Jesus told his disciples that the end would come as a flood. He also analogized it to birth pangs. They were warned that "in such a moment as ye think not" it could come in an admonition to stay always ready. He also made references to Sodom and Gomorrah and the suddenness in which it hit that culture.
The birth pangs are especially interesting. They increase in intensity, coming closer and closer together as they strengthen.
Developments of the last few years have certainly proved interesting. An anti-New Age Pope Benedict XVI (formerly Cardinal Ratzinger) made an unprecedented retirement. He was replaced with Argentina's Cardinal Bergoglio. Liberal Catholic author Robert Blair Kaiser had Bergoglio on his short list of "pro-change" Popes. Ratzinger had been on his list of "no-change" Popes.
Today, per news reports, Pope Francis has blamed the ISIS-Al Qaeda violence on deviant fundamentalist religion. He also expressed hopes that 2015 would bring about progress toward a "climate change agreement."
As bad as the violence both past and threatened are, I cannot help but wonder if this is setting the stage for renewed and accelerated "New World Religion" calls. Rich of Medford has written guest columns for us on the past on the United Nations "Alliance of Civilization." They have a global conference set for this May 18-19, 2015 to be held in Indonesia. It will have an old, familiar New Age theme: Unity and Diversity" with the same buzzwords I viewed when first discovering the Movement's existence in 1981: UNITY AND DIVERSITY because "we live in a GLOBAL VILLAGE".
There will be many attempts to force compromise in a new global pantheon. Simultaneously, I foresee many attempts to play the old time honored games of "Watch the Fundamentalists Run" in an attempt to use as Exhibit 1 of claimed hysteria provoking excesses from more easily panicked members of the Christian Community into creating a legal and moral justification for the long claimed New Age religious goal where all would say, "Blessed be THY God" rather than "Blessed be MY God." In the best Karen Armstrong advocated position, they would have us bow to each other's gods in the New Age pantheon as a condition of being deserving to live in the New World Order.
Of course, the "Internet of Everything" for which drums are also now furiously beat would help keep tabs -- not to mention the drones.
The Christian community, particularly the Evangelical Christian community has been sold out for a long time. Glenn Clark founder of Camps Farthest Out wrote glowingly of the New Age in a book he wrote during World War II. Glenn Clark was a spiritual director to Mrs. Aymar Johnson (Marian Johnson) who held yearly New Years' Day retreats for "The Twelve." It now appears very clear from my recent intense reseach which I've been discussing at length on my Saturday morning internet program that "The Twelve" were Christian in name only -- their roster was a panel of nearly all mystics and part of the gang was Roland Gammon. Marian Clark checked her "guidance" to take a large home on Embassy Row in Washington, D.C. to be "God's Living Room". This was where Abraham ("Abram") Vereide got his start. Both Harald Bredesen and Doug Coe successively worked for Abram Vereide. Paul Nathaniel Temple, the co-founder and chief financial benefactor of Institute for Noetic Sciences, was part of the core group of that organization since 1944. Although he is now in his 90s, he still writes very large checks annually for both Fellowship Foundation (C Street Group) as well as his Institute of Noetic Sciences. I suspect they will play no small role to help "swing the masses into step" as Alice Bailey happily put it in her book, THE EXTERNALISATION OF THE HIERARCHY. (pages 502-503)
At any rate, much is on my mind and it is difficult to summarize. I've long delayed my finishing of my series on "The HiJacking of Evangelicalism" both here and on NewswithViews. I'm now close to completion. I have recently obtained Glenn Clark's autobiography, A Man's Reach, which confirmed many of my suspicions concerning the origin of the Washington group which was discussed by mystical enough Norman Grubb in his biographical book about Abraham Vereide: "Modern Viking." When thoroughly analyzed, one cannot help but think that this group of 12 at least perceived of themselves as "illuminati," After reading Clark's THE MAN WHO TAPPED THE SECRETS OF THE UNIVERSE, I don't know what else to believe. Clark was summoned by eugenist/physician Alexis Carrel to help him find a man who was fully cosmically attuned. Clark believed he had found them in some of the men that were part of their group of 12 meeting at Marian Johnson's Washington mansion (e.g. Rufus Jones, E. Stanley Jones, and Frank Laubach). His book was about another he claimed to have discovered,
Thanks for sticking around. I do the radio program every Saturday morning, 10 a.m. Eastern Time. I share tremendous amounts of information there during the two hours of programming. Consider tuning in there as well as staying tuned here.
Happy New Year to all!
CONSTANCE
717 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 717 Newer› Newest»how do you define legitimate commentaries? sure there is a parable that focusses on the angels taking the tares out of the midst of the Christians when the crop is grown and the difference evident, but this doesn't talk about timing or anything, the wicked are burned and the good gathered into His barn the analogy being harvest.
When you dig into little details to try to override the general picture painted by Jesus and Paul you just get confusion and apparent bible contradictions.
Justine,
I've read through the Bible four times, never
with any handbook on the side, just reading it. Unlike you I tried very diligently NOT to
speed read and skim it. So it took me quite
awhile each time. I've got to say, I could read it forty times and still not have the prideful sense that yes now I have it all together in my mind.
Every detail is in it's place and "now I stand firmly on my own understanding..".
Also unlike you, I'm aware that many people other than myself have read it through multiple times.
In other words I'm aware that the universe doesn't revolve around my nose.
Why would you continually assert that you are the resident expert and that you're the only one to have read it ?
Never mind, don't answer that.
I do know from reading it as much as I have, that:
Men on Mars, Chakras, Auras, Vampirism, Emotional Vampirism, Holy Water (plus paprika!), Transhumanism, demonic expertise, and countless other foolishness is not to be found anywhere in the Scriptures. Nor is the continual defamation of one's mother.
You've called the pre tribulation view "crap" (and other terms) repeatedly, saying that it's unbiblical, but then you're the one to spew all the above.
It's mind boggling and frustrating trying to give you the respect that every human deserves.
I repeat, ( and you've never denied ), YOU ARE A professional JAMMER on this website.
How much do they pay you?
Never mind, don't bother answering. I truly am through feeding the troll.
On and on and on she rants like an unruly parrot in the asylum's occupational therapy suite: get a job, you sluggard!
One of the biggest arguments against the pre-tribulation theory is that Jesus will return one more time, not two more times. In other words, there will be a second coming, but not a third coming.
re that defamation of my biological so called mother, it is nothing but the truth. and it isn't Christian to lie now is it? I think she only got mentioned in order to explain something or other. Honoring your parents doesn't include supporting them in evil or pretending they aren't evil.
God says to honor your parents so you may live long in the land He has given you, and you won't live long in the land He told the Israelites, if you become ungodly. Following the evils of their fathers was condemned later. Clearly this about honoring godly parents, and at most being polite to them in refusing to accomodate evil.
In fact, my good deeds to her were as much motivated by honor your father and mother as by doing go to your enemies. But I erred in the first part, because it did her no good to cut her too much slack.
That woman didn't just harm me, but everyone else she could, and I strongly suspect she murdered at least one person. But I could never prove it.
"My point for jumping in here is to illustrate that it’s not so clear cut. As noted above, this is not a salvation issue; and, it shouldn’t be a point to divide over. And the debate is not going to be solved here."
But Christine is a divider and will argue with a wall if there is no one else to engage. Confusion is her game. Divide and conquer is her game too. She tramples the truth continually....and why???
Because she thinks she is the life of this blog! Incredible isn't it?
Her idle and ungodly life is on display here for all to see and what I find amazing...and very sad...is that she has absolutely no shame. All these things we notice here smacks of a reprobate. She is in a bad way.
Christine you are guilty of murdering this blog.
Your approach is death by slow poison. You are full of venom. You keep dumping doses of it to keep you twisted need for attention going. Some things of our lives do not belong in the public arena but that does not stop you------that fuels you! You are one sick puppy. God alone can help you.
I didn't do much speed reading with the Bible that's why it took me three or four months each time I read through it. the only skimming was in Psalms during the third read through.
Of course each time you get more. But if you read it through in one year sort of style, you lose a lot. And you can't help bringing presuppositions to the table that you imbibed throughout your life.
I don't think I ever talked about "emotional vampirism," that is a psychological thing, but about paranormal energy feed vampirism. That is what "psychic vampirism" is, although the term is sometimes used to refer to people who waste your time and energy but that is not the same thing. A kind of telepathic hypnosis is involved also.
And I think she was amping it up by doping me when she had control of the food supply. There was something about the nature of the trance I was in once she'd isolated me, before I was extracted because she never sent me to school, EVER, and the kind and degree of trance she could induce later, when she didn't have control over the food. A good candidate would be potato eyes, which have belladonna (atropine) in them. Or some similar plant.
paranormal energy feed, er,
psychic energy feed...
Steady, Jack.
Let it go.
Let it go...
Telepathic hypnosis.
Wow.
It's one thing to be crazy.
It's a whole 'nuther level when you're proud of it.
some things don't belong in the public arena? oh yes they do. The Bible doesn't mince words either. If things aren't put in the public arena, no one else learns from your experiences, or realizes something they are suffering under is wrong.
There are plenty of details that should not be left out, and people wander into situations blind. Or don't realize what they are in. It doesn't feel right, but they can't define it. Cutting through the deceptions is precisely a matter of DETAIL and that includes some major sin and evil that is essentially mind control. Normal discipline is not the issue. Even corporal punishment is not the issue. Beating you up without touching you is the issue.
Paul warned not to drive your children to despair, another translation says anger, sounds like despairing anger.
Of course this is complicated when you have people who don't want to be answerable to anyone else, but want to have all authority over their children or, in the case of men, over their wives and children. Hierarchy is bad in church but good and the more controlling the better in the home to these people. baptized pride.
All parents manipulate children? give details. exasperate? define with details what you mean.
Did your mother take a toy gun and beat her head with it till her scalp bled and leave the house saying she was going to kill herself out of the blue for no reason when you were 7 or 8 and just reading a book (i.e., not engrossed in her) in order to get your attention?
Did your mother tell you your grandmother had the soul of a whore, was a paranoid schizophrenic, a "witch bitch" and tell you that every time you slipped out of a trance that your grandmother had you "in her thrall" all the time keeping you isolated from her so you couldn't know the truth or be "in her thrall" in the first place?
Did your mother cut cross hatches with a knife in her upper arm in front of you or stamp out lit matches in her arm in order to horrify you, when you were 9 or 10 and too small to stop her and too young to know that these actions don't in fact endanger her or inflict that much pain?
Did your mother routinely threaten to throw herself in front of a car or hold a knife or a hacksaw to her own throat, until you got big enough to wrench it out of her hand?
Did your mother do anything to prevent you going to school, having friends, having any association with anyone but her, AND DEMAND YOU NEVER CLEAN ANYTHING, did your mother trash every house and apartment she ever lived in to the point outside intervention from the health department would happen?
Did your mother when asked what she wanted you to do tell you that she didn't wan't you to DO anything just have an "attitude," AND NOT BECAUSE YOU WERE HAVING A BAD ATTITUDE BUT WERE JUST READING BY YOURSELF IN A ROOM ALONE AND SHE'D BARGE IN AND START SCREAMING FOR HALF AN HOUR FOR NO REASON and finally you figured out what she meant, that she wanted your soul?
I confronted her, I said I'd figured out what she meant by an "attitude" that what she wanted was my soul and that she cannot have it. And she backed off.
Did your mother fly into a rage saying she could feel a barrier or wall going up between us, when I came out of the chronic trance when I was first living in my grandmother's home and started looking around and being alert to the environment?
"Of course each time you get more. But if you read it through in one year sort of style, you lose a lot."
Who the heck do you think you are?
That Holy Spirit is the teacher. And you obviously do not know Him.
You make the some of the most asinine statements to judge others that I have ever heard in my life, miss 'virtual christian' Christina justina whoever the heck you are.
Constance, do you see the level of low Christine is reducing your blog to?
Christine,
I hate to tell you, but apparently then, you take after your mother.
anon 11:14 you ought to be ashamed. I guess you are the same sort of garbage she was. Truth is something you don't like to deal with. I suppose when you were a kid you'd join with the strong to bully the weak, eh?
you people don't know the reality of spiritual warfare, you worry about politics (which are not irrelevant but there is more to it than that) and when the issues of the occult and paranormal come up you can't even comprehend the least of it, except as perhaps some illusion and take refuge in secular psychiatry.
Like I said, I know this shit is real because I've been victimized by it.
And you are still playing the victim. It is your identity or you would not promote it here by giving it so much attention. This is what one goes to the Lord for and leaves it on His altar. but you 'altar' is here evidently. It must suit you or you would let Jesus heal you. I mean really, not your way of 'healing' with paprika and 'stuff'. Forgiveness is how that happens. You need it and you need to give it. God alone shows us that freedom not your religious 'prescriptions' for what is wrong with us or even you. Why do you perpetuate what you say was her bad life if you hate it so bad?
You should be ashamed for parading this here and offering your crappy remedies and rituals that have helped you how much?--not all at!--yet you are the expert about this too. You take the cake.
anon 12:13 I don't parade it, someone brings up the issue and I deal with it. I was accused of defaming her and the accuser said she was "long suffering." bah humbug.
