Two Linguistic Traps That Can Make You Look Ridiculous

There are two quirks of language that can trick you into saying some pretty silly things if you aren't aware of them, especially in regard to translation and ancient languages like Hebrew and Greek.

1. False Cognates. A false cognate is a word that sounds or looks so much like another word that you assume they must have the same origin (aka "etymology") and probably mean the same thing at some level. Don't fall for it! Many, many words sound or look like completely unrelated words. Before you say "This word in English (or Greek, Latin, German, etc.) is derived from that word in Hebrew (or Greek, Latin, Egyptian, etc.)" because they resemble each other, make sure that it's actually true. Languages all over the world have very similar sounding words that don't actually have any connection to each other at all. A few minutes of searching the Web can save you hours of fighting over a hill you never should have climbed in the first place. 

2. False Friends. A false friend is very similar to a false cognate, but can involve words that really do have the same origins. However, words evolve over time and the exact same word (or closely related words) might have totally different meanings in different contexts. One of the most obvious examples in modern English is the word "gay". The word once meant one thing, but was coopted to mean something else entirely. When a person uses that word, you need to know the context before you can know what meaning they intend.

Regeneration, Volume One by J.D. King

Amazon Affiliate Link

I just finished reading the first of three volumes of J.D. King's Regeneration, a history of divine healing in the Christian Church. Volume One surveys faith healing from the first century to the first few decades of the twentieth. I was surprised at just how much evidence there is for healing throughout the Middle Ages, but documentation is sparse for obvious reasons. Until the invention of the printing press, there was no easy way for a commoner to tell us how his dysentery vanished when traveling missionary prayed for him. In the nineteenth century, printing became much more accessible; a ministry could pay to have books or periodicals printed and distributed around the world. King understandably uses a lot more of his own ink discussing the faith healing movements of the late 1800s and early 1900s.

This history of divine healing is both encouraging and discouraging. Every era of Christian history has had miracles and dramatic healings, but they come in waves. A new faith healing movement arises, sets the world on fire, and then burns out in controversy and scandal or fades away into institutionalized religion.

With so much evidence, it's hard to argue that miraculous healings don't happen, but it also leaves the reader with some serious questions. Why then and not now? Why him and not me? When God uses such imperfect people to perform miracles, how do we tell charlatans from legitimate people of faith? Should we expect miracles all the time or are they temporary measures that God uses to advance a cause or make a point, like wilderness experiences designed to move his people from here to there?

I'm looking forward to reading Volume Two, but Volume One wasn't light reading. It took me a couple of years and I expect the sequel to take as long.

The State of American Politics

 This line represents the normal, human levels of hypocrisy that we all have:

====

This line represents the in-your-face, shameless, mind-blowing level of hypocrisy of the leftist media & politicians:

=========================================================================================================================================================================================^10

They don't even bother trying to hide it. Their elitist hypocrisy is right out in the open and has been for so long, screened from public view by a willing and eager press, that they wouldn't know how to hid it if they wanted to. We didn't see it before because the Press has made it their #1 priority to hide every evil of the left. They don't care about truth or "news". They don't care about children, the poor, justice, racial equality, freedom of speech, or any of the other causes they wrap their perversion in. They care about money, power, control, and corrupting everything beautiful and pure.

A reporter recently excoriated Trump because he wouldn't denounce QANON for accusing the Democrats of being Satan-worshiping pedophiles. I used to think such accusations were wild exaggerations. After everything we've seen in the last four years, I'm not so sure anymore. As far as I can tell, Donald Trump is the only reason we have seen as much as we have. They're tripping over their own feet in their efforts to bring him down, and in the process revealing their true nature. 

I'm not sure that most of the Left is consciously engaged in Satan-worship--many are probably just deceived--but I am convinced that they are entirely owned by him. To be a member of the DNC today is essentially to declare your allegiance to Satan, and I suspect that the filth and corruption we have seen to date is only the tip of the iceberg.

No, that's not hyperbole or sarcasm. The Left is pure evil, and it needs to be burned to ash.

Should the Epistle of Barnabas Be in the Bible?

 

The Letter of Barnabas was not written by Paul's disciple, as has been commonly presumed at different times in the past, but was either a forgery or written by some other Barnabas. Arthur Coxe, editor of Ante-Nicene Fathers, wrote, "The ancient writers who refer to this Epistle unanimously attribute it to Barnabas the Levite, of Cyprus, who held such an honourable place in the infant Church." 

Whoever wrote it, I do not believe it to be authoritative, and I am not alone. 

Coxe continues, "On perusing the Epistle, the reader will be in circumstances to judge of this matter for himself. He will be led to consider whether the spirit and tone of the writing, as so decidedly opposed to all respect for Judaism-the numerous inaccuracies which it contains with respect to Mosaic enactments and observances-the absurd and trifling interpretations of Scripture which it suggests-and the many silly vaunts of superior knowledge in which its writer indulges-can possibly comport with its ascription to the fellow-labourer of St. Paul. When it is remembered that no one ascribes the Epistle to the apostolic Barnabas till the times of Clement of Alexandria, and that it is ranked by Eusebius among the "spurious" writings, which, however much known and read in the Church, were never regarded as authoritative, little doubt can remain that the external evidence is of itself weak, and should not make us hesitate for a moment in refusing to ascribe this writing to Barnabas the Apostle." 

All of the Apostles were highly respectful of the Law, if not all of Jewish tradition, which had come to supplant the Law. This Barnabas, on the other hand, seems to be at pains to discredit the Law and to rebuild the wall of separation between Jews and Gentiles that Yeshua gave up his life to tear down.

