God Withdraws His Hand

Rod Dreher believes that God withdrew His hand of protection from the United States on September 11, 2002. And, let’s face it, subsequent events do tend to support his contention.

On this morning in 2002, I woke up before daylight to join a journalist friend in Brooklyn, where we both lived, and to follow a NYPD bagpipe band down to Ground Zero. The NYPD arranged for one of its piper bands to begin marching from each of the five boroughs, all to converge simultaneously at Ground Zero, where the memorial service was to begin.

The only people who had access to Ground Zero were family members of victims, and officials. But when we arrived there, a huge crowd had massed outside the perimeter. I said goodbye to my friend, and melted into the crowd to gather material for the piece I was writing for National Review (I had gone to work there that previous January). I remember standing there at the edge of Ground Zero, looking at my watch, waiting for the minute when, one year earlier, the first plane struck the north tower. That was also to be the signal for the start of the memorial service at Ground Zero.

At that moment — at that precise moment — a ferocious wind blew in from the same direction that the plane had taken. It was uncanny. There was a hurricane far offshore, and this was its outermost fringe. Still, the timing was eerie. That wind blew like something biblical, all morning. Signs, chairs, anything not tied down was blowing around. I walked around in that for hours, watching and talking to people.

After a while, I made it to the other side of Ground Zero, and took refuge from the wind in Trinity Church Wall Street, the old Episcopal church next door to the Twin Towers. The Archbishop of Canterbury had come over to preside over a memorial service there. I stayed for that. At some point towards the end of that service, we all heard the bells toll from Ground Zero next door, signaling the end of the reading of the names, and that service. When I emerged out onto the street a few minutes later, the wind had stopped. I don’t know what time it ceased to blow, but I would bet it was when the last name was read. In all these years since then, I’ve never seen anything online remarking about it one way or the other.

I walked back home to Brooklyn, wrote a piece for NR, filed it, then relaxed. The phone rang. It was my journalist friend, slightly freaking out. “Come over,” she said. I took off.

At her apartment, she led me into her home office, and pointed to something hanging on a wall. It was a small American flag, almost paper-thin, and very old. Judging from the number of stars on its field, I would say from the Revolutionary War era. It was mounted and framed under glass.

And it was torn from top to bottom, right down the middle.

“What am I looking at?” I asked.

She explained that someone had given her that antique flag many years earlier. She had it framed, and it had hung on the wall of every home office she had had since then, wherever she lived. Every day she was home, for years, she had looked at it.

On this day, however, when she returned from Ground Zero, she noticed that it had been torn right down the middle.

Nobody else had been home, and if they had been, they would have had to have torn the paper on the back of the frame to get to the flag. It was untouched.

Both of us were, and are, Christian. The significance of this sign was not lost on us.

The curtain of the Temple separated the Holy of Holies from the rest of the Temple. Traditionally, Christianity interprets this sign as indicating God’s judgment on the religion of His people, the Jews. I can’t speak for my friend, with whom I lost touch after I left New York, but I immediately interpreted the torn flag as a sign that God had withdrawn his protection from America, in judgment.

The USA observably ceased to be either a Christian or an American nation after its leaders surrendered to decades of tireless blandishments by judeochristians, led by Emmanuel Cellar, in 1965. But it wasn’t until 2001 that it became undeniable the US government was being ruled by a foreign elite, as the intentional sacrifice of thousands of US citizens for the purpose of engaging in imperialist warfare and eradicating historical American liberties sufficed to demonstrate.

If Dreher’s instincts are correct, then America was judged for its excessive tolerance, for committing the sins of Jeroboam and for its submission to evil, and was given over to the wicked to rule. And so long as the wicked rule, the suffering of Americans and those who live in US satrapies will continue, and most likely, will continue to increase.

What do Jeroboam’s sins have to do with us today? More than one would think, because the root cause of his sins is a temptation faced by most Christians today. Tolerance is a byword for virtue these days, but it was Jeroboam’s tolerance for that which was wrong which led to his disobedience, and ultimately culminated in the kingdom’s full-blown rejection of the Lord God of Israel. The Israelites did not immediately turn to Baal and Asherah, indeed, it took them many years to reach that state of apostasy. But the seeds of evil had already been sown by Jeroboam, in his willingness to tolerate forms of worship that God had expressly forbidden.


Doug Wilson is a Boomer Fraud

It’s nothing but dance, dance, dance and the usual bullshit derived from Galatians 3:28 and Colossians 3:11.

