The Mosque

post 083

I was recently asked my opinion regarding the Mosque at Ground Zero.
It is so hard to present my view without it being misunderstood by those who do not follow Jesus the Christ, because there is soooo much unfamiliar groundwork that must apply.
Therefore I know this is long for a blog, but here goes;

There have been Muslims living peacefully in America as long as we have been a nation,
But we have also been in military conflict with Islamic nations just as long.1
How are both these possible?
Clearly Witchcraft is opposed to the Christian values upon which this nation was established, yet because of the freedoms granted to mankind by his creator, Witchcraft also has a right to practice, and is well established in America… within the social limits we all fall under equally. The local coven cannot kidnap my dog and sacrifice it to Satan. Not because the act is a practice of religion, but because it is a violation of the social laws regarding property, animal rights, and socially destructive activity.
Yet legal confusion regarding right and wrong has begun to fall on America.

Recently a Muslim man who violently raped his wife in New Jersey, was found not guilty because his religion allowed such conduct.2 (eventually overturned)
Honor killing is now the new level of legal debate in America. 3
These are indications of how far we have fallen, and not an indication of our intended form of Government.

Christians are instructed to love everyone… even those who hate them! 4
The laws and concepts of American tolerance are based on those instructions.
But since we are now a whole generation of God rejecters, our current understanding of what that means is corrupted to believe tolerance is a virtue.
A more popular phrase held dear by many is; “un-conditional love.”
But even our Creator has conditions on the actions of those he loves.
He may in fact love us with unconditional love, but that in no wise eliminates the heavy consequence for doing wrong. “whom the lord loves he chastens” 5

“Tolerance is the virtue
Of a man without conviction”
Bill Gothard

God, nor Jesus, nor any of his apostles who wrote the bible, have suggested Christians are to tolerate everything. Rather, Christians are to stand boldly and firmly against evil in all forms, yet love the evildoer as a valuable creation of God. The desire of the Christian is to persuade the evildoer to abandon his evil ways and follow the ways of Christ, but never force them to comply, which is contrary to the “free will” concept.
The Christian can distinguish between the person, and the conduct.
The Civil government is created with the burden of responsibility to deal out chastisement and even punishment for destructive social behavior, but not for personal beliefs. These governmental guidelines, follow the principles of the Christian God.

Our founders did not fear Witchcraft or Islam in America because the power of Christian love among its citizens was able to successfully overcome the general evil, as light overcomes darkness. Those bent on evil to the degree of evil social conduct, were charged and convicted of crimes against society. Not on religious grounds, but on social grounds under the guidelines of faith based laws. In this way moderate Muslims were also free to build mosques and worship as they desired, so long as they did not infringe on the rights of others. Radical Muslims were identified by their conduct, and removed from society, as are all people with socially destructive ways.
This is not a dichotomy, this is responsible civil law based on Christian principles.

Today, Americans are confused and no longer understand how to separate one, from the other, so lets provide a simple example we can understand;
Sex within the marriage is very good, but rape is very bad.
Because of the problem of rape, should we make sex unlawful?
Of course not; One is not the other, though by definition they appear similar.

We have foundational laws against Congress prohibiting the free exercise of religion.
Our land is now full of Islamic Mosques, which are religious.
Islamic Terrorism is religious.
Terrorism is bad.
Removing the establishments of Terrorism has nothing to do with prohibiting the free exercise of religion, even if that establishment is a mosque.
That does not suggest removing all Islamic Mosques.
This is a no brainer. Any third grader can tell the difference.

As free as Americans have always believed themselves to be, we have always had laws against insurrection. 6 (US Constitution Article 1 Section 8)
Dichotomy?
Hardly.
We have the right to make all sorts of public declarations against the actions of our government, but there are even limits to that when it crosses the line to insurrection.
What makes the difference?
The security of the Nation. For only in this security do we have the freedom to openly criticize it!

Congress does have the lawful ability to prohibit the free exercise of terrorism…
Even if it is religious. This is the same idea why people claiming to be Christian are not allowed to blow up abortion clinics they accuse of murdering babies.
This is a no brainer for a reasonable mind.
But for some reason today our Congress, our President, nor our Courts, can see the differences between such concepts.
Why?

* * *
This strange reality can only be explained from a spiritual perspective.
The following Scripture is talking to wayward followers of the Creator God, such as present America;

Romans 1:18 “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;”
Verse 21 …”Because, when they knew God, they did not glorify him as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,…”

Deuteronomy 28:15 “…it shall come to pass, if thou wilt not hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to observe to do all his commandments and his statutes which I command thee this day; that all these curses shall come upon thee, and overtake thee:…”

Then there is a very long and detailed list of curses that will happen.
Including the following related to this present topic:

Verse 20 “The LORD shall send upon thee cursing, vexation, and rebuke, in all that thou settest thine hand… to do, until thou be destroyed, and until thou perish quickly; because of the wickedness of thy doings, whereby thou hast forsaken me.

Verse 43 “The stranger that is within thee shall get up above thee very high; and thou shalt come down very low.”
Verse 48-50 “Therefore shalt thou serve thine enemies which the LORD shall send against thee, … and he shall put a yoke of iron upon thy neck, until he have destroyed thee. The LORD shall bring a nation against thee from far, from the end of the earth, as swift as the eagle flieth; a nation whose tongue thou shalt not understand; a nation of fierce countenance, which shall not regard the person of the old, nor shew favour to the young:…”

These passages are God speaking.
No matter how we try to avoid such evils, if we deserve them, they will come, just as he promised.
That our government protects the terrorists that are committed to destroy us, under the religious freedom clause, is pure insanity, but unexplainably conforming to these promises of doom as a result of our own conduct!

