Dublin journey to an end.
"The guys were excited and up for the challenge and they knew they were in a strong position and kept doing the right things.
"We've changed an awful lot in the team throughout the last two years.
"We've a lot of guys that are ready to play and some guys that didn't make the 26 today could be well in contention for the next day so that's been a huge strength for us.
"The bench today had a big impact."
Last minute equaliser from Rob Hennelly for @MayoGAA v @DubGAAOfficial to bring the game to extra time in the All Ireland Senior Football Championship Semi Final ! #GAANOW pic.twitter.com/FqNu7g0v3W
— The GAA (@officialgaa) August 14, 2021
As with all Dublin and Mayo games, this one wasn't without controversy.
Many felt that Conor Lane should have sent off John Small for a dangerous tackle on Eoghan McLoughlin in the 56th minute.
Horan was unhappy with how this was handled.
"The thing that bothered me the most is you know when a player is in bother the way they fall to the ground.
"They can't really protect themselves because they're either unconscious or knocked out.
"I saw the way Eoghan fell with that hit and what bothered me was the play went on and Dublin had a goal chance.
"That ball could have gone in, what happens then?
"It could be a very different game but my main concern was was Eoghan ok? I thought the game should have stopped."
Many had written Mayo off before this game for a number of reasons but possibly the biggest was the omission of Oisín Mullin trough injury.
The 2020 young player of the year was ruled out with a quad injury and a lot thought without his involvement in defence Mayo simply wouldn't have enough to hold off Dublin.
Horan gave an update on him and Cillian O'Connor's fitness and if we could possibly see them in the final in three weeks time.
"Oisín is in rehab and I genuinely don't know so we'll see how that works out but Cillian [O'Connor] won't be involved with us this year."
And Sin é, Mayo are into another All-Ireland final where they'll play either Kerry or Tyrone while Dublin won't spend the winter as champions.
All-Ireland Senior Football Championship James Horan Mayo GAA
Tommy Walsh retires from inter-county football after eight years of service
Tyrone and Kerry All-Ireland semi-final rescheduled for second time
Kerry willing to wait to play All-Ireland semi-final with Tyrone
O'Shea on how it wasn't just O'Connor's scoring ability Mayo lost this year

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


In recent years there has been a steadily growing interest of religious/spiritual issues in several areas of psychology; a variety of reliable and valid means of assessing the different facets of religiosity/spirituality have been developed. However, there is still some need for multidimensional approaches. With respect to the positive experience with the German version of the Multidimensional Inventory for Religious/Spiritual Well-Being, we developed an English version of this scale (MI-RSWB-E) in order to facilitate research in this budding field. The MI-RSWB-E was tested and validated on a sample of British college-students (n = 400). First, the factor structure and psychometric properties of the MI-RSWB-E were analysed. As a second step, MI-RSWB-E dimensions were related to a variety of indicators of personality and mental health. An in-depth analysis provided evidence in support of the psychometric quality of the MI-RSWB-E, and the ability of its proposed six-factor structure. The MI-RSWB-E dimensions were also found to be substantially related to personality factors as well as with indicators of subjective well-being and mental illness. In light of these findings the MI-RSWB-E could be considered as a suited tool in the assessment of different facets of religiosity/spirituality.


text:
One More Time, With Consent: 'Baby, It's Cold Outside' Gets An Update Musicians Lydia Liza and Josiah Lemanski have reimagined the holiday classic to emphasize consent — but at the time it was written, the song was actually something of a feminist anthem.
One More Time, With Consent: 'Baby, It's Cold Outside' Gets An Update
One More Time, With Consent: 'Baby, It's Cold Outside' Gets An Update 2:06
December 20, 20165:06 AM ET
Heard on Morning Edition
Alyssa Edes
Musicians Lydia Liza and Josiah Lemanski created a version of "Baby, It's Cold Outside" with updated lyrics that emphasize consent. Nate Ryan/Courtesy of the artist hide caption
Nate Ryan/Courtesy of the artist
Musicians Lydia Liza and Josiah Lemanski created a version of "Baby, It's Cold Outside" with updated lyrics that emphasize consent.
The song "Baby, It's Cold Outside" has had many lives. The first recording of the holiday classic came out in 1949, performed by Esther Williams and Ricardo Montalban. Frank Loesser wrote the song with the intention of performing it with his wife at parties. In the past few years, however, some have called the song out for what they see as creepy undertones. In it, a woman sings, "I really can't stay," and the man she's with insists — repeatedly — that she stay longer.
Minneapolis-based singer-songwriters Lydia Liza and Josiah Lemanski are among those who take issue with its lyrics. "It was meant to be playful, but all those lyrics just sit wrong with me — especially being from this generation," Liza says.
Lemanski adds that the original score for the song labels the man's voice part as "wolf" and the woman's voice part as "mouse." "It's just very aggressive," he says. "He's not respecting her wishes to leave."
So Liza and Lemanski decided to rewrite the song. Their version is much more mellow, and it emphasizes consent — they replace the original words with lines like, "Baby, I'm fine with that" and "Been hoping you get home safe." They have released the song, and say they will donate the proceeds to the Sexual Violence Center of Minnesota, the National Alliance to End Sexual Violence and RAINN.
But here's the irony: When that song first came out in the 1940s, it was actually seen as empowering for women. Music historian Thomas Riis says the now-controversial lyric, "Say, what's in this drink?" came across differently in its original context. "Nowadays we see that and we go, 'Oh, my gosh, this is date rape! He's putting something in the drink!' " he says. But Riis adds that at the time, the phrase was simply about having a drink.
In the 1940s, it could be seen as scandalous for an unmarried woman to be alone, drinking with a man — much less staying the night. So it's not that the woman in the song doesn't want to stay — it's that she doesn't want to be judged for it. Riis says the song shows a woman debating her options, wondering whether she should risk ruining her reputation by staying the night.
In the end, Riis says, the woman makes a strong statement by making the decision for herself. "In a sense, it's, 'I can do what I doggone please. I'm a modern woman,' " he says. So, as different as the old and new versions might seem, it might be that they were both about choice all along.


If you own property in Miami we are here to help manage it or prepare it for your enjoyment.
This is for absent owners of properties in Miami who have it as investments and wish to rent it. This is an annual based service and includes the search of tenants, collection of the rent, payment of associated bills, maintenance and repairs needed, as well as the reception and handling of the keys every time the tenants change. Inventory checkup, photo report of the property and walkthrough every time a new lease begins.
This is a luxury service for clients who own a property in Miami and that they only use seasonally or sporadically when doing business or visiting Miami for vacation. Our company offers a customized service that accommodates and prepares the house or apartment for it to be ready and functional upon the guests' arrival.
Our goal is that the client starts enjoying the city and his property immediately. We take charge of the preparation for you to only benefit from it.
We understand the quick trip, where every minute counts. Allow us to help you for you to have more free time.
Base on the client's taste, we work hard to get your unit immaculate, fill the fridge with your favorite treats, bar, pantry and fresh flower arrangements just waiting for you to enjoy them.