There is no way to defend Western culture (which has been a major aspect of my calling in life), without incurring the charge of racism. This is a standard tactic of the Left. And in my experience, there have been many conservative Christians who would have joined in with this effort earlier if there hadn’t been all these darn kinists out there doing their level best to make the charge seem plausible. So rather than say that kinists were Christian nationalists before it was cool, I would prefer to say that kinists were playing the role of a dog in the manger—not really enjoying their brand of conservatism, and by their fringe behavior preventing others from wanting to join them. Schlebusch is skeptical of our motives, but I can still state them plainly. Conservative Christians aren’t worth a cultural dime if they aren’t routinely accused of being racists, and conservative Christians aren’t worth a cultural dime if the accusation has any merit or substance.

So of course, kinism only starts to look like a responsible option in demented times. You know, I find that I am using the word demented far more often than I used to. But it has to be admitted that kinism can start to look reasonable in comparison to what the commies are doing. This is because the commies despise whiteness far more than the kinists love it.

But you also have to realize that it only looks like a responsible option in the same way that a Calvin-Klein-hot-couple-in-their-skivvies ad looked back in the eighties, you know, sultry and miserable, when compared with a couple of body positive type models in one of their ads today, in which the probable-girl-unit has a beard, and the guy-unit is probably pregnant. The former ad was certainly sinful and worldly, while the latter is demented. See? There is that word again.

All of this is to say that the powers that be (with most of them being as white as the back of Elizabeth Warren’s knees) are doing their level best to make it appear like the kinists are the only ones who haven’t taken a complete leave of their senses. So why do I still want to cordon that kinist realm off with yellow caution tape like I do?

Here is how you know Doug Wilson is an inversive snake who has been appointed Gatekeeper for the rising nationalists by Clown World: he’s playing all the usual word games, in this case, by substituting “kinism” for “racism”. While I’m all for necessary neologisms, this construction is not only unnecessary, but it is clearly being utilized for rhetorical rather than dialectical purposes. The term does not clarify anything, but rather, adds to the chaos that cloaks the evil intent of the wicked.

Not only is Wilson intentionally misapplying the two verses from Galatians and Colossians, not only does he have at least one seriously suspect relationship with a convicted pedophile, not only does he delicately avoid referencing (((certain fellow white people))), and not only does he celebrate what he calls “gospel cosmopolitanism”, but he goes directly against Timothy 5:8 .

But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.

How is Wilson providing for those of his own house when he aggressively provides cover for those attempting to burn it down? Or when he attacks those who are attempting to put out the fires?

At the end of the day, Wilson is observably more concerned about his equalitarian Boomer ideals than anything else. He doesn’t hate wickedness or pedophilia or global satanry “with the heat of a thousand suns”, just “ethnic animosity”. OK, Boomer.

He’s not just a Boomer fraud, he’s an irrelevant Boomer fraud. Getting comfortable in bed with satanists and child molesters is no problem for Wilson, so long as there is no merit or substance to be found in accusing him of defending the right of a people to exist, to live among their own kind in their own way, to speak their own language, and to worship in their own way without being forced to accept the presence or the interference of others.

As part of the American Indian remnant, I know perfectly well where all of this “anti-racism” was born and where it is heading. But Europeans are the Indians now.

  • A great general has said that the only good Indian is a dead one, and that high sanction of his destruction has been an enormous factor in promoting Indian massacres. In a sense, I agree with the sentiment, but only in this: that all the Indian there is in the race should be dead. Kill the Indian in him, and save the man. Col. Richard Henry Pratt, 1892
  • “Segregating any class or race of people apart from the rest of the people kills the progress of the segregated people or hinders their growth. Association of races and classes is necessary to destroy racism and classism.” – Gen. Richard Henry Pratt, 1902

The good news is that the fact religious posturers like Wilson feel the need to utilize new rhetorical terms to defend their equalitarian inversions indicates that the rhetorical force of “racism” has been spent. Which means we can probably anticipate a new term to replace “anti-semitism” to appear on the public scene soon.

The only meaningful perspective by which intellectuals, idealogues, figureheads, and frauds can be judged is how well their words stand up before the clarifying light of the Good, the Beautiful, and the True. Doug Wilson’s “kinism” rhetoric fails all three aspects. He’s little more than a Christian version of Jordan Peterson and Ben Shapiro, and he’s intended to serve the same purpose of corralling conservatives and keeping them away from the genuine Christian nationalism that will never submit to global satanry and its Babelism.

In summary, Doug Wilson is offering a false imitation of nationalism in much the same way Jordan Peterson offered a false imitation of Christianity.


Doug Wilson is a Christian

But he is most certainly NOT a Christian nationalist.

