DANEGELD

“It is always a temptation to an armed and agile nation

To call upon a neighbour and to say: —

“We invaded you last night–we are quite prepared to fight,

Unless you pay us cash to go away.”

So begins Rudyard Kipling’s poem, Danegeld. It was a foreboding lesson, and all too accurate of today. What began as raids in the 10 century continues on today. A different group demanding it, but the strategy is the same.

Today’s Danes use shame, intimidation and ridicule to gain their gold. The threat of actual violence is not mentioned – in fact, the rules of the game seem to indicate that actual use of violence robs you of points. Instead, the leaders threaten boycotts, protests and – worse – damning headlines in local and national press.

Often the victims of this attention are bewildered and befuddled. What did they do? Often there isn’t any actual guilt to assign; they are just a convenient wall to paste the message on.

Appeasement never works. Appeasement. Never. Works.  APPEASEMENT. NEVER. WORKS.

A little hesitation. A little waffling. A little committee study. And the game is lost.

If ever you are faced with such demands, cry not to lawyers. Lawyers, by their very training seek to smooth issues, to compromise – often to capitulate with misdirection. “Ha Ha! We’re giving in, but let me make it look like we’ve won!”

Don’t seek advice from the book keepers. Thier job is simply to tell you if you have the money for tribute; not to advise for or against paying it.

Instead, you need to Man up; Cowboy up; Put on your Big Girl panties.

You need to say no. And not just no, but HELL NO!! WE WON”T PAY!

An early American president, faced with ransom demands against American shipping, replied by sending a squadron of war ships. A leading newspaper of the day supported the presidents actions, with the banner headline, “Millions for defence, but not a cent for tribute!” 

That headline needs to fly again.

America was born of a pugnacious people, a rebellious rabble who demanded that their right to self-determination WOULD be recognized around the world. We’ve fought wars on that premise, and lost millions of citizens – some before they could even vote – supporting that ideal.

And when modern-day brigands shout in our faces, demanding retribution (whether in cash or recognition), our response had best be NO!

Otherwise, you’ve lost before you can even begin to fight.

This started with the first stanza of a poem: it’s only fitting to end it with that same poem. Pay particular attention to the last stanza. It is a harsh, but necessary reminder.

Dane-Geld by Rudyard Kipling

A.D. 980-1016

It is always a temptation to an armed and agile nation

To call upon a neighbour and to say: —

“We invaded you last night–we are quite prepared to fight,

Unless you pay us cash to go away.”

And that is called asking for Dane-geld,

And the people who ask it explain

That you’ve only to pay ’em the Dane-geld

And then  you’ll get rid of the Dane!

It is always a temptation for a rich and lazy nation,

To puff and look important and to say: —

“Though we know we should defeat you, we have not the time to meet you.

We will therefore pay you cash to go away.”

And that is called paying the Dane-geld;

But we’ve  proved it again and  again,

That if once you have paid him the Dane-geld

You never get rid of the Dane.

It is wrong to put temptation in the path of any nation,

For fear they should succumb and go astray;

So when you are requested to pay up or be molested,

You will find it better policy to say: —

“We never pay any-one Dane-geld,

No matter how trifling the cost;

For the end of that game is oppression and shame,

And the nation that pays it is lost!”

This I Know

What is the fundamental difference between science and faith?

In Psalm 56: 9 David states, "When I cry out to You, Then my enemies will turn back; This I know, because God is for me."

This I know. That statement is used only three times in scripture, but in each place it refers to a positive evidence based knowledge.

The first place is 1 Kings 17: 24, when the Widow of Zarephath rejoices that God has raised her son.
'Then the woman said to Elijah, "Now by this I know that you are a man of God, and that the word of the LORD in your mouth is the truth." '

Her son was dead. Then he was alive, by the power of God working through His prophet. It wasn't theory; it was fact.

Then again, in Ps 41:11, David again cries out to the Lord for deliverance, and cites a sure knowledge that He will provide it. Further, he states that God will set him before His face.

