Ok...I've gotta say this...
YES...AKON should be ashamed of himself!
...but so should that "Preacher's Daughter". AKON can always claim he didn't know she was underaged...it ain't like "HE" was checkin ID's at the door.
But SHE knew she was underaged...and she didn't look to me like she was resisting at all...with her legs all up in the air...wrapped around his waist.
Who forced this girl to go to a club that her Father forbid her from going to?
Who forced this girl to lie about her age to get into the club?
Who forced this girl to find her way to the stage and participate in a "dance contest"?
Who forced this girl to lay on her back, raise her legs and spread them for him to simulate sex with her?
Who forced her?
Yes...what AKON did was inexcusable and savage...but she was a willing participant.
If we're gonna flog ONE...we need to flog the OTHER. Justice is fair and impartial.
What say you?
RM
Thursday, April 26, 2007
Sunday, April 22, 2007
Are YOU a "Worker of Iniquity" ?
In the Name of Allah - the Beneficent, the Merciful:
Matthew 7
22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
WORK(ER):
–noun
1. exertion or effort directed to produce or accomplish something; labor; toil.
2. something on which exertion or labor is expended; a task or undertaking: The students finished their work in class.
3. productive or operative activity.
INIQUITY:
[Origin: 1300–50; ME < L iniquitas "unevenness, unfairness", equiv. to iniqu(us) "uneven", unfair (in- in-3 + -iquus, comb. form of aequus even, equal) + -itas -ity]
[c.1300, from O.Fr. iniquite, from L. iniquitatem (nom. iniquitas) "unequalness, injustice," noun of quality from iniquus "unjust, unequal," from {in- (not) + æquus (just, equal)}]
Since a "worker" is one who "exerts effort directed to produce or accomplish something",
And...
Since "iniquity" is essentially "inequality" or "injustice",
Then...
A "worker of iniquity" would be one who "exerts effort" directed to produce or accomplish "inequality" between one entity and another.
In Mathematics, "inequalities" are represented by the symbols...
"<" (less than),
and
">" (greater than).
What Jesus was saying of this class of "Christians" who would be present in the Last Day, is that he would not even recognize them as being of him, because they were not working from his Spirit. They were doing "many wonderful works", but they were doing it from the attitude that they were "greater than" those who were not of their particular order or group. They "worked" to produce or accomplish the idea that they were "greater than" those whom their Master told them to be "servants" of. They created in their minds and "unjust" attitude that they were "better than"...or..."better off than" everyone else, and, because they were operating from an attitude of "injustice" and "inequality", they could only deal with the people unjustly.
"If you're not one of us, then you're "less than" us." ...Workers of Iniquity.
Basically, what it boils down to is "self-righteousness", which is rooted in ignorance...because if they REALLY understood the Message of their Master, they would come to the people as "Servants" and not as "Judges". They tell everyone "Judge not, lest ye be judged"...while they inwardly judge those who don't believe as they do.
No wonder Jesus said, "This people draweth nigh unto me with their lips, but their hearts are far removed from me."
How grieved he must be to see those who claim his name, demonstrating such "iniquity" in thought, word and deed. No wonder it is said that Judgement will begin in the House of God.
All that being said, now go back and replace the name "Jesus" with every other prophet who has a modern-day following, and the same applies.
It is precisely the attitude that "I am better" which makes us "lesser".
Beware.
RM
Matthew 7
22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
WORK(ER):
–noun
1. exertion or effort directed to produce or accomplish something; labor; toil.
2. something on which exertion or labor is expended; a task or undertaking: The students finished their work in class.
3. productive or operative activity.
INIQUITY:
[Origin: 1300–50; ME < L iniquitas "unevenness, unfairness", equiv. to iniqu(us) "uneven", unfair (in- in-3 + -iquus, comb. form of aequus even, equal) + -itas -ity]
[c.1300, from O.Fr. iniquite, from L. iniquitatem (nom. iniquitas) "unequalness, injustice," noun of quality from iniquus "unjust, unequal," from {in- (not) + æquus (just, equal)}]
Since a "worker" is one who "exerts effort directed to produce or accomplish something",
And...
Since "iniquity" is essentially "inequality" or "injustice",
Then...
A "worker of iniquity" would be one who "exerts effort" directed to produce or accomplish "inequality" between one entity and another.
In Mathematics, "inequalities" are represented by the symbols...
"<" (less than),
and
">" (greater than).