That we refuse to call evil, evil is our confusion.
We secretly release child molesters into our neighborhoods,
We fully allow illegal aliens to all our societies benefits, while restricting our citizens.
We violate the Constitution’s amendment to prohibit the free exercise of Christianity, but we protect and support the rights of the religion committed to our destruction.

But is it fair to identify all Islamic Mosques as bent on our destruction?
Is there actually a difference between “moderate and radical Muslims?
One must examine the religion that rules their life to find out.

According to the Bible
Moderate Christians are offensive to God
The moderate Christian is
Unloving, self-centered, angry, hateful.
God promises his wrath on moderate Christians.7

According to the Qur’an
Moderate Muslims are offensive to Allah
The moderate Muslim is
Unwilling to blow himself up
Does not hate everyone
Doesn’t want to kill infidels.
Allah promises his wrath on all moderate Muslims.8

Radicals are willing to use force, (Jihad) while moderates prefer persuasion. (Da’wah) 9
Radical or Moderate, followers of Islam believe Islam must take over the world leaving no opposition.

* * *

If the Federal Government, can decide what kind of religious establishment is acceptable, and where that establishment can be located, then they can control ANY establishment of religion and where it can be located regardless of the will of the people; Mosque, Church, or Temple. The fear of this is the reason for the very significant and very encompassing First Amendment:

“Congress shall make no laws respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for redress of grievances.” Bill Of Rights - 1791

So how important is this Bill OF Rights?
The preamble tells us;

“The conventions of a number of states having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficient ends of its institution.” Preamble to the Bill Of Rights

The Constitution was quite good at specifically determining the boundary of power the Government was to have, but out of concern that its authority might still be misconstrued or abused, the Bill Of Rights was written.
The very first Article, suggesting its standing of importance, is largely regarding religion, with the freedom of speech following close after.
As I have shown in many of my previous posts, Religion was viewed as the most important factor in the success of the Government established by the Constitution.

“Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure if we remove their only firm basis?” Thomas Jefferson - carved in stone on the Jefferson Memorial

“A conviction in the minds of the people these liberties are a gift from God and not to be violated but with his wrath.” Thomas Jefferson

“It is impossible to rightly govern a nation without God and the Bible.”
George Washington

Remember these people who wrote these documents, had just miraculously succeeded in a virtually hopeless cause, by declaring in writing a determination to throw off the bondage to the well established, and might of, the British Crown only 14 years earlier.
That written declaration was the Declaration Of Independence - 1777

The great suffering and bondage to the King of England was sourced in “The Divine Right of Kings” philosophy. This is the notion that God established the King, and therefore he must be obeyed as God’s voice and desire toward the people.

Although this general idea can indeed be concluded through misapplication of scripture, it became quite clear to the people that the idea had been misconstrued and abused by the Crown.
It is quite amazing to think that a people who had felt forced to rebel against a religious tyrant, would at the same time desire to establish a new form of government so steerable by religion.
But as seen in their writings, quotes and foundational documents, these people already had a very deep understanding of the true religion. They could see and understand the difference between a truth, and a corruption of that truth. The religion was good and vital while the abuse of it was unacceptable.

Now all these years later, through direct violation of the Bill of Rights, the Government has misconstrued and abused the power granted by the Constitution:

1. The first step toward that abuse was the Government Court’s removal of the Bible from schools. This began the ignorance and then abandonment of necessary religious understanding to maintain our system.
2. The next step was the intentional Government driven Separation of Church and State. Directly hindering Christian values from further steering our Government.
3. The third step was prohibiting the free exercise of religion. But not just any religion, the focus has been specifically targeting the religion of Christianity, which had already been nationally weakened through lack of education.
4. The most recent step, is respecting the establishment of the Islamic religion.
5. The next step, which has already begun, is introducing into schools the re-writing of history to disparage our Christian foundations, and glorify the new religious establishment of Islam.

The clear goals through these steps is not relegated to speculation, the enemies of the American system have already told us their goals before beginning the process.10

* * *

Simple facts:
Islam has a long history of building Mosques on conquered soil.11
Islam is the self-declared religion, which intends to kill all Americans.12
Islam is the undisputed religion, which drove the planes into the Towers.
Now Islam is attempting to build a Mosque on that site.
The Imam of this proposed Mosque has clear Anti-American views.13

But apparently by our laws of freedom, we are powerless to stop the religious establishment of the Mosque on Ground Zero, right?

If this was but a religious Mosque, we should not resent the freedom of others to worship as they choose, and we should swallow our resentment for their crass choice of location.
Their right should be very precious to all Americans, and should be protected even to very great cost.

* * *

But this should not be the focus of the topic regarding this Ground Zero Mosque.
Many have already exposed enough serious concerns that this mosque is a front for promoting terrorism, that the validity should be seriously investigated. 14
Further, Islam as directed by the Qur’an, requires violence against all those who do not follow Allah, 15
and this Mosque has been eagerly approved by the founder of Hamas, the Terrorist organization, without a single word of distancing by the Imam.
The topic of concern then, should be regarding terrorism.
Prohibiting terrorism is clearly within the scope of government authority.

The fact that the present American Government is in the practice of violating the laws regulating that government, is but one serious complication as to why this is not being investigated. Why our tax dollars are used to respect and promote this particular establishment of religion is another serious question. 16 Yet, without actually writing laws favoring this establishment, Congress has carefully avoided breaching the letter of the law.

* * *

On yet another point of concern;
Of all places to build a mosque, where is the sensitivity of the Muslims building this Islamic mosque, on ground hallowed by the deaths of thousands of Americans murdered by radicals of the Islamic religion.
Compassion, regret, and sorrow, are none of the character shown by this construction.
Did the Japanese build a temple in Pearl Harbor following their attack?
Did the Americans build a church in Hiroshima following their attack?
The location of this mosque is not the actions of a religion with the desire to “build bridges” as declared.17
This action IS in keeping with their self-declared desire to conquer or destroy America,18
and their history to build mosques on conquered soil.

