FANDOM

Superdadsuper

Councilor Bureaucrat
  • I was born on October 18
  • My occupation is Witness of the Bible and its truths
  • I am Male

My name is Superdadsuper and I'm an Admin and Bureaucrat (means I manage other Administrators) here at Bible Wiki. If you have questions about the site please ask me here. If you have a question about the Bible please ask on the Bible Questions Forum so I can answer it in a better format

A FANDOM user
  Loading editor
  • how must one be saved or born again?

      Loading editor
    • View all 8 replies
    • Great job on the edits! It seems you are catching on quickly to the intricacies of our editing system. Grammartical edits are very important (its always good to have a 2nd pair of eyes read over a written work) and help you in a segway to hopefully creating new content on the site and learning how to use the MediaWiki software. 

      I want to encourage you to keep editing. Let me know if you need anything whether it be wiki specific or otherwise in your life.


      In Christ,
      Superdadsuper, Bible Wiki Administrator and Bureaucrat 03:33, February 15, 2018 (UTC)

        Loading editor
    • thx!

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • So, I'm working on an extensive project that you might find interesting-as we both love the Bible, and hate Wikipedia bureaucracy.

    The research that I'm doing is exhaustive and will take some time to produce, but I've made a lot of headway- at least enough in hopes of rousing your interest...

    We both believe in God's Creation. We both abhor evolution, and evolutionary concepts. I bet that we agree that Man's science is not God's science. That said...

    I bet you know this already.. so I'm not telling you anything knew - but Man's scientific research about how the universe came about follows the EXACT same sequence of the Bible in Genesis chapter 1, VER BATUM. This is where I'd like you to just look at this one project page I'm working on... at Life Expansion. You don't have to read it all because it is very exhaustive. Just notice where I inserted "See: (Day 3, Day 4, Day 5) and look at the titles and dates for each of the selected paragraphs. It is basically showing that each Day in Genesis at LEAST follows the same sequence of researched scientific EVENTS. The article is fine tuned to remove all wording associated with evolution, but still keeps its scientific integrity for academia to consider with exhaustive footnotes.

    Here's where your Wiki comes into play. In an effort to prove the Bible's authenticity - Just like a mirror, I can flip the article Life Expansion to show how each verse of the Bible matches scientific sequences. For example:

    • Day 1, Genesis 1:1-5, Universe expands (<=but NOT with evolution in mind) (14 mya - x)
    • Day 2, Genesis 1:6-8, Earth formation (x - 1 bya)
    • Day 3, Genesis 1:9-10, Supercontinents merge into Pangaea (541 mya - 335 mya).
    • Day 3, Genesis 1:11-13, Appearance of Gymnosperm-seed bearing plants! but thats not all - it's an EVENT - the Whole Genome Duplication Event of 319 ma! (<-God in action!)
    • Day 4, Genesis 1:14-19, Climate change (due to Divine configuration of luminaries) results in Permian–Triassic extinction event in 252 ma: sets the stage for day 5. (300 mya - 252 mya)
    • Day 5, Genesis 1:20-22, Biodiversity! an explosion of COMPLEX life swarming 240 mya (only a 10 ma window for dinosaurs to "evolve" (<=according to scientists) into 1,000 different COMPLEX and MASSIVE species, and not to mention the explosion of sea life that all occurs after the most catastrophic extinction event in Earth's history, in 252 ma, wiping 98% of previous less-complex life before it.) <-this phenomena has scientists scratching their heads. Notice the statement at Dinosaur, second sentence: "although the exact origin and timing of the evolution of dinosaurs is the subject of active research." (<=Because they can't admit that God created them).
    • Day 5, Genesis 1:22-23, pangaea breaks apart, where waters divide sub-continents (175 mya). Appearance of angiosperms (flowering plants) in 160 ma. for what? for appearance of True birds! (125 mya) of which flowering plants flourish by 120 ma.
    • Day 6, Genesis 1:24-25, appearance of domestic and wild smaller animals! (65 mya) after the KT Extinction of Dinosaur. And then of course... sometime later... MAN

    If you see any value in this, I'd like your feedback to see how we could integrate this. If not, I respect your input either way. Br-jsosa (talk) 04:29, December 24, 2017 (UTC)

      Loading editor
    • Hi Br-Josa, this would be outside the scope of our article content, though you are more than welcome to do this on a blog. Some organization like the Institute of Creation Research and other groups have likely done this research to the comprehensivity you are seeking. If you are doing this for personal research I would encourage it, but don't waste your time contributing new research to the field. Keep in mind God didnt reveal the Bible in our reason obessed culture. God didnt neccesairly reveal scientific truth in the Bible, for the Israelites didnt believe or have science. The Bible uses phenemological language and it doesnt contradict science, but does not endorse nor acknolwedges the existence. You cannot derrive scientific phenomna from the Bible like you suggest. Consider the original viewpoint and intention.God did not choose the 21st worldview to express his truth (not to mention science changes). Dr. John Walton has some great talks about this.