In the early 1950’s a young man named William F. Buckley was tapped by the CIA to serve as the single head of the conservative movement that was rising then in America. The problem the CIA hoped to correct by tapping Buckley as their guy is that the conservative movement was getting out of control because it was such a broad and variegated movement. By anointing Buckley as the head of the movement that gave the CIA the ability to streamline the conservative movement into one single expression and thus could be monitored, controlled, and manipulated more easily. In his position as unofficial head of the conservative movement Buckley became the guy who was the gatekeeper of conservatism. Without Buckley’s legitimizing nod any hopeful movement conservative was out in the wasteland. By not granting that nod Buckley read Robert Welch and the Birchers out of the conservative movement early on. In later years Buckley threw Sam Francis, Peter Brimelow, and Joe Sobran out of the conservative movement. Murray N. Rothbard’s “The Betrayal of the American Right,” exposes all this.

The reason I go into all this history is to suggest that it may well be being repeated. Here we are in a time where Christian Nationalism is on the rise and suddenly we find the left wing Media anointing who the “Leader” is going to be by hotfooting it out to Moscow Idaho to do a mild hit piece on Doug Wilson. They hit Doug just hard enough for everyone to think that Doug must now be the leader of this Christian Nationalism movement that they kind of like. Next, we learn the BBC is coming out to do another mild hit piece on Doug.

The irony in all this is that Doug has said how he was a National Review junkie for years and years. Doug loved him some William F. Buckley. Now Doug has become Wm. F. Buckley. Pity poor Doug.

Now, any other time Conservatives know that they are not going to get a fair shake from the National and International media and so they decline the opportunity to be flayed alive. Conservatives know that in interviews their words will be spliced and segments will be edited by the Lugenpresse. But does that stop Doug from opening his doors to the Lugenpresse? Not Doug … nope, Doug steps right up to the microphone and speaks. And in so doing what has happened is that Doug becomes the leader of the “Christian Nationalism” movement and this despite the fact that all Doug is offering is warmed over classical Liberalism and not Christian Nationalism at all.

Anyone who is even remotely concerned about the false and manufactured sins of “racism” and “anti-semitism” and “white supremacy”, much less makes a big deal about opposing them, is not a genuine nationalist. Such men are, at best, statists who advocate a paper nationalism in the place of the real thing.

This really isn’t that hard. A nationalist is one who puts first the people who are related to him by blood and history, rather than by ideology, citizenship, skin color, religion, or geographic location. Anyone who does not support that concept, or who attempts to substitute anything other than genetic and cultural kinship for the nation, is a charlatan.

A Christian nationalist is one who ADDS the element of the Christian faith to the cultural requirement, not one who SUBSTITUTES religious identification for blood and history. One can no more use Christianity to deny national differences than to deny the reality of sex or slavery; Galatians 3:28 is one of the most intentionally misused verses in the Bible.

However, the mere fact that the media sees the need to coopt and subvert the term is a very positive sign indeed. It means that the nations are rising and Globohomo’s multiracial Babelism is failing.



Karl Denninger commented on my post yesterday:

Vox could have emailed me and asked about such a thing as he opined in relationship to what I believe, but he didn’t.

You see, it fits with a “gotta be this way” pronouncement to not do so.

It also allows one to hide behind “trust the plan” (of God, if you prefer) which, from my point of view, isn’t much different than those who buy into the “Q” crap.

‘Nuff said.

Fair enough, I stand corrected. I should not have assumed that Karl was not a religious man, simply because many, if not most, religious people nevertheless do not analyze current events through a religious or spiritual lens. It would have been more accurate to say something like this:

It is very difficult, if not impossible, for those analyzing events from a rational or a materialist perspective to connect the events of today with the pattern of historic manifestations of the same evil that is now ascendant, no matter how well they happen to analyze those events.

Karl’s particular beliefs are not relevant here, which is why I did not ask him about them and why I should not have even mentioned them. But I think my point generally stands, as evidenced by his subsequent comment about his perspective on current events.

I don’t dislike Vox and do read him from time to time.

My view of how spirituality has been twisted and abused through the ages both as a foil (“if you do that you’ll go to HELL!”) and a shield behind which one can evade doing what they know damn well is both right AND necessary (“God will judge; its not my place”) however, is well-documented and I’ve said so many times. The latter is especially invidious and, in my opinion, responsible for an unbelievable number of wrongs that various people get away with despite the fact that they did it being common knowledge and that the act deserves punishment also being not only common knowledge but in many cases near-universal consensus.

You need only look at the current VUMC controversy with them allegedly being involved in cutting off kids dicks and tits, perhaps with both drugs and knives. That predates Covid by quite a lot, yet in point of fact it is no different in fundamental character than their pronouncements vis-a-vis the virus and various public pronouncements surrounding it.

Risk assessment and personal autonomy be damned; there was money to be made and thus it was. At its core that’s the bottom line and it requires nothing further to see.

I do have a beef with those who claim that this is some spiritual war between good and evil (e.g. God and Satan, light and dark, pick ’em) and then, having identified the problem as such, refuse to join the battle when they claim to be on the good side.

Exactly how committed to that viewpoint is said person?