* * *

Lets look at this from the other side;
Let us suppose that self declared followers of Jesus Christ, hijacked 2 commercial jets and flew them into the Dome of The Rock.

The very first thing you would see is a public separation of Christians from those men.
Christians do not condone this type of action, nor do they tolerate it from their members.

To support this, a quick and shallow, or deep and serious search of the Christian Bible condemns such actions, even against their enemies. “thou shalt not murder” Exodus 20:13 comes to mind. One of the 10 foundational laws, “…Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” Romans 13:9b “for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.” 13:8 “Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.” Matthew 7:12
Acts of honorable war, in war time is not the same as terrorism. Because the goal of war is to stop the enemy from progressing an evil, while the goal of terror is simply to terrify, if not to perform an act of hate for hate’s sake.

The very nature of Christ is truth.
This is why we see thousands of examples in history, such as; “The Fox’s Book Of Martyrs” where Christians were willing to face death, rather than lie about their faith.
A Christian cannot denounce his LORD, even as self protection, and expect to remain in favor with his God.
Deception is not the nature of Christ. Christians are not authorized to act un-christlike, or to join themselves with those who are.
Revenge too, is not the nature of Christ. This is why we do not see Christians filling the streets in violent rage working up a blood lust against Muslims after 9-11. Instead our laws attempted to discover the source of the act, and then declared war against that source in the attempt to stop its progress.
granted, in today’s Godless America, I confess the waters have become quite muddy, and I cannot vouch for the honor of our Government in their conclusions.
But this is precisely why we do see American Christians crying “fowl!” at the godless conduct of our Government, because having turned godless, it has also become untrustworthy and corrupt. This is the reason for the 8-28 Glenn Beck rally this year.
Christian Americans are deeply concerned regarding a government gone rogue.

But where are the Muslims crying “Fowl!” at the Terrorist acts of “radical” Muslims?
Where is the Imam declaring a separation and public rebuke to the founder of Hamas who praises the establishment of this Mosque?
The Qur’an allows for such conduct, and of a truth, the terrorists are the truest Muslims, to receive the greater rewards, according to the Qur’an. 19
Yet even at this level of evil conduct by some Muslims, Christians are not searching out to destroy all Muslims in America.
This “hope for the best” is the foundation behind “Innocent until proven guilty”.
A well-meaning Muslim with peaceful purposes is quite welcome to live safely among his Christian neighbors, even after 9-11.
Only when his conduct is shown to have destructive intent do we take action to protect his neighbors…. As we do with all men, of all religions.
This is the same mentality of the Jews, because our God is the same.
Yes, we will always have the corrupt, and misaligned among us. But their wayward actions will be openly condemned among us.

* * *

There is an event, when the Scriptures identify the wicked as sure of destruction.
That is said to be; “when their iniquity is full.” (Genesis 15:16)

Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible:
Iniquities: 1647 and 5771 (the combination of both words)
1647 Gershowm, from the root 1644;
1644 garash; a prim root to drive out from a possession; especially to expatriate or divorce.

5771 avon; from 5753; perversity, moral evil.
5753 avah; a prime root; to crook, literally or figuratively; do amiss, bow down, make crooked, commit iniquity, pervert, do perverse, do wickedly.

Once an entire nation become so committed to wickedness that it cannot tolerate the un-wicked around them, they become actively antagonistic toward good.
This is the general definition the scripture calls; “The fullness of iniquity”
At this point God turns his attention toward their destruction, and has on occasion used his followers to do this work, through war.
This is the historical foundation of the American attitude toward war.
Viet Nam is the first action, which I am aware of, where America lost her perspective of this foundational approach to war. We became mired in dark politics, and our honor was thoroughly tarnished.

Even though the Qur’an teaches;
“Believers! Wage war against such infidels, as are your neighbors, and let them find you rigorous” (Qur’an 9:124) “Slay or crucify or cut off the hands and feet of the unbelievers, that they be expelled from the land with disgrace and that they shall have a great punishment in world hereafter” (Qur’an 5:34)
Many practicers of Islam have still not come to the fullness of iniquity as their extremists counterparts have.
They remain socially honorable and a benefit to their community by a moderate practice of their faith. Unfortunately for them, as long as they remain offensive to Allah by their non committal to the commands of the Qur’ran, 15 they remain socially acceptable in the American communities they choose to live. Our form of Law protects them equally to their freedom of religion, as it should and must! This is the Spirit of Christ, not Allah.

All this to attempt a simple explanation at why I feel the Muslim desire to build a Mosque at ground Zero is indication of Evil against America, and not an acceptable form of worship that must be protected by our nations right to free exercise of religion,
while at the same time feeling we must continue the firm grip on our laws prohibiting congress from prohibiting the free exercise of all religions.

Terrorism is not to be protected under our religious protection laws. And when Islam commits terrorism, it must be actively and quickly treated as terrorism.
Combined with the evil intent of Islam to consume America, the words of Imam Rauf and his wife showing intent to bring Sharia Law to America is evidence enough for me to label him unworthy to build a Mosque on U.S. soil.13

As long as Americans are decidedly Christian, our laws protect us from the control of oppressive religions such as Sharia Law. But once we abandon our Christianity, Our same laws enslave us to those forceful religious controls, which we allow to come.
This is because our Laws are established on the people’s freedom of will.
The choice is ours to make; The tolerant benevolence of Christianity, or the demands of Islam’s Sharia Law.
One can hardly blame Islam for wanting to easily conquer a people who have cast off our only firm basis, as Jefferson so prophetically stated.

