KJ7RRV

In this tutorial, I will show how to enable and use Greek-language typing on a computer running Linux Mint's Cinnamon edition.

Setup

The steps should be the same on any distribution using Cinnamon, and are likely to be at least roughly similar on many other desktop environments.

While this guide focuses on enabling polytonic Greek, the keyboard layout used for typing ancient Greek, the steps are the same for any language.

Step 1: Open keyboard settings

To begin, open the main menu. Click the Linux Mint logo in the bottom-left corner of your screen, or tap the Super key, also known as the Windows logo key. Then, type “keyboard” into the search box and click the highlighted “Keyboard” launcher, as shown in the screenshot below.

Step 2: Go to Layouts tab

After clicking the launcher, Cinnamon's keyboard settings will open. You should see this window:

In the row of buttons across the top, click “Layouts.”

Step 3: Open the list of layouts

Now, the window should look like this:

In the bottom-left-hand corner of the window, click the plus-sign button to open the list of keyboard layouts.

Step 4: Add polytonic Greek

The list of available keyboard layouts should look like this:

It is possible to simply scroll to the desired language, but because of the large number of layout options, it is quicker to search for the language you want. Type “greek” into the search box.

Next, click “Greek (polytonic),” which is the option suitable for typing ancient Greek.

Finally, click “Add” in the bottom-right corner. This will add polytonic Greek as a keyboard layout and return you to the main window, which you may now close.

Layout selection

Toward the right end of the panel at the bottom of your screen, there should now be an icon depicting a national flag representing your main keyboard layout. For example, if you use a US English keyboard, there will be an American flag (🇺🇸).

This flag icon indicates what layout is currently in use. In this screenshot, my keyboard is set to US English. The icon is a button; you can click it to open a menu to change your keyboard layout.

Click “Greek (polytonic)” to switch your keyboard layout to Greek; the icon in your panel will change to the flag of Greece (🇬🇷). You can click “Show keyboard layout” in the menu to open a window showing where the keys are; while the layout window is open, keys pressed on the keyboard will be highlighted on the screen.

A screenshot of the Greek layout is provided below for convenience, but, of course, the key-highlighting feature will not work in the screenshot.

You can now use this menu to switch between English and Greek (or any other set of layouts) as needed.

Greek typing on Linux Mint Cinnamon © 2024 by Samuel Sloniker is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International

Many people think faith is an irrational acceptance of claims made without evidence. True faith, however, is based on a logical, reasonable persuasion. The Apostle Paul wrote, “I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day” (2 Timothy 1:12, KJV; emphasis added). Paul did not simply say that he believes Christianity is true, or even that he is certain of its truth. Rather, he says that he has been persuaded. He has seen that the Gospel is true. Paul had first-hand experience proving Christianity because of his encounter with Christ on the road to Damascus, but he was not the only first-century Christian with compelling evidence for the Gospel. Luke wrote that Jesus “shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs” (Acts 1:3, KJV); first-century believers did not accept Christ blindly, but based their faith on a multitude of eyewitness accounts. Even today, there is much historical evidence confirming the resurrection of Christ, which is the central claim of Christianity. Faith is not an unthinking acceptance of baseless beliefs; rather, it is a rational trust in proven teachings.

Although true faith is built on a rational foundation, it leads to conclusions that we could not reach by reason alone. The author of the book of Hebrews wrote, “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen... Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.” (Hebrews 11:1, 3, KJV). We can see by historical evidence that Christ rose from the dead, and because this seemingly impossible claim is true, we can have faith that the other teachings of Christianity are also true. Today, we can understand, based on the laws of thermodynamics and the principle of causality, that the universe must have come from an outside entity, but when the book of Hebrews was written, long before these scientific principles were discovered, faith was the only way to know “that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.” Even today, we must accept by faith that it was “by the word of God,” rather than some other supernatural cause, that the universe was created; however, it is reasonable to accept this teaching because it comes from a source that is historically and scientifically corroborated. Faith allows us to have rational confidence in the truth of God's Word.

What Is Faith? © 2024 by Samuel Sloniker is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International

#BibleStudy

I gave this speech at the Pelican Bay Amateur Radio Club meeting on February 23, 2024. The motion passed, and at the next meeting, we voted to approve a new version of the rule.

When we recite the Pledge of Allegiance, we promise loyalty to our flag and to our republic. This does not mean that we always agree with our government's decisions. Rather, it means we support our nation and its values – the values represented by the colors of our flag.

The flag’s blue field symbolizes vigilance and justice. It represents the ideal, named in the Pledge of Allegiance, of “liberty and justice for all.”