While I share Karl’s outrage and frustration about religious passivity and the refusal of Christians to reject obvious evil and to judge the wicked when it is both necessary and appropriate for them to do so, his response underlines the very point I was attempting to make. There is, absolutely and unquestionably, a monetary angle to the VUMC controversy. That’s valid and it is an important part of the equation. But there is also a very wicked spiritual angle as well; the obsession with homosexuality and transgenderism is ancient and unnatural, and it is an unmistakable sign of a satanic submission to Baphomet on the part of someone influential in that organization. One cannot fully understand the situation, or correctly anticipate the future consequences, unless one factors both the material and the spiritual elements into the analytical model.

It’s not an accident that the same ghastly evils, homosexuality, transgenderism, pedophilia, and child sacrifice, keep reappearing in the late stages of societies given completely over to more common evils such as lust, sloth, and greed. In the absence of a comprehensive theology of evil, we must make do with recognizing its historical patterns, and one observable pattern is that submission to Mammon in the form of usury and greed tends to precede submission to Asmodeus in the form of conventional lust, eventually followed by submission to Baphomet and Moloch, among others.

It even provides us with a predictive model; such societies are usually destroyed utterly by other, less corrupt societies that regard them, quite rightly, with horror and revulsion. And certainly that scenario is much easier to envision today than it was even three years ago.

As for the valid question of how committed one is if one does not join the battle, I would merely observe that we are reliably informed that “our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.”

When the time comes to take material action, you will know because your conscience will guide you. God will call some to be martyrs, some to be crusaders, and some to be inquisitors. The Pax Christiana of Jesus Christ is enforced with the sword he ordered his followers to buy. The evil will be confronted and the wicked will be defeated. But in the meantime, until the time comes, we must act as witnesses and as fearless speakers for the truth.

And of all the speakers for the truth today, Karl Denninger is one of the most intrepid. Which is why this is not a criticism of the man, it is merely an expression of my hope that he will see even more clearly, and analyze even more effectively, as the ancient elements of the ongoing conflict continue to come in focus over time.


BIC Digs Deeper

Bounding Into Comics contemplates whether my explanation of the reason the mainstream media is attacking Tolkien in the aftermath of the catastrophic debacle of the Amazon subversion is well-founded in light of the original Tolkien texts.

Arkhaven Comics publisher Vox Day recently explained why he believes numerous media outlets, so-called Tolkien academics, Tolkien influencers, and others are attacking J.R.R. Tolkien. There are numerous pieces of evidence of media outlets, so-called Tolkien academics, and others attacking J.R.R. Tolkien. Most recently, Deakin University Lecturer Helen Young accused Tolkien of racism, anti-Semitism, and orientalism in The Conversation.

“Fascinating, is it not, that a high fantasy writer could foresee today’s transhuman global technocrats in the 1940s? It’s because their goals are no different than they were back before the dawn of recorded human history: to be like God.”

Indeed Tolkien saw that evil because he also wrote in The Silmarillion, “Sauron with many arguments gainsaid all that the Valar had taught; and he bade men think that in the world, in the east and even in the west, there lay yet many seas and many lands for their winning, wherein was wealth uncounted. And still, if they should at the last come to the end of those lands and seas, beyond all lay the Ancient Darkness. ‘And out of it the world was made. For Darkness alone is worshipful, and the Lord thereof may yet make other worlds to be gifts to those that serve him, so that the increase of their power shall find no end.’”

He continued, “And Ar-Pharazôn said: ‘Who is the Lord of the Darkness?’ Then behind locked doors Sauron spoke to the King, and he lied, saying: ‘It is he whose name is not now spoken; for the Valar have deceived you concerning him, putting forward the name of Eru, a phantom devised in the folly of their hearts, seeking to enchain Men in servitude to themselves. For they are the oracle of this Eru, which speaks only what they will. But he that is their master shall yet prevail, and he will deliver you from this phantom; and his name is Melkor, Lord of All, Giver of Freedom, and he shall make you stronger than they.’”

The reason Tolkien is being subverted and attacked today is because he clearly saw the nature of evil and its objectives, which have not changed since men began building the Tower of Babel. The entire course of human history is one of repetitive waves of would-be immortals desparing at the Law of Nature, rebelling against their Creator, and sacrificing massive quantities of innocent mortals to evil supernatural beings in inevitably futile attempts to transform themselves into gods and thereby escape death.

Everything evil that is not driven by hedonism, greed, and attention-seeking is driven by fear of death. And the more one satiated one is of the first three, the more completely one succumbs to the fourth. Tolkien knew this, he wrote about this, and that is why the evil would-be immortals of today want him to be forgotten.


The Informing Principle

Archbishop Viganò points out that the informing principle of globalism, its “Great Reset”, and the would-be “New World Order” is essentially satanic.

