This morning.

This morning, I received a call notifying me that I was booked as a curtain-hanger and computer specialist at Carl's house. So, off I went.

While I was installing some curtain-rod hangers, I made use of a drill. Little Carl kept shouting "Naaaaaaaaaa!" He was imitating the sound of the drill, I finally realized. He'd come up and try to grab my tools, then I'd pull the drill's trigger and he'd back away, shouting "Naaaaa!"

Claire was describing the process of feeding her baby doll salad, and giving her a bath. After she finished the virtual bath, Claire promptly told me "She smells really good now." She's so funny!

Now I'm wasting time on the computer, instead of studying for my biology exam. But who wants to learn about how we went from murky polluted algae in a huge ocean of deadness to hugely complex life-forms? All that I'm learning in the first part of my biology course is evolution. It's really sad.

I'm sorry i don't have any pictures. Both of my cameras are malfunctioning. As soon as I'm able to get a new camera or repair my older ones, there will be ample pictures. Until then, "Tere!!"

Getting a bit rusty..

It seems like I've forgotten how to blog.

I haven't, and (of course) I have many excuses. I will forbear from listing any, however, because I'm sure you will have none of them.

As you see, some of my widgets have expired. I need to pay for them again, but I haven't had any time to do anything like that. Much less type as many blog posts as I should.

My resolve, as always, is to update frequently. Nothing else remains but to see that my resolve is not very strong. lol..

I've been confused, recently, in my head. Seems as though questions go unanswered for ages. Important uncertainties hang over my head, and i feel like I have nowhere to go. However, I was reading in 1 John 2 recently, trying to help someone out who didn't know anything about our beliefs, and I got a good amount of help from that chapter. It spells things out pretty clear.

My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.

He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.

He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

Brethren, I write no new commandment unto you, but an old commandment which ye had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word which ye have heard from the beginning.

Again, a new commandment I write unto you, which thing is true in him and in you: because the darkness is past, and the true light now shineth.

He that saith he is in the light, and hateth his brother, is in darkness even until now.

He that loveth his brother abideth in the light, and there is none occasion of stumbling in him.

But he that hateth his brother is in darkness, and walketh in darkness, and knoweth not whither he goeth, because that darkness hath blinded his eyes.

I write unto you, little children, because your sins are forgiven you for his name's sake.

I write unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I write unto you, young men, because ye have overcome the wicked one. I write unto you, little children, because ye have known the Father.

I have written unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I have written unto you, young men, because ye are strong, and the word of God abideth in you, and ye have overcome the wicked one.

Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.

For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.

Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.

They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things.

I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth.

Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.

Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.

Let that therefore abide in you, which ye have heard from the beginning. If that which ye have heard from the beginning shall remain in you, ye also shall continue in the Son, and in the Father.

And this is the promise that he hath promised us, even eternal life.

These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you.

But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.

And now, little children, abide in him; that, when he shall appear, we may have confidence, and not be ashamed before him at his coming.

If ye know that he is righteous, ye know that every one that doeth righteousness is born of him. (1 John 2, King James Version)

So, that helps a lot of the world's problems, I reckon.

White House looking for informants..er, spammers!

Take this from Rush Limbaugh.

"I just saw something at RedState.com. Here's the headline: "If you oppose Obamacare, even in casual conversation, the White House wants to know about it." Jeff Emanuel put this up 1:45 this afternoon. "If you see anybody publicly opposing President Obama’s plan to implement a government-centric overhaul of the health care system, the White House wants you to report that person (or persons) ASAP. From the White House website: There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain e-mails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an e-mail or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to Flag@WhiteHouse.gov."

So the White House is asking its supporters, these groupies that hang on their website if they get an e-mail, they hear anybody talking about fishy stuff, disinformation about the health care plan, send their name, send a copy of their e-mail to the White House. Now, the problem with this claim of disinformation about health insurance reform, control of personal finances to end of life care, the White House has gotta understand, people have read the House of Representatives bill. It's all in there! None of this is being made up. I'm going to tell you who this bunch reminds me of. There's a parallel going on in the world right now to this bunch that's running this country and the parallel is Iran. They supposedly had a fair election. The people of Iran didn't think it was fair. They think it was a fraudulent election and they started protesting in the streets. Even the people of Iran, this was too much to swallow, the mullahs were just putting one over on them, they wanted a reform candidate to win, they didn't dig any of this, they didn't think Ahmadinejad was the legitimate winner, they started protesting, and what was the result?