Science, in it's basic form is a seeking for knowledge. It presupposes that the seeker does not currently have that knowledge or truth. By definition, science is never satisfied. It must seek.

Faith, on the other hand, is not based on hypothetical searchings, but empiric facts. The writer of Hebrews states that it is evidence, factual. As the saying goes, a hundred theories are trumped by one fact.

People are in error when they refer to faith in such a way as to instill doubt.
"You must have faith!" is a despairing cry. But it shouldn't be so.

There's nothing wrong with using science to discover truth. Indeed, the father of modern science, Isaac Newton, claimed science as "Thinking God's thoughts after Him."

But in a contest between realities proposed by science or faith, faith is the clear winner.

This I know.

The Preaching Farmer

The Preaching Farmer

Some people go to college to learn to preach; some go to their fields.

A farmer knows that if you sow wheat, you'll get wheat; you reap what you sow.
And no matter what you sow, there's going to be some tares included. Let them ripen - they'll be easier to pull when they get more noticeable.

There's a time to sow, and a time to harvest. Bring in your sheaves when the time is right.

It's hard to be thankful and bitter at the same time. Remember that the rain that flooded your living room can also water the fields. Accept what's offered, and make sure you are prepared for rain - wherever it falls.

Cows need to be milked even if it is on Sunday. God gave us Dominion, but there's a responsibility there as well. If you accept the privileges, you accept the duties, too.

More life lessons can be learned by looking at a farmers hands that some people will learn in their Bibles. But there's one thing for certain; the more worn either is, the more lessons that have been learned!

LOT'S OF VOICES -- But who are we to believe?

One of the problems a Christian faces in any age is the issue of error. Not just erroneous or false teachings, but wrong practices.

Having grown up in the Southern Baptist church, we had a veritable list - I'm tempted to call it a litany - of prohibited practices. I'm sure you've heard the ditty: I don't smoke, I don't chew; and I don't go with girls who do! Well, that's Southern Baptist to the core.

Now, there are a lot of very good reasons  to avoid tobacco. And it's certainly a good practice to instill in our children. Parents are responsible for the teaching of their children, after all. But really: what's the theological signicance of tobacco? Or alcohol? Or movies?

Truthfully -- none.

The Bible does not speak specifically about any of these topics. An argument could be made (and has) that since tobacco use and theaters did not exist in Jesus' day, then it's a moot issue. Alternately, some have said that anything that is physically or morally questionable should be avoided.

Both are valid points. And both - in this context - are wrong.
Almighty God knew the issues that would face believers in every age, but instead of issuing specific rules in each case (which would likely double the size of the Bible itself), He chose to provide a touchstone.

"Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin." James 4:17

God does not place the responsibility on any group or congregation to proscribe activities. He places it on the individual. An individual who is to remain in close enough fellowship with God to follow His leading.

I don't smoke, chew, dance or watch movies rated R or worse. But that's the prohibition God the Holy Spirit has placed on me. Some do smoke; I encourage them to quit, for the sake of their health. But it would be utterly wrong - even Scriptually wrong - for me to insist they do in God's name. Which is using God's name in vain. And a prophet (or any other teacher) who tells people "God said", when God has not said, has more problems than health issues facing them!

We are inundated by lots of messages today, and social media has increased the volume almost beyond comprehension. But the same guideline exists as it was expressed to the first century Church:

"Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin."

Not your church; nor your relatives, cyber friends or other teachers. What does God tell YOU?
And once you know it, it's your responsibility to obey.

A Tale of Two (types of) Cookies

When is a Peanut Butter cookie, not Peanut Butter? And when is an Oatmeal Chocolate Chip cookie not?
When you use a new recipe!
We had an oatmeal cookie recipe, but were not happy with it. Oftimes, when we used it, we had to add more oatmeal or more flour because the mix was too wet and sticky. It would taste like flour.
So today I used a recipe I downloaded from Cooks.com (I recommend the site). I've pasted the recipe below.
The issue here is that they don't taste like oatmeal cookies. They taste more like peanut butter cookies. So much so, I was afraid I would get indigestion from sampling them (I have issues with peanut butter).
For those trying the recipe be advised that while I doubled the recipe, I only used half the oatmeal called for, with a 12 oz. bag of chocolate chips. And don't try using beaters with this - you'll likely burn them out. It's a very stiff mix.


