re Bob Kok returning photos of his beloved father Sherwood

The Unjust Takedown on Lake Avenue: A Pasadena CA story

The Unjust Takedown on Lake Avenue: 

A Short Story

Part I: The Quiet Interruption

The sun hung low over the San Gabriel Mountains, painting the sky above Pasadena in hues of bruised orange and purple—the same intense, fading light that mirrored the sudden, agonizing shift in J. Good A. Citizen's life.

At fifty-five, Good was not a man built for confrontation. His days were spent wrestling with Aramaic texts and theological paradoxes within the quiet sanctuary of Fuller Seminary. He was an M.Div. student, a man of faith, and paradoxically, a staunch believer in the necessity of law and order. Tonight, however, he was simply hungry. It was a brief break between late classes, and he was driving his sedan north on Lake Avenue, seeking a quick dinner, his mind still cycling through the complexities of Pauline eschatology.

Rush hour was a chaotic ballet of impatience. As Good approached the crucial intersection, the signal for Lake Avenue went green. He eased his foot onto the accelerator, ready to move, when a shape of metal and speed flashed violently across his path. It was a black SUV, tearing through the intersection like a cannonball, utterly running the red light—a defiant act of a driver attempting to beat the signal at the last, suicidal moment. Good slammed on his brakes. The jarring, wrenching halt was painful, but it was just enough. The two vehicles missed colliding by an agonizing breath.

The driver of the SUV, a woman named Evangalina Bustamonte, braked across the intersection, shaking but safe. Good, adrenaline surging, pulled over, anger momentarily supplanting his theological calm. This near-miss was not just careless; it was reckless and dangerous. Before he could even process the extent of his shaking, the blare of approaching sirens cut through the twilight air. Two Pasadena Police Department cruisers, already on patrol in the area, pulled up.

"Heard that one clear across the block," Officer Thomas Brown, a stocky man with a severe, unyielding expression, muttered as he approached. His partner, Officer Tim Mosman, was younger, leaner, and radiated an unsettling, hyper-alert intensity.

The narrative of injustice began right there, in the first five minutes, with the officers' fundamental blind spot: they "heard, but did not see" the infraction. They arrived to a scene of two tense drivers, and without the crucial context of the red light, they were immediately vulnerable to bias.

Part II: The Coercive Demand

Officer Mosman gravitated toward Ms. Bustamonte first. The conversation was low, soothing, almost solicitous. When he turned back to Good, his posture had hardened, his jaw set. "Sir, we need to clear this up. Just acknowledge that the accident was your fault. Let's wrap this up," Mosman stated, his voice a flat, non-negotiable command.

J. Good, still reeling from the rattling experience, felt a sudden, cold clarity. "Officer, with all due respect, I will not. The other driver ran a solid red light. I had the right of way. I avoided her vehicle by inches. She caused this. I cannot  accept blame for an infraction I did not commit." 

It was the phrase "I cannot accept blame" that detonated the officers' professionalism. In that crowded, pulsating rush-hour street, Good's assertion of his legal rights was perceived not as civic duty, but as defiance. Officer Brown stepped forward, closer. His face was a mask of simmering fury. "You will do as we say, now. Don't make this harder than it has to be, young man."

It was here, in the deepening twilight, that the witnesses later focused on Officer Brown. His face was drawn tight, but it was his eyes that betrayed the moment. His eyeballs were visibly dilated—an unnerving physiological response that suggested not focused attention, but an adrenalized, aggressive instability, or some sort of medication making things worse, not better. It was less about enforcing the law and more about an inexplicable rush of power, a perceived act of machismo to validate the female driver and crush the dissent of the male citizen who dared to challenge their unearned authority.

The confrontation had instantly pivoted. It was no longer a traffic dispute; it was a battle for J. Good's dignity, his right to speak, and his bodily autonomy. The coercive demand to "accept responsibility" became the flashpoint for what followed.

Part III: The Matter of Seconds and the Searing Pain

The officers' patience, if it ever existed, vanished. The transcript confirms the violent pivot occurred in a matter of seconds. Officer Brown, seized by the manic energy in his dilated eyes, became the aggressor. He was the first to use force, drawing his baton, & thrusting it into J Good's abdomen forcefully. Instinctively, or reflexively, J. Good tried to push the baton away. The officer's wrongly interpreted this as an act of aggression rather than self-defense.  

The officers inexplicably tried to "take him down" to the pavement. J. Good's fear spiked - having never been the victim of force by officers of the law;  but his resistance was purely defensive, a physical manifestation of his moral refusal to submit to a false narrative. He started "yelling loudly," asserting his innocence, and when the cold steel of the handcuffs touched his wrist, he did the only thing his body could do: he "tensed his arms."

Sergeant Calvin Pratt, who arrived on the scene as backup, testified that Good's resistance was limited to this passive tensing and yelling. This testimony, this concession, remains the most damning evidence against the City. J. Good was not physically assaulting them. He was not armed. He was not running. He was merely tense, verbally dissenting, and no immediate threat to the safety of any officer or the public. But the officers saw only defiance. And defiance, in the corrupt institutional culture of the Pasadena Police Department, was met with brute force.

"Take him down!" The order was followed instantly by a devastating, reckless maneuver. Good felt his body lifted, twisted, and then slammed. He went down, face-first, onto the rough, unforgiving asphalt of Lake Avenue. The impact was bone-jarring. It was not a controlled descent; it was a violent, spiteful throw. A searing, blinding pain shot through his back and neck. The world went silent, then rushed back in as a cacophony of throbbing agony. He had landed heavily, his spine protesting the sudden, brutal shock.

Even on the ground, subdued, broken, and gasping for breath, the cruelty continued. Sergeant Pratt applied a control hold—a brutal pressure point technique—to Good's arm. Good cried out that the pain was "searing." Pratt maintained the hold, refusing to release the excruciating pressure, demonstrating a callous disregard for Good's well-being that transcended professional policing.

