Saturday, March 12, 2022

Legacy Standard Bible Flaw #4: Fornication

Before addressing this particular flaw (that is not unique to the LSB), I want to stress that the Legacy Standard Bible is an excellent translation of the Bible and I highly recommend it for reading and studying. With that said, however, it still retains several flaws that modern translations have yet to address and correct.

"SEXUAL IMMORALITY":

Like many modern translations of the Bible, the LSB continues to retain the false interpretation of the Greek word porneia as "immorality," "sexual immorality," or "marital unfaithfulness." This word is correctly interpreted as "fornication." An examination of every passage where this word is used will show that if you let the Bible interpret itself—in context, in none of these passages does this word mean anything more than illicit sexual acts committed by unmarried persons (single, betrothed [engaged], or widowed). It does not include incest, homosexuality, bestiality, prostitution, harlotry, etc., nor does it include adultery.

There is a difference between fornication (porneia) and adultery (moicheia). Unfortunately, many false teachers lie and claim Jesus provided an "exception clause" for divorce with regard to adultery (marital infidelity). If this were so, why then does Jesus use the word porneia in this "exception clause" while every other reference to adultery He uses the word moicheia? Because of this glaring problem, these false teachers lie further and claim that the word porneia includes adultery. If this were so, why are there so many passages that use both words side-by-side (Matt. 15:19; Mark 7:21; Gal. 5:19; 1 Cor. 6:9; Heb. 13:4)? If adultery were included in the word porneia, it would be redundant to add the word moicheia. If the word porneia includes other sexual acts, such as homosexuality, why are both words mentioned alongside each other (1 Cor. 6:9)? Again, if homosexuality were included in the word porneia, it would be redundant to add the word arsenokoites. When this word is understood correctly, it keeps us accountable for our actions and restricts our behaviour. So let's get our terms accurate:

Adultery = Illicit sexual acts committed by married persons. (Post-marital)
Fornication = Illicit sexual acts committed by unmarried persons. (Pre-marital)

It is imperative to know that the Bible does not combine all sexually immoral behaviours, such as homosexuality, bestiality, pedophilia, prostitution, harlotry, etc., into the word "fornication." This is a false claim by many Bible teachers (found also in many dictionaries and lexicons). Look up the 7 occurrences of porneuo, the 10 occurrences of pornos, and the 25 occurrences of porneia in the Bible and let the Bible define the meaning of these words. Therefore:

Adultery is only applicable to married persons.
Fornication is only applicable to unmarried or single persons.

The Bible uses the terms adultery and fornication to address both physical and spiritual sin. When speaking of physical sin, adultery is illicit sexual acts committed by married persons (currently married or previously married [divorced]), while fornication is illicit sexual acts committed by unmarried persons (single, betrothed [engaged], or widowed). Adultery is only applicable to married persons, while fornication is only applicable to unmarried or single persons.

Friday, March 11, 2022

Legacy Standard Bible Flaw #3: Shepherds and Apostles

Before addressing these particular flaws (that are not unique to the LSB), I want to stress that the Legacy Standard Bible is an excellent translation of the Bible and I highly recommend it for reading and studying. With that said, however, it still retains several flaws that modern translations have yet to address and correct.

"PASTORS":

For all the consistency efforts in translation that the translators undertook with other words in order to clarify and connect things, I am utterly astounded that the LSB retains the error of mistranslating the word 'poimen' in Ephesians 4:11.

"And He Himself gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers,"

Every single occurrence of the word poimen in the New Testament is translated as "shepherd" except here in this verse. Why? There is no reason for this alternate rendering. This leads to misconceptions and assumptions. The 1380 Wycliffe New Testament, the 1526 Tyndale New Testament, and the 1537 Matthew's Bible all translate the word correctly as "shepherds." Unfortunately, the poor rendering of "pastors" first occurred in the 1557 Geneva New Testament, and has been retained in every translation since (at least the ones that I am familiar with). "Shepherds and pastors" is introduced in the Greek with a single article. Teachers are shepherds. This is a single gift/function; not two separate ones.

"MESSENGER":

Again, for all the consistency efforts in translation that the translators did with other words in order to clarify and connect things, I am utterly astounded that the LSB retains the error of mistranslating the word 'apostolos' in Philippians 2:25.

"But I regarded it necessary to send to you Epaphroditus, my brother and fellow worker and fellow soldier, who is also your messenger and minister to my need;"

Every single occurrence of the word apostolos in the New Testament is translated as "apostle" except in this verse. Why? Again, there is no reason for this alternate rendering. What is an apostle? The word means "a delegate, an ambassador, a messenger, one sent." Jesus first sent out the 12, then He sent out the 70. Anyone who is sent to preach the Gospel and plant a congregation is technically called an apostle. Therefore, technically, apostles still exist today (although we tend to call them "missionaries"). If you pay attention to Scripture, how many apostles were there?

List of Apostles
  1. Jesus — Hebrews 3:1
  2. Simon Peter — Matthew 10:2
  3. Andrew — Matthew 10:2
  4. James the son of Zebedee — Matthew 10:2
  5. John — Matthew 10:2
  6. Philip — Matthew 10:3
  7. Bartholomew — Matthew 10:3
  8. Thomas — Matthew 10:3
  9. Matthew — Matthew 10:3
  10. James the son of Alphaeus — Matthew 10:3
  11. Thaddaeus, or Judas the son of James — Matthew 10:3; Luke 6:16
  12. Simon the Zealot — Matthew 10:4
  13. Judas Iscariot — Matthew 10:4
  14. Matthias, the replacement for Judas — Acts 1:26
  15. Paul — Galatians 1:1
  16. Barnabas — 1 Cor. 9:5-6; Acts 14:4, 14
  17. James, the Lord's Brother — Galatians 1:19
  18. Silas (Silvanus) — 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 2:6
  19. Timothy — 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 2:6
  20. Epaphroditus — Philippians 2:25 [the Greek uses the word apostolos, but most English translations translate it as something other than apostle]
  21. Apollos — 1 Corinthians 4:6-9; 3:22
  22. Two unnamed apostles — 2 Corinthians 8:23

That is 23 apostles right there. There were clearly more than this because "[Jesus] Himself gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as [shepherds] and teachers," How can this be if there were only the twelve plus Paul? It is because we have a wrong understanding of what an apostle is and was. Titus was most likely an apostle, too (though Scripture never addresses him as such), because he had the same function as Timothy. Neither Timothy nor Titus were "pastors"; they were apostolic workers. Likewise, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, and Titus are not "pastoral letters"; they are apostolic letters. Do not forget that Jesus was the Apostle (Heb. 3:1), sent from God.