text:
Worthy Christian Books » Ante-Nicene Fathers » Lactantius (Cont.) A Treatise on the Anger of God. (Cont.)
Lactantius (Cont.) A Treatise on the Anger of God. (Cont.)
A Treatise on the Anger of God. (Cont.)
Chap. XIII. – Of the Advantage and Use of the World and of the Seasons.
If any one considers the whole government of the world, he will certainly understand how true is the opinion of the Stoics, who say that the world was made on our account. For all the things of which the world is composed, and which it produces from itself, are adapted to the use of man. Man, accordingly, uses fire for the purpose of warmth and light, and of softening his food, and for the working of iron; he uses springs for drinking, and for baths; he uses rivers for irrigating the fields, and assigning boundaries to countries; he uses the earth for receiving a variety of fruits, the hills for planting vineyards, the mountains for the use of trees and firewood,85 the plains for crops of grain; he uses the sea not only for commerce, and for receiving supplies from distant countries, but also for abundance of every kind of fish. But if he makes use of these elements to which he is nearest, there is no doubt that he uses the heaven also, since the offices even of heavenly things are regulated for the fertility of the earth from which we live. The sun, with its ceaseless courses and unequal intervals,86 completes its annual circles, and either at his rising draws forth the day for labour, or at his setting brings on the night for repose; and at one time by his departure farther towards the south, at another time by his approach nearer towards the north, he causes the vicissitudes of winter and summer, so that both by the moistures and frosts of winter the earth becomes enriched for fruitfulness, and by the heats of summer either the produce of grass87 is hardened by maturity, or that which is in moist places, being seethed and heated, becomes ripened. The moon also, which governs the time of night, regulates her monthly courses by the alternate loss and recovery of light,88 and by the brightness of her shining illumines the nights obscure with gloomy darkness, so that journeys in the summer heat, and expeditions, and works, may be performed without labour and inconvenience; since
"By night the light stubble, by night
The dry meadows are better mown."89
The other heavenly bodies also, either at their rising or setting, supply favourable times90 by their fixed positions.91 Moreover, they also afford guidance to ships, that they may not wander through the boundless deep with uncertain course, since the pilot duly observing them arrives at the harbour of the shore at which he aims.92 Clouds are attracted by the breath of the winds, that the fields of sown grain may be watered with showers, that the vines may abound with produce, and the trees with fruits. And these things are exhibited by a succession of changes throughout the year, that nothing may at any time be wanting by which the life of men is sustained. But93 (it is said) the same earth nourishes the other living creatures, and by the produce of the same even the dumb animals are fed. Has not God laboured also for the sake of the dumb animals? By no means; because they are void of reason. On the contrary, we understand that even these themselves in the same manner were made by God for the use of man, partly for food, partly for clothing, partly to assist him in his work; so that it is manifest that the divine providence wished to furnish and adorn the life of men with an abundance of objects and resources, and on this account He both filled the air with birds, and the sea with fishes, and the earth with quadrupeds. But the Academics, arguing against the Stoics, are accustomed to ask why, if God made all things for the sake of men, many things are found even opposed, and hostile, and injurious to us, as well in the sea as on the land. And the Stoics, without any regard to the truth, most foolishly repelled this. For they say that there are many things among natural productions,94 and reckoned among animals, the utility of which hitherto95 escapes notice, but that this is discovered in process of the times, as necessity and use have already discovered many things which were unknown in former ages. What utility, then, can be discovered in mice, in beetles, in serpents, which are troublesome and pernicious to man? Is it that some medicine lies concealed in them? If there is any, it will at some time be found out, namely, as a remedy against evils, whereas they complain that it is altogether evil. They say that the viper, when burnt and reduced to ashes, is a remedy for the bite of the same beast. How much better had it been that it should not exist at all, than that a remedy should be required against it drawn from itself?
They might then have answered with more conciseness and truth after this manner. When God had formed man as it were His own image, that which was the completion of His workmanship, He breathed wisdom into him alone, so that he might bring all things into subjection to his own authority and government, and make use of all the advantages of the world. And yet He set before him both good and evil things, inasmuch as He gave to him wisdom, the whole nature of which is employed in discerning things evil and good: for no one can choose better things, and know what is good, unless he at the same time knows to reject and avoid the things which are evil.96 They are both mutually connected with each other, so that, the one being taken away, the other must also be taken away. Therefore, good and evil things being set before it, then at length wisdom discharges its office, and desires the good for usefulness, but rejects the evil for safety. Therefore, as innumerable good things have been given which it might enjoy, so also have evils, against which it might guard. For if there is no evil, no danger – nothing, in short, which can injure man – all the material of wisdom is taken away, and will be unnecessary for man. For if only good things are placed in sight, what need is there of reflection, of understanding, of knowledge, of reason? since, wherever he shall extend his hand, that is befitting and adapted to nature; so that if any one should wish to place a most exquisite dinner before infants, who as yet have no taste, it is plain that each will desire that to which either impulse, or hunger, or even accident, shall attract them; and whatever they shall take, it will be useful and salutary to them. What injury will it therefore be for them always to remain as they are, and always to be infants and unacquainted with affairs? But if you add a mixture either of bitter things, or things useless, or even poisonous, they are plainly deceived through their ignorance of good and evil, unless wisdom is added to them, by which they may have the rejection of evil things and the choice of good things. You see, therefore, that we have greater need of wisdom on account of evils; and unless these things had been proposed to us, we should not be a rational animal. But if this account is true, which the Stoics were in no manner able to see, that argument also of Epicurus is done away. God, he says, either wishes to take away evils, and is unable; or He is able, and is unwilling; or He is neither willing nor able, or He is both willing and able. If He is willing and is unable, He is feeble, which is not in accordance with the character of God; if He is able and unwilling, He is envious, which is equally at variance with God; if He is neither willing nor able, He is both envious and feeble, and therefore not God; if He is both willing and able, which alone is suitable to God, from what source then are evils? or why does He not remove them? I know that many of the philosophers, who defend providence, are accustomed to be disturbed by this argument, and are almost driven against their will to admit that God takes no interest in anything, which Epicurus especially aims at; but having examined the matter, we easily do away with this formidable argument. For God is able to do whatever He wishes, and there is no weakness or envy in God. He is able, therefore, to take away evils; but He does not wish to do so, and yet He is not on that account envious. For on this account He does not take them away, because He at the same time gives wisdom, as I have shown; and there is more of goodness and pleasure in wisdom than of annoyance in evils. For wisdom causes us even to know God, and by that knowledge to attain to immortality, which is the chief good. Therefore, unless we first know evil, we shall be unable to know good. But Epicurus did not see this, nor did any other, that if evils are taken away, wisdom is in like manner taken away; and that no traces of virtue remain in man, the nature of which consists in enduring and overcoming the bitterness of evils. And thus, for the sake of a slight gain97 in the taking away of evils, we should be deprived of a good, which is very great, and true, and peculiar to us. It is plain, therefore, that all things are proposed for the sake of man, as well evils as also goods.
Chap. XIV. – Why God Made Man.
It follows that I show for what purpose God made man himself. As He contrived the world for the sake of man, so He formed man himself on His own account, as it were a priest of a divine temple, a spectator of His works and of heavenly objects. For he is the only being who, since he is intelligent and capable of reason, is able to understand God, to admire His works, and perceive His energy and power; for on this account he is furnished with judgment, intelligence, and prudence. On this account he alone, beyond the other living creatures, has been made with an upright body and attitude, so that he seems to have been raised up for the contemplation of his Parent.98 On this account he alone has received language, and a tongue the interpreter of his thought, that he may be able to declare the majesty of his Lord. Lastly, for this cause all things were placed under his control, that he himself might be under the control of God, their Maker and Creator. If God, therefore, designed man to be a worshipper of Himself, and on this account gave him so much honour, that he might rule over all things; it is plainly most just that he should worship Him99 who bestowed upon him such great gifts, and love man, who is united with us in the participation of the divine justice. For it is not right that a worshipper of God should be injured by a worshipper of God. From which it is understood that man was made for the sake of religion and justice. And of this matter Marcus Tullius is a witness in his books respecting the Laws, since he thus speaks:100 "But of all things concerning which learned men dispute, nothing is of greater consequence than that it should be altogether understood that we are born to justice." And if this is most true, it follows that God will have all men to be just, that is, to have God and man as objects of their affection; to honour God in truth as a Father, and to love man as a brother: for in these two things the whole of justice is comprised. But he who either fails to acknowledge God or acts injuriously to man, lives unjustly and contrary to his nature, and in this manner disturbs the divine institution and law.
