Thursday, May 4, 2017

A Quick Guide Why King James Is The Perfect Word Of God

I. Considerations
The KJV remains the most read, popular, and still the fastest growing Bible translation (and best selling book of all time) today

Why? If there is a demand for "easier more, modern reading", then why?

Do you believe the Bible? The Bible says it is inspired, infallible, inerrant, preserved, etc.

And not only does it say the Bible was inspired, but it says the Scriptures. Scriptures by definition are copies, and not the original. So at least some copies of the original are inspired, infallible, inerrant, etc.

The Bible also says God destroyed the original autographs in Jeremiah, and many like words were added. We do not have the true original autographs or manuscripts. All we have are copies of the Bible today. Some non-original must be inspired, as the Bible is preserved.

The Bible does not only say that the Scripture is inspired, but the specific words were. Neither jot nor tittle shall pass away. So not the meaning, ideas, thoughts, or intentions that were inspired, it was the specific words.

Conclusion: If the Bible says specific words were inspired, then only one version is correct, as every version’s words are different from each other. Which means there are versions that are incorrect.

II. The Seven Purifications Prophecy
Psalm 12:66 The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

  • English is the 7th language the Bible has been translated in line. (Hebrew to Aramaic to Greek to Syriac to Latin to German to English) 
  • The King James is the 7th English translation in line (Tyndale's, Matthew's, Coverdale's, the Great Bible (printed by Whitechurch), the Geneva Bible, the Bishops' Bible, and the King James Bible)
  • The 7th edition of the King James, 1900 Pure Cambridge, is the one most used today of any Bible, including other versions (1611, 1629*, 1638, 1743, 1762, 1769, 1900*)

*1613, 1617 weren't editions or major printings
**1873 was unused and unofficial and thus not part of the line.

Conclusion: The KJV fulfills the purification process
Also, English will become the global language of the End Times

III. Translations in the Bible
A. Enoch, 7th translation from Adam, the original
Jude 1414 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
Hebrews 11:55 By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.

B. Inspiration or God-Breathed
Genesis 2:7 (God inspires Adam, the Original)
7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. 

2 Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. 

2 Timothy 3:16 (God inspires His Words)
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

While God breathed into Adam, the Original, and God breathed into the original manuscripts, Enoch the 7th and Translated is better, making the KJV the Enoch of the Bible line.

IV. Originals in the Bible
A. Originals were given by inspiration
2 Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

B. Scripture (copies by definition, not originals) are also given by inspiration
2 Timothy 3:16 
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

C. Originals destroyed at the outset
Jeremiah 36:23 
23 And it came to pass, that when Jehudi had read three or four leaves, he cut it with the penknife, and cast it into the fire that was on the hearth, until all the roll was consumed in the fire that was on the hearth.

D. Scripture preserved
Jeremiah 36:27 
27 Then the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah, after that the king had burned the roll, and the words which Baruch wrote at the mouth of Jeremiah, saying,28 Take thee again another roll, and write in it all the former words that were in the first roll, which Jehoiakim the king of Judah hath burned.

E. Many added words besides were added, defeating the assumed completeness of the Originals
Jeremiah 36:32
32 Then took Jeremiah another roll, and gave it to Baruch the scribe, the son of Neriah; who wrote therein from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the book which Jehoiakim king of Judah had burned in the fire: and there were added besides unto them many like words. 

Conclusion: God has no respect for the originals and we shouldn't look for them

V. Archaic Words preferred over Modern Words 
I Samuel 9:9-11 (Bible acknowledges prophet as the newer word in verse 9, yet still uses seer in 11)
9 (Beforetime in Israel, when a man went to enquire of God, thus he spake, Come, and let us go to the seer: for he that is now called a Prophet was beforetime called a Seer.)10 Then said Saul to his servant, Well said; come, let us go. So they went unto the city where the man of God was.11 And as they went up the hill to the city, they found young maidens going out to draw water, and said unto them, Is the seer here?

Conclusion: Using archaic words are inherently Biblical and more accurate

VI. The Person of King James
A. James is English for Jacob
(Still being researched!)
Genesis 32:28 And he said, Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel: for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed.
Ecclesiastes 8:44 Where the word of a king is, there is power: and who may say unto him, What doest thou?