Thursday, March 10, 2022

Legacy Standard Bible Flaw #2: Unicorns

Before addressing this particular flaw (that is not unique to the LSB), I want to stress that the Legacy Standard Bible is an excellent translation of the Bible and I highly recommend it for reading and studying. With that said, however, it still retains several flaws that modern translations have yet to address and correct.

"WILD OX":

Unfortunately, the LSB continues to make the modern mistake of assuming that the "unicorn" is a mythical horse-like creature with a horn in the center of its head and choose an erroneous translation to render the Hebrew.

"God brings them out of Egypt, He is for them like the horns of a wild ox." (Num. 23:22)

"God brings them out of Egypt, He is for him like the horns of the wild ox. He will devour the nations who are his adversaries, and will gnaw their bones in pieces, and shatter them with his arrows." (Num. 24:8)

"As the firstborn of his ox, splendor is his, and his horns are the horns of the wild ox; with them he will push the peoples, all at once, to the ends of the earth. And those are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and those are the thousands of Manasseh." (Deut. 33:17)

"Will the wild ox consent to serve you, or will he spend the night at your manger? Can you bind the wild ox in a furrow with ropes, or will he harrow the valleys after you?" (Job 39:9-10)

"Save me from the mouth of the lion; from the horns of the wild oxen you have answered me." (Ps. 22:21)

"He makes Lebanon skip like a calf, and Sirion like a young wild ox." (Ps. 29:6)

"But You have raised up my horn like that of the wild ox; I have been anointed with fresh oil." (Ps. 92:10)

"And wild oxen will also fall with them, and young bulls with strong ones; thus their land will be soaked with blood, and their dust become greasy with fat." (Isa. 34:7)

The Hebrew word rendered as unicorn in many of our older translations appears as riem (ראם), rieym (ראים), reym (רים), or rem (רם), which The Complete Word Study Dictionary Old Testament writes, "A masculine noun indicating a wild ox. It refers to a large animal with horns that are powerful offensive as well as defensive weapons." However, this definition is wrong, as we will see in a moment! The fact is, English translators from the past chose to translate it as unicorn for a reason. Rather than assume, based on modern ideas and concepts of what a "unicorn" is, we would do well to find out why these translators chose this word and what it meant to them. I am quite certain it was not the mythical one-horned horse we see depicted today. Chances could be quite possible that they were referring to an animal that we no longer see today; a very real and non-mythical animal referred to as the unicorn. However, I believe that we do see this animal today.

The Webster's New World Dictionary says of the word 'unicorn': "A mythical horse-like animal with a single horn growing from its forehead." The 1828 Noah Webster American Dictionary of the English Language says of the word 'unicorn': "An animal with one horn: the monoceros. This name is often applied to the rhinoceros." Hmm... interesting. Notice how this definition says nothing about a "horse," a "horse-like animal," a "mythical animal," a "fictitious creature," or "Greek mythology"? It says this name is often applied to the rhinoceros. People frequently and erroneously think of rhinoceroses as having two horns. If you look up the word "rhinoceros" in the same dictionary, you read: "A genus of quadrupeds of two species, one of which, the unicorn, has a single horn growing almost erect from the nose. ... There is another species with two horns, the bicornis." Noah's original dictionary was written almost 200 years ago. The KJV Bible was translated over 400 years ago. The Wycliffe Bible was first published in 1382 and used the word 'unicorn'. So if the definition of the word 'unicorn' has changed in the last 200 years from a rhinoceros to a horse, it does not make sense to take a modern definition of the word 'unicorn' and apply it to a 400-year-old and a 600-year-old translation of the Bible. That is illogical. The reference to the description of its strength should be noted; not just the name. This animal is obviously very powerful. What kind of strength does a horse have in contrast to that of a rhinoceros? 

Furthermore, it is interesting to note that the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures) translated these words as monokeros (μονοκερως), monokerotos (μονοκερωτος), and monokeroton (μονοκερωτων), which literally mean "one horn"; μονος "only, alone, without others" (i.e., "one") and κερας, "horn." Nearly 2,000 years before the Geneva and KJV Bibles were produced, the Hebrew scholars who translated the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek chose these words. The Latin Vulgate translates the first 5 passages as rinocerota, rinoceros, and rinocerotis (rhinoceros), while it translates the last 4 passages as unicornis , unicornes, and unicornium. The Douay-Rheims Latin Bible renders Psalm 29:6 as rinocerotis and Psalm 92:10 as monocerotis (Remember Noah Webster's definition? Remember the Septuagint's rendering?). Interestingly enough, the scientific name for the single-horned rhinoceros is Rhinoceros unicornis.

You see, in Deuteronomy 33:17, in the KJV, it says, "His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh." The Hebrew word for 'unicorn' is singular, whereas the Hebrew word for 'horns' is plural possessive. Now, look closer at this passage and what it says: "his horns are like the horns of unicorns"; and it goes on to say "they are the ten thousands of Ephraim" and "they are the thousands of Manasseh." Back in Genesis 48:19, it was prophesied that Ephraim would be greater than Manasseh. In the Latin Vulgate, the word 'unicorn' here is rinocerotis; the two-horned rhinoceros. Ever examine the horns of a two-horned Rhinoceros?

Ephraim is compared to the larger horn of the two-horned Rhinoceros, while Manasseh is compared to the smaller horn. A "wild bull" or a "wild ox" is not a suitable translation for these passages. These translators have rendered it this way because, rather than believe the Bible and do their homework, they applied modern understanding of the mythical unicorn and feared the Bible might contain some kind of error. We can trust our Bibles, people! Something to think about.

Wednesday, March 09, 2022

Legacy Standard Bible Flaw #1: Daniel 9:24-27

Before addressing this particular flaw (that is not unique to the LSB), I want to stress that the Legacy Standard Bible is an excellent translation of the Bible and I highly recommend it for reading and studying. With that said, however, it still retains several flaws that modern translations have yet to address and correct.

CHIASM / CHIASTIC STRUCTURE:

The translators of the LSB sought to reveal several chiasms in Scripture in order to help the reader, yet they seem to have willfully ignored the most obvious chiasm: Daniel 9:24-27.