Yeah you deal with it. You are a picture of 'health'.
Got it.
Dave in CA
My reasearch shows so far the insurance companies still don't cover HeartMath, binauraual beats or Deepak's products (microwaving the brain into a forced trancendental meditative state using radiowaves embeded in sound) but public schools do use it and parents with ADHD kids can get funding for it. When the insurance companies start covering it, I will be very worried.
In the mean time I thought the New Ageing of coporate America has been going on for a long time. Things are getting faster.
***
10:28 She is a troll and that is her job, it is the owner of the blog who is to blame for not blocking, deleting her. The blog owner does nit unddrstand the power and value of her work, the nature and purpose of the global spy system called the internet. This is a google blog. There is an entire book on why you can't trust google. Their servers contain your medical records, their google chome books and curriculum 21 monitor and rat train your children and grand children. Trolls work for satan.
***
***
Christine @ 11:07 AM
Re: "Did your mother (fill in the blanks).......?"
__________________________________
The fact that you are absolutely clueless as to how inappropriate it is to 'share' this TMI speaks volumes.
You need major intensive therapy ASAP....not constant ranting on this blog.
I have to agree with Paul that Christine is more than likely a JAMMER (and getting paid for it).
Anonymous 2:32 PM, I concur!
Jestina, you are a Scripture twister: you add and you take away... your wisdom is built on foundations of futility. You put sweet for bitter and bitter for sweet; you are briars and thorns and no good fruit is evident in your ramblings... your posts are the roots of poison ivy and the sap of deadly nightshade intent on strangling and poisoning the life of this blog. You are a cobra charmed by the tunes of your live-in guru; your resident seer; your fellow fornicator. You make your bed a pit of destruction and your words have the hiss of an asp nest, they are an unholy flow of bile and venom: spiced with the power of delusion and misadventure!
if you have no love, forgiveness, compassion nor honor for your parents whom you have seen, how can you love and honor He who you have not seen, our Father in Heaven? If you do not hear the voice of
the Father (as heard by Moses) how can you claim to know Him? Therefore, how can you likewise claim to know His Son? You are a child of disobedience and do the works of your father the Devil: like you, he is a deceiver, a liar and a murderer and was such from the beginning!
You lie because you deny the Power and Truth of God's Holy Commandments reiterated by His Son! What relationship can a daughter of Belial have with the Son of God? I tell you none!
Get thee hence and depart foul spirit: stop attempting to divide the sheep here with your not so clever insane rapport, heretical Infowolf!
Repent and honor your mother. She hit herself till she bled? She was obviously at her wit's end and your attitude about that betrays a cold distance about her as you continue to disrespect and defame her and her memory!
Go from here, repent, stop living in sin, and when you've humbled yourself, let's hope you've the decency to truly and remorsefully apologize to Constance and all concerned!
Some of you are going too far with Christina.
Does she post too often sometimes? Does she come up with some strange stuff? Yes she does.
But some of these responses are out of line. None of us really know what kind of life she led and what she dealt with her mother.
Everyone who posts here probably sins at least once everyday. It is not appropriate to keep bashing her for living in sin. That's between her, her partner and God.
You all have every right to be frustrated with her but, some of this has gotten ugly. Hasn't it?
Be careful how you judge. This reminds me of the two men at the temple. The one was so proud of himself for being pious and attending temple regularly. The other, he was certain he was such a sinner that God wouldn't even hear his prayers.
Guess who's prayers God would listen to first?
Something to think about.
I judged her by her ugly troll comments as I should.
***
3:24 PM went too far in my book. Too direct. We can get the drift from her own words which betray her.
Her sins are paraded here by herself (she must be quite proud of them) and for that reason she draws fire. That she feels the need to 'teach' us (you people) when she has so much dirt in her skirt is beyond me...
She does not deserve hatefulness toward her though and she needs to get real about what anybody should know about common courtesy (especially when even Constance has pointed that out).
I pretty much really dislike a lot of what she posts but I don't hate her. She needs Jesus.
Christine, you really really do.
Anon 12 5:36 PM,
Y ou wrote: "The other, he was certain he was such a sinner that God wouldn't even hear his prayers."
Question: Was he repentant?
6:10 PM, I think 3:24 PM's direct approach was appropriate, measured and necessary. We've had months of this. Whilst some may see it as an unkind attack, others of us recognize true defense and a firm reasoning in calling her out.
I repeat, my fiance and I don't have sex. so we are not living in sin. as for the image or example presented, the neighbors don't know we aren't legally married so we are not being a bad influence.
as for living in sin consider this: I Cor. 6:16 sex makes the two one flesh regardless of context. so if someone here was in a "relationship" with someone without marriage, or met with the person to have sex and had said words like love and always and so forth, and you dumped the person to marry another.....you're living in adultery. however, some things once done can't be undone so don't bother divorcing and looking for the person you did wrong to.
Meanwhile, I don't see any reason to put myself at risk to be liable for his debts. which I would be in California. Also, since he has had enough bullshit misapplications of the Bible flung at him as a child, a typical respectable type closet satanist maneuver, I would lose credibility and standing with him because he would see himself as over me and me married into his family instead of himself married out of his family.
honor your father and mother was used to keep him from straying too far from their satanist gnostic scene and on the surface they are Christian.
I remember years and years ago his mother told me "we've always been baptist." more recently she told me "we've always been catholic." and her knowledge of catholicism seemed limited to St. Jude and what you could pick up in a quick note on the subject. Apparently long ago they were into Old Catholicism which spawned some strange groups though it began as rejection of papal infallibility.
Read it yourself Luke:18 9-14.
And no one can claim whether she is truly repented. Only her and God know that. Regardless of what you think you know by her posts, and are going to say she is not humble. You should still be careful what you THINK you know about others. Some of you sound like the Pharisees.
The Parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector
9To some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everyone else, Jesus told this parable: 10“Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other people—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector. 12I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’
13“But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner.’
14“I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For all those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted"
agreed 6:33 PM Paul & anon 3:26 expose her trolling & jamming without wavering.
and as for inappropriate to share info, telling the truth is never inappropriate.
God is no respecter of persons, The Bible tells us. you do evil to someone it doesn't matter if they are your children or other subordinates, YOU ARE LIABLE FOR JUDGEMENT potentially. If God is no respecter of persons, would not consider her sins okay because done to her child, why should I be a respecter of persons? if anything her sins were worse because of the target.
you identify with her disliking distance? MAYBE YOU ARE ANOTHER PSYCHOLOGICAL INCEST AKA ENMESHMENT PERP?
you want to complain about my defaming her, I will expose what evil she was doing (briefly) so you understand. And since you still defend her, I can only conclude you are evil also.
Anon 6:46
Wow!
Who did Jesus associate with when he walked the earth?
Not Paul and Anon 3:26. He associated with people that you claim are like Christina (sorry Christina, not trying to stick you with that label as I do not know you personally, just making a point).
I have more compassion and hope for Christina than I do for Paul and Anon 3:26.
You sound like a pharisee yourself anon 12, she has Not repented, she IS jamming and trolling here and IS continuing with all kinds of foul language, heresy and attacking, defaming and dishonoring her poor mom (who's not here to defend herself) in public here! There's NO comparison between her and the tax collector in Luke 18. I doubt he continued to worship mammon as she continues to promote gnostic and occultic deception from Hinduism, Wicca and the New Age Movement! Thank you for inadvertently making my point for me!
Anon 12, wrong again! Jesus walked with REPENTANT sinners, not with UNREPENTANT proponents of the craft of Mystery Babylon!
In Acts 16 we learn that Paul the Apostle (you know the former Pharisee and deeply repentant servant of the Lord) rebuked the wicked and deceiving spirit of occultism that possessed the slave girl. He was not gentle, indirect nor condoning of her, even though the words that sprang from her mouth pretended to commend the Apostles and the Faith (with a subtle twist)!
Paul is not rebuked for this. He did not pat her on the back and make analogies with Luke 18, he dealt directly with the girl and rebuked the foul spirit behind her behavior!
"Regardless of what you think you know by her posts, and are going to say she is not humble."
Uh, how are you missing the outright arrogance of her posts? Judging her words and behavior is not the same as judging her soul. That is God's job. We can all tell to at least some degree when somebody is a good or bad neighbor. That is called discernment. By their fruits ye shall know them is understandable to you isn't it 6:41 PM? Let the truth speak. It is the tone of speech that we must be careful with. The truth will take care of itself.
Abstain from all appearance of evil. 1 Thess 5:22 and Eph 5:3 spells this out Christine. That part I care about and you should to if you are a real deal christian. I don't need the do they or don't they ? details you like to tell us. Jesus calls saints out to be separate from worldly ways. You are very worldly.
Your own words condemn you.
You so often mishandle the word of God Christine yet you are never seem the least convicted by that hypocrisy. You refuse correction. If you refuse it from us well that is no big deal--but if refusing it from the Holy Spirit you have a major problem. You need to get to the nearest the prayer closet to find out from Him if I am (and others) speaking the truth to you.
This is not a court of law Christine. This is a blog for heaven's sake. That much detail, and one-sided to boot, cannot be rightly heard or judged here and is inappropriate. You just love hanging her out to dry in a public place and there is no defense for her because she is not here. That makes you the pharisee here.
You are full of unforgiveness and the gall of bitterness and why your posts and your 'offerings' and advice and so-called 'educating us' are so egregious. The very Spirit of God's words are vacant from your posts.
It is spew. And if a real christian you would be ashamed and not defensive of your behavior. We can see which is the case. (well at least the ones with discernment can...)
At 10:26 PM, Justina admitted, "I joined Orthodoxy five years after she [her mother] was dead...", she goes on to suggest (implying the affirmative) that, "... you could as well argue that I became Christian at all in order to flip her off so to speak."
A clear reading of her words in this instance would logically infer that her purported conversion to Christianity was not one through revelation and humble repentance but merely a device to spite her mother and her mother's memory. Where is the renewal? Where is the evidence of true conversion in her attitude and ongoing profession of occultic beliefs and elements from false religion and continued deception paprika-ed with foul coarse language, obfuscation and arrogant hubris despite being corrected? Where is her repentance? Are these the fruits of a true convert or those of a reprobate? We are to rebuke, correct, expose as disinfecting salt in the light of truth. It is love to her and others here to expose her and get her to repent and stop clogging this blog with New Age heresy and occultism, etc. It is not love to plant prosed primroses at her feet as she walks on blindly towards destruction!
Wow. No Holy Spirit there 8:01 PM.
To the contrary, 7:45 PM, the very Spirit of God's words are vacant from yours!
You defend the destruction of this blog, not just any blog but a Christian blog specifically aimed at exposing New Age occultism and its poisoning of Church congregations; from mixing the leaven (like the Babylonian mystery occult gnosticism of the Pharisees), of false belief and practice, in with the loaf of Scriptural Truth. Christine is introducing this leaven of lies and occultic deception whilst advocating an eye for an eye against her very own mother here!
Her actions here show nothing but contempt and wanton destruction and you are happily giving her a helping hand to continue in her folly. Shame on you!
You should be pointing that finger at yourself 8:08 PM! Blind guide, of no discernment! Take out that mote: you are leading both you and Justina into a ditch!
8:20 PM
That post was to Christine for the way she mistreats her dead mother's memory here at this blog. She is the one who is the unforgiving pharisee no matter what her mother was or was not.
That was not defense of her very bad behavior here at this blog. Reread and you'll see what I was saying. She is wrong to air her grievances against her mother here. Like I said this is not a court of law, it is a blog.
Sorry I was not clear 8:01. That was in reference to Christine's words that you posted. Her words are condemning against herself.
"At 10:26 PM, Justina admitted, "I joined Orthodoxy five years after she [her mother] was dead...", she goes on to suggest (implying the affirmative) that, "... you could as well argue that I became Christian at all in order to flip her off so to speak."
8:01 I forgot to copy and paste what you posted of her words above. I was so taken aback by how ugly those words were from her that I forgot to do it and just responded at the sheer gravity of her words so devoid of a true repentance and faith in Jesus.
" Anonymous said...
At 10:26 PM, Justina admitted, "I joined Orthodoxy five years after she [her mother] was dead...", she goes on to suggest (implying the affirmative) that, "... you could as well argue that I became Christian at all in order to flip her off so to speak."
A clear reading of her words in this instance would logically infer that her purported conversion to Christianity was not one through revelation and humble repentance but merely a device to spite her mother and her mother's memory."
I was being sarcastic. My conversion to Jesus Christ as real King and God not just a nice social convention did piss her off, but I was only seeking truth I was not even thinking about her.
I apologize for not making that clear.
8:08 PM, that is alright, sorry for jumping in without asking you to clarify there. God bless you.
