Archive for January, 2011

What was God’s one infallible perfect Bible before the King James?

January 31, 2011

I thought about the scriptures from 2 Chronicles 34, where during the remodeling in the temple the high priest Hilkiah discovered the scrolls hidden in the temple walls they were dismantling. Sounded like somebody hid one from the king’s wicked grandfather I think it was, who ordered all the copies of the scriptures destroyed. He told the king, who had it read to the whole nation, they repented, and he destroyed all the sodomite prostitute houses that had built up around the temple.

So there was such a scripture at the time, but nobody knew where it was or even to wonder about it, apparently, even though there were godly people still around like the prophetess Huldah.

As to the King James generation, it could be that although there was such a thing as a perfect copy of the Hebrew scriptures and Greek scriptures somewhere, God had a different plan going forward, because he know the end from the beginning, and he knew English was the language of the future.

But who knows how God works? Maybe just the fact that King James was so amenable to this project, and in England there was a “critical mass” of good, godly, righteous men who were also doubtless were among the most brilliant scholars in Biblical languages and European languages, that this was a blessing for their sake. Being vessels for such a work, God blessed them and blessed their adventures around the world insomuch as they spread the word anyway. Even into the reign of Queen Victoria, wasn’t it, she could point to the Bible to answer the question of how Britain got so great.

Of course when they stopped spreading the word and started spreading the pagan Darwin myth instead, the whole thing started decaying. The United States was saturated with Biblical Christianity and so they started growing in the stead of the Brits.

Now its our turn. The United States kicked the Bible out of the schools, and of course prayer and the Ten Commandments with it, and that “Christian nation” just let it happen, and they left us in the Darwinian schools, so they’ve been decaying from within ever since too.

–trutherator

2 Thessalonians 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

Bible Question #1

January 23, 2011

What is the longest chapter in the Bible?

Biblical Morality Was Always New Testament Morality: Christians See Morality More Rationally

January 16, 2011

Don’t let the atheist fool you with the accusation that “Biblical morality” changes from the Old Testament to the New Testament.

Biblical morality does not consist of a bunch of rules. The rules that God did give out, circumcision, the laws of Moses, the warnings of the prophets, these were gifts from God to those who loved him, feared him, obeyed him.

It was always the same “New Testament morality”. This absolute morality has two inviolate rules, i.e., the two greatest commandments. Now some will bring up the same tired old objections of slavery and stoning, which I’ll deal with later. Suffice it now to say that the idea that the Old Testament “endorsed slavery” is just plain false, and what the Bible talks about is a much lighter idea of “servant”. Think “customer service”, “military service”, “unpaid intern”, “medical internship”….

Keeping the first commandment “with all thy heart soul and mind” provides the anchor for applying objective, rational criteria for keeping the second.

In other words, if you decide what your own morality is, then you can allow yourself to say Jews are not persons, Gypsies are not persons, dissenters and believers should get mental health “treatments”, babies in the womb are not babies if they inconvenience you. You can decide that it doesn’t matter that sodomy is extremely harmful to the person and to others and to the body politic, without having to consider the facts.

But the absolute morality that comes from God keeps one’s eyes open to even those things that inconvenience us. The “fear of God” and the “love of God” obligate us to face reality.

This is why we can see clearly that the baby in the womb is a live human, even if we didn’t have Psalm 139:16 to tell us so, because we have the unchanging immutable 2nd commandment. “The love of Christ” constraineth us”. We are better able to look at the issue in context of reality rather than human-centered convenience.

Fpr example, I read once said that “humanistic thought always expands its concepts of morality to become less exceptionalistic and to view more and more beings as deserving of moral consideration” is an absurd statement that is wiped out by facts from history and reality.

And then he used a dirty trick. It’s DOUBLE absurd that he use the issue of abortion AS IF it supported this absurdity, because we can see around us that it is contradicted by reality.

“Humanistic thought” –meaning the idea that there is no God-given absolute morality– has made just our one nation (the U.S.) a killing field of 50 million babies (and counting). The human-centric thinker can just change the definition of what beings are “deserving of moral consideration”.

Such “humanistic thought” motivated the slaughter of more that 100 million human beings in the 20th century alone, not even counting prenatal infanticide!

Look at Spain! They should be the laughingstock of the whole world! In 2008 the Spanish Parliament granted “human rights” to great apes! And in July 2010 they declared baby-killing-on-demand as legal, as long as the baby is still inside the womb! But bull-fighting continues!

So yes, the decay in respect for moral absolutes that came from abandoning Biblical morality led to legalizing prenatal infanticide. By Biblical morality, I mean the absolute morality that comes from following the two greatest commandments. They have always been in effect, from the time of Adam’s first day, to today, and forevermore.

But if you don’t have the first, then you can decide when, where, to whom, wherefore, and how to apply the second. That puts the lie to the false label of “humanism”, in a way. The “Humanist Manifesto” (or one of the three versions) said that “man is the measure of all things”.

Abortion (it’s not a human life), next euthanasia (it’s a human life, but not “quality of life”), next eugenics (it’s a human life, but not enough), where does it go? Then there’s homosexuality. Male sodomy especially has proven to be extremely dangerous to health and life expectancy generally, independent of moral considerations, and yet almost all vocal humanists today demands that nobody even mention such facts.

Now almost every single application of the Golden Rule from the Christian perspective has a perfect rationale even in “natural” terms.

That’s why there are atheists who despise abortion and do regard it as murder.

http://www.godlessprolifers.org/home.html

http://www.godlessprolifers.org/members.html

So the morality that atheists today claim to be independent of God or Biblical morality, they only have it to the extent they do practice it, as an effect of the Christian heritage of a post-Christian society.

–trutherator

Where does faith come from?

January 16, 2011

Hebrews 11:1  ¶Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Romans 10:17  So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

The more you study the word, the more you can see how it matches the world around you and the specific things that happen in your life, and that increases your faith in what God can do.

Matthew 21:21  Jesus answered and said unto them, Verily I say unto you, If ye have faith, and doubt not, ye shall not only do this which is done to the fig tree, but also if ye shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; it shall be done.
22  And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive.

Matthew 7:7  ¶Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:
8  For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.

What’s the Mark of the Beast

January 11, 2011

You can think what you want, or accept somebody’s esoteric explanation, but it is a mark “in” the right hand or “in” the forehead, not “on” it, or hanging around somewhere.

Since you seem to like Greek, read the explanation from one of the few students of Biblical Hebrew and Greek at Harvard that actually believes the Bible, and what that “mark” really means in Greek (not Hebrew), –more like a “groove” or an “etching”– and why “Biblical scholars” get it wrong, and other Biblical explanations on that chapter:

Authorized Version Defence MAN’S NUMBER
http://www.kjv-asia.com/authorized_version_defence_man_s_number.htm

Again, the first rule of understanding the Bible is getting the real, true, genuine, Bible, or the real true genuine anointed translation done by brilliant scholars who also were believers deep down deep and had a genuine fear of God.

But the second rule is straightforward reading, in context. If it matches something real world without drug-addled contortions, then that’s it. Immediate context trumps everything else. “Immediate context” includes where the Bible itself interprets it DIRECTLY for you. Like the seven mountains in Revelations upon which the whore sitteth, it says RIGHT THERE (Revelation 17:9-12) what the seven heads and seven mountains and the ten kings are.

After that, ONLY if necesssary, comes intermediate context (surrounding scriptures, the general message of the book, and so on), then further context.

So the “mark of the beast” in Revelation 13 is indeed “in” their right hand or in the forehead.