Everything Changes... Not!

Heard a little quote somewhere on this vast internet thats simply put as, "Everything changes."

Is this true? I'm sure people have plenty of arguments for why or why not it is. But the only logical conclusion can be is that it is a false statement. And the argument is very simple. The statement "Everything changes" is given as an unchanging statement, and any argument supporting it is given as an unchanging argument. The statement itself and any argument made to support it ultimately defeats it. Therefore, there are some things in the world that do not change.

As a Christian, I believe God's nature never changes. As a person with reason, I believe the statement "Not everything changes" is unchanging.

Y'know, "everything changes" sounds like something out of a movie. Did it come from some movie outta Hollywood?

Update 06/02/2012: That movie Ratatouille!!! One of the main moral points came out in a talk with Remy and his dad, and Remy said, "Change is nature, dad! And it starts when we decide." What's wrong with it? If it's true, shouldn't the two things he said naturally change (if change is nature)? Oh wait, we can't say that in the movie- it'd defeat the purpose!

People, think about what you put on your statuses! I will comment on them to point out their stupidity and write a blog about it. :D

Not filled with much to chew on, but wanted to write something for fun. Until next time,

J-Lindo

Forgetfulness and Youth Pastor Pressure

There was something I wanted to blog my thoughts on, but for the life of me, I can't remember what!!

Was it a KJV-only argument?
Was it something I thought up?
Was it something someone said?
Was it something I read?

What was it?!?!?! Grr.

Well, this isn't it, but a friend I'd just met recently had this conversation with me:

She goes, "I'm Methodist. My dad is a youth pastor :D"
Not incredibly impressed, I say, "Cool. Bet that's fun."
Then the truth comes out as she says, "Sorta..."
Betting I already know what she's gonna say, I say, "Not really?"
She then admits, "It is, but there are downsides to it... Everyone expects me to be perfect, and be a little angel... at church I can't be myself.."
I then say a bit of info I'd learned somewhere, "Ah, I see. Yeah, it's always the pastor's kids/youth pastor's kids (or any kids of the ones in church authority) expected to be perfect angels. Which is why oftentimes they're actually the worst kids- because so much pressure is put on them to be perfect angels.
Not saying anything about you specifically, I'm not saying you're bad just because you're the daughter of a youth pastor :P"
She then goes, "Yeah. Im not bad I don't usually let it get to me."

Then she says what I think is a bunch of poop that's been shoved down her throat, prolly most of her life: "God doesn't want it to. He wants me to try to reach the expectations. But yeah."

Bull.
Bull.
Bull!

I then say, "He wants you to try to reach the expectations? Someone's given you some messed up theology.
I say He simply wants you to love Him like a bride loves her husband. With a relationship as deep and loving as that, He'll take you through anything with ease."

To which she replies, "I have been told by my dad that I should try to reach expectations even though I may not fully reach the level of them . He said its the right thing and what God wants."

So that's where it's coming from. The pressure to be an angel in church is coming straight from her father. And why not? What youth pastor wants to be known for having a "backslidden" or "fallen away from God" kind of daughter? In fact, the youth pastor's daughter oughta show everyone what a wonderful dad he is and  remind them of the reason he was chosen for the job and they weren't. Right?

This is the kind of corruption I'm really growing to strongly dislike, especially since the more I look into it, the more I see. I bet it's been in church since day one and has since passed on down to our generation.

In the words of Stan Lee...

'Nuff said.

J-Lindo

What Christianity Is

I considered titling this "Mere Christianity," but sadly, it's taken.

So, I've got to do a 2-page essay (whew, not too long) on what I believe Christianity is. This is really ironic, having to write a long essay I'd rather keep short about C.S. Lewis and having to write a short essay I'd rather have long on Christianity. Anyways, here I go.

...Well, now that I'm trying to think about it, it may not be that long xD I must do it anyway!

Oh, I just looked over it again, and all I need for tomorrow is an outline. Alright, I can do this... I think.

What's the "main thing" about Christianity? What's the core?