Okay Christine, fair enough! Let's say we're to give you the benefit of the doubt and you are genuine in your faith, would you take more time away from here in order to fully study the Holy Scriptures and give up your own unbiblical quirks? If you are ill I understand but you should share this so we are aware of it. Where it comes to speaking things false and occultic are you prepared to be corrected and acknowledge where you are and have been wrong here, and are you prepared to publiclyand privately reject such false beliefs when shown their error here? Are you prepared to not need to be always 'right' and to humble yourself? Are you prepared to make an effort not to use foul and coarse language? Are you prepared to recognize that we should honor our parents even if they have hurt us intentionally or not? If you are and your posts begin and continue to reflect so, then I and many others will gladly soften our approach with you. I will rejoice over this and over the truth of your repentance and will take you seriously. If you do not though then you cannot expect not to be rebuked, corrected and called out here. I urge you for everyone's sake to choose wisely and not ignore this post. The ball over your content and behavior is in your court. Show us you're not here to troll, divide and destroy as a wolf among the flock and I shall stop firing.
Sorry 7:45 PM, I should have read more clearly and been less defensive. I am just sick of the apparent trolling from Christine and Anon 12, and am not prepared to back down unless given a valid reason to do so. I will not sit back and let this blog be destroyed nor stay silent when others promote or condone heresy. Their souls and anyone who is taken in by them are in jeopardy! Sometimes love is not waving hello at the neighbor if your neighbor is intent on setting his and/or other's house on fire. Sometimes love means to expose and rebuke strongly, warn, demand the danger is stopped and to strongly tell someone in danger of perishing in the flames to get out before it is too late. That is my position and shall God willing remain so.
Once again, sorry for not reading your post clearly.
Furthermore Christine, that is the first time I personally have seen you apologize here: I believe it to be genuine, despite the coarse language preceding it. I admit that took courage on your part especially under the circumstances. I commend you for that.
I too shall show humility in return. I apologize for my harsh tone at points and for blurring the line between rebuking you and attacking you. I am sorry. I shall, however, not cease from exposing and rebuking you firmly if you show no reason for me to do so. I sincerely hope you make the right choices and repent of your behavior and dissemination of false belief, jamming attitude, foul language, etc, here. I will pray for you and hope you repent, receive wisdom and understanding in humility, and healing.
here is something to help the survival of all here, if you live within 25 miles of a military base, especially an Air Force base. you can calculate effects, range, fallout and whether a ground burst (typical for a military base attack and more fallout) or airburst. WW 3 seems to be looming on the horizon.
http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/
Anon 10:05
You apparently don't understand what trolling is. The term trolling and its usage have evolved into describing a person who posts viewpoints that differ greatly from the majority of community members.
Trolling is ACTUALLY when someone has a specific desire to inflame, incite and promote unnecessary fear for reaction.
I don't think Christina falls into the troll category. She may be misguided on some subjects and certainly covers some controversial areas but for some to suggest she is actually paid to disrupt this blog is ridiculous. In fact, some of you go back and forth with her feeding ongoing disagreements.
Constance has asked her many times to limit her posts and has been more than patient, without doubt. But ultimately, it is up to Constance to have her leave this site or not.
If I'm not interested in what she posts, I just skip right over it and move on to the next one. Not really hard to do.
You really should learn the meaning of something before judging something or someone.
Anon 10:27
You are totally within your right to be frustrated and I do understand where you are coming from.
I think some others could learn from your post as it was stern but, not unforgiving.
Kudos to you.
As the poster above states that Jesus associated with repentant sinners, and this leaves out certain people.
WRONG!
There are those who came to Christ with a desire to repent. But there were many who were NOT repentant until they met HIM.
Was Matthew repentant the first time Jesus chose him? No, he was not. He was a tax collector, one of the most despised professions of the times.
Was Paul repentant before Jesus appeared to him? No, he was not. He was, by his own words, the chief sinner of them all.
Christine,
Sorry, no, the context does not definitively ‘solve’ “that one easily.” First of all, the coming of the Lord is reflected in the Greek word parousia; and, interestingly, this same term is used of the coming of Satan in 2 Thes 2:9. I hope we can agree that by the context of the Thes verse, this “coming” of Satan is not instantaneous, but rather a period of time most likely months or perhaps even years (cf. Matt 7:21-23). (The “revealing” of the lawless one is a different matter.) Moreover, I hope you’d agree that the “Day of the Lord” is not one calendar day, but months or years (the Tribulation). So, given that the workers in both Matt 24:40 and 41 were totally unaware, is it possible the Tribulation had not begun at all? Or, is it possible the Tribulation was not yet in its final stages (cf. Rev chapters 15-18)? That is, is it possible that parousia is equivalent to “Day of the Lord” in some contexts, while in others it means the actual moment Christ returns?
And, please don’t try to nitpick one or more of the statements above. I am merely serving to illustrate that there are other viewpoints worth considering. In the final analysis, your interpretation may well be correct; but, it’s not the only plausible one.
You ask about my “legitimate commentaries” – my meaning was those which actually have real scholarship behind them, those that engage the Greek text. This includes Hagner, Osborne, and Blomberg. Hagner opines that those taken are “among the elect” (p 720), Blomberg (p 366) states that it’s the wicked, while Osborne admits the two possibilities, leaning to Blomberg’s position:
…It is difficult to know which is the negative image and which is the positive. It could be one is “taken” to be with Christ (the majority of commentators) or “taken away” to judgment. If the two verbs for “taken away” in vv. 39 – 40 are different [ED: not synonymous], the former is the connotation. But they are not really different in meaning, so the more likely is “taken away to judgment,” the same in v. 40 as in v. 39 (the context of vv. 37 – 39 is judgment). The two verbs here are futuristic or prophetic presents, “going to be taken/left.” The main thrust is again on those engaged in the normal rhythms of life when the end unexpectedly comes (p 905).
By Osborne’s argumentation, the context actually conveys that it’s the wicked which are taken away to judgment. That is, vv 37 – 39 clearly are speaking about judgment, and it would seem that the next two verses follow that same thought that it’s the wicked taken, while the good are left standing.
On the other hand, I think one can make the case that the two verbs are different, which is why I posted what I had in my initial comment.
Bottom line: there are opposing viewpoints, each equally valid, and these should not be dismissed out of hand. One can certainly form their own opinion, but it’s flat out arrogant to claim to know absolutely on such eschatological matters.
And, for the record, I’m not pre-trib.
craig,
the particular statement's context is pretty obvious. if you have two present and one taken, the one who is left is left where? where he was to begin with. That is what being left is about, not moved elsewhere.
As for being grabbed to be judged, that is hardly the same thing as caught up to meet Christ.
the whole point is, it doesn't matter where you are or what you are doing, awake or asleep you don't have to cooperate you will get picked up no matter what, if you are to be picked up. you need to have a watchful attitude to keep focussed on Jesus and live right, as if He is due back now, but nothing can keep Him from taking you when He is ready to do so, and you don't have to be standing on a particular hill like the Russellites, or anything else.
If you read the words, and convert them into a picture, what do you see?
In any case all this nit picking over such details doesn't have bearing on the rapture disputes.
and "Moreover, I hope you’d agree that the “Day of the Lord” is not one calendar day, but months or years (the Tribulation). " shows you are still confusing the wrath of God with The Tribulation, which is the core error causing the pre trib rapture idea to be possible.
Day of the Lord is God's vengeance. the Tribulation is persecution against the church. Whether the antichrist's persecution of the Church or any other persecution it is "tribulation" In the sermon at the Last Supper in John's Gospel, Jesus says "in this world you will have tribulation."
There is nothing special or interesting about parousia being used to refer to the appearing of the antichrist and the appearing of Jesus Christ. Appearing is appearing. The parousia of the sun at dawn. The parousia of the swarm of locusts crossing the mountain top. The parousia of the alligator at the door in Florida. The parousia of the door to door salesman. The parousia of the antichrist. The parousia of Jesus Christ.
Christine,
And yet you persist that your view is the only correct view. Your arrogance knows no bounds.
You wrote: the particular statement's context is pretty obvious. if you have two present and one taken, the one who is left is left where? where he was to begin with. That is what being left is about, not moved elsewhere.
As for being grabbed to be judged, that is hardly the same thing as caught up to meet Christ.
You are apparently missing the point. Of course, those left are on the earth. But, which is actually left, the wicked or the redeemed? THAT is the question. And, conversely, which is taken, the wicked or the redeemed? Osborne’s reasoning, which I thought was made clear, was that given that it’s the wicked who were “taken” during the Flood (24:39), then it would seem to follow that those “taken away” in vv 40-41 are the wicked as well.
You wrote, Day of the Lord is God's vengeance. the Tribulation is persecution against the church.
My use of the terms were not necessarily meant as synonyms. The two reflect the same time period, but from different perspectives.
And, you just dismiss out of hand my point re: parousia. But, I can’t say I’m not surprised.
Anonymous,
I don't have any idea which anonymous. Sorry to all the wrong ones but;
Do you have any idea how ridiculously self righteous you are with all your teachings in righteousness you spew here daily?
You have set yourself up as the judge and jury here and you're...anonymous. It's laughable, really.
Christine with all her quirks could never be as ridiculous as you, you self proclaimed self righteous, idiot. How does anyone know if you are the least bit Christian? The only thing that's clear is that you're a jackass.
Awhile back you attacked me viciously, (you are vicious), and vociferously for no good reason, and
almost immediately changed your mind and apologized and decided that I was "okey", then
a few days later you decided that no, I'm a bad bad person and need to be corrected by you and your
grand authority.
You don't know Jack.
You're guessing at all times.
You have nothing to contribute except a very silly
childish form of judgement.
And here I am talking to a weasel that hides in the weeds and hisses and spits. Shame on me.
But good luck with that.
By the way your "poetry" is on a third grade level.
The troll is winning. This is how the enemy does it. Justina is probably posting as an anon as well, come on guys; stop acknowledging her, him, them, or whatever.
***
Together we pray, Dear Lord please diminish all trolls presence, power, comments and attendance to this blog forever more. Please teach Constance how to better control her blog content and reputation.
Father please expose the enemy and allow us to see his tactics, be unaffected by them and bind him up in the Holy name of Jesus, Amen
***
There once was a woman who exposed the New Age
She warned us from her internet stage
This alarmed the enemy’s sense
Very quickly the blog became tense
A trolling campaign had been waged
***
Craig, it is not my view it is what the Bible says.
how can you talk about the redeemed being left on earth?! The whole point is that WE the believers are CAUGHT UP TO MEET JESUS.
Now since we meet Jesus in the air while He destroys the antichrist, and we are all in the atmosphere, in a certain sense we never leave earth if by "earth" you mean the planetary environment incl. the atmosphere.
"We shall always be with The Lord" and where is He? hovering until He finishes His descent to begin His rule on earth, and we being "always with The Lord" descend with Him to rule with Him.
Why don't you stop hassling me and go listen to the people who will explain this for you? Its really really simple, its your teachers who are making this difficult for you.
The customs of the times are relevant, the greeting party who goes out to meet a visiting dignitary and escort him back into town, or the returning ruler back from some escapade or visit elsewhere and escort him into town. A custom probably invisibly instigated by God in the pagans, so people would have a model they could understand.
I didn't cook all this up myself, it got explained to me, and the other options that depend on mixing all sorts of Scripture and speculation together made less sense than the simple thing.
How anyone could get the idea that the non redeemed leave earth I have no idea, all the catching up at the Second Coming is believers to meet The Lord Jesus Christ, WHERE DO YOU GET THIS IDEA THAT REDEEMED ARE LEFT ON EARTH?
The leaving earth is only temporary and local. If you don't artificially divide the Second Coming into more than one coming, that is what you are left with, the blessed hope of Jesus Christ ruling in person and our resurrection!
The unbelievers and backslidden believers who defect and worship the beast are killed, and dumped somewhere to the side or buried, and any unredeemed who for whatever reason refused to worship the antichrist would be the ones being ruled over. Also the lesser quality redeemed who don't have that much going for them in terms of crowns or fruit.
Paul says WE are going to get caught up to meet Jesus, obviously the unredeemed are NOT getting caught up to meet Jesus. The unredeemed aren't even discussed in this picture. The verses speak about us getting our resurrection bodies at that time without dying first, an instantaneous change to the glorified, but physical, bodies.
Why would wrath include yanking people off the ground? where is anything like that depicted in any picture of wrath?
yeah, I suppose, if there are explosions for any reason some unredeemed are going to fly up in the air, really briefly. We will be up in the air longer than that.
Craig you seem to be in love with some ideas that if questioned or dismissed are evidence of heresy or pride, but just go look at the meaning of parousia. It can as I said be applied to anything that is appearing or arriving in a visible way.
THIS IS THE LANGUAGE OF THE COMMON PEOPLE, KOINE GREEK, STREET GREEK, it isn't special and mysterious some people who were studying NT Greek saw it was not Classical Greek and thought it was some special kind of sacred Greek for The Bible, at first. Then they got to studying the graffitti and letters etc. of the common people, and realized THIS IS THE DIALECT OF THE UNEDUCATED THE NON CLASSY THE COMMON MAN. This is like inner city junior high school english compared to ivy league colleges english.
I suppose now you will say I am blaspheming. Go and read up on the subject.