* * * * * * *
(Some have told me the links on this blog don't work, so I have included the web address after each link for you to copy and past into your browser.)

1 Barbary wars - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Tripoli

2 Muslim wife rape - http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/07/sharia-in-new-jersey-muslim-husband-rapes-wife-judge-sees-no-sexual-assault-because-husbands-religio.html

3 Jihadwatchorg on Honor Killing - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tr2MrmlX4Kg&feature=fvsr

Honor killings:
An honor killing is defined as the murder of a girl or woman who has committed an act shaming or embarrassing her family. The family shows the community that it has reasserted control by killing the woman, thereby making "harm to reputation" a defense for murder.[59] The Koran does not mention honor killings, and many Muslim scholars and commentators say that honor killings are a cultural practice which is neither exclusive to, nor universal within, the Islamic world.[60]According to law professor Noah Feldman in the New York Times, Islam "condemns the vigilante-style honor killings that still occur in some Middle Eastern countries."[61]
On the other hand, honor killings are justified under Islam in Saudi Arabia.[62] Saudi textbooks state that it is permissible to kill adulterers. In April 2008, a girl was killed by her father for talking to a boy on Facebook. However Most honor killings require some sort of a sexual bodily interaction. [63]Honor killings are justified as a part of the culture in Jordan.[64] In 2001, a bill demanding stiff penalties for honor killings was rejected by parliament on the grounds that: "it would encourage adultery and create new social problems." In 2005, honor killings accounted for one-third of all violent deaths in Jordan. There is no punishment for honor killings in Iraq. [65] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_Islam

4 Matthew 5:44-45 “But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven:…”

5 proverbs 13:24, Hebrews 12:6, Revelation 3:19

6 in·sur·rec·tion/ˌinsəˈrekSHən/
Noun: A violent uprising against an authority or government: "opposition to the new regime led to armed insurrection". Merriam-Webster

7 Romans 1:18 “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighreousness:”
Revelation 3:15-16 “I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.”

8 “Unless we go fourth, (for Jihad) He (Allah) will punish us with a grievous penalty, and put others in our place” Qur’an 9:39

9 Da‘wah (Arabic: دعوة‎) usually denotes preaching of Islam. Da‘wah means literally "issuing a summons" or "making an invitation", being the active participle of a verb meaning variously "to summon, to invite" (whose triconsonantal root is د ع ى). A Muslim who practices da‘wah, either as a religious worker or in a volunteer community effort, is called a dā‘ī, plural du‘āt. A dā‘ī is thus a person who invites people to understand Islam through a dialogical process, and may be categorized in some cases as the Islamic equivalent of a missionary, as one who invites people to the faith, to the prayer, or to Islamic life. [1]

10 "Do you think when two representatives holding diametrically opposing views get together and shake hands, the contradictions between our systems will simply melt away? What kind of a daydream is that?"
- Nikita Khrushchev

"America will fall without a shot being fired. It will fall from within."
- Nikita Khrushchev

"Education is a weapon whose effects depend on who holds it in his hands and at whom it is aimed."
- Joseph Stalin

"The first requisite for the happiness of the people is the abolition of religion."
- Karl Marx

"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Lenin

"The press is our chief ideological weapon."
- Nikita Khrushchev

"When we hang the capitalists they will sell us the rope we use."
- Joseph Stalin

"I once said, "We will bury you," and I got into trouble with it. Of course we will not bury you with a shovel. Your own working class will bury you."
- Nikita Khrushchev

"Democracy is indispensable to socialism."
- Vladimir Lenin

"Democracy is the road to socialism."
- Karl Marx

"When one makes a Revolution, one cannot mark time; one must always go forward - or go back. He who now talks about the 'freedom of the press' goes backward, and halts our headlong course towards Socialism."
- Vladimir Lenin

"The goal of socialism is communism.
The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all private property."
- Karl Marx

"Fascism is capitalism in decay."
- Vladimir Lenin

"The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to socialism."
- Karl Marx


11 Islam, the religion of Peace:

Mosques on conquered soil - http://soccerdad.baltiblogs.com/archives/2010/08/22/islam_has_a_history_of_building_mosques_over_other_religions_ruins.html

12 Qur’an 9:29 “Make war upon such of those to whom the scriptures have been given as believe not in (Allah) and have forbidden His Apostle, and profess not the professor of truth, until they pay tribute out of hand, and they be humbled”
Qur’an 2:191 “Kill the disbelievers wherever you find them”

13 Hanity exposes Imam Rauf - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GCEpVbs5320&feature=related
, Imam Rauf investigated by Fox - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJ-yCsshV_s

14 A leader of the Hamas terror group yesterday jumped into the emotional debate on the plan to construct a mosque near Ground Zero -- insisting Muslims "have to build" it there.
"We have to build everywhere," said Mahmoud al-Zahar, a co-founder of Hamas and the organization's chief on the Gaza Strip. 'WE HAVE TO PRAY': Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf (inset) got support from Hamas co-founder Mahmoud al-Zahar (above left, with Gaza political leader Ismail Haniyeh), who spoke on WABC Radio yesterday in favor of Rauf's proposal to build an Islamic center in this downtown location two blocks from Ground Zero.
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/hamas_nod_for_gz_mosque_cSohH9eha8sNZMTDz0VVPI#ixzz0y3L6fu4W
Jihadwatchorg on religion of Peace - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFuJz0hA5rc&feature=related