Part IV: Agony on the Asphalt

The immediate violence gave way to prolonged humiliation. Good lay there, handcuffed, his face millimeters from the rough pavement that had just bruised his dignity and his body- his glasses bent and lying on the concrete a few inches away. The officers did not immediately call for medical assistance or move him to a squad car. Instead, he was left on the street corner, a spectacle for the passing rush-hour traffic, handcuffed and in agony for up to an hour. Unfortunately, camera phones were still a few years away. No footage of the crime (by the police) would be available for later litigation. 

Forty-five minutes. Sixty minutes. The transcript's ambiguity about the precise time only underlines the indifference. For a man of 55, already grappling with the structural realities of aging, this prolonged, constrained position on the rough ground was a form of exquisite torture. The pain in his back was not fleeting; it was deep and pervasive, a constant, dull roar that intensified with every shallow breath. The City's own expert, Dr. Mulryan, would later be forced to concede the critical medical truth: that the officers' violent restraint was medically possible that the takedown aggravated a pre-existing condition. The officers had not just arrested a man; they had inflicted lasting, permanent injury, including spinal damage and aggravated Carpal Tunnel Syndrome.

The irony was crushing. A man who spent his life studying the moral framework of the Gospel, arrested and humiliated for a non-crime, by officers who themselves acted outside the bounds of any moral or legal code _ who had not even observed the incident, only heard the screeching brakes from nearby. . He was detained for nearly two hours for a simple charge of Disturbing the Peace—a charge so flimsy it was eventually dropped. but  the damage was already done, to J. Good's body. He would be contending with chronic pain for the rest of his life. And the arrest was not about enforcing the law; it was pretextual, used solely as a mechanism to punish a citizen for his verbal objections and his assertion of constitutional rights.

Part V: The Argument for Justice

The case of J. Good A. Citizen is a tragic reminder that institutional rot can turn protectors into aggressors. The actions of Officers Mosman, Brown, and Sergeant Pratt were not an isolated lapse in judgment; they were symptoms of a broader disease.

The historical context of the Pasadena Police Department, as documented by former officer Naum Ware in his book Roses Have Thorns, highlights a pervasive culture of corruption, internal lying, and excessive force. This history provides the chilling explanation for the officers' behavior: they were emboldened by a systemic failure in training, supervision, and discipline. They felt entitled to bypass professional standards and inflict injury because their institution had historically permitted or excused such violence. They did not see a Master of Divinity student, a law-abiding citizen, or a man of faith; they saw an obstacle to be summarily dealt with, and the resulting force was objectively unreasonable.

The argument for justice for Good A. Citizen is simple and profound:

1. The Threat was Zero: The officers' own testimony admits the only resistance was passive (tensing and yelling). Force must be proportional to the threat. A violent takedown against a non-assaultive citizen is the very definition of disproportionate, egregious force.

2. The Injury is Permanent: The City must be held accountable for the lasting physical consequences—the pain, the suffering, and the medical expenses—that stemmed directly from the officers' recklessness.

3. The Badge is Not a License for Abuse: This verdict must be a clear message that a police badge does not grant immunity from the rule of law. When agents of the state act with machismo and punitive malice, the city that employs them must pay the price for the resulting constitutional violation.

The Pasadena Police Department acted irresponsibly, allowing a minor incident to become a catastrophic injury through sheer, unwarranted force. This was not policing; it was an inexcusable abuse of authority. Justice demands accountability for Good A. Citizen, whose life was irrevocably altered on a simple drive up Lake Avenue.

For He shall give His angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways. (Psalm 91:11)

À Thanksgiving 🦃🍽️🙏✝️Poem 2025🇺🇸

"O give thanks unto the Lord, for He is good, for His mercy endureth for ever" — Psalm 107:1

À Thanksgiving 🦃🍽️🙏✝️Poem 2025

Through windswept seas the Pilgrims sailed ⛵ with trembling hearts yet unassailed by fear that tried to pull them down, they sought God's grace 🕊️ & Heaven's crown 👑.

Upon the rock of Plymouth shore they knelt in prayer 🙏 to Him once more, for winter's cold had bowed them low, yet Christ ✝️ would guide where they must go. With hunger fierce & sickness near they clung to faith instead of fear, they trusted God with every breath & praised His name in life & death☝️

Then Squanto came with gentle hand to teach the ways of this new land, he showed them how the corn 🌽could grow & where the sweetest streams would flow 🏞️.  Some tribes came forth with peace & care, with open hearts ❤️ & food to share, yet others watched with wary eyes, for old distrust could still arise. But still that feast 🦃🍽️of harvest day brought thanks to God in humble way, for every gift His love had shown & every seed 🌱 the Lord had grown.

More Dutch soon came with dreams renewed, with hopes & prayer & fortitude, they worked the soil 👨‍🌾👩‍🌾with steady might & thanked the Lord for guiding light. Then Germans, Scots, the Irish too, Italians with their courage true, all searching for a place to stand & raise their children in this land.

Each brought a voice, each brought a song 🙌 😀 🎵, each learned to praise God all lifelong, for every trial He helped them through & every dawn with mercies new

Thru centuries the custom spread as tables 🍽️wide with bounty fed, from cabins warm to bustling towns where blessings 💞 rose like harvest crowns. As families family gathered hand in hand across the towns of this broad land, they bowed to Christ with grateful hearts & thanked Him for His wondrous parts in making fields & forests 🌲 grand & holding them within His hand

"Then Butterball rose in modern days, a name that Leo Peters gave.

He coined it with inventive cheer & soon it spread both far & near."

And turkeys 🦃🧈chilled & turkeys brined filled homes with fragrance well designed, with laughter 😁 bright & prayerful song 🎻🥁as grateful families got along. 