"At 10:26 PM, Justina admitted, "I joined Orthodoxy five years after she [her mother] was dead...", she goes on to suggest (implying the affirmative) that, "... you could as well argue that I became Christian at all in order to flip her off so to speak."
You cannot explain this away Christine. Your flippancy and coarseness is actual ungodly irreverence at what should have been the most humbling time of your life. At the time when you should forgive as you had supposedly just been forgiven. Gratefulness and worship should have poured out of your soul to Jesus to exalt Him for the Blood Sacrifice that was freely given for all of us sinners and yourself a sinner and you make it (your supposed confess of Christ) about your pissing match with your mother.
Christine, you continue to exalt yourself and your own style of belief and not Jesus Himself. How telling as you apologize for not making that clear that you still did not upraise the Lord at a prime opportunity to do so that would have diffused your statement but instead just some lame excuse about being sarcastic. Oh please......
Does this the prove that you are a 'virtual christian', a christian in name only, with some quite mixed up head knowledge but no revealing from the Holy Spirit of the living God that proves a humble contrite spirit? It appears that that would have been too humbling for your supposedly great intellect because you tell God-He does not tell you! You continue this attitude and behavior here daily for years! Where is the life change that should have shown in your life from then on? All you can post here ad nauseum is your own quack version of EO and beyond.
Is your heart a stone? Because your pissing match with your mother still continues we can see here and your pissing match with other posters who clearly show the cracks in your constant arguments yet you doggedly and proudly diss everyone to trample the real truth to promote your own version of it, and mostly your pissing match with God because you argue with Him constantly in not letting HIM have the last word.
Are you a very publically unrepentant fraud, but not because I said so, but because you have condemned yourself Christine? I hope you do not rot in hell but clearly you need to come clean before God.
So, she is not just some misguided soul that just needs help from the well meaning here. She needs to be saved from herself....and that is God's job. If any of you care for Christine, as you may claim, then you will be praying for her to leave her many idolatries and unforgiveness and bitterness to humbly come to the cross of Jesus the only Savior.
My questions for her are from the heart going straight to the heart of the matter. Like it or don't, it is not about her or about us, folks.
Dear Constance, Please keep your word and restrict Christine to one post per 24 hours.
I am looking into messers Hagner Osborne and Blomberg. (sounds like a legal firm.)
So far I am real unimpressed with Osborne what I can get from one of his books sample view on amazon.com his presentation is awful almost designed to bog you into a half trance while making the whole thing more complicated than it is (The Spiral of Hermeneutics, the title
and cover design look like some New Age thing, "the recording of the stories [the Gospel writers had to use
many sources, Luke 1L1-4]"
phrasing is ambiguous, implies that these are "stories" a bad choice
of words as if these are stories told by story tellers, and implies
the Gospel writers weren't the listed eye witness authors, when in
fact the passage from Luke says that since several were putting
records together he thought that since he was among the eyewitnesses
he should do so also, and of course those things that happened he
missed he would get filled in on, but Luke is ALONE in any kind of
supplementation from reports by others. Luke is trying to do this in
a chronological historical way also. The others are teaching and
sometimes chronology is of less importance than what was said not
when it was said.
"unity and diversity of Scripture" is a phrasing that bugs me, while
technically this is correct, the use of these terms so dear to the
New Age, instead of other terms, strikes me as a psychological
set up to be on a conveyorbelt, or presented by one who is already
on that conveyorbelt even if he doesn't know it.
Talks about skimming and writing summaries of paragraphs of Scripture - eh? this is a good way to miss a lot. No wonder this guy would give credence to Blomberg.
Osborne's commentary on Matthew, sample in amazon, has this display
of ignorance:
"Because so little is known with certainty about the setting of the
Gospel of Matthew, I have chosen to begin inductively, with structure
and theology, and then to use the results of those discussions to help
inform decisions about authorship, date, and the like"
Ahem. Irenaeus, writing c. AD 180, a student of Polycarp who was a
student of The Apostle John, and Irenaeus also learned in the words
of some who had conversed with the Apostles, tell us in Against Heresies,
that MATTHEW WROTE THE GOSPEL ASCRIBED TO HIM. and Matthew being a tax
collector would have a strong inclination to keep records or at least
compile a record later, to understand the importance of putting things
in writing.
There is no need to apply all this effort to figure out date and author,
those who were close to the times can tell us, if we have the humility
and common sense to look for them, aka The Pre Nicene Fathers.
Blomberg, in his defense of John's Gospel's historicity
seems to be trying to counter effects of liberal theology
like the Jesus Seminar.
However he comes up with this: "John seems to think Christ
was born in Nazareth rather than Bethlehem (7:52)" I don't
need to read farther. That passage doesn't say anything
about what JOHN thought, but what some others SAID, based
on Jesus being known to have come from Galilee, specifically
Nazareth, and having grown up there is called Jesus of
Nazareth, which effectively disguised His actual birth city
until someone makes inquiry.
well, a little bit quick to jump to a conclusion without reading closely. (Too much skimming and paraphrasing perhaps? you need to read in detail like you were looking for evidence in some report.)
from an interview with him, "The tribulation in Revelation contains many judgments similar to the plagues on Egypt in Moses’ day, when the Israelites were protected in the land without being taken out of it yet.
When Jesus talks about two in the field or at the mill, with one “taken” and one left (Matt. 24:40-41), he has just spoken about those “taken” in judgment in the days of Noah and the Flood (vv. 38-39), so this is not likely referring to people taken from the earth to be protected.
Although Revelation 7:1-14 seems to distinguish two groups—Jews who live through the tribulation and Christians who are taken out of it, on closer inspection they more likely refer to the same group—the multi-ethnic church viewed as the fulfillment of the hopes of Israel—being protected on earth during the tribulation."
This is what you seem to be all up in arms about. Well, if they are taken in judgement they aren't taken off the earth any more than those in Noah's time were taken off the earth, now were they?
But the word connecting these two things, the discussion of Noah and the taking and leaving, is THEN not likewise, in English at least there seems a subtle shift.
Blomberg is smart enough to see his way out of the pre trib and dispensationalism thing.
If those taken are taken in judgement, then they are not lifted up but knocked aside.
This whole idea is apparently what spawned some idea online about the rapture being for the wicked not the righteous.
"A Rapture Of The Wicked?
Monday, May 23rd, 2011End TimesRapture
Q. Media has given a lot of attention to this prediction that the world would end May 21. Recently, they interviewed a new testament professor and minister about it. He said that Christians are wrong about the rapture, that the wording means “taking away” and has always meant the wicked. He said God took the wicked away during Noah’s time and what Christians call “the rapture” is actually talking about taking away the wicked. He also said that the idea of a rapture is a new idea, that the early Christians didn’t believe in it. Please address this, as I have been waiting expectantly since I became a Christian.
A. There’s no Biblical support for what this professor says about the rapture. His comparison to Noah’s time is misplaced. Jesus compared Noah’s day to the 2nd Coming not the rapture (Matt. 24:37). In John 14:2-3 Jesus said He would to come back for the Church to take us to be with Him where He is. He was not referring to the 2nd Coming, when He’ll come back with the Church, but the rapture.
He’s also ignoring the fact that Paul taught the rapture in his very first letters. In 1 Thes. 1:10 He said the Lord would rescue us from God’s Wrath. (The Greek wording means out of both the time and place of the Wrath.) And in 1 Thes. 4:16-17 He said the Lord would be taking us to be with Him, not taking the wicked somewhere. It’s not the rank and file believers who read the Bible as it’s written who are mistaken about the rapture. It’s the theologians who think it’s OK to re-interpret it to suit themselves." http://gracethrufaith.com/ask-a-bible-teacher/a-rapture-of-the-wicked/
This whole idea when I first heard of it was so repugnant I didn't even look into it, figured some half ass satanist effort to confuse everyone. Thank you Craig for getting me to look at this. So it has a "respectable" source, eh?
of course this last quote makes the same error of separating the rapture from the Second Coming, but his other points are solid - especially that bit about theologians not getting it as well as simple readers who don't reinterpret to suit themselves. This was a good quick find denouncing this rapture of the wicked notion. I am sure there is better.
"PROGRAM OF SATANIC DUPLICATION
Pre-Flood Era: Occultists believe that the ancient gods were once mortals who became divine by ascending or transcending the material.
Old Testament: In the initiation rites of cultures which worshipped the sun, sunrise was regarded as the time of resurrection.
Church Age: The apostate church promulgates many false doctrines concerning the rapture; one false teaching is that the wicked will be raptured.
Tribulation: The rapture/translation of the true Church will be rationalized on earth and celebrated as God's removal of the wicked.
Great Tribulation: The Antichrist will refer to the resurrection of the Church as 'the rapture of the wicked'. A false resurrection - the transfiguration or deification of mankind - will occur under the oversight of the False Prophet and a counterfeit 144,000 (monastics)."
http://watch.pair.com/new-life.html I don't buy everything she says, but this is interesting.
Some character named Stephen E. Jones published the Rapture of the Wisked in 1977 or earlier, a book of this date is advertised. co authored with Sheldon Emry whoever he is.
I am writing this in pieces as I google and find more. Sheldon Emry is an Anglo Saxon Identity teacher, who however rejected the two seed heresy. http://emahiser.christogenea.org/Recommended/Jones%20-%20Babylonian%20Connection%20Review.pdf apparently Stephen E. Jones is another in this camp.
though this represents some false teaching, it snipes at persons it disagrees with and says "So we know, at this point, that Sheldon Emry along with Stephen E. Jones were not only one seed-liners, Universalists, but also no Satan proponents." (The latter position seems to be one of saying the serpent in the garden of Eden was not satan.)
Looks like my gut instinct that this "rapture of the wicked" doctrine is satanic in origin was correct.
http://katsbloglove.blogspot.com/2010/04/how-to-block-people-from-your-blog.html
***
Christine, in your extreme myopia, wrote: Craig, it is not my view it is what the Bible says.
how can you talk about the redeemed being left on earth?! The whole point is that WE the believers are CAUGHT UP TO MEET JESUS.
Apparently, you are only reading some of what I write. Is it not possible that this passage is not speaking of the moment of Jesus’ return, but the Day of the Lord in general, i.e., the beginning of the DotL? And, with that in mind, it’s the wicked who are “taken away” in this particular context?
You continue: Why would wrath include yanking people off the ground? where is anything like that depicted in any picture of wrath?
You are looking at this literally; could it not be figurative? That is, could these wicked be victims of the third or fourth seal, with “taken away” understand as meeting their death?
You then, hypocritically state: Craig you seem to be in love with some ideas that if questioned or dismissed are evidence of heresy or pride, but just go look at the meaning of parousia. It can as I said be applied to anything that is appearing or arriving in a visible way.
I’ve not mentioned anything in the current discussion about heresy. And, rest assured I have looked up the meaning of parousia. You state, “[i]t can as I said be applied to anything that is appearing or arriving in a visible way.” I’ve not disputed that – once again, read what I write carefully if you’re going to engage in the discussion, rather than erecting straw man arguments. My point is that parousia does not necessarily imply the very moment of arriving; as, in the example of Satan in 2 Thes 2:9, this arriving, in context, is not described as if it were a moment. Can it not be the same with Jesus Christ’s parousia? Certainly, some contexts refer to the moment He arrives (e.g. Matt 24:30), while others can be construed as encompassing the DotL (e.g. 2 Pet 3:13). And, I submit that Matt 24:37-41 can be construed as encompassing the DotL as well. All this means that this passage can possibly be congruent with a pre-trib rapture (though, as I’ve already stated, it’s not my view).
And, yes, I’m well aware of what Koine Greek is.
Your criticisms of Osborne are unfounded. Just because he wished to let the facts of authorship, date, etc. of Matthew be revealed inductively does not mean he doesn’t reach the same conclusion as Irenaeus, e.g. Have you read the entire commentary in full to see if this is true?
It’s also helpful to cite page #s if you’re quoting someone. Since I have Blomberg’s Historical Reliability of John’s Gospel, I see your quote is from page 19. However, perhaps you missed his earlier statement: “The distinctive of John’s Gospel have of course been observed throughout church history. They may be categorized under five headings (Blomberg 1987: 153-155).” Blomberg is citing an earlier work (The Historical Reliability of the Gospels), and the quote you used is the fourth of the “five headings.” So, I presume he’s sourcing others. However, on this point I’ll agree with you that this says nothing of John the Gospel writer, who was merely reporting what was said.
As to your entire comment @ 12:57 PM I’ve addressed it already in the preceding and even in an earlier comment.
Welcome to Dyfunction Junction. curator: Christine Erikson
blog formerly known as: My perspective -- What Constance thinks
Christine,
Not one of the Christian sources I've found which opine that it's the wicked who are "taken away" call Matt 24:36-41 "the rapture of the wicked," as they don't call it a "rapture" at all.
Craig, I am not filthy rich I don't go out and buy the books or have them on my shelves (generally I wouldn't trust anything from a theological seminary situation anyway). I have to use the Internet.
For whatever reason, you are more tolerant of Hagner's rejection of "rapture of the wicked" than of my rejection of it, why is that?