Chap. XV. – Whence Sins Extended to Man.
Here perhaps some one may ask, Whence sins extended to man, or what perversion distorted the rule of the divine institution to worse things, so that, though he was born to justice, he nevertheless performs unjust works. I have already in a former place explained, that God at the same time set before him good and evil, and that He loves the good, and hates the evil which is contrary to this; but that He permitted the evil on this account, that the good also might shine forth, since, as I have often taught, we understand that the one cannot exist without the other; in short, that the world itself is made up of two elements opposing and connected with one another, of fire and moisture, and that light could not have been made unless there has also been darkness, since there cannot be a higher place without a lower, nor a rising without a setting, nor warmth without cold, nor softness without hardness. Thus also we are composed of two substances equally opposed to one another – soul and body: the one of which is assigned to the heaven, because it is slight and not to be handled; the other to the earth, because it is capable of being laid hold of: the one is firm101 and eternal, the other frail and mortal. Therefore good clings to the one, and evil to the other: light, life, and justice to the one; darkness, death, and injustice to the other. Hence there arose among men the corruption of their nature, so that it was necessary that a law should be established, by which vices might be prohibited, and the duties of virtue be en-joined. Since, therefore, there are good and evil things in the affairs of men, the nature of which I have set forth, it must be that God is moved to both sides, both to favour when He sees that just things are done, and to anger when He perceives unjust things.
But Epicurus opposes us, and says: "If there is in God the affection of joy leading Him to favour, and of hatred influencing Him to anger, He must of necessity have both fear, and inclination, and desire, and the other affections which belong to human weakness." It does not follow that he who is angry must fear, or that he who feels joy must grieve; in short, they who are liable to anger are less timid, and they who are of a joyful temperament are less affected with grief. What need is there to speak of the affections of humanity, to which our nature yields? Let us weigh the divine necessity; for I am unwilling to speak of nature, since it is believed that our God was never born. The affection of fear has a subject-matter in man, but it has none in God. Man, inasmuch as he is liable to many accidents and dangers, fears lest any greater violence should arise which may strike, despoil, lacerate, dash down, and destroy him. But God, who is liable neither to want, nor injury, nor pain, nor death, can by no means fear, because there is nothing which can offer violence to Him. Also the reason and cause of desire is manifest in man. For, inasmuch as he was made frail and mortal, it was necessary that another and different sex should be made, by union with which offspring might be produced to continue the perpetuity of his race. But this desire has no place in God, because frailty and death are far removed from Him; nor is there with Him any female in whose union He is able to rejoice; nor does He stand in need of succession, since He will live for ever. The same things may be said respecting envy and passion, to which, from sure and manifest causes, man is liable, but to which God is by no means liable. But, in truth, favour and anger and pity have their substance102 in God, and that greatest and matchless power employs them for the preservation of the world.
Chap. XVI. – Of God, and His Anger and Affections.
Some one will ask what this substance is. First of all, when evils befall them, men in their dejected state for the most part have recourse to God: they appease and entreat Him, believing that He is able to repel injuries from them. He has therefore an occasion of exercising pity; for He is not so unmerciful and a despiser of men as to refuse aid to those who are in distress. Very many, also, who are persuaded that justice is pleasing to God, both worship Him who is Lord and Parent of all, and with continual prayers and repeated vows offer gifts and sacrifices, follow up His name with praises, striving to gain His favour by just and good works. There is therefore a reason, on account of which God may and ought to favour them. For if there is nothing so befitting God as beneficence, and nothing so unsuited to His character as to be ungrateful, it is necessary that He should make some return for the services of those who are excellent, and who lead a holy life, that He may not be liable to the charge of ingratitude which is worthy of blame103 even in the case of a man. But, on the contrary, others are daring104 and wicked, who pollute all things with their lusts, harass with slaughters, practise fraud, plunder, commit perjury, neither spare relatives nor parents, neglect the laws, and even God Himself. Anger, therefore, has a befitting occasion105 in God.
For it is not right that, when He sees such things, He should not be moved, and arise to take vengeance upon the wicked, and destroy the pestilent and guilty, so as to promote the interests of all good men. Thus even in anger itself there is also contained a showing of kindness.106 Therefore the arguments are found to be empty and false, either of those who, when they will not admit that God is angry, will have it that He shows kindness, because this, indeed, cannot take place without anger; or of those who think that there is no emotion of the mind in God. And because there are some affections to which God is not liable, as desire, fear, avarice, grief, and envy, they have said that He is entirely free from all affection. For He is not liable to these, because they are vicious affections; but as to those which belong to virtue, – that is, anger towards the wicked, regard towards the good, pity towards the afflicted, – inasmuch as they are worthy of the divine power, He has affections of His own,107 both just and true. And if He is not possessed of them, the life of man will be thrown into confusion, and the condition of things will come to such disturbance that the laws will be despised and overpowered, and audacity alone reign, so that no one can at length be in safety unless he who excels108 in strength. Thus all the earth will be laid waste, as it were, by a common robbery. But now, since the wicked expect punishment, and the good hope for favour, and the afflicted look for aid, there is place for virtues, and crimes are more rare. But109 it is said, ofttimes the wicked are more prosperous, and the good more wretched, and the just are harassed with impunity by the unjust. We will hereafter consider why these things happen. In the meantime let us explain respecting anger, whether there be any in God; whether He takes no notice at all, and is unmoved at those things which are done with impiety.
Chap. XVII. – Of God, His Care and Anger.
God, says Epicurus, regards nothing; therefore He has no power. For he who has power must of necessity regard affairs. For if He has power, and does not use it, what so great cause is there that, I will not say our race, but even the universe itself, should be contemptible in His sight? On this account he says He is pure110 and happy, because He is always at rest.111 To whom, then, has the administration of so great affairs been entrusted,112 if these things which we see to be governed by the highest judgment are neglected by God? or how can he who lives and perceives be at rest? For rest belongs either to sleep or to death. But sleep has not rest. For when we are asleep, the body indeed is at rest, but the soul is restless and agitated: it forms for itself images which it may behold, so that it exercises its natural power of motion by a variety of visions, and calls itself away from false things, until the limbs are satiated, and receive vigour from rest. Therefore eternal rest belongs to death alone. Now if death does not affect God, it follows that God is never at rest. But in what can the action of God consist, but in the administration of the world? But if God carries on the care of the world, it follows that He cares for the life of men, and takes notice of the acts of individuals, and He earnestly desires that they should be wise and good. This is the will of God, this the divine law; and he who follows and observes this is beloved by God. It is necessary that He should be moved with anger against the man who has broken or despised this eternal and divine law. If, he says, God does harm to any one, therefore He is not good. They are deceived by no slight error who defame all censure, whether human or divine, with the name of bitterness and malice, thinking that He ought to be called injurious113 who visits the injurious with punishment. But if this is so, it follows that we have injurious laws, which enact punishment for offenders, and injurious judges who inflict capital punishments on those convicted of crime. But if the law is just which awards to the transgressor his due, and if the judge is called upright and good when he punishes crimes, – for he guards the safety of good men who punishes the evil, – it follows that God, when He opposes the evil, is not injurious; but he himself is injurious who either injures an innocent man, or spares an injurious person that he may injure many.
I would gladly ask from those who represent God as immoveable,114 if any one had property, a house, a household115 of slaves, and his slaves, despising the forbearance of their master, should attack all things, and themselves take the enjoyment of his goods, if his household should honour them, while the master was despised by all, insulted, and deserted: could he be a wise man who should not avenge the insults, but permit those over whom he had power to have the enjoyment of his property? Can such forbearance be found in any one? If, indeed, it is to be called forbearance, and not rather a kind of insensible stupor. But it is easy to endure contempt. What if those things were done which are spoken of by Cicero?116 "For I ask, if any head of a family,117 when his children had been put to death by a slave, his wife slain and his house set on fire, should not exact most severe punishment from that slave, whether he would appear to be kind and merciful, or inhuman and most cruel?" But if to pardon deeds of this kind is the part of cruelty rather than of kindness,118 it is not therefore the part of goodness in God not to be moved at those things which are done unjustly. For the world is, as it were, the house of God, and men, as it were, His slaves; and if His name is a mockery to them, what kind or amount of forbearance is it to give119 up His own honours, to see wicked and unjust things done, and not to be indignant, which is peculiar and natural to Him who is displeased with sins! To be angry, therefore, is the part of reason: for thus faults are removed, and licentiousness is curbed; and this is plainly in accordance with justice and wisdom.
