The Near Misses - Listing #32 - #26 On My Jersey List

So here we go. These are all of my jerseys that were very close to making the cut of the top 25. I have listed all of those that are within 2 points. Here are all the 78s and 79s in my collection, in reverse order - 32 up to 26.

#32: Philadelphia Flyers White Reebok Premier Winter Classic Jersey

Jersey Type: 17. It’s a Reebok premier, so this one is set in stone.

Jersey Condition: 19. I’ve only worn this pristine jersey a couple times. It looks new.

Logos: 17. I do like the Flyers logo and scheme, but it can’t go higher than 17 here, as there are numerous ones I like better and rank higher. Yet, a 17 is a good score.

Personalization: 0. Well, it’s a blank, what can I say? Now, if I were to personalize this jersey with a fair to decent player, it would be knocking on the door of the top 10. If I were to personalize it with a really good player, it leaps into my top 10 - as it should. Imagine a Chris Pronger on the back of this jersey. That would be a solid 8 and put it at an 86. That would put it at #6 on my list. But for now, it remains blank.

Color Scheme: 8. I like the orange, white, and black color scheme they have going in Philadelphia, and I especially like that they are making more use of the orange these days. Orange, black, and white isn’t the best though, in my opinion, so it gets an 8.

Tradition/History/Longevity/Rarity: 17. It’s a classic team, but not original 6. That being said, it has to get an extra point or two here simply for being a Winter Classic jersey, even though the Flyers immediately made this jersey their standard road jersey in the years following the Classic in Boston.

Total Score: 78

#31: New York Islanders White CCM 4 Hamrlik Jersey

Jersey Type: 15. It’s a CCM replica. Enough said.

Jersey Condition: 18. It’s in really good shape, but I bought it used and it’s been worn a few times. Overall though, no flaws, so 18 seems right here.

Logos: 16. I like the Islanders logo and scheme (other than the orange thing they trotted out in the mid 2000s). It’s not great, but it’s still a pretty decent logo and scheme. I like the Flyers logo slightly more, so 16 here for the Isles. They also have some interesting shoulder patches on these jerseys. It’s like an orange and blue bar code. Different, to be sure, but it works.

Personalization: 6. Roman Hamrlik has been around forever it seems. He’s a good solid defensive defenseman. A 6 might be a small slight here, but he’s definitely not more than a 7 here. I went with 6, since he’s certainly above average. Anyone that stays in the league that long has to be.

Color Scheme: 8. Pretty much similar to the Flyers. Orange, white, and navy blue this time. Not too bad, but not the best either. They do well with it on their white jerseys - and their home blues.

Tradition/History/Longevity/Rarity: 15. The Islanders aren’t an original 6 team, but they’ve been around for some time and had a sweet run of Stanley Cups back in the early 80s before Gretzky, Messier, and Coffey and the Edmonton Oilers took over. 15 works here for me. It’s not a rare jersey by any stretch and the tradition, history, and longevity don’t rival some other teams.

Total Score: 78

#30: Detroit Red Wings Red CCM Home Jersey

Jersey Type: 15. A standard CCM replica. Nice jersey.

Jersey Condition: 19. This one is in great shape. It looks new.

Logos: 18. I like the Winged Wheel. Hate the team, but that’s irrelevant. I’m trying really hard to be objective here! It’s a good classic Original 6 logo with staying power. One of the best in the league.

Personalization: 0. As we speak I’m getting this one personalized with a 24 Probert. He’s gotta be worth 8, as he is the best goon in NHL history. Not a Hall of Famer though, so I can’t go more than 8. This jersey rockets way up the list with the personalization.

Color Scheme: 9. Well done. Really well done. They do the 2 color look just about as good as you can in Detroit.

Tradition/History/Longevity/Rarity: 17. Original 6 home and away jerseys get a standard 17 in this category. This one is no different. Slap a Probert on the back and give it 8 more points and this guy shoots up into the top 10. I am anxiously awaiting the completion of it. If I went with Yzerman, Gordie Howe, or Nick Lidstrom I would have to add 10. I just wanted a Probert. How can you not?

Total Score: 78

#29: Vancouver Canucks Blue CCM Vintage Stick and Rink Jersey

Jersey Type: 17. CCM Vintages get 17 here. They’re a good heavy jersey; well made.