The government went out and started cracking heads, started putting people in jail. Some people have died as a result of government treatment when they were in protests. Now you've got the White House asking people, its groupies, to be informants? Let me read this again from the White House website: "There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain e-mails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an e-mail or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to Flag@whitehouse.gov."

Well, I would hate to see what they're going to get now at Flag@whitehouse.gov. I wonder what kind of e-mails they're going to get now. They're looking for tattletales, they're looking for snitches, they're looking for informants, they want their groupies to tattle on you if you happen to be telling the truth about what's in the health care plan. "The White House has, as yet, offered no explanation of what it is they plan to do with the tips on policy opposition they hope to receive from citizen informers. Jake Tapper pointed out on Twitter this morning, the title of that post on the White House is a quote from John Adams' 1770 'Argument in Defense of the Soldiers in the Boston Massacre Trials.'" So this has happened before in human history. Parents whose minds weren't right, parents who were saying things against the regime, their children were supposed to inform on them. So now the Obama administration is genuinely, legitimately asking for informants."

A bit of fear-mongering going on there, I think, but I'm pretty sure we can get the jist of what Rush is saying. And I have to say I agree with him. He's calling us to vigilante justice, practically. "Tell on your fellow-Americans, citizens! We don't want the truth getting out about my Obamacare plan!"

Refutation of an article by Elmasry

My last post was an effort to prove that Islam is not a religion of peace. (BTW, I'm sorry for the mis-typed link.) I outlined several texts from the Qur'an dealing with violence, some even about chopping FINGERS and TOES and HANDS and HEADS off, to prove that Islam is violent. Even if they are historic, aren't the actions of chopping limbs off rather gruesome and violent? No matter what age or era you're in? It was to no avail. So I'm back to try to offer some humble refutations of an article I was given. The article makes an effort to prove that Islam is indeed a peaceful religion. Make no mistake about it, the article proves it over and again. You can read it by clicking here. Take note that re rarely, rarely makes direct quotations from the Qur'an. He only cites references. I'll show you what he's talking about. Les'see... Mohamed Elmasry says that "the Qur'an repeatedly emphasizes that defensive war -- fighting to protect oneself against invading enemies -- is the only kind of combat sanctioned (2:190 - 191)." Okay, let's look at that passage.

(189) Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors.
(190) And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers.
(191) But if they desist, then lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

So to all appearances, pretty good. If you look at 190, I'd say it already looks a bit questionable. "Slay them wherever ye find them." Persecution is worse than slaughter? Christ said to turn the other cheek to the smiters. Without doubt, Islam is supposed to be more violent or unforgiving than Christianity is supposed to be. That's just so far.

"In numerous other examples, it teaches that the use of force should be a last resort (2:192, 4:90); that normal relations between peoples, nations and states, whether Muslim or not, should be peaceful (49:13); that necessary wars must be limited in time and space (2:190); that maximum effort must be applied at all times to advance the cause of peace (10:25); that whatever means are undertaken to work for peace during a conflict (such as mediation and arbitration) must be attempted over and over again until resolution is achieved (8:61); that freedom of religion must be granted to every one (2:256), and so on."

So, let's see if what Elmasry says is right. First, then, chapter 2 and verse 192. "And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrong-doers." Now that doesn't exactly say that warfare should be a last resort, does it? It says if they desist, then we don't fight. If I wanted to say that warfare should be a last resort, I'd probably say something like "And slay them not, until they have rejected your counsels, threatenings, and promises." You know, something like that. But verse 192 doesn't say anything like that.

