If History Conflicts With Scripture; Whose Fault Is That?

I haven’t found scripture to be in conflict with history. There was a philosopher named Ludwig Wittgenstein who developed a concept he called the indeterminacy of translation. I believe that people including theologians often misunderstand scripture. The reader’s ‘translation’ into there brain isn’t an exhaustive source of what scripture refers to.

I will try to illustrate what I mean. Say for example, that one has a report with words referring to historical events in ancient proto-Russia in the day of Yaroslav about 1000 a.d. The report found in Kiev- where Russia started, says that A, B and C were powerful symbols of Viking power.
So a modern theologian reading the report trying to understand how the orthodox church originated in Slavic countries, ‘translates’ the literal text into his brain, reading it. He uses his understanding of what he read in a Sunday sermon.

“I could find no evidence of Orthodox Christianity in ancient Kievan Rus. Instead the people worshiped A,B and C as well as Thor and Wooden. Only later did St. Cyril arrive in Russia to create Cyrillic alphabet with the gospel encoded within his homiletic apologetics. We must not make the same mistake of seeking to dominate Ultima Thule with literary literalism aboard spacecraft bound for the Kyper Belt.”

Well, we know as archival historians that A,B and C referred to Alpha, Bob and Charlie; three vikings that savaged Dniepr River settlements plundering them for booze and women. They were not religious symbols at all. That’s an example of the indeterminacy of translation. The events and the order they occurred in are greatly different than the language that refers to them. It is not possible to recapitulate with accuracy the complete complex of compresent events of a particular space-time locality of the past with scripture about it. It is naive to believe one can.

Scripture is unerringly true; it is human interpretation that is incorrect. Historians also are susceptible to making historical evaluations with incomplete information leading to inaccuracy.

A good example of the indeterminacy of translation today in the theological field involves the controversy of when the Biblical apocalypse occurred. Some such as Rev PhD Kenneth Gentry believe it already happened in the first century A.D. (I agree). Others believe it is yet to happen; those are pre-millennialists. I am fairly sure they are wrong.

He Shall Have Dominion: A Postmillennial Eschatology (Third Edition: Revised & Expanded): Kenneth L. Gentry Jr.: 9780977851676: Amazon.com: Books

Another example is in the field of creation and Genesis. There are numerous ways to interpret scripture. That is called hermeneutics. Interpreting ancient scripture at best can determine an accurate use of what the words meant in the day. What the words referred to as symbols and what the actual events were, are to a certain extent, beyond the capacity of language implicitly. Hollywood can make movies about Biblical times yet of course the reality generally wasn’t anything like that.
God, Cosmology and Nothingness - Theory and Theology In a Scientific Era (free download)

Indian Game- 3M Blitz

       An Indian game. Playing black I missed a mate in one...blitz.

What to Do About John McCain's Posthumous Glory Naming

The late Senator John McCain probably should have retired 15 years ago. Senators with brain cancer simply have impaired judgment. The brain doesn’t support thought in the same way with cancer as it does without. Probably the subconscious is altered substantially.

Fox news decided to award a medal of honor to the late Senator for being a P.O.W. and staying in the Hanoi Hilton even when his North Vietnamese captors tortured him to try to get him to leave and go home. Plainly that is worthy of a medal of honor.

Yet medals all around could be awarded to the congress just for being there to debate renaming the Russell Office Building the McCain Senate Office Building. They to can share the glory of being p.o.w.s as they are in a sense captive to the federal debt.

Senator McCain’s legacy of disregarding flight instructions to get to low and shot down, breaking his jaw while escaping his aircraft, being bayoneted by a Vietnamese soldier and being tortured into leaving which he refused was far beyond the conduct of his fellow p.o.w.s Maybe all of those people incarcerated by the enemy should get medals for valor from the Congress and a nice check too.

The Russell Office Build should be renamed the McKinley Office Building, or the Martin Luther King Office Building, or the Robert F. Kennedy Office Building and John McCain should just get an aircraft carrier with his name on it. It he is flying around anywhere in spirit, he might land on that.

