Monday, May 31, 2010

Is BP Trying to TAP Instead of CAP The Oil Spill?

Here's an interesting theory that Mike Adams, the Health Ranger of relays as he interviews residents and former BP workers
in the Gulf.

I have to tell ya, it doesn't sound so far fetched to me. I was
wondering why BP doesn't have several plans in action. Why are they
waiting to cap an oil spill AFTER "top kill" failed. Multitasking is
something they expect their employees to do, yet they, with the billions
they have, cannot come up with more than one plan at a time...hmmm....

---------------------------start of article---------------------------

(NaturalNews) Today, I spent my time interviewing people on the Gulf
Coast from Mississippi to Louisiana. Several of those interviews were
conducted on camera, and you'll be seeing those videos as early as
tomorrow here on NaturalNews.

Interestingly, it turns out that a lot of the people living on the Gulf
Coast have a history of working with oil companies -- and even on oil
rigs. I spoke to several people who have a work history with BP, and two
of them told me they are certain that British Petroleum is NOT trying to
stop the oil coming out of the well . What they are trying to do, I was
told, is SAVE the oil well so that they can capture the oil and sell

This claim stands in direct contradiction to what BP says. The company
insists it's trying to stop the flow of oil from the well. But if you
look at BP's actions , what they're really trying to do is siphon off
the gushing oil where it can be pumped to a tanker ship and sold as
crude. It is a simple matter, by the way, for oil companies to separate
water from oil. They do it all the time in oil fields all across
America. So if they can siphon off the oil from the Deepwater Horizon
well -- even if it's mixed with water -- they can sell it for
potentially billions of dollars.

It raises the question: Is the economic promise of captured oil causing
BP to avoid using its best effort to cap the well?

Tapping, not capping Notice that the new device they're lowering onto
the well is designed not to close it off but to pump the oil to an
awaiting ship. This is a plan to "capture" the oil, not to seal off the

The mainstream media hasn't picked up on this yet, by the way. To my
knowledge, no one is yet reporting this story that BP may have never had
any intention of actually capping the deep sea well.

We already know BP has been extremely dishonest with the media about
this entire situation. By distorting the truth and lying to the public,
BP has lost all credibility with almost everyone (Governors, Senators,
journalists, etc.). So how can we trust that BP is actually trying to
cap this well when there's so much money to be made from allowing it to
keep spilling oil that can soon be captured?

In other words, it's in BP's financial interests to avoid capping the
well and claim the well can't be capped when, in reality, what they may
be trying to do is buy more time until they can lower a "capture
containment device" onto the well head that can direct all the
outflowing crude oil to BP's awaiting tanker ships.

In talking to the people face to face here on Gulf Coast, I learned that
Gulf Coast people don't trust BP , and they don't trust the company's
intentions. Today was the first I had heard of the BP agenda to "keep
the well flowing" yet suddenly this theory makes sense. BP, after all,
went through all the trouble and expense to drill the well. Why
wouldn't they want to cash in on the crude oil coming out of it?

To collapse the well and plug it for good would destroy BP's chance to
siphon off oil and sell it for profit (until at least August, when the
pressure relief wells are expected to be completed). And that is perhaps
the single most important reason why oil is still flowing out of that
well right now.

As one person I interviewed today put it, "Why should a British
petroleum company care about what happens to America's shores?" After
all, the financial payoffs to the businesses hurt by the spill may pale
in comparison to the billions of dollars in profit to be had from
tapping -- not capping -- the well and turning crude oil into raw cash.

There will be more to this story. Let's see if the mainstream media
picks up on this angle.

By the way, I don't yet have conclusive proof that BP's intentions are
to avoid capping this well. It's just a working theory based on people
I've talked to here on the Gulf Coast who appear to know what they're
talking about. BP would obviously deny this, but then again BP has
denied many things that we know to be true (like the fact that the beach
cleanup crews specifically cleaned the beach on Grand Isle before Obama
showed up, then left promptly as soon as he left).

If you haven't yet, check out my CounterThink Cartoon on the BP oil
spill at

Also, watch for video interviews with the people on the Gulf Coast.
We'll be publishing them here on NaturalNews starting as early as

I'm headed to New Orleans tomorrow to check out the local scene there
and see what else I can find out by talking to the locals on the front
--------------------end of article---------------------------------

"Why should a British petroleum company care about what happens to
America's shores?"

Good question. Why should they?