My remark about heresy was not that you called things that, just your reaction was like you were looking at it. I went to book links and got sample views at amazon.
If the wicked are destroyed, and it is in the form of just being killed and dumped, you don't have a catching away or "rapture" of them you just have a massacre.
If Revelation is not entirely sequential as some argue that would solve a lot of problems. Even so the parousia IS the Day of The Lord, the BIG Day of The Lord though this term is also applied to lesser days of vengeance on Israel and some other places not the whole world's peoples at once.
When Jesus comes back He will destroy the antichrist "with the brightness of His coming." If you read the entire chapter of II Thess that deals with this you get the picture. If you deal with verses here and verses there you can get confused.
What I could make out of the Hagner material seems saner and without blather, so if you are correct that he does not support "rapture of the wicked" but keeps to the original to early Church times interpretation of the rapture of the saints that is not surprising.
I wonder where Blomberg got his idea, maybe he read some decent refutation of the pre trib rapture from a bad source, and took chaff along with wheat from it.
My criticism of Osborne is his style, the choice of words, and that he doesn't just start by shooting down doubts of authorship of Matthew but waddles along in this inductive stuff. The known history should be the standard, and the inductive stuff thrown in as a by the way afterwards.
I don't have the entire book to work with.
I think Constance would agree that "unity and diversity" as a term chosen over other possible phrases, combined with a book of that title (spiral is in it, a hypnotic thing and a big New Age deal) and that cover is suspicious on the face of it.
I think that my impression of Osborne is accurate, if your statement is accurate that he says both views have merit, because I would expect that of such a slithering weasle as he shows himself by his writing style.
Craig,
"Not one of the Christian sources I've found which opine that it's the wicked who are "taken away" call Matt 24:36-41 "the rapture of the wicked," as they don't call it a "rapture" at all."
it doesn't matter whether the words "rapture of the wicked" are used or not.
Of course the wicked are going to be destroyed, the issue is, are they caught up to do this or on the ground?
Luke chapter 17, typical of Luke, gives more detail. like the days of Noah and Lot, etc.
"But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.
"EVEN THUS SHALL IT BE IN THE DAY WHEN THE SON OF MAN IS REVEALED.
"In that day, he which shall be upon the houstop, and his stuff in the house, let him not come down to take it away" and he that is in the field, let him likewise not return back. Remember Lot's wife....
"I tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left.
"Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken and the other left....Where Lord? And he said unto them, wheresoever the body is, thither will the eagles be gathered together."
If you have to deal with flat earthers, yes, they are out there, this is also proof the world is a GLOBE, because at the same day are two men asleep, night time, and two women at the mill, day time.
"I would expect that of such a slithering weasle as he shows himself by his writing style."
All too familiar with you, the merely googling infowolf, for the same reason.
Christine,
You wrote, Even so the parousia IS the Day of The Lord, the BIG Day of The Lord though this term is also applied to lesser days of vengeance on Israel and some other places not the whole world's peoples at once.
Revelation 6:15-17:
15 Then the kings of the earth, the very important people, the generals, the rich, the powerful, and everyone, slave and free, hid themselves in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains. 16 They said to the mountains and to the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of the one who is seated on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb, 17 because the great day of their wrath has come, and who is able to withstand it?” (NET)
Revelation 15:1:
15 Then I saw another great and astounding sign in heaven: seven angels who have seven final plagues (they are final because in them God’s anger is completed). (NET)
I don’t think we can say this is one day; and, since the “Day of the Lord” is not one calendar day, then neither is the parousia - again, in some contexts.
Following that, you wrote, When Jesus comes back He will destroy the antichrist "with the brightness of His coming." If you read the entire chapter of II Thess that deals with this you get the picture.
Yup. That’s clearly speaking of the actual moment (and immediately following) of His appearing at the Second Coming. Yet, as above, given that the “Day of the Lord” is not one calendar day, but a series of days encompassing perhaps months or years, the parousia can also refer to the entirety of the DotL/Tribulation.
You wrote, I wonder where Blomberg got his idea, maybe he read some decent refutation of the pre trib rapture from a bad source, and took chaff along with wheat from it.
Osborne has the same idea. Could it be they got it from reading the context? I’ve already stated twice already that the ‘taking away’ of those in the Flood is equated to the ‘taking away’ of the workers in Matt 24:30-31. It’s right there in the context. However, it can certainly be the redeemed which are taken rather than the wicked. Either interpretation has validity.
You wrote of Osborne, referring to him as “such a slithering weasle as he shows himself by his writing style” – I’m not sure what a “weasle” is, but I’m sure it’s not a very nice term. Although you won’t, you should be ashamed for writing such nasty things.
However, I’m sure Osborne, Blomberg, and Hagner won’t view your words in a very good light, though I suspect they’d be polite enough not to stoop to your level.
You wrote, Of course the wicked are going to be destroyed, the issue is, are they caught up to do this or on the ground?
Didn't I just state that this does not have to be as literal as you are making it out to be? Doesn't Matthew refer to the victims of the Flood as "taken away" in 24:39?
She means weasel Craig.
And nasty is her style.
Perhaps more to the point of all this is that the Greek word harpazo, the one most translate as "rapture" in 1 Thes 4:17, is not used at all in Matthew 24:36-41. So why do you, Christine, insist on using the term "rapture" in that context?
Anon: 3:49,
I know what she meant. But, would she heed my advice to construct her comments in MS Word, or some such, before posting into the comments box, we'd find less overt spelling errors.
could it be they got the idea from Identity preachers who started this? and who use exactly this phrase drawing on this Bible passage.
Luke I think makes it pretty clear, those who are "taken" are taken to join the body and eagles since there is a warning to not turn back from the pull of the angels. Lot's wife is referenced.
Try to understand the concept of the conveyorbelt. It is something that starts at one place and ends in another. Terminology may change along the way but core concepts begin with something that is added on to as it progresses until at the end things don't resemble what they were at the beginning.
And you haven't addressed the issues I raised about the peculiar New Age signals that seem to be in Osborne's book. Or the fact that what I see in Osborne makes me not surprised he sits on the fence on this, while Hagner who is very Scripture focussed only throwing in what is needed for understanding things, does not buy this idea.
If I find his style consistent with his conclusions you say he drew on this, then maybe I am reading him right.
I use the word "rapture" in that context, because the CONCEPT is the same. It doesn't matter what you call something, a vehicle with an internal combustion engine and four wheels is what it is whether you call it a car, or a brand name of a car or a whatsit. Haggling over this is like saying it can't be a car its called a Ford not a car.
weasel weasle both spellings are correct, I grew up seeing the second spelling in books.
https://www.google.com/search?q=weasle&oq=weasle&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.3463j0j7&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8#q=weasle&nfpr=1
If you missed the Verge video of Bill (I funded common core states standards initiative on my own) Gates openly promoted Agenda 21 and his depopulation vacinations.
Verge is open to only the biggest green coporations, you can't get in unless you are sorth mega bucks. My opinion is they get the big business to force the little businesses into green hell ways.
Of course the UN people are on the ground now. I even know local businesses forced to go to globalization meetings. They are still identifying and marking those who won't go along, my friends refused and were instantly marginalized.
Most researchers know what they are up to so it is sad and facinating to watch this Lucis Trust world server give statistics on how many poor people will be saved, knowing dang well he is predicting something opposite all together. One in 40 saved? or one in 40 dead? or one in 40 will get ADHD or one in 40 won't be able to have babies?
Thr old Rockefeller had a head education guy named Gates. I tried to link the two but the records don't match, I still suspect. I know which foundation controls all the other foundations. Also Warren Buffet is on the board of Bill and Melinda Gates foundation. He is building all the educare day cares all over the US, scary considering all the required preK ed newly required state programs coming in under the same grant that started common core and Buffet played a big roll in the Franklin Case.
Gates also called for a cashless society yesterday. The Rockyfellas are medicine men long before they are oil men.
Despite the intense warnings about A21, they progress as if there will be no one who will address the criminal nature of the whole thing.
If Christians would stop discussing the Biblical nature of things just long enough to address the criminal nature of these events, well, it would be a welcome change.
I won't hold my breath.
***
anon 4:21, it is nice to see something that isn't a prophecy or personal brawl. I suspect there is a sense of what to do I don't know. However ONE tool you might want to use, or turn others on to using is this.
It is prohibited in the Constitution for any state (presumably any other govt. body) to have any dealings with a foreign government, except through the federal govt.
The ICLEI system of cities working together on Agenda 21 worldwide strikes me as illegal. Perhaps it is given an exemption to do this in Clinton's Agenda 21 support, perhaps not.
But it's worth looking into.
Back to the original post by Constance:
"Marian Clark checked her "guidance" to take a large home on Embassy Row in Washington, D.C. to be "God's Living Room". This was where Abraham ("Abram") Vereide got his start. Both Harald Bredesen and Doug Coe successively worked for Abram Vereide. Paul Nathaniel Temple, the co-founder and chief financial benefactor of Institute for Noetic Sciences, was part of the core group of that organization since 1944. Although he is now in his 90s, he still writes very large checks annually for both Fellowship Foundation (C Street Group) as well as his Institute of Noetic Sciences. I suspect they will play no small role to help "swing the masses into step" as Alice Bailey happily put it in her book, THE EXTERNALISATION OF THE HIERARCHY. (pages 502-503)
... I have recently obtained Glenn Clark's autobiography, A Man's Reach, which confirmed many of my suspicions concerning the origin of the Washington group which was discussed by mystical enough Norman Grubb in his biographical book about Abraham Vereide: "Modern Viking." When thoroughly analyzed, one cannot help but think that this group of 12 at least perceived of themselves as "illuminati," After reading Clark's THE MAN WHO TAPPED THE SECRETS OF THE UNIVERSE, I don't know what else to believe. Clark was summoned by eugenist/physician Alexis Carrel to help him find a man who was fully cosmically attuned. Clark believed he had found them in some of the men that were part of their group of 12 ...(e.g. Rufus Jones, E. Stanley Jones, and Frank Laubach)."
I googled Rufus Jones and found this: "While in India, Jones visited Mahatma Gandhi and the birthplace of the Buddha. This trip helped Jones formulate a new approach to missions—that of giving humanitarian aid to people while respecting other religions and not aggressively converting people to one's own religion." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rufus_Jones_%28writer%29
E. Stanley Jones was another missionary, who was into contextualizing the faith, which up to a point is fine, Paul on Mars Hill is a case in point. But it may have gone too far. also he supported Indian independence which was a bad idea. "In 1947 in the United States, he launched the Crusade for a Federal Union of Churches. He conducted mass meetings from coast to coast and spoke in almost five hundred cities, towns and churches. He advocated a system through which denominations could unite as they were, each preserving its own distinctive emphasis and heritage, but accepting one another and working together in a kind of federal union patterned after the United States' system of federal union." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._Stanley_Jones
Christine, you wrote, I don't have the entire book (Osborne’s) to work with.
Then, perhaps you’ve prematurely misjudged it?
You wrote, And you haven't addressed the issues I raised about the peculiar New Age signals that seem to be in Osborne's book.
What, because he uses “unity in diversity”?! I suppose all who use “paradigm shift” are New Agers also?
You wrote, I use the word "rapture" in that context, because the CONCEPT is the same
Yet, this is only one possible interpretation. There are the others I’ve already mentioned.
You wrote, weasel weasle both spellings are correct, I grew up seeing the second spelling in book
Can you point me to one book (preferably online), which equates both spellings to the little furry creature? Looking at the link you provided, I find a new word in the “Urban Dictionary” meaning nothing like the animal; and, I find a reference to “weasle words.” All others redirect to the correct spelling: weasel.
Do you ever get off the computer long enough Critine to like take a bath or shower? Brush your teeth? Clean your house? Grocery shop? Cook dinner? Visit your neighbor? Water and mow your lawn? Pay your bills? etc.,etc....
You know..normal stuff.
And especially, spending time to stop everything and read the Bible and pray? And love the Lord your God with all your heart and soul and mind and strength and love your neighbor as yourself?
OSborne combining that term with spiral in the title and spiral on the cover is creepy.
weasel is the British spelling, both are in use here and there. "To say he is a weasel - to use the British spelling" http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=199618&forum=15&start=90
4:59
Spy agencies use multiple people on each case on shifts. Why is it so hard for you guys to get this. Have none of you been on-the-ground activists? They have armies of these workers, crisis actors, intel, internet patrols, etc. They have a particular group that flags documentaries and the like that expose the bad guys. I am surprised every day to see how naive Constances followers can be when she should have the smartest group ever.
***
***
Christine, you wrote, OSborne combining that term with spiral in the title and spiral on the cover is creepy
An author most times has not much to do with the cover art. "Hermeneutic Spiral" doesn't sound New Age to me.
Nice try with your claim that "weasle" is the British spelling. An informal forum is not what use as any sort of 'proof.' For all we know they are using the "Urban Dictionary" meaning of the term.
anon 4:59 I've been up since 1:10 am last night, and got two or more hours sleep before that. Its been one of those days.
And I pray a whole lot.
Hermeneutic spiral is a strange concept in itself.