With years rolled on came football 🏈 cheer on glowing screens 📺 each thankful year, as crowds 🏟️ would shout & players run beneath the sky God shaped the sun. Yet still the church ⛪ bells hum their call to feed the hungry, one & all, for Christ commands with gentle plea to serve the poor & set them free 🕊️. So kitchens warm with pots 👨‍🍳 & pans give meals 🥪🥧🍜 to struggling fellow man, with volunteers in lines so long who raise their voices in thankful song

Today as leaves 🍁🍂 of amber fall we give our thanks to Lord of all, for freedom's gift & mercy's way & every breath of every day. 

For Pilgrims brave & friendly guides, for all who walked thru storms ⛈️& tides🌊, for faith that held through trials grim & every prayer we lift to Him. 

So let our hearts in chorus say that Christ is Lord in every way, with gratitude our spirits sing for all the blessings He doth bring 👍🙏✝️🇺🇸☝️😊

Should we forgive those who are not repentant? conditional vs unconditional forgiveness

The most famous recent example of forgiving somebody is probably Erica Kirk the late wife of Charlie, who was tragically assassinated by a horrible misguided young person in Utah. And yet as far as we know this young person is not repentant, has not even actually accepted responsibility for it, and maybe is going to try to dodge responsibility by pleading not guilty and seeing if he can get away with it. So he has not accepted responsibility, has not pled guilty, and as far as we know shows no remorse.

 Nonetheless Erica, at the funeral memorial service at the large stadium in Arizona in probably the most publicized excerpt by the media said she

 " forgives this young man ". 

Was this the right thing to do? What would Jesus do? There are Biblical arguments for conditional forgiveness as well as for unconditional forgiveness.  Read below and you can make your own decision , decide for yourself. God bless you 🙏 ✝️ 

Partially Generated by AI. 

"The discerning heart seeks knowledge" — Proverbs 15:14

Yes — there is a biblical argument made by some theologians against unconditional forgiveness, especially when the offender does not repent or want forgiveness. This view is less common in modern preaching, but it is absolutely present in Christian theology, especially in Reformed and older Protestant traditions.

Below is the strongest biblical argument against forgiving the unrepentant, presented the way serious theologians frame it.

The Repentance-Required View (Theological Argument Against Forgiving the Unrepentant)

1. God Himself does not forgive the unrepentant

This is the core of the argument.

The Bible repeatedly says God requires repentance before forgiveness:

"If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him." — Luke 17:3

"Repent… so that your sins may be wiped out." — Acts 3:19

"Unless you repent, you will all perish." — Luke 13:3

The logic is:

> If God does not forgive without repentance, and we are commanded to imitate God's character,

then Christians should not forgive without repentance either.

This is the central theological point.

2. Jesus says if they repent, forgive — implying a condition

Luke 17:3–4 is the strongest text:

> "If he repents, forgive him."

Many theologians argue:

Jesus could have said, "Forgive him no matter what,"

but instead He built repentance into the requirement.

This creates a clear conditional structure that some scholars say cannot be ignored.

3. Forgiveness in Scripture is often tied to reconciliation — which requires repentance

Forgiveness in the Bible is not always an internal emotional release; sometimes it is a restoration of relationship, which cannot happen without repentance.

Amos 3:3 — "Can two walk together unless they be agreed?"

Matthew 18 (the church discipline chapter) requires confrontation and repentance before restoration.

The argument:

Biblical forgiveness is relational, and relationships require repentance from wrongdoing.

4. Unconditional forgiveness can undermine justice

Some theologians argue that forgiving unrepentant people:

Minimizes sin

Short-circuits the need for repentance

Sends a false message that God overlooks sin without change

Verses supporting that God cares deeply about justice:

Proverbs 17:15 — "He who justifies the wicked… is an abomination."

Romans 2:5 — the unrepentant store up wrath for themselves

Thus, they argue that premature forgiveness might actually oppose God's justice.

---

5. Jesus' example on the cross does not equal forgiveness

Many theologians argue:

> Jesus asked the Father to forgive His killers,

but that is not the same as actually granting forgiveness.

They argue:

Jesus did not pronounce forgiveness

The soldiers did not receive forgiveness unless they later repented

Jesus' prayer expresses God's compassionate heart, not automatic absolution

This is a major counterargument in scholarly circles.

6. Paul never tells believers to forgive unrepentant people

Paul consistently ties forgiveness to restoration after discipline and repentance:

2 Corinthians 2:6–8 — forgiveness is extended after the offender repents.

1 Corinthians 5 — do not restore or reconcile with the unrepentant.

The argument:

Paul's model includes boundaries and discipline, not unconditional forgiveness.

7. Practical theological concern: forgiveness without repentance enables sin

Classic Reformed theologians (including some Puritan writers) argue:

> Forgiving someone who does not repent encourages them to remain in rebellion.

Thus:

Sin must be confronted

Repentance must be required

Only then does forgiveness reflect God's own pattern

Summary of the Repentance-Required Argument

From this viewpoint:

Forgiveness should follow the pattern of God's forgiveness

That pattern includes repentance

Unrepentant sinners are not forgiven by God, so Christians should not pronounce forgiveness prematurely

You can still release bitterness, but true forgiveness (restoration, pardon) is withheld until repentance

So yes — there is a real biblical case against forgiving people who don't want forgiveness.

***************

"Come now, let us reason together, says the LORD" — Isaiah 1:18

Here is the best Christian argument for unconditional forgiveness, the strongest side of the debate, grounded in Scripture, early church tradition, and the teachings of Jesus.

This is the view taught by many pastors, church fathers, and modern Christian teachers.

THE ARGUMENT FOR UNCONDITIONAL FORGIVENESS

(Forgiving even if they don't repent, don't care, don't ask, or don't want it.)

1. Jesus forgave people who never repented

This is the centerpiece of the unconditional-forgiveness view.

Jesus on the cross said:

> "Father, forgive them…" (Luke 23:34)

The Roman soldiers:

Did not repent

Did not ask

Did not care

Did not even understand what they were doing

Yet Jesus extended a prayer of forgiveness toward them while they were committing the crime.

This shows forgiveness is an act of grace, not a transaction.