I wondered if there was a boycott for BP oil, quite naturally there is.

Facebook fans,, are some
calling for a boycott.

Update: BP is now saying that the spill may continue until August!!!

Boycott BP!!!

Sunday, May 30, 2010

Myths of Today's Christian Culture - Modern Translations

In light of my most recent response to a comment, I decided to write posts in regards to myths that are frequently mistaken for truth in today's climate of Christianity. Starting with the topic of modern translations.

Some Christians from various denominations promote their preferred translation against the KJV. Their most popular argument against it is this:

"The KJV is out-dated in language, therefore (insert point/argument here) and should not be studied out of".  

While, I unabashedly prefer the KJV and use it in all my posts, I have never encouraged others to abandon their translations, only that they research it. The truth of the matter is, not all translations are created equal. The author/publisher of the translation should be researched. And if you have full trust in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob to give you wisdom in choosing a translation, where can it be "wrong" to question the motives of a modern author/publisher, considering the capitalistic climate in which this Christian culture resides in? 

These publishers are certainly not "not-for-profit" companies. They are certainly are in competition with other translations, after all, they have a bottom line to support along with employees, as well as their own livelihood be it modest or wealthy. I should know... my husband used to work for one. 

There are Christians out there who certainly don't agree with my preference of the KJV and even more, dislike my encouragement of other Believers, truly seeking Truth, to "search out a matter" by faith in the leading of the Holy Spirit. These are the Christians who promote ONE translation to be better than all. They are ones typically associated with ONE denomination, group or pastor who espouse such beliefs. Such behavior and beliefs are reminiscent to personal dedication to the works of man over the truth of God.

Clearly my exhortation to research, pray to be led to the translation that conveys the sound doctrine of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, is a threat to them. And anyone threatened by my exhortation for one's responsibility to accountability (Holy Spirit) should truly examine by what means they call themselves Christian. 

But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. - Romans 8:9

My exhortation to "double-check" what you're reading/studying from and to be led of the HOLY SPIRIT should be "common sense"... instead it is an offense.

In any event, these are the people who declare "out-dated" language as a reason why one shouldn't read the KJV. While the argument may appear to be "common sense", it is weak in the sense that, "old" does not automatically infer inferiority. The argument assumes that "old" means inferior. This argument borderlines on silly because the implications of that kind of thought process apply more to cell phones, televisions and cars than the adaptations of the English language over time. Yes, it is a "new age" argument, where everyone should be "up-to-date" with the latest and the greatest.

BUT...the Word of God does not change. .

Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever. - Hebrews 13:8
Our concern should be interpretation. Which leads to point two of their argument, other translations are easy to read, thus, easy to understand. This argument is also a myth. Specifically, it is a myth that appeals to the "diet pill mentality" I described in my last post. Easy reading does not equate to knowledge. It is only by the power of the HOLY SPIRIT by which we receive knowledge and understanding. The HOLY SPIRIT is the interpreter by which the principles of God are revealed. (Read 1 Corinthians chapter 2, 1 John 2:17)

But God hath revealed [them] unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. - 1 Corinthians 2:10

But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned - 1 Corinthians 2:14
The confusion in today's Christian's culture is this...Christianity is applied in the physical sense, by which physical means for understanding and knowledge is sought. The truth is this...God is a spirit and those seeking to worship Him, must worship in spirit and in truth.

But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. - John 4:23

God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship [him] in spirit and in truth. - John 4:24 
If God is a Spirit and we are physical, i.e. human, it can only make sense that the only interpreter who can adequately interpret HIS TRUTH would be His Spirit.

It is by this principle I exhort the Believer to research, question and PRAY for guidance in studying out of ANY translation, for the matters of salvation and the Gospel are not physical, but spiritual.

That we [henceforth] be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, [and] cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; - Ephesians 4:14 

Thursday, May 13, 2010

Is Modern Better? A Response to a Comment

Response to KCTeenCenter on Translation vs. Paraphrase


Your desire to make things "clear" for readers who come to this blog, that the KJV is out-dated in language begs the question is the modern language better in communicating the doctrine and teaching of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, Son of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob?

The short answer is no, one cannot assume because of an old language that the KJV does not and cannot offer the principles and teaching of Jesus Christ of Nazareth and His Gospel.

Which leads to the second point: "KJV was written with the Church of England's beliefs in mind"

Since it is not clarified in your point I have to assume within the context of your statement that you are insinuating the principles/doctrine of Christ has been compromised some how by the personalized beliefs of the Church of England.