I'm waiting for a workman to get over here and after he leaves I'll get some sleep.
I think a key problem with those three guys that Clark identified, and who were in that 12 group was a kind of undiscerning attitude about love. All probably contributed to the conversion of many heathen, one of them promoted literacy among muslims and hindus and started the each one teach one idea, which has been useful in a lot of places, and which might have laid the groundwork for them or their children to read Christian materials that got to them. God can use anyone. But something has to be wrong in this picture.
http://books.google.com/books?id=eBQRAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q=weasle&f=false
book from 1909 uses weasle spelling on p. 19. I knew it was an older spelling.
That spelling politicly I think is a newer one. Well, things change over the decades. I was reading adult material in my early teens, so I guess I read some older stuff and I'm 63 years old.
"Paul Nathaniel Temple, the co-founder and chief financial benefactor of Institute for Noetic Sciences, was part of the core group of that organization since 1944. Although he is now in his 90s, he still writes very large checks annually for both Fellowship Foundation (C Street Group) as well as his Institute of Noetic Sciences."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Nathaniel_Temple,_Jr.
"Paul Nathaniel Temple, Jr. (born March 19, 1923[1]) is the Chairman Emeritus and co-founder of the Institute of Noetic Sciences and the Chairman of the Board of BioGenesis Enterprises.[2][3]
Biography[edit]
Paul graduated from Princeton University in 1944 and Harvard Law School in 1948.[2] From 1954 to 1961 he was an international petroleum concessions negotiator for Exxon.[2] He and astronaut Edgar Mitchell co-founded the Institute of Noetic Sciences in 1973.[citation needed] He has been a member of the Institute of Noetic Sciences board of directors since 1973 and was the chairman from 1983 to 1999. He created the Temple Awards for Creative Altruism.[2][3] He helps fund The Fellowship Foundation.[4][5] Paul N. Temple was an insider "core member" of the Fellowship Foundation and/or Institute for Christian Leadership since the 1940s. Others classified with him in that category, per the Billy Graham Archives of Wheaton College included James Bell, Frank Carlson, Chuck Colson, Billy Graham, Wallace Haines, Mark Hatfield, Fred Heyn, Karlis Leyasmeyer and Albert Quie."
BioGenesis is a sediment washing company that produces clean sediment for construction, topsoil or landfill, decontamination process.
The core problem with these people is identification with the world, however decently they may do this. Power elites, looking to please God not for His own sake but to restore the country to greatness whatever that means.
As far as I can tell, there has always been a nasty undercurrent in the USA back to day one, but the difference now is that it is out shamelessly in the open, corrupting more openly, and not prosecutable and censorship bureaus not allowed. "freedom of speech," etc.
The sins of the USA are not just abortion and gay rights, that is the outgrowth of the rest spawning more evil. It is the greed, ambition, lust for empire, hypocrisy, etc. etc. True, every 20 or so years we reinvent ourselves, until now for the better.
http://books.google.com/books?id=NVmcx-8zdGEC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false " In public, they host Prayer Breakfasts; in private they preach a gospel of 'biblical capitalism', military might and American empire. Citing Hitler, Lenin and Mao as leadership models, the Family's current leader, Doug Coe, declares, 'We work with power where we can, build new power where we can't'."
In the new start of the American Christian Right in the late 1970s, early 1980s, the unreverend Moon played a big role, with a big partnership with light and darkness game by the evangelical leadership.
I wonder how many of them attend Bohemian Grove.
I've been collapsing Christine's threads ... sadly it doesn't leave a lot left to read. Perhaps it's time to copy and paste Christine's posts and any replies back onto one of her blogs and hope that the off topic posts here are then edited out.
~ K ~
Yes ~ K ~ . Collapsing. And collapsing is what is happening to this blog itself in her hostile takeover.
I can't sit all day, I have chores etc. I must move around. I use a tablet so my posts will never be academic like the others and more like a text message, but I seriously do have some tiny things to contribute. I knew about Bill Drayton, Moody and the Zionists and a few other small things. Constance needs to block the trolls.
It's their job to discourage, confuse and waste time; I am telling you they do shifts. I once left an activist group and they followed me night and day on the email for a year. Each email was different in nature, style grammar etc. I tried out many different tones, subjects and responses, they exposed themselves often, and it was NEVER the same person. They tested me with questions as if to gather my opinions (get their finger on the pulse of America so-to-speak on certain issues or gauge where I was in my research). I never met the original person I was supposed to be emailing (the supervisor). Several times I caught them outright. She asked me about a group she was a member of but I looked up the group in her location, she acted all shocked that her name was not there. She thought I was a total moron, sorry not totally.
I can tell you two of the main actors in two conservative groups in my local area.
In the book Dedication to Leadership, a former communist becomes a Catholic, he explains how the communists march in progress night and day. This is Satan’s form of governance, like a reflex, they can't stop and when as possessed and some of these trolls are, they are not redeemable, they made their choice, sometimes you must let go. They don’t think like you, they just can’t. They are driven to do harm and destroy in any way they can, they will destroy even themselves as Richard Wurmbland wrote about in Marx and Satan. Constance’s work is about them, duh. They hate her.
The trolls here are trying to confuse waste time and create blogs of misinformation based on tidbits of your postings. It’s so obvious to me. Her posts are confusing, long and usually come in groups after a good comment. They chase away the new people. She will post the entirety of a link you post because I believe they plan to make a file someday and if that link is broken at least the comrade can read what was on the link. (Or to waste more time).
They again, I am a Christian, that makes me superstitious (as I should be), why else would Dawkins constantly slam me for that. BE suspicious, Jesus warned you. Just make people sign in Constance, change the comment format, it’s that easy.
***
Christine, you said that your mother's near-takeover of you was accomplished by telepathy rather than demonic means. But there are no natural ways by which telepathy may be accomplished. Enough science is known to establish that with reliability. so the only possible means is between demons in the two people. Your mother is now deceased, but you can still have the demon in you removed. I hope you will. I wish you well.
Often the thing we hate so much, we might in turn take on and turn onto ourselves, like some sort of a self-fulfilling prophecy and self-sabotage. Have seen this time and again and watching some family members do this very thing. Very prevalent behavior in families all over the place now.
Christine is not free from whatever it is that binds her to her mother in this very sad way. Becoming on some level like her though, she insists that is not true. And is tainted with much spite that is displayed very openly here. (even a taint in her supposed confession of Christ as her own words attest). She needs way too much attention and creates some type of drama-perhaps a lot like she describes of her mom-in different ways maybe ? (I'm not viewing this personally) but antics that are demanding and manipulative nonetheless. Every day and all day long Christine is demanding attention here. One wants to hope that the lady (her mom) was forgiven and resolved with the Lord before she left this life.
I hope, and pray too, Christine, that you will embrace the forgiveness and healing God intends for you before you leave this life too. You need real peace in your life. The peace you obviously do not live right now.
Paul
I apologized to you but did not turn around and attack the day after or whenever you claim. I have posted as Anon 12 since Craig asked for some distinction between anon posters. Maybe you should look back for accuracy before you comment.
I apologized because I felt that some of my posts were indeed attacks, and that was wrong, but I did not apologize because I thought you were "ok now".
Honestly, I don't think your ok now. I don't feel you contribute much to this blog other than some very bad attempts at humor and your man crush with Shoebat. You have gained a few friends here since your really nasty days but, it's usually because you conform to the views of someone like Susanna, who when you communicate with, act like you have a schoolboy crush.
And poetry? What poetry? I don't know what your talking about. Nevermind, you don't have to answer.
But, although you have a high opinion of yourself, you are no better than Christina.
The comment directly above makes sense.I've noticed for a long time that my comments, ( I'm a Christian and a fan of Mrs Cumby), have been perused and
used in a negative way to come back and confuse the issue(s).
It's sad but not too surprising. As you said, Mrs Cumby has exposed these people and they hate her.
My favorite situation is when one anonymous is talking to another anonymous in an attitude of being above it all and looking down on the foolish Christians.
Well, this is their hour and to power of darkness.
But, like most Christians, I skipped to the last chapter and it turns out that after losing every battle, we win the war!
Hallelujah!
Anon12
As a matter of fact I had intended to thank you for
using anon12 at Craig's suggestion.paul
And since then I didn't really think you were one of
them.
I don't mind the truth around here from whomever (catholic or protestant or scientist or not, etc., etc.).
What I do mind is "unnecessary roughness".
And would not even mind Chritine's posts if she was not so controlling of nearly every single topic (and willing to learn from someone else showing a tad of humility), also her need to give tmi about her own situation that is for her own life lessons, and not ours as she insists. And last, but not least, her determination that she will have the last word.
This blog has been abused to the point of craziness. And the abuses I described get in the way of the real message it is to herald.
I've noticed that when I pray to the Father, and
my request/petition is within His will, that my prayers
are usually answered.
I've noticed this more times than I can count.
In fact it's the norm.
But it's clear all you anonymous jammers don't believe in Him.
So Anonymous, play your games. You're so clever,
and this is your hour.
What are you referring to Paul?
Everyone has an opinion and it may or may not be a game to them to express it. How they express it can come under question (all fall short sometimes) but I don't know what you mean in particular.
And maybe it doesn't matter....
I notice that people are people...
but God is GOD.
His is the opinion that matters
This blog has become so TOXIC that it actually brings on heart palpitations.
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
Engaging Christine in debates (by giving into her demand for constant attention) is evidence that the lunatics are now running the asylum.
Sad to say the blog has lost, and Christine has won.
If Christine was a sincere person who was posting on this blog for all of the right reasons, she would express OUTRAGE that she was being accused of being a paid Jammer. Since she continues to ignore, and doesn't even bother to address this issue, we can only come to the conclusion that she is exactly what we think she is.
She will be back. But not to admit (specifically confess/repent) anything wrong on her part. And if she does say anything she explains away her behavior. There are clinical names for this kind of thing.
Reminds me of Proverbs 30:20.
"Anonymous said...
If Christine was a sincere person who was posting on this blog for all of the right reasons, she would express OUTRAGE that she was being accused of being a paid Jammer. Since she continues to ignore, and doesn't even bother to address this issue, we can only come to the conclusion that she is exactly what we think she is."
Actually I am just ignoring you people, you are too pathetic and your latest accusation absurd.
The trouble with you all is you think you are so damn important that I would care.
anon 2:54 Actually I think I did say I think she had a demon, or demonic component, my point was that it was she herself doing the possessing instead of a demon.
The symptoms were rather different than is reported from demonic possession.
As for telepathy, you say demon, and I agree they can cause this, but since you argue there is no mechanism for it, just what mechanism is there for it among demons? That her powers greatly decreased over time especially as I got more involved with Jesus Christ, tells me they had their origin in a demonic thing. The strange insistence she had that demons don't exist, tells me she had one in hiding. When I was preteen or barely, I once saw something in the living room, staring at my father who was sitting on the couch, and either not seeing it or deceived by it, which was not entirely physically visible, but definitely was not the bitch herself. I think she had a familiar spirit and at some times may have been possessed or borderline possessed. I remember years ago she told me, that when her father died something of him came out of him and entered her, and it gave her "strength." I think it was a demon he had acquired somehow.
At least Christine has the chutzpah to identify herself,
which is infinitely better than cowardly, hissing,
anonymous fleas.
Anon *** @ 7:35 pm....
Very good observations about trolls and Communists and other enemies of the Truth and how they plan and operate and disrupt and infiltrate. They really are "everywhere", and have been trained to blend in.
I helped moderate a discussion board (which is a better format for discussion, oddly enough, than a blog) that tried to expose the deception that the Communists pulled on the West, ie, that Communism, the USSR, and all those nasties we were fighting during the Cold War went away for good, and so we don't have to worry about them anymore. You know... We "won" the Cold War, so we can enjoy the "peace dividend"; Russia is our "friend" in the War on Terror; the Soviet Union collapsed because the people rose up and made it collapse; etc, etc. (The collapse of the Iron Curtain is a fascinating study - many of the "revolutions" at that time can be shown to have been controlled from the top, although some of them "got away" from their handlers....)
Anyway. We had our share of trolls and disrupters. We also held a pretty tight reign on people. First of all, we didn't allow anonymous posting. I realize that here it makes sense to allow it, but for places that really see the need, blocking it can be a BIG help. But we also could block by IP address, which is basically the "home address" of the computer (or more accurately, the router) you are posting from.
It shouldn't surprise many of you that when you leave a comment here, you also leave a footprint - even the anonymous ones. And if the blog owner had the desire and the time to, those anonymous posters could be blocked using various tools that Google gives Blogger blog owners.
-------
War is closing in, everyone. I just listened to Nathan Leal and Steve Quayle on Hagmann and Hagmann talking about how God is impressing on them that America is about to be attacked because of our sins. Like Israel was taken captive by Babylon, so are we to go into captivity, unless we repent BIG TIME.
Start reading books by Christians and others what it's like and how to live and survive in an occupied nation. Books like "Tortured for Christ" by Wurmbrand, which talks of what it was like for Christians under Communism, or "The Heavenly Man" by Brother Yun and Paul Hathaway, which shows what it is like in Communist China.