2. Jesus commands forgiveness with no conditions attached

In the Sermon on the Mount:

"Forgive us… as we forgive others"

(Matthew 6:12)

Jesus does not qualify this with:

"If they apologize"

"If they feel remorse"

"If they ask"

Again in Matthew 6:14–15, the command is unconditional.

3. Forgiving others imitates how God forgave us

But here's the key:

We were forgiven before we repented.

Romans 5:8:

> "While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us."

God initiated forgiveness toward us first, before any repentance was possible.

The argument:

If God loved, initiated grace, and offered forgiveness while we were unrepentant, we must extend the same posture.

4. Forgiveness and reconciliation are different

This is extremely important.

Jesus' command to forgive unconditionally does not mean:

restoring the relationship

trusting the person

removing consequences

pretending nothing happened

Forgiveness = you release the debt and bitterness

Reconciliation = requires repentance and change

So Christians forgive unconditionally, but reconcile conditionally.

This allows forgiveness to be unlimited while justice still exists.

5. Forgiveness is part of spiritual health

Refusing to forgive while waiting for someone to "earn" it creates:

bitterness

spiritual bondage

corruption of the heart

anger that takes root

Hebrews 12:15 warns about "the root of bitterness" defiling a person.

Forgiveness is therefore:

an act of obedience

an act of freedom

an act of spiritual protection

And none of these require the other person's cooperation.

6. Proverbs and Jesus' teachings emphasize mercy, not reciprocity

Jesus commands:

"Love your enemies."

(Matthew 5:44)

He does not say "love your repentant enemies."

Showing kindness and grace to unrepentant people reflects the Father's character:

"He causes His sun to rise on the evil & the good."

(Matthew 5:45)

This is the basis for forgiving even those who don't want forgiveness.

7. Early church fathers taught unconditional forgiveness

Such as:

Tertullian

Clement of Alexandria

John Chrysostom

They consistently argued that Christians must forgive:

enemies

persecutors

slanderers

abusers

betrayers

even when these people showed zero repentance.

Because forgiveness is an internal posture of mercy, not approval of their actions.

8. Forgiveness frees you, not the offender

Unforgiveness binds your heart, but forgiveness releases you from the weight of:

revenge

anger

bitterness

resentment

From this view, forgiveness is something you do with God, not with the offender.

SUMMARY: THE UNCONDITIONAL FORGIVENESS POSITION

Forgive even if they:

show no remorse

deny wrongdoing

don't want forgiveness

refuse reconciliation

Because:

Jesus forgave the unrepentant

Jesus commands unconditional forgiveness

We were forgiven before repenting

Forgiveness protects our hearts

Forgiveness ≠ reconciliation

Early church taught the same

"Teach me Your way, O LORD, that I may walk in Your truth" — Psalm 86:11

Here is the clear, balanced, side-by-side comparison of the two major Christian positions on forgiveness:

CONDITIONAL VS UNCONDITIONAL FORGIVENESS

A biblical & theological comparison

1. BASIC DEFINITIONS

Conditional Forgiveness (Repentance Required)

You forgive after the offender repents.

Forgiveness means reconciliation + restored relationship.

Unconditional Forgiveness (No Repentance Required)

You forgive regardless of repentance.

Forgiveness means releasing bitterness and giving justice to God.

2. CORE BIBLE VERSES TO SUPPORT EACH VIEW

Conditional View (Repentance required)

Luke 17:3 — "If he repents, forgive him."

Matthew 18:15–17 — Restoration after confrontation and repentance.

Acts 3:19 — "Repent… so sins may be wiped out."

2 Corinthians 2:6–8 — Forgiveness given after a sinner repents.

Unconditional View (No repentance required)

Luke 23:34 — Jesus forgave unrepentant executioners.

Matthew 6:14–15 — Forgive with no conditions.

Matthew 5:44 — Love your enemies (unrepentant enemies).

Ephesians 4:31–32 — Forgive as God forgave us (initiated before we repented).

3. HOW EACH VIEW DEFINES FORGIVENESS

Conditional

Forgiveness = release + reconciliation

Requires repentance

You don't forgive someone who refuses to admit wrongdoing

Withholding forgiveness pressures the offender toward repentance

Unconditional

Forgiveness = releasing anger, not necessarily reconciling

Does NOT remove boundaries

You forgive to obey Jesus & free your heart

Reconciliation still requires repentance

4. EXAMPLES FROM JESUS' LIFE

Conditional View Interpretation

Jesus forgave after repentance (e.g., Peter after denying Him)

The Luke 23:34 prayer wasn't forgiveness itself—just a request

Unconditional View Interpretation

Jesus forgave violent, unrepentant men on the cross

Jesus taught forgiveness as a posture, not a negotiation

5. PURPOSE OF FORGIVENESS

Conditional

Protects justice

Prevents cheap grace

Avoids pretending sin doesn't matter

Encourages repentance

Unconditional

Breaks bitterness

Sets the believer free

Reflects Jesus' mercy

Honors God's heart toward enemies

6. WHY PEOPLE CHOOSE EACH VIEW

Why some Christians choose conditional forgiveness

They want justice to be upheld

They worry unconditional forgiveness rewards evil

They emphasize passages about church discipline, repentance & accountability

They define forgiveness as restoration, not just emotional release

Why some Christians choose unconditional forgiveness

They see Jesus' example on the cross as the model

They do not want to stay in bitterness

They emphasize love of enemies & mercy

They separate forgiveness from reconciliation

7. WHAT BOTH SIDES AGREE ON

This is extremely important.

✔ Bitterness is sin

✔ Reconciliation requires repentance

✔ Boundaries can be necessary

✔ You must let go of revenge

✔ Justice belongs to God

✔ Forgiveness is commanded by Jesus in some form

The disagreement is only about:

Do we offer forgiveness before repentance, or after?

8. WHICH VIEW IS "MORE BIBlical"?

Both views have biblical support.

Both have serious theologians behind them.