QUAKER'S BEST OATMEAL COOKIES
3/4 c. firmly packed brown sugar 1/2 c. granulated sugar
1 egg 1 stick butter 1 tsp. vanilla
1 1/2 c. all purpose flour 1 tsp. baking soda 1 tsp. salt (opt.)
3 c. Quaker Oats (quick or old fashioned, uncooked)

Preheat oven to 375 degrees.

Beat together butter and sugars until light and fluffy. Beat in egg and vanilla. Combine flour, baking soda, salt and spices; add to butter mixture, mixing well. Stir in oats. Drop by rounded tablespoonfuls onto ungreased cookie sheet. Bake 8 to 9 minutes for a chewy cookie, 10 to 11 minutes for a crisp cookie. Cool 1 minute on cookie sheet; remove to wire cooling rack. Store in tightly covered container. 4 1/2 dozen.

OATMEAL COOKIE SQUARES: Press dough onto bottom of ungreased 13"x9" pan. Bake about 25 minutes or until light golden brown. Cool completely; cut into 1 1/2" squares. Store in tightly covered container. 4 dozen.

VARIATIONS: Add any one or combination of two of the following ingredients, if desired: 1 cup raisins, chopped nuts, or semi sweet chocolate, butterscotch or peanut butter flavored pieces.

Let it Flood!

I found an interesting map today that I found intriguing. It is a map showing the possible loss of land that a sea level rise could cause. Running from zero to 14 meters (about 46 feet, a meter is 39 1/3 inches long). I found that by zooming in, I could follow the extent of flooding.

To my surprise, A great majority of the United States would not be affected. Some major shipping ports would be inundated, but many of these locations already have buffers against storm surge, so the actual effects would be minimized. Some coastal cities would be covered.

But what caught my interest especially is the number of areas, mainly pleasure resorts of the rich and famous, that would be lost.

Goodbye, Martha's Vinyard. The Kennedy's would have to find a new compound. Bye-bye, Southern Florida. No more hanging chads in Palm Beach, since there would be no Palm Beach, west or otherwise.

Goodbye, New Orleans; in fact, much of lower Louisiana and quite a bit of the Gulf Coast. And while South-east Houston would be covered, most would survive.

And last, but most significant, quite a bit of San Francisco would be soggy. Enough, perhaps, to drop the population there below the magic 200,000 number, which would eliminate Nancy Pelosi's 8th District.

So, while in general I think a rise in sea levels should be avoided, this last convinces me that there is indeed cause for hope and change. After all, as some scientists like to tell us, it was only after the disappearance of the big dinosaurs that the little people - I mean mammals - thrived.

Time to add some carbon to the atmosphere!

http://flood.firetree.net/

True cause (but little known) of American Conflict

Most people don't realize it, but grits is what caused the the war between the states. Southern states tried exporting hominy grits (you know, it's bleached with sulfuric acid?) and once the northern states had ONE TASTE, they banned importation of it.

Well, southern states persisted, even going so far as to smuggle grits in bales of cotton. It soon became a shoving match, with one side trying to make more outrageous claims over the other side. States Rights entered the argument, with southern states claiming they had a right, under the Constitution to sell grits to everyone, and northern states, under the auspices of the federal government, claiming the Protect and Defend clauses. Somehow slavery got in (maybe because that what the poor unfortunates were fed? explains a lot of their politics, now!) and from that point there was no return to sanity.

Even today it threatens to split families (my OWN SON claims to like them!) and I foresee another outbreak in the near future

Some politicians, notably democrats, are claiming grits are good for you (an undisclosed part of the Health Care debate that leaked out). That is bound to get a lot of people stirred up. Already there has been a lot of angry denouncements at Town Hall meetings.

So for the cause of Liberty and freedom, avoid the topic of Grits. Like politics and religion (and this can claim both) some topics should be avoided for peace in the community.