I fear this is slowly becoming another Christian cliché, but I believe it's falling totally in love with Jesus, like a bride and groom. There is a Christian cliché going around, in which people reply, in response to being asked what their religious views are, "I don't have a religion, I have a relationship with Jesus Christ." (Which I've found to not always be a truthful answer.) As cliché as it is, it's what true Christianity is- a relationship. That's exactly what the main thing is, but it's much deeper and better than what that sounds like. Here's a comparison I like to make: I'm sure most everyone has had or does have someone they absolutely love. Someone you know so well you could tell what they were thinking and feeling. You absolutely hate it when they're anything but happy. You wanna be the best boyfriend/girlfriend/spouse you can be. You'll do anything to keep them happy. You can't stand not talking to them. You dread every second away from them. Whatever they like/dislike, all of a sudden, you like and dislike the same thing. I'm sure this sounds familiar to a lot of people.

I believe that's the kind of love God wants with Him and every human. In fact, you look at Jesus quoting Deuteronomy 6 when He said to love the Lord with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength. In order for her to even be a bride, is that not precisely what she must do, love her betrothed with all her heart, mind, soul, and strength?

What's so good about being a Christian?


Going with what I said before about love being the main thing about it, it's also what's so good about being one. I've not met anyone who loves to be hated. Even if they're hated by some, they're loved by others. Suppose even those others started to hate that person? The person would be in misery. No one to love, confide in, talk to, anything. In fact, it's a reason there's so much suicide (particularly among teenagers)- they feel alone, left out, like no one loves them or cares. One even gets a renewed spirit with a brand new nature, both different than the original. One that enables the person to truly love God and every last human being around them.

What's so different about Christianity?


As far as I know, it's the only religion (if one can call it that) that doesn't require good works to outweigh bad works in order to get to the good place. Instead of mankind attempting (and failing) to ascend to where God is, God came down to the level of mankind, even making Himself into the form of a man. Any other religion has mankind attempting to reach God's level, which does not work out, since no one is perfect (supported even in Christianity by Romans 3:23).



If I could have someone comment and tell me how I could do better, do so please.

Transliteration: Baptizo and Hades

There's another KJV argument that goes something like this:

Some modern translations use the word Hades instead of Hell! What is Hades doing in the Bible? That is of ancient Greek mythology, not the Bible. The KJV correctly uses the word Hell.


I wasn't too sure about this until a couple days ago, when it randomly hit me. (I kinda wonder if it's God just giving me random thoughts sometimes.) Hades is indeed the god of the underworld in Greek mythology. (In this case, the name of the god probably became used as the general underworld. We do that in English too. For example, the word scrooge was made up after Ebeneezer Scrooge, the old miser in A Christmas Carol.) So lemme ask this- what language was the New Testament written in?

Indeed, Greek. Perhaps the word for hell is hades?

If that's so, then they have merely transliterated the word rather than translated it! Only goes to show what a terrible translation it is, because obviously the people who made it don't want people to know where they're going without Christ when they die.


In that case, you've condemned your own KJV. It also has a transliteration- the Greek word baptizo. The translation is something like "to submerge, esp. in water".

So what? They obviously knew what that meant.


Nope. Remember, the KJV was going to be under King Jame's name, and the translators- and everyone in Britan- didn't wanna offend or contradict the king and his beliefs. Otherwise, off with your head. Short history lesson- the tradition was to merely sprinkle water upon the person's head, rather than submerging them. (It probably came from one of the ancient pagan traditions when Rome tried to convert England to Catholism.) One knows long-held traditions are not easily broken. If they made a Bible that contradicted the tradition and beliefs of the king, imagine what trouble they'd be in. So what'd they do? Made up a new word. Baptize! So if one condemns other Bibles for transliterating, one must also condemn the KJV for it.

I just checked it out with a KJV Bible program, in which I can click on a word and it shows me what its original was. In the Old Testament, I find that the only word for Hell is Sheol. (We've heard that one before, another transliteration.) It's the Hebrew word for Hell. Then in the New Testament, I've got Hades (told ya) and Geena, which I have never heard before. I'll have to check that out.

These three words do seem to be able to translate as Hell, but their definitions vary a bit. I'll have to look into them a bit more. I've found (I think) Hades and Sheol seem to be equivalents.

Oh, I found another one. Tartaroo.

Y'know, since the New Testament has a bunch of different words all being translated into one Hell, I wonder if they mean more than what the consolidated English word appears to say. I do think I'll be checking this out.

Let Me Google Unimpressed For You

I was quite unimpressed on Good Friday (04-06-2012). I meant to talk about this before, but it slipped my mind. Where was I unimpressed? At church. Why?