The white stars and stripes symbolize innocence and pure motives. While America is not perfect, we seek to do what is right and work toward a better nation.

Finally, the flag’s red stripes represent bravery and valor. They remind us of the sacrifices made by the millions of Americans who have served in our armed forces. In particular, they honor the nearly seven hundred thousand men and women who have given their lives for this country. Do we want to stop honoring their sacrifice?

When we pledge allegiance to our republic, we are not endorsing our government, which changes from year to year. Rather, we are expressing support for our form of government: a constitutional democratic republic that has succeeded in reflecting the will of the people for nearly two hundred and fifty years without falling to mob rule.

After the Constitutional Convention, a woman asked Benjamin Franklin what form of government had been established. He told her, “A republic, if you can keep it.” To keep our republic requires that we show respect for our flag and our country. To stop beginning our meetings with the Pledge would work against this goal.

Therefore, I move that we continue and formalize our long-standing custom by adopting a standing rule that all meetings shall begin with the Pledge of Allegiance.

Pledge of Allegiance speech and motion by Samuel Sloniker is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0

#PBARC #HamRadio #USA

The Pilgrim's Progress by John Bunyan is a classic allegory illustrating the path to salvation. At the start of the book, Christian leaves the City of Destruction on a journey to the Celestial City, which represents Heaven. Christian is not the only person on this journey; several other characters have the same goal. Some of them follow God's path and are saved, but most attempt to reach the City on their own and are condemned. Ignorance, one of those who are not saved, seeks to enter the City based on his own supposed holiness. Because no one is holy except by God's imputed righteousness, Ignorance is not allowed into the Celestial City. Christian and Ignorance share the same goal, but they differ in their methods to reach the goal and in their final outcomes.

Christian and Ignorance have a common goal: both of them want to reach the Celestial City, which represents Heaven. At the beginning of the story, Christian is approached by Evangelist, who warns him of the coming destruction of his city; Christian believes Evangelist and begins the journey. Although he is turned aside from the true path several times before he reaches the City, his ultimate goal never changes. Ignorance also seeks to go to the Celestial City. We are not told how he learned that it exists, nor what convinced him to seek it, but it is clear that he desires and expects to reach it. Throughout the story, Christian and Ignorance share the same goal. Despite their common goal, however, Christian and Ignorance attempt to reach the Celestial City in different ways. Christian believes that he will be saved by following the path that God had planned and revealed to him through Evangelist: by entering at the Wicket-gate, symbolic of the “strait... gate... which leadeth unto life” (Matthew 7:14), and leaving the burden of his sins at the cross. In contrast, Ignorance believes that he does not need to go through the Wicket-gate, but can enter the City based on his own righteousness. He claims, “I know my Lord's will, and have been a good liver,” and continues with a list of his good deeds. He fails to recognize that “we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags” (Isaiah 64:6), and none of us can be saved except “by grace... through faith[,]... not of works, lest any man should boast” (Ephesians 2:8-9). Although both seek to go to the Celestial City, Christian and Ignorance follow entirely different paths.

Finally, Christian and Ignorance have contrasting outcomes due to their different methods. At the end of the book, Christian and Hopeful, a fellow believer, reach the Celestial City. When they show the angels guarding the City their “certificates,” representing salvation, the King commands the angels to open the gate and let them in. Thus, Christian and Hopeful enter Heaven to live eternally. In contrast, Ignorance does not have a certificate, because his faith was in his own works, not in God. When the angels ask for his certificate, “he fumble[s] in his bosom for one, and [finds] none.” When the angels ask again whether he has a certificate, he “answer[s] never a word.” Because he is not truly saved, Ignorance is condemned to hell. Despite their common goal, Christian and Ignorance have opposite outcomes due to their different methods.

Although Christian and Ignorance both want to go to the Celestial City, their methods, and therefore their final outcomes, are diametric opposites. Christian accepts God's free gift and is saved; Ignorance trusts in himself and is condemned. These two characters in The Pilgrim's Progress show how salvation can only be achieved by grace, not by works.

Christian and Ignorance from The Pilgrim's Progress by Samuel Sloniker is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0

It is common to omit some verses in #hymns to save time; normally, this is fine. However, there are some hymns that this doesn't work well for, although it is still common. One type of hymn that should be sung completely is hymns that follow a trinitarian pattern, with each verse being about one person of the Trinity. For example, “Be Thou Exalted” by Fanny Crosby has one verse about the Father, one about the Son, and one about the Holy Spirit:

Verse 1 Be Thou exalted, forever and ever, God of eternity, Ancient of Days! Wondrous in majesty, perfect in wisdom, Glorious in holiness, fearful in praise.