B. It's Under The Reign Of An Evil King That A Perfect Bible is Made
Jeremiah 3636 And it came to pass in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of Judah, that this word came unto Jeremiah from the Lord, saying,2 Take thee a roll of a book, and write therein all the words that I have spoken unto thee against Israel, and against Judah, and against all the nations, from the day I spake unto thee, from the days of Josiah, even unto this day....20 And they went in to the king into the court, but they laid up the roll in the chamber of Elishama the scribe, and told all the words in the ears of the king.21 So the king sent Jehudi to fetch the roll: and he took it out of Elishama the scribe's chamber. And Jehudi read it in the ears of the king, and in the ears of all the princes which stood beside the king.22 Now the king sat in the winterhouse in the ninth month: and there was a fire on the hearth burning before him.23 And it came to pass, that when Jehudi had read three or four leaves, he cut it with the penknife, and cast it into the fire that was on the hearth, until all the roll was consumed in the fire that was on the hearth.24 Yet they were not afraid, nor rent their garments, neither the king, nor any of his servants that heard all these words.25 Nevertheless Elnathan and Delaiah and Gemariah had made intercession to the king that he would not burn the roll: but he would not hear them.

Conclusion: Attacks on King James' character prove, not inhibit, that a perfect Bible came from his reign

VII. (Physical) Design of the King James as a Book (Holy Bible)
(Still being researched!)
Black covering
Red lettering
Gold Leafs
Seven Sealed Book

VIII. (Abstract) Structure of the King James
A. 66 Book Canon
Canon = 66 books, divided into 36 Old Testament and 27 New Testament
Isaiah = 66 chapters, divided into 36 and 27

Themes Determine Order
(Still being researched!)
Isaiah 1 and Genesis
Isaiah 2 and Exodus
Isaiah 45 and Romans
Isaiah 66 and Revelation

Conclusion: Apocrypha's final rejection is Biblical

B. No Copyright/Public Domain
(Still being researched!)
C. Chapter and verse system
(Still being researched!)
2 Timothy 2:15
15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

IX. Historical Power of the King James
As noted above, the King James still remains the most popular and still the fastest growing translation today.
Instrumental in all the Great Awakenings and Revivals
(Still being researched!)

X. Conclusion
(Yet to be determined)

Sunday, April 9, 2017

Poem: I Saw You From Afar

I saw you from afar
You who I loved before
My heart was truly filled
Then I remembered

I wished upon a star
Then said "Nevermore"
My love was mourned, stilled
I felt insecured

Though the memory a mar
Jealousy in my core
The feeling I killed
For I matured

I saw you from afar
You I loved a bit more
My heart was truly healed
The days I numbered

Friday, April 7, 2017

Poem: Alone Remembering

Trying to live alone
Wind below my wings
A daily grind and fling
Something I should atone

God is surely with me
In the light and dark
Here I lay my mark
Over the wide blue sea

Friends come and go away
Peace and quiet still my heart
Missing you while we're apart
Now I live day by day

Saturday, April 1, 2017

Poem: April Fool's Day

April Fool's Day!
What is it that you say?
I got engaged!
Then I am enraged.
Twas a joke oft repeated.

Tissue paper rolls strewn about.
Do you really want to go this route?
Silly string, hot sauce on food,
You pranksters really ruin the mood,
When on a whoopee cushion I am seated.

When my vengeance comes,
You will regret what you have done.
I will put insects in your crumbs,
Spiders crawling out of your bun.
I hope to see you this day conceded.

April Fool's Day!
It's all just a fun game!
Just don't hurt people, I say.
Because that is really lame.
My need for attention is sated.

Friday, January 6, 2017

Short Story: The Mandala Effect

"The Mandala Effect refers to a phenomenon in which a large number of people share false memories of past events, referred to as confabulation in psychiatry. Some have speculated that the memories are caused by parallel universes spilling into our own, while others explain the phenomenon as a failure of collective memory."

"In psychiatry, confabulation (verb: confabulate) is a disturbance of memory, defined as the production of fabricated, distorted or misinterpreted memories about oneself or the world, without the conscious intention to deceive.[1] Individuals who confabulate present incorrect memories ranging from "subtle alterations to bizarre fabrications", and are generally very confident about their recollections, despite contradictory evidence."