What Is A Chiasm / Chiastic Structure? The term chiasm comes from the Greek letter chi, which looks like our letter X. A chiasm (also called a chiasmus) is a literary device wherein a sequence of ideas is presented and then repeated in reverse order, frequently used to emphasize the idea at the center. This results in a "mirror" effect as the ideas are "reflected" back in the passage. It is similar to a palindrome, a word or phrase that can be read forwards and backwards (e.g., deed, civic, kayak, level, racecar, rotator, Hannah, "Was it a rat I saw?"). Each idea is connected to its "reflection" by a repeated word, which is often in a related form.

The structure of a chiasm is typically expressed via a series of letters, with each letter representing a new idea. The first idea corresponds to the last idea, the second idea corresponds to the second last idea, the third idea corresponds to the third last idea, etc. For example, the structure ABCCBA refers to three ideas (A, B, and C) repeated in reverse order (C, B, and A). Chiasms frequently include a main idea in the middle of the repetition, which by virtue of its location is emphasized. The structure ABCXCBA has the three ideas (A, B, and C) repeated in reverse order, but a fourth idea is inserted before the repetition (X). The middle idea is the central point of the chiasm, the main focus. It is what all the other ideas are pointing to.

The motto of Alexandre Dumas' Three Musketeers, "All for one, and one for all," is a basic chiasm. The words all and one are repeated in reverse order in the second half of the sentence. The same goes for the common saying "When the going gets tough, the tough get going." Benjamin Franklin's axiom "By failing to prepare, you are preparing to fail" is a chiasm, as is John F. Kennedy's "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." Some chiasms are so complex that they span entire poems. (Palindromes can do the same thing, as seen here.)

The letter to the Colossians is filled with chiastic structure. An example is 1:15-20.

A (1:15-16) — Everything in heaven and earth
B (1:17-18) — He is the head of the body, the church
A (1:19-20) — Everything in heaven and earth

There are many examples of chiasms in the Bible. Jesus' words in Mark 2:27 are in the form of a chiasm: "The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath." Genesis 6-9, Joshua 1:5-9, Isaiah 1:21-26, Ecclesiastes 11:3-12:2, Amos 5:4-6a, and Matthew 23:12 are other examples of chiasms. Joel 3:17-21 is an example of a longer chiasm, having seven parts, much the same as the chiasm found in Daniel 9:25-27.

Messiah cut off (v.26a)
Construction (v.25c) ——— Destruction (v.26b)
        Unto Messiah (v.25b) ——— Messiah covenant (v.27a)
Construction (v.25a) ——— Destruction (v.27c)

Viewing Daniel 9:25-27 in this way clarifies a great deal of confusion. The last part of verse 27 describes the destruction of Jerusalem, which corresponds to its construction in the beginning of verse 25. The he in the first part of verse 27 quite obviously corresponds to the Messiah in the second part of verse 25. The death of the Messiah is the great focus of this prophecy as His death would make atonement for all evil and, as a result, bring in everlasting righteousness (v. 24). Both the chiastic structure and poetic structure of Daniel 9:24-27 utterly obliterate the eisegesis and false interpretation imposed on this passage by Dispensationalists.

Monday, February 21, 2022

The Cult of Veganism

Animals are not "soulful"! They are soul-less! They do not have souls!

Only one species was given a soul, and that is man:

"Then Yahweh God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." Genesis 2:7

No serious individual professing to be a Christian can call themselves a Vegan; the Vegan's god is the animals while the Christian's God is Yahweh.

If you choose not to eat meat, but only fruits and vegetables, that is fine. However, you are not a "Vegan"; you are a Vegetarian. Get your terms correct! Vegans are a cult who worship all animals. They do not just believe that we should not eat animals, but that we should not use them in clothing or in any other way. They do not believe that we should use honey from bees or silk from silk worms either. A true Vegan will not wear a leather belt or shoes because they come from animals. That is, if he/she is the least bit consistent and not a double-minded hypocrite.

If you are a Christian who chooses to be a Vegetarian, understand that Scripture calls you the "weaker" brother:

"One person has faith that he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats vegetables only." Romans 14:2

Before you attempt any silly arguments or excuses, let me remind you that "all Scripture is God-breathed" (2 Tim. 3:16). What Paul wrote here, he was inspired by the Holy Spirit to write. Ergo, Paul's words here come directly from God, which means they are God's words. God called you the "weaker" brother. I encourage you to think twice before you attempt to argue with God.

Vegans, like most delusional individuals, are incapable of independent critical thought. They are unable to think logically, objectively, or even rationally. Like homophiles, transphiles, and the politically far-Left, Vegans are led about and controlled by their emotions. Their cognitive functions are intellectually void. Vegans will try to convince other humans that we should not eat fish or other animals by concocting ridiculous nonsensical illustrations, such as fish being close-knit families swimming around talking with each other when suddenly their brother or sister or whatever is snatched away forever. If Vegans possessed even an ounce of intelligence, they would try applying their nonsensical illustrations to the entire animal kingdom. Their close-knit family of fish are swimming around talking with each other when suddenly their brother or sister or whatever is snatched away forever by a bear or a raccoon, or a wolf, etc. Are these Vegans going to start telling all animals that they need to stop eating each other? Will they use the same pathetically lame illustrations? Owls eat rabbits and mice. Wolves eat deer and rabbits. How about spiders eating flies? What about anteaters eating ants? Oh no! How atrocious and devastating!

The entire idea of Veganism deserves to be mocked. They show you photos of these creatures and talk about how beautiful they are, but they refuse to open their eyes to the real world and look at images of animals attacking other animals in order to eat and survive. They attempt to call humans "inhumane" for doing so, and pretend animals doing so do not actually exist. They are attempting to live out their own fantasy world and demanding others submit to it, too, exactly the same as homophiles and transphiles. Try as hard as you want, but you cannot sweep reality under the rug and pretend it does not actually exist. It is one thing to be concerned with the inhumane treatment of animals (we should always take the best care of them, as God commanded us in the Garden), but it is another thing to say we should not eat them when nature itself is doing the eating. You can defend a worthwhile cause without going overboard and becoming a complete lunatic.