        Loading editor
    • I appreciate your insight. I will contemplate over this feedback that you have given. Yes, it is original research-a conflict with Wikipedia. But in reality... all man's thoughts are original research and really "there is nothing new under the sun."- Ecc. 1:9 (Link)

      Br-jsosa (talk) 23:13, December 24, 2017 (UTC)

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Good day! I read your Beliefs, Viewpoint, Editors, and your profile. I noticed that you list many wonderful scriptures and link them accordingly. I observed that your links all link to NIV, so I assume that is your preferred translation. Since this is a Bible Wiki, are you in agreement to referencing other translations like: KJV, NKJV, ASV, RSV, NASB, NLT, NWT, ELT, HNV, HCSB, DBY, and WEB? I appreciate your feedback. Br-jsosa (talk) 05:30, December 22, 2017 (UTC)

      Loading editor
    • Hi there. Thanks for checking out all of those pages, I appreciate that. 

      First to briefly address the verses: right now we are actually undergoing discussion of changing how our verse system works (your question is time perfectly). We are thinking about switching the linked website over to Biblehub from Biblegateway, because Biblehub has a lot more built in resources such as interlinears, concordances, lexicons and commentaries. Additionally, we may try to incorporate a notes feature that way users can add notes from other sources like interlinears or concordances.  The NIV is the default on Biblegateway as well as most other Christian websites (including Biblehub). It is not that we choose to make that "our favorite" translation, but we leave it open ended. It will automatically link to NIV but if a user has selected a translation preference on the site already then it will link to another translation (for both Biblegateway and BibleHub). We have to test this change to see if it is technologically possible so it may be several days before we have any updates on whether this will happen. 

      Our Disclaimer (which is incomplete) does include section that explains our translation endorsement philisophy. We do not endorse a particular translation and recongize the original Scripture as what is God breathed. All translations and manuscripts are faithful preservations of the original, but are not the original. We do recongize that different users will use different translations, so that will affect the preciseness and wording of specific content on our wiki. We reccomend using interlinears to look at the original language for the most accurate rendings (use translations to help understand), but we know this not feasible for most users to do. 

      I understand you are a Jehova Witness (based on the wikis you are involved on and your profile picture). You are welcome to contribute, provided you comply with all of those pages you have read over. From my understanding JW's believe in the canon of the Scripture (of 66 books, Old and New Testament) and do not differ on this point. I believe the difference lies in the intrepration of Scripture. This wiki is not about our own opinions about Scripture or "what does it mean for me", but we try to restate or explain what the original intent of a Scriptural passage was, based on internal evidences. I cannot expect you to compromise on your beliefs, for I refuse to do that myself. As long as your content does not insert your own ideas onto the Bible you can contribute.

      Please know that since Jehova Witness have many different ideas than Christians (especially on the nature of Christ) I do not expect you (I apply this to everyone) to be able to be a fully productive member of the community. This is not only Scriptural, but it is impossible to remove our biases and viewpoints. I would be more than happy to help answer questions you may have of why Christians see a Scripture a certain way. I am by no means an expert on Jehova Witness, but I have a lot of pratice (and trying to learn more and more) on intrepreting the Scriptures. God has blessed me with a knowledge and skill beyond most, but if something surpasses my knowledge Southwriter (the other Admin) has more formalized training. 


      In Christ,
      Superdadsuper, Bible Wiki Administrator and Bureaucrat 16:13, December 22, 2017 (UTC)

        Loading editor
    • Hi Superdadsuper!

      Thank you for your feedback! biblehub.com looks like a fair resource. However, I also find that https://www.blueletterbible.org/ is an exceptional resource, for the following reasons:

      1. https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/gen/1/1/t_conc_1001 (interlinear)
      2. https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/gen/1/1/t_bibles_1001 (Cross section bibles)
      3. https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/gen/1/1/t_corr_1001 (Cross ref scrip)
      4. https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/gen/1/1/t_comms_1001 (Commentaries)
      5. https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/gen/1/1/t_refs_1001 (Dictionaries)

      You may also review their about - https://www.blueletterbible.org/about/about.cfm

      Disclaimer. blb.org is not affiliated or promoted by Jehovah's Witnesses. Jehovah's Witnesses have their own preferred online Bible Reference library available to the public at https://www.jw.org/en/publications/bible/ . However, this study link is more or less for Jehovah's Witnesses themselves. Only through revelation by God, will one come to know what His Will is. Therefore, you and I both benefit from God's Will in the positions that we are both seated in - You (here) and me (there), or vise versa depending on perspective. As this is a "Disclaimer" section, allow me to speak freely by this somewhat obscure language. However, let me now be clear that I am not speaking as a mouth-piece for Jehovah's Witnesses. I will only glean light on Jehovah's Witnesses as it is appropriate to do so. I do acknowledge that I posses bias behavior and understanding. But, I also understand that there are lines and sections to respect. Had all Christians respected each other throughout history, perhaps we would not have had events like St. Bartholomew's Day massacre and the sub-sequent events that followed.

