Often the story that's not true is more interesting, and preferred ...but often it is not preferred. I think it's okay to proceed, but proceed with caution.

I'm often told that I don't get stories straight ...and often I'm not able to get to the end of the story, not because I can't remember; believe me, I can embellish it if I want.  But often I don't finish the story because a diversion arises, becoming a debate over whether I got certain details correct.  So let me say, it was some time ago, and I can't remember all the details; but I'm going to attempt to tell something that I know ...so I'm giving you fair warning, "This is MY story!"   It's only based on a true story.  (I do understand the only true story is by someone who witnesses it ...someone who was there.  I was not there, my brother was ...so his is the factual story.  I will not claim that my story is true ...but I do truly know where I want to take you, so I will begin:)

My brother, Al, was traveling through Canada ...attempting to drive around Lake Superior.  I'm saying 'attempting' because for some reason there was tremendous flooding, and the roads completely washed out.  My brother gave some rather vivid details of the destruction ...but I am just saying he was forced to stay at a Hotel.

Okay, I'm changing the story now. I'm imagining that it's me, not my brother.

And let's say that it's early spring, and my wife wants to go out for ice cream to celebrate our Anniversary.

We head out for ice cream, as we often do ...so nothing new there, but this time we decide to try a new place we'd heard about.   We'd not been there before, but we heard it was real good, and not too far away.  I memorize the directions, so no need to write them down.  I guess that goes hand-in-hand with not needing to know that I make a wrong turn ...and not needing to decide how far I will actually be willing to go before I concede that I possibly made a wrong turn.   Having romantically said that I would have climbed the highest mountain, swam the deepest ocean ...you get the idea; you've all heard that before.  Well, she was enduring the 'longest', without any word of complaint ...but everyone has their limit.  Though some of us really test those limits, and as men are known to do, or known 'not' to do ...as in 'not' asking for directions, nor admitting I was lost.   So one wrong turn led to another ...and soon as we knew it (or didn't know it), we had traveled halfway around Lake Superior.

Cindy is not endeared to these 'great lakes' that appear to be forming around us.  Our car is not getting much traction, and it feels like we are bogged down within some huge banana split.  (I'll leave off my next joke.)  Suffice to say, the only safe haven appears to be that Hotel over there on slightly higher ground ...if I can just quickly make this next turn ...before the road disappears.

Who's desserting who?

Cindy decides to stay in our Hotel room, and prepare for bed, skipping dessert ...but I am set on having that ice cream.  Besides, I feel I'm doing the management a favor, as the power had gone out ...and the Hotel ice cream will go bad if I don't eat it.

As I'm eating my ice cream by candlelight, I'm thinking fond thoughts of Cindy as she prepares for bed just down the hall in our Hotel room.   But those thoughts are interrupted by thoughts of the words exchanged just a few minutes prior.  With that in mind, perhaps it's wise to enjoy the ice cream, slowly, in hopes she will fall asleep before I climb into bed.   I had heard quite enough of her telling me of my stubbornness, dually matched by my arrogance ...which both working in concert, landed us deep into Canada, waiting for the earth to swallow us up.   And what bothers me most about what she'd said ...is that it is all true.

As I engage myself with my second order of ice cream, I feel the sugar-high, and it seems my eyes have become stronger.  I'm sure my eyes have just adjusted to the candlelight, but I'm confident I can read now.  The book I have with me is one our oldest daughter had given to us for our Anniversary.

I had no sooner opened the book ...when an older gentleman at the next table attempts to strike up a conversation, "Whatcha readin'?"

I didn't want to get into a political conversation ...I didn't honestly want to get into any conversation at all, so I didn't mention that it was a book by Glenn Beck.  I decide to simply mention, "It's just a book our daughter gave my wife and me."

"What's the name of it?"

I could see I wasn't going to be let off so easy, "Being George Washington."

Another younger gentleman obviously overheard the conversation, "I wouldn't want to be George Washington."