15 Qur’an 9:123 “O you who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty unto Him”

16 “Rauf is in the middle of a Mideast trip funded by the U.S. State Department that is intended to promote religious tolerance. He told a gathering Sunday at the U.S. ambassador's residence in the Persian Gulf state of Bahrain that he took heart from the dispute over the mosque, saying "the fact we are getting this kind of attention is a sign of success." government funded religious promotion - http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/71433

17 "We want to build bridges," Khan said. "We don't want to create conflict, this is not where we were coming from." building bridges - http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/71433

18 youtube death chants - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHoVuFlrcjA
“Because They Hate” by Brigitte Gabriel, DVD “Obsession” by obsessionthemovie.com

19 “And never think of those who have been killed in the cause of Allah as dead. Rather, they are alive with their Lord, receiving provision” Qur’an, Al-Imraan:169 The goal of Jihad is to gain salvation. We are all aware of the promise of 70 virgins to the shaheed (martyr) “Allah has bought from the faithful their persons and their belongings against the gift of paradise; they fight in the way of Allah; they kill and get killed; that is a promise binding on Allah” Qur’an 9:110

You Don’t Argue With Weeds

post 082

An analogy:

The Democrat’s grandfather bought a small parcel of land,
He worked hard to cut the trees, level the terrain, divert the creek, and till the ground in laborious preparation for a family farm.
He did not have much, couldn’t buy a tractor, or a backhoe, so he bought a plowblade, harnessed his horse, and did his work the hard way.

And his labor paid off.
In time and hard work, he had a small farm, large enough to feed his family, with a little extra to sell at market.
He eventually saved enough to buy a tractor, which made his work easier and quicker.
This made his life better, allowing him to make more profit, with which he built a farmhouse and barn.

The democrat’s father never knew the hard work that went into making the farm.
But he grew up working the land which was prepared before his time.
He was able to easily feed his family, make good money and send you to college.

Away at college, you did not work the land.
At school they taught you that farming was too hard, didn’t pay enough, and took too much time. The proof was seeing your tired out old man, now too worn out to continue farming.
But having run out of money for school, you returned home to find your farm had overgrown with weeds from lack of tending.

With your college degree, you are able to see that farming clearly is an idiot’s plan, as nothing but weeds grow, it produces nothing of value, The collapsed barn has no function, the house roof leaks and the property tax is high. The farm your grandfather passed on to you is clearly worthless to you!
You conclude that your grandfather was an idiot!


The Republican follows the same general path; as their grandfathers had differing view, but both understood the need for the farm to feed their families.
The only difference is at the end the republican returns to the farm, and the democrat neighbors see him out in the fields arguing with the weeds!


America, the life sucking weeds have grown up in our land as both democrat and republican politicians.
We both know things are not good.
But the argument is in how we see what we are looking at.
The true life potential of the nation is the same today as it was in your grandfather’s day, But by neglect, the nation your grandfather worked hard to pass on to you has deteriorated;
The government, as the tractor, is broke.
The trees, as the political obstructions to success, have grown back.
The weeds, as self serving interests, fill the land.
The spring, as the religious compass, has stopped up.
What you see today is not proof that the system was flawed, but by neglect has reverted to its natural state of corruption.
You no longer have the benefits of your grandfather’s labor.
Most of his beneficial labor has been lost in neglect. Now you must do again, what he did the first time to prepare the land for producing life-giving sustenance.
You cannot live the easy life of your father, because the preparation is now unavailable.
Have the courage of your grandfather, to use what little you have, put in the labor, and reclaim the land so that it can produce the goods which it did for your grandfather.
Your grandfather was willing and able to put in the hard work, because he had a vision of the better life he could pass on to you. Are you really so self-centered to care not for your children?

A wise man does not argue with the weeds!
He plows them under and gets to the business of planting a valuable crop for a better harvest.
While the liberal media preaches whatever they want, the conservative media is infatuated with “fair and balanced” as a virtue.
Does the wise farmer negotiate with the weeds? Or give them equal time to preach their virtues?
No, he determines what is the good plant, and what is the undesirable.
It is not a negotiation.
The liberal mindframe understands this.
The conservative mindframe is still very much confused,
And looks as foolish as the farmer out in the field arguing with his weeds!

The vote approaches; till the weeds under with your vote!
Cut down the trees of hindrance with those you put into office.
If you do not know for certain and sure proofs that your congressman is not a weed,
Till him/her under!
But planting uncertain seeds and hoping for wheat is just as foolish.
This is the labor part.
No longer can you benefit from the good and fruitful organization your grandfather gave you, Your laziness has spent up the benefits, now you must get seriously involved, read up on your candidates, learn what policies are profitable for the nation, and which are life sucking.
Or are you already too lazy and passive to be free?

Vengeance

post 081

A follow up from the previous post regarding Justice and Tolerance.
In that post we discussed God’s ordained Justice, and we reviewed how “turn the other cheek” is not in conflict with the principle of Justice. But only hinted at how this relates to vengeance. Probably the hardest thing for me to do is to write on a topic in so few words, to fulfill the spirit of a blog!

Define Vengeance;
According to the Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, The Hebrew word Vengeance, used in scripture is defined as; “feminine of the Hebrew word for Revenge; avengement, whether the act or the passion.”
The Hebrew word for Revenge, is defined as; “a primary root; to grudge, i.e. avenge or punish.”

So how do we distinguish between a Just penalty, and revenge or punishment?
We again are able to understand what the founders and early lawmakers had in mind when we understand the scriptural perspective on the topic.
Our early lawmakers established that revenge was not an acceptable social conduct, but Justice supplied by the judicial branch of our government is.
Why?
Because this is a basic principle laid out in the Christian Bible,
And because this basic principle makes logical sense.