Refrain Be Thou exalted by seraphs and angels, Be Thou exalted with harp and with song; Saints in their anthems of rapture adore Thee, Martyrs the loud hallelujahs prolong.

Verse 2 Be Thou exalted, O Son of the Highest! Gracious Redeemer, our Savior and King! One with the Father, co-equal in glory, Here at Thy footstool our homage we bring. [Refrain]

Verse 3 Be Thou exalted, O Spirit eternal! Dwell in our hearts, keep us holy within; Lead to Thy home in the life everlasting, Open its portals and welcome us in. [Refrain]

Omitting verses takes away from the point of a trinitarian hymn more than it does with most hymns, so it should be avoided with hymns following this format.

#BibleStudy #music

I put my Christmas and New Year countdowns from last year back online. Since they're hosted on the same server as this blog now, they should stay online permanently.

#Christmas #NewYear #holidays #OpenSource #software

This is an update to a prior article.

Since the end of the Speaker election, the United States House of Representatives has passed a simple resolution supporting Israel in the ongoing war with Hamas and other Palestinian militant groups. The resolution, H.Res. 771, was supported by 98% of the House.

In the roll-call vote, 412 representatives (95%) voted “yea,” 10 (2%) voted “nay,” 6 (1%) voted “present” (i.e. present but not voting), and 5 (1%) were absent. (Vote data are from GovTrack.us.) Because the resolution passed by such wide margins, the primary focus of this article is on those representatives who did not vote in favor of the resolution.

Republicans

Among Republicans, support was nearly unanimous. 218 Republican representatives voted in favor (99%), one voted against the resolution (less than 1%), none voted “present,” and two (1%) did not vote.

The one Republican opponent was Thomas Massie, representing Kentucky's 4th district. He explained his vote in a post on X, formerly known as Twitter; he “condemn[s] the barbaric attack on Israel and... affirm[s] Israel’s right to defend itself” but opposes the resolution as written because he believes it involves the United States too much in a foreign conflict.

Debbie Lesko, representing Arizona's 8th district, and Derrick Van Orden, from Wisconsin's 3rd district, did not vote. Mrs. Lesko stated that she would have voted in favor had she been present; her statement is found in the Congressional Record. It is on page H5064 of the Record, which corresponds to page 18 in the PDF file. Mr. Van Orden wrote a press release saying that he supports the resolution but was unable to vote because he is currently in Israel, meeting with Israeli officials and others to gather more information about the war.

Democrats

Support among Democrats was also broad, although not by quite as large a margin as among Republicans. 194 Democrats (92% of the party) supported the resolution, while 9 (4%) voted against it. Six (3%) voted “present,” and three (1%) were not present.

No members of The Squad, a group of some of the most progressive House Democrats, voted in favor of the resolution; all voted either “nay” or “present.”

The following Democrats opposed the resolution:

• Jamaal Bowman, representing New York's 16th district
• Cori Bush, representing Missouri's 1st district
• André Carson, representing Indiana's 7th district
• Al Green, representing Texas's 9th district
• Summer Lee, representing Pennsylvania's 12th district
• Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, representing New York's 14th district
• Ilhan Omar, representing Minnesota's 5th district
• Delia Ramirez, representing Illinois's 3rd district
• Rashida Tlaib, representing Michigan's 12th district

Rep. Bowman released a statement, agreeing with H.Res. 771's condemnation of Hamas's invasion, while calling the resolution “pro-war and anti-peace” and saying he believes it is outdated. (It was introduced shortly after the war began; passage was delayed due to the removal of McCarthy as Speaker.) He said that the resolution “does not include the urgent need for de-escalation and prevention of ground invasion nor any humanitarian efforts.

Rep. Bush said in a statement that she believes an immediate ceasefire is necessary.

Rep. Carson has released a statement saying that he does condemn Hamas's invasion of Israel, but opposed this resolution because it “is horribly one-sided” and “fail[s] to acknowledge the growing loss of Palestinian lives” and that Hamas does not represent the beliefs of all Palestinians.

Rep. Green said in a statement prior to the vote that he “believe[s] that there is a moral imperative for this resolution to reiterate our longstanding commitment to the peace process, a two-state solution, and concern for the wellbeing of the Palestinian people,” suggested certain amendments, and said he would not support the resolution without them. As these amendments were not made, he opposed the resolution.

Rep. Lee published a press release expressing similar sentiments to several others, condemning Hamas's actions while opposing the resolution because it “does not acknowledge the overwhelming loss of life and humanity” and “moves us further from – not closer to – a just and lasting peace.”

Rep. Ocasio-Cortez does not seem to have made a statement specifically regarding this resolution, but she did publish a press release on October 9 condemning the attack and calling for a ceasefire.