I tried fighting off the thought of ...don't worry, friend, I can already tell you're nothing like good ole' George.

I could scarce take a breath before the younger gentleman directs his question to me, "Would you want to be George Washington?"    I wanted to do old George proud, and say, yes ...I even tried to picture myself as George, to try to give a worthy example of the distinguished life he'd lived; but I could find no words.  At that moment I felt like the horse had been shot from under me.

I wanted to say that I only wanted to 'be' alone ...but I didn't quite think I was going to get that chance, at least at this moment.   But I was then saved by a happenstance glance that the older gentleman and younger gentleman gave each other.

The younger gentleman looks straight at the older gentleman, "I wouldn't want to be George Washington; he was anti-environment."

The older gentleman looks with scorn upon the representative of his own past youth, "Where'd ya git a lame-brain idea like that?"

The youngster says, "Come on, old man, everyone knows the story of the cherry tree."

The elder of the two comments with a slight edge, "Yer makin' no sense, boy!"

You could tell the youth took offense to being called "boy".

"Well, old man, what do you suppose they did with the wood?"  Before he could answer, the youth added, "He burned it ...everyone was burning wood back then.  They did for years ...and it destroyed the environment."

You could tell the older man was a bit unnerved, "Yer gonna criticize George Washington because he chopped a tree down?"

As if he had not been heard, the youth more or less repeats what he'd already said ...

 "He not only needlessly chopped down trees, he polluted the air by burning the wood."

If that isn't crazy enough, a third young man joins in, "Yeah, he definitely had something against trees, I just know it; and if you think I'm crazy, how do you explain the fact that later in his life he got wooden teeth?"

I thought, how'd he know I thought he was crazy?

At this point, the two young men had a very intense conversation amongst the two of them.  I heard them say George Washington was a revolting man ...he was inhuman ...he was just like the present-day liberals ...and he was born a slave.  When I heard one of them mention how he had found well over a hundred uses for the peanut, I realized they weren't even talking about our first President ...one of them had him confused with George Washington Carver, the agricultural genius who'd joined another Washington, Booker T., at Tuskegee Institute.

You think this story about George was wild?

Today we have an even greater fabrication and distortion, birthed from counterfeit claims, as if we'd lived ...not over 200 years ago,to have witnessed George Washington's character; but as if we'd witnessed what happened over 2,000 years ago.   And we have the bold confidence to arrogantly not only re-write history, but His story?

It's not just about President George ...

Some have concocted a story about Jesus, whereas He will return as a servant, subservient to their ruling god ...and who do you suppose will be that timely President?

Okay, it is now April 2017 ...and I am a bit confused myself.  To prevent ourselves from being confused, I've been told to not focus on all the fakes out there ...as that will be even more confusing, and it is not a good use of time to attempt to figure who said what.  I can't even make sense of what I've said (here).

But, it is difficult to say something that I thought was clear, that perhaps is not.  If we focus on God, it is well and good.  Here, I want to figure out what I was referring to, and I think it had something to do with this article, a section of what I'm listing here:

Dr. Peter Hammond’s book Slavery, Terrorism, and Islam:

“When the Muslim population remains at or under 2%, their presence tends to fly low under the radar. In the 2% – 5% range, Muslims begin to seek converts, targeting those they see as disaffected, such as criminals. When the population reaches 5% they exert influence disproportionate to their numbers, becoming more aggressive and pushing for Sharia law. When the population hits the 10% mark Muslims become increasingly lawless and violent. Once the population reaches 20%, there is an increase in rioting, murder, jihad militias, and destruction of non-Muslim places of worship. At 40%, there are “widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks, and ongoing militia warfare.” Once beyond 50%, infidels and apostates are persecuted, genocide occurs, and Sharia law is implemented." 

So, it is not the belief necessarily of what everyone in that religion believes ...but, of the leaders who manipulate the faith, which already is on shaky ground.  The Islamic State or (ISIS) leaders say Jesus is a 'slave' to their Allah, and that Jesus will return with the directive to commit jihad.