But the Stoics did not see that there is a distinction between right and wrong, that there is a just and also an unjust anger; and because they did not find a remedy for the matter, they wished altogether to remove it. But the Peripatetics said that it was not to be cut out, but moderated; to whom we have made a sufficient reply in the sixth book of the Institutions.120 Now, that the philosophers were ignorant of the nature of anger, is plain from their definitions, which Seneca enumerated in the books which he composed on the subject of anger. "Anger is," he says, "the desire of avenging an injury." Others, as Posidonius says, describe it as the desire of punishing him by whom you think that you have been unfairly injured. Some have thus defined it: "Anger is an incitement of the mind to injure him who either has committed an injury, or who has wished to do so." The definition of Aristotle does not differ greatly from ours;121 for he says that "anger is the desire of requiting pain." This is the unjust anger, concerning which we spoke before, which is contained even in the dumb animals; but it is to be restrained in man, lest he should rush to some very great evil through rage. This cannot exist in God, because He cannot be injured;122 but it is found in man, inasmuch as he is frail. For the inflicting123 of injury inflames124 anguish, and anguish produces a desire of revenge. Where, then, is that just anger against offenders? For this is evidently not the desire of revenge, inasmuch as no injury precedes. I do not speak of those who sin against the laws; for although a judge may be angry with these without incurring blame, let us, however, suppose that he ought to be of a sedate mind when he sentences the guilty to punishment, because he is the executor125 of the laws, not of his own spirit or power; for so they wish it who endeavour to extirpate anger. But I speak of those in particular who are in our own power, as slaves, children, wives, and pupils; for when we see these offend, we are incited to restrain them.
For it cannot fail to be, that he who is just and good is displeased with things which are bad, and that he who is displeased with evil is moved when he sees it practised. Therefore we arise to take vengeance, not because we have been injured, but that discipline may be preserved, morals may be corrected, and licentiousness be suppressed. This is just anger; and as it is necessary in man for the correction of wickedness, so manifestly is it necessary in God, from whom an example comes to man. For as we ought to restrain those who are subject to our power, so also ought God to restrain the offences of all. And in order that He may do this, He must be angry; because it is natural for one who is good to be moved and incited at the fault of another. Therefore they ought to have given this definition: Anger is an emotion of the mind arousing itself for the restraining of faults.126 For the definition given by Cicero, "Anger is the desire of taking vengeance," does not differ much from those already mentioned.127 But that anger which we may call either fury or rage ought not to exist even in man, because it is altogether vicious; but the anger which relates to the correction of vices ought not to be taken away from man; nor can it be taken away from God, because it is both serviceable for the affairs of men, and necessary.
Chap. XVIII. – Of the Punishment of Faults, that it Cannot Take Place Without Anger.
What need is there, they say, of anger, since faults can be corrected without this affection? But there is no one who can calmly see any one committing an offence. This may perhaps be possible in him who presides over the laws, because the deed is not committed before his eyes, but it is brought before him as a doubtful matter from another quarter. Nor can any wickedness be so manifest, that there is no place for a defence; and therefore it is possible that a judge may not be moved against him who may possibly be found to be innocent; and when the detected crime shall have come to light, he now no longer uses his own opinion, but that of the laws. It may be granted that he does that which he does without anger; for he has that which he may follow. We, undoubtedly, when an offence is committed by our household at home, whether we see or perceive it, must be indignant; for the very sight of a sin is unbecoming. For he who is altogether unmoved either approves of faults, which is more disgraceful and unjust, or avoids the trouble of reproving them, which a tranquil spirit and a quiet mind despises and refuses, unless anger shall have aroused and incited it. But when any one is moved, and yet through unseasonable leniency grants pardon more frequently than is necessary, or at all times, he evidently both destroys the life of those whose audacity he is fostering for greater crimes, and furnishes himself with a perpetual source of annoyances. Therefore the restraining of one's anger in the case of sins is faulty.
Archytas of Tarentum is praised, who, when he had found everything ruined128 on his estate, rebuking the fault of his bailiff, said, "Wretch, I would have beaten you to death if I had not been angry." They consider this to be a singular example of forbearance; but influenced by authority, they do not see how foolishly he spoke and acted. For if (as Plato says) no prudent man punishes because there is an offence, but to prevent the occurrence of an offence, it is evident how evil an example this wise man put forth. For if slaves shall perceive that their master uses violence when he is not angry, and abstains from violence129 when he is angry, it is evident that they will not commit slight offences, lest they should be beaten; but will commit the greatest offences, that they may arouse the anger of the perverse man, and escape with impunity. But I should praise him if, when he was enraged, he had given space to his anger, that the excitement of his mind might calm down through the interval of time, and his chastisement might be confined within moderate limits. Therefore, on account of the magnitude of the anger, punishment ought not to have been inflicted, but to have been delayed, lest it should inflict130 upon the offender pain greater than is just, or occasion an outburst of fury in the punisher. But now, how is it equitable or wise, that any one should be punished on account of a slight offence, and should be unpunished on account of a very great one? But if he had learned the nature and causes of things, he never would have professed so unsuitable a forbearance, that a wicked slave should rejoice that his master has been angry with him. For as God has furnished the human body with many and various senses which are necessary for the use of life, so also He has assigned to the soul various affections by which the course of life might be regulated; and as He has given desire for the sake of producing offspring, so has He given anger for the sake of restraining faults.
But they who are ignorant of the ends of good and evil things, as they employ sensual desire for the purposes of corruption and pleasure, in the same manner make use of anger and passion for the inflicting of injury, while they are angry with those whom they regard with hatred. Therefore they are angry even with those who commit no offence, even with their equals, or even with their superiors. Hence they daily rush to monstrous131 deeds; hence tragedies often arise. Therefore Archytas would be deserving of praise, if, when he had been enraged against any citizen or equal who injured him, he had curbed himself, and by forbearance mitigated the impetuosity of his fury. This self-restraint is glorious, by which any great evil which impends is restrained; but it is a fault not to check the faults of slaves and children; for through their escaping without punishment they will proceed to greater evil. In this case anger is not to be restrained; but even if it is in a state of inactivity,132 it must be aroused. But that which we say respecting man, we also say respecting God, who made man like to Himself. I omit making mention of the figure of God, because the Stoics say that God has no form, and another great subject will arise if we should wish to refute them. I only speak respecting the soul. If it belongs133 to God to reflect, to be wise, to understand, to foresee. to excel, and of all animals man alone has these qualities, it follows that he was made after the likeness of God; but on this account he goes on to vice, because, being mingled with frailty derived from earth, he is unable to preserve pure and uncontaminated that which he has received from God, unless he is imbued with the precepts of justice by the same God.
Chap. XIX. – Of the Soul and Body, and of Providence.
But since he is made up, as we have said, of two parts, soul and body, the virtues are contained in the one, and vices in the other, and they mutually oppose each other. For the good properties of the soul, which consist in restraining lusts, are contrary to the body; and the good properties of the body, which consist in every kind of pleasure, are hostile to the soul. But if the virtue of the soul shall have resisted the desires, and suppressed them, he will be truly like to God. From which it is evident that the soul of man, which is capable of divine virtue, is not mortal. But there is this distinction, that since virtue is attended with bitterness, and the attraction of pleasure is sweet, great numbers are overcome and are drawn aside to the pleasantness; but they who have given themselves up to the body and earthly things are pressed to the earth, and are unable to attain to the favour of the divine bounty, because they have polluted themselves with the defilements of vices. But they who, following God, and in obedience to Him, have despised the desires of the body, and, preferring virtue to pleasures, have preserved innocence and righteousness, these God recognises as like to Himself.
Since, therefore, He has laid down a most holy law, and wishes all men to be innocent and beneficent, is it possible that He should not be angry when He sees that His law is despised, that virtue is rejected, and pleasure made the object of pursuit? But if He is the governor of the world, as He might to be, He surely does not despise that which is even of the greatest importance in the whole world. If He has foresight, as it is befitting that God should have, it is plain that He consults the interests of the human race, in order that our life may be more abundantly supplied, and better, and safer. If He is the Father and God of all, He is undoubtedly delighted with the virtues of men, and provoked by their vices. Therefore He loves the just, and hates the wicked. There is no need (one says) of hatred; for He once for all has fixed a reward for the good, and punishment for the wicked. But if any one lives justly and innocently, and at the same time neither worships God nor has any regard for Him, as Aristides, and Timon,134 and others of the philosophers, will he escape135 with impunity, because, though he has obeyed the law of God, he has nevertheless despised God Himself? There is therefore something on account of which God may be angry with one rebelling against Him, as it were, in reliance upon His integrity. If He can be angry with this man on account of his pride, why not more so with the sinner, who has despised the law together with the Lawgiver? The judge cannot pardon offences, because he is subject to the will of another. But God can pardon, because He is Himself the arbitrator136 and judge of His own law; and when He laid down this, He did not surely deprive Himself of all power, but He has the liberty of bestowing pardon.