If you have children, start talking to them about the possibility of war coming to our shores. They might be drafted, either into the regular armed forces to fight off the invasion (like what Ukraine is doing now as Russia keeps invading), or into some kind of underground resistance after the invasion. They need to be given a hard and strong faith, for hard times.
A surprise attack on America, with nukes and whatever else, would certainly change the things we focus on, yes? We probably won't even have the internet anymore. How would you communicate with fellow believers? Could you make it on your own, isolated from all others? So make the most and the best of your time here, whatever you take that to mean. And discipline your life so that Christ is all that matters, and walk with Him so that you can CLING to Him when that time comes.
Link to Nathan Leal and Steve Quayle, on H & H
I don't think I saw this anywhere in the discussion about one being taken and the other left, but what about this passage:
20 Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, 21 nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the kingdom of God is within you." 22 Then he said to his disciples, "The time is coming when you will long to see one of the days of the Son of Man, but you will not see it. 23 Men will tell you, 'There he is!' or 'Here he is!' Do not go running off after them. 24 For the Son of Man in his day will be like the lightning, which flashes and lights up the sky from one end to the other. 25 But first he must suffer many things and be rejected by this generation. 26 "Just as it was in the days of Noah, so also will it be in the days of the Son of Man. 27 People were eating, drinking, marrying and being given in marriage up to the day Noah entered the ark. Then the flood came and destroyed them all. 28 "It was the same in the days of Lot. People were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting and building. 29 But the day Lot left Sodom, fire and sulfur rained down from heaven and destroyed them all. 30 "It will be just like this on the day the Son of Man is revealed. 31 On that day no one who is on the roof of his house, with his goods inside, should go down to get them. Likewise, no one in the field should go back for anything. 32 Remember Lot's wife! 33 Whoever tries to keep his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life will preserve it. 34 I tell you, on that night two people will be in one bed; one will be taken and the other left. 35 Two women will be grinding grain together; one will be taken and the other left. " 37 "Where, LORD?" they asked. He replied, "Where there is a dead body, there the vultures will gather." -- Luke 17:20-37.
This seems to me to imply that the ones "taken" are the evil ones. Also, we have in Rev. 14 the following:
14 I looked, and there before me was a white cloud, and seated on the cloud was one "like a son of man" with a crown of gold on his head and a sharp sickle in his hand. 15 Then another angel came out of the temple and called in a loud voice to him who was sitting on the cloud, "Take your sickle and reap, because the time to reap has come, for the harvest of the earth is ripe." 16 So he who was seated on the cloud swung his sickle over the earth, and the earth was harvested. 17 Another angel came out of the temple in heaven, and he too had a sharp sickle. 18 Still another angel, who had charge of the fire, came from the altar and called in a loud voice to him who had the sharp sickle, "Take your sharp sickle and gather the clusters of grapes from the earth's vine, because its grapes are ripe." 19 The angel swung his sickle on the earth, gathered its grapes and threw them into the great winepress of God's wrath. 20 They were trampled in the winepress outside the city, and blood flowed out of the press, rising as high as the horses' bridles for a distance of 1,600 stadia.
In this case, both groups are "harvested" - one to Christ, sitting on the clouds, and the others into God's winepress of wrath. If we take this literally, there would be nobody left on earth. But the meaning behind the passage seems to say the same as the passage from Luke - there is a separation at the return of Christ, and no second chance at redemption after that separation. Just like in Noah's day - after the door was shut, there was no second chance to get on the ark.
God is a God of second chances, but only up to a certain point in history, that point being the return of Christ to unite with His Bride.
"paul said...
At least Christine has the chutzpah to identify herself,
which is infinitely better than cowardly, hissing,
anonymous fleas.
5:08 PM"
For goodness sake who needs a name to tell the truth? And the truth has more than chutzpah-that is all she's got. If the shoe fits wear the thing-if it doesn't where is Christine's or anyone else's worry? What is taking the hit here is what should be being upheld instead. We sure know her name and what good has come of that please tell us Paul?
Anonymous means nothing when you cannot even see someone. We are actually all anonymous since we have no idea who any of you are for that matter.
Let the truth be the truth and own it if it applies should be all anybody takes away here.
Christine gets caught by her own faulty words and that is somebody else's fault? Get real.
Anonymous or not, the truth will set us all free.
So, 'cowardly hissing' is OK as long as you put your name on it huh, Paul???
That's your world that you love to write about here justina whether we want or need to know anything about it....which we don't. It's your 'story' and you insist it is important to this blog but all it is is your pitiful life of the past haunting your present.
Let's not pray against the 'cobwebs' - webs and webs of lies and weird experiences in her tell-alls that she relishes telling over and over of her rotten life. No let's pray instead 'kill the spider' (unforgiveness) that occupies her her mind and is the spirit of whatever she writes.
Hiding = cowardice.
Christine may be a lot of things but she doesn't hide,
so at least we know what and who we disagree with.
You anonimice have ZERO skin in the game. You losers are the ones whose comments we should collapse.
I mean, c'mon, some of us are seriously considering that we may get our heads cut off.
You have just so many words and claims that you're Christian, but no credibility or any reason to believe you about anything.
So, I don't believe a word you mealy-mouthed little imps have to say.
Then do it Paul.
We all know her name and her shame. She loves a public platform. If only that would collapse...
It would be good if Christine would hide instead of trumpet her shame here. The place to hide is in the Blood of Jesus.
Signed,
Freda (oops I mean Fred)
If you were about to get your head cut off for being accused of being a christian would there be enough evidence to convict you? (an open question to all)
Marko, the national ID will be linked to our census records which will be done online and automatically linked to our IP adresses. All internet activity will be linked to our medical and educational records stored on Amazon and Google servers.
***
Well, my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ knows, and I know, that I am a true Christian. I certainly don't feel the need to be 'validated by any of you with 'names' on this blog.
And by the way, Paul, YOU were the first one to call Christine a 'jammer.' So, don't get all self righteous all of a sudden.
Anon ***
Yes, if war does NOT come to the US, and the internet remains intact as it currently is, then we should all be concerned about internet tracking, and tying everything together electronically.
Think about it - there are two versions of "You". The flesh-and-blood one, and the one that is a composite of all online data that is linked to you. Sometime soon the online one will be the "authoritative" one. Have you ever argued with some clerk somewhere about some issue, and you claim one thing, and the clerk says "Well, but the computer says...." as if that is the final word on the matter, no matter what YOU say? Ughhh.... the unthinking masses that will believe a computer over flesh-and-blood standing right in front of them.... that's what frustrates me.
But if we are invaded, I would imagine one of the first things that will go is the internet, especially if the first thing we are hit with is an EMP. The possibility of an EMP (manmade or natural) is larger than what we'd like to admit. Rick Wiles has had several guests on lately discussing that topic.
Marko:
First of all, I don't waste my time living in fear. I am quite comfortable, and completely at peace, with the person I am behind closed doors or behind my computer.
Second, God's judgment is the only one that should matter to each and every one of us.
MIT CLIMATE SCIENTIST: GLOBAL WARMING BELIEVERS A 'CULT'
www.breitbart.com/big government/2015/01/21/mit-climate-scientist-global-warming-believers-a-cult/
Anon. 10:04....
I agree with you completely. Nothing I said would indicate otherwise. Being "concerned" about something does not mean I'm fearful. I gave up being fearful about being tracked and all that crap years ago. It sucks the life out of you, and hinders your witness. Not to say fear doesn't try to creep back in from time to time - it does. But I have to remember who we are in Christ. Daily.
God bless you, Marko.
Peace....
Christine, I've no idea how demons communicate across space, but I'm not in doubt that they can. Whereas humans unaided can't - science doesn't now everything but it has least enough to be very confident of that. So if your mother was really trying to remotely control you then it must have been via a demon in her and one in you. Perhaps she put it there when you were young - I don't know. If you have a demon it can cause all sorts of funny sensations and delusions and I don't think you should trust yourself to say it didn't feel like one but felt like something else. Occult means hidden. I therefore believe you have this and I urge you to get it dealt with. I don't want to argue this with you; I'm trying to help.
Anon 10:56,
Thanks for the link. Here's some of the content:
An MIT professor of meteorology is dismissing global-warming alarmists as a discredited “cult” whose members are becoming more hysterical as emerging evidence continues to contradict their beliefs.
During an appearance on this writer’s radio show Monday, MIT Professor emeritus Richard Lindzen discussed the religious nature of the movement.
“As with any cult, once the mythology of the cult begins falling apart, instead of saying, oh, we were wrong, they get more and more fanatical. I think that’s what’s happening here. Think about it,” he said. “You’ve led an unpleasant life, you haven’t led a very virtuous life, but now you’re told, you get absolution if you watch your carbon footprint. It’s salvation!”
…This writer asked him if, as has been alleged in some of the warmist blogs, he is taking money from the energy industry.
“Oh, it would be great!” he said with a laugh. “You have all these people, the Gores and so on, making hundreds of millions of dollars on this, Exxon Mobil giving $100 million to Stanford for people who are working on promoting this hysteria. The notion that the fossil-fuel industry cares – they don’t. As long as they can pass the costs on to you, it’s a new profit center.”
Lindzen said he was fortunate to have gained tenure just as the “climate change” movement was beginning, because now non-believers are often ostracized in academia. In his career he has watched the hysteria of the 1970’s over “global cooling” morph into “global warming.”
“They use climate to push an agenda. But what do you have left when global warming falls apart? Global normalcy? We have to do something about ‘normalcy?’”
anon 12:54,
if it was demons directly, why did it depend entirely on her concentration and my attention?
The whole thing was broken up by the distracting sound of my grandmother walking across her room directly overhead.
Demons indirectly, empowering her, yeah, but not one in her and one in me, that scenario wouldn't break that easily from someone breaking her concentration and getting my attention.
". But what do you have left when global warming falls apart? Global normalcy? "
you get the ice age that the global cooling crew were too early on. They didn't realize that global warming precedes ice ages. Might not be a major ice age, maybe another mini ice age. The sun is the real driver in all this.
When will the resident Saul have his 'on the road to Damascus' experience?
Yes Christine may be alot of things but at least she's not heartless, relentless and unforgiving like you, Saul.
Do people see how Christine Erikson has been successful to become The Topic of this poor battered blog?
She wears everything and everybody down to achieve this. A tactic she learned from her childhood taking after her mother if she is correct about her manipulations. The devil works this way and the blog has succumbed to it.
Saul Aka Paul,
You hide in the weeds in wait to maul Christine or other, never posting anything of value, despite your epitaph being engraved above the weeds! You are a whited sepulchre full of dead man's bones. Your faith is without love. You are the biggest troll of them all, Saul, and you are too blind to see it!
Like I said, you are no better than Christine.
Paul & All
There is some funny business going on here. I am the one who has been posting as Anon 12 but, I did not write the previous post. I don't know why the person writing decided to use my name but its pretty ridiculous.
An anon poster above referred to Paul as Saul, but this was also not me.
This is unbelievable!! Don't think I've seen anyone going that far on this blog before. Just wanted you all to know.
Thanks Anon12 (the real one)
Now you understand why I thought you had forgiven, then unforgiven, then...
plus the whole semi-literate poetry thing.
I'm glad you straightened it out for me.
This person strikes me as an eight year old with a anger issue.
Oh well.
Seeing why it can be a good thing to remain anonymous..and....to take what people say with a grain of salt.
People are not always who they say they are. But true colors always come out whether I see that or not-the point is: God sees.
Chritine is exposed and still explaining her miserable life here so I take what she says cut it in half, and then for good measure, throw the rest away. She does not care who sees evidently-even God. She'll answer. (and she is God's project).
May the truth prevail in the lives of those who truly want it.
Paul
I stayed away from this blog all day after responding to you in anger yesterday because I was ashamed at how I let my emotions take over and felt my response to you was again unwarranted.
I really don't like to put my personal stuff out there like this but, have no other way of letting you know.
I still struggle with controlling my tongue when becoming upset or feeling offended and responding to people, in my personal life as well. Maybe one day I can get it right.
We are ALL a work in progress. Its cool to see posters humble themselves and be apologetic. I have to do this ten times a day, on a good day. I marvel at the grace of my Savior. All glory to Him!
May the grace of our Lord Jesus be with everyone here.
That which I wrote, I wrote! I don't know who this supposed 'real' Anon 12 but I've been straight up about you Saul (look back over my posts) and I haven't changed my tune for you!
You have the grace of a cockroach and the manners of a rhino!
I didn't post that either! Whoever this other Anon 12 is I don't know. Stop now anon trolls, Paul has been a gentleman in his last posts and I can't commend him higher!
This is how they try to get a person to give up and leave, and it's worked many times.
Anon12, they did this very same thing to me
a few years ago. Whoever it is , they're very childish.
Unfortunately only Mrs Cumby can see the difference but I'm pretty sure she has many more important things to do.
Even if she didn't I would bother her about it.
I think it's the sincere faith in Jesus that bugs them so much. They even feign that in order to disrupt this blog, which belongs to an outspoken Christian woman.