No one acts without a purpose. And even what has been happening before our eyes for more than two years now is the consequence of a set of concomitant causes that presuppose an initial thought, an informing principle, so to speak. And when we realise that the reasons given to us to justify the actions taken are not rational, it means that these reasons are pretexts, false reasons, which serve to hide an unmentionable truth.

This is the way of the Evil One. When he tempts us, he lies to make us believe that he is our friend, that he cares about our good. Like a fairground peddler, the devil offers us his miraculous finds, his elixirs of happiness and wealth, for the modest sum of our immortal soul. But this, like a swindler, he omits to say, of course; at most he writes it in small print in the clauses of the contract.

Everything is a lie when it comes to Satan. The premises are false: Your God oppresses you with heavy precepts. The promises are false: You can decide and get what you want. And everything is a lie too when Satan’s minions are organising to establish the dystopia of the New World Order….

The globalist world does not tolerate comparisons. It demands this “exclusivity” which it denounces with horror as soon as it is not itself that claims it. It tears the clothes off the temporal power of the Church – with the complicity of fornicating and heretical clerics – and then demands absolute and irrational obedience to the dogmas it proclaims from Davos or Brussels. It celebrates freedom of speech and of the press, which it generously funds, but tolerates neither dissent nor truth, which it seeks to make simply inaccessible, invisible.

And again: the globalist world has no past to show us to confirm the greatness of its ideas, its philosophy, its faith. Conversely, it lives by falsifying history, by erasing the past, by eliminating it from the new generations. So that there is no one who, in front of Chartres Cathedral, is able to recognise the images of Christ and the Saints. So that no one would know that in the Holy Chapel was kept the ampulla of the Holy Chrism carried by an Angel to consecrate the Kings of France. So that no one could know their deeds, find their tombs, or understand the treasures of art and literature that have made the Catholic Nations great. The Cancel Culture reveals the radical ontological inconsistency of globalism in the face of the splendour of Christian civilisation.

The globalist world has no future. Or rather: the future it intends to give us is the darkest and most terrifying that the human mind can conceive. The future it presents to us is false and unrealizable. “I don’t have a house, I don’t own anything, and I’m happy,” Schwab and the promoters of Agenda 2030 try to convince us. But their aim is not to make us happy – which will not happen in time, of course – but to take away our homes and possessions. When they talk to us about pacifism and disarmament, it is not because they want peace, but because, being disarmed and without ideals, we will let ourselves be invaded and dominated without reacting. By imposing welcome and “inclusiveness” on us – adopting an insider’s lexicon – they do not want us to really welcome and integrate people from other cultures and religions, but they want to create the premises for social disorder and the consequent disappearance of our traditions and our Faith.

When they talk to us about “resilience,” they are not telling us that they will protect us from the disasters that threaten us, but that we must resign ourselves to absorbing them without protest. When they accuse us of extremism or fundamentalism, it is only because they know that the faithful and the citizens with noble and holy ideals can resist, organise opposition, spread dissent. And when they impose on us a mass inoculation with a gene serum that has no efficacy but many serious and deadly side effects, they do so not for our health, but to modify our DNA and make us chronically ill, with a permanently compromised immune system and a life expectancy lower than the average healthy person. And to introduce into our bodies – as we have learned from the complaint recently filed by Attorney Carlo Alberto Brusa – self-assembling graphene nanostructures, capable of making us geolocatable, including the military.

Never expect the truth from the Great Reset advocates. For where there is no Christ, there can be no Truth, and we know how much they hate Our Lord. 

Except I would not say that it is “essentially” satanic. It is quite literally satanic. It is the same evil that was behind the Tower of Babel, it is the fire of knowledge that the Prometheans worship, the water upon which the Phoenician Navy floats, and the Empire That Never Ended of which PKD wrote.

No matter what its name, all we really need to know is that it is the Enemy and our duty is to stand against it.


Quantum Edit List

An exhaustive list of suspected Mandela Effect changes to the Bible. As I previously mentioned, it goes far beyond the simple lion/wolf edit.

Isaiah 11:6… “wolf” replaced the young lion.

Isaiah 65:25… “wolf” replaced the lion.

Luke 19:23…”bank” replaced ‘exchangers’ or ‘those who lend’.

Luke 19:27…”But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them-bring them here and kill them in front of me.”

Luke 6:49…”sand” replaced with “ground” or “earth”.

A recent change in online NIV and some NIV copies in people’s homes is in Matthew 25, the parable of the talents. Now “talents” has been changed to “bags of gold”. This is in all online NIV translations, but it isn’t in our NIV in our home. That still says talents.

KJV Changes with KJV 1611 notations. Changes are in bold, unless noted, applies to both KJV and 1611.

Genesis 1:1 – “In the beginning, God created the heavenS and the earth.”