Chap. XX. – Of Offences, and the Mercy of God.
If He is able to pardon, He is therefore able also to be angry. Why, then, some one will say, does it often occur, that they who sin are prosperous, and they who live piously are wretched? Because fugitives and disinherited137 persons live without restraint, and they who are under the discipline of a father or master live in a more strict and frugal manner. For virtue is proved and fixed138 by means of ills; vices by means of pleasure. Nor, however, ought he who sins to hope for lasting impunity, because there is no lasting happiness.
"But, in truth, the last day is always to be looked for by man; and no one ought to be called happy before his death and last funeral rites,"139
as the not inelegant poet says. It is the end which proves happiness, and no one is able to escape the judgment of God, either when alive or after death. For He has the power both to cast down the living from on high, and to punish the dead with eternal torments. Nay, he says, if God is angry, He ought to have inflicted vengeance at once, and to have punished every one according to his desert. But (it is replied) if He had done this, no one would survive. For there is no one who offends in no respect, and there are many things which excite to the commission of sin – age, intemperance, want, opportunity, reward. To such an extent is the frailty of the flesh with which we are clothed liable to sin, that unless God were indulgent to this necessity, perhaps too few would live. On this account He is most patient, and restrains His anger. For because there is in Him perfect virtue, it follows of necessity that His patience also is perfect, which is itself also a virtue. How many men, from having been sinners, have afterwards become righteous; from being injurious, have become good; from being wicked, have become temperate! How many who were in early life base, and condemned by the judgment of all, afterwards have turned out praiseworthy? But it is plain that this could not happen if punishment followed every offence.
The public laws condemn those who are manifestly guilty; but there are great numbers whose offences are concealed, great numbers who restrain the accuser either by entreaties or by reward, great numbers who elude justice by favour or influence. But if the divine censure should condemn all those who escape the punishment of men, there would be few or even no men on the earth. In short, even that one reason for destroying the human race might have been a just one, that men, despising the living God, pay divine honour to earthly and frail images, as though they were of heaven, adoring works made by human hands. And though God their Creator made them of elevated countenance and upright figure, and raised them to the contemplation of the heaven and the knowledge of God, they have preferred, like cattle, to bend themselves to the earth.140 For he is low, and curved, and bent downward, who, turning away from the sight of heaven and God his Father, worships things of the earth, which he ought to have trodden upon, that is, things made and fashioned from earth. Therefore, amidst such great impiety and such great sins of men, the forbearance of God attains this object, that men, condemning the errors of their past life, correct themselves. In short, there are many who are just and good; and these, having laid aside the worship of earthly things, acknowledge the majesty of the one and only God. But though the forbearance of God is very great and most useful; yet, although late, He punishes the guilty, and does not suffer them to proceed further, when He sees that they are incorrigible.
Chap. XXI. – Of the Anger of God and Man.
There remains one question, and that the last. For some one will perhaps say, that God is so far from being angry, that in His precepts He even forbids man to be angry. I might say that the anger of man ought to be curbed, because he is often angry unjustly; and he has immediate emotion, because he is only for a time.141 Therefore, lest those things should be done which the low, and those of moderate station, and great kings do in their anger, his rage ought to have been moderated and suppressed, lest, being out of his mind,142 he should commit some inexpiable crime. But God is not angry for a short time,143 because He is eternal and of perfect virtue, and, He is never angry unless deservedly. But, however, the matter is not so; for if He should altogether prohibit anger, He Himself would have been in some measure the censurer of His own workmanship, since He from the beginning had inserted anger in the liver144 of man, since it is believed that the cause of this emotion is contained in the moisture of the gall. Therefore He does not altogether prohibit anger, because that affection is necessarily given, but He forbids us to persevere in anger. For the anger of mortals ought to be mortal; for if it is lasting, enmity is strengthened to lasting destruction. Then, again, when He enjoined us to be angry, and yet not to sin,145 it is plain that He did not tear up anger by the roots, but restrained it, that in every correction we might preserve moderation and justice. Therefore He who commands us to be angry is manifestly Himself angry; He who enjoins us to be quickly appeased is manifestly Himself easy to be appeased: for He has enjoined those things which are just and useful for the interests of society.146
But because I had said that the anger of God is not for a time147 only, as is the case with man, who becomes inflamed with an immediate148 excitement, and on account of his frailty is unable easily to govern himself, we ought to understand that because God is eternal, His anger also remains to eternity; but, on the other hand, that because He is endued with the greatest excellence, He controls His anger, and is not ruled by it, but that He regulates it according to His will. And it is plain that this is not opposed to that which has just been said. For if His anger had been altogether immortal, there would be no place after a fault for satisfaction or kind feeling, though He Himself commands men to be reconciled before the setting of the sun. (Eph_4:26) But the divine anger remains for ever against those who ever sin. Therefore God is appeased not by incense or a victim, not by costly offerings, which things are all corruptible, but by a reformation of the morals: and he who ceases to sin renders the anger of God mortal. For this reason He does not immediately149 punish every one who is guilty, that man may have the opportunity of coming to a right mind,150 and correcting himself.
Chap. XXII. – Of Sins, and the Verses of the Sibyls Respecting Them Recited.
This is what I had to say, most beloved Donatus, respecting the anger of God, that you might know how to refute those who represent God as being without emotions.151 It only remains that, after the practice of Cicero, I should use an epilogue by way of peroration. As he did in the Tusculan Disputations,152 when discoursing on the subject of death, so we in this work ought to bring forward divine testimonies, which may be believed, to refute the persuasion of those who, believing that God is without anger, destroy all religion, without which, as we have shown, we are either equal to the brutes in savageness, or to the cattle in foolishness; for it is in religion only – that is, in the knowledge of the Supreme God – that wisdom consists. All the prophets, being filled with the Divine Spirit, speak nothing else than of the favour of God towards the righteous, and His anger against the ungodly. And their testimony is indeed sufficient for us; but because it is not believed by those who make a display of wisdom by their hair and dress,153 it was necessary to refute them by reason and arguments. For they act so preposterously,154 that human things give authority to divine things, whereas divine things ought rather to give authority to human. But let us now leave these things, lest we should produce no effect upon them, and the subject should be indefinitely drawn out. Let us therefore seek those testimonies which they can either believe, or at any rate not oppose.
Authors of great number and weight have made mention of the Sibyls; of the Greeks, Aristo the Chian, and Apollodorus the Erythræan; of our writers, Varro and Fenestella. All these relate that the Erythræan Sibyl was distinguished and noble beyond the rest. Apollodorus, indeed, boasts of her as his own citizen and countrywoman. But Fenestella also relates that ambassadors were sent by the senate to Erythræ, that the verses of this Sibyl might be conveyed to Rome, and that the consuls Curio and Octavius might take care that they should be placed in the Capitol, which had then been restored under the care of Quintus Catulus. In her writings, verses of this kind are found respecting the Supreme God and Maker of the world: –
"The incorruptible and eternal Maker who dwells in the heaven, holding forth good to the good, a much greater reward, but stirring up anger and rage against the evil and unjust."
Again, in another place, enumerating the deeds by which God is especially moved to anger, she introduced these things: –
"Avoid unlawful services, and serve the living God. Abstain from adultery and impurity; bring up a pure generation of children; do not kill: for the Immortal will be angry with every one who may sin."
Therefore He is angry with sinners.
Chap. XXIII. – Of the Anger of God and the Punishment of Sins, and a Recital of the Verses of the Sibyls Respecting It; And, Moreover, a Reproof and Exhortation.
But because it is related by most learned men that there have been many Sibyls, the testimony of one may not be sufficient to confirm the truth, as we purpose to do. The volumes, indeed, of the Cumæan Sibyl, in which are written the fates of the Romans are kept secret; but the writings of all the others are, for the most part, not prohibited from being in common use. And of these another, denouncing the anger of God against all nations on account of the impiety of men, thus began: –
"Since great anger is coming upon a disobedient world, I disclose the commands of God to the last age, prophesying to all men from city to city."
Another Sibyl also said, that the deluge was caused by the indignation of God against the unrighteous in a former age, that the wickedness of the human race might be extinguished: –
"From the time when, the God of heaven being enraged against the cities themselves and all men, a deluge having burst forth, the sea covered the earth."
In like manner she foretold a conflagration about to take place hereafter, in which the impiety of men should again be destroyed: –