What Jesus was saying of this class of "Christians" who would be present in the Last Day, is that he would not even recognize them as being of him, because they were not working from his Spirit. They were doing "many wonderful works", but they were doing it from the attitude that they were "greater than" those who were not of their particular order or group. They "worked" to produce or accomplish the idea that they were "greater than" those whom their Master told them to be "servants" of. They created in their minds and "unjust" attitude that they were "better than"...or..."better off than" everyone else, and, because they were operating from an attitude of "injustice" and "inequality", they could only deal with the people unjustly.
"If you're not one of us, then you're "less than" us." ...Workers of Iniquity.
Basically, what it boils down to is "self-righteousness", which is rooted in ignorance...because if they REALLY understood the Message of their Master, they would come to the people as "Servants" and not as "Judges". They tell everyone "Judge not, lest ye be judged"...while they inwardly judge those who don't believe as they do.
No wonder Jesus said, "This people draweth nigh unto me with their lips, but their hearts are far removed from me."
How grieved he must be to see those who claim his name, demonstrating such "iniquity" in thought, word and deed. No wonder it is said that Judgement will begin in the House of God.
All that being said, now go back and replace the name "Jesus" with every other prophet who has a modern-day following, and the same applies.
It is precisely the attitude that "I am better" which makes us "lesser".
Beware.
RM
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
"I and My Father are One"
In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful...the Best Knower.
It is a widely held and scientifically supported view that "living things retain the effects of their experiences." The effect of an experience is, in essence, a change from a previous state. This is true for cells as well as organisms.
Take "Cell A", for example...it is indeed a "living thing". As such it has intelligence and is affected by its environment (experience). The experiences of the Cell are recorded, and the effects are retained and then passed on to the next generation of cells so that "Cell B" (the descendant of Cell A) contains all that Cell A contained at the time of the "birth" of Cell B.
This suggests that Cell B begins its existence with the benefit of Cell A's experience in its genetic makeup. Then Cell B lives out its life, having experiences of its own, and retaining the effects of those experiences; so that by the time Cell B reproduces itself, it possesses the cumulative effects of the experiences of Cell A and itself, and passes that "data" on to its progeny, Cell C. "Cell C" then lives its life, retains the effects of its experiences, combined with the inherited cumulative data from the experiences of Cells A and B, and then passes that information on to its progeny, Cell D, who now possesses the data from the cumulative experience of Cells A, B and C. And the process continues on into infinity...
The Hon. Elijah Muhammad taught us that the Originator began as an Atom of Life, trillions of years ago, turning in the darkness; and that Atom kept growing, turning and evolving in the darkness until it produced a Form for Itself through which It could effectively Express itself.
What kind of "experiences" did that Atom of Life encounter? What Lessons were Learned over those trillions of years of Self-Development? What information was recorded in its genetic makeup that was passed on to His Progeny? How many generations of Experience and Information have been added to that genetic "database" from that time to now, where YOU and I are now Living?
WHO ARE WE, REALLY???
And HOW is our Cumulative Genetic Make-Up affected by the EXPERIENCE of Studying the Teachings (IDEA) of Master Fard Muhammad, as given to us by the Hon. Elijah Muhammad?
And...HOW is this relevant to the Science of Mating???
Just something to think about.
RM
It is a widely held and scientifically supported view that "living things retain the effects of their experiences." The effect of an experience is, in essence, a change from a previous state. This is true for cells as well as organisms.
Take "Cell A", for example...it is indeed a "living thing". As such it has intelligence and is affected by its environment (experience). The experiences of the Cell are recorded, and the effects are retained and then passed on to the next generation of cells so that "Cell B" (the descendant of Cell A) contains all that Cell A contained at the time of the "birth" of Cell B.
This suggests that Cell B begins its existence with the benefit of Cell A's experience in its genetic makeup. Then Cell B lives out its life, having experiences of its own, and retaining the effects of those experiences; so that by the time Cell B reproduces itself, it possesses the cumulative effects of the experiences of Cell A and itself, and passes that "data" on to its progeny, Cell C. "Cell C" then lives its life, retains the effects of its experiences, combined with the inherited cumulative data from the experiences of Cells A and B, and then passes that information on to its progeny, Cell D, who now possesses the data from the cumulative experience of Cells A, B and C. And the process continues on into infinity...
The Hon. Elijah Muhammad taught us that the Originator began as an Atom of Life, trillions of years ago, turning in the darkness; and that Atom kept growing, turning and evolving in the darkness until it produced a Form for Itself through which It could effectively Express itself.