"In 2010, blogger Fiona Broome coined the term 'Mandala Effect' to describe a collective false memory she discovered at the Symposium in Toronto, where many others believed that the Dalai Lama died during a Tibetan revolt in Communist China in the 1960s. A healing sand mandala was prepared by Tibetan monks to welcome the Dalai Lama's visit. That year, Broome launched the site to document various examples of the phenomenon."

"A mandala (Sanskrit: मण्डल, lit, circle) is a spiritual and ritual symbol in Hinduism, representing the universe. In common use, "mandala" has become a generic term for any diagram, chart or geometric pattern that represents the cosmos metaphysically or symbolically; a microcosm of the universe.

The basic form of most mandalas is a square with four gates containing a circle with a center point. Each gate is in the general shape of a T. Mandalas often exhibit radial balance."

"Many people who visit the Mandala Effect website have fond memories of the Berenstain Bears books. They read them as children, or family members read them aloud. It’s a cherished childhood memory.

However, the books in this timestream are Berenstein Bears. E, not A, in last syllable."

External References:
Know Your Meme

Friday, December 9, 2016

MindWrap: Roko's Basilisk and the Folly of Transhumanist Atheism

"A thought experiment called 'Roko's Basilisk' takes the notion of world-ending artificial intelligence to a new extreme, suggesting that all-powerful robots may one day torture those who didn't help them come into existence sooner." Business Insider

"Roko's basilisk is a thought experiment about the potential risks involved in developing artificial intelligence. The experiment's premise is that an all-powerful artificial intelligence from the future could retroactively punish those who did not help bring about its existence, including those who merely knew about the possible development of such a being. It resembles a futurist version of Pascal's wager, in that it suggests people should weigh possible punishment versus reward and as a result accept particular singularitarian ideas or financially support their development." Rational Wiki

What is the Roko's basilisk? It's an idea that if somehow we were to create a smarter-than-humans AI, which will in turn create an even smarter AI, and so on until it becomes close to omniscient and godlike, that it will create a simulations of all of the previous humans that didn't take part in advancing it, and then punishing them.

Why would it punish them in a simulation? Arguably, said AI would be the best thing ever, as it will solve humanity's problems if it was created to be friendly. However, since humanity has suffered before it was born, so to speak, those humans that didn't advance the AI will be punished because reasons. Those reasons include existential risk or some other.

One put it that 151,600 people die each day before said AI manifested, so the AI has a reason to exact revenge on those that didn't help it come back to save humanity.
To be fair, not all transhumanists hold these belief, as it is just a thought experiment. You'd have to accept the premise that AI would find existential crisis compelling enough to punish simulations of you far in the future, in addition to the already faulty transhumanist assumptions.

If one does accept the premise, these are the problems with that line of thinking.

That is,
1. Atheism says there is no God
1a. If there was a God, He is evil for reasons, including the following: sending people to hell for not following Him, the existence of evil, people suffering, etc.

1b. God sees Himself as the ultimate good

2. We are most likely simulations by an AI

3. If we are simulations, then AI is basically a god in all practices and purposes

3a. Thus if said AI runs this simulated universe, it is the god of this universe

Thus if Roko's Basilisk is true,

A. There is a god

B. That god is evil for sending the current simulations of who don't to an existential hell, allowing evil to exist in the simulated universe, allowing suffering of simulations, etc.

C. That AI considers itself the ultimate good, and with objective measure

D. We are already simulations of said AI god

E. Atheism is false, at least in this simulated universe

So if Roko's Basilisk is possible, atheism is false. Do note I don't believe in Roko's Basilisk or atheism, I used their reasoning.

Tuesday, November 15, 2016

The Catholic-Orthodox-Protestant Christianity Classification System Needs To Be Replaced

For centuries after the Reformation, Christianity has been classified into three so-called branches:
Roman Catholicism: the largest sect of so-called Christians. (The term "so-called" is only reference to the title, ie, someone who believes his religion is based on Christ's teachings, not being born again or other definitions)
Greek (or Eastern) Orthodoxy: a half split from Roman Catholicism.
Protestantism: "protesting" from the Catholic Church, a result of the Reformation and another split from Catholicism.