For this particular occasion, three Independent Baptist churches came together for one service. One of the three was the church of my sister's and my friends who go there. I don't really mind going. I tend to be accepted as long as I don't mention my beliefs on the KJV :P

Anyways, my sister and I went to the host church for the sermon, sitting with our friends. The host church's pastor (I think) came up and gave a short speech about these three churches coming together under Christ to celebrate His death and resurrection. This is where I was unimpressed.

How could I be unimpressed by this, you ask? Well, three churches coming together... they're all Independent Baptist churches. It's not hard at all for them to come together. That's like a couple white gangs coming together.

What's it gonna take to impress me then?

Had the churches coming together been different denominations- Methodist, Baptist, Pentecostal, Assembly of God, Church of Christ, etc. come together under one Christ to celebrate Him, then would I have been incredibly impressed. It would have been like black, Mexican, and white gangs coming together.

And I bet satan would hate nothing more than all the denominations of Christianity putting aside their differences and unifying. After all, what better way to attempt to destroy the Bride of Christ than dividing her against herself (Mark 3:25; Mark 3:25 NIV)? And indeed, what better way to fool the different divisions into thinking they're doing okay by coming together with the ones that believe the same way they do?

I just recently rediscovered Let Me Google That For You. It's quite amusing. Here's one I made for borborygmus. Terrible thing to have, it is. I get it everyday. You probably do too.

The Meaning of Life: Why'd He Do It?

Before I scare you off with the title, lemme say this. Yes, I am talking about Jesus and His trip to the cross and dying. No, my final answer is not gonna be saving us from our sins, getting us to Heaven, saving us from hell, or even to praise and glorify Him, even though all are true. But they all tie up into one thing. This one thing results in all of these. And I've only met one guy who actually knows this. He's the one who showed it to me, and now I'll do the best I can to show it to whoever reads this. I prefer doing it in person, but some of you live too far away.

Ephesians 5:25-32 (Eph. 5:25-32 NIV)* says, "Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave Himself for it; that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the Word, that He might present it to Himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church: for we are members of His body, of His flesh, and of His bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church."

We believe in the Bible interpreting itself, right? Even from Old Testament to New and New to Old. That's how it should be.

I believe Paul is leaving us clues to this "great mystery". Perhaps he didn't have the time to explain it, so maybe he expected the Ephesians to research on their own. But I do believe I know the answer. Let's dig around.

Paul says, "For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh." And, "of His flesh, and of His bones." He's quoting the Old Testament- in fact, he's even quoting the very beginning of it.

Genesis 2:18-24 (Gen. 2:18-24 ESV) says, "And YHWH God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground YHWH God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. And YHWH God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which YHWH God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh."

And there we are. Looking into the context of where Paul quoted from, we find the great mystery revealed. He says, "...I speak concerning Christ and the church."

In this case, let's replace Adam with Christ and Woman with Christ's bride.

God said, "It's not good that Christ should be alone; I'll make a bride fit for Him." And God brought Christ to Earth and brought to Him every man, angel, and creature to see what He thought, but there was no bride found fit for Him. Then God put a 3-day sleep onto Christ, and out of His side, a bride was formed.

That's why He came and died. Not merely to give Himself praise and glory, but so that, in His sleep, a bride could be made. When one has been forgiven of their sins, and the nature of God embedded into them, then have they become part of the bride of Christ. And what must a bride do? Love her husband with all her heart, mind, soul, and strength. But how could she completely love Him, unless He demonstrates His love first? John 15:13 (John 15:13 NLT) "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends." Indeed, no better way to show how much you love someone than to give one's own life for them. Romans 5:8 (Rom. 5:8 NKJV) "But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." He showed her He loved her. That's why being a Christian is all about relationship.

Why'd He need a bride to love though? "And YHWH God said, 'It is not good that [Christ] should be alone..." You tell me.

His bride is just like Him. No spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing. She's perfect. Sinless. Knows Him well enough to know His thoughts, feel His feelings, and speak His words. Being loving, joyful, peaceable, patient, good, gentle, faithful, humble, kind, and maintaining self-control. Not envying, not prideful or bragging, polite, not self-centered, not easily provoked, thinks no evil, rejoices in truth and not evil, and hopeful. She's got God's own nature, in short. (1 Cor. 13:4-7 RSV, 1 Cor. 13:4-7, Gal. 5:22-23, Gal. 5:22-23 WEB)

That's what you become when you get saved and decide to love Him. The relationship will grow. You will grow more like Him as time goes by.