So now it is heaven, no s.

Genesis 3:15– This is the protoevangelical prophecy of Yeshua (Jesus) Messiah….This is a HUGE deal.

“And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; he shall crush thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.”

Now this verse says “it” shall “bruise” thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

“stuff” inserted 16 times for possessions or belongings. Once in Luke 17:31 in the New Testament, all other occurrences in the OT.

Here are the other locations of “stuff”…Genesis 31:37 (2x), 45:20, Exodus 22:7, Joshua 7:1, 1st Samuel 25:13, 10:22, Nehemiah 13:8, Ezekiel 12:3, 12:4 (2x), 12:7 (2x)

Also, “stuff” appears once in the NT, as mentioned, in Luke:

Luke 17:31… In that day, he which shall be upon the housetop, and his stuff in the house, let him not come down to take it away: and he that is in the field, let him likewise not return back. –should say belongings or possessions.–

There is a small possibility that one use of the word “stuff” may have existed previously. That possibility is in Exodus 36:7. All others are definite changes. This is a different word entirely from the other Hebrew words now appearing as stuff. In the KJV Scofield Reference, instead of “belongings” or “stuff” it now says…“furniture”. I will try to get the picture linked on this…

“matrix” used in five places instead of womb. Here are the verses in KJV and KJV 1611 that now say “matrix”: Exodus 13:13, 13:15 and 34:19, Numbers 3:12 and 18:15.

Job 19:23…Now reads: Oh that my words were now written! oh that they were printed in a book! Used to be “written (or recorded) in a scroll”
Job 21:24
…Now reads: His breasts are full of milk, and his bones are moistened with marrow. Used to be “his pails (or troughs) are full of milk…”

Numbers 11:12… Have I conceived all this people? have I begotten them, that thou shouldest say unto me, Carry them in thy bosom, as a nursing father beareth the sucking child, unto the land which thou swarest unto their fathers?….Used to say “as a father beareth the sucking child…” Some other translations say “foster father”.

Comment here…We seem to have a problem developing here with neutering the male and confusing genders. In my recollection of Shakespearean era English, men’s “breasts” were “paps”. Certainly not full of milk, or nursing.

Genesis 28:18…18 And Jacob rose up early in the morning, and took the stone that he had put for his pillows, and set it up for a pillar, and poured oil upon the top of it…… Pillow is what it used to be. So it gained an ‘s’.

Deuteronomy 17:1…. Thou shalt not sacrifice unto the Lord thy God any bullock, or sheep, wherein is blemish, or any evilfavouredness: for that is an abomination unto the Lord thy God. Used to be “defect”

Ecclesiastes 3:11
… He hath made every thing beautiful in his time: also he hath set the world in their heart, so that no man can find out the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end…..World has replaced eternity.

Leviticus 24:2
… Command the children of Israel, that they bring unto thee pure oil olive beaten for the light, to cause the lamps to burn continually.

Note: The KJV 1611 very likely always had this backwards usage. However, the regular KJV’s do NOT have “oil olive” any other place than in the verse above. At least not the 7 I have checked here. They all say “olive oil” everywhere else.

Isaiah 53:5… But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed…..A little discussion about this. In 1st Peter 2:24, it still cites Isaiah 53:5 as most remember it. There is reads: “by whose stripes ye were healed”. Most quoting Isaiah 53:5 from memory say, “But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and by his stripes we are healed.

Now, on to predominately NT changes. I have been trying to kind of keep things in order to help people have an easier time going through this. Even so, I doubt I will completely succeed.

Matthew 7:1… Judge not lest ye be judged…..Now it reads, Judge not that ye be not judged.

Matthew 6:9-13….The “Our Father” or “Lord’s Prayer”

Was….”Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed by thy name. Thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread, and forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us, and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil, for thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever. Amen


9 After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.

10 Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.

11 Give us this day our daily bread.

12 And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.

13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.

Matthew 13:15…. For this people’s heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

Was always waxed cold.

Matthew 19:14… Used to be “Suffer the little children to come unto me; forbid them not, for of such is the kingdom of heaven.” Now it’s all messed up. Here it is: But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.

Matthew 26:24….24 The Son of man goeth as it is written of him: but woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if he had not been born…..Used to say “better for that man if he had not been born.

Matthew 26:45…Now it reads:
45 Then cometh he to his disciples, and saith unto them, Sleep on now, and take your rest: behold, the hour is at hand, and the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners.

Used to be “Are you still sleeping and resting? Behold…”

Matthew 9:17…. Neither do men put new wine into old bottles: else the bottles break, and the wine runneth out, and the bottles perish: but they put new wine into new bottles, and both are preserved.

Bottles has replaced wineskins in this and the synoptic verses. Additionally, “bottles” has replaced jar/jug and container throughout the OT. The word from which “bottles” is translated points to leather skins or bags.