God has not suggested vengeance is not deserved, nor warranted, nor justified.
But God has declared that it is not ours to deal out as individuals.
The first mention of vengeance in the Scriptures is found in Genesis 4
This is the story after Cain killed his brother Abel.
In 4:11-12 God Judges Cain for his murder before man’s social laws were established, and his judgment was as follows;

“And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brothers blood from thy hand; When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth.” Genesis 4:11-12

God’s judgment was not on Cain alone, but on his entire lineage from that point.
It has been suggested, that the Gypsies are the lineage of Cain. Though I have not verified this, it gives you the idea presented, whomever Cain’s lineage actually is.

Then Cain appeals to God, crying that his punishment is too harsh, and because of it, anyone who finds him as a vagabond (or his people) will kill them.

So God establishes the first law regarding vengeance, and by doing so, makes a distinction between Justice and vengeance.

“And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, (meaning his lineage) vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold….” Genesis 4:15

We see that Justice was done unto Cain by God.
But we also see that justice has a distinct limit, not to be crossed. As shown in the previous post, Justice is a 1:1 ratio. (Leviticus 24:20-21)
We also see in this passage, that if Cain’s descendants are killed because of the results of justice, they should be avenged at the ratio of 7:1
That is a very steep consequence! And a sure deterrent from harming these nomadic people, for the sins of their farther Cain.

So we see that according to God, vengeance, or revenge, is a justifiable retaliation in at least some cases.
But then the story of Cain’s lineage continues until we find a descendant of Cain who misused this protection of the threat of vengeance;
“And Lamech said… Hearken unto my speech: for I have slain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt. If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold.” Genesis 4:23-24
While God proclaimed the right of vengeance for Cain to be 7:1, Lamech presumptuously proclaimed his own right of vengeance, and since he was proclaiming, he figured; Why not up the ratio while he was at it, to 77:1?!
Lemech’s wickedness has very significant and long lasting consequences we will not get into here, but the point is twofold;
First, that it is God alone who is allowed to proclaim the right of vengeance.
And second, man will tend toward a desire to corrupt a righteous proclamation.

So we see the next time vengeance is recorded in Scripture, is in the Law book of Deuteronomy 32:35
“To me (God) belongeth vengeance, and recompense; their foot shall slide in due time: for the day of their calamity is at hand, and the things that shall come upon them make haste.”

God claims the right to distribute vengeance many times in scripture, as recognized by the writer of Psalm 94:1 “O LORD God, to whom vengeance belongeth; O God, to whom vengeance belongeth, shew thyself.”
And the entire Psalm is a very pained cry to God; “LORD how long shall the wicked, how long shall the wicked triumph? How long shall they utter and speak hard things? And all the workers of iniquity boast themselves?” Psalm 94:3-4
But unlike our present government, who claims the right NOT to take action at the border, God promises in the previous verse that "the evil will get theirs" as it where, in the proper time.

Through the study of this scriptural concept we understand that Justice cannot always be had when we want it. Through the study of History we understand at least in part, why that is.
Our Founders also understood this as presented in Proverbs 29:2 “When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice: but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn.”

In this light, our founders understood that if they could create a nation in which the righteous were in authority, Justice could be had as ordained by God.
1st Chief-Justice of the Supreme Court, September 1777;
“Gentlemen- It affords me very sensible pleasure to congratulate you on the dawn of that free, mild, and equal government which now begins to rise and break from amidst those clouds of anarchy, confusion, and licentiousness which the arbitrary and violent domination of the King of Great Britain had spread throughout this and the other American States… Will it not appear extraordinary that thirteen colonies, divided by a variety of governments and manners, should immediately become one people, and, though without funds, without magazines (ammunitions), without disciplined troops, in the face of their enemies, unanimously determine to be free, and, undaunted by the power of Great Britain, refer their cause to the justice of the Almighty, and resolve to repel force by force- thereby presenting to the world an illustrious example of magnanimity and virtue scarcely to be paralleled?” *(resource?)

How can I not add here the huge volumes of text proclaiming loudly that our founders both relied on God alone for their existence, and publicly gave him praise for it!?
If ever we needed to read the many writings of our founders regarding their faith, we need to now, for the purpose of bolstering our hope, our faith, and our encouragement that we can expect God to hear our cries and help us in our present battle against the evil that is overtaking our great nation, under God, indivisible… so long as we choose to be those things.

But where then is the validation for revenge?

Revenge, is Justice delayed.
Revenge is how Justice is taken when Justice is not available.
But God, in his great wisdom knows that revenge is the embryonic fluid of Bitterness, and Hate.
And so, for our own health, God has claimed the right of vengeance for himself.
He does not declare vengeance is unwarranted. He does not even demand you refrain from it. He simply declares that it belongs to him, and his followers choose to surrender it to him.

Our founders, and early Law makers, added all this up to conclude that the people are not designed by their Creator, to privately manage revenge. The French revolution is a fair example of vengeance in the hands of the people. Their vengeance against an oppressive government resulted in the very bloody rampage and killing of many, many innocents.
Why was the result of our own revolution from Great Britain so different? Because our revolution remained under the administering of our divinely appointed authority, as our fledgling federal government.
In this way vengeance was avoided, and Justice was accomplished. Read the Declaration of Independence it is not long and the spirit in which they reluctantly entered war was evident.
But when the wicked rule, and Justice is not available, God begs us to leave vengeance in his wise care.
He does not suggest we should write it off as “uncollectible according to God”
God assures us that he will repay! Romans 12:19, Hebrews 10:30 and many others.
Holy Bible online

So is God unjust for claiming the right to be vengeful when he does not allow it from us?
“…Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance?...” Romans 3:5
“God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world?” Romans 3:6
It is my opinion, that God delays judgment upon evil men and nations for the purpose of building a case for vengeance. Justice is to be delivered at 1:1. But there are those evils so great that by delaying Justice, the law of vengeance can be applied at the ratio of 7:1.