Answer to Why Pres Trump Doesn't Wear a Beard

In California it can be regarded as uncool to have a mustache. Some believe it’s chauvinist. That could be a minority opinion though-maybe there should be a poll on the topic.

President Trump is more of a New York kind of guy than a grizzly Adams fellow. Yet if he has a substantive percent of Cherokee blood, like Senator Warren, he might not be able to grow a good beard, although that might be legendary rather than accurate.

Though the Donald is the living fulfillment of Frank Sinatra’s song ‘New York, New York’- a veritable Barbarossa in the flesh, if President Trump wants to win California next time, maybe he should grow a bushy beard and wear torn Levis to L.A. (if his star is restored) to show that he respects casual Fridays too.

A Paradigm for National Sovereignty and Globalism in the Future

Sovereign governments and nations are simply organizations exercising and reflecting the will of people for self-governance, within a criterion of democracy. Sovereignty for others may mean living in a subjective state as something like a captive or prisoner of an elite or authority.

A country is a word; a name, an abstract concept more or less equivalent to the word domain. Domain etymologically was from the Latin word dominus, meaning ‘Lord’. In my opinion the world shall have sovereign peoples of some form or other even against the jejune paradigm of one world government as the governance-for-others sought after by leftists, communists, socialist, dictators oddball religions and megalomaniacs of all sorts.

Economic powers with instant telecommunications tend to evolve plutocracy rather than democracy, since there are advantaged capitalists and elites able to lever the abstract tools to buy everything and to finesse the world’s billions to work for them. The power of elite wealth to end self-determination by national democracies is a clear and present evolving situation. Already it is difficult to imagine the reform of capitalism toward a new ecological sustainability foundation as crass materialism made popular by the social and broadcast media drives the billions of souls toward consumerism and blind allegiance to the succor of globalism under plutocrats and communist elites.

In the future social dynamics will tend to disrupt the constant political thermodynamics of stable power structures as they have over history, even as history evolved political forms and technology concurrently. Reorganization of a global state, that should be avoided to start with, would tend to be a greater disaster than managed. local troubles. Firewalls within a structure exist for a reason though some would like to remove them, and other remove them as obstructions to wealth development.

As humanity moves off-world sovereign powers may return to be the normal condition as self-reliance and cohesive organization of millions of souls wold be requisite with other authorities possibly light years distant. There are some very strong and beneficial points to local and sustainable democratic self-reliance that are lost in a globally homogeneous culture.

Adolph Hitler; Left, Right or Center

Adolph Hitler wasn’t fundamentally a political ideologue. He wasn’t very well educated. His ideas were the sort that are somewhat populist and street. People develop such ideas with a kind of intellectual feminism that hasn’t the genius of intellectual vigor. Physical rather than intellectual development is the rule, and that can be dangerous in leaders.

Hitler inherited an anti-intellectual tradition that General Hindenberg (later to lead the Weimar Republic until appointing Hitler to lead) established; he bragged that he had never read a book. Hitler’s origin and personal history can’t be ignored; it shaped his mature outlook on life. The First World War affected his opinions. He won an Iron Cross as a messenger on the battlefield. He was gassed and hospitalized and recovering when the armistice happened. The news gave him a relapse into what people regard as hysteria-induced blindness. Hitler and the veterans generally didn’t believe the war was really lost and that they had been betrayed by leftists and communists. Kaiser Wilhelm II was given an ultimatum to abdicate or there would be a popular revolution because he had been regarded by the German public as losing the war. He quit the job and left for Belgium.

There were some prominent Jews in leadership positions in the near-revolution. One had spoken at the Munich beer hall where Hitler would later lead the Beer Hall Putsch. Hitler found it easy to blame the Jews for the armistice and revolution, He was wrong about that though. Hitler also blamed communists for the revolution- they were very active in Germany. When the Russian Revolution happened near the end of World War One the Red visage to the east affected popular opinions.