Monday, February 14, 2022

God Did Not Return Jews to Israel in 1948

I have often said that it was not God who brought the Jews back to the land of Israel in 1948. With regard to the Babylonian captivity, God's Word states emphatically and unequivocally that for the Jews to be returned to the land they must return to God with their whole heart, mind, and soul. Scripture never promises another return after the events of A.D. 70! Anyone who claims otherwise is ignoring the historical context and twisting Scripture. Nevertheless, if they were to be returned again, this same stipulation would have to be met. Today, that means that they would have to accept Jesus as their Messiah. This has never been done! Jews are not saved on account of their "race." If they want to receive salvation, they must receive it in the exact same manner as everyone else. Jews who adhere to Judaism today believe that the Talmud is the "life of Judaism." The Talmud has several extremely repulsive things to say about Jesus and Christians. Observe:

"Jesus fornicated with his jack ass." Sanhedrin 105a-b

"Jesus is in hell and is being punished by being boiled in hot semen. Christians are boiled in dung." Gittin 57a

I have also said that it was the Zionists who brought the Jews back to Israel in 1948. To be honest, I never really knew much about the Zionists. I just assumed that it was another term for Dispensationalists, or Semitophiles. It turns out that Zionism was founded by Theodor Herzl in 1895. He wrote a small book titled Der Judenstaat (The State of the Jews). Here are some of the things he put forth in his booklet:

"The idea I have developed in this pamphlet is an ancient one: It is the restoration of the Jewish State ..."

"The decisive factor is our propelling force. And what is that force? The plight of the Jews ... I am profoundly convinced that I am right, though I doubt whether I shall live to see myself proved so. Those who today inaugurate this movement are unlikely to live to see its glorious culmination. But the very inauguration is enough to inspire in them a high pride and the joy of an inner liberation of their existence ..."

"The plan would seem mad enough if a single individual were to undertake it; but if many Jews simultaneously agree on it, it is entirely reasonable, and its achievement presents no difficulties worth mentioning. The idea depends only on the number of its adherents. Perhaps our ambitious young men, to whom every road of advancement is now closed, and for whom the Jewish state throws open a bright prospect of freedom, happiness, and honor, perhaps they will see to it that this idea is spread ..."

"It depends on the Jews themselves whether this political document remains for the present a political romance. If this generation is too dull to understand it rightly, a future, finer, more advanced generation will arise to comprehend it. The Jews who will try it shall achieve their State; and they will deserve it ..."

"I consider the Jewish question neither a social nor a religious one, even though it sometimes takes these and other forms. It is a national question, and to solve it we must first of all establish it as an international political problem to be discussed and settled by the civilized nations of the world in council.

"We are a people—one people.

"We have sincerely tried everywhere to merge with the national communities in which we live, seeking only to preserve the faith of our fathers. It is not permitted us. In vain are we loyal patriots, sometimes superloyal; in vain do we make the same sacrifices of life and property as our fellow citizens; in vain do we strive to enhance the fame of our native lands in the arts and sciences, or her wealth by trade and commerce. In our native lands where we have lived for centuries we are still decried as aliens, often by men whose ancestors had not yet come at a time when Jewish sighs had long been heard in the country ..."

"Oppression and persecution cannot exterminate us. No nation on earth has endured such struggles and sufferings as we have. Jew-baiting has merely winnowed out our weaklings; the strong among us defiantly return to their own whenever persecution breaks out ..."

"Wherever we remain politically secure for any length of time, we assimilate. I think this is not praiseworthy ..."

"Israel is our unforgettable historic homeland ..."

"Let me repeat once more my opening words: The Jews who will it shall achieve their State. We shall live at last as free men on our own soil, and in our own homes peacefully die. The world will be liberated by our freedom, enriched by our wealth, magnified by our greatness. And whatever we attempt there for our own benefit will redound mightily and beneficially to the good of all mankind."

They even considered some land in Turkey and some land in modern Kenya.

I have no doubt that it was the Zionists who made the revisionist changes to the Scofield Reference Bible. After the death of C. I. Scofield, the notes in the Scofield Reference Bible exploded and were accelerated to advance the Zionist aims. Much of Scofield's original notes were removed and replaced with more heavily Zionist-friendly notes. In 1908, Scofield wrote concerning John 8:37:

"Cf. John 8:39. The contrast, 'I know that ye are Abraham's seed' — 'If ye were Abraham's children' is that between the natural and the spiritual posterity of Abraham. The Israelitish people and the Ishmaelitish people are the former; all who are 'of like precious faith with Abraham,' whether Jews or Gentiles, are the latter; Romans 9:6-8; Galatians 3:6-14. See 'Abrahamic Covenant,' Gen 15:18."

Compare that with the Oxford note substituted in the 1967 edition:

"All Jews are natural descendants of Abraham, but are not necessarily his spiritual posterity; Romans 9:6-8, Galatians 3:6-14."

Scofield's original footnote was accurate with Christian teachings and belief of the previous 1900 years. The revised footnote is a fallacious heresy. How can "all Jews" be "natural descendants of Abraham," a Chaldean who lived some 3,000 years ago? People of all ethnicities and nationalities are Jews, and new Jews are being converted every day from every ethnicity and nationality. You might as well say that all Lutherans are the natural descendants of Martin Luther. That is how preposterous and nonsensical this new footnote is. The publishers of this Bible (The Oxford University Press) clearly have an agenda: the advancement of the fallacious, erroneous, and heretical teachings of Zionism.

Take this brazen and outrageous newly inserted footnote from the 1967 edition concerning Genesis 12:3:

“For a nation to commit the sin of anti-Semitism brings inevitable judgment.”

There is no word for “anti-Semitism” in the New Testament, nor is it found among the Ten Commandments. “Sin” is a personal concept. It is something done by individuals in conflict with God’s words, not by “nations.” Even Sodom did not sin—its people did. The word “judgment” in the Bible always refers to God’s action. In the New Testament, Jesus promises both judgment and salvation for individuals, not for “nations.” There was also no “State of Israel” when Scofield wrote his original notes in his Scofield Reference Bible in 1908. All references to Israel as a state were added after 1947, when Israel was granted statehood by edict of the United Nations. The Oxford University Press simply rewrote its version of the Christian Bible in 1967 to make antipathy toward the “State of Israel” a “sin.” Israel is made a god to be worshiped, not merely a “state.” That is exactly what Christian Zionism does: it worships the state of Israel as a god. Hence why they teach and believe that the entire Bible is Israel-centric; all about Israel.

The Oxford 1967 edition continues concerning Genesis 12:1-3:

"(2) God made an unconditional promise of blessings through Abram's seed (a) to the nation of Israel to inherit a specific territory forever"
"(3) There is a promise of blessing upon those individuals and nations who bless Abram's descendants, and a curse laid upon those who persecute the Jews."