But here's how the majority breaks down:

Most modern pastors & evangelical teachers lean:

➡️ Unconditional forgiveness (because of Jesus on the cross)

Most Reformed, conservative, or Puritan theologians lean:

➡️ Conditional forgiveness (because of Luke 17:3)

Most early church fathers leaned:

➡️ Unconditional forgiveness

So the split is real and longstanding.

---

9. THE PRACTICAL REALITY: BOTH CAN BE TRUE

Many Christians resolve the tension this way:

Forgive unconditionally in your heart

to release bitterness

AND

Reconcile only if they repent

to restore the relationship.

This combines the strengths of both positions.

"You Can’t Eat Pearls ~ " The Imaginative Conservative

https://theimaginativeconservative.org/2025/02/you-cant-eat-pearls-barnabas-wilson.html 

"Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant seeking beautiful pearls." — Matthew 13:45

Read the article ☝️ , 

otherwise read this 

AI generated summary 👇

What the Essay Is Saying 

(Plain English)

Br. Barnabas's thesis is simple:

> Human analogies break when taken literally, but Christ's analogies don't—because the spiritual truths behind them are more real than the analogy itself.

He uses the parable of the pearl of great price to illustrate this.

---

1. Human analogies are helpful but fragile

He opens with humor:

Saying "-5.00 diopters" doesn't help most people

Saying "blind as a bat" works instantly

But if you take "busy as a bee" literally, it becomes absurd

So:

> Human analogies can only go so far before they collapse.

---

2. Jesus uses analogies because Heaven is beyond our natural comprehension

Christ describes the Kingdom with:

pearls

treasure

seeds

fields

These images give us access to a reality we cannot understand directly.

But Christ's analogies are different from ours.

---

3. Push Jesus' analogy literally… and it becomes even more true

Br. Barnabas imagines the literal scenario:

merchant sells everything

he owns nothing but a single pearl

he's hungry

you can't eat pearls

This would be foolish if we were talking about an earthly pearl.

But in Christ's analogy, the pearl represents:

> the Kingdom of Heaven — union with God Himself.

And that is worth everything.

So even when you push the analogy to its "breaking point," instead of collapsing, it opens a deeper truth.

---

4. The Pearl = Christ Himself

This is the essay's real pivot:

> Jesus isn't giving us a pearl.

He's giving us Himself.

He is:

the treasure

the pearl

the fulfillment of every analogy

This is deeply sacramental and incarnational:

If we're lonely → Jesus is friendship

If we're tired → Jesus is rest

If we've sinned → Jesus is mercy

If we're hungry → Jesus gives His Body and Blood

Thus:

> Christ is not LIKE the treasure.

Christ IS the treasure.

---

5. Earthly treasures cannot satisfy, but the Kingdom can

Why?

Because:

earthly pearls can be owned but not eaten

earthly wealth can be possessed but not save

earthly goods satisfy temporarily

But:

> The Kingdom gives a happiness that needs nothing more.

And the Kingdom is not a thing — it is a Person.

This is classic Dominican spirituality:

The end of man is union with God

Everything else is a shadow of that fulfillment

---

Final meaning of the essay

Here is the thesis in a single sentence:

> Give everything for Christ because only in Him do you receive everything your soul was made for.

This is why the merchant's actions, which look foolish literally, become wise spiritually.

You can't eat pearls.

You can't live off earthly treasures.

But you can live on Christ.

Re Blake the mechanic at quick Feet Fleet auto repair near Stockton CA

https://maps.app.goo.gl/Kd2sRj5945xuZULs8?g_st=am 

I want to share my honest experience here. When discussing repair options, I noticed some cheap, sleazy sales techniques—mainly pressure to choose the most expensive parts and comments that felt like price-shaming when I asked about standard or budget-friendly options. I prefer straightforward, respectful communication without tactics that make a customer feel judged for not choosing the top-priced items. I hope they improve in this area, because customers deserve clear choices without unnecessary pressure. There's a there's plenty of good options without always buying the most expensive. Don't allow the mechanic to shame you. 

Review of Blake the mechanic at Quick Feet Fleet Auto Repair near Stockton CA

Unfortunately it did not go that great. On the first visit when I had an appointment, he forgot he had a doctor's appointment himself & wasn't there when I arrived . A managed to get a response from him on email and he said he was on the way about an hour later. I'm a gracious person so I didn't make a big deal about it. 

And then he put my car on the lift and made a few observations. But when I said " my car is actually running well" then he was kind of sarcastic because it wouldn't start without touching the gas pedal. That's NOT a big hardship for me to touch the gas pedal to get the car to start. 

He was astute about observing that there might be something else going on besides torque converter. Because the codes were showing oxygen sensors, mass air flow sensor, and purge valve among others.

 I realize now ex post facto that an experienced mechanic should have thought about the fuse because this same fuse controls all of those and it turns out that this fuse was burned out. And a fuse usually doesn't burn out just for being old or anything. There's usually a reason. 

And as it turns out there was a reason. And he almost looked right at it because he noticed the oil leaking below the pan. But he didn't spot the melted wires from the hot oil. A different mechanic later on noticed this and fixed the wires which solved the code problem and we're hoping the torque converter issue as well. 

Still haven't driven it far enough for long enough to know 100% for sure. The  further problem is that before I went to the second mechanic he had already convinced me that I should invest in a new mass air flow sensor and make sure it's OEM.

 Despite my reservations I paid the extra for an AC Delco MAF sensor but it didn't solve the problem because with a burned out fuse the MAF sensor wasn't working at all - once again an experienced mechanic would notice that the code for this sensor was low input, not defective.

 "Low input" means the MAF sensor was not giving a signal to the ECU. This should have also been a clue to an experienced mechanic that there was something else CAUSING the problem for the MAF sensor . 

So on the second visit to see this mechanic at quick feet I had already installed the new ACDelco maf sensor, but he began ridiculing me for not buying it straight from an AC Delco dealer.