What kind of "experiences" did that Atom of Life encounter? What Lessons were Learned over those trillions of years of Self-Development? What information was recorded in its genetic makeup that was passed on to His Progeny? How many generations of Experience and Information have been added to that genetic "database" from that time to now, where YOU and I are now Living?
WHO ARE WE, REALLY???
And HOW is our Cumulative Genetic Make-Up affected by the EXPERIENCE of Studying the Teachings (IDEA) of Master Fard Muhammad, as given to us by the Hon. Elijah Muhammad?
And...HOW is this relevant to the Science of Mating???
Just something to think about.
RM
Saturday, April 07, 2007
Oh REALLY??? Can you PROVE it???
Salaam (Peace) to all.
The problem with most religious people, regardless of what religion they belong to, is that they insult the Intelligence of the people by telling them to "believe", or accept as true, that which they themselves do not even understand and cannot Explain...and that is why so many people turn away from "religion", because the proponents of religion are usually ill-informed and superstitious, and the Mind demands Truthful, Mathematical answers to legitimate questions.
The Bible teaches us to "prove all things". Does that include the Bible, itself? Does that include the doctrine of "Christianity"? What is the process or standard by which we "prove" the Truth of the Bible, or the Qur'an, or any other Text?
What is the process or standard by which we "prove" the accuracy of our UNDERSTANDING of these texts?
If you hand me a book, and tell me "this is the Truth and your salvation", my first words to you would be, "PROVE it". How would you begin the PROCESS of "Proving" to me that what you are offering to me is "The Truth"? Would you begin with an ASSUMPTION that the Book is true, and make that ASSUMPTION the basis of your position? Or, would you introduce me to a Universal, Observable, Unchangeable Standard by which the Book you are presenting to me could be measured?
Something to Think on...
RM
The problem with most religious people, regardless of what religion they belong to, is that they insult the Intelligence of the people by telling them to "believe", or accept as true, that which they themselves do not even understand and cannot Explain...and that is why so many people turn away from "religion", because the proponents of religion are usually ill-informed and superstitious, and the Mind demands Truthful, Mathematical answers to legitimate questions.
The Bible teaches us to "prove all things". Does that include the Bible, itself? Does that include the doctrine of "Christianity"? What is the process or standard by which we "prove" the Truth of the Bible, or the Qur'an, or any other Text?
What is the process or standard by which we "prove" the accuracy of our UNDERSTANDING of these texts?
If you hand me a book, and tell me "this is the Truth and your salvation", my first words to you would be, "PROVE it". How would you begin the PROCESS of "Proving" to me that what you are offering to me is "The Truth"? Would you begin with an ASSUMPTION that the Book is true, and make that ASSUMPTION the basis of your position? Or, would you introduce me to a Universal, Observable, Unchangeable Standard by which the Book you are presenting to me could be measured?
Something to Think on...
RM
Friday, April 06, 2007
Is It Wrong to JUDGE???
In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful...the Best Knower.
[1] Judge not, that ye be not judged.
[2] For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
John 7
24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.
Online Etymology Dictionary
judge (v.)
1225, "to form an opinion about," from Anglo-Fr. juger, from O.Fr. jugier "to judge," from L. judicare "to judge," from judicem (nom. judex) "to judge,"
a compound of jus "right, law" + root of dicere "to say" (see diction).
The O.E. word was deman (see doom). Meaning "to try and pronounce sentence upon (someone) in a court" is from c.1290. The noun is from 1303. In Hebrew history, it refers to a war leader vested with temporary power (e.g. Book of Judges), from L. judex being used to translate Heb. shophet
Given both scriptures and the etymology, I think that the point here is that we must be VERY CAREFUL HOW we judge, because once we make a "judgment", we concretize that judgment as a basis for how we interact with, treat or respond to the object of our judgement from that point, forward.
This is dangerous because most people do not see deeply enough INTO the person, thing or event under consideration to render a "true" judgment; and since the word "Judge" basically means to "speak rightly" or "speak truth", we have to strive to resist the temptation to "speak" on that which we do not have a full knowledge of.
Another meaning of the word "judge" is "to evaluate"..."to determine or assess the value of". This is another dangerous area, because, although it is a natural function of the human brain/mind, too many times people are hurt and even killed because someone else made an improper "evaluation" of themselves or another, based on something said or done that was not fully understood.
I don't think it is realistic to suggest that people "not judge". I think a better approach is to emphasise the need to exercise great care and caution in the process of forming judgments.