Barnabas is not completely devoid of truth, but it contains enough error that it should be read with caution and should certainly not be the basis for any doctrine. For example, while the dietary restrictions given in the Books of the Law may well have a secondary meaning, they were not inventions of Moses nor were they meant not to be literally obeyed. Whatever hidden meaning the restrictions may have, the writer did not know them. This is obvious from his bizarre characterizations of the animals involved. (He says the hyena is unclean because it can change its gender. It cannot, but some coral reef fish, which are clean, can change gender.) 

I believe the misattribution of this letter to Barnabas, the associate of Paul, contributed to the proliferation of many false doctrines in the early Christian church. In this work, as well as in The Shepherd of Hermas, the Books of Adam and Eve, the Nag Hammadi library, and numerous works which no longer exist, lie the roots of the Roman church's errors concerning sex and marriage.

Do All Lives Really Matter?

We hear a lot about systemic racism and nobody doubts that the American people and justice system were once heavily weighted in favor of whites of European extraction, especially Englishmen, but that hasn't been the case for decades now. The plain and obvious truth to anyone who has spent any time outside of the USA is that Americans are among the least racist people on the planet, and anyone who has been in the corporate job market for long knows that if there is any institutional racism remaining, then it is against whites, not blacks. If anyone is likely to be the target of a racist hate crime, it's far more likely to be a white person in a black neighborhood than the other way around. I have never in my life picked a fight with a black person (or "African American" if you prefer), but I was attacked by black people in my own neighborhood many times in my youth.

99.9% of the time, if you obey the law and cooperate with law enforcement in the USA, you will have no problems with them no matter what your race or skin tone might be. When someone is shot or roughed up by a cop, in almost every single case, they could have avoided trouble by not *being* trouble. That doesn't mean that it's always right to cooperate with law enforcement nor that you won't be one of the rare exceptions, but it is a very good reason to obey the law and to be as polite and respectful as possible to all law enforcement officers.

Anyone who needs to be told that "black lives matter" will never believe it no matter how many times they are told, but the message of rioting, looting, & destroying lives will engrave itself in their hearts & minds forever.

Nobody who is countering with "all lives matter" believes that black lives don't matter. NOBODY.  

But if BLM terrorists (if you don't like that term, take it up with the many dictionary publishers) are allowed to continue employing violence and threats as a political tool and if people keep accusing normal, decent people of being evil racists for believing that "all lives matter", then those normal, decent people will start changing their minds. Very soon they will stop believing that all lives matter.

And in a very real sense, they will be right because terrorists, murderers, human traffickers, and traitors to their people have forfeit the right to live. Mercy and forgiveness for the penitent is ideal, but eventually we're going to have to take decisive and unpleasant action to restore order and peace.

From Dictionary.com.

A Biblical Day Is from Sunset to Sunset

The traditional Hebrew method of counting days is from sunset to sunset. As far as I know, this has been true throughout recorded history, while most other cultures count days beginning either at sunrise or at midnight. There are multiple scriptural bases for beginning the calendar day at sunset, but the most significant one is from Genesis 1: "It was evening and it was morning, the first day..." etc. 

People who take the books of Enoch too seriously tend to get caught up in all kinds of calendar controversies. They say that the day is only from sunrise to sunset and the nighttime doesn't count as part of a calendar day at all, so the Sabbath is really only about 12 hours. They also say that the Sabbath must be counted each month beginning with the new moon, so that the Sabbath is always on the 1st, 8th, 15th, 22nd, and 29th of the lunar month. (There are some variations on that.) I have read Enoch a couple of times, but haven't studied it--mostly because of the foul fruit I see in the lives of those who do--so I can't comment on exactly what Enoch says about days and months, etc.

These ideas create several contradictions in calculating feast days and Sabbaths, and puts their adherents at odds with the rest of the world. In the minds of most "Enochians", though, being at odds with all other believers is a feature, not a bug, of the Enochian calendar. True believers who accept the *whole* word of God know the *true* calendar. The rest of us are deceived....or so they want to believe.

I talk about the Sabbath idea a little more here: All About the Weekly Sabbath.

Face Masks and Social Distancing

Defense in Depth

• "the arrangement of defensive lines or fortifications so that they can defend each other."
• "a concept used in Information security in which multiple layers of security controls are placed throughout an information technology system.

A network firewall filters all traffic coming in and out of a network and tries to prevent threats like hackers and viruses from getting onto the network. Each computer on the network has its own firewall that does the same thing in a different way. The computer also has software that checks websites for malicious code, scans files for known viruses, and actively watches the behavior of programs for anything suspicious. A military installation has fences, security cameras, and guards at the gates. Secure facilities within the base will have additional guards, access control using biometrics, passcodes, id cards, etc., and alarms. The personnel are trained to watch for suspicious activity and alert security or intervene when necessary. This is called "Defense in Depth". Everyone understands this concept intuitively. We use it while driving, in our personal safety, and even in our homes. No single element of defense is sufficient to prevent all attacks. In fact, it's impossible to stop *all* attacks. No security system will ever be perfect. However, each additional layer increases the odds that an attack will be stopped before it can do any serious harm. This is also the concept behind vaccines, face masks, social distancing, limited gatherings, etc.. Whether or not each of these layers is effective, necessary, or unintentionally harmful in some other way is another question altogether. As far as I'm concerned, it's all a waste of time, and we should just go about our lives as if this was a bad flu season. Protect the vulnerable, take reasonable precautions, and keep living. My point is that arguments like "If masks stop the virus, why do we have to stand 6' apart" are silly and they make you look silly when you use them.