 I bought it from a person who guaranteed it was AC Delco but when it arrived I wasn't positive it was ACDelco because I hadn't seen the words on it, but later I did I verify it, so it was not the issue. 

But once again I repeat myself it wouldn't have mattered if I had the most expensive MAF sensor in the world installed because it was the fuse and the fuse was due to the wires being melted which he could have spotted if he had looked at them closely for a few seconds when he was underneath the first time!

 It was the second visit when he became abusive that I just couldn't take it anymore and I left. He also seemed to expect me to give him money but he hadn't done any actual work yet.  We were still trying to get to what the actual issue is. 

I  was positive about him even after him being late the first time I thought that he was a good person and that he was a new mechanic starting a new shop and I would be glad to support a young ambitious person. But if he's going for pocket change already just to read the codes and take a quick look this makes me wary. 

Nonetheless if that's important to him he should say so upfront. There are places that will say up front that we charge for looking at the vehicle or for reading the codes so you know what they expect.

 In this case he didn't say that up front and then he seemed to become passive- aggressive about it. That quickly turned me off and I left abruptly. And I apologize for words I used towards him but he was abusive towards me as well. 

I wish him well in the future and Hope he can work out his time management and hopefully sleep management as well because he works nights also. I don't know how he does it but I wish him the best. 

Follow up re Quick Feet Fleet Auto Repair near Stockton CA

One of the engine codes he found was P0102 code (Mass Air Flow Sensor – Low Input). Blake the mechanic immediately assumed the sensor was defective and encouraged a replacement and to make sure to use OEM parts. So I did.

 I paid the extra for an AC Delco brand MAF sensor even though I've had experience with MAF sensors censored before and I was dubious that replacing it would solve the problem. Nonetheless, he seemed very strongly sure that this would be one of the fixes. 

Only to find out later that there was a blown fuse which means the MAF sensor was not even registering -that's why I got a LOW INPUT 102 code not a total malfunctio code . Low input means the ECU is not receiving enough information from the MAF sensor. 

A proper diagnostic step — checking whether the sensor was receiving power — was skipped. As mentioned, It turns out the fuse supplying the MAF sensor was blown, which should have been considered first.

An experienced mechanic should also have maybe made the connection between the code alert for purge valve, the oxygen sensors, and the MAF sensor simultaneously because ONE FUSE CONTROLS ALL OF THOSE. 

 This led to unnecessary concern and unnecessary parts replacement. A skilled mechanic should always check power, wiring, and connections before concluding the sensor itself is faulty.

To give him a little credit because he also mentioned the oxygen sensors at that first visit, he did say that suggests there might be some wiring issues because rarely do both oxygen sensors go bad simultaneously. But he didn't think about the fuse. 

And we never got to the part of further diagnosis at the time, and he never did the quick and easy step of checking the fuses or suggesting I do so. I write this review to try to help him grow as a mechanic .

When I returned the second time having just replaced the MAF sensor , the garage doors were closed and he was on the phone and I waited for him to come out and he seemed a little grouchy and then he complained that I didn't give him money for his time, and yet to be exact, no services had been performed yet, other than reading the codes. 

 But if money was his concern, he should have made that clear from the beginning and I would have either agreed to payment for reading the codes or doing a diagnosis, or I would have said "well I'll find somebody else."

 Instead he became passive aggressive angry about me not offering him money for reading the codes etc. 

ChatGPT says: 

"Yes — an experienced, methodical mechanic should consider that scenario. Here's why:

---

⚡ Why multiple related codes can indicate a fuse/power issue

1. Shared fuse or circuit:

If multiple sensors (MAF, O2, purge valve) all report faults simultaneously, and they share a power source, this is a strong clue that the problem is upstream, like a blown fuse, bad relay, or wiring issue, rather than all sensors failing at once.

2. Unlikely coincidence:

It's extremely rare for three independent sensors to fail at the exact same time. A competent mechanic's mental checklist should include power delivery problems whenever multiple sensors fail together.

3. Standard diagnostic practice:

Many shops teach:

1. Read all codes.

2. Check fuses and relays that supply power to affected sensors.

3. Check wiring/connectors.

4. Replace parts only if power and wiring are intact and the sensor itself is faulty.

---

✅ Bottom line

If a mechanic immediately assumed all three sensors were defective without first checking fuses, relays, and wiring, that indicates a gap in diagnostic procedure. Experienced mechanics are trained to make the mental connection:

> "Multiple codes on components sharing a power source → check fuse/circuit first."

In your case, fuse #19 supplying all three makes the fuse the most likely culprit, and a proper mechanic should have considered that before suggesting any sensor replacements.

Review :

I brought my vehicle in after seeing a P0102 code (Mass Air Flow Sensor – Low Input), along with codes for the oxygen sensors and purge valve. The mechanic correctly noted that it was very odd for both oxygen sensors to fail at the same time and suggested there might be a wiring issue, but we didn't proceed further with diagnostics. He immediately assumed the MAF sensor was defective and suggested replacing it, without checking whether the sensors were receiving power. In fact, all three components share fuse #19, which was blown. An experienced mechanic could have easily checked or suggested checking the fuses first, since multiple simultaneous sensor codes on components sharing a power source are often caused by a fuse or wiring problem rather than all the sensors failing at once. I was planning to return later after replacing the MAF sensor to see if that solved the issue, but this step could have been addressed upfront.

Re Blake, owner of Quick Feet & Fleet Auto Repair , near Stockton CA

Posted: 11.12.25 

This young man (Blake ) is starting a new auto repair business while also still working nights elsewhere. I think he's capable, although he never actually did any work for me other than read the codes and ALMOST started doing a job for me. 

The problem like many mechanics who sometimes start to feel sorry for themselves is that he thinks that by engaging with me he did some work for me and apparently thought I should give him a little money for talking to me & putting my car up on the lift. 

I actually liked his personality & gumption at first, even though he was late for our first appointment (he said he forgot he had a doctor's appointment) . I didn't make a big deal out of out of this but after the second blow- up I'm writing this down because he started becoming accusatory towards me. 