This bequeath is joined to an Oxford prophesy that never occurs in the Bible itself:

"It has invariably fared ill with the people who have persecuted the Jew, well with those who have protected him." and "The future will still more remarkably prove this principle."

None of these notes appeared in the original Scofield Reference Bible or in the 1917 or 1945 editions. The state of Israel did not exist in 1945, and according to the best dictionaries of the time, the word “Israel” only referred to a particular man and an ancient tribe, which is consistent with the Bible text. See “Israel,” Webster’s New International Dictionary 2nd (1950) Edition.

God is sovereign over all things. He may have allowed Jews to obtain land and start occupying it (just as He allowed sin to enter the world), but He never personally brought them back to it the way He did after the Babylonian captivity. Had He, then they would not only possess all the land (as they had in the past, the fulfillment of such being acknowledged on four different occasions: Josh. 11:23; 21:41-45; 1 Kings 4:20-21; Neh. 9:21-25), but they would also have embraced Jesus as their promised Messiah. Zionism and Dispensationalism are two sides of the same deceptive, demonic coin, peddling the false doctrine of Restoration theology.

Exposing the Deeds of Darkness

Christians are not supposed to turn a blind eye and remain ignorant. We are to "be wise as serpents, and harmless as doves" (Matt. 10:16) and to "not participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but instead even expose them" (Eph. 5:11). When we expose wicked deeds and are called ignorant words, we should not let that deter us. When you see ad hominem attack, when you see someone going after the individual in order to circumvent what they are saying, in order to dodge and evade the issues (often by way of obfuscation, technicalities, ambiguous language, and equivocation), being unable to argue the main point and never providing a reasonable refutation or an intelligent counter-argument (merely presenting subjective opinions and irrational feelings), that is a person speaking by way of the devil. It is a confession of intellectual bankruptcy. When the truth is not on your side, you have to rely on denial, deflection, projection, manipulation, smearing, gaslighting, jamming, "cancelling," framing, ad hominem, character assassination, intimidation, and the use of fallacious arguments that have no basis in reality.

"Racism" of any kind is unacceptable! Acknowledging the fact that most Jews are underhanded and untrustworthy is in no way "anti-Semitic" and in no way means that we should hate Jews; only that we should be aware of their true nature and character. Hatred toward any group of people accomplishes nothing, and has never been of any good or benefit. For Christians, it is especially unacceptable given the Lord Jesus' command to us: "Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which spitefully use you, and persecute you" (Matthew 5:44).

The Talmud is the Jewish bible, and it is the "life of Judaism" to this very day. The most prominent Jewish sources of our day admit:

"The Jewish religion as it is today traces its descent, without a break, through all the centuries, from the Pharisees." —Universal Jewish Encyclopedia

"Pharisaism became Talmudism, Talmudism became Medieval Rabbinism, and Medieval Rabbinism became Modern Rabbinism. But throughout these changes of name, inevitable adaptation of custom, and adjustment of Law, the spirit of the ancient Pharisee survives unaltered." —Rabbi Dr. Louis Finkelstein

"The Talmud is, then, the written form of that which in the time of Jesus, was called the Traditions of the Elders." —Rabbi Michael L. Rodkinson

Jesus had a strong condemnation against their traditions:

"Why also do you transgress the command of God on account of your traditions?"—Jesus of Nazareth to the Pharisees, Matthew 15:3

Most people, including professing Christians who hold to the bankrupt theology of Dispensationalism, are completely unaware that the Talmud has the most repulsive things to say about Christ Jesus, as well as Christians. Observe this instance:

"Jesus is in hell and is being punished by being boiled in hot semen. Christians are boiled in dung." Gittin 57a

If you, as a professing Christian, do not find that offensive, then perhaps you should examine yourself to see if you truly are a Christian. Nevertheless, such blatant disrespect of the Creator of the world and of our Lord and Saviour is not an attack on us. It is likewise not an excuse to hate or commit violence against such people. What did Jesus say? "Blessed are you when men hate you, and ostracize you, and insult you, and scorn your name as evil, for the sake of the Son of Man" (Luke 6:22).

Before we continue looking at the most grotesque statements made in the Jewish Talmud, believed by Jews, let us look at some other facts.

  • 100% of Hollywood is owned and controlled by Jews.
  • Six (6) Jewish companies own 96% of the world's media.
  • Approximately 80% of politicians, judges, teachers, and corporation owners are Jewish. Certainly the majority of owners of valuable items such as gold, silver, platinum, etc., are Jewish.
  • A large percentage of "churches" erroneously believe—contrary to Scripture—that the Jewish Temple will be rebuilt (despite Scripture saying that Christians are the new temple), that sacrifices will be re-instituted (despite Scripture saying that Jesus was the final sacrifice to end all sacrifices), that Jews will rule over the nations in the Millennial Kingdom (a Jewish myth), and that we should never speak ill of the Jews (this is derived from the revisionist notes in the Scofield Study Bible).

In 1930's Germany, most of the cat houses and other perverse sex businesses were Jewish owned. This is verified by history. If you find this hard to believe, take a good look at Hollywood sometime. It is entirely Jewish owned and controlled. Have you noticed how perverse it is? Have you noticed the moral and ethical lines they are willing to cross? Are you aware of the amount of pedophilia and child sex trafficking that goes on there? Do you really think this is just some sort of "coincidence"?

Over the centuries, Jews have been ejected from every European country as little as 359 times and as much as 1030 times. No other people groups have this kind of record. You need to honestly ask yourself: Why? No, it is not because of "anti-Semitism." That is an ignorant term designed to paint their opponent in a bad light while removing all eyes off of them. It is exactly the same with the ignorant terms "homophobia," "transphobia," "Islamophobia," and "anti-vaxxer." If no one is looking at them, they are free to press their agendas. These terms are slung about like weapons by the ignorant who refuse to be educated by facts and reality. If anything, the ignorant clowns hurling these terms around are alethephobes, allodoxophobes, gnosiophobes, phronemophobes, sophophobes, veritaphobes, and Deitiphobes.

Benjamin Franklin apparently wanted to use the Constitution of the United States to bar Jews from entry:

"There is a great danger for the United States of America. That great danger is the Jew. Gentlemen, in whichever land the Jews have settled, they have depressed the moral level and lowered the degree of commercial honesty. They have created a State within a State, and when they are opposed, they attempted to strangle the nation financially as in the case of Portugal and Spain.