"And at some time, God no longer soothing His anger, but increasing it, and destroying the race of men, and laying waste the whole of it by fire."
From which mention is thus made concerning Jupiter by Ovid:155 –
"He remembers also that it is fated that the time shall come in which the sea, the earth, and the palace of heaven, being caught by fire, shall be burnt, and the curiously wrought framework of the world156 be in danger."
And this must come to pass at the time when the honour and worship of the Supreme shall have perished among men. The same Sibyl, however, testifying that He was appeased by reformation157 of conduct and self-improvement, added these things: –
"But, ye mortals, in pity158 turn yourselves now, and do not lead the great God to every kind of auger."
And also a little later: –
"He will not destroy, but will again restrain His anger, if you all practise valuable piety in your minds."
Then another Sibyl declares that the Father of heavenly and earthly things ought to be loved, lest His indignation should arise, to the destruction of men: –
"Lest by chance the immortal God should be angry, and destroy the whole race of men, their life and shameless race, it is befitting that we love the wise, ever-living God the Father."
From these things it is evident that the arguments of the philosophers are vain, who imagine that God is without anger, and among His other praises reckon that which is most useless, detracting from Him that which is most salutary for human affairs, by which majesty itself exists. For this earthly kingdom and government, unless guarded by fear, is broken down. Take away anger from a king, and he will not only cease to be obeyed, but he will even be cast down headlong from his height. Yea, rather take away this affection from any person of low degree, and who will not plunder him? Who will not deride him? Who will not treat him with injury? Thus he will be able to have neither clothing, nor an abode, nor food, since others will deprive him of whatever he has; much less can we suppose that the majesty of the heavenly government can exist without anger and fear. The Milesian Apollo being consulted concerning the religion of the Jews, inserted these things in his answer: –
"God, the King and Father of all, before whom the earth trembles, and the heaven and sea, and whom the recesses of Tartarus and the demons dread."
If He is so mild, as the philosophers will have it, how is it that not only the demons and ministers of such great power, but even the heaven and earth, and the whole system of the universe, tremble at His presence? For if no one submits to the service of another except by compulsion, it follows that all government exists by fear, and fear by anger. For if any one is not aroused against one who is unwilling to obey, it will not be possible for him to be compelled to obedience. Let any one consult his own feelings; he will at once understand that no one can be subdued to the command of another without anger and chastisement. Therefore, where there shall be no anger, there will be no authority. But God has authority; therefore also He must have anger, in which authority consists. Therefore let no one, induced by the empty prating159 of the philosophers, train himself to the contempt of God, which is the greatest impiety. We all are bound both to love Him, because He is our Father; and to reverence Him, because He is our Lord: both to pay Him honour, because He is bounteous; and to fear Him, because He is severe: each character in Him is worthy of reverence.160 Who can preserve his piety, and yet fail to love the parent of his life? or who can with impunity despise Him who, as ruler of all things, has true and everlasting power over all? If you consider Him in the character of Father, He supplies to us our entrance to the light which we enjoy: through Him we live, through Him we have entered into the abode161 of this world. If you contemplate Him as God, it is He who nourishes us with innumerable resources: it is He who sustains us, we dwell in His house, we are His household;162 and if we are less obedient than was befitting, and less attentive to our duty163 than the endless merits of our Master and Parent demanded: nevertheless it is of great avail to our obtaining pardon, if we retain the worship and knowledge of Him; if, laying aside low and earthly affairs and goods, we meditate upon heavenly and divine things which are everlasting. And that we may be able to do this, God must be followed by us, God must be adored and loved; since there is in Him the substance164 of things, the principle165 of the virtues, and the source of all that is good.
For what is greater in power than God, or more perfect in reason, or brighter in clearness? And since He begat us to wisdom, and produced us to righteousness, it is not allowable for man to forsake God, who is the giver of intelligence and life, and to serve earthly and frail things, or, intent upon seeking temporal goods, to turn aside from innocence and piety. Vicious and deadly pleasures do not render a man happy; nor does opulence, which is the inciter of lusts; nor empty ambition; nor frail honours, by which the human soul, being ensnared and enslaved to the body, is condemned166 to eternal death: but innocence and righteousness alone, the lawful and due reward of which is immortality, which God from the beginning appointed for holy and uncorrupted minds, which keep themselves pure and uncontaminated from vices, and from every earthly impurity. Of this heavenly and eternal reward they cannot be partakers, who have polluted their conscience by deeds of violence, frauds, rapine, and deceits; and who, by injuries inflicted upon men, by impious actions, have branded themselves167 with indelible stains. Accordingly it is befitting that all who wish deservedly to be called wise, who wish to be called men, should despise frail things, should trample upon earthly things, and should look down upon base168 things, that they may be able to be united in a most blissful relationship with God.
Let impiety and discords be removed; let turbulent and deadly dissensions be allayed,169 by which human societies and the divine union of the public league are broken in upon, divided, and dispersed; as far as we can, let "us aim at being good and bounteous: if we have a supply of wealth and resources, let it not be devoted to the pleasure of a single person, but bestowed on the welfare of many. For pleasure is as shortlived as the body to which it does service. But justice and kindness are as immortal as the mind and soul, which by good works attain to the likeness of God. Let God be consecrated by us, not in temples, but in our heart. All things which are made by the hand are destructible.170 Let us cleanse this temple, which is defiled not by smoke or dust, but by evil thoughts; which is lighted not by blazing tapers,171 but by the brightness and light of wisdom. And if we believe that God is always present in this temple, to whose divinity the secrets of the heart are open, we shall so live as always to have Him propitious, and never to fear His anger.
Note by the American Editor
It is worth while to direct attention to (book vi. cap. 2) what our author has said of "true worship," just now, when the most violent and persistent efforts are made to sensualize Christian worship, and to explain away the testimony of the Ante-Nicene Fathers on this important subject. The argument of our author, in its entire drift, is as applicable to our own times as to his; and, deeply as I value beauty in the public worship of God, I cannot, as a Nicene Catholic, do less than adopt the universal sentiment of the early Fathers as to the limits of decoration.
85 Lignorum.
86 Spatiius. The word properly refers to a racecourse.
87 Herbidæ fruges.
88 Amissi ac recepti luminis vicibus.
89 Virg., Georg., i. 289.
90 Opportunitates temporum.
91 Certis stationibus. Others read "sationibus," for certain kinds of sowing; but "statio" is applied to the stars by Seneca and Pliny.
92 Designati.
93 An objection is here met and answered.
94 Gignentium.
95 Adhuc, omitted in many manuscripts.
96 [I have heretofore noted the elements of a theodicy to be found in Lactantius.]
97 Propter exiguum compendium sublatorum malorum.
98 [I cease to note this perpetually recurrent thought. It had profoundly impressed our author as an element of natural religion.]
99 Et Deum colere, etc. Some editions read, "et eum, qui tanta præstiterit," ommiting the word "colere."
100 i. 10.
101 Solidum.
102 Materia. Subjective existence.
103 Criminosa
104 Facinorosi.
105 Materia.
106 Gratificatio.
107 Proprios.
108 Prævaleat.
109 An objection is here met and answered.
110 Incorruptus.
111 Quietus.
112 Cessit.
113 Nocentes.
114 Immobilem: not subject to emotions.
115 Familiam.
116 in Catal., iv. 6.
117 Paterfamilias, the master of a house.
118 Pietatis.
119 Ut cedat.
120 [Cap. 15, p. 179, supra.]
121 [See p. 277, note 145, infra. But he should say indignation, not anger.]
122 Illæsibilis est. Others read "stabilis est," he is firm. The reading of the text is confirmed by "læsio" in the next clause.
123 Læsio.
124 Inurit, "burns in."
125 Minister.
126 [See note 121, supra.]
127 [P. 260, etc., supra.]
128 Corrupta esse omnia.
129 Parcere.
130 Inureret, i.e., should burn in, or brand.
131 Immania, i.e., of an inhuman character.
132 Jacet.
133 Deo subjacet.
134 Others read "Cimon." If the reading Timon be retained, the reference is not to Timon who is called "the Misanthrope," but to Timon the philosopher of Phlius, who lived in the time of Ptolemy Philadelphius, and belonged to the sect of the Sceptics.
135 Cedetne huic impune.
136 Discepatator.
137 Abdicati.
138 Constat.
139 Ovid, Metam., iii. 153.
["Ultima semper
Expectanda dies homini est; dicique beatus
Ante obitum nemo," etc.]
140 [The degradation of the mind of man to the worship of stocks and stones impresses our author as against nature.]
141 Temporalis.
142 Mentis impos, i.e., not having possesion of his mind, opposed to "mentis compos." Some editions add, "in bile."
143 Ad præsens.
144 As supposed to be the seat of the passions.
145 [Psa_4:4. Vulgate, and Eph_4:26, as below.]
146 Rebus communibus.
147 Temporalem.
148 Præsentaneâ. The word is applied to a remedy which operates instantaneously.
150 Resipiscendi.
151 Immobilem.
152 [Book i., concluding chapters.]
153 The philosophers wore long hair and cloaks. See Instit., iii. 25. [Needlessly repeated. See p. 95, supra; also 137.]
154 Præpostere, i.e., in a reversed order, putting the last first.
155 Metam., i. 256.
156 Moles operosa laboret.
157 Pœnitentiâ factorum.
158 ἐλέει. Others read, ὦ μέλεοι, "O wretched."
159 Vaniloquentia.
160 Venerabilis.
161 Hospitium, i.e., a place of hospitality.
162 Familia, "a household of slaves."
163 Officiosa, i.e., familia.
164 Materia rerum.
165 Ratio virtutum.
166 Æterna morte damnatur.
167 Ineluibiles sibi maculas inusserunt.
168 Humilia.
169 Sopiantur, i.e., be lulled to sleep.
170 Destructilia. The word is used by Prudentius.
171 [See p. 163, supra. See note below.]
Lactantius (Cont.) On the Workmanship of God, or the Formation of Man. (Cont.)
Lactantius (Cont.) A Treatise on the Anger of God.