 I love to help out young new mechanics who are earnest and striving to build an honest business. In fact I was actually thinking he might be the person I would go to to either do my transmission or a transmission related job - both profitable jobs.

 But we weren't to that point yet. I was still diagnosing the issues. He jumped to the conclusion that I should try a new air mass air flow sensor. And against my better judgment I trusted his assessment. 

Turns out I DON'T need a new air flow sensor because it's actually a fuse- related issue. I was getting a airflow code but it didn't mean the MAF was bad . 

Then this young man actually had the audacity to rebuke me for buying an AC Delco mass air flow sensor online without knowing if it was actually authentic ACDelco. It was ! Sometimes you have to trust. 

But it didn't matter because that wasn't the issue. Yet by this time the young man was feeling sorry for himself that I didn't give him a few bucks for reading the codes again. And probably a little grouchy from lack of sleep. 

  I was hoping the second time to dig a little deeper and if he did,  then for sure I'd pay him a fair price 💰. I pay all my bills! 

Then he lost his temper. He even mocked my vehicle each time sarcastically saying "You think this runs well?"  Is that how you treat a customer ?  . 

And actually, yes it does run well, I told him twice. I actually drove it to Washington DC twice this year. And back to California. And also all the way up to Northern Washington -the Canadian border- and back to California.  

The only thing you have to do is touch the gas when you're starting it. That's not the end of the world for me. that's not a big hardship. But I wanted to diagnose the issues so they don't get worse.

He may have some issues of supremacy as well I'm not sure . Then I look over at his little red car and it's nothing to brag about. So I'm not sure what's going on with this guy. 

I think he knows his stuff in general but he may be elitist about being a perfectionist which actually can sometimes mean throwing a lot of money away. 

I wish him well. I hope he doesn't get too temperamental, or he's going to lose customers before he even gets them.Helpful tip: If you do the little things without demanding money, you'll get the big things for a lot of money later. 

 

I'm not a perfect person either of course but I am a Christian and I do strive to do better and be better everyday and I did lose my cool after he last out at me and so I said a few words towards him and I repent to my God for anything I said that was uncalled for. 

And I invite young Blake to accept Jesus Christ ✝️ as his Lord and Savior if he hasn't done so. Or if he has- if he does know Jesus then I encourage him to grow in faith and in his attitude and treatment of others when he's not in a good mood. If he doesn't know Jesus or grow in Jesus, he's got a long life to live -it's not going to be very happy. 

How important are the Dutch in terms of cutting edge semiconductor technology? & Related issues

Things I learned today

---

🇳🇱 1. ASML: The crown jewel of chipmaking

ASML (Advanced Semiconductor Materials Lithography) is based in Veldhoven, Netherlands.

It is the only company on Earth capable of making EUV lithography systems, which are used to etch transistor patterns onto silicon wafers at 3 nm and smaller scales.

Each machine costs $200–400 million, contains over 100,000 parts, and requires technology sourced from more than 800 suppliers worldwide — including optics from Germany's Zeiss and lasers from the U.S. firm Cymer.

Without ASML's EUV equipment, no company — not even in China — can produce chips as advanced as those from TSMC, Samsung, or Intel.

" The plans of the diligent lead surely to abundance." — Proverbs 21:5

.

The Netherlands' mastery through ASML wasn't luck or chance — it was vision, patience, and decades of quiet technological partnership. Here's how this small European country came to dominate one of the most advanced and secretive industries on Earth.

---

🇳🇱 1. It began in the 1980s — Philips' legacy

In 1984, ASML was founded as a joint venture between Philips (the Dutch electronics giant) and a small toolmaker named ASM International.

The goal: to build precision photolithography machines, used to project light patterns onto silicon wafers — essentially, the "printing press" of computer chips.

Philips already had deep experience in optics, lighting, and electronics — skills that became the backbone of ASML's early designs.

The Netherlands' strong tradition in precision engineering and optics (dating back to Dutch lensmakers of the 1600s) also helped lay the cultural foundation.

---

⚙️ 2. Early struggles and long-term investment

ASML nearly went bankrupt several times in the 1980s and early 1990s.

Instead of chasing quick profits, Dutch investors and engineers doubled down on long-term R&D — a national strength.

The company worked closely with customers like Intel and TSMC, allowing it to co-develop each new generation of lithography systems based on what fabs actually needed.

This customer-partner model gave ASML an edge over Japanese competitors like Nikon and Canon, who were more secretive and slower to adapt.

---

🔬 3. Partnership with Zeiss and the birth of EUV

The real leap came when ASML partnered with Carl Zeiss (Germany), the world's best lens maker, to develop ultra-precise optics that could focus extreme ultraviolet (EUV) light — wavelengths just 13.5 nanometers wide.

The EUV concept was seen as impossible for decades because it required light sources a million times brighter than the sun, yet focused to atomic precision.

By the 2000s, after billions in research funding (with help from Intel, TSMC, and the EU), ASML finally succeeded where everyone else failed.

Result: ASML became the only company in the world capable of producing EUV machines.

---

🌍 4. Global cooperation, Dutch management

The Netherlands provided a neutral, stable, and innovation-friendly environment — ideal for multinational collaboration.

ASML built a supply chain spanning 60+ countries, integrating parts from the U.S., Germany, Japan, and others, while maintaining the intellectual core in Dutch hands.

Dutch corporate culture — practical, consensus-driven, globally minded — helped coordinate thousands of suppliers without political chaos.

This cooperative ecosystem became impossible for rivals to duplicate.

---

🔒 5. Strategic patience meets global timing

While others focused on faster profits, ASML spent over 20 years developing EUV with little return.

When AI and 3-nm chips suddenly became critical around 2020, ASML was already ready — the only company with machines capable of producing them.

Now, every advanced chip (Apple M3, NVIDIA Blackwell, AMD Instinct, Intel Xeon) depends on Dutch machinery.