Jersey Condition: 18. I got it new and have worn it a fair amount. It has no major flaws - it’s just been worn a fair amount.

Logos: 17. I like the old simplicity of this logo. It’s not top notch, but it’s pretty darn good. 17 is a good number here.

Personalization: 0. It’s blank, so it gets el zippo. Bruce has this same jersey with Luongo on it. I can’t imagine that one not hitting his top 20, but we shall see.

Color Scheme: 8. I like it of course, but on the other hand, blue, green, and white isn’t the greatest combination. Thankfully, they minimized the green on this jersey (not a fan of blue and green combo) and ended up with a jersey that is a majority dark blue with white. 8 is right here.

Tradition/History/Longevity/Rarity: 18. This one has to get a high score, it’s a throwback jersey, although the Canucks recently trotted out a similar version of this jersey as their alternate jersey. By no means can this score perfectly, but I’m certainly not afraid to slap a big number on it here. And I did.

Total Score: 78

#28: Montreal Canadiens White Reebok Premier Away Jersey

Jersey Type: 17.It’s a Premier, so 17 is the set in stone score here.

Jersey Condition: 17. I got this brand new and it now has some light staining on it. For some reason, white Reebok premiers tend to pick up dust and stains like it is their job. Other than that, this one is pristine. I need to give it a good cleaning and see if the score here cannot go up. If it does, this jersey is in the top 25.

Logos: 19. Anyone that argues that the Canadiens C with the H is not one of the best logos in the NHL needs to have their head examined. I don’t think it’s the absolute best logo in the league (Bruce, I think, does), but it’s definitely top 3 in my book. 19 all day on this one.
Personalization: 0. I really should slap a player on this one and disrupt my top 10.

Color Scheme: 9. I’d give it a 10, but I can’t, since I am of the firm opinion that the Canadiens look better with the horizontal striping around the jersey (like on their home reds). So, 9 it gets. The red, white, and blue works. That’s probably why it’s a common scheme in the NHL.

Tradition/History/Longevity/Rarity: 17. I gave all the Original 6 standard jerseys a 17 here for consistency. The only thing they aren’t is rare, but the tradition and longevity for them are unrivaled.

Total Score: 79

#27: Chicago Blackhawks Black Pro Player Mid 2000s Alternate

Jersey Type: 16. This is one of those heavyweight Pro Player jerseys that I love. 16 is the number that Bruce and I agreed upon for the Pro Player.

Jersey Condition: 18. I got it used, but there really isn’t a thing wrong with it. It’s just been worn. Love this jersey. Did I mention I am a Blackhawks fan?

Logos: 19. I would give it a 20, but I won’t. I think the two best logos in the NHL are the Indianhead of the Chicago Blackhawks and the Maple Leaf in Toronto. The only thing holding me back from slapping a 20 on this one is that I think the Hawks logos look best on red or white. Those two jerseys both got 20s in this category.

Personalization: 0. Sadly, this one is blank. It would be sweet with Patrick Sharp and the assistant captain’s A on it, right?

Color Scheme: 9. I love the Hawks color scheme. The way they use it is done to perfection. However, the red and white versions of this jersey are better than the black one. Thus, this gets a 9.

Tradition/History/Longevity/Rarity: 17. It’s an Original 6 alternate jersey that looks exactly like the regular jerseys. Easy 17 here. I’m interested to see where Bruce’s black jersey here lands. He’s got it personalized with the captain, Jonathan Toews.
Total Score: 79

#26: San Jose Sharks White Reebok Premier 14 Cheechoo Jersey

Jersey Type: 17. Reebok Premiers score 17.

Jersey Condition: 19. This one is in great shape. I got it brand new and have only sported it 5 or 6 times. It’s essentially new.

Logos: 16. The Sharks logo is OK. It’s actually pretty good, but it’s not top of the line as far as NHL logos go. So, a 16 seems right here.

Personalization: 7. Jonathan Cheechoo would get a 5 or a 6 from me here if it weren’t for one season where he potted 50 goals. The 50 goal season is enough to bring him up to a 7. Other than that one season, he didn’t do much.