      About me. I love history.

      About you. I respect your position. I appreciate this correspondence. I understand your seemingly apprehensiveness to my background by the nature of your writing "Jehova Witness" (As indicated by the red squiggly under the name in the edit section, in contrast to your attention to detail in commentary- and that you have a full section on Yahweh where His name matches that which is in current academia -https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/jehovah).

      My intentions. My intentions are to reach out to you and collaborate on possible future edits. Collaborating reduces war. I may or may not contribute-It depends on my position before God how I should move, and it also depends on how God is moving you. I believe that a proper dose of debate is healthy, as long as we maintain respect. Therefore, I will strive to respect your position. I am not seeking a position on your Wiki. I do, however, see that your Wiki is a potential resource. Let me reiterate that I am not speaking as a mouth-piece for Jehovah's Witnesses.

      Obscure language. As I am one of Jehovah's Witnesses, I wear their glasses. I also understand that you have your own glasses. My glasses are not better than your glasses. I cannot speak for your glasses, so I cannot presume that your glasses are any better or worse than mine. God has allowed our glasses to be manufactured the way they are and with the intensity that we both suffer/benefit from by wearing our individualised glasses. Therefore, I cannot convince you to see things my way should your glasses not allow you to. It would be of ill conceit for me to force you (by any kind of sword) to see something that you (generally speaking, by higher forces) are not permitted to see. Likewise, I must respect God's Will to reveal to me what I ought/must/should see. I speak from my heart, not as a mouthpiece for Jehovah's Witnesses in this regard.

      לֹו יְבָרֶכְךָ יהוה
      May יהוה bless you,
      Br-jsosa (talk) 18:36, December 22, 2017 (UTC)

        Loading editor
    • Yes if you feel you are able to contribute appropiately then by all means. One of my jobs as an Administrator is to correc the edits of users by showing them what the Bible has to say. If you choose to contribute I will provide both correct and applause. I do not believe there will be an issue provided you contribute what it observable from the Scriptures and not from outside revelation. Again, I know it is impossible to seperate your viewpoints from edits (as I myself am aware and have a strong rebuke of Wikipedia for it), but I know we can at least have mutual respect. Mainly I do not know how the Governing Body of JW choose to intrepret Scripture. We can address this at a later time if it causes a disagreement of doctrine in your edits. 

      I will say that the Jehova's Witnesses have done an excellent job being active spreading their message through the Internet and in real life. I hope and pray the Christian church can have a similair fervor and commitment (which they do not have) to that of your group. 

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • I started doing an outline for Mark but the last section (H7) refuses to appear. If you look at it in source mode you'll see it but it won't appear once you exit source mode.

    Also, is the level of detail OK for the synopsis so far? Or is it too detailed? It's more detailed than one commentary I have but about the same as the New Bible Commentary.

      Loading editor
    • This is likely an error with the template for the outline. I am not sure whether or not we really need a template for outlines. I personally am not too concerned about outlines. I looked at the source code a little bit and I was unable to determine what would be causing the problem (I even removed the templates below to see if they were intefering somehow). 

      In regards to detail- Bible Wiki encourages in depth information and comprehensive coverage of biblical topics. This would include a detailed synposis of the Gosepl of Mark, as it pertains to Mark itself (not just a general retelling of Gospel history but the specific elements of the narrative important to Mark itself). 

        Loading editor
    • The reason why it is broken is because the outline template currently goes upto 6 main sections. While you can add more than 6 sections, only the first 6 will appear. For the sake of the article it is being used on, I can easily add the next section (and likely will add up to Section 10)

        Loading editor
    • All done. That took me about 20 minutes. The template has 10 headings, with each heading having 26 sections, and each section having 5 subsections.

      Edit
      I just checked the Gospel of Mark article, and the 7th heading is visible.
        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • You deleted Raphael because you think it is non canon it is actually canon in Catholic and Orthodox Bible so it is actually canon so you deleted something that is canon and you are being a very poor administrator.

      Loading editor
    • I am composing a message on your wall now explaining this, don't worry I don't delete things without explaining. You will see the message within the next 15 minutes. 


      In Christ,
      Superdadsuper, Bible Wiki Administrator and Bureaucrat 18:35, July 16, 2017 (UTC)

        Loading editor
    • It better be good seriously that is just stupid that you deleted something you don't understand. I did a lot of reasearch and took a lot of time to make that.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • It seems that I have come across this particular place during my time here on the Wikia, and it seems to be have piqued my interest.

    Other than the Holy Bible, are there any other required text that must be read before making contributions here on this Wiki?

    Apologies in advance, but my location (Alberta, Canada) is from a place where the Bible and its scriptures do not have significant influence, thus I may not be considered a true Christian, according to your standards here on the Wiki. Would there be any way for me to make positive contributions here on this Wiki?

      Loading editor
    • View all 6 replies
    • It depends. Life outside of this wiki has been busy for me, as I am working, as well as contributing towards a different Wiki.

        Loading editor
    • Ah, okay. Well let me know if you plan on contributing more or have any other questions related to this wiki or matters of the Bible or Faith.


      In Christ,
      Superdadsuper, Bible Wiki Administrator and Bureaucrat 23:20, July 11, 2017 (UTC)

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • The person who posted before me vandalised that page, and I was wondering why it wasn't protected. 

      Loading editor
    • Thanks for letting me know- this was simply an oversight error. I am very aware of the vandalism incident, please make sure to ignore him and do not engage him. 

      If you have any feedback about that page or the other "About" pages I would appreciate it, especially on the Disclaimer.


      In Christ,
      Superdadsuper, Bible Wiki Administrator and Bureaucrat 22:39, June 17, 2017 (UTC)

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • I see that your an administrator on this Wiki! Just wanted to stop by and say "Hi" before I start editing! I am a fan of the local celebrity in a small town of Indiana named, Cam Monroe (hence the name!), you should hear him sometime! Well bye! This Wiki looks great by the way!

      Loading editor
    • I am looking forward to you contributing here. Bible Wiki strives to be a comprehensive and in-depth encyclopedia of the Bible, that covers all its content from a Biblical Point of View. While there are many good Bible encyclopedias out there, there are none as comprehensive nor as good on search engines as Wikipedia is in its content. However Wikipedia is very liberal and in their attempt to be "neutral" it creates the gateway for the secularization of the Bible.

      While this wiki has been around for some time we have a very strong lack in editors in content. We do have a few comprehensive articles, but for the most part our content is very "sprinkled" (content in lots of different areas, but not one topic is covered very well). RIght now we are trying to focus our efforts on the Pentateuch, particuarly on the Book of Numbers for the month of March.

      While anyone can edit on Bible Wiki we can only expect Christians to productively contribute to our mission overall. If you would be interested I would love to join you in chat sometime to talk a bit further about our goals and how you can get started on writing. A large problem we have found in the Wikia audience is lack of a good familarity with the Bible, which causes many new users to be uncomfortable with writing (they are afraid they don't know enough). Bible Wiki creates a unique opportunity to both Study and Write about the Word of God, simantenously.


      In Christ,
      Superdadsuper, Bible Wiki Administrator and Bureaucrat 20:36, March 13, 2017 (UTC)

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • It's nice to meet you, Superdadsuper, I'm new here and I'm glad to be contributing to this community! See you around! ;)

      Loading editor
    • Hi, welcome to Bible Wiki- you certainly reached out to the right person. Happy Purim!

      I am looking forward to you contributing here. Bible Wiki strives to be a comprehensive and in-depth encyclopedia of the Bible, that covers all its content from a Biblical Point of View. While there are many good Bible encyclopedias out there, there are none as comprehensive nor as good on search engines as Wikipedia is in its content. However Wikipedia is very liberal and in their attempt to be "neutral" it creates the gateway for the secularization of the Bible.

      While this wiki has been around for some time we have a very strong lack in editors in content. We do have a few comprehensive articles, but for the most part our content is very "sprinkled" (content in lots of different areas, but not one topic is covered very well). RIght now we are trying to focus our efforts on the Pentateuch, particuarly on the Book of Numbers for the month of March.

      While anyone can edit on Bible Wiki we can only expect Christians to productively contribute to our mission overall. If you would be interested I would love to join you in chat sometime to talk a bit further about our goals and how you can get started on writing. A large problem we have found in the Wikia audience is lack of a good familarity with the Bible, which causes many new users to be uncomfortable with writing (they are afraid they don't know enough). Bible Wiki creates a unique opportunity to both Study and Write about the Word of God, simantenously.

      In Christ,

      Superdadsuper, Bible Wiki Administrator & Bureaucrat

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • I saw an article that had an icon that was for ranking a page's quality. Perhaps we can do something similar here. We can use Template:Icons to do this. What do you think?

      Loading editor
    • My short response is "No". We don't need any more templates at this point, too many templates bog articles down and can cause portability issues (make sure you design some of your templates more portably please, they cause lots of bugs and mobile issues).

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
See archived talk page
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message