This is the meaning of life- to have a perfect, loving relationship with Jesus. With what He's done and what we can become, what more do we need?

I'll always love Him.


*For those who are on the mobile website or don't know, I have a Bible plugin that, when I type a reference, will make a box with the verse when the mouse hovers over the reference. It changes translation when I specify it. I put an extra reference in parentheses with a different translation for comparison or easier reading.

Rebuttal to KJV Questions

Yesterday, I was trying to do some research on the whole "Bible has to be changed at least 30% in order for a new translation to be legally published." I couldn't find anything (as in, couldn't find any answers or legal stuff, I need to change my wording or something in my search terms), but I found a KJV-onlyist website with lots of arguments defending the KJV as the one and only perfect and inspired Word of God. In his table of contents, he had one called "Questions for the KJV Critics" and I looked at it, and I just really wanted to answer them as best as I could for some reason.


1. Since you're smart enough to find "mistakes" in the KJV, why don't you correct them all and give us a perfect Bible?

I never said I was smart enough to find mistakes in it. I don't know enough Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic to find any. I suppose you know enough of all three to be able to tell me it is perfectly translated?

2. Do you have a perfect Bible?

I don't know. Like I said, I don't know enough of the old languages to know. I assume you do?

3. Since you do believe "the Bible" is our final authority in all matters of faith and practice, could you please show us where Jesus, Peter, James, Paul, or John ever practiced your terminology ("the Greek text says...the Hebrew text says....the originals say...a better rendering would be....older manuscripts read...." etc.)?

Since you believe the same thing, could you please show us where Jesus, Peter, James, Paul, or John ever practiced your terminology ("you must use the KJV...faith in Christ alone gets you to Heaven if you have a KJV...people who don't believe in the KJV are stupid occultists and satanists...etc.)?

4. Since you do not profess to have a perfect Bible, why do you refer to it as "God's word"?

Oddly enough, I don't. The Word of God is Jesus, and the Bible is a compilation of translated Scriptures. So far, I haven't found a Bible verse or a good enough reason to equate Scripture to Word of God.

5. Remembering that the Holy Spirit is the greatest Teacher (John 16:12-15; I John 2:27), who taught you that the King James Bible was not infallible, the Holy Spirit or man?

Suppose I said it was the Holy Spirit? I'd love to know what you'd say next.

Anyways, if the Holy Spirit is the greatest Teacher and man isn't, why are you trying to teach me (or whoever reads these questions) that the KJV is infallible? If you really think the Holy Spirit should do it, then why not let Him do it while I'm trying to grow in my relationship with God rather than you giving me a lecture on why the KJV is infallible?

6. Since you do believe in the degeneration of man and in the degeneration of the world system in general, why is it that you believe education has somehow "evolved" and that men are more qualified to translate God's word today than in 1611?

In that case, explain the translations before the KJV. Using that kind of (bad) logic, shouldn't the previous versions- the Bishop's Bible, Genevan Bible, etc.- be even better Bibles? Why don't you use them instead?

In fact, let's take it even further and say Jesus used a degenerated Bible- He (and most of the other NT writers) quoted from the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, rather than quoting the actual Hebrew.

7. There is one true God, yet many false gods. There is one true Church, consisting of true born-again believers in Christ, yet there are many false churches. So why do you think it's so wrong to teach that there is one true Bible, yet many false "bibles"?

I never said it was wrong to teach there's some false bibles in the world. There probably are. But the teaching of one true Bible is silly. The Bible doesn't even teach that.

8. Isn't it true that you believe God inspired His holy words in the "originals," but has since lost them, since no one has a perfect Bible today?

Nope. God preserved much of the originals. Not in the originals themselves, since they are indeed lost, but in the thousands of ancient copies. If someone had the originals, they could very well change what it says, since all copies are based on it. But since we have no originals, but many copies, it is extremely hard for anyone to try and change something in any of the Scriptures. Now it's a matter of scholars who know much about old languages to determine what is the best translation to use for certain words and phrases, especially the ones that don't really have an English equivalent. God lost the originals (probably for this reason), but He never lost His words. He preserved it far better than He would have had He preserved the originals. We may not have perfect English Bibles, but His words is still there- Jesus came, died, rose, and forgave. And, from what I've read, we are sure of about what 98.something percent of what the originals said. The rest of the percentage is a few words here and there that really do not at all alter the message of the Bible. We may never be able to translate everything from the ancient languages perfectly into English, since there are things in some languages that cannot be translated into others, but God's message of salvation is still flying through in any language.