Color Scheme: 7. It’s not a bad color scheme, but the addition of the golden orange-ish color as a highlight brings the scheme down a point in my book. My favorite Sharks jerseys ever are the original ones they skated with back in the 90s. Don’t get me wrong, the golden orange-ish highlight actually works with this jersey. But it’s not the greatest color scheme in the world. 7 is OK.

Tradition/History/Longevity/Rarity: 13. It’s the Sharks. First of all, the franchise is what, 20 years old or so? Secondly, what have they done? They’ve went on a run of playoff appearances, but they’ve garnered a high seed and choked more often than not. I love this jersey. It’s sharp looking and personalized, but it’s a near miss to the top 25.

Total Score: 79

Those are all of the near misses. All of them are excellent jerseys in their own right and many would surely vault up the rankings if they were personalized. Time will tell on the final rankings of these jerseys.


Hockey Jerseys! How I Rank Them

One of my favorite hobbies, as well as pastimes, is the sport of hockey. I never actually played organized hockey, but we played a lot of local ice rink hockey and pond hockey growing up. But I’ve always been a fan of the sport. What better trophy is there in sports than the Stanley Cup? What other sport openly allows players to police themselves with legal fighting within the game? A buddy of mine and myself are going to stack up our top 25 jerseys against each other and see where they come out. It should be a pretty close race. This first post is going to lay out my rating scale for jerseys and give you an example of how I would rate a jersey.

My rating scale is a numerical value assigned to 6 different categories that add up to an aggregate score of 100 points that I deem to be important in the worth of a hockey jersey. Without further adieu, here is my rating scale I have concocted.

Category #1: Jersey Type: 15 Points

As you know, there are many clothing manufacturers and not all of them are the same quality. The same is true for hockey jerseys. Here are my rankings.

To score a perfect 15 in this category, a jersey must be an on the ice authentic. Sadly, I don’t own any of these, and Bruce I believe has only one. Thankfully, there are some pretty high quality replica jerseys out there. Jerseys that would score a perfect 15 in this category are the current NHL on-ice jersey the Reebok Edge, as well as older on-ice versions, such as a CCM Ultrafil, CCM Authentic, or Koho Authentic. These jerseys are the highest quality and almost always come with a fight strap.

The next rung down the ladder are the top notch replica jerseys. The current Reebok Premier is a good one. I have a bunch of these as will be shown when I reveal my ranking list. I also assign CCM Vintage jerseys, CCM/Reebok replicas (that’s one jersey they made for a short time when the NHL was transitioning from CCM to Reebok), and the excellent heavy duty Koho replicas with the vented sides. Jerseys in this category are not authentic, but they’re good. I also chuck in good old replica CCM jerseys and pro player jerseys here. I give jerseys in this category 13 points a piece - only a 2 point deduction.

I slot the overseas CCM jerseys in a 12 point category along with the good knock-off jerseys.

I assign 11 for Maskas and 10 for Starters. Both are lesser quality.

I also reserve another category for other jerseys made by other companies. I have a Finland national jersey made by who knows who. So, I assign a numerical value based on its quality.

Category #2: Jersey Condition: 15 Points

The condition a jersey is in is a big deal.  I leave a little room for subjective play in this category, but not much. If a jersey is brand new with the tags still on it, it gets a 15. And that is the only way it gets a 15. Since I wear my jerseys (yes, all of them), I only have one of these right now. 

If a jersey is in pristine condition and is mint, I give it 13-14 points, depending on just how flawless the jersey is. These jerseys will have no noticeable flaws and will, for all intents and purposes, look pretty much new.

If it is in good to very good condition, I’ll slap it with 11-12 points. The jerseys here might be just worn from age or have some minor blemishes, but nothing major. They’re in nearly excellent condition and to the untrained eye, not viewing the jerseys up close, they will appear to be nearly new.

If a jersey is in OK condition with some blemishes, I’ll give it 8-10. If it has some noticeable flaws, it scores 5-7 in the fair range. It takes a pure rag to score between 1-4 in the poor range. I have a couple of these, but rest assured, they’re nowhere near my top 50.

Category #3: Logos/Layout/Scheme: 20 Points

This is where it starts getting subjective. In this category I look at how the logos used on the jersey, including front patch, shoulder patches, and other “special” patches, and how they work with the jersey. I score them based on the logo itself as well as how it works with the overall layout of the jersey. Essentially I take the entire collection of patches on the jersey and grade them as a whole. I don’t dock points from a jersey for having only one patch (the Montreal Canadiens normal home and away jerseys have only one, for instance), but I may add points to a weaker jersey if it has some sort of special patch(s) on the sleeves or chest.