With all due respect to the history of the King James Version, where are these “beliefs” evident in the KJV that undermine the sound doctrine/principles of His Word?

Putting this thought on hold, let me share with you... the 2 reasons you list as basis of support against the KJV are reasons I have heard repeatedly to support another translation over the KJV. In dialoguing with a Jehovah's Witness, the same reasons, in so many words or less, were spelled out to me. This person attempted to make their translation (Watchtower) appear as though the only difference between the two was the language, when I pointed out the two translations taught different doctrines, I was told it (KJV) was full of errors. She never could show me how and where the “errors” were. My point… anyone can say the KJV is full errors, but proof, as they say, lies in the pudding...not in an archaic language.

Does easy readability equals understanding?

There is no question the NLT is easy to read; after all it was my reason for choosing it in the beginning. But as I explained in the original post, I repeatedly ran into inconsistent passages. Thus is the problem and reason why the NLT is the subject of debate and dissatisfaction of many.

In all honesty, I would not have recognized the inconsistency, IF I wasn’t desirous of reading whole books/chapters at a time as opposed to reading stand alone scripture.

The truth… this is how Christians study and it is also how pastors preach... with stand – alone, out-of-context scripture. Truly I got MORE out of the KJV in my short 5 years, compared to the 10 PLUS years I studied and read out of the NLT.

But back to the question, does readability equate to understanding...the answer is no.

Found in both versions the "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge" (minus "the" NLT states the first part of Proverbs 1:7 VERBATIM, how's that for an archaic language?)
Reading further in Proverbs 2:1-6

"My son, if thou wilt receive my words, and hide my commandments with thee;So that thou incline thine ear unto wisdom, and apply thine heart to understanding; Yea, if thou criest after knowledge, and liftest up thy voice for understanding;If thou seekest her as silver, and searchest for her as for hid treasures;Then shalt thou understand the fear of the LORD, and find the knowledge of God."

"For the LORD giveth wisdom: out of his mouth cometh knowledge and understanding."

(For your benefit: Proverbs 2:6 NLT For the LORD grants wisdom! From his mouth come knowledge and understanding.)

When asked why He spoke in parables, Christ answered this:

“Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.” Matt. 13:13

Keeping in mind that the disciples had the very presence of Christ teaching them, yet they still did not understand the fullness of what He taught…until the Holy Spirit was given to them.  Acts 2

In essence, NO, easy reading does not promote understanding.

The truth of the matter is today’s Christian culture desires the “easy” readability of translations today, they have, what I call a “diet pill” mentality.  Everything (Christians and non) must come quick, easy with immediate results.

With this diet pill mentality, Christians want the result without the work. They want the knowledge without the “fear”. They want the wisdom without searching and seeking (Him).

It is my very personal years of experience that the KJV has PROVEN to be consistent and wholesome compared to the NLT.

And YES, I absolutely need to study it with my Greek/Hebrew Lexicon! YES, I study it with a bible dictionary handy! And if I’m stumped for understanding, YES, I present my confusion to the LORD for He alone is my source of wisdom and understanding! I seek wisdom and knowledge of the LORD as for “hid treasures”. It is my absolute pleasure to do so!

In closing, I must say I find it disturbing when one promotes a translation as “end all, be all” for it seems to be a belief focused more on the “works of Man” rather than the truth of God.

Am I declaring in my post that the NLT is not to be read or studied out of? No, I am not. The NLT was apart of my journey in my walk with God. But I do declare and warn that the NLT can be inconsistent and at times confusing.

Why do I declare this? I am apart of NO denomination or church. I have made allegiance to no pastor of self-proclaimed prophet.

I promote SOUND doctrine and like the Word, I warn of “false prophets” and doctrine as it our duty to watch for and keep ourselves from. If I am wrong for exhorting and encouraging other like-minded Believers to search out a matter and cry out for knowledge, then by the standards of NLT lovers everywhere, I am wrong.

I leave with this question, if the NLT trumps the KJV in errors, language and understanding, why, then, are churches with different doctrines and denominations, reading from the same translation (NLT)? Why do they not agree with another?

Eph. 4:5,6 "There is only one Lord, one faith, one baptism, and there is only one God and Father, who is over us all and in us all and living through us all." - NLT

(I received the NLT from my pastor, when I was a member of the World Wide Church of God, considered a borderline cult, by many mainstream churches at that time)