All this is explained very well in the real life existence of Israel today.
Hezbollah of Lebanon, and Hamas of Gaza, continues to fire hundreds and hundreds of rockets into Israel, The entire Muslim world has declared over and over their desire to "wipe them from the map", Yet Israel continues to “turn the other cheek” while Justice cannot be had at this time.
Sure they get stung again and again until they lash back in a short fit of defense, but they are clearly not the aggressor. They do not possess the spirit of vengeance.
The long history of the Jews shows this trend of horrible abuse, and a retaliation-less demeanor.
According to the Scriptures, God is delaying justice for a number of reasons, it is my opinion that one primary reason is to make way for the law of vengeance. Deuteronomy 32:41, 43, Isaiah 34:8, 35:4, 47:3, Jeremiah 50:28, and many others.
Is this evil on God’s part?
No.
Vengeance is not evil, it is only a vehicle through which evil can take root.
God alone is capable of administering vengeance without being infected by the seeds of evil which would take root in our hearts, were we to take vengeance ourselves.

God Begs you, for your own good, to give your justifiable right for vengeance to God.
Our original government has therefore, in the spirit of obedience and governance by God, made laws discouraging taking vengeance, and a legal system to deal justice in its place.
This is the Christian, and the Christians government’s stand on vengeance.

Our foolish lawmakers today are giving away our nation's authority to administer Justice, and we will soon be powerless to beg God for anything but un-administered vengeance after a long and miserable existence, because we, like the Jews, officially and in practice, have now rejected our Messiah.

Can you yet see how our government, and Christianity are so completely intertwined with deliberate intent by our founders?
Can you yet see the two forces of Good and Evil at play in the nations of the earth?

The Christianity of our founders is as practical and applicable for us today, as it was for them. Their great and amazing accomplishments are wonderful signs indicating they had the right idea.

It is time to choose on which side of this struggle you will stand, by your life choices and conduct, as well as your declaration.

Capitol Punishment

post 080

A reader has made a very good and deeply controversial question that should be answered.
How do we reconcile; “vengeance is mine…says the LORD” with “an eye for an eye”?
This post then is an attempt to answer in a small way, that very big concept;

Regarding Capitol Punishment.
If we recognize the original intent of our nation’s system of law was based upon the concepts found in the Holy Scriptures, then we can evaluate what the founders had in mind, by understanding what the scriptures have to say on the topic.

“an eye for an eye” is a concept of Old Testament law found in the body of Leviticus 24 establishing a foundational concept of justice;

Leviticus 24:20-21 “Breach for breach, eye for eye, tooth for tooth: as he hath caused a blemish in a man, so shall it be done to him again. And he that killeth a beast, he shall restore it: and he that killeth a man, he shall be put to death.”

This establishes the proper judgment for a crime.
This proper judgment is Just. And this Just "payment" actually protects the criminal from abuse beyond what is Just, while at the same time establishes what Justice is to be expected for the harmed. This is the Scriptural principle on which our founders established the 8th Amendment;

"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."

It is the very next verse of this scripture, which establishes the concept of Blind Justice,
Leviticus 24:22 “Ye shall have one manner of law, as well for the stranger, as for one of your own country: for I am the LORD your God.”
This topic was covered in the previous post, Justice is no longer blind

So how does this Capital Punishment concept, fit with “turn the other cheek”?
First let me make clear that Jesus, as the Son of God did not come to change the principles of God.

Matthew 5:17 “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.”

One of the foundational values of scripture is its unchangeable perfection.
Unlike documents of other religions, the Holy Scriptures are flawless and unchangeable.
So Jesus could not have come to change the values or concepts found in the old testament, but what he came to do was show us the actual intent of the original laws.
It was this more complete “Christian understanding” of scripture through combining the Old and New Testaments which our founders used to establish this government.

In Matthew 5:28 Jesus said;
“Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: But whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also….” And the concept continues for several verses.

So according to the foundational law of none contradiction, and according to Jesus' own words, we must understand this New Testament concept through the principle presented in the Old Testament established law.
Justice says a guilty man must pay a Just penalty for his evil.
But Jesus is not dealing with the Justice issue here, he is dealing with the heart of the one injured.
Hatred, Revenge, and Bitterness are internal poison that destroy ones life from within, And Jesus was talking to a generation of people who had taken the Law of Justice, and used it to feed the internal poison.
Jesus wisely used the wording; “Ye have heard…” he was saying; you really don’t understand the concepts of this law, and it was not written to support your hatred.
Jesus was saying we should act from the heart of benevolence, be willing to be wronged, and go willingly even further than the forced wrong to ensure you are on right ground.
His concept he was presenting is summed up in Matthew 5:44;
“But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you:…” And his reasoning is so that we can be the children of God, or as it were, “on the same page as God.”

This does not eliminate Justice.
Jesus' concept does not suggest the rapist be allowed to rape, or the murderer to murder. Again, his topic was not about justice.
His concept only fixes the heart so that justice can be honorable and the evil does not infect you.
If the heart of the one dealing Justice, is gleeful for the punishment given, the evil has already taken root.
If the heart dealing Justice is broken because of the high cost of Justice, Justice is still carried out because it must be, but the heart is protected and remains unaffected by the evil of Bitterness and Hatred or the Spirit of Vengeance.

It is for this reason I can recommend a government established DMZ at the Mexican border, and a government established Militia with orders to shoot to kill all persons within that DMZ.
Not because I want to see people killed. On the contrary, it would break my heart. But because Justice must be done for the protection of our nation against invasion, and for the protection of our children against drugs etc.
I would greatly promote signs and loudspeakers warning of the intent in an effort to encourage the Mexicans to stay home, but once on our soil, the evil has become too great to cast off Justice.