I think my reference to the timely President, was not really a president, but just using the term for a leader ...which would somehow fit into the scenario described in the Book of Revelation.  I don't know much, but I feel somehow that perhaps the two witnesses mentioned ...may be witnessing to Muslims, some of which are already having dreams, revealing to them that Jesus is God.  I believe many will come to believe the truth of the Bible at this time, among those who've been deceived for so long.

You guessed it, ...the very one who is advocating this idea!  To some this may appear to be a huge 'con' scheme, but sadly, I don't think this person is 'conning' us ...he is the one who is being 'conned', but he doesn't think so.  He believes it!!  How about you?!?

And he's not some innocent little kid, creatively imagining on the playground at school during recess.  But he is schooling many ...on many untruths.  He is not just kicking a ball around, he's kicking around some very dangerous ideologies ...with his eye on weapons of mass destruction.

He Papa ...She Mama ..I son, I (am) male ...E-mail, to me Mom ...Imam ...so familiar, how credible our associations?

Some's little more than gibberish, and some's a bit true ...but thankful me Mom told the truth about Jesus; but not from 'er own head, 'in not from 'er own eye.

The only documentation of Jesus that I follow is from eye witnesses, written out for us in the Bible.   Mama'd be proud of such sound reasoning.

Often hard to say how the conversation will go if something is convincingly credible.  But  a weak argument often moves from a discussion ...to increased name-calling, degradation, and sundry hostilities.

It depends a lot upon our window of reasoning ...which varies from topic to topic, and that variation also depends upon the individuals in the verbal exchange ...and what the pre-established relationships between each of the participants of the discussion happen to be.  

Without trying to express an established bias, the following includes some stereotypical examples, more as an attempt at humor ...before getting to the more serious statements:

* * *A child will say, "I know, I know ...", attempting to suffice being obedient and agreeable, but at the same time, having their mind on something else, anything else ...and wanting to move on, having not really listened.

* * *A spouse, on the other hand, will often say, "I don't know what you're talking about!"   The true meaning may be that they understand all too well what you are saying, but it feels uncomfortable, and let's move on.

* * *Some politicians may say, "I don't know what you're talking about!"   Moving 'away' from the subject by bringing up another subject, and hoping the initial one will never be brought up again.

* * *A 'con' will say, "I don't know what you're talking about!"   And saying it in a way that may even be a little intimidating, hoping it makes you uncomfortable enough that you will never bring it up again ...and perhaps even implying that it will be even more uncomfortable for you if you do.   Without a doubt, they do understand ...yet, they feel it's a very unwelcome intrusion upon their agenda.

Our adversary, in the spiritual realm, handles our sin in a much similar way.  We know we sin, but the attempt is for us to not acknowledge it, to minimize it as not really that significant, or to further deny and defend it.

It is not my attempt to categorize anyone, yet many of us have seen ourselves in these very scenarios.  To see ourselves can be a good thing ...as we see not just ourselves, but to stand with open eyes to those around us ...and to what is going on with all of us.   To see those in need, and to see well enough to avoid needlessly repeating our own hindrances, to the advancement of moving beyond our mistakes.  I will choose no one who acts superior to my God ...and I will knowingly let no one guide me in faith issues, who first does not believe in the authority of God's Word in the Bible.

You still contend ...you don't know what I'm talking about, I'm making no sense?

Perhaps if you try a little harder, you'll understand what I'm talking about ...if you want to understand.  I've intentionally written it this way, to avoid having you just skim over it.  Of course, some may just dismiss it as nonsense, but if you say you still can't understand ...then perhaps you can admittedly say you don't want to understand.    You can dismiss or ignore everything said not to your liking ...or perhaps you can easily ask me to clarify something you think you misunderstood me saying.   With this high tech convenience of communication, it isn't that difficult to connect with me and leave a note.