If they are not excluded from the United States by the Constitution, within less than a hundred years they will stream into our country in such numbers that they will rule and destroy us, and change our form of government for which Americans have shed their blood and sacrificed life, property and personal freedom. If the Jews are not excluded, within 200 years our children will be working in the fields to feed the Jews, while they remain in the Counting House gleefully rubbing their hands.

I warn you, gentlemen, if you do not exclude the Jew forever, your children`s children will curse you in your grave. Their ideas are not those of Americans. The leopard cannot change his spots. The Jews are a danger to this land, and if they are allowed to enter, they will imperil its institutions.

They should be excluded by the Constitution.
"

He was not wrong. In fact, a great many world-famous men have had a lot of insightful things to say about the Jews, from the times of Jesus on up to our present times. Do you honestly believe all these men, from various nations, eras, ethnicities, etc., were nothing but "anti-Semites"? What is the common denominator in every single one of these cases? It is the exact same result with the Muslims; wherever they go, there are problems. Why is it that Jews and Muslims are always the common denominator in their situations? Do not be so naive and gullible to fall for the age-old narcissistic psychological excuse of, "It's not my fault; it's always everyone else's fault." When everything is always everyone else's fault, that should be a red flag.

Here is something that you should ponder over promptly, especially professing Christians:

"You know very well, and the stupid Americans know equally well, that we control their government, irrespective of who sits in the White House. You see, I know it and you know it that no American president can be in a position to challenge us even if we do the unthinkable. What can they (Americans) do to us? We control congress, we control the media, we control show biz, and we control everything in America. In America you can criticize God, but you can’t criticize Israel..." —Israeli spokeswoman, Tzipora Menache

Jews are some of the most "racist" people on the face of the planet. Observe from their Talmud:

"For murder, whether of a Cuthean (non-Jew) by a Cuthean, or of an Israelite by a Cuthean, punishment is incurred; but of a Cuthean by an Israelite, there is no death penalty" Sanhedrin 57a

"Murdering Goim (non-Jews) is like killing a wild animal" Sanhedrin 59a

"Whatever a Jew obtains from robbery of a Gentile (non-Jew), he may keep" Sanherin 57a

"A Goi (non-Jew) who pries into the Law must be killed ..." Sanhedrin 59a

People are hard on Muslims for the amount of "racism" found in the Qur'an and Hadiths against Christians, Jews, and pagans, yet Jews have the exact same amount of "racism" found in the Talmud against Christians, Muslims, and pagans.

Contrary to the lies continuously spewed and regurgitated by Semitophiles, we are not "morally obliged" to stand up to threats against Israel. You will find no such declaration in God's Word! The only place you will find such blatant rubbish is in the revision of the Scofield Study Bible (see next post). If you compare the original, the notes say something entirely different.

Now let us look at the most disgusting, repulsive, grotesque statements made in the Talmud, the Jewish bible.

"When a grown man has intercourse with a little girl, it is nothing, for when the girl is less than three years old, it is as if one puts a finger into the eye - tears come to the eye again and again; and so does virginity come back to the little girl under three years" Kethuboth 11b

"...but when a small boy [less than nine years of age] has intercourse with a grown-up woman he makes her as 'a girl who is injured by a piece of wood [masturbating]." Kethuboth 11b

"When a grown man has had sexual intercourse with a little girl less than three years old or when a small boy less than nine years of age has intercourse with a grown up woman, or when a girl was accidentally injured by a piece of wood [during masturbation] ... there is in regard to them no charge of non-virginity" Kethuboth 11a

"Rab said: Pederasty with a child below nine years of age is not deemed as pederasty with a child above that. Samuel said: Pederasty with a child below three years is not treated as with a child above that" Sanhedrin 52b

"A Jew may sodomize a child as long as the child is less than nine years old" Sanhedrin 54b

"MISHNAH. A GIRL OF THE AGE OF THREE YEARS AND ONE DAY MAY BE BETROTHED BY INTERCOURSE; … IF SHE WAS MARRIED TO A PRIEST, SHE MAY EAT TERUMAH." Niddah, 44b

"GEMARA. … R. Joseph said: Come and hear! A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition, and if her deceased husband's brother cohabits with her, she becomes his." Sanhedrin 55b

These verses should be enough to turn any decent person's stomach, whether they are Christian or heathen. Do these verses sound like something any normal individual would support? This is absolutely disgusting and deplorable. Jews should condemn such teachings, and if they do not, if they are unwilling to do so, that tells you all you need to know about them. The reader should consider that Kethuboth 11a-b are part of the Mishnah or "Core Doctrine" of the Talmud.

When laws have to be passed barring perceived or assumed "anti-Semitism," such as the one recently passed by Governor Ron DeSantis in Florida, that should be a red flag. Any time anyone exposes the Jews, they are automatically labeled falsely as "anti-Semites." As I said, this is an ignorant term designed to paint their opposition in a bad light while removing all eyes off of them. Any law that is ethnic-specific, whether Jewish or Muslim, should be a red flag. The law should be equal for all people and all religions. If you cannot criticize Islam or Judaism, then likewise you cannot criticize Christianity, Hinduism, or anything else. If Muslims get to walk away from their job in the middle of their shift to "pray," then so too ought Christians, Hindus, Jews, etc., be able to do the same thing. Current laws are intent on protecting Muslims and Jews, but there are zero laws protecting Christians. This is hypocrisy wrapped up in agendas. Christians are the only people that everyone agrees it is okay to hate, harass, and discriminate against. In most countries, you can criticize God, Christianity, and the Bible, but you cannot criticize Israel or the Jews. Red flag!

Why is it that when you criticize Jews or expose them for what they are doing to and against your people and your country, they threaten the province, state, or country they are in with economic collapse? Something to think about. Manipulation, blackmail, and ultimatums are not the behaviour of the "good guys."

The current nation of Israel has no religious significance. Zionism is a heresy. Jews have no supremacy whatsoever, and definitely should not be worshipped (as Dispensationalists seem intent on doing). Today, according to God's Word, it is those who have the same faith as Abraham who are God's particular chosen people—Christians. The Jews were given 490 years to fix their ungodly behaviour. They doubled down in their sin, rejected the Messiah—Jesus, and were expelled from the land. The Bible no where teaches another return to the land. God did not bring them back to it in 1948—Zionists did. (They even considered some land in Turkey and some land in modern Kenya.) God's Word states emphatically that if Jews were to be brought back to the land, they would have to return to God. A return to God would mean accepting Jesus as the Messiah, which they have never done. Jews are not saved on account of their "race." If they want to receive salvation, they must receive it in the exact same manner as everyone else. The nation of Israel and the Jews are nothing special. If you have been hypnotized and brainwashed to believe otherwise, then you need to undergo de-programming.