This tends to get subjective because there are certain logos and patches I like a heck of a lot more than others. I tend to favor simplicity, although I’m biased towards traditional logos and such. Original six teams get a high nod from me. I love the Chicago Blackhawks, Montreal Canadiens, and Toronto Maple Leafs logos and layouts - and even the Detroit Red Wings (even though I despise the Red Wings). If you want a non original six team that I like regarding their logo, look no further than the Calgary Flames. I think the Flames have put out some excellent jerseys over the years. I can’t stand the new metallic arena football looking jerseys with gaudy logos. I don’t like the logos of the Nashville Predators or Carolina Hurricanes.

I put a big number on this too, because with hockey jerseys, looks are important.

Category #4: Personalization: 10 Points

Of course, the majority of my jerseys are not personalized and have no name or number on them. They will score a 0 in this category. I didn’t want to put too big of a number on this category, since it could then skew the rankings too much for my liking. For instance, I could have a personalized jersey of the Carolina Hurricanes or something (I don’t) end up being ranked higher than a sharp looking Winter Classic jersey with no name or number on the back. But in this system with a low number on personalization, that won’t happen.
So how do I score this? Fairly simple, really. If the player on the back is a Hall of Famer or an All-Time Great, the jersey will get a 9 or a 10. A jersey with Wayne Gretzky or Mario Lemieux is an obvious 10. I’ll give a 9 to other Hall of Fame players who are not in the Gretzky/Lemieux class.

A current NHL star or excellent player will get a 7 or 8 from me in this category. Not only do I take into consideration how talented the player is, but also if they’ve won the Cup, performed in the playoffs on a high level, and things like that. I may make an exception for a player that has been playing for many years in the league and is still playing - but only if that player is a slam dunk Hall of Famer. I may give that one a 9. For example, I have a Capitals Alex Ovechkin jersey. By anyone’s standards, love him or hate him, he’s a superstar in the league now. He gets an 8. I also have an old Canucks alternate jersey with Todd Bertuzzi on it. Bertuzzi is a good player, but he’s an example of a 7 for personalization.

A good NHL player who is average to above average past or present gets a 5 or 6 here, while a common player will get a 3 or 4. I have a penguins Winter Classic jersey with Max Talbot on the back. Even though Talbot has some serious sentimental value for me (he scored 2 goals in game 7 at Detroit in the Cup finals and the Pens beat the Wings 2-1), he still gets a 5. He’s a 3rd line player who has never been considered to be a star in the league.

Personalization is important and really completes a jersey, but that does not mean that there will be no blank jerseys (logos and patches but no name and number) in my top 25. A hockey jersey collection is an evolving process and list, but at last count, 7 of my top 25 jerseys are not personalized, although if I did get any of them personalized, it would blow up my top 10 (there is only one blank in my top 10. The first blank jersey makes an appearance in the #7 spot). The blank jerseys that hit the top 25 are excellent jerseys that will be awesome when a name and number are added.

Category #5: Color Scheme: 10 Points

This is quite subjective too, which is why I only slap a maximum of 10 points on this category. Simply put, I take into account not only the colors on the jersey, but also how they use them. For instance, the New York Islanders skate out with blue, orange, and white more or less. That’s a decent color combination, but I prefer the blue home and white road jersey over the orange alternate they trotted out not so long ago. Simplicity and classic color schemes trump some of the newer gaudy foolishness that some teams have resorted to.

Category #6: Tradition/History/Longevity/Rarity: 20 Points

This is the category that separates the best from the best. I take into account the tradition of the jersey here, so I’ll be more apt to score the blue and orange Oilers jersey higher than the navy and copper one they wore for around a decade. I’ll also take into consideration if the team hoisted the Stanley Cup in that jersey, had winning seasons, or were perennial contenders. The history and longevity of the jersey counts here too. Has the jersey been around for 50 years or 2?