Rep. Omar wrote a statement criticizing both Hamas and Israel and supporting a ceasefire.

Rep. Ramirez said in a press release that she also condemns Hamas's attack, but opposed the resolution because it “did not honor our shared humanity, did not advance a two-state solution, and did not recognize the interconnectedness of the Israeli and Palestinian people in their struggle for liberation and safety” and “[w]e cannot unequivocally support or condone the Israeli government’s collective punishment of the Palestinian people in Gaza.”

Rep. Tlaib said in a statement that she believes the resolution presents “a deeply incomplete and biased account of what is happening in Israel and Palestine, and what has been happening for decades.” She said that it “rightly mourns the thousands of Israeli civilians killed and wounded in the horrific attacks but explicitly does not mourn the thousands of Palestinian civilians, including over 2,000 children, killed and wounded in the collective punishment of Palestine.” (While it is true that the resolution does not mention any Palestinians killed in the war, her statement that it “explicitly does not mourn” Palestinians is not entirely accurate. The resolution unequivocally supports Israel, but it does not say that everything Israel has done is justified.)

These Democrats voted “present”:

• Gregorio Casar, representing Texas's 35th district
• Joaquin Castro, representing Texas's 20th district
• Chuy García, representing Illinois's 4th district
• Pramila Jayapal, representing Washington's 7th district
• Ayanna Pressley, representing Massachusetts's 7th district
• Nydia Velázquez, representing New York's 7th district

Rep. Casar said in a thread on X (post #1; post #2) that while he cosponsored it when it was introduced, he did not vote in favor the resolution because “it chooses not to recognize the thousands of Palestinian deaths since Oct. 7,” reflecting a belief that it was outdated.

I was unable to find any statement from Rep. Castro.

Rep. Garcia expressed much the same view as Rep. Casar, also in a thread on X (post #1; post #2; post #3).

Rep. Jayapal published a statement, saying in part that she “cannot in good conscience vote for a resolution that ignores [the civilian casualties] and the humanitarian impact on Palestinian civilians and their families as this war has unfolded and escalated,” while saying that she does still condemn Hamas's attack.

Rep. Pressley also published a statement explaining her vote. She holds a similar view to Rep. Jayapal, condemning Hamas's actions while believing that the resolution does not recognize the impacts of the war on civilians.

Rep. Velázquez, like Reps. Casar and Garcia, said in a press release that she initially cosponsored the resolution, but no longer supports it because it “does not acknowledge the suffering of Palestinians and the horrific toll the war has taken on the innocent people living in Gaza.” She also expressed support for “an immediate ceasefire.”

Three Democrats were not present; they are Luis Correa, from California's 46th district, Vicente Gonzalez, from Texas's 34th district, and Donald Payne, from New Jersey's 10th district.

Rep. Correa does not appear to have made a statement on this resolution, but in a post on X on October 18 (a week before the vote on the resolution), he expressed support for Israel while emphasizing the importance of protecting civilians.

I could not find any statements from Rep. Gonzalez regarding the resolution. However, in a post on X about the Speaker vote which took place earlier the same day as the vote on the resolution, he said that he was absent due to the death of a family member.

Mr. Payne stated that he would have voted in favor of the resolution had he been present. His statement, along with that of Republican Debbie Lesko, who was also absent, can be found in the Congressional Record on page H5064 (numbered 18 in the linked PDF file).

Vote Results on H.Res 771 Supporting Israel by Samuel Sloniker is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0

#politics #Israel #Congress

In a shocking turn of events, a thread on QRZ.com's forums has led to an argument over the best means to attract youth to amateur radio. Also surprisingly, several posts criticized the American Radio Relay League (ARRL), which has, until now, always had the full support of every radio amateur in the country.

It is believed that this marks the first time the topic of encouraging young people to obtain licenses has ever been discussed in amateur radio circles; it is also the first argument to ever take place on “the Zed,” as the popular forum, which has always been entirely peaceful until now, is often called. The criticisms of the ARRL are also entirely new, and are certain to lead to extensive changes within the organization.

At publishing time, some users were beginning to complain about FT8; this is the first time anyone has ever expressed a negative opinion regarding the relatively new but very popular mode.

#HamRadio #satire

This is an updated version of a prior article.

Large majorities of members in both houses of the United States Congress, including all Senators, have expressed support for Israel in the ongoing war with Hamas and other Palestinian militant groups using simple resolutions. Although these resolutions are entirely symbolic, as they do not have the force of law, they do express the beliefs of individual members who support them, and the collective view of the entire House or Senate when passed.