While we are on the subject of de-programming, it is imperative that you know that there is no such thing as a "Judeo-Christian" religion. Christianity does not have "Jewish roots." Even the Jews recognize this. Observe:

"You will notice that a great difference exists between the Jewish and the Christian religions. But these are not all. We Jews consider the two religions so different that one excludes the other...we emphasized that there is no such thing as a Judeo-Christian religion... There is not any similarity between the two concepts..." —Rabbi Maggal, President, quoted in the National Jewish Information Service, August 21, 1961

Jews have abandoned the faith of Abraham in place of the traditions of the Pharisees. Their religion has just gotten more Satanic over the centuries. Even Freemasonry is a Jewish Institution. In 1855, Rabbi Isaac Wise wrote:

"Masonry is a Jewish institution, whose history, degrees, assignments, signs and explanations are of a Jewish nature from beginning to end,"

Remember when Jesus said, "From everyone who has been given much, much will be required" (Luke 12:48)? Even in their cursed state, being wanderers and vagabonds, God still blesses the Jews. Why? Because with all the underhanded things they do to others, cheating and deceiving people; with all the hatred and discrimination they display against non-Jews, especially against Christians by blaspheming the Lord Jesus ("Jesus fornicated with his jack ass." Sanhedrin 105a-b); with their constant rejection of the Messiah, they continue to heap mountains of coal upon their own heads. They are "digging their own graves" for when they stand before the Judgment Seat of the Lord. Two thousand years later and they still hate Jesus the Messiah with every fiber of their being. Again, God never brought the Jews back to the land—Zionists did.

Monday, February 07, 2022

Covidian Cult Refuted

In case you were interested in knowing the facts and seeing the evidence, here is the reality:

2018 World Population: 7,631,091,040
2019 World Population: 7,713,468,100
2020 World Population: 7,794,798,739
https://worldometers.info/world-population/world-population-by-year/

2018 All-cause Deaths: 57,625,149
2019 All-cause Deaths: 58,394,378

2018 Death Rate: .76%
2019 Death Rate: .76%
2020 Death Rate: .76%

[ What you're looking for here is the option "Y is WHAT percent of X?" ]

How much would you like to bet that 2021 is going to reveal a significant increase in the all-cause deaths and the death rate?

Gee, I wonder what could be attributing to that...

I will give all the Covidian Covidiot Vaxtard Cult clowns a moment to think about it...

*Jeopardy music playing*

Let's face it; last year they re-branded Influenza, and this year they are re-branding the common cold.

In 2018 and 2019, we had all sorts of deaths from Influenza. In 2020, we apparently had all sorts of deaths from "COVID"—the Wuhan Virus. When you look at all-cause deaths, you can clearly see that there was no change in the overall total percentage of deaths. This would not be the case if we were really in some sort of a pandemic.

Wait until the numbers for 2021 are released. How much would you like to bet that 2021 is going to reveal a significant increase in the all-cause deaths and the death rate? This will include the rise in murders in Liberal-run cities in the USA as well as all the deaths that have occurred since the roll out of these faux "vaccines." Just for kicks, I am going to guess-timate an approximation of .86% to .96% death rate for 2021.

We are not in a "pandemic"; we never were! You have been lied to, and you swallowed it hook, line, and sinker because you lack the cognitive ability to critically think and be objective for yourself.

Climate Alarmists Refuted

For all you climate alarmist clowns out there who deny real climate science, allow me to educate your obvious ignorance.

What percentage of the Earth's atmosphere is carbon dioxide (CO2)? If CO2 is the biggest issue we face today, then surely you clowns can tell us, right?

The amount of CO2 in the Earth's atmosphere is .04%! Go ahead, look it up!

Human beings around the world create 3% of that .04%. Canada's contribution to CO2 emissions is 2% of 3% of .04%! Would anyone like to do the math on that?

What is 3% of .04%?
3% ÷ 100 = .03
.04% ÷ 100 = .0004
.03 x .0004 = .000012 x 100 = .0012%
3% of .04% is .0012%

What is 2% of that 3%?
2% ÷ 100 = .02
.02 x .000012 = .00000024 x 100 = .000024%
2% of 3% of .04% is .000024%

Canada produces .000024% CO2!!!


INCONVENIENT FACTS CLIMATE ALARMISTS DON'T WANT YOU TO KNOW

Inconvenient Fact #1: Carbon dioxide is not the primary greenhouse gas.

Inconvenient Fact #2: The warming effect of CO2 declines as its concentration increases.

Inconvenient Fact #3: First and foremost, CO2 is plant food.

Inconvenient Fact #4: In the last four ice ages, the CO2 level was dangerously low.

Inconvenient Fact #5: 140-million-year trend of dangerously decreasing CO2. [If you believe this false evolutionary dating.]

Inconvenient Fact #6: Our current geologic period (Quaternary) has the lowest average CO2 level in the history of the Earth.

Inconvenient Fact #7: More CO2 means more plant growth.

Inconvenient Fact #8: More CO2 helps to feed more people worldwide.

Inconvenient Fact #9: More CO2 means moister soil.

Inconvenient Fact #10: Recent Inconvenient Pause of 18 years in warming, despite rise in CO2.

Inconvenient Fact #11: CO2 rose after the Second World War, but temperature fell.

Inconvenient Fact #12: Modern warming began long before SUVs or coal-fired plants.

Inconvenient Fact #13: Melting glaciers and rising seas confirm warming predated increases of CO2.

Inconvenient Fact #14: Temperatures have changed for 800,000 years. It wasn't us. (This Inconvenient Fact deserves to be repeated often.)

Inconvenient Fact #15: Interglacials usually last 10,000 - 15,000 years. Our is 11,000 years old.

Inconvenient Fact #16: Each of the four previous inter-glacial warming periods was significantly warmer than our current temperature.

Inconvenient Fact #17: The last interglacial, ~120,000 years ago, was 8°C (14°F) warmer than today. The polar bears survived. Greenland didn't melt.