Finally, I take into account the rarity of the jersey. If I were ever to get a hold of a Cleveland Barons jersey, that would be super rare. I won’t deduct points for a jersey not being rare if it scores well in the other criteria in this category, but I will add some points to a jersey that scores poorly in the other criteria if it is rare and tough to get your hands on.

Category #7: Wearability: 10 Points

This is a catch-all category. how does the jersey look on? How does it feel?


Lookin' Through the Corridor of Time - Or Not

Without question, one of the biggest battleground texts in the entire Bible between predestinarians and non-predestinarians is Romans 8:29-30. What does this passage teach? Does it teach that God looked through time and then predestined certain individuals based on what he foresaw? Or does it teach that God chose to know certain individuals in a salvific sense and thus predestined them based upon His choosing to know them relationally? There is also a third (albeit rare) interpretation of the passage that holds that the passage is talking only about those whom had lived and subsequently died in Christ before the epistle to the Romans was written. For sake of brevity, I will only be treating the two major interpretations, since the third also defaults to something very similar to the advance prescience view. Does the passage teach an advance prescience of God, who looks through time and then predestines based on what He has seen and infallibly knows? Or does it teach sovereign election here?

The text in question reads, “For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.” -Romans 8:29-30 (ESV)

The battle is fought mainly around the word “foreknew.” This word by itself in our English translations of Scripture can easily be interpreted in either manner to support either interpretation. The problem is that in English we have the words “know” and “knew,” and these words can mean both “head knowledge” as well as “intimate relational knowledge” as well as “personal knowledge.” So the word can be used, and indeed is used, to mean “have knowledge of” as well as “to know relationally” or “to love intimately.” Scripture uses the latter quite liberally. Matthew 7:23 where Jesus says “I never knew you,” is a prime example. It is only when we look at a) what the Greek language states in the original writing, and b) the rest of the passage, does the proper interpretation come to light.

First, if we look at the Greek here, we see that every action word that Paul uses here is what is called an aorist active indicative. In English terms, these are active verbs that occurred in the past that have a permanent significance. Simply put, God is the active agent here and the words foreknew, predestined, called, justified, and glorified are all the actions done by God. God foreknows, God predestines, God calls, God justifies, and God glorifies. And, whoever He has foreknew, predestined, called, justified, and glorified stand in those states as well. Paul’s usage of the aorist here is an interesting choice; most likely used to show that the predestination of God’s elect is as good as done, since it is grounded not in our actions but in God’s actions. This fact alone speaks volumes against the advance prescience view since if this were talking about God’s omniscience the word foreknew would be a noun (and that still could swing to either view depending on interpretation - see 1Peter 1;2 for example), not an active verb; and if it were talking about God looking through time the action would be “looking” or “seeing,” as opposed to “knowing.” But it does not say that God looked and saw the actions of persons and that is His basis for predestining them. Simply put, if parts of speech have any say in the proper interpretation of this passage (and they do), the meaning is clear. God is making a choice to know certain persons. Those he foreknew. God chose to know people. God does not need to look through time to see and find out something that He already knows. He is God. He does not learn from outside sources by observation.

Second, if we look at what the verse is saying it creates major roadblocks for the advance prescience viewpoint. We can point out from the beginning of the verse that the passage is speaking about persons, not the actions of persons. It does not say “That which he foreknew.” Thus, it is not referring to God looking and seeing actions of persons. Namely, it is not saying that God looked and saw that certain persons would exercise faith. Faith would be an action on the part of the person. But the passage says that God knows persons themselves.

Next, we can point out that there is a problem with the advance prescience view here when we analyze the relationship between “called” and “justified.” Advance prescience advocates would claim that God calls everyone. Yet the passage here says that “…those whom he called he also justified…” Therefore, we can conclude that the persons who are called are also justified, which means this can only be referring to the regenerate and not the unregenerate, since the unregenerate are not justified. It cannot be referring to what theologians refer to as the external call, which is the preaching of the Gospel. Not everyone who hears the Gospel is justified. In fact, most people reject it.

We also can point out that predestination precedes calling in this passage. If calling preceded predestination, then a much better case could be made for the advance prescience view. We could then assume that predestination is based upon calling (even though the external vs. internal call would still be a problem). But the text places predestination first, meaning that it precedes calling. Since those who he predestines are called, justified, and glorified, we can then conclude that only those who are predestined are called. This creates the idea that not everyone receives this internal call. The advance prescience view claims that persons are predestined based on the faith that God knows they will exercise. But we can also conclude from the passage that not only are all the predestined called, but all the predestined are also justified and all the predestined are also glorified. Since justification is by faith, we conclude that only the predestined will ever have faith, since clearly from the passage, only the predestined are justified and only the predestined are glorified.