9. Isn't it true that when you use the term "the Greek text" you are being deceitful and lying, since there are MANY Greek TEXTS (plural), rather than just one?

Oh yes, there's many Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic texts. But with all the copies we have, we've been able to figure out almost all of what it originally said. 98% of it.

10. Before the first new perversion was published in 1881 (the RV), the King James Bible was published, preached, and taught throughout the world. God blessed these efforts and hundreds of millions were saved. Today, with the many new translations on the market, very few are being saved. The great revivals are over. Who has gained the most from the new versions, God or Satan?

Very few? I still hear of people getting saved all the time.
Why were so many saved in the time of the KJV? Because no Bible had previously been open to the public. The Catholic Church dictated what the people believed, and very few actually were able to get their hands on a Bible and see for themselves what it really said. When the KJV, the first public Bible, got published, of course many people would get saved from reading it. The Bible's teachings clearly contradict much of what the Catholic Church was teaching (though some of it was still kept in the KJV because it was a project to gain more control over Britain). When people found out they didn't need to partake in all the rituals the Catholic Church said would get them to Heaven, and it was by faith alone in Christ, of course there'd be an outbreak of people getting saved! So why's there not so much of a sudden oubreak now? Because having a Bible is a common thing now. It's no longer restricted to only be in the hands of a tyrannical church, and everyone has one or has access to one. But does that mean God's not still saving many people? Of course not.

I may not have answered as well as some other people could, but I wanted to see for myself how well I was able to answer them. 1 Peter 3:15 (1 Pet. 3:15 NIV) does say to always have an answer, right?

Oh, speaking of that verse, it also says to do so with humility and respect. And when I read or listen to KJV-onlyists' arguments, they always have some way of insulting people who don't believe the way they do. Stupid, occultists, satanists, miserable, jack@$$, double faced, fork tongued, unholy, unspiritual, infidels, etc. Sometimes they'll get pretty vulgar. But it's okay, as long as they're only insulting the ones who believe those perverted translations are still good Bibles, right?

If being a KJV-onlyist is gonna require that I throw out 1 Peter 3:15, I don't wanna be one...

Bible Verse Plugin

I just found a really really really cool html plugin for my blog :D
Having installed it makes me feel so... smart! I don't dab into html coding very often, though I know a little about it.

It's a Bible verse plugin! When applied, it looks for any Bible reference, makes it a link, then when you hover your mouse over it, it shows a little box with the verse(s) inside! Pretty cool, isn't it? It's made by Blue Letter Bible, and their website is here. It's a pretty good website for Biblical resources and such. Good stuff on there.

If you want the plugin on your website or blog, click here. Basically, you copy and paste the code, go to where you edit your html coding for the website or blog or whatever, and stick it right under where it says <head>. Pretty simple!

Though, you gotta be careful with how you word things. If you say something like "number 2" or "is 18", it picks it up as a Bible reference, so you'd have to reword it just a tad. Or just type the number words instead of the number symbols. I've had to look at my other blogs and correct some wording, but it's been no hassle. So I wouldn't worry too much about that. It's not hard.

Oh, and you can edit the coding and set the default translation. Mine's on KJV atm, though I always quote in KJV anyway unless I have reason not to, so do you think there's another translation I should set it to? Which'd be best?

Although, if after the reference I specify a specific translation that's not the default one, it'll use that translation instead. Really neat stuff!

There's a limitation though- the box'll show as many as 7 verses, but if your reference has more than that, it'll have a  "More »" link and it'll give ya a web page with the entire chapter(s).

Just because this fascinates me, Imma give ya some examples.

James 1:22

James 1:22 NIV

Psalm 119:11 NASB

Galatians 5:22-23 NKJV

Romans 3:23 ESV

Romans 5:8 NLT

Romans 6:23 ASV

Romans 10:9 RSV

Yes, I just used the Romans Road xD But hey, it's pretty effective, as you can see! Give it a try, you'll love it.

So, when I reference a verse from here on in, I'll put the same verse to another translation next to it for comparison or ease of reading. Such as 1 Cor. 15:3-4 (1 Cor. 15:3-4 RSV). Like that. KJV and RSV for example, side by side.