Inconvenient Fact #18: Temperatures changed during the past 10,000 years. It wasn't us.

Inconvenient Fact #19: Today's total warming and warming rate are similar to earlier periods.

Inconvenient Fact #20: It was warmer than today for 6,100 of the last 10,000 years.

Inconvenient Fact #21: The current warming trend is neither unusual nor unprecedented.

Inconvenient Fact #22: Earth's orbit and tilt drive glacial-interglacial changes.

Inconvenient Fact #23: We are living in one of the coldest periods in all of Earth's history.

Inconvenient Fact #24: Earth has not had a geologic period this cold in 250 million years. [If you believe this false evolutionary dating.]

Inconvenient Fact #25: The only thing constant about temperatures over 600 million years is that they have been constantly changing. (This is a recurring Inconvenient Fact.) [If you believe this false evolutionary dating.]

Inconvenient Fact #26: For most of Earth's history, it was about 10°C (18°F) warmer than today.

Inconvenient Fact #27: IPCC models have overstated warming up to three times too much.

Inconvenient Fact #28: For human advancement, warmer is better than colder.

Inconvenient Fact #29: A return to the temperature at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution would lead to famine and death.

Inconvenient Fact #30: Only 0.3% of published scientists stated in their papers that recent warming was mostly man-made.

Inconvenient Fact #31: Science is not consensus and consensus is not science.

Inconvenient Fact #32: More CO2 => fewer droughts.

Inconvenient Fact #33: Higher temperature => fewer droughts.

Inconvenient Fact #34: Forest fires across the northern hemisphere are decreasing.

Inconvenient Fact #35: More CO2 >> CO2 fertilization >> more soil moisture >> faster tree growth >> fewer forest fires.

Inconvenient Fact #36: More CO2 in the atmosphere means more food for everyone.

Inconvenient Fact #37: The Earth is becoming greener, not turning into desert.

Inconvenient Fact #38: Growth seasons are lengthening.

Inconvenient Fact #39: More CO2 and warmer weather mean more world food production.

Inconvenient Fact #40: EPA: Heat waves are not becoming more frequent.

Inconvenient Fact #41: Extreme heat events are declining.

Inconvenient Fact #42: Cold kills far more people than heat every year.

Inconvenient Fact #43: Warmer weather means many fewer temperature-related deaths.

Inconvenient Fact #44: Warmer weather prevents millions of premature deaths each year.

Inconvenient Fact #45: More CO2 and warmth mean shorter, less intense heat waves.

Inconvenient Fact #46: The number of tornadoes is decreasing.

Inconvenient Fact #47: The number of tornadoes in 2016 was the lowest on record.

Inconvenient Fact #48: Deaths from tornadoes are falling.

Inconvenient Fact #49: There has been no increase in frequency of hurricanes in recent data.

Inconvenient Fact #50: We have seen 250 years of declining hurricane frequency.

Inconvenient Fact #51: No significant increase in hurricane intensity due to warming.

Inconvenient Fact #52: The population of polar bears is increasing.

Inconvenient Fact #53: There are more polar bears now than we've had for 50 years.

Inconvenient Fact #54: Polar bears are thriving even where sea ice is diminishing.

Inconvenient Fact #55: There is no historic correlation between CO2 and oceanic pH.

Inconvenient Fact #56: The oceans did not become acidic even with CO2 at 15 times modern levels.

Inconvenient Fact #57: Sea-level increase began >15,000 years ago.

Inconvenient Fact #58: Recent sea-level rise began 150 years before the increase in CO2.

Inconvenient Fact #59: Melting the northern polar ice cap would not increase the sea level.

Inconvenient Fact #60: Most of Antarctica is cooling and gaining ice mass.


Funny... melting ice caps supposedly prove "Global Warming," but growing ice caps do not prove it is all utter nonsense? Yep. All sounds like legitimate "science" to me. This is why only the dumbest of the masses still trust the lame-stream media.

Flat-Earthers Refuted

Flat-Earthers are hilarious! I cannot believe there are still people alive who actually believe this complete and utter nonsense. Well, let's set to educating their ignorance...

The circumference of the Earth is roughly 24,901.461 miles (40,075.017 km). Round that to 25,000. Divide by 360 degrees. You get 69.44444 miles per degree.

A 25,000 mile circumference has a diameter of 7961.78 miles and a radius of 3980.89 miles. The diameter and radius are through the Earth—not around it! Anyone with half a brain cell who can do basic math knows that half the circumference is 12,500 miles, and 1/4 of that is 6,250 miles.

25,000 ÷ 360° = 69.4

12,500 ÷ 180° = 69.4

6,250 ÷ 90° = 69.4

This is what consistent mathematics looks like. These affect the surface area. Diameter and radius affect the cross section of the Earth—not the circumference!

The distance between Toronto, ON and Mooretown, ON is 140 miles.

140 miles ÷ 69.4 = 2.0173°

Follow the mathematics demonstrated here, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=riv3x1h, and it is an approximate drop of 2.47 miles between the two points. [I have tried returning to this video with no luck. Rather than opening the link from my Facebook in its original location and then copying it, I copied it directly from my Facebook, which tends to cut off links at a certain length. The fact the video ID is only 7 characters, as well as it displaying zero info about the video or account, leads me to believe the above is the case. I have tried finding the video back with no luck. If I ever do, I will update the link as it is extremely important.]

Can you see the curve with the naked eye over 140 miles?

Flat-Earthers need a re-education in basic mathematics. Their mathematics and charts are flawed, attempting to apply a flat surface to a curved surface.

Is it not interesting that belief in a flat Earth predominantly occurs north of the Equator? Why do you suppose that is? When you look up at the night sky in Alaska, you see one set of stars, but if you look up at the night sky from the Falkland Islands, you see a different set of stars. In the northern hemisphere, when you look up at the sky in the north, you can observe stars rotate counter-clockwise around the north celestial pole, while in the southern hemisphere, when you look up at the sky to the south, you can observe stars rotate clockwise around the south celestial pole. This would be impossible with a flat Earth. The motion of stars cannot happen in a flat Earth, which is proof that the Earth is round and rotates around its axis.

Flat-Earthers are a joke. They are being intellectually dishonest, demonstrating intellectual bankruptcy, and committing intellectual suicide.

Flat-earthers refuted:

https://flatearth.ws/

https://www.boredpanda.com/lake-michigan-curvature-flat-earth-gregpagel/

https://creation.com/refuting-flat-earth