And it is for this reason that I can at the same time, have great compassion on the poor and hopeless Mexican who would love to come to America to find a better life.
I would see great programs, even at the expense of American tax payers, which would make the lawful reception and immigration and naturalization of well meaning Mexicans more successful and expedient.

My two views are not in conflict, but united in the protection and betterment of America. As in my previous post, I can warmly welcome someone through my front door in the day, and shoot the same individual coming through my window at night.

God's declaration; "an eye for an eye"
Is not in conflict with; "Vengeance is mine"
It is established by it!
Justice is not vengeance, and the establishment of "Justice by government" is a necessary principle laid out in Scripture to avoid vengeance.
Regarding man's role: Justice keeps our nation healthy. Vengeance destroys it.

Our founders understood all this.
Or present government does not.

Who Is Evil?

post 079

Is a bartender evil for selling alcohol?
How about the Bar owner?
The manufacturer?
No?
How do we determine who is evil?

If a man kidnaps a young woman and takes her into the woods to kill her,
Is he evil?
Yes?
Why the difference?

Are these two scenarios different because the one victim helps, while the other does not?
Actually a high percentage of young girls molested in this way are college girls who are attacked by dates or people they know, so the differences between the two appears to be shrinking.
Don’t both lives end up destroyed? And don’t we have to factor in the number of lives ultimately destroyed by them both?
The worst serial killer only destroys a few dozen, while alcohol kills millions.

Are these scenarios different because the destruction of the one is less sure than the other? Maybe the girl might get away, so is the uncertainty really different?

Com’mon people, are we really that confused in determining who is evil?
Isn’t the truth of our determination more related to defense of our lifestyle, or those of our friends?
Most Americans drink, and a high percentage of those are often drunk, and a good share of those, are actually drunks.
But these are our friends and families.
And so we create a social “rule” making alcoholism acceptable, only openly opposing it at the extreme, when the life is fully ruined.
But why are we so willing to watch the destruction, while refusing to identify the evil element in the case of alcohol? Is alcohol the criminal here? Like the knife that kills the girl? Or is there a person involved in both cases.

A party animal young woman might live a very promiscuous life, yet when she is raped we want to burn the evil guy who attacked her.
But if a drunk guy drives off the road to his death, why do we not search diligently for the evil one who set that up?

Don’t get all worked up, I am not advocating anything, but we really need to evaluate our moral foundations that determine right from wrong.
So I ask again,
Who is evil?

We can only determine the answer, when we determine who gets to decide.
Does the Judge decide?
Do the Legislators decide?
Is that all there is to evil? Some obscure rule like a speed limit that one week makes a certain speed illegal and punishable, but the next it’s not?

Isn’t evil actually something real, and not just an opinion?
How can we know?
We can begin by asking who or what is harmed in the act, if any.
If the speed limit law is broken, who or what is harmed?
Not the potential of harm, but the expected results of the event.
In fact, no one or nothing is harmed any more or less, if the speed limit law is created or removed. Therefore we can reason that the creation of the law does not make something evil.
But is anyone harmed if a girl is raped or killed?
Regardless of the legislation, or even public opinion in the matter, some one is harmed in the event.
This is the nature of evil.
It is this nature that our original laws were designed to battle in our society.
Our original laws understood how to identify evil.
In fact according to our original laws, no crime could be committed or prosecuted, if no harm was done or expected.
The laws were not created to make something evil, but to make clear the public cost of doing evil in our society.

So if evil is actually real, by the definition that someone is harmed by the evil, can appointed men really make something evil or not evil by writing legislation?
Just because those governing our society create laws making abortion legal, does that eliminate the harm done to the unborn?
It does not.
Legal or illegal, the child still dies.
This is the definition of evil.

Who is evil?
The person who willingly and knowingly acts in a way which is harmful.

Can a businessman sell another human being the elements which he knows will do him harm, and not be participating in evil? You might be able to sell the idea to your fellow man, but how are you going to explain you actions to the Maker when you stand before him?
He is the ultimate judge of evil.
And suddenly, we are using reason and understanding to personally evaluate our actions in spite of what the present law says. We are now thinking.
See how this works?

In this way we see that the social laws are not what should regulate our conduct.
Nor should they try to.
The laws are supposed to be written to discourage those tending toward evil, and to authorize society to administer the means to limit evil in that society.
In this way the laws are there for the protection and good of the people who are themselves avoiding evil conduct.
This is the meaning and intent of a government, of the people, by the people, and for the people.

Today, outside the will of the people, our governing body is making laws which do us harm. Laws which are enslaving us. Laws which avoid defending us from evil.
This is evil.
If they do so knowingly and intentionally, they are evil.
If they do so without knowledge, and unintentionally, they are used of evil.

Now take this approach when evaluating every decision, every view, every law, and forget which party presented it.
In this way you will be better able to know if a law is good or bad.
You will be better able to determine if the legislator making the law, is good or bad.
But even more important, you will be better able to make your own life choices regardless of laws declaring something lawful, when in fact it may be evil.


* There are always those who misunderstand or misapply a concept, and so I state;
Capitol punishment, and lawful judgments do harm someone, but the judged has been found to deserve the punishment or judgment by the evil which they have done.
Yet the punishment is none the less approaching the border of evil by its nature. For this reason, our government has been given the authority to deal out this punishment, to avoid the burden being placed upon the people. It is for this reason that we do not condone retaliation, or revenge, because justified as it may be, the act is too close to evil for the citizen to take upon themselves without stepping into the realm of evil.
It is for this reason that God writes: “Vengeance is mine; I will repay, says the LORD.” Romans 12:19