---

🧠 6. In summary

> The Netherlands became a semiconductor superpower not by making chips —

but by perfecting the tools that make chips.

Their advantage rests on:

Centuries of optical craftsmanship

Philips' legacy of electronics and precision

Deep scientific patience

Cross-border cooperation and neutrality

Relentless reinvestment in research rather than quick profit

> "The plans of the diligent lead surely to abundance, but everyone who is hasty comes only to poverty." — Proverbs 21:5

At present, virtually no company fully competes with the Netherlands' ASML in the field of extreme ultraviolet (EUV) lithography, the most advanced chipmaking technology. Here's the landscape :

🧠 1. Who's trying to compete

Nikon (Japan) – Longtime rival in older deep ultraviolet (DUV) lithography systems, but fell far behind in EUV and effectively stopped pursuing it after ASML pulled ahead in the 2010s. Nikon still sells DUV tools but not EUV.

Canon (Japan) – Recently re-entered competition through nanoimprint lithography (NIL), a different approach to patterning chips. In 2023–2024 they announced a NIL system that could potentially rival low-end EUV nodes for certain uses (confidence ~70% that it'll matter commercially).

Shanghai Micro Electronics Equipment (SMEE, China) – China's most advanced domestic attempt. Their best tool today is roughly equivalent to ASML's DUV immersion machines from around 2009–2010, about 15 years behind in real-world capability.

🧰 2. Why no one else is close

ASML's lead is due to:

Partnership with Zeiss (Germany) for ultra-precise mirrors and optics

Exclusive source of EUV light from Cymer (U.S.)

Unmatched supply chain integration — thousands of components, each produced to near-atomic tolerances

Government and industry support over decades, starting in the 1980s as a Philips–ASM International joint venture

🌍 3. New or potential challengers

Intel (U.S.) invested in ASML but also funds research in High-NA EUV systems, though they depend on ASML's tech.

Japan's Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) has funded Canon and Nikon to re-enter advanced lithography.

China continues a crash program to develop its own EUV, reportedly with hundreds of millions in state support, but success is still years away — they lack Zeiss-level optics and the EUV light source technology.

 > "Two are better than one, because they have a good return for their labor." — Ecclesiastes 4:9

Yes — Carl Zeiss is absolutely critical to ASML's success. 

Here's how Zeiss fits in:

🔍 1. Zeiss provides ASML's optical heart

Zeiss builds the ultra-precision mirrors and lenses used in ASML's lithography machines.

In EUV (extreme ultraviolet) systems, no lenses exist — light at 13.5 nm wavelength can't pass through glass — so Zeiss supplies six to eight giant mirrors, each polished to an accuracy of about 0.1 nanometers (that's one-thousandth the width of a virus).

Each mirror reflects EUV light up to 40 times before reaching the silicon wafer, and even a microscopic defect would ruin the chip pattern.

🧠 2. ASML + Zeiss = decades of partnership

ASML and Zeiss have been strategic partners since the 1980s, so much so that ASML even bought a 25% stake in Zeiss's semiconductor optics division in 2016 to lock in collaboration.

Without Zeiss, ASML cannot produce EUV systems — there's no alternate supplier capable of those mirror assemblies.

🧩 3. Why Zeiss is irreplaceable

Only Zeiss has the facilities (in Oberkochen, Germany) to measure and polish mirrors at that level of atomic precision.

The production of just one EUV mirror can take months.

Zeiss's optical alignment process happens inside vacuum chambers, simulating EUV conditions, a capability no other optics company currently has.

So, in short:

> ASML is the system integrator; Zeiss is the optical soul.

Without Zeiss, ASML's EUV machines would be impossible.

> "For nothing is hidden that will not be made manifest, nor is anything secret that will not be known and come to light." — Luke 8:17

That's a sharp and realistic question — and the short answer is: China has tried to gain insight into ASML and its partners like Zeiss, but true infiltration or technology theft at Zeiss's EUV level would be extremely difficult. I'm 95% sure of this assessment.

Here's why:

---

🛡️ 1. Zeiss's environment is ultra-secure

Zeiss Semiconductor Manufacturing Technology (SMT) facilities in Oberkochen, Germany are treated almost like defense sites — controlled access, biometric security, compartmentalized work zones, and continuous audits.

Only a handful of engineers have full knowledge of how the EUV mirror assemblies are produced.

Manufacturing steps are split across different buildings so no single person can copy an entire process.

---

🌐 2. Western counter-intelligence involvement

Because EUV technology is classified as strategic, Zeiss's supply chain is monitored by Germany's BfV (domestic intelligence) and often coordinated with the Netherlands and U.S. under export-control programs.

Employees are vetted, and there's close cooperation with NATO-aligned cybersecurity agencies to prevent data exfiltration.

---

🧬 3. Why stealing the designs wouldn't be enough

Even if someone did gain some data:

The mirror fabrication requires atomic-layer polishing, exotic coatings, and metrology instruments that don't exist anywhere else outside Zeiss.

Replicating that environment would take billions of dollars and decades.

It's not like downloading blueprints — the precision and alignment are achieved by machine-to-machine calibration using Zeiss-only tooling.

---

🕵️ 4. Documented espionage attempts

Dutch intelligence (AIVD) confirmed in 2021 and again in 2024 that Chinese actors targeted ASML and its suppliers for industrial espionage.

So far, no evidence indicates successful penetration of Zeiss's EUV optics program — only lower-level theft related to older DUV technologies.

---

So while China has motivation and resources to attempt infiltration, Zeiss's combination of security, compartmentalization, and unique expertise makes successful theft of its crown-jewel technology nearly impossible in practice.

Analysts classify global "tech choke points" under strategic industrial targets.

Typically, the list includes:

1. TSMC (Taiwan) – chip fabrication

2. ASML (Netherlands) – EUV systems

3. Carl Zeiss SMT (Germany) – EUV optics

4. Tokyo Electron (Japan) – wafer equipment

5. Applied Materials (U.S.) – chip process equipment

[Partially generated by ai, always verify ]