Mark 2:22…wineskins replaced with bottles.

Luke 5:37-38…wineskins replaced with bottles.

Mark 13:10… And the gospel must first be published among all nations.

Was always preached or proclaimed before.

Luke 1:35… And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

Was NEVER “thing”. This one really makes me angry. It was that holy one, not a “thing”.

Luke 5:19 and 5:24

19 And when they could not find by what way they might bring him in because of the multitude, they went upon the housetop, and let him down through the tiling with his couch into the midst before Jesus…..And again “couch” in 5:24. This was either bed or mattress depending on the translation. It never was “couch” in the KJV…Fairly popular scripture in conversation…”Pick up thy bed and walk”. No one ever said., “Pick up your couch and go home.”

John 3:16…Was…”For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten son, so that whosoever believeth in Him shall not perish but have eternal life.”

Is now…

16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”

Funny thing about this one is that I actually remember it both ways. Due to so much residual evidence of “shall”, I have to go with it.

John 8:32….”And you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.” That’s what it always was. Now it is:

32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

Acts 3:19… Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord…..Used to be “and“.

Acts 4:27 and 30…27 For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together,…..30 By stretching forth thine hand to heal; and that signs and wonders may be done by the name of thy holy child Jesus.

“Child” was “Son” or “Servant“…Not child.

Acts 12:4… Easter is used in several variations of KJV, many that people have been reading for decades and they are deeply offended that Easter has replaced Passover in their Bibles. It was always in the KJV 1611.

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

Many are certain that it said “a strong delusion”. I have honestly heard it both ways and cannot find it with the “a” in any KJV, so I am counting it.

Revelation Chapter 5 : “Scroll” has been replaced with the word “book”. It always said scroll in this chapter although it did say “little book” and the “Book of Life” and “written in this book” elsewhere in Revelation.

Revelation 12:12

12 Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.

It was inhabitants. It did not have “and of the sea“.

Revelation 22:12… And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.

Used to be according to his works.

Revelation 22:21…Added. It previously ended with verse 20.

Here is verse 20:

20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

I won’t claim to be certain about all of these purported changes, but there are several of which I am sure. The serpent’s head was always CRUSHED, not “bruised”; my NIV still says “crush his head”. The word “stuff” leaped out like a red flag the first time I saw it, Luke 1:35 was definitely “holy one” not “holy thing”, and the Gospel was most certainly never “published”.


Summa Speculatica

My aversion for theology, particularly of the modern sort, is well-known here. But that aversion has never extended to St. Thomas Aquinas, whom I admire enormously, and as I was reading selections from his Summa Theologica, as I do on occasion, I thought it might be interesting to consider my own thoughts on his various positions. So, I returned to the beginning, which is the ten articles on the nature and extent of sacred doctrine.

I answered them – my answers are in italics – prior to re-reading his answers, so as not to compromise my own reactions.

To place our purpose within proper limits, we first endeavor to investigate the nature and extent of this sacred doctrine. Concerning this there are ten points of inquiry:

(1) Whether it is necessary? YES

(2) Whether it is a science? YES, although not as science is presently defined by post-modernity or in the scientodic sense.

(3) Whether it is one or many? ONE, in the sense of true Sacred Doctrine. Of course, there are many false sacred doctrines.

(4) Whether it is speculative or practical? PRACTICAL, albeit with speculative consequences.

(5) How it is compared with other sciences? UNFAVORABLY in the modern context. I assume Aquinas is viewing it from the “Queen of Sciences” perspective here, but I could be wrong.

(6) Whether it is the same as wisdom? NO

(7) Whether God is its subject-matter? YES

(8) Whether it is a matter of argument? YES

(9) Whether it rightly employs metaphors and similes? YES

(10) Whether the Sacred Scripture of this doctrine may be expounded in different senses? YES

I’ll compare my answers with the Great Ox’s and attempt to ascertain where I went awry in a future post.


Contemplating the Mandela Effect

The Tree of Woe focuses his formidable intellect on the subject of false memories and divergent universes:

According to internet conspiracy theorists, however, the Mandela Effect is not just a real phenomenon — it’s a weapon. These theorists claim that the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN is used to manipulate our reality, causing changes in our universe each time it runs. This claim is widely popular on 4Chang’s /x/ and /pol/ boards, but it has also shown up on a number of other sites.

What these conspiracy mavens have failed to offer, however, is a mechanism by which the Large Hadron Collider could possibly change reality. On its face, it sounds absurd. How could a big particle collider change the universe?

CERN releases 300TB of Large Hadron Collider data to the public – KLGadgetGuy
Contemplations on the Tree of Woe is a reader-supported publication. It costs almost as much as the Large Hadron Collider just to pay for the instant coffee I drink while writing it. To help ensure a steady supply of caffeine to your contemplator, sign up to be a subscriber.