text:
L'équipe cycliste Thailand Women's ( en anglais, littéralement équipe cycliste féminine de Thaïlande) est une équipe cycliste professionnelle féminine basée au Thaïlande. Contrairement à ce que son nom pourrait laisser croire, il ne s'agit pas d'une équipe nationale, mais bien d'une équipe professionnelle. Elle est dirigée par Adisak Wannasri.

Histoire de l'équipe

Classements UCI

Encadrement
Le directeur sportif est Adisak Wannasri et le représentant de l'équipe auprès de l'UCI est Thitiwimolphat Tharnsiri. Leur adjoint est Wisut Kasiyaphat.

Thailand Women's en 2022

Effectif

Victoires

Classement mondial

Saison précédente

Effectif

Classement mondial

Victoires

Classement mondial

Victoires

Classement mondial

Effectif

Victoires

Classement mondial

Notes et références

Liens externes

Thailand Women's
Thailand Women's

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


While most Christians have a vague understanding of the symbolism of what we call the "Lord's Supper," few believers understand how Jesus transformed the most important meal in Jewish life into a way to remember the most important event in human history.
The book of Luke, written for the Gentiles, does not give a detailed explanation of the entire meal, but instead focuses on two elements that would become part of the new meal we call The Lord's Supper: the bread and the wine.
The bread represents the body of Christ and reminds us that Jesus was willing to leave behind the majesty of heaven and submit Himself to His Father's will – to provide deliverance from sin. The wine represents the blood of Jesus Christ, which is the only method that can adequately atone for our sin. And when we trust in Christ to be our Savior, God no longer sees our sin, but the blood of His Son and He "passes over us" in judgment (Romans 8:1).
Jesus is saying "My body instead of yours is the one being offered as a sacrifice for sins. My blood is being poured out for your sins instead of yours." God could have directed His punishment toward us, because we deserve it. Yet, He poured out His punishment on Jesus, who is our substitute (2 Corinthians 5:21).
While that message was to everyone reclining around the table that night, there are two men who desperately needed to hear it who would both betray Jesus that very night. Judas Iscariot would sell out the Lord for thirty pieces of silver. But the other disciple who would do something equally heinous was the Apostle Peter.
Peter would be the leader of the apostles, and Satan knew if he could take Peter out, he had a good shot and stopping the whole Christian movement before it got off the ground (Luke 22:31-32).
And within a few hours Peter would be tempted to deny Christ three different times.
But Jesus said, "I'm praying for you, Peter, that your faith won't fail; and that you, when once you have turned again will strengthen your brothers." Hebrews 7:25 says Jesus is praying for you right now as you go through a test.
Peter did fail, and he failed miserably. Just as Judas failed. But Christ offered both men forgiveness for their sins. His sacrifice would be for both of them.
The difference was one man – Judas – turned away from God's gift, and the other man, Peter, repented and received the gift.
Jesus offers you the same gift. You may think, "God could never forgive me." He forgave David, who was guilty of murder and adultery. He forgave the apostle Paul, who was guilty of murder and blasphemy. He forgave Peter, who denied Christ and cursed His name, and He was willing to forgive Judas who betrayed him.
Today Jesus offers to do the same for you.
"This is my body, this is my blood" which is given FOR YOU.
Join us every week for worship and a bold, biblical message by Dr. Jeffress at First Dallas or via the iCampus.


Low energy efficiency and limitations of cooling temperatures in the ejector refrigeration systems (ERSs) are major obstacles for its widespread use. The application of binary or multicomponent fluids may prove to be one of the successful ways to increase the ERS performance by 30–50%. Zeotropic mixtures, which have unlimited solubility and evaporate at specified pressures and varying temperatures, are considered as possible candidates to be applied in a binary-fluid ERS (BERS). An ideal candidate working fluid should exhibit high molecular weight, low latent heat of evaporation, high normal boiling temperature and high compressibility factor. A refrigerant fluid should have low molecular weight, high latent heat of evaporation, low boiling point and compressibility factor. BERS pursues simultaneous achievement of two main goals: increase in system's efficiency and take the condensation point up to 45–50°C at fixed coefficient of performance, i.e. employ atmospheric condenser in ERS. This article presents schematic diagrams of a multicomponent-fluid ERS; its cascade principle based on BERS enables to produce cold at several temperature ramps, using renewable or low-grade heat sources. Research outcomes from this article can improve the effective application of ejector technology.


text:
Q: Fireabse login con Google y Facebook Por alguna extraña razón cuando creo un usuario ya sea por Google o por Facebook el providerId que me devuelve la instancia de FirebaseUser me dice que es Firebase y no ninguno de los anteriores. Para hacerlo más extraño en la consola de usuarios si me pone bien quien es el proveedor. He seguido al pie de la letra los tutoriales. Entro normalmente a mi aplicación pero cuando salgo y vuelvo a entrar y pregunto por el usuario si existe como es lógico existe pero no se corresponde ni a  Google o Facebook por tanto no puede entrar y tengo que volver hacer login.
Codigo Google:
    // Configure Google Sign In in onCreate()
    GoogleSignInOptions gso = new GoogleSignInOptions.Builder(GoogleSignInOptions.DEFAULT_SIGN_IN)
            .requestIdToken(getString(R.string.default_web_client_id))
            .requestEmail()
            .build();

 private void firebaseAuthWithGoogle(GoogleSignInAccount acct) {
    Log.d(TAG, "firebaseAuthWithGooogle:" + acct.getId());
    AuthCredential credential = GoogleAuthProvider.getCredential(acct.getIdToken(), null);
    mAuth.signInWithCredential(credential)
            .addOnCompleteListener(Objects.requireNonNull(getActivity()), task -> {
                Log.d(TAG, "signInWithCredential:onComplete:" + task.isSuccessful());