But wait. We're not even more than one sentence into that paragraph. But there's more. I'm trying to establish that Islam is no religion of peace. Is a religion that calls for warfare as a last resort entitled to the adjective "peaceful"? I don't believe so. The second text is more or less the same as the first, and I'm going to let y'all look that one up for lack of time. Let's move on.

"Normal relations between peoples, nations and states, whether Muslim or not, should be peaceful (49:13)." Right. Let's quote the verse. "The wandering Arabs say: We believe. Say (unto them, O Muhammad): Ye believe not, but rather say "We submit," for the faith hath not yet entered into your hearts. Yet, if ye obey Allah and His messenger, He will not withhold from you aught of (the reward of) your deeds. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful." Whether misinformation or deceit, Elmasry does NOT have his faith down well. Nor his reading, for that matter. It says "If ye will obey...he will not withhold...your reward." It does not say "Whether thou art obedient or not, thou shalt be treated equally." In fact, here's a passage directly against what Elmasry says. "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." That's chapter 9 verse 29.

I'm completely out of time. Let's hope i get this posted in time. There's so much more, though! I definitely recommend looking deeper than the article. Check out his brilliant references, and you'll see he's greatly exaggerated their messages.

One more thing..Elmasry says something like "Maximum effort must be applied at all times to advance the cause of peace." (Quoting from memory). Well, what's his text?

"(24) And Allah summoneth to the abode of peace, and leadeth whom He will to a straight path. (25) For those who do good is the best (reward) and more (thereto). Neither dust nor ignominy cometh near their faces. Such are rightful owners of the Garden; they will abide therein. (26) And those who earn ill-deeds, (for them) requital of each ill-deed by the like."

So those who do good will go to paradise, and those who don't will be damned. More or less. So again, what does that have to do with maximum effort? Peace at all times? All it says is to do good! And repeatedly (please look it up yourself--I'm not stupid, I've seen the passages; they're there.) the Qur'an says that Allah commands to fight! Fighting persecutors, fighting unbelievers, whatever. As I said earlier, even if the religion has war as a LAST RESORT, it still can't rank in the peaceful religion class. Can't you see this? It's not obscure, hidden, and dark. I hear you saying "It's all out of context!" Regardless of context, some passages are more gruesome, violent, and brutal than others. Take this. And take it in three different translations, if you're worried about that! From Yusufali, Pickthal, and Shakir, respectively, it's Qur'an 8, Al Anfal, at the end of verse 12.

"...smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them."

"Then smite the necks and smite of them each finger."

"Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them."

The people it is talking about are "unbelievers," by every translation. You decide if it's violent for yourself. I don't ever find anything about chopping off the enemy's hands or fingers or toes or heads in the Bible, unless they had commited great acts of sin. Monstrous sinners, and notorious. On the contrary, Christians are told (in Matthew 5)

"Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.
Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.
Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake."

You make the judgment! Is Islam entitled to the adjective "peaceful"?

Proof that Islam is no religion of peace.

The website Islam: religion of peace (and a big stack of dead bodies) has been really helpful and insightful for me. It really exposes how the Mohammedan religion is not at all peaceful. In fact, the religion *is* violence, basically. Take this quote from the above website..

"The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.

"These verses are mostly open-ended, meaning that the historical context is not embedded within the surrounding text (as are nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence). They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subjective as anything else in the Qur'an.

"Unfortunately, there are very few verses of tolerance and peace to abrogate or even balance out the many that call for nonbelievers to be fought and subdued until they either accept humiliation, convert to Islam, or are killed. This proclivity toward violence - and Muhammad's own martial legacy - has left a trail of blood and tears across world history."

Also visit the "Myths of Mohammed" page on the same website. It's really helpful and light-shedding, for lack of a better word.

One wonders what we're coming to, when President Obama has stated "To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history, but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist."

In the immediate above quote, Obama calls out to those who cling to power through corruption and deceit. So he expects their unclenched fist to be a truly unclenched fist? If I were him, and if I really believed that they were prone to corruption and deceit, I'd be very wary of extending my hand, even though they may unclench their fist. These people (meaning terroristic Islamists) aren't to be played with, negotiated with, etc. In my two-cent opinion. Or one-cent, for that matter.