Unless otherwise stated, all data in this article are from GovTrack.us and are current as of October 20, 2023.

Senate

The Senate has passed S.Res. 417, “A resolution standing with Israel against terrorism,” unanimously. The vote passed 97-0 with three Senators absent, but all 100 senators sponsored or cosponsored the resolution. (The three who were absent are simply listed as “Not voting” on GovTrack, but the Congressional Record for October 19 indicates that they were “necessarily absent.”) The resolution was introduced by Senator Chuck Schumer, a Democrat from New York.

House of Representatives

A new article on a House resolution regarding the war is available.

Two resolutions have been introduced into the House of Representatives to support Israel, and another calls for a ceasefire without expressly supporting either side. None of the resolutions have been voted on at this time, because the House cannot do normal business until it elects a replacement for former Speaker McCarthy, who was recently removed.

H.Res. 768, entitled “Standing with Israel as it defends itself against the barbaric war launched by Hamas and other terrorists,” has 382 sponsors, comprising 88% of the House; this includes 197 Republicans, or 89% of the party, and 185 Democrats, or 87%. (Sponsorship counts include both the bills' primary sponsors and their cosponsors.) The primary sponsor is Representative Michael McCaul, who represents Texas's 10th congressional district. Representative McCaul is a Republican.

H.Res. 770, entitled “Condemning an act of war against Israel by Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and associated forces, and for other purposes,” has 44 sponsors, or 10% of the House. 32 Republicans, 14% of the party, and 12 Democrats, 6% of the party, sponsor this resolution. H.Res. 770 was introduced by Republican Representative Zach Nunn, representing Iowa's 3rd congressional district.

A total of 387 representatives (89% of the House), including 201 Republicans (91% of the party) and 186 Democrats (88% of the party) have sponsored one or both of the resolutions supporting Israel.

H.Res. 786, “Calling for an immediate deescalation and cease-fire in Israel and occupied Palestine”, has 17 sponsors, all Democrats, making up 4% of the entire House and 8% of Democrats. This resolution was introduced by Representative Cori Bush, who represents Missouri's 1st congressional district. Although it does not explicitly support Palestine or oppose Israel, the use of the phrase “occupied Palestine” in the title could be seen as loaded language against Israel.

Eight Democrats have cosponsored one or both pro-Israel resolutions as well as H.Res. 786. They make up 2% of the House and 4% of their party.

In the map below, congressional districts whose representatives have sponsored one or both of the pro-Israel resolutions and not the pro-ceasefire resolution are green, while the districts of those who have sponsored only the pro-ceasefire resolution are red. Districts of representatives who sponsored both the pro-ceasefire resolution and at least one of the pro-Israel resolutions are blue, and vacant districts and those whose representatives have not sponsored any of the resolutions are light gray. Click the map for a higher-resolution downloadable version.

United States Congressional Resolutions on Israel-Hamas War by Samuel Sloniker, including map created with MapChart, is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0

#politics #Israel #Congress

An updated and expanded version of this article is available: United States Congressional Resolutions on Israel-Hamas War

Two resolutions have been introduced into the United States House of Representatives to support Israel in the ongoing war with Hamas and other Palestinian militant groups. Neither resolution has been voted on at this time.

H.Res. 768, entitled “Standing with Israel as it defends itself against the barbaric war launched by Hamas and other terrorists,” has 382 sponsors, comprising 88% of the House; this includes 197 Republicans, or 89% of the party, and 185 Democrats, or 87%. (Sponsorship counts include both the bills' primary sponsors and their cosponsors. Both bills' primary sponsors are Republicans. All data is from GovTrack.us as of October 15, 2023.)

H.Res. 770, entitled “Condemning an act of war against Israel by Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and associated forces, and for other purposes,” has 44 sponsors, or 10% of the House. 32 Republicans, 14% of the party, and 12 Democrats, 6% of the party, sponsor this resolution.

A total of 387 representatives (89% of the House), including 201 Republicans (91% of the party) and 186 Democrats (88% of the party) have sponsored one or both of the resolutions.

(It is important to understand that, while sponsoring one or both of these resolutions is an expression of support for Israel, not sponsoring either does not indicate support for Hamas. No vote has been taken yet; representatives can support a bill or resolution without cosponsoring it.)

In the map below, congressional districts whose representatives have sponsored one or both of the resolutions are highlighted in blue, while those who have not sponsored either are red. Vacant districts that currently have no representative are light gray. Click the map for a higher-resolution downloadable version.

Sponsors of H.Res. 768 and H.Res. 770 to Support Israel by Samuel Sloniker, including map created with MapChart, is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0

#politics #Israel #Congress