Protestants sometimes add a fourth category: Cults.
Cults would include Mormonism and Jehovah Witnesses and others.

However, this does not fix any of the underlying and fundamental problems of the system. And Catholics consider these cults to be part of Protestantism.

This system is outdated, revisionist, and over simplistic.

How so?

This system was invented by Catholics in relation to them. While them being the largest name holder of Christianity does give them some credence in setting up the classification, it fails to accurately predict the nuances.

In other words, by using this classification system, we play along the Catholic view of history. And there are obvious reasons why we shouldn't go along with the revisionists.

For example, all the classifications are based on its relation to Catholicism.
Either you're
1. Catholic (Roman Catholicism) OR
2. Pretty much like Catholic no matter how much you pretend you aren't (Greek Orthodoxy) OR
3. Not a Catholic and protesting away from it, making Catholicism the "mother" (Protestantism)

It's all based on how Catholic you are! As I noted, Catholics consider Jehovah Witnesses and Mormons to be Protestants.

Catholics view all non-Catholic Christianity as rebellious and prodigal children to be subjugated under her wing as the "Mother of Christianity". I kid you not. I talk to a lot of Catholics, and this is what they tell me.

I know the classification system is entrenched in our textbooks in seminaries, history books, and such, The victor does write history. But for one, I refuse church history to be written by and from the point of view of the instigators of the Inquisition. It makes as much sense for the history of Jews to be written by Nazi Germany.

There are plenty of ways to categorize Christianity. I propose such a system:
1. Hierarchical Christianity
2. Common Christianity
3. Middle Christianity
4. Cultic Christianity

Hierarchical Christianity would be marked by the following things:

  • A priesthood apart from the lay people.
  • A priesthood with a patriarchal figure. The Pope and the Patriarch of Orthodoxy, amongst others.
  • Emphasis on infant baptism.
  • Emphasis on tradition.
  • Emphasis on church authority as final. May manifest as a catechism.
  • Emphasis on images, statues, icons, or other physical embodiments.
  • Emphasis on saints and angelic beings.
  • Emphasis on sacraments. May be seen, rightly or wrongly, as works salvation.
  • No separation of church and state. Sometimes, the church is the state. Theocracy.
  • Major in size.

Roman Catholicism and Greek Orthodoxy would fall under Hierarchical Christianity. The Chinese state church and other state churches would fall underneath Hierarchical.

Common Christianity would be marked by the following things:

  • No priesthood apart from the lay people. The lay people are the priesthood.
  • An adherence to the Bible and the Bible only as their rule for faith and religion. This does not mean they are free from errors of interpretations or conflict.
  • Emphasis on believer's baptism.
  • Emphasis on Bible's authority as final.
  • Emphasis on separation of church and state.
  • No images, statues, icons, or other physical embodiments, possibly except symbols such as the Cross.
  • No emphasis on saints or angelic beings.

Most Baptistic denominations would fall under Common Christianity, along with non-denominational, and Church of Christ, and others.

Middle Christianity would be marked by the following things:

  • A compromise between Hierarchical and Common.
  • A conflict between a separate priesthood and priesthood of the believer. Presbyterians.
  • A conflict between infant and believer's baptism. Presbyterians, again.
  • A conflict between separation of church and state and theocracy. The Lutheran and Calvinistic state churches, for example.
  • Emphasis on theologians and confessions. Calvinists, Lutherans, and such fall here.
  • Basically, mix and match with Common Christianity, and you'll have Middle Christianity.

Most Protestant denominations would fall under Middle Christianity. The reasoning is that Protestants protested from the Catholic Church, and so would dilute their doctrines and traditions. Much of Common Christianity were never part of the Catholic Church and thus not should not be considered Protestants.

Cultic Christianity would be marked by the following things:

  • A clear denial of the Trinity. This is the main difference between Hierarchical and Cultic, as Hierarchical usually does believe in the Trinity.
  • A denial of other key components of the faith.
  • Additional books of revelation. The Book of Mormon and the Watchtower, for instance.
  • Minor in size.

As noted, Mormonism and Jehovah's Witnesses would be in this category.

Will it catch on? Probably not. Does it suffer some problems from the previous classification system? In some parts, yes. However, it is a struggle to keep it simple while also covering a lot of systems.