                // If sign in fails, display a message to the user. If sign in succeeds
                // the auth state listener will be notified and logic to handle the
                // signed in user can be handled in the listener.
                if (!task.isSuccessful()) {

                    Log.w(TAG, "signInWithCredential", task.getException());
                    Snackbar.make(snackView, getString(R.string.authentication_failed),
                            BaseTransientBottomBar.LENGTH_LONG).show();
                    try {
                        throw Objects.requireNonNull(task.getException());
                    } catch (UserRecoverableAuthException userRecoverableException) {
                        // GooglePlayServices.apk is either old, disabled, or not present
                        // so we need to show the user some UI in the activity to recover.
                        //mActivity.handleException(userRecoverableException);
                        Log.e(TAG, userRecoverableException.getMessage(), userRecoverableException);
                        FirebaseCrashlytics.getInstance().recordException(userRecoverableException);
                        MDToast.makeText(context, "Actualice los servicios de Google Play o revise que estén instalados.", MDToast.LENGTH_LONG, MDToast.TYPE_ERROR).show();
                    } catch (GoogleAuthException fatalException) {
                        // Some other type of unrecoverable exception has occurred.
                        // Report and log the error as appropriate for your app.
                        Log.e(TAG, fatalException.getMessage(), fatalException);
                        FirebaseCrashlytics.getInstance().recordException(fatalException);
                        MDToast.makeText(context, fatalException.getMessage(), MDToast.LENGTH_LONG, MDToast.TYPE_ERROR).show();
                    } catch (Exception e) {
                        FirebaseCrashlytics.getInstance().recordException(e);
                        e.printStackTrace();
                        Log.e(TAG, e.getMessage(), e);
                        MDToast.makeText(context, e.getMessage(), MDToast.LENGTH_LONG, MDToast.TYPE_ERROR).show();
                    }
                } else {
                    FirebaseUser user = mAuth.getCurrentUser();

                    assert user != null;

                    askForTypeOfUser(user);
                }
            });
}
@Override
public void onActivityResult(int requestCode, int resultCode, Intent data) {
    super.onActivityResult(requestCode, resultCode, data);

    mCallbackManager.onActivityResult(requestCode, resultCode, data); // Esto pertenece al de facebook

    if (requestCode == RC_SIGN_IN) {// Result returned from launching the Intent from GoogleSignInApi.getSignInIntent(...);
        Task<GoogleSignInAccount> googleSignInAccountTask = GoogleSignIn.getSignedInAccountFromIntent(data);
        try {
            // Google Sign-In was successful, authenticate with Firebase
            GoogleSignInAccount account = googleSignInAccountTask.getResult(ApiException.class);
            if (account != null) {
                firebaseAuthWithGoogle(account);
            }
        } catch (ApiException e) {
            // Google Sign-In failed
            Log.e(TAG, "Google Sign-In failed:" + CommonStatusCodes.getStatusCodeString(e.getStatusCode()));

           }
       }
  }

Código de Facebook:
mCallbackManager = CallbackManager.Factory.create();
    LoginManager.getInstance().registerCallback(mCallbackManager, new FacebookCallback<LoginResult>() {
        @Override
        public void onSuccess(LoginResult loginResult) {
            Log.d("LoginFragment", "facebook:onSuccess:" + loginResult);

            String accessToken = loginResult.getAccessToken().getToken();
            // save accessToken to SharedPreference
            saveAccessToken(accessToken);
            handleFacebookAccessToken(loginResult.getAccessToken());
        }

        @Override
        public void onCancel() {
            Log.d("LoginFragment", "facebook:onCancel");
            loadingLayout.setVisibility(View.GONE);
            animationView.pauseAnimation();

            Snackbar.make(snackView, "Cancelado", BaseTransientBottomBar.LENGTH_LONG).show();
        }

        @Override
        public void onError(FacebookException error) {
            Log.d("LoginFragment", "facebook:onError");
            loadingLayout.setVisibility(View.GONE);
            animationView.pauseAnimation();
            if (error.toString().equals("CONNECTION_FAILURE: CONNECTION_FAILURE"))
                Snackbar.make(snackView, "Conexión fallida.", BaseTransientBottomBar.LENGTH_LONG).show();
            else
                Snackbar.make(snackView, Objects.requireNonNull(error.getMessage()), BaseTransientBottomBar.LENGTH_LONG).show();
        }
    });

private void handleFacebookAccessToken(AccessToken accessToken) {
    Log.d("LoginFragment", "handleFacebookAccessToken:" + accessToken);

    AuthCredential authCredential = FacebookAuthProvider.getCredential(accessToken.getToken());
    mAuth.signInWithCredential(authCredential).addOnCompleteListener(task -> {
        if (task.isSuccessful()) {
            //Sign in success, update UI with the signed in user's information
            Log.d("LoginFragment", "signInWithCredential:success");

            FirebaseUser user = mAuth.getCurrentUser();
            askForTypeOfUser(user);

        } else {
            loadingLayout.setVisibility(View.GONE);
            animationView.cancelAnimation();
            try {
                throw Objects.requireNonNull(task.getException());
            } catch (FirebaseAuthUserCollisionException e) {
                switch (e.getErrorCode()) {
                    case "ERROR_EMAIL_ALREADY_IN_USE":
                        MDToast.makeText(context, getString(R.string.mail_in_use), MDToast.LENGTH_LONG, MDToast.TYPE_ERROR).show();
                        break;
                    case "ERROR_ACCOUNT_EXISTS_WITH_DIFFERENT_CREDENTIAL":
                        MDToast.makeText(context, getString(R.string.account_already_exists), MDToast.LENGTH_LONG, MDToast.TYPE_ERROR).show();
                        break;
                }
            } catch (FacebookServiceException e) {
                Log.w("LoginFragment", Objects.requireNonNull(e.getMessage()));
                MDToast.makeText(context, getString(R.string.connection_error), MDToast.LENGTH_LONG, MDToast.TYPE_ERROR).show();
            } catch (FacebookDialogException e) {
                Log.w("LoginFragment", Objects.requireNonNull(e.getMessage()));
                MDToast.makeText(context, getString(R.string.facebook_error_dialog), MDToast.LENGTH_LONG, MDToast.TYPE_ERROR).show();
            } catch (FacebookAuthorizationException e) {
                Log.w("LoginFragment", Objects.requireNonNull(e.getMessage()));
                MDToast.makeText(context, getString(R.string.fail_auth), MDToast.LENGTH_LONG, MDToast.TYPE_ERROR).show();
            } catch (Exception e) {
                Log.w("LoginFragment", "signInWithCredential:failure");
                MDToast.makeText(context, getString(R.string.connection_error), MDToast.LENGTH_LONG, MDToast.TYPE_ERROR).show();
            }
        }
    });
}

// Este es el boton que llama a todo lo anterior
facebookAccount.setOnClickListener(v -> {

        loadingLayout.setVisibility(View.VISIBLE);
        animationView.playAnimation();
        if (isOnline(context)) {
                /*loadToast.setText("Logueando con Facebook");
                loadToast.show();*/
            LoginManager.getInstance().logInWithReadPermissions(LoginFragment.this, Arrays.asList("public_profile", "email"));
        } else {
            loadingLayout.setVisibility(View.GONE);
            animationView.pauseAnimation();
            Snackbar.make(v, R.string.bad_connection, BaseTransientBottomBar.LENGTH_SHORT).show();
        }
    });

A: Encontre cual es el problema exacto del porque pasa eso...
El problema esta en que la sdk de firebase cambio el metodo .getProviderId() y ahora retorna siempre firebase pues es el método de logueo global...
Para poder recuperar con exactitud el tipo de usario por providerId tenemos que hacer los siguiente:

FirebaseAuth.getInstance().getCurrentUser().getProviderData().get(1).getProviderId();

Explicación:

En la posición número uno siempre estará firebase o sea ...get(0).getProviderId() devuelve siempre firebase, sin embargo en la primera posición devuelve realmente el proveedor que se registro al ingresar el usuario por primera vez.

Espero que esto pueda ayudar a alguien como me ayudo a mi. Salu2

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange