Most Christians are con
vinced of God’s existence based on their personal experience of God rather than by rational argumentation (though some are convinced by a combination of experience and argument). This is a rational justification for such a belief. After all, we generally take our experiences to be veridical unless and until we have good reasons for thinking our experience was not veridical. An argument for God’s existence based on personal experience goes something like this:
- I seem to have had an experience of God
- I should trust my experiences unless I have good reasons to doubt their veracity
- I have no reason to doubt the veracity of my experience of God
- Therefore, I have experienced God
- Therefore, God exists
Atheists will often claim that they would also believe in God if they had a similar experience. It’s not uncommon for this claim to be followed up by a question: Why, if God exists, have they not experienced Him?
That’s a fair question, but I would pose a follow-up question: Have you truly been seeking God with an open mind and an open heart? God is not going to force Himself on people. If someone does not want to believe in or submit their life to God, and thus have not been seeking after God, why should God reveal Himself? Why should the atheist be surprised that they have not found God?
This sort of a question is similar to the person who wonders why, if President Obama exists, I have never encountered him. The answer is simple: I’m not looking to meet him. I don’t situate myself in the places where he shows himself in public. Similarly, I would argue that those who have not experienced God are not seeking Him. They are not putting themselves in the places where God shows Himself. They are not reading the Bible, praying, or attending church. They are not studying the arguments for God’s existence or the truth of Christianity. It should not be surprising, then, that they have not experienced God. Could there be exceptions? Could there be people who have genuinely sought after the Lord but did not experience Him? Perhaps so. After all, God does not promise an experience per se. What He promises is that He will draw close to those who draw close to Him. If we seek Him, we will find Him. It may not be on our own terms or be what we expected, but find Him we will.
See also:
- Waldo as an analogy of divine hiddenness
- The Hiddenness of God Objection to Theism, Part I
- The Hiddenness of God Objection to Theism, Part II
Thinking to Believe 
February 11, 2015 at 11:10 am
(“Most Christians are convinced of God’s existence based on their personal experience of God rather than by rational argumentation (though some are convinced by a combination of experience and argument).”)
Not quite. Most people are intentionally convinced early on in life that they should use an internal (or external, depending on the belief) God as the default answer for their unknown and unknowable personal experiences, by their family, their friends, and some acquaintances.
This creates a deep emotional explanation for them to apply towards their life’s experiences that they usually prefer and then adapt as a part of them.
Most of these Christians have never been expected or instructed by these outside influences to unbiasedly TEST these assumptions against Logic and Reason. Instead, they follow in the footsteps of their parents, role models, and friends, who, after all, have followed in their parent’s and friend’s footsteps.
And since the person never learns to test the testable, Christianity (or any Religion) then becomes the “go to” idea for them to explain the apparently “Supernatural events,” which seem to surround them.
And usually a simple answer is the correct path. But through their learned behavior, they never really look very hard for it.
This unreasonable idea creates a simple path for their lives. “Simple, but absolutely NOT based on anything which even remotely appears to be factual.
IOW, they do not need to do too much personal inner work in order for them to “grow” into reasonable adults, if they learn to “accept Jesus as their personal Savior.” This “crutch” allows them to exist in a type of life, but never really knowing what its like to really “leave home.”
A path not adhering to Reason and Fact will cause one to adhere to anything that comes along, IF the oncoming idea is emotionally favorable, reinforced by popular beliefs, and conducive to their implanted religious bias.
Proof of this would be the large numbers of Christians and other religious sects now in the world, who do not unbiasedly perform those tests on their “faith.”
Most human beings will, like water, take the easy path. That is, the emotionally-biased one. “I don’t have to work very hard to find my own truths in life, IF I only believe in God, the Father” they will intimately and subliminally tell themselves.
The only real and true Path is one that the individual makes for himself, out of his own hard and conscientious inner work, giving all of his life and his possessions towards his “road” by learning to discern Fact from Fiction.
This true Path is the only Path that relies on sensible choices for our reality. A Path based solely on the things we cannot sell out to by instead optioning for our human emotional bias to lead us..FACTS!
(“I seem to have had an experience of God”)
In fact, this item is the first portion of the average religiously-biased human being’s experience. Clearly, this person has already made up his “mind.” Had he instead learned to rely on Fact and Reason for living his life, it would be stated thus: “I seem to have had an experience.”
Science is only, and always a system of Knowledge. Nothing more and nothing less.The scientific approach is the only approach that can stand with Reason and Fact.
A belief system like Religion is strictly and only based in emotional platitudes! This person in your example has already colored his experiences with his learned bias.
This thought will lead him on to other unreasonable ideas about his existence. All of them meant to feed his personal emotional bias. He will more than likely never have an authentic thought that wasn’t tainted by this emotional “imposter!”
(“I should trust my experiences unless I have good reasons to doubt their veracity”)
What is a “good reason” to someone who abdicates Reason for emotional belief to authenticate his personal knowledge of what is happening all the time around him?
If this person’s initial trusts were first and foremost placed in Facts instead of his emotional bias, wouldn’t he see the error of his ways and then begin to test all of his other emotional assumptions against Fact and Reason? Would his baseless Religious bias continue to cloud his genuine unbiased thought?
(“I have no reason to doubt the veracity of my experience of God”)
True. That is, the first portion of the sentence stating “I have no Reason” is true. If this person has an extraordinary experience, it becomes affected almost instantaneously by his Religious bias. And Reason will be damned if the experience deposes any portion of his emotionally-biased beliefs.
(“Therefore, I have experienced God”)
The simple fact of the matter is you’ve only had a personal experience in your life. To embellish the emotional is to only “polish the silverware,” and not to eat the meal.
(“Therefore, God exists”)
Only in your emotional bias, does a Personal God exist. Until Fact and Reason make this personal wish apparent, you are strictly working with a personal fantasy.
Faith is the excuse of the religious vendors and their blind followers to keep their flocks intact….nothing more and nothing less. “Religious Faith” is a mutation of the REAL meaning of the word “faith.”
Real faith speaks of real, precise, and scrupulous work applied to any system of knowledge where results both positive and negative come from meticulous testing, verifying, and ultimately peer-review. It will describe knowledge found of the different testable situations, without any bias, or personal emotion.
Real faith is when the mission goes on and on, constantly testing and retesting the evidence. It constantly changes ever so slightly, because conditions of exploration change ever so slightly. Religion tests nothing! It has no REAL evidence to offer. It NEVER changes. It doesn’t want to change.
Like a “house of cards,” Religion is extremely shaky, when scrutinized. Too much change and the flocks will start to shift their allegiances. It stays “complete” since it satisfies an internal emotionally-fed hunger.
(“Atheists will often claim that they would also believe in God if they had a similar experience.”)
When a “Personal God” crosses the “void” between Reality and his supposed “Kingdom,” science will be the first entity to let Humanity in on it.
( “Have you truly been seeking God with an open mind and an open heart?”)
I would first fault the Christians of the world for not keeping an “open mind,” but only IF they haven’t first walked a mile in the shoes of the Atheist, giving up their systemic Religious beliefs for the reality we all face as humans.
You see, for the first fifty-five years, I was a devout Christian. This means that I have indeed walked at least a mile in your Christian shoes, so I understand just what most Christians feel and think about our shared reality. But from my experiences, it was mostly a feeling experience and not a thinking one.
And I understand that most Christians are uncomfortable when they attempt to look at their religious beliefs, without their habitual bias. 99% of them never do this successfully. It takes a serious examination that most are unwilling to go through. You see, they have become very comfortable in their beliefs.
I could just as easily seek a “Satan,” or a “Superman” with an open mind and an open heart, but I understand that they are both myths, so until these two myths make their appearance in reality, they both belong to the world of the unreal, much like a Personal God.
LikeLike
February 11, 2015 at 12:33 pm
Jason:
You insist using the physical to compare against the metaphysical concepts. I can understand the spirit moral of a parable, a fable, a story. How can one compare an experience meeting President Obama the person and God the non-person?
And would the non-person God be external you could have a social with or internal you could have a debate with like talking to yourself?
And whatever you experience how would you know it was a “God” experience? Would someone have to tell you, would custom make it so, would religion claim the experience definition for you?
I was over whelmed with the emotion of joy, tears could not be contained; was that a “God” experience or an experience of “Good”?
I have been overcome with sorrow and tears could not be contained, was that an experience of “God” or was that an experience of “Good”; i.e., love?
Scripture says similarly: “we do not know what we ought to pray (wish, hope, plead, implore, petition, ask) for, but the Spirit himself (within) intercedes for us through moanings and groanings, sighs and tears.” Nobody can “know” what a God experience is unless it is defined by the one experiencing “the experience” and describe it in personal terms but that doesn’t make the experience a “God” experience anymore than ritual practice makes you a Christian or sitting in the plane makes you a pilot.
What Christians refer to as Soul is merely Emotion. The Triune Man:
Mind, Emotion and Will; Body, Soul and Spirit.
beingreal’s definition of faith is so much more profound that Paul’s assertion that simply wishing for, hoping for “the experience”, is evidence of “its” existence. I am pleased also to hear that he walked the mile in Christian shoes as well, for I too have been there, done that. Thanks.
LikeLike
February 11, 2015 at 3:04 pm
On the definition of faith, Paul states that “We walk by faith and not by sight.”
I propose that we do not walk by faith in reality, but instead we walk by observation and experience, becoming proficient in it. IOW, we walk by the faith in our abilities which was brought to us by our observations and our experiences.
If anyone believes to the contrary, that we do, in fact, walk by faith and not by sight, (observation and experience) the next time you go for a hike up a rocky hill or mountain, try blindfolding yourself.
Then continue your walk unaided by your sight or any accomplice. If you don’t get seriously hurt, or worse, you will have proved me wrong…
LikeLike
February 12, 2015 at 12:05 am
beingreal,
I don’t doubt that God-belief starts early in life. Even scientific studies have been done that support the idea that humans are hard-wired for belief in a deity from a young age even apart from the ideological influences of family. That said, the community also influences beliefs. Children generally accept what their parents tell them about the transcendent as being true. But that is not why they continue believing in deities when they get older. After all, these same people don’t continue believing in Santa. Why is God different? Something else is needed to warrant continued belief in these transcendent realities. For most people it is some sort of experience.
However beliefs in the transcendent originate, it doesn’t show that they are false, and it doesn’t mean they cannot be independently tested. They can. And I think the evidence for theism is abundant. I am a theist both because of my experience with God and the many rational evidences that He exists.
It’s not a matter of reason versus emotion. It’s a matter of reason and experience. And what is it about rationality that precludes the existence of a being like God, such that any experience we have that appears to be an experience with that being must be deemed irrational?
Your experience as a Christian may have been a feeling one, but that does not mean feelings are what justifies Christian belief. Rational evidence justifies Christian belief.
Jason
LikeLike
February 12, 2015 at 3:53 am
I’m confused. “Rational evidence”? What documented, testable, peer reviewed evidence is there for the existence of God, any God for that matter, Christian, Muslim, Sikh, Hindu, the Gods of the Incas, the spirits of the North American Indians, or whatever? Personal beliefs don’t count as evidence.
LikeLike
February 12, 2015 at 8:28 am
(“I don’t doubt that God-belief starts early in life. Even scientific studies have been done that support the idea that humans are hard-wired for belief in a deity from a young age even apart from the ideological influences of family.”)
I believe that those studies can, and should be broken down for the sake of this discussion to include the fact that children are not just hard-wired to believe in deities, but they are also hard-wired to believe in fantasy worlds and magic, also.
This is a natural occurrence, I believe stemming from their lack of experiences and testing systems in our reality. The parent’s chosen religion, (if any!) and belief systems definitely influence the kids, along with their contact with outside friends, television, etc.
(“But that is not why they continue believing in deities when they get older. After all, these same people don’t continue believing in Santa. Why is God different? Something else is needed to warrant continued belief in these transcendent realities. For most people it is some sort of experience.”)
Some do, and some do not believe in magic, fantasy lands, or deities when they get older. This depends on the level of personal work they do, the influences they are led by, and the encounters they are present at.
People are present at encounters to different degrees, depending on their level of awareness and consciousness, Jason.
No matter what the encounter, the consciousness level of the individual relays the event to his brain where it is transmitted to his emotional side and his rational side.
The greatest influence on his overall thinking is dependent on which portion of the brain is sitting in the “driver’s seat,” on a regular basis.
For the religious, or fantasy-based type of person, the emotional portion rules his rational side, for the most part, depending on how much control the event seems to reign over, or affect his basic belief systems.
The “hook” for these types of folks seems to be the “pull” of the attachment to feeling good. (or bad, sometimes!) The “Emotionality” of it all.
“God” is only the Face they must paint on their mainly emotionally-based values. I strongly believe that for the most part, this hook is a security issue for them.
A practiced Atheist like myself knows that there has never been, nor will there ever be any such thing as security….anywhere, at any time or place.
(“However beliefs in the transcendent originate, it doesn’t show that they are false, and it doesn’t mean they cannot be independently tested. They can. And I think the evidence for theism is abundant. I am a theist both because of my experience with God and the many rational evidences that He exists.”)
“It doesn’t show that they are false,” and it doesn’t show that they are true, either, as there is absolutely zero viable, outside evidence for anything “Supernatural.”
The most important denominator to take away from the conjunction of this dilemma is that everything in everyone’s life is only a personal experience.
The only test for Theism’s existence being factual can only be based on factual proofs……Emotionally-based “proofs” are not proofs. This axiom is quite simple, yet most of you religious people simply tend to overlook fact-based surveys on Theism.
IOW, which portion of the individual’s brain is dominant in his life? His Theism is strictly based in conjecture, not practical evidence. And if he is Theistic, his emotions must rule his mind and therefore, his beliefs.
Your “evidence” is not real, factual, or evident. It is only comparable to other fantasy-based folk’s experiences which follow along the same lines as yours. They emanate from a similar emotional connection in their brains.
I use the analogy of the entire universe being a circle. Every single thing, regardless of it’s makeup or Nature, in the universe is considered a single and individual point on this circle. If it “IS,” then it “IS” on this circle. And if it “IS NOT,” then it “IS NOT” on this circle.
Now on this circle, there are also “Empty” points, with nothing factual on them, but a single, unsubstantiated belief of some folks. This would be true of all of us, at one time, or another.
Now, for a VERY FEW of these individual non-factual beliefs, which are for the moment unsubstantiated since we have no tangible evidence, there are indeed some proofs, but as of yet these are undetected.
They may become detected in the future when some other point, or points shift as to reveal them to the “believer,” but they have not as of yet shifted, and so they “ARE NOT” yet.
There are also “empty points” that are simply false….period! There is no evidence for them, and there never will be evidence for them!
They are simply “unknowable” because they are false. And they are are false because they do not exist!
There is even mountains of verifiable evidence which proves that these empty points do not exist, they cannot exist now, and will never exist, but some folks either do not understand these proofs, or do not want to understand or believe in this evidence, since it falsifies their beliefs that they’ve built.
So these people simply construct a “clay model” of their belief on this non-factual empty point in order to justify their unsubstantiated belief system. They simply must have something where there is really nothing.
Like the person who likes his alcohol too much, they must change their “Sober Reality” to fit into their personal belief system.
Their Reality is still a reality to them, but it is different from the REAL and verifiable Natural Reality….The one and only one that we all shared, before their emotions dictated their lives to them.
The “Sober Reality” and the “Intoxicated Reality” are both Realities….they are the same in that they are both Realities, yet one of them is tainted with the aberration of a falsification based on an idea’s emotional appeal.
LikeLike
February 12, 2015 at 11:35 am
Re: Posts # 1, 3 & 6 = verbose obscure pontificating.
LikeLike
February 12, 2015 at 12:23 pm
(“Posts # 1, 3 & 6 = verbose obscure pontificating.”)
When I point out that Religion focuses on it’s practice of believing and promoting “faith” the incredible, the preposterous, the undetermined, and the fantasies of the “crowd,” and it does this without any facts to back up these beliefs, I would expect you, or anyone for that matter to bring a little more to this table than a simple negative sentence.
IOW, prove your points with something viable, other than a rhetorical statement.
LikeLike
February 12, 2015 at 12:34 pm
beingreal:
Methinks “verbose obscure pontificating” is academia speake for “rant” lol :).
I get that a lot too. tee hee.
LikeLike
February 12, 2015 at 12:51 pm
“………it falsifies their beliefs that they’ve built.”
This is difficult to overcome if not impossible.
I told an eldery gentleman that Ham’s curse, (the curse on Canaan:Genesis) was the result of Ham having incestuous relations with his mother when she and Noah were in drunken sleep in their tent which resulted in the birth of Canaan by Noah’s wife because of Ham the ftaher of Canaan.
I gave him scripture of the Genesis narrative that was found elsewhere in the bible.
He cussed me for trying to taint his belief but his refusal to accept that he had been wrong his whole life believing that Ham only saw his father naked was the real motive for his anger and knowledge could not supplant his belief because he remained defiantly in denial.
LikeLike
February 12, 2015 at 1:43 pm
Got it, SonofMan. One thing I didn’t point out earlier is the fact that some folks will take my statements exposing the falsities of religious belief in a personal way. I do not mean to offend anyone’s feelings, although I realize that there will always be hurt people. Hurt by what they know, what they think they know, and what they do not know.
And yes………there are some Atheists that will react negatively when they think their “toes” have been stepped on.
I only seek to discuss Reason and Fact on this site in an intelligent, and gentle manner with other seekers.
LikeLike
February 12, 2015 at 2:28 pm
It’s easy to see how this “exposing” plays on Christians and others following belief systems, even from a biblical perspective. Jesus so angered the Clergy “believers” after he indicted them by exposing the falsities of religious belief in Matthew 23 they madeit their mission to kill him.
BY the time John 7:1 came around the opening statement is evident for his stepping on their toes: “After these things Jesus walked in Galilee; for He did not want to walk in Judea, because the Jews sought to kill Him.” AND a little further on says in 7:7: “The (religious) world cannot hate you, but it hates Me because I testify of it that its works are evil.”
It seems to me that today’s believers are like the children of the believers Jesus called out in that generation but believers can’t, or won’t see it, because they believe they are descendants of Jesus but continue ignoring the blind spot like drivers who swerve into accidents even though they are all taught to mind the blind spot.
LikeLike
February 12, 2015 at 5:20 pm
beingreal,
You’ll need a much thicker skin if you choose the atheist position and reject the LORD of glory; much like the nobleman who penned this prose:
Click to access marquis-de-sade-dialog-between-a-priest-and-a-dying-man.pdf
I am one who serves the Almighty YHVH, “And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom you will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.” (Joshua 24:15)
LikeLike
February 12, 2015 at 5:46 pm
Jason says:
“God is not going to force Himself on people. If someone does not want to believe in or submit their life to God, and thus have not been seeking after God, why should God reveal Himself? Why should the atheist be surprised that they have not found God?”
Jason, As a former atheist – until age 43- I agree completely with your statement above. In 1975 I was also like some of the others that recurrently pop up in this blog site – arrogant, harsh, and barricaded behind the walls of naturalism, unwilling to concede the possibility of a God – especially the Judeo-Christian God; but in 1970, during a back-packing honeymoon trip to a high mountain lake in the Pecos wilderness of New Mexico; and I beheld the incredible beauty and majesty of the mountains and forests surrounding us – interspersed with golden aspen trees and the river valley far below, a thought came to my mind for the first time: “How can I be standing here feeling the thrill of such an incredible sight and still believe that all this happened by itself,” That moment a seed was planted, and, thereafter I began to develop a more open and humble attitude, and the walls of naturalism began to crumble.
God isn’t going to do any more than He already has to prove His existence, but if we have the right motives and the right attitude coupled with faith, which comes by hearing His word, we can find Him. Five years after my wilderness honeymoon, through an amazing chain of events God undeniably revealed Himself to me identically like He did to those in the Book of Acts, and when I came home to my then -Agnostic wife, all I could say over and over was…”It’s real! it’s real!
BTW 24 days later she had the same experience in our home!
LikeLike
February 12, 2015 at 10:43 pm
No need to worry about the thickness of my skin, Frank. It is as thick as it needs to be, thanks! I’m still waiting for you to give me your serious personal input aimed at my critique of emotionally-based Religious fantasy, magic, and the “Supernatural.”
All of these subjects versus an emotionless, factually-based perception of a Reality that, by all rigid accounts is only rooted in an apparent Godless Nature.
The place where all of the atoms that make up our bodies, as well as all the atoms of the known universe exist, described by the critical system of knowledge we call Science.
I’m not interested in what This gentleman in your video has to say. The Discovery Institute, and it’s “scientists” create plenty of their own problems with their mostly moronic assaults on Logic and Reason.
Their so-called “work” is it’s own discredit, and I do not feel that I need to run them down anymore than their in-house, and apologetic fallacies already do.
As I stated above, I’m interested in what YOU, Frank have to say as far as a retort to my comparisons of religion, reality, and the two types of faith.
All of these topics I’ve brought to this forum conform to the main topic of this thread. Does any type of a “God” exist for a person to have an experience of a “God?”
If there is a “God” of any type, is it a Personal God, or an Impersonal God, as in Forces, both seen and detectable, or unseen and undetectable?
Or is all of this religious business only a very popular, emotionally-induced fantasy created a long time ago after a caveman crawled out of a cave 20 or 30,000 years ago only to witness his first Solar eclipse, then falling down to cry for a Heavenly Father to protect him?
LikeLike
February 13, 2015 at 7:09 am
Frank Adamick:
Re: the conversation of the priest and the dying man:
In this conversation I must say the dying man appears to me to be the priest offering an intoxicated belief that defies his ability to explain it while the “dying man” caption is actually the man soberly alive in his understanding of natural human endowment, sound reasoning of both Nature being the cause of its own effect and the pride that forced man to invent an imaginary “prior cause” to raise himself up higher than the Cosmic Laws itself allows.
Such was the fertile imagination of man’s trickery of the past amid the uneducated minds of men without the wheel or fire to propel and control his destiny; one was the King, the others subjects; AKA, the Pope and the Congregation; the Leader and the followers, the Shepherd and the sheep.
The world remains in thrall unto this very day, in the same way, even after the light of Jesus shone among us.
BTW, the Jesus referred to in the “dying man” prose derogatory remarks, is the religious Jesus as labelled by religious zealots who shuttle him into the ethereal world of the supernatural because they cannot accept the real Jesus as an ordinary human being born with an endowment of understanding and wisdom without measure; the real Jesus who by practice had his senses trained up in the discernment of good and evil; who chose and sought out the good while recognizing and challenging the evils of the religious world.
Thanks for the great read.
LikeLike
February 13, 2015 at 8:40 am
Click to access marquis-de-sade-dialog-between-a-priest-and-a-dying-man.pdf
Frank, is this just a silly attempt on your part to prove your God of the bible exists? Its only an example of “After-The-Fact-Reasoning” which is a poor attempt at either humor, or just more negativeness on your part. Lets now begin to be serious, ok?
LikeLike
February 13, 2015 at 10:31 am
I think we should be careful with thinking that we must “experience” God. Experience usually involves feelings and emotions which can be up and down from day to day. All religions can testify of “experiences” not just Christianity, so this is not a good measure of what is true.
The scriptures never tell us to feel something but they teach us to renew our minds and grow in the grace and knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ. This is about truth and knowledge about the truth, not about having some miraculous experience with God. Just because people in the bible had miraculous experiences like we read in the book of Acts, it does not mean that those same experiences will happen to all of us. I would say that most of us do not routinely have those experiences and you would be chasing your tail and probably miserable if you tried to chase after experiences. Experience chasing is just another distraction from the enemy who would like to see God’s children take their focus off of Jesus, that’s all it is. The book of Acts is descriptive and not prescriptive. god had very good reasons for revealing Himself in those ways at that time.
Even Jesus said to those who were performing miracles in His name, “I never knew you…”.
The question of why an agnostic or atheist does not have a God experience is a mute point I believe. Why or how God chooses to reveal Himself is totally out of our control and does not conform to our preconceived notions. I think God is a lot closer to all of us than we think, we just have not tuned in our faith radio to the right station.
As Paul said (to a number of idol worshipers), it speaks to all of us whether we are Christian, agnostic or atheist……….or whatever…..
Act 17:26 And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place,
Act 17:27 that they should seek God, and perhaps feel their way toward him and find him. Yet he is actually not far from each one of us,
Act 17:28 for “‘In him we live and move and have our being’; as even some of your own poets have said, “‘For we are indeed his offspring.’
Naz
LikeLike
February 13, 2015 at 5:15 pm
For me it all begins from the standpoint of humility; realizing that we do indeed live in a fallen world where humankind despoils the original creation from beginning to end. But I do see a Blessed Hope for our ultimate destiny. Truly, each and every one of us has his/her own perspective and must take responsibility for the conduct of their life. As I said, I will serve YHVH. My values strive to conform to what He has written in His Word. There are those of us who accept & comprehend that through humility & obedience we faithfully follow His instructions & ordinances. I do not rebel. I detest arrogance. I surrender the life He has given me to His Divine Will. I take as my LORD and Savior Yahshua the One who came before me; who paid my price for sin which I could never pay on my own to our Righteous Father so it would be possible that I could become one of His sons. If I could put it into pictures it would go something like this:
I cited the Marquis de Sade because he clearly presents the dichotomy between two conflicting positions; i.e., atheist vs. theist. In so doing he poses contrast to Lennox’s championing of the Gospel.
Son of Man received it in the spirit in which it was given.
Beingreal failed to do so.
But that doesn’t mean I’ll stop offering, beingreal:
With gentle affection,
Frank
LikeLike
February 13, 2015 at 10:06 pm
The Dying Man of the Marquis’ Dialogue despite his caustic protestations clings to a suffocating rigid world view. He’s not the true libertine he would have you believe. He’s strapped & straddled, crippled into compliance by his dominatrix Mother Nature. “Evidence is provided by my senses alone.”, he asserts. He perceives and experiences only the physical laws of the natural world. The Sun radiates heat & light. Rainwater turns to vapor in Summer & ice in Winter. He does acknowledge he has a soul. He ungrudgingly admits his soul is what it pleased Nature to be. He also claims a mind/intellect but defies rational thought. Because if he did think rationally he’d grant more to the workings of this universe and the sentient beings who inhabit it than an indiscriminate Mother Nature. For one thing the Dying Man gives no reckoning to Father Time. We’ve determined through rational processes during observation that times/seasons do change. We live in a universe composed of matter, energy, space and time. These days scientists speak of spacetime fabric as well as Newtonian physics. The Dying Man refuses to consider consequentially the inexorable March of Time. “Do not seek further than her [Nature’s] laws for the cause of our human inconsistency, and to explain her laws look not beyond her will and her needs.” His obstinate prejudice halts any further inquiry. He paints himself into the proverbial corner. How could he breach competence employing such faulty calculus? His pride proves his undoing. He fails to exercise his own capacity for reason. Pride blinds him to the possibility of the Creator God. He concludes by misunderstanding. His misunderstanding elicits frustration. Frustration generates rejection. His rejection manifests in arrogance. “Prove to me that matter is inert, and I shall grant you a Creator.”, he challenges. Well, time will tell: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inert_gas
LikeLike
February 14, 2015 at 9:12 am
(“For me it all begins from the standpoint of humility; realizing that we do indeed live in a fallen world where humankind despoils the original creation from beginning to end.”)
Religious folks do not own the patent on Humility, Frank. Humility is acquired through the inner work of conscientious human beings, regardless of whether their belief systems are tempered with facts or dogmatic hearsay.
One can be just as humble in the face of awe and wonder whether it is an imagined mental picture of a “God” in Heaven, or when one contemplates the orbits of neutrons around a common nucleus. This, naturally, depends on the individual.
(“But I do see a Blessed Hope for our ultimate destiny. Truly, each and every one of us has his/her own perspective and must take responsibility for the conduct of their life.”)
Our ‘ultimate’ destiny, the destiny of Civilization, in reality is tied to the level of each and every person growing internally into a viable adult, which is the development of his Self-Knowledge and Self-Reliance. This is called the Inner Work.
I believe that this the most vital work on the planet today, as it was yesterday, as it will be tomorrow. The Earth is presently over-populated with “children” existing in adult bodies for this work to not be important.
This work is vital because it has been shown to have a tangible effect on a human being’s thoughts which control their actions and thus their interactions with others. Praying for change, or that fact anything, will do absolutely zero good.
The “SHROUD OF TURIN??”
http://www.truthbeknown.com/shroud.htm
“Despite claims to the contrary, carbon-14 dating conducted in 1988 has proved the shroud cloth was created during the 13th or 14th centuries AD/CE.”
“Independent tests in 1988 at the University of Oxford, the University of Arizona, and the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology concluded with 95% confidence that the shroud material dated to 1260–1390 AD.”
Only more “Quackery” from the religious charlatans, Frank. Sorry to let you in on this.
LikeLike
February 14, 2015 at 9:16 am
(“The Dying Man of the Marquis’ Dialogue despite his caustic protestations clings to a suffocating rigid world view. He’s not the true libertine he would have you believe. He’s strapped & straddled, crippled into compliance by his dominatrix Mother Nature.”)
And what is your point. Frank? That when people die and start praising a “God” that this proves there is one? To be honest, because everyone deserves honesty, I’ve seen dying men scream and curse “God.,” and Nature! It still carries the same notion…..but zero proof of any sort of “God,”
LikeLike
February 14, 2015 at 10:40 am
Beingreal,
Speaking of quackery your “philosophy” sounds alot like New Age. I can get the same stuff in a much more entertaining format from Heinlein’s “Stranger in a Strange Land”. As to carbon dating and the Shroud what you neglect to state regarding “claims to the contrary” is that they come from the inventor of the dating process. Try watching the video (42:45 to 44:48) with attentiveness.
Pertaining de Sade: he makes his own points; I merely offer observations on those points.
– Frank
LikeLike
February 14, 2015 at 2:43 pm
Frank Adamick:
Re: the shroud authenticity.
Perhaps you did not have the opportunity to read my commentary as follows and references thereto:
COMMENTARY:
May 9, 2013 at 10:27 am
[“Does anyone really believe that a body being placed for burial would not have been washed and cleansed of blood which the Shroud is claimed to be soiled with, from the face and dripping run lines on the arms? I mean what blood, unless the heart was still beating and pumping blood through wounds?
And what was the myrrh used for after water washing if not rubbed over the body?
And why would the “handkerchief” that covered the head be lying apart from the linen the body was wrapped in? Certainly the creator of the shroud did not use this tidbit of tactical theology since the shroud shows the outline of the entire body but how could that be if the head was wrapped in a separate linen.
The conclusion? The shroud is a fake, a forgery, a clever ruse, a typical antic of religious trickery. I mean common sense would not accept this as authentic………]”
JOHN 20:7
Parallel SCRIPTURAL TRANSLATIONS:
New International Version
as well as the cloth that had been wrapped around Jesus’ head. The cloth was still lying in its place, separate from the linen.
New Living Translation
while the cloth that had covered Jesus’ head was folded up and lying apart from the other wrappings.
English Standard Version
and the face cloth, which had been on Jesus’ head, not lying with the linen cloths but folded up in a place by itself.
New American Standard Bible
and the face-cloth which had been on His head, not lying with the linen wrappings, but rolled up in a place by itself.
King James Bible
And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself.
CROSS REFERENCES:
Luke 19:20
“Then another servant came and said, ‘Sir, here is your mina; I have kept it laid away in a piece of cloth.
John 11:44
The dead man came out, his hands and feet wrapped with strips of linen, and a cloth around his face. Jesus said to them, “Take off the grave clothes and let him go.”
John 19:40
Taking Jesus’ body, the two of them wrapped it, with the spices, in strips of linen. This was in accordance with Jewish burial customs.
John 20:6
Then Simon Peter came along behind him and went straight into the tomb. He saw the strips of linen lying there,
Treasury of Scripture
And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself.
And the napkin that was about his head,…. The word rendered “napkin”, is thought to be originally Latin, and signifies an handkerchief, with which the sweat is wiped off the face, and so it is used in Acts 19:12 but Nonnus says it is a common word with the Syrians, and the word is used in the Syriac version; and which he renders, , “the girdle, or binding of the head”, for with this the head and face of the dead person were bound; see John 11:44. Now Peter, by going into the sepulchre, and looking about him, and examining things more strictly and narrowly, observed that which neither he nor John had taken notice of, when only stooping they looked in: and that is, that this head binder, or napkin, was
not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself: and was plainly the effect of thought, care, and composure; and clearly showed, that the body was not taken away in a hurry, or by thieves, since everything lay in such order and decency; and which was done, either by our Lord himself, or by the angels.
CONCLUSION:
A rectangular linen cloth 4.37 metres long and 1.13 metres wide, the Turin Shroud, housed in that city’s cathedral since 1578, is famous for its two images of a mutilated man, apparently naked, one of his front, with the arms crossed over the genital area, the other of his back. The wounds resemble those of a crucifixion, with an additional wound in the side similar to the one inflicted on Jesus when he was on the cross (John 19:34). Here we have negative images of Christ’s body as if they had been transferred from the body to the cloth. – See more at: http://www.historytoday.com/charles-freeman/origins-shroud-turin#sthash.lAKV0WfV.dpuf
The producer of the Shroud neglected to study the bible enough and obviously missed the fact that the head and face, as was the Burial Custom, were covered with a separate piece of linen burial cloth and therefore the entire body image that includes the head and face, in the shroud, could not have been transferred to the one single piece of linen the Shroud purports to show.
In this case Bible Scripture refutes the authenticity and the Shroud is a Fake. One might say the “the hypothesis is falsified by the evidence from the Bible itself.”
Amen for the women in your life.
LikeLike
February 14, 2015 at 5:51 pm
The existence of God and morality are two very interesting topics. Theists love to tie the two together but one of the things history has shown me is people whether they be Theist, Atheist or whatever can do very horrible things.
Look around, if you think this is by design your a Theist, if you don’t agree your not. I’ve read about some Theists (past, present and future) that would kill me for disagreeing with them or not following some of their rules. I’ve read about non-Theists that would do the same. The big question is: whether Theist or not how will you live with your neighbor?
I’m Christian and believe in the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. That being said, I’m very cautious about the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin and I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s a fake.
LikeLike
February 14, 2015 at 10:50 pm
“(Speaking of quackery your “philosophy” sounds alot like New Age. I can get the same stuff in a much more entertaining format from Heinlein’s “Stranger in a Strange Land”.)
“New Age??” Yes, New Age is a type of Religious quackery, Frank.
New Age is very close to Christianity. Like Christianity, it focuses on a “Heaven on Earth” type scenario and a seeking of a lasting happiness, but without the person doing any serious personal work.
Both of these teachings offer “tranquility,” “harmony,” and, the BIG one, a “GOD.” They are both ok and good starting points for an initiation into the reality of personal inner growth.
Obviously, a man like you is after entertainment, as your above statement reveals. Christianity would be a good choice to keep oneself “entertained.”
New Agers, like Christians, seek a sort of inner happiness, using the outer tools of a dogmatic belief system, including the bible.
However, they both fail at delivering any authentic form of self reliance, or self realization since they create a personal and stagnating dependency on dogmatic beliefs with the offering of a strange belief in unseen and undetectable “Supernatural” Entities, instead of one relying on oneself to make one’s way.
The typical follower of these two imposters wants all the benefits of these belief systems without investing too much effort into consciously bettering themselves.
“Self-Knowledge” is just what these two words mean. It is serious training meant for people who are serious about living a meaningful, and responsible life. It’s outline follows the works of people like Aristotle, Confucius, Alfred Adler, and Carl Jung.
It teaches one a responsibility to oneself, and to Humanity. It is the discovery of who I really am under the influence of outside events.
Unlike New Age beliefs or Christianity, Self-Knowledge isn’t a search for some sort of “payoff” Like eternal happiness, or a God, or a Heaven.
It is an honest look at who you really are. It is the preparing of the self to meet any obstacle or scenario. It is self instruction on how to face one’s life, with a personally learned knowledge of how you respond to all of life’s challenges.
It is the realization that you are indeed human in every way, and that you are ultimately alone, and that you always were alone, and that you always will be.
New Age and Religion are twin charlatans, waiting to take away your life and in it’s stead, give to you what you thought you were looking for…….mainly, a distraction from reality, comfort, happiness, and most importantly, dogma.
And ultimately, these two fakers never teach you the important facts around learning to deal with your life. New Age and Religion will never teach you to leave home for the first time, nor will they teach you to find your OWN truth, nor will they teach you to replace yourself.
They will always encourage you to stop looking for your own truth and to take up someone else’s truth……theirs.
LikeLike
February 14, 2015 at 11:10 pm
And on your questioning of the accuracy of Carbon-14 dating and “The Shroud Of Turin;”
https://www.shroud.com/nature.htm
Even one of your Christian “scientific” websites states that Carbon-14 dating is “Probably accurate back 3500 years, or so.”
http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/FAQ221.html
Thats more then enough time to uncover the “Shroud” fraud.
Modern science, (REAL science!) gives it a thumbs up, but gives it a slight adjustment when you go back 30,000 or 40,000 years, or so. A perfect example of peer-reviewing and testing and retesting… You won’t get that from Religion.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/carbon-dating-gets-reset/
LikeLike
February 15, 2015 at 2:06 am
O SonofMan,
No I did not see your comments regarding authenticity of the Shroud dated May 9, 2013 before today.
The reference you cite written by Charles Freeman proves utterly worthless. He claims that 14th century iconography establishing a Christ mutilated by intense scourging was generated by a mining of Old Testament prophecies concerning the crucified Christ which uncovered the following prophecy about his Passion: “From the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it; but wounds, and bruises, and putrifying sores: they have not been closed, neither bound up, neither mollified with ointment.” (Isaiah 1:6 KJV) Now all it takes is a rudimentary reading of this very verse IN CONTEXT to thoroughly understand that it has absolutely nothing to do with Messianic Prophecy but rather expresses Isaiah’s recording of YHVH’s indictment and condemnation of the corrupt servant Jacob; i.e., the nation of Israel.
Isaiah, Chapter 1
1. The Vision of Isaiah, the son of Amoz, which he saw
Concerning Judah and Jerusalem in the days of Uzziah,
Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah, kings of Judah.
2. Hear, O heavens, give ear, O earth
For the LORD has spoken:
I have reared sons and raised them up,
But they have rebelled against Me.
3. The ox knows his owner,
The ass the crib of his master,
Israel does not know,
My people do not understand!
4. Ah, sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity,
Seed of evildoers, sons of corrupters!
They have forsaken the LORD,
They have despised the Holy One of Israel,
They have turned backward.
5. Upon which place will you yet be smitten?
You will still continue to rebel,
The whole head is sick,
The whole heart is diseased.
6.* From the sole of the foot even to the head
There is not a sound spot,
Only bruises, stripes and running sores,
Not pressed out, nor bound up
And not softened with oil.
7. Your country is devastated, your cities burned with fire,
Your land in your very presence is devoured by aliens
And utterly ruined in the customary manner of aliens.
8. And the daughter of Zion is left
Like a hut in a vineyard,
Like a shack in a melon field
Like a city under siege.
9. Except the LORD of Hosts
Had left us some survivors,
We would have been almost as Sodom
We would have been like Gomorrah.
This is clear demonstration of Adversary instigated misappropriation of Biblical Scripture to twist a message. Freeman’s a spurious hack and with this as example of his “scholarship” you can just throw his whole mess in with the sewage.
If you’re interested in genuine Bible scholarship look to Victor Buksbazen on The Prophet Isaiah. Search his commentary on these Messianic verses written some 700 years before Yahshua the Son of David dwelt among us:
The Lord GOD has opened mine ear, and I was not rebellious, neither turned away back. I gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to them that plucked off the hair; I hid not my face from shame and spitting. (Isaiah 50:5-6)
Behold, my servant shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high. As many were astonished at thee; his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men: So shall he sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him: for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider. (Isaiah 52:13-15)
WHO has believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed? For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he has no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him. He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely, he has borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he opened not his mouth. He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken. And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth. Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he has put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand. He shall see the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities. Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he has poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors. (Isaiah 53:1-12)
Concerning the “Napkin” or Sudarium of Oviedo as it’s called in relation to the Shroud of Turin; we do agree they are two distinct objects. I refer you to section 39:00 – 42:44 of the Shroud video in Post # 19. According to these investigators the Sudarium covered Messiah’s Face from when He was brought down from the Cross until it was removed by those tending His Body BEFORE folding & wrapping Him in the Shroud. Blood types match as AB on both cloths. Blood pattern displays match on both cloths.
As to any significance ascribed to the positioning of the cloths upon discovery in the tomb I refer you here: http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/f/folded-napkin.htm#.VOAtQS49ZkU
Leo, I have reached no conclusion as to the authenticity of the Shroud at this time. I do think it serves to foster contemplation of Yahshua Son of David as YHVH’s Messiah plus our relationship to Him. To all those who categorically contend that the Shroud of Turin is a hoax and a fraud; I agree with Barrie M. Schwortz, Editor of Shroud.com & official photographer on the 1978 STURP Team who challenges each and every one of them to replicate the Shroud while consistently duplicating ALL of its anomalous technical aspects. To date this has not been accomplished by anyone nor successfully passed scientific peer review.
– Frank
LikeLike
February 15, 2015 at 12:58 pm
Frank: Adamick:
The only reference I cited from Freeman were the facts of the Shroud; i.e. dimensions, where housed and the negative images transferred; apart from that I have not read anything from Freeman and only included the URL as it pertained to the facts mentioned. I did not comment on any other conclusions of Freeman because I draw on my own without approval from others.
The main meaning of John 20:7 is to convey that the cloth, which was placed over Jesus head or face at burial, was separate from the rest of the grave clothes.
Two points to note. 1. the speculation that the burial cloth was placed around the face and head when Jesus was taken down from the cross; to cover a presumed deceased person.
2. I believe that the cloth around the head and face in that case would not have been the burial cloth since the washing and cleansing of the wounds would have taken place in the tomb and then, new, clean-linen burial cloths would have been used, as custom required, in the actually wrapping process and of course this is speculation too; however, it is worth noting that scripture suggests only Joseph of Arimathea(to whom the body was entrusted for burial) and Nicodemus(who brought the 75 to 100 pounds of aloes and myrhh) were privy to the body in the tomb. The myrrh and aloes were pounded and mixed for the purposes of resisting the decomposition of death. The method was entirely to cover the ojqoni>ai – othoniai – sheets – with its pungent and purifying powder, and then to swathe the whole body with the grave-clothes thus enriched.
From where I sit the body was still alive and while some wounds may have continued to ooze most of them would have clotted but that still does not authenticate the turin hoax; religion has thrived on hoaxes since its invention.
The washing and cleansing would have removed remaining residue so it seems to me that the single Shroud should not have been so pronounced with blood amid sweat to show outlines of hair and revealing shadows?
About the AB blood type, any forger worth his forgery salt would have used the same blood to smear the linen so on the face of it the blood type is a moot point. If the replication were to take place it would be done with a live person painted and smeared and pressed with a linen shroud before drying but any swet or would have long since evaporated without leaving any trace marks other than miniscule saline dust.
If nobody accepts the challenge to replicate a forgery it does not make the forgery any less fraudulent and certainly no argument for authenticity.
While the person is still alive, the blood is circulating and any injuries such as cuts or stabs will bleed unless clotted. After death, the body usually does not bleed.
Do you believe Jesus was naked on the cross or stripped naked in the tomb? One or the other would have to be true according to the Turin Shroud. And why would his hands be conveniently crossed to cover the genital area? Prudes have ruled the world up until the 1960’s and can hardly bring themselves to speak about the privates in religious circles still today so I imagine the forgers in the 16th century would have been so convicted.
Time heals all wounds, solves all mystery, and buries all truth.
The connection between this cloth and Jesus Christ is stretching the imagination so far as to be ridiculous. Only the faithful will believe it anyway, and those people who need their faith to be bolstered by something as trivial as this need to question why they believe in the first place. The altars of Catholic Europe are full of the interred bones of saints who, if their existence is to be believed, must have had 7 legs and 97 ribs.
LikeLike
February 15, 2015 at 1:47 pm
Leo,
Fact is you can amuse yourself til doomsday with such fatuous conjecture as you’ve delivered here. The second fact remains if no one comes up with the goods by replicating the Turin Shroud there’s no definitive determination one way or the other. The howls of a hoax are just more worthless useless blather.
In answer to your question, I think based upon the dehumanization that He endured at the hands of His executioners Messiah hung nude on the Cross. FYI: I’ve heard tell there’s a church somewhere in Spain where the Christ figure affixed to the main altar crucifix is totally nude so you can see his genitals.
– Frank
LikeLike
February 15, 2015 at 3:49 pm
Frank:
In other words not replicating a fraud makes the original fraud authentic? Huh!
Or are you saying a replica of a fraud makes the fraud an authentic fraud?
I think the textile industry has changed quite a bit since medieval times; the hoax was perpetrated by religious fanatics “divinely inspired” by their myth and would do whatever it took to conveyed the truth of dogmatic belief by whatever means necessary.
Its also said that no blood was found on the shroud but hematic mix with red paint.
Nevertheless even if the Turin Shroud was authemtic it would merely be more evidence that Jesus survived the crucifixion as the bible itself proves the appearances after entombment was the appearance of an “alive” Jesus; even if all the burial clothes were found in a box with the inscription “here lies the burial clothes of Jesus but not the body”, it still only proves the survival of the cross and since neither you nor any of your religious counterparts can prove the existence of ghosts in the paranormal world it will remain a hoax along with the hoax of being resurrection of the dead as a typical clergy hoax as are all so called miracles.
Tell me this Frank, as a believer do you believe that there was a mass resurrection as per the bible? “And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, and came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.”
~ Matthew 27:52-53
So why is Matthew the only gospel writer to include this detail?
Whenever a story is missing from the other gospels, a common apologetics move is to say that “the absence of evidence isn’t evidence of absence.” Something like your can’t replication theory. In other words, just because Mark, Luke and John don’t mention it, doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. Perhaps they’re right. Perhaps the other gospel writers just forgot that detail, or were ignorant of it, or didn’t feel it was important to the story. Seriously?
Hanging your hat on a supernatural hat rack still will only show the hat on the floor to reasonable folks but an invisible hat rack in the mind of the believers.
LikeLike
February 18, 2015 at 10:33 pm
Leo,
Isn’t part of the process of the Scientific Method for testing a claim being able to repeat the process and get the same result? If the Shroud does in fact constitute a hoax as some individuals blatantly assert than a requirement to substantiate their claim would be to replicate the Shroud with consistency to ALL of its anomalous aspects so as to certify the ability to achieve fabrication FIRST. NO ONE has even succeeded at that. Let alone unambiguously identify the actual Shroud of Turin as fraudulent. So far despite instances where charges of a hoax are alleged NOBODY brings along empirical proof to validate the claim. It’s like this, “put up or shut up” otherwise you forfeit all credibility. I do not contend that the Shroud of Turin is THE genuine burial wrap of Yahshua of Nazareth or bogus based upon inconclusive evidence. However, I’d have to be deaf, dumb and blind not to realize that there’s some serious explaining to do concerning the origins of this particular Shroud. Here we have the most tested artifact in ALL of HUMAN HISTORY and still NO ONE can determine with surety how it came to be or reproduce it. You also need to vet your source information (Remember Charles Freeman.) to verify your claims: NewsFlash – There is NO density of paint on the Turin Shroud as determined by competent scientific analysis. Peruse the Shroud Video in Post # 19 @ (11:30 – 18:52).
Again Leo, get your terminology straight: no speculative musings, don’t twist Scripture whether through ignorance or without regard; use your God-given mind to conclude rationally: the appearances post entombment were the appearances of the Resurrected Yahshua/Messiah. The eyewitness testimony of the Apostle John plus the actions of Joseph of Arimathaea, Nicodemus, the Roman guard who thrust the spear into His chest, the centurion who delivered the report that Yahshua of Nazareth died on penalty of certain execution if he lied to his commander, Pontius Pilate, additionally, the account of the Roman guards who took bribes from the elders and chief priests (unique to Matthew 28:1-15), take it one more verse, Leo, “Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.” (Matthew 27:54) – “Truly this was the Son of God.”; He was DEAD, Leo, DEAD ON THE CROSS. Continuing, the other two New Testament Gospel writers’ accounts; i.e., Luke & Mark both confirm that Messiah died on the Cross and rose the third day according to Scripture. Finally, we have the categorical testimony of Paul, “Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also you have received, and wherein you stand; By which also you are saved, if you keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless you have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.” ( 1 Corinthians 15:1-8)
As to Matthew 27:52-53: yes, I do believe this Scripture as it is written. I could explain to you why when you demonstrate to me that you have a thorough accurate understanding & knowledge of the Messiah’s promised fulfillment of YHVH’s Spring Feast of First Fruits as written in the Book of Leviticus. Otherwise, we’d both be wasting each others’ time. Secondly, recognizing that each of the four writer’s of the Gospel emphasized a different aspect of the essence of Messiah: Luke records Yahshua as Son of Man presenting His fully human nature; Mark records our LORD and Savior as the Humble Servant of the Almighty stressing Yahshua’s actions to serve our Righteous Father; John presents the Messiah as the Son of God emphasizing His fully Divine Person while Matthew records the Son of David as the King of heaven and earth laying down the rules of God’s Kingdom; we know that In order to get the full clear picture of Messiah it’s essential to integrate all four Gospel Scriptures (the 3 Synoptic Gospels plus the Gospel written by the Apostle John) into a cohesive narrative of Yahshua Messiah’s Ministry. http://www.cresourcei.org/synoptic.html
From Yahshua Messiah, “I said therefore unto you, that you shall die in your sins: for if you believe not that I am he, you shall die in your sins.” (John 8:24)
LikeLike
February 18, 2015 at 11:03 pm
In counterpoint to the vacuous atheist world view: The Blessed Hope of forgiveness through repentance and acceptance of the Risen LORD.
LikeLike
February 19, 2015 at 6:48 am
Frank:
On the shroud: you only consider technical aspects of the linen for replication (but you can probably get a whole shipload of shroud knockoffs from China lol) Replications by the way are from bonafide experiments; nevertheless, it is obvious to me that the face and head could not have been part of the shroud because the head and the face are wrapped in separate burial clothes apart from the linen piece that wraps around the rest of the body. These head clothes were wrapped and were lying separately from the body linen wraps. Now ask yourself how the face and head images if wrapped in separate cloths would have seeped through the head and face cloths and which residue would have made their way through the head and face cloths onto the full body linens. The shroud would have looked like the headless horseman from sleepy hollow in that case and the separate linen clothes should have been together with the body linen; the burial cloths should all have been together. How could it not be a fraud if it does not conform to the bible statement?
This is the only reason to believe the shroud is an obvious fraud:
John 20:3 “So Peter and the other disciple started for the tomb. 4 Both were running, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first. 5 He bent over and looked in at the strips of linen lying there but did not go in. 6 Then Simon Peter came along behind him and went straight into the tomb. He saw the strips of linen lying there, 7 as well as the cloth that had been wrapped around Jesus’ head. The cloth was still lying in its place, separate from the linen.”
So if the head cloth was used as it were, like a bag, encircling the head and face how could the residue image have ended up on the body strips of linen? And what’s with the “strips” of linen as the bible states; the Shroud of Turin is all one single piece of linen 4 metres X 1 metre is it not? Here’s the description and sizes: “The shroud is rectangular, measuring approximately 4.4 × 1.1 m (14.3 × 3.7 ft). The cloth is woven in a three-to-one herringbone twill composed of flax fibrils. Its most distinctive characteristic is the faint, brownish image of a front and back view of a naked man with his hands folded across his groin. The two views are aligned along the midplane of the body and point in opposite directions. The front and back views of the head nearly meet at the middle of the cloth. When Lazarus came stumbling out of the tomb it went something like this: “John 11:44 And out walked the man who had been (supposedly) dead, his hands and feet wrapped in burial cloths (linen strips), and with a [burial] napkin bound around his face. Jesus said to them, Free him of the burial wrappings and let him go.
Regarding the appearances of Jesus; Frank, the appearances confirm what I have been saying all along, that Jesus appeared to them Bodily because he was alive, not dead Frank. he was alive that is the only evidence one needs to know: that Jesus survived the crucifixion, regardless of what the centurion said, regardless of what the writers wrote, they wrote about what they believed to have been the case; the fact is he appeared “ALIVE”. When he appeared they, supposing he was a ghost(a spirit), were frightened by him and Jesus said calm down it’s me I’m alive, here feel my muscles and bones and flesh; I’m not a ghost, I’m hungry, give me something to eat and eat he did because he was alive.
And of course you want to go back thousands off years and find some scripture that talks about the first fruits that will arise from the dead and use this to say yes many did raise from the dead after Jesus resurrection but Frank….You’re just grasping for straws, trying to spin scripture to your side to support that dead people raise from the dead their decomposed flash and oragns pulsating with life but that’s as ridiculous as the notion that psychics exist. You can have your fortune read by the mystic prophets(psychics) on almost every corner in any major city in the country. Hey, Gung Hey Fat Choy is today, the Casino is having a free Chinese New Years fortune telling booth this year? Are you going? Not me but I may look upon the superstitioius who do and laugh at them as they leave believing they’ll win the next lottery….or come into the next fortune by winning a jackpot of $8,888.88.
Prophets and psychics are one group of bizarre people who never fail to gather a flock from the pool of believers; It reminds me of the old children’s rhyme: “here’s the Church and here’s the steeple look inside and there’s all the sheeple”. Psychics and believers are a dime a dozen and believers willingly give their money for the hopes the psychic will foretell just as the prophets of old did pretending they were spokespersons for God even as some of them rightly predicted trends as pundits do today like foretelling the day when nobody, rich or poor, slave or freeman, Kings and subjects alike will be able to buy and sell anything without access to the beast, not a micro chip but “Money”. We live in those days now and nobody can buy or sell has since the invention of the common currency money supplanted bartering trade; even Judas sold Jesus for money? So John didn’t need to be a prophet to foretell what was trending when he wrote Revelation.
LikeLike
February 19, 2015 at 7:49 am
Franj:
Vacuous is a smart- sounding way to describe something dumb and more appropriately describes someone mired by the tyranny of supernatural indoctrination and fear from which only persistence, intelligent thinkers and seekers are able to shimmy up from on the rope of clarity, common sense and understanding.
Forgiveness by repentance is a humanity virtue made fashionable by the revolutionary Jesus in contrast to the worldview of tit for tat revenge in his day and which virtue he demonstrated by practice, parables and stories during the life of the revolutionary, non-religious man who put his life on the line by testifying that the works of religious pseudo-intellectuals that their ways and works were evil by teaching men that the supernatural was something when it was nothing because “nothing” turned them on and needed no evidence to support the imaginary concept.
Unfortunately this utter contemptible concept is still rampant around the world today as we see the religious fundamentally extremes operating with wars, beheadings and executions of other religious minorities, non believers and homosexuals in thr name so the prophet god and Book Teachings.
LikeLike
February 19, 2015 at 2:50 pm
He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay. (Matthew 28:6)
LikeLike
February 19, 2015 at 7:04 pm
FranK;
An old adage: “Dead men don’t walk”. Been true for thousands of years although one day when we learn enough to eliminate disease, genetically modify or renew the body with stem cell therapy and embrace the world of immortality when “death will be conquered”, men will walk without being subject to it; up until this very day no man has ever died, recomposed the body and came back to life; No, not one, Nada, NOn, Neit; not the saints who died and were raised by an earthquake that split open the tombs to release them to return to their loved ones, Not Lazarus and not Jesus.
Of course you have the same opportunity that the Shroud of Turin photographers and you gave anyone the chance to replicate the feat if they can but until now not one person has been able to replicate such a feat. Why? I should not have to tell you the common sense answer that stares you in the face and stirs the brain to stimulated reasonable intelligence. Perhaps you and all your belief system wisdom can perform such a feat? Can anybody? Any?
The answer is evident by its absence.
LikeLike
February 20, 2015 at 4:00 am
In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the first-born from the dead; that in all things he might have the pre-eminence. For it pleased the Father that in him should all fullness dwell; And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now has he reconciled In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblamable and unreprovable in his sight. (Colossians 1:14-22)
LikeLike
February 20, 2015 at 5:20 am
Mr Adamick:
My, my what shroud cloth you are made from, really?
The simplicity of what you quoted from Colossians, in a word, is wrong. What Paul is saying and you’re repeating, is that If the death and spilled blood of Jesus is everything then his life meant nothing. You’re so wrong. So religiously wrong; so dogmatically wrong.
Jesus’ legacy is one of attitude and disposition, graceful and genuine in compassion and kindness, always ready to forgive those willing to receive it; a man so full of common sense and sound judgment that he had the wisdom to turn insight into foresight and recognizing the Father within everyman, not the supernatural gods created by charlatans, magicians, popoffs and snake oil salesmen selling miracle water in ketchup packages.
No, Jesus was a real man credited with supernatural powers because of his common sense ideas to tackle any problem. Jesus gave the presence of his peace to the world by his life, not through his death; the clergy has it all backward by claiming Jesus gave the world life through his death, uh uh. Couldn’t be farther from the truth.
You have no redemption through his blood nor are you reconciled and presented holy and unblamable by his death. This is the idiocy of dogma. You see if anything was accomplished by Jesus, it was accomplished by his Life, not by his death. Death Sacrifice and Blood Sprinkling is Religion’s Legacy to the world.
Jesus’ persistent messages and the revolutionary changes that he announced and conducted his campaign by for three years, is the essence of the invisible spirit, made visible by word and deed for all to witness, before he was tracked down and arrested by the religious toes he stepped on.
Yet the same religious toes he stepped on after his crucifixion were quick to claim him as one of their own in order to take advanatge of the increasing numbers of people whose numbers were growing exponentially as the numbers in their traditional meeting places dwindled by comparison. Not being able to face religion’s diminishing returns as the reulst of religion’s wicked deeds to the innocent, it resorted to hijacking the growing crowd-following of Jesus. By their usual deceitful tactics traditional religion began asserting that it was representative of the true followers and were leading the charge of proclaiming the real truth. So they poured their billions of money into the New Church Followings and continued their pomp and splendor in ceremonial acts of pretense, dressed in tall hats and flowery robes, carrying sceptre symbols of power from the Mosaic Era melding the two into the grandiose fraud we see today from Westminster Abbey throughout Europe and the West to the Vatican in Rome.
One of the first tactics the old religionists devised was to jump on the biggest bandwagon Festival in town which became known as Christmas by proclaiming it as the birthdate of baby Jesus when in fact the biggest Annual Festival of Estrus in town, a pagan( another word for natural humanity) Festival that was practiced long before Jesus was ever born(as noted in Old Testament Scripture); nevertheless, the hoax persists unto this very day. The same religious folly that harrassed Jesus since the beginning of his 3 year campaign to expose religion for the evils of its work and the evil of the leaders that perpetrated the hoaxes, has operated ever since. They wrote the book of Deceit and Dogma and delivered it throughout the religous world as it morphed into Christianity from fundamental Judaism that was eventually challenged by Islam.
The Big Three mixed with eastern religions and ancient mythologies of mankind into a world full of suspicion, superstition and supernaturalism, ignoring the Oneness of Humanity for the sake of divisive ideology of dog eat dog by whatever means necessary.
PS A quote from your quote of the Colossian quote: “Who is the image of the invisible God,(as is) the firstborn of every creature:”
Do you think it is true that the firstborn of every creature is the image of an invisible god? Does this make sense to you?
LikeLike
February 20, 2015 at 9:27 am
Whether a ‘ Thaumaturge ‘ can raise the dead or not would be determined nowadays, M. Renan thinks, by a formal ‘commission of physicians, physiologists, chemists, and critics,’ who are to ‘choose their corpse,’ appoint the place and circumstances ‘of the operation, and lay down a system of precautions’ to guard against imposture.
— Henry Rogers, “Critique on M. Renan’s ‘Vie de Jésus,'” Reason and Faith , 1866
LikeLike
February 20, 2015 at 4:38 pm
In keeping with the thread of this blog:
It’s often said, “God works in mysterious ways”. Our travels and experiences can take us places we never anticipated yet wind up having profound effect on the eventual course of our lives. Case in point:
And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose. (Romans 8:28)
LikeLike
February 20, 2015 at 6:01 pm
Re: Post # 39
Leo,
As evinced by your Biblical textual distortions I find it necessary to point you in the right direction; whether you’re capable of reading the signs – only God knows:
For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that makes an atonement for the soul. (Leviticus 17:11)
For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God. And inasmuch as not without an oath he was made priest: (For those priests were made without an oath; but this with an oath by him that said unto him, The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchisedec:) By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament. And they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death: But this man, because he continues ever, has an unchangeable priesthood. Wherefore he is able to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever lives to make intercession for them. For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners and made higher than the heavens; Who needs not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself. For the law makes men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, makes the Son, who is consecrated for evermore. (Hebrews 7:19-28)
LikeLike
February 21, 2015 at 10:16 am
Frank:
X-STREAM ALLITERATION
Saturday’s Sermon: Serving Simple Saints Seeking Safe Secure Sagacity Shelter as Sacrosanct Sanity Supplants Supernaturalism.
You have the same problem as all religious adherents in that proselytes must thread everything to the past in order to justify your reasoning for religion. Just because the ancients used death and sacrifice to make amends for the sins of themselves and of the people, as ludicrous as that was, you persist in trying to connect what was ludicrous in the past (that something has to die to absolve sin (Leviticus 17) to give validity to the human sacrifice, Jesus. But there is no connection to it. It’s just the way religion has to operate for the appearance of righteousness in the eyes of society; to do otherwise, would show that the belief that someone, something needed to die was as ridiculous as doing rain dances to try to bring rain to the land. And so it went from human sacrifice (the ignorant) to animal sacrifice(civilized progress) back to human sacrifice to keep the common thread full circle, only with Jesus it was to have been the last, the ultimate, so that death was finally conquered for the atonement for all sins (ONCE AND FOR ALL) but we know it wasn’t and sin still persists and people still die because of the sins in the hearts of men around the world. We see it in wars, we see a recent example in Argentina where the prosecutor was executed the day before he was to testify to the government’s involvment in hiding Iran’s role in the bombing of a synagogue 20 years ago: “The 1994 bombing of a Jewish center in Buenos Aires killed 85 people and wounded hundreds more.”
One might say, religiously, that the prosecutor died for the atonment (covering up) of the sins of the world.
It is not out of love that almost 6000 Ukranians are dying, 200,000 in Syria and so on and so on. And yet religion makes everything sound so wonderful and peaceful and righteous and in fulfillment of scripture and they’ve been doing that now for how many years? And they still have line-ups in the parking lots as Sunday rolls around and another prayer session gets underway for the atonement of sins yet once again for last week’s behavior like bears on the roadways full of road rage and in some churches once on Sunday and once on Wednesday so more collateral can be shown to the banks for purposes of “financial expansive services” outgrowth.
Do you drive a car? I know of few places where more Christians tell more lies about God than behind the steering wheel.
You don’t suppose that sermons directly related to increasing the bottom line just happen; they’re already prepared in advance for the day when finances dwindle or expenses increase. It’s done on a regular basis….(.hmmmm what shall we preach about today? Go to the folder and look under FINANCE sermons and we can purchase a new vehicle with brighter logos on the doors) when the appeal for more tithing and better to give with the maxim it will return some tenfold and some a hundredfold, brimming up and overflowing when you give with joy from the abundance of the heart.
Now Frank what happened after the last human sacrifice(Jesus) made way for a new era in freedom from religion’s obvious killing machine? Well the priests went for wine and wafers and the sprinkling was done with Holy Water instead of blood and then they started the Scribes on a road to penning indulgences for the atonement of sins, indulgences you could buy to pay your way to the Pearly Gates and the wealth just kept on coming until the Gutenberg Press and then OMG the coffers BLOOMED, they were overflowing as Indulgences were printed by the thousands and the tens of thousands and people already atuned to the new-atonement-for-sins-program could buy them for a dime a dozen; even the poor could get in on it, they could afford a few too…Wow. And yes all because of Jesus the son of God that came among us who proved that God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten……yada yada.
Get the picture yet Frank? A FInancial Farce Fraternity. Did you know that the Vatican is so wealthy the value worth of its Estate cannot be calculated?
LikeLike
February 21, 2015 at 10:27 am
Pope Finds 100s Of Millions Of Euros “Tucked Away”; Freezes Ex-Vatican Bank Heads Assets.
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 12/07/2014 22:21 -0400
It’s a miracle… The Vatican’s economy minister has said hundreds of millions of euros were found “tucked away” in accounts of various Holy See departments that were previously not counted on the city-state’s balance sheet. “In fact, we have discovered that the situation is much healthier than it seemed,” noted Australian Cardinal George Pell, adding that “it is important to point out that the Vatican is not broke.” Indeed a miracle – like hookers-and-blow in GDP data? However, the Vatican finances remain in darkness as Reuters reports, the state’s top prosecutor has frozen 16 million euros in bank accounts owned by two former Vatican bank managers and a lawyer as part of an embezzlement investigation into the sale of 29 Vatican-owned real estate in the 2000s.
SOURCE:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-12-07/pope-finds-100s-millions-euros-tucked-away-freezes-ex-vatican-bank-heads-assets
LikeLike
February 21, 2015 at 10:40 am
Frank: CHURCH AND WEALTH?
LikeLike
February 21, 2015 at 12:29 pm
You know Frank:
There are several points about the Shroud Video I find interesting, not the least is that the lecturer is a believer and has no doubt that he was positioned by God as a team member doing photos of the Shroud with the Sturp Team and that he was preordained to develop a website and eventually to go around lecturing on the authenticity of the Shroud but the one point that he mentioned that threw me for a loop was how easily he denied the bible scriptures about the linen being in strips that the bible clearly says were linen strips; he nonchalantly discards the scriptural references to the strips by saying that in Jesus’s day they had already done away with linen strips in order to explain why the Turin Shroud was one big piece of linen sewn at the sides like a body bag that bodies would have just slid into. So in order to authenticate the Shroud he rejects the bible verses that state there were “linen strips”. (16:50-17:12) because the sides of Shroud were sewn which was consistent with first century burials, the same way that his Father was wrapped when he died.Huh?
Thus according to B.S. there were no linen strips just the Shroud clotth and the Face cloth which for some reason he believes was covering the face of Jesus after he was removed from the cross but then taken off the face and set aside, inside the tomb, which explains why there is no image on the face cloth only blood and which face cloth he claims is in Spain and documented back to the 6th century. That’s how he gets around discarding the bible verses and connects a face cloth in Spain as the “other” cloth from the tomb that was seen.
“And if you believe that I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell.”
LikeLike
February 21, 2015 at 1:36 pm
Frank:
Another of B.S.’s reasons for authenticity is because he asked his blood specialist friend why the blood was so red? He said it was because of the high concentrtion of bilirubin which is laughable because “Jaundice causes your skin and the whites of your eyes to turn yellow. Too much bilirubin causes jaundice. Bilirubin is a yellow chemical in hemoglobin, the substance that carries oxygen in your red blood cells.”
If anything the blood would turn yellow which explains why the yellowish coloring appears in bruising. It doesn’t make blood redder it makes blood yellower. Look it up “Bilirubin”
Bilirubin is created by the activity of biliverdin reductase on biliverdin, a green tetrapyrrolic bile pigment that is also a product of heme catabolism. Bilirubin, when oxidized, reverts to become biliverdin once again. This cycle, in addition to the demonstration of the potent antioxidant activity of bilirubin, has led to the hypothesis that bilirubin’s main physiologic role is as a cellular antioxidant.
Red blood cells are red because they have hemoglobin. This iron protein is responsible for picking up oxygen in your lungs and transferring the oxygen to every cell in your body. The blood leaving your lungs has more red blood cells with attached oxygen than does the blood flowing into your lung.
Hemoglobin molecules have a red color, but hemoglobin + oxygen is redder. Thus, the more oxygenated the blood, the redder the blood.
LikeLike
February 21, 2015 at 3:29 pm
Leo,
Climb down off your soap-box and take a deep breath. You also might try investing in some saline solution to flush your ears.
Stop the B.S. and listen to what Barrie Schwortz had to say about his own father’s burial. He said it took place about 10 (ten) years ago and there was no need to use strips to bind his father into his shroud because it was sown along the sides so he could be slid into it. Mr. Schwortz does not say there were no linen strips for the Turin Shroud.
Authentic messages from God are most convincing for those who experience them. Try reading Mr. Don Eames’ testimony in Post # 14. My own opinion is God has little or nothing to say to those so unwilling to take their heads out of their own asses due to self absorption & rancid arrogance.
Any adult with an IQ above 100 knows the Roman Catholic Nicolaitan Hierarchy is 1. extremely wealthy in the secular sense and 2.extremely corrupt in the moral sense. You’ve ably presented the first aspect and I would refer to the many pedophile priests infesting the ranks of the Catholic Rite to illustrate the second aspect. Whether or not they’ll admit it publicly is purely another matter. [So why are they closing down all those parochial schools? Rumors had it the Catholic church was going bankrupt due to all those successful lawsuits filed by the victims of the pedophile padres. According to your video maybe Pope Francis let the cat out of the bag and quite a stash has been unveiled. Let’s see what develops. Hopefully, future victims will see a substantial increase in their damage awards.] This has been well known literally for centuries. Read the writings of the Marquis de Sade such as “Justine, or the Misfortunes of Virtue”; “Juliette” or “The 120 Days of Sodom” or for a modern take on the subject watch Pier Paolo Pasolini’s film “Salo” and I’m sure you’ll catch the flavor of their drift. Better still read The Bible. These Catholic clerics are the modern day Pharisee and Sadducee. This is one of the very things Yahshua will vanquish when He returns in His Second Coming as the Almighty Judge. You do realize He’s coming back to judge the world; do you not, Leo? He said so Himself quite often. Not only that, for every prophecy confirmed in the Bible of Messiah’s First Advent there are 7(seven) prophecies concerning His Second Coming; each awaiting its turn for fulfillment. And If there’s one thing Yahshua hates it’s a Nicolaitan. Read “The Revelation of Jesus Christ to John” so we can discuss it further. God said crushing the serpent’s head would be decisive. He didn’t say it would be swift.
O Leo, you can keep the bridge in Brooklyn. I’ll take The Tree of Life. (Revelation 22:1-5, 10-14)
– Frank
LikeLike
February 21, 2015 at 3:53 pm
Leo,
And how about blue? Why does blood appear blue? Is that where the term bluebloods in reference to royalty comes from?
The description of blood and the purpose it serves leads me to think: Wow! How amazing! “I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knows right well.” (Psalm 139:14)
LikeLike
February 22, 2015 at 4:46 pm
Frank:
Jesus talked about the son of man in his day but not about himself exclusively any more than Abraham saw the day of the Son of Man coming and rejoiced, not because he was talking about himself or even Jesus but whoever would eventually take the Messiah Mantle and run with it. I rejoice because I see the day of the son of man as well so I have hope that the world will be better civilized as revolutionary Sons of Man reign in their respective generations like Winston Churchill for example.
My skin lacks melanin (dark skin pigment), and thus is very pale. The veins near the surface of my skin are very blue. While my skin seems to be relatively transparent, it isn’t. If my skin were transparent, my veins would appear red due to the red blood flowing through them.
So, why do my veins look blue? The answer would be the same for –Why does the sky look blue? Everything that has a blue color reflects light energy with a wavelength that is perceived by your brain as some shade of blue.
It seems to me that God only talks to people who have their craniums up their own rectum due to self absorption & rancid arrogance”; and, an ego bigger than their ability to discipline it and who follow Rule # 1 of every religious believer: The Drug of Absolute Certainty.
That’s why most of the ancients who spoke the most convincingly to the crowds were hearing frokm God on a regular basis, whenever any of the biblical men like Moses for example when they heard God speak or when they spoke to God it was through one of the sages in the population AKA prophets who spoke convincingly that they were the mediator between the masses and their God. Whenever Moses wanted to speak to or hear from God he went to his favorite Medium and whatever the Medium said , it was believed to be from God directly. That ;s the simplicity of the God said this, and God advises what to do and not to do. The Godspeake was from the Mediums who claimed convincingly like the Popoffs and Van Impe’s that they are the modern day Mediums as though they know what they are talking about…well; take yourself fro example you say that BS does say that there only two clothes, the face covering and the Shroud because they did not use the linen and when he talk about his father ten years ago he followed it with the cinclusion that his father’s burial is consitent with the burial practice of Jesus and that’s why they did not use linen strips. I quote:
“When my father died ten years ago he had an orthodox Jewish burial…..the only difference was that it (the Shroud) was sewn along the sides so there was no need for linen strips anymore, because it was like a mummy bag, sort of you know, and he was sort of slid into it, and so that’s very consistent with Jewish first century Jewish burials.”
And at 53:00 why didn’t the bible tell anything about this except the Burial Shroud and the face cloth folded separately? No mention of the linen strips. That’s why elsewhere he says there was only two cloths, the Shroud and the face cloth. Now go back to 5:08 and listen to what he says here about the cloths in the tomb. No need for saline solution for your ears Frank. There were only two cloths in the tomb, the Shroud and the face cloth and they were separated during the 2000 years…….and what about the linen strips well he already told you why there was no need for linen strips(linen strips were for Mummies along with Egyptian tradition but it was incorrect for Jesus burial. because of his father’s orthodox burial and which was consistent with Jewish first century burials. You have to do a dance around the video to get the gist of what he is really saying because of the convoluted way he needs to say things for obfuscation purposes. The Gift of Gab as the old saying goes is really the Gift of Obfuscation.
For believers the image of the Lord Jesus has been seen in pizza, potatoes and the bark of tree trunks.
BUT a death does not a Messiah make; rather, the life a Son of Man reveals.
LikeLike
February 22, 2015 at 11:12 pm
Leo,
Replies to par. 1: Psychiatrists diagnose this condition as “Messianic Complex”. Yahshua warned about false messiahs and those who promote them in His Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24:23-27).
par. 2: http://scienceblogs.com/scientificactivist/2008/04/17/why-are-veins-blue/
par. 3: Beware of whom (or what) you worship – http://freeminds.org/psych/absolutecertainty.htm
par. 4 & 5: Elijah & the Prophets of Baal on Mount Carmel (1 Kings 18:20-40)
Leo, keep your words in your own mouth. Don’t attribute them to me. I made no such statement as you claim. Perhaps your problem isn’t earwax build-up. Possibly it’s deficiency in reading and aural comprehension. Or maybe it’s a proclivity to misquote & misdirect attention in a futile attempt to sway your own argument. At 16:42 – 16:44 of the Shroud video Schwortz states, “The linen strips were there just to bind Him in.” referring to Yahshua in His Shroud. Viewed in context (Again, remember your use of the spurious scholar, Charles Freeman); Schwortz also refers to the SCENE IN THE PAINTING AND THE WAY IN WHICH YAHSHUA IS FOLDED INTO THE SHROUD AND TIED WITH LINEN STRIPS TO SECURE HIS BODY WITHIN THE SHROUD as being consistent with first century Jewish burial.
par. 6: Aside from an obvious fixation on linen strips; you also display basic tap dance ability. At 53:00 Schwortz points out the anomoly of no human detritus, corruption or decay found on the Turin Shroud. (Psalm 16:10, 49:9; Acts 2:27, 2:31, 13:35) He alludes to the fact that the existence of this Shroud violates two Jewish Laws; i.e., (a) it contains human blood yet did not remain in the tomb with the body plus (b) it contains an image. He makes a case for the Shroud’s concealment. In 5:08 – 6:36 Schwortz gives a succinct explanation of the identity & purpose of 1st century Jewish burial cloths (including the linen strips). He speaks of the Face cloth being removed from Yahshua prior to His being placed in the Shroud. He tells of its separation from the Shroud and eventual location in Spain. Schwortz refutes any similarity between Jewish burial rites and Egyptian mummification. What is it about clear & direct that phases you, Leo?
And the destruction of the transgressors and of the sinners shall be together, and they that forsake the LORD shall be consumed. (Isaiah 1:28)
LikeLike
February 23, 2015 at 7:07 am
STURP itself has been discredited because they fabricated their reports and reported erroneous results because they all believed that the authenticity of the Shroud would be confirmed given enough time and so lying about the results was based on their belief that dogma would win out eventually and exonerate them for false reporting.
How could BS know that a face covering was put around the head when taken down from the cross and removed in the tomb and folded up to be later found? He’s full of embellishments like the rest of STURP. Joseph and Nicodemus were more concerned with getting Jesus into the secluded tomb to cleanse and bandage the wounds to promote healing and to prevent infection than putting a face covering over his head.
Of course there was no decomposition or putrefaction in the 36 hours from Friday to Sunday morning because the body was alive; alive Frank, alive.
Your use of ad hominems says more about you than it does about me It merely signals that your “belief in the authenticity of the Shroud Hoax” has been defeated.
This face cloth in Spain, was it tested for dating, blood, why not I wonder, I mean it was documented some 700 years after Jesus crucifixion so it must necessarily be the missing cloth from the tomb; of course, what other conclusion would a believer come up with except it was the missing fce covering that got separated from the Shroud that didn’t need linen strips to bind the Shroud around the body because it was sewn like BS’s father ten years ago which was consistent with 1st century burial tradition? So lolable
And who would have worried about Jewish tradition for a thug like Jesus; after all, the Jews hated him for testifying that their ridiculous religious traditions were evil anyway? The Sanhedrin Member all woke up every day for 3 years hooked on the Drug of Absolute Certainty and so full of their own righteousness that they only thing that made sense to them was someone else’s death. (Except Joseph and Nicodemus who planned for the time of rescue following the crucifixion and secreted passageway escape for healing in Joseph’s mansion)
I am very relaxed and confident about my position because it has a solid foundation of reason, common sense and knowledge-based interpretation of scripture using the same “technique” that allowed Jesus himself to interpret scriptures perfectly. And it is a wonderful joy to have that ability, the ability “to know” compared to your position of “to believe” which is quite set apart from “to know”. I am in Jesus’ camp and you; well, you are still in the Pharisaical Camp but you are not alone Frank if you can gain comfort from that; the pharisaical camp has about half the world’s population still in thrall. You know, like enthralled(bewitched and spellbound without grace or charm)
It is my wish, hope, dream, prayer, that one day the pharisaical crowd will not remain asleep and lost but will have a resurrection and win life.
You must Ask, Seek, Knock;
I will Answer, Reveal, Open with the caveat:
“Don’t be flip with the sacred. Banter and silliness give no honor. Don’t reduce holy mysteries to slogans. In trying to be relevant, you’re only being cute and inviting sacrilege.”
LikeLike
February 23, 2015 at 7:40 am
For the religious philosophers who try to use their belief as knowledge based I offer the following:
The tripartite theory of knowledge analyses knowledge as justified true belief. According to this analysis, if something is true, and we believe it to be true, and we are justified in believing it to be true, then we know it.
The tripartite theory, though it has been around since Plato, and though it is still widely used by many philosophers as a working model of knowledge, is false.
This was shown to the satisfaction of most philosophers by Edmond Gettier, who developed what are now known as “Gettier cases”.
Gettier cases are cases in which the tripartite theory’s three conditions for knowledge are satisfied, i.e. in which a person does have a justified true belief, but in which there is no knowledge. The existence of such cases shows that there is something more to knowledge than justified true belief, and so that the tripartite theory of knowledge is false.
Suppose that two students, Mark and Sam, have taken a test. Mark is a straight A student, while Sam consistently fails any work he is set. Mark has attended the lessons in preparation for the test, while Sam has been absent due to illness. Mark revised hard for the test, while Sam stayed out all night at a party. Mark wrote furiously for the full duration of the test, while Sam wrote a few lines and then walked out in disgust. Mark says that the test went well, while Sam says that he didn’t even understand the question.
Reflecting on the test, and on a book that he has recently been reading, Sam forms the following belief: the student that will get the highest grade on the test shares a name with the author of The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.” Sam clearly has excellent evidence for this belief, he is justified in believing it; he has excellent evidence that Mark will get the highest grade on the test, and can see from the cover of his copy of “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn that it was written by Mark Twain. Furthermore, the belief is true; the student that will get the highest grade on the test does indeed share a name with the author of “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.” According to the tripartite theory of knowledge, therefore, Sam knows that the student that will get the highest grade on the test shares a name with the author of “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.”
Sam, however, does not know this. Mark, despite his excellent grades in the past, perfect attendance, hours of revision, furious writing, and confidence, failed the test. He did not appreciate the subtlety of the question, and so missed its point entirely. Sam, on the other hand, despite his previous poor grades, frequent absences, late night partying, and pessimism concerning his performance, did understand the question. In the few lines that he wrote he managed to scrape a passing grade. Sam, therefore, rather than Mark, got the highest grade on the test.
Unknown to Sam, though, he does share a name with the author of “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.” Its author, who used the pseudonym Mark Twain, was in fact called Samuel Clemens. Sam, therefore, who is the student who will get the highest grade on the test, does share a name with the author of Huckleberry Finn.
Although Sam clearly did have a justified true belief, he equally clearly did not have knowledge. His justification for his belief, far from helping him to discern the truth, threatened to lead him astray. The truth of his belief had nothing to with his reasons for holding it; it was nothing more than good luck that the belief that he formed was true.
This example, and other Gettier cases like it, show that it is possible to have justified true belief without having knowledge; the tripartite theory of knowledge, which holds that justified true belief and knowledge are precisely the same thing, is therefore false.
LikeLike
February 24, 2015 at 10:07 am
Frank Adamick writes,
Frank, that’s been Leo’s MO since he began posting here. It is futile to argue with him. I saw that from the first few times he’s posted here. You’ve made your point, and we can see that.
LikeLike
February 24, 2015 at 12:44 pm
2. Scalia Says:
3. February 9, 2015 at 11:56 am Jason, you’re wasting your time talking to Leo. He’ll just bury your post in a blizzard of words.
Scalia Says:
February 24, 2015 at 10:07 am Frank, that’s been Leo’s MO since he began posting here. It is futile to argue with him. I saw that from the first few times he’s posted here. You’ve made your point, and we can see that.
Leo said:
February 9, 2015 at 8:13 pm Scalia: “……perhaps you should have offered your own thoughts on the subjects discussed; or, don’t you have any?”
Scalia: You only offer reaction not action. In the scheme of things? Proverbs 26:17 says of you: It’s [Like] grabbing a dog by the ears, [so] is a bystander who gets involved in someone else’s disagreement.
And that, not by reasoned debate which would be most acceptable on this thread but just commenting with ad hominems is not a good use of brain power considering your otherwise bystander status about any matter.
“Your comments are so lolable”
LikeLike
February 26, 2015 at 9:58 am
Frank Adamick Paul V et al:
Biblical Relics Featured in Upcoming CNN Series: “Finding Jesus: Faith, Fact, Forgery” Premieres March 1
Since the first years A.D., billions of people have worshipped, revered and modeled their morals around the teachings and life of Jesus of Nazareth. Yet, very little historical or archeological evidence is available to back up the Biblical narrative of his existence–until now.
Next week, CNN will premiere an original series “Finding Jesus: Faith, Fact, Forgery.” The six-part documentary investigates key artifacts in the story of the life of Jesus of Nazareth, examining their authenticity using scientific techniques and archeological research.
Through images of artifacts from biblical times, the series offers glimpses into the lives of characters in the biblical Gospels.
The first episode centers on the Shroud of Turin — said to be the burial linen Jesus was wrapped in after his crucifixion. The shroud still contains traces of human remains, evidently showing the story of Jesus’ passion in one image, from the scourging to the spear in his side. Most notably, the cloth provides a negative image of what is apparently the face of Jesus — as it covered his head in the tomb.
Archaeologists, theologians, scientists and historians from the world’s leading universities like Harvard, Oxford, Princeton and Yale provide insight into the narrative, and connect evidence presented in the artifacts to the biblical story of Jesus’ life.
Also featured in the series are relics such as the gospel of Judas, the burial box of Jesus’ brother James, relics believed to be of John the Baptist, the gospel of Mary Magdalene, and relics venerated as part of the True Cross.
The series will premiere on Sunday, March 1 at 9 p.m. ET.
Review:
“A fascinating, provocative and informative entry into the life of Jesus. Finding Jesus uses controversies over recent archeological and literary finds, as well over some long-argued-over tales and relics, to provide readers with solid scholarship and thoughtful insights into the life of the man whose life, death and resurrection continues to enthrall and inspire.” (James Martin, SJ, author of Jesus a Pilgrimage)
LikeLike
February 26, 2015 at 10:02 am
https://theosophical.wordpress.com/2015/02/10/if-god-exists-why-havent-i-experienced-him/#comment-42833
LikeLike
February 26, 2015 at 10:04 am
Post 57 is a mistaken entry
sorry about that.
http://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2015/02/25/finding-jesus-shroud-3.cnn
LikeLike
March 5, 2015 at 6:26 pm
Barrie Schwortz with late breaking news on the recent CNN Shroud docudrama: Finding Jesus: The Shroud of Turin.
http://www.shroud.com/latebrak.htm#reviews
LikeLike
March 6, 2015 at 11:02 am
OBSERVATIONS A PRIORI:
I agree with Barrie that the Shroud documentary was saturated with drama and paid hardly any references to the actual testing for validity of the Shroud. Another important oin t is how the carbon dating was refuted because it was suggested that the patching of the shroud afer the fire used material from the 14th century. This only supports the theory that any port of objection is acceptable in the religious storm.
The other series parts will also invlove too much hollywood theatrics and drama but provide little substantive value. Take the DNA profiling that may reveal if Jesus and John the Baptist were blood related. Of course they were blood related according to the bible: Mary and Elizabeth were cousins. “Your cousin Elisabeth has also conceived a son, old as she is. Indeed, this is the sixth month for her, a woman who was called barren. For no promise of God can fail to be fulfilled.”
To refute the carbon dating of the shroud in the instance of the Shroud because it is amore than a thousand years later but then use the carbon dating of the head covering as authentic because it is closer to the time of the crucifixion merely reveals the bias of selective preference.
Getting back for a moment to John the Baptist and Jesus, the bible cleary states that Mary and Elizabeth, the mother of John the Baptist, were cousins (so the relation of the two by blood is not in dispute BUT, and this is an important note to ponder, the question is whether Jesus and John were brothers? This could only be if they had a common father.
The common “father” theory is, in this writer’s opinion, very relevant to the simple axiom that no man was ever born without the input of a father, no matter how many believe that a woman can become pregnant without male participation; this is simple nonsense promoting only religious insanity.
However, wit is noted that the name OF THE COMMON person associated with both the John the Baptist pregnancy (Elizabeth, Mary’s cousin) and Mary the mother of Jesus pregnancy is one so called “Angel” (of convenience) at both events and that was Gabriel (AKA the Arch Angel). Given that Gabriel was the enunciater of Elizabeth’s pregnancy, the enunciater of Mary’s pregnancy and one may extrapolate the postulate that the angel who appeared at night to Joseph, interceding on Mary’s behalf, that Joseph reconsider his position and “NOT” to put away Mary privately” in divorce disgrace because her’s was a destiny directed from God through the Spirit (of love). was the actual father of John and Jesus. In this case then, John the Baptist and Jesus would not only be blood relatives because of the cousin connection of Elizabeth and Mary but would indeed be brothers by a common father.
The above scenario in the judgment of this writer is in fact the truth of the bloodline but there is little evidence, if any at all, that the DNA from the Headscarf covering in Spain, the Shroud of Turin and the alleged bones of John the Baptist can ever confirm the bloodline connection scientifically but Biblcal scripture itself infers the conclusion made regarding the bloodline relationship of the players.
LikeLike
March 7, 2015 at 12:10 am
Now in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent by God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. The virgin’s name was Mary. And having come in, the angel said to her, “Rejoice, highly favored one, the Lord is with you; blessed are you among women!” But when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and considered what manner of greeting this was. Then the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bring forth a Son, and shall call His name JESUS. He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be no end.” Then Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I do not know a man?” And the angel answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you; therefore, also, that Holy One who is to be born will be called the Son of God. For with God nothing will be impossible.” Then Mary said, “Behold the maidservant of the Lord! Let it be to me according to your word.” And the angel departed from her. (Luke 1:26-35, 37, 38)
Miriam receives word from God’s messenger, Gabriel, that she is to be the conduit to bring forth Israel’s long awaited Messiah. He who would receive from the Lord God the throne of His father David and rule the kingdom of Heaven from God’s Holy Mount Zion forever as the Son of God. Being told she’s highly favored and blessed among women she remains puzzled over how this will come to pass. Gabriel explains to Miriam that she will receive the Holy Spirit. Through transcendent power of the Almighty she shall conceive in her womb the Holy One of Israel. She will find herself with child through no human agency. Conceived by God, Yahshua would be of sinless nature, the spotless Lamb of God; though no less human due to that fact. Miriam can rejoice and rest in the assurance that because she is highly favored with God; therefore, with Him nothing will be impossible. Yahshua’s coming as Son of David was in fulfillment of Old Testament promises. Her response was to offer humble prayer, praise and worship to the Righteous Lord God.
And Miriam said: “My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior. For He has regarded the lowly state of His maidservant; for behold, henceforth all generations will call me blessed. For He who is mighty has done great things for me, and holy is His name. And His mercy is on those who fear Him from generation to generation. He has shown strength with His arm; He has scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts. He has put down the mighty from their thrones, and exalted the lowly. He has filled the hungry with good things, and the rich He has sent away empty. He has helped His servant Israel, in remembrance of His mercy, as He spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to his seed forever.” (Luke 1:46-55)
LikeLike
June 30, 2022 at 9:08 am
There is a big difference between I have fate and l believe. I believe youknow God with head knowledge lhave fate with experience the difference is that if you believe you might get tired easyly but wit experience you never turned back from following Jesus how can you new how hot is the fire if you don’t touch it Gbu
LikeLike
August 4, 2022 at 11:20 am
Hello,
Just a quick comment. I have been a Christian for 42+ years and have never seen, heard, or felt anything from God/Jesus. No experience with God/Jesus. 42+ years of silence, absence, and unanswered prayers, zero interaction. I desperately need some kind interaction with God/Jesus. Reading God’s word isn’t interaction with God/Jesus. So disappointed, discouraged, disillusioned. Despair and hopelessness abound. Thanks.
God bless you, by the Holy Spirit, in Jesus holy name, Amen.
LikeLike
August 8, 2022 at 11:41 am
Hi Kenneth. Many Christians can relate to you. While I know we would all like such encounteres, there is no reason to expect that we would regularly experience God in supernatural ways, and we don’t need such experiences to know He is real or to be faithful to Him. I have had such experiences in the past, but it’s been years since I have had them. My Christianity does not depend on them. And I would argue that reading God’s Word is an interaction with Him. If He is responsible for the writing of Scripture, then when we read the Bible, we are reading what God wrote to us. It’s similar to reading a letter from a relative. It is personal.
LikeLike
March 10, 2023 at 8:53 am
Hello,
I gave myself to God through Jesus over 43 years ago. In all that long time, I have never seen, heard, or felt anything from/of God in my life. No matter how much I seek, He is never found. Silence, absence, broken promises (Bible), and unanswered prayers don’t point to God being here. The doubt is caused by God’s lack of involvement. From my perspective, God has proven to be unfaithful. He doesn’t keep His word (promises). I doubt my salvation because if God breaks one promise, how are we to know that He will keep any of them? I need God to be interactive (noticeable), not absent. At this point, the only things tentatively holding on to my faith are stubbornness and fear of Hell. God’s lack of involvement has broken my heart and crushed my soul. Thanks
God bless you through the Holy Spirit, in Jesus’ holy name, Amen.
LikeLike
March 16, 2023 at 12:45 pm
Hi Kenneth. I’m sorry to hear about your plight. Many people struggle with what’s termed “the hiddenness” of God, including Biblical writers. One of the things we have to consider is our expectations. What kind of experiences are we expecting? How often? And are our expectations being driven by Scripture or something else? I have had some powerful encounters with God in my life, but they are few and far between. It’s not the normal experience. One thing I never see in Scripture is any requirement of regular experiences with God. That’s not the kind of relationship God has with us.
You mention God breaking His promises. What promises are you referring to?
LikeLike
March 17, 2023 at 9:55 am
Hello Jason,
First thing, I only have the logical argument for my belief in God and Jesus. Zero experience. You asked what promises God has broken. I’ll list some, but it would take too long to write them out completely.
– to be here with us, Joshua 1:5
– to strengthen us, Ephesians 3:14-16
– to give us rest, Matthew 11:28-30
– to answer our prayers, Matthew 7:7
– to take care of all our needs, Philippians 4:19
– to work everything out for our good, Romans 8:28
– freedom from sin, John 1:9
I could probably think of and list more of God’s broken promises, but that would take far too long. Does this give you an idea of what I am going through. God is absent.
God bless you through the Holy Spirit, in Jesus’ holy name, Amen.
LikeLike
March 17, 2023 at 12:33 pm
Kenneth, I am deeply sorry for how you feel right now, but I honestly think part of the problem is false expectations based on assumptions or improper interpretations of the text. For example, the Bible does not promise that every prayer will be answered. Freedom from sin does not mean we’ll never sin again. God being here with us is true, but we have expectations of what “here” will look and feel like that may not be true. We think a relationship with God should parallel what human relationships look like, but that’s a false expectation. I would encourage you to re-examine your expectations to see if they truly line up with what the Bible tells us to expect and what we see some Biblical characters experiencing. Many Biblical characters did not feel or hear from God, but they knew God was true and they trusted in Him. They experienced intense suffering, but trusted God through the process.
LikeLike
March 17, 2023 at 2:14 pm
Hello Jason,
Just for clarity, when I “use” God in a comment, I am grouping all three together, interchangeable.
The Father – God
The Son – God
The Holy Spirit – God
John 14:13-14
13 And whatever you ask in my name, that I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.
14 If you ask anything in my name, I will do it.
This tells me that all prayers that are in Jesus’ name will be answered. All prayers are rightfully made in Jesus’ holy name. Thus, all prayers will be answered. Then you might think that prayers aren’t always answered as we expect. I don’t have any expectations that the answer is always going to be Yes. I’m told that God answers with three different answers. God answers with Yes, No, or Wait. The problem is that I have never received any answer at all. Not yes, not no, not wait, not even a kiss-my ass from God. Nothing.
God promised to keep us free from sin. To me, that means to keep us from sinning again. If we sin again, then we aren’t free from sin.
As for God being true, that is correct in the fact that God is true to Himself. After all, the Bible teaches us that God does everything for His own glory. To forward His plan. Everything that God does is for His benefit, alone.
I don’t know what a relationship with God is, as God is never here to have a relationship with. A one-sided relationship (my side) isn’t a relationship of any kind. A relationship requires interaction from both sides. God doesn’t interact with me.
God’s presence is nonexistent. Never anything that points to God actually being here, as promised.
John 14:18
18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you. (another broken promise)
This tells me that I can expect God to actually show up because Jesus said so.
God bless you through the Holy Spirit, in Jesus’ holy name, Amen.
LikeLike