Let’s Get Colliding Largely
Theorists have nowadays accepted the possibility that energy emissions from Large Hadron Collider at CERN could generate quantum micro-black holes (see Alberghi, Casadio, and Tronconi 2007).

It is possible that these micro-black holes would emit tachyons (see Srivastava 1983).

As tachyons are faster-than-light particles, their worldlines are spacelike rather than timelike. If one assumes that tachyons have an invariant direction of travel, it follows that in certain frames of reference, tachyons travel backwards in time (see Arntzenius 1990).

Therefore, during its operational run in December 2012, LHC might have generated unobserved micro-black holes from which tachyons escaped and traveled backward into the past.

As these tachyons decayed, they could release energy which could interact with other particles in past. Such interactions, though microscopic, could cause “butterfly effects” (see Lorenz 1963) that materialized as retrocausal macroscopic changes in those worldlines associated with the interactions.

Voila. Each time the LHC runs, it changes the worldline. Reality shifts.

Well, Why Hasn’t the Universe Gotten Destroyed?
The possibility that the LHC might change reality every time it runs raises the question of why it hasn’t changed reality destructively. Why hasn’t the universe been blown up?

The answer to this is, of course, “Look around! Maybe you haven’t been paying attention to current events, but we’re getting our asses kicked, pal.”

I jest. The real answer is that changes to the worldline are limited by the Echverria, Klinkhammer, and Thorne (EKT) Effect. The EKT Effect proves that retrocausation cannot lead to paradoxes. Any self-contradictory event sequence will be replaced in reality by a closely related but noncontradictory sequence (see Dobyns 2011).

Therefore, the LHC cannot bring about changes which would result in the LHC not being built. Since the LHC is an incredibly large, expensive, and difficult-to-maintain piece of scientific hardware, worldlines in which WWIII destroyed Europe, or an EMP flare destroyed all electronics on Earth, and so on, are impossible. Subject to that constraint, worldlines could shift in a number of ways.

But Why Do We Remember the Changes?
Demonstrating that there is a theoretical mechanism by which the LHC might change reality does not yet explain the Mandela Effect. After all, the point of the Mandela Effect isn’t that the universe used to be different; it’s that we remember the universe being different.

If the Mandela Effect is real, I very much doubt it is the Large Hadron Collider or scientists that are responsible. I would assume a more supernatural force and a more sinister purpose are behind it, as an escalation of the way in which Christians are already being deceived, misled, and gaslight by perfectly natural means.

Jesus was not a refugee. Racism is not the unforgivable sin. Our ethics and traditions are not Judeochristian. If all of these false beliefs can be instilled by conventional means, how much more dangerous are those that could be installed by unconventional, seemingly-impossible methods?

And while I am skeptical myself, I remind you, one of the first objectives of the con man is to convince the mark that he cannot be deceived.


The Quantum Editing Hypothesis

A number of Christians are, quite understandably, deeply appalled at the idea that Satan can not only quote Scripture and inspire the publication of false and misleading Scriptures, but can even ex post facto alter the historical texts. However, 2 Thessalonians appears to suggest that in the rebellion that follows the exit of the Restrainer, the man of lawlessness will “exalt himself over everything that is called God”.

Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters, not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from us—whether by a prophecy or by word of mouth or by letter—asserting that the day of the Lord has already come. Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshipped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God.

Does this include “the Word of God” in the context of the physical texts of the Bible? It’s not conclusive, but it certainly would appear to be a potentially viable interpretation, particularly when all of the Christian organizations that supposedly represent “the Bride of Christ” have observably prostrated themselves before the spirit of evil.

And we know that God’s words can be perverted. Are you so absolutely certain that you know the limits to which it can be done?

Every man’s word shall be his burden; for ye have perverted the words of the living God, of the Lord of hosts our God. – Jeremiah 23:36

This is not an opinion. This is merely observation and hypothesis. Perhaps the Mandela Effect skeptics are completely correct and nothing has ever changed in any text or corporate logo despite our unreliable childhood memories of something having been different in the past. But the hypothesis is important, because it provides a predictive model concerning the possibility of future, more spiritually significant alterations.

Here is why I would caution those who insist upon the absolute impossibility of any such changes – and I freely admit that they are, to the best of my understanding, absolutely impossible. Anyone who is armed by the awareness of the possibility of quantum editing is unlikely to be deceived, whereas those who insist upon the eternal immutability of the text under any and all circumstances will find it very hard to avoid being deceived.

Note for the midwits: don’t even start with your ridiculous “X can’t be Y, because that would mean Z isn’t Z” illogic. In fact, please just excise the whole binary “if-then” routine from your repertoire. The subject is observably beyond you.