Now, in the matter of Religion...if God, Himself makes a Judgment and then pronounces His Judgment among the people, then the people have a Right and a Duty to use His Judgment as a Basis for their judgments. We must uphold that which God upholds, and we must reject that which God rejects. HOWEVER, we still must exercise the greatest care and caution in doing so, because we want to make sure that our MOTIVATION for acting on God's Judgement is the same as GOD's Motivation for rendering the Judgment. If we act on God's Judgment from a spirit of "self-righteousness", then we have corrupted God's Righteous Judgement by seeking to make it our own, using God's Name as the "justification".
For example:
Saint Sam understands that it is against God's Will to _____ . Saint Sam therefore does not _____ . However, when Saint Sam comes upon Sinner Sue who DOES _____ , then Saint Sam forms a judgment in his mind about Sinner Sue that causes him to see her as less than himself. This only proves that Saint Sam doesn't really understand God's Purpose for rendering His Judgement regarding _____ . Nor does Saint Sam understand God's Love for both him AND Sinner Sue.
If Saint Sam really understood God's MOTIVE for the Judgement regarding _____ , then, when he came across Sinner Sue he would have done whatever he could to HELP Sinner Sue to come up out of _____ , knowing that SHE is no different from HE, except that she has a need to be helped in the area of _____ .
More on this later, God Willing, from the Beautiful book, "Closing the Gap: Inner-Views of the Heart, Mind and Soul of the Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan."
RM
[1] Judge not, that ye be not judged.
[2] For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
John 7
24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.
Online Etymology Dictionary
judge (v.)
1225, "to form an opinion about," from Anglo-Fr. juger, from O.Fr. jugier "to judge," from L. judicare "to judge," from judicem (nom. judex) "to judge,"
a compound of jus "right, law" + root of dicere "to say" (see diction).
The O.E. word was deman (see doom). Meaning "to try and pronounce sentence upon (someone) in a court" is from c.1290. The noun is from 1303. In Hebrew history, it refers to a war leader vested with temporary power (e.g. Book of Judges), from L. judex being used to translate Heb. shophet
Given both scriptures and the etymology, I think that the point here is that we must be VERY CAREFUL HOW we judge, because once we make a "judgment", we concretize that judgment as a basis for how we interact with, treat or respond to the object of our judgement from that point, forward.
This is dangerous because most people do not see deeply enough INTO the person, thing or event under consideration to render a "true" judgment; and since the word "Judge" basically means to "speak rightly" or "speak truth", we have to strive to resist the temptation to "speak" on that which we do not have a full knowledge of.
Another meaning of the word "judge" is "to evaluate"..."to determine or assess the value of". This is another dangerous area, because, although it is a natural function of the human brain/mind, too many times people are hurt and even killed because someone else made an improper "evaluation" of themselves or another, based on something said or done that was not fully understood.
I don't think it is realistic to suggest that people "not judge". I think a better approach is to emphasise the need to exercise great care and caution in the process of forming judgments.
Now, in the matter of Religion...if God, Himself makes a Judgment and then pronounces His Judgment among the people, then the people have a Right and a Duty to use His Judgment as a Basis for their judgments. We must uphold that which God upholds, and we must reject that which God rejects. HOWEVER, we still must exercise the greatest care and caution in doing so, because we want to make sure that our MOTIVATION for acting on God's Judgement is the same as GOD's Motivation for rendering the Judgment. If we act on God's Judgment from a spirit of "self-righteousness", then we have corrupted God's Righteous Judgement by seeking to make it our own, using God's Name as the "justification".
For example:
Saint Sam understands that it is against God's Will to _____ . Saint Sam therefore does not _____ . However, when Saint Sam comes upon Sinner Sue who DOES _____ , then Saint Sam forms a judgment in his mind about Sinner Sue that causes him to see her as less than himself. This only proves that Saint Sam doesn't really understand God's Purpose for rendering His Judgement regarding _____ . Nor does Saint Sam understand God's Love for both him AND Sinner Sue.
If Saint Sam really understood God's MOTIVE for the Judgement regarding _____ , then, when he came across Sinner Sue he would have done whatever he could to HELP Sinner Sue to come up out of _____ , knowing that SHE is no different from HE, except that she has a need to be helped in the area of _____ .
More on this later, God Willing, from the Beautiful book, "Closing the Gap: Inner-Views of the Heart, Mind and Soul of the Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan."
RM
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)