Herein lies the biggest fundamental difference between all forms of non-Reformed theologies and Reformed theologies. Reformed theology sees faith as the result of God’s predestination, not the cause of it. R.C. Sproul sums up the Reformed view. “Reformed theologians understand the golden chain as follows: From all eternity God foreknew His elect. He had an idea of their identity in His mind before He created them. He foreknew them not only in the sense of having a prior idea of their personal identities, but also in the sense of fore loving them. When the Bible speaks of “knowing,” it often distinguishes between a simple mental awareness of a person and a deep intimate love of a person. The Reformed  view teaches that all whom God has foreknown, He has also predestined to be inwardly called, justified, and glorified. God sovereignly brings to pass the salvation of His elect and only His elect.

Thus far, I have dealt directly with Romans 8:29-30, but I would be remiss to not point out that the advance prescience view suffers from drastic topical theological problems as well. Namely, if the advance prescience view is true, God is looking through time to get information on who will follow His plan of salvation. This is more than just a small problem. In short, this view has God gaining information from His creatures. This means that God, in a real sense, gains information from us. Gaining information is called learning. Does God learn from his creatures? I certainly hope not, because that means God gains information and learns from sources outside of Himself! That, I would assert is to make God imperfect and in all actuality, destroy His omniscience. If this is true, is God really perfect in all His ways and attributes?

We can also rightly raise the question: “What’s the point of predestination?” If God looks through time and sees who will come to Him and then bases His predestination on that, why does God need to predestine at all? Whether or not God predestines, these same people are going to come to Him either way, right? Advance prescience advocates may respond to this in one of two ways. The first way is to respond that God predestines the plan of salvation. He predestines those that will come to Him to glory. The obvious problem here as it pertains to Romans 8:29-30 is that it conflicts what the passage is saying. The passage is clear: “Those” He foreknew. And then, “those He predestined He also called…” It is speaking of persons here, not of a general plan. The advance prescience advocates would be correct to point out that the goal of predestination is the glorification of his people. They are to be conformed to the image of Christ. However, the passage indicates that God predestines persons to this goal, as opposed to predestining the goal and then the persons based on His prescience, knowing they will cooperate with Him.

The second manner in which the prescience folks can answer here is that God looks through time, sees who will cooperate with Him, and then predestines these people to hear the Gospel and be called to Christ. But this defaults to sovereign election and no prescience advocate should use this argument, as it proves the Reformation doctrine - the exact position they are kicking so hard to disprove. Does God predestine an advantage to the elect because He knows they will cooperate? How could this be anything other than sovereign election?

The main objections to the Reformed view of Romans 8:29-30 (as well as Romans 9 and Ephesians 1:3-14 and 2:1-10 for that matter) are that this view makes God arbitrary as well as a capricious despot. I will allow R.C. Sproul to answer this charge as the final word in this entry:

“Paul reminds the Romans of what God had declared to Moses: ‘I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion.’ The principle is that of the sovereignty of God’s mercy and grace. By definition grace is not something God is required to have. It is His sovereign prerogative to grant or withhold it. God does not owe grace to anyone. Grace that is owed is not grace. Justice imposes obligation, but grace, in its essence, is voluntary and free.

The ground on which God chooses the objects of His mercy is solely the good pleasure of His will. Paul makes this clear: ‘Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, just as he chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love, having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will…’ (Eph 1:3-5)

That God chooses according to the good pleasure of His will does not mean that his choices are capricious or arbitrary. An arbitrary choice is one made for no reason at all. Though Reformed Theology insists that God’s election is based on nothing foreseen in the individuals’ lives, this does not mean that He makes the choice for no reason at all. It simply means that the reason is not something God finds in us. In His inscrutable, mysterious will, God chooses for reasons known only to Himself. He chooses according to His own pleasure, which is His divine right. His pleasure is described as His good pleasure. If something pleases God, it must be good. There is no evil pleasure in God.”