However it was the German leadership that sent Lenin in a sealed train east to Russia where they knew he would lead the revolution. Probably they had some secret agreement with Lenin to be given the Ukraine in exchange for allowing Lenin to return to Germany and not to invade the new communist state after the revolution. Lenin did sign the treaty of Brest-Litovsk after destroying Russia and creating the Soviet Union. Germany owned most of Ukraine until Hitler lost it to the Soviets himself after invading Russia.

Hitler was sent to take over the National Socialist Workers Party by the Wehrmacht leadership. With the aristocracy deposed the 1% needed to restore their position in some way, and Hitler was the key to creating a corporatist government that would let the former aristocracy unite with government at the top level through business. His desire to be a new Caesar was just following the tradition of the Kaiser. Karl Rohm led S.A. Storm Troopers helped let Hitler take over German society and end the republic. Hitler's Storm Troopers: A History of the SA: The Memoirs of Wilfred von Oven

Hitler was a great, charismatic speaker able to lead the populace with a vision of a restored Aryan Germany purified of all of those that had brought Germany to lose the first world war that they could have won if the armistice had not been signed. Hitler was damaged by the war and not the best and brightest in the first place. A peaceful Germany with it’s scientific and engineering brilliance had all it needed. The uneducated veteran of the great war saw nothing besides expansion materially and killing hypothetical opponents.

Corporatism as a political philosophy co-opts the left socialist movement and grafts it into the Aristocratic/Corporate 1%’s will to power. Benito Mussolini invented it, and Hitler used it.

Communists on the left were the enemy. The right of the day and post-hoc are considered to be the fascists/Nazis, that initially were a leftist party. Neither side were U.S. founder style constitutional liberals that are today thought of as conservatives. In a way people never really know what left and right mean outside of a present context. One should use linguistic philosophy and a paradigm like Kripke’s naming and necessity to understand well that the meaning of words can change yet keep a little lasting meaning in some respects. Left and Right just cannot replace a good historical understanding of the people and events, circumstance and pressures, opportunities and challenges that led particular political situations to exist.

Search Engines May be Unfair to Conservative and Independent Bloggers

President Trump is concerned about the power of Internet search engines over what people see in the political realm. Plainly search engines like Google have the power to gerrymander search results to put up their own political views if they wish. If they don’t choose to do so, or if that never occurred to them, that would be good.

Americans aren't exactly monkey see, monkey do people yet there are a lot of people that follow current trends to go with front runners.  If the left-leaning media is featured, rather than articles from The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy or whatever, that will influence what people believe is important. Preferred locations for business such as Wal-mart along freeways bring in customers and so do preferred internet locations; hence people pay Google to get a better search engine result for their web page. Free and fair Internet listings that aren't repressed or disadvantaged by an algorithm are meaningful concepts for those with web pages,

It required a couple of months of using the google filter before I could get rid of CNN articles from the news feed. The top listings were invariably the usual suspects; The Washington Post, CNN, CNBC, Vanity Fare, The Atlantic and so forth; all left leaning Democrat Party supporting entities. Besides Fox, and Fox is weak on conservativism and foreign owned, the conservative point of view was non-existent. The filter out the source button at google news just did not work; eventually I wrote a blog article about the topic and after that it stopped. 

I used to get a thousand views on my blog many days before President Obama took office, then after a few years the views crashed overnight to fewer than 100 where it remains, I tend to support President Trump.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-news-on-google-is-rigged-against-him/

It seems to me that the Internet search engines do hire a lot of Democrats with easy access to programming opportunities to marginalize blogs that post opinions they don’t like,burying them so they are in a dark, distant place. The ability to influence elections that multinational search engines have is substantial. How equal opportunity and political ‘net neutrality’ could be forced upon search engines is beyond my constitutional law knowledge.

The better solution would be if their were conservative, independent, libertarian as well as corrupting Democrat search engines, so anyone could duplicate their posts to a friendly site if need be.