Proverbs 22 says: "Those who sow iniquity shall reap vanity and the rod of his anger shall fail"
Back to the Osborne argument. I notice he prefers inductive reasoning. Aside from putting everyone to sleep by being both boring and longwinded, there is another problem.
By using inductive logic, or at least proclaiming he is doing so, in fact it is probably a mix, he is setting his conclusions up for attack on the basis of the unreliability of inductive logic.
Which by the way is designed to come out with more likely true than not, as distinct this has to be the case.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductive_reasoning#Inductive_vs._deductive_reasoning hashes over the issues, I recommend reading the whole articl, highlight and delete the # and everything after and hit enter to get to the start, or scroll back to the start.
Mary Christine Erikson circa 1951 same email, it's a match.
http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/workshops/ag2010/002/AGW-01987.html
and
http://www.homesnap.com/CA/Palo-Alto/919-University-Avenue
I was wrong, it might just be a case of internet addiction and the lonely upperclass.
Good lesson for me then.
***
Thank you Christine, that link is a real gem! You're a breath of fresh air here. Ignore the stench Saul the unchristian grouch has tried to kick up. At least you post articles worth reading unlike that old boar! Keep going girl and don't give up coz of jealosy.
Seriously, when was the last time that old fart posted anything of relevance here? I tell you never!
Saul, you can let go of Susanna's pleats now... (he's going through his 2nd childhood you know.) Lost viper that he is!
Saul and his sidekick Christine are as bad as each other!
Still firing through the weeds, coward! Using my name shows how trivial you lot are... I didn't post at 7:18 pm + 8:07 am. I know how to spell Cumbey... not Cumbey! You're so transparent and fake Anon 12 / Real Anon 12, whoever you are! You're a professional JAMMER. It's you, isn't it, Justina? Come out of the weeds you yellow bellied troll!
This place is infested. Is it some foul and nasty spirit attached to Christine? She talks so much about these things I wonder.......
Paul I believe you to be part of what is good with this blog. I don't believe everything that is posted in the comments section.
The Paul above is not me, and has posted many times
in the past. I write mine with the small "p". No problem there.
But the paul directly above is not me either.
Hey, it's the comments section of a blog, for goodness sakes.
Apparently it's precious to someone to the point that they're furious.
Maybe the person used to rule this comments section and now feels left out, or at least not quite as important as they used to feel.
Paul, you have always been a major problem here! You sway in the wind with the cowards in the weeds as you love pointing out. You are no better! You always need someone to bully here, Dorothy, Susanna, etc. It's mostly because of the likes of you that I no longer post here.
People who live in expensive houses shouldn't stow thrones.
This is the REAL Paul, there's something real nasty going on here! The post at 10:17 is not me! It's probably Anon 12, anon above with the trashy poetry, or Justina gone incognito. Many of the recent posts are not mine! Justina, you're a professional JAMMER and like I said before, probably getting a hefty sum for it too!
This is an old tactic and it won't work on me!
That is right Paul. It is just the comments section and it is a blasted mess. People are too wrapped up in it! (Christine has done a very good job of making herself the issue and all the swirls around it)
I think it is time to for me to leave off the comments section and just read What Constance thinks.
"(Christine has done a very good job of making herself the issue and all the swirls around it)"
At least Christine is gutsy enough to put her head above the weeds you yellow bellied rattlesnake! She is no jammer after all, it's you anon cowards! This is Cumbys blog not yours!
This is the REAL Paul! Like I said, there's something nasty going on here. I don't much trust Anon posters but 11:11 am, the paul above is not me! Justina you're a professional JAMMER!! I'm not surprised you could stoop so low!
Neither of the pauls above are me! There's some strange plot to get me off here, you trolls won't win! It's you isn't it, Justina?! You're stirring the pot again. JAMMER!
You and the anons should be ignored I'm going to collapse your comments from now on!
To the original Paul here. Change your name on here to Saul then as someone suggested. It'll more properly fit your vile character, you loveless pharisee!
Paul
The posts listed by Anon 12 and THE REAL Anon 12 after the one yesterday that stated I stayed away from blog because my response to you was unwarranted, were not from me, who is actually the one originally posting as Anon 12 and then the REAL Anon 12.
Kind of really confusing but, from your response above I can gather it is hard to tell now who is who.
I am the one who apologized to you a few weeks back and then lashed out at you on Saturday, returning yesterday to expose the person posing as me. They then posted twice yesterday after that using my names.
The original Anon 12 and THE REAL Anon 12 is not the one further posting late yesterday afternoon.
If they can use both my names and your name then they are quite pathetic.
To the original Paul. Change your name here to Saul then as someone suggested. It'll probably be in harmony with who you really are, loveless pharisee!
NONE of the previous 6 comments are mine.
Don't you realize that Constance can see who is who?
I am visiting with an attorney in Southern Cal this week.
I am interested to find out if Mary Christine Erikson from University Drive in Palo Alto, CA fits the description of a cyber bully as I suspect she does. (Especially since she is generally harassing on religious grounds).
It's time for Mary to think more seriously about her disruption of the comment section of Constance's blog.
This is why the internet will be regulated via international law in the end as they want to bring the world to one international order under UN laws.
http://www.stopbullying.gov/laws/california.html
http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2014/01/so-who-owns-the-internet/
Simply put, I am sure if the owner of the blog leaves a public comment asking Mary to limit or stop her comments, if she continues it then becomes harassment, period.
***
anon @ 12:03, you come out of the blue defending Troll number 1 Christine, attack Paul and others in anger then all this starts who are you? Sorry if I'm mistaken but it seems as if you are the one doing the fake Paul posts and your own to cover your tracks... if I am right then you are no better than Christine and are in your own words pathetic. If not I apologize but it seems weird that you turn up out of nowhere and all this starts.
I don't support Paul and his harsh attacks on who he sees as weak here but this has gone too far. Enough already!
This is the REAL Paul, my posts are 9:39, 11:11 and 11:48. Ditto, coward at 12:49! Yes, she can! You deliberately posted 1 hour and a minute after my last post: typical New Age symbolism going on there!
I can't keep up with this garbage, just got back from a hard day keeping trees free from parasites etc.
To find them here again!!!!
STOP NOW! Get a job you morons!
Anon 1:19
I started posting as Anon 12 almost immediately after Craig requested that anons distinguish themselves, I think the very same day. I did not come out of the blue. I posted at various other times after that as Anon 12, once again, not out of the blue.
It was not until I signed on Sunday (yesterday January 25) that I saw someone posted under my name and replied. I then replied again to Paul for my response to him, not posting again. I then look this morning (Monday January 26) and there are posts from Anon 12 and THE REAL Anon 12 from late yesterday afternoon that were NOT my posts. I then replied today with: DONT KNOW WHAT TO CALL MYSELF NOW WITH THIS TROLL ON THE LOOSE.
You are wrong in your assumption as I gather by your use of the word "pathetic" that you are referring to my post at 12:03. If you don't know the answer to something you should not assume.
And... I was not so much sticking up for Christina, as much as I was really bothered by the tone of some of the replied. Yes, she is into some weird stuff, and I think she is looking for attention and approval but I thought some of the remarks bordered on almost hatefulness. There is a difference between sticking up for someone and, sticking up for anyone to be treated with hatefulness.
You got that wrong too.
This is the REAL Paul. The posts at 9:39, 11:11 and 11:48 are mine. I see you posted exactly 1 hour and 1 minute after my last post, coward at 12:49! This is typical of New Age symbolism and is a dead give away as to what you are made of! Ditto, yes she can see them! I've been working with trees and getting rid of parasites from them all day, only to find more infesting here!
Get a job moron(s)! You have too much time on your hands!
Nice try, anon 1:41, anon 12 or whoever you are! You showed enough hatred yourself then double -backed (or so we are supposed to believe). Who's to say you're not just as duplicitous now? We just don't know, do we? that's the point!
By the way, JACKASS 12:49, the blog owner's name is Constance CUMBEY not Cumby, moron!
Again, not me.
And trees are dormant all winter.
You know, you're not bothering me much.
You're definitely messing up the blog though.
Anon 1:49
I hope someone will be able to help figure out (if there is a way to track the IP) so I can take pleasure in showing you how wrong you are.
There was no doubling back. I apologized to Paul a few weeks ago, posted several times after that without incident, then posted a response to Paul apologizing for my unnecessary response on Saturday.
You should get your facts straight. It's hard to trust your word when you can't even get the time of the post correct (you responded to a 12:03 post which was incorrect). I don't like to knit pick about the time but things like that are usually an indication of how well a person pays attention. Sometimes it's people like you that incite when accusing a person without proper knowledge.
Should I expect an apology when you discover how wrong you were?
Probably not, doesn't seem like your style.
Anon 1:49
Sorry for the remark about the time of post issue. I looked at it wrong and am mistaken on that.
But you are still wrong about the rest.
Christine,
I haven't read Osborne, but I think you are a little confused at 11.35pm regarding inductive and deductive logic.
Logic is about propositions that are either true or false, known therefore as binary propositions. The challenge is to work out whether a proposition of interest is true or false when you know that certain other propositions, related to the one of interest, are true or false.
Often this is possible. Sometimes, though, the propositions you know don't give you enough information to decide whether the proposition of interest is true or false - even though they are clearly relevant.
What then? If you restrict yourself to strict deductive logic, you can say nothing more; you want to know if the proposition of interest is true or false and you can't - end of story. But the very fact that the propositions of which you have knowledge are relevant suggests that we can do better. If we admit the concept of how strongly the truth of one proposition implies the truth of another then we can go further. There is a scale from 0 (what you know implies the proposition is definitely false) to 1 (what you know implies the proposition is definitely true). Of course these extreme cases correspond to deductive logic, but there is now a scale in between.
In 1946 it was shown that this quantity obeys two well known mathematical rules, known as the laws of probability. On these grounds I should love to call this quantity the probability of the proposition being true, but unfortunately there is longstanding argument about the meaning of the word 'probability'. Suffice it to say that the quantity I have just defined is what you actually need in every real problem and it obeys "the laws of probability".
I also assert that inductive logic, done correctly, IS probability theory when the latter is understood in this way. Unfortunately there is a great deal of confusion both terminological and logical. Wikipedia has to try to be all things to all factions (otherwise it is edited by an opponent of whatever stance it currently espouses) and is of limited help in getting through this jungle.
David Hume rejected inductive logic, ultimately because it can't provide certainty. Of course it can't - its whole point is to do the best you can when you are short of the information needed for certainty. Popper accepted probability but rejected induction, which is a confused start point and not a basis for anything cogent.
The hard part is not inductive logic but thinking up propositions to deploy in inductive analysis in the first place. it is fairly easy to test new scientific theories but extremely difficult to think of new ones, consistent with yet improving on all that has gone before, to put to the test.
This is Physicist, who has worked in what is called statistical physics, in which probability theory is crucial.
CONSTANCE & All - just spotted this on the BBC website!
Radio interview (don't know if you'll be able to access this outside of the UK) http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02hqbtc
[clip] Would you microchip your children?
I would "absolutely" microchip my children to keep them safe says Stephen Fern, who runs the company Lost Kidz.
Over 16,000 people have responded on social media after Mr Fern sought public opinion on the subject.
He said the responses were "over 95%" in favour of microchipping children.
This clip is originally from 5 live Drive on Monday 26 January 2015.
Release date: 26 Jan 2015
***
Lost Kidz Facebook page - https://www.facebook.com/LostKidzApp?fref=photo
~ K ~
Constance, you can stop the impersonators by inspecting IP addresses and stating (without specifying those addresses publicly) which posts above are not who they claim to be. Even a threat to do this might deter. A threat to post the IP addresses of the liars certainly would. I'm afraid your blog has become sullied and you need to take some action to clean it up for the sake of those who post here in good faith.
Thank you ~ K ~ for the update. How pertinent to what we are to be watching for of global governance issues.
Thanks for some actual substance posted here. The "Christine show" and all of the resulting "sideshows" are non-stop stupid and proving they are not interested in the real topics to be highlighted here. If she was, and they who have jumped on her bandwagon, would have never let themselves distract from what is really important.
Some people are desperate for attention of any kind-even and especially the negative-sick and wrong behavior that has flooded this place. Christine leads the pack.........
"Christine leads the pack....."
Doesn't she just! If she'd any decency she'd have gone by now. Fat chakra of that happening!
That is not me at 6pm, it looks like K.
***
To the clown pretending to be me at 1:54 / 2:09.
You have shown WHO you are JACKASS, total IDIOT! First you can't spell CUMBEY, then you talk TRASH just like that other JAMMER Justina about trees being dormant in winter as though that means no parasite... If you had the smallest idea of what happens to a variety of ash (that's a tree species, DUMBO) when infested with borer larvae during the WINTER months through to Spring you wouldn't have been so foolish in exposing yourself, DUMBO!
The fact is yes, you ARE messing up this blog. I think I can guess WHO you are too COWARD!
Hey, everybody -
The 'real' Paul's posts stand out from the rest, because his sentences are condensed and don't go all the way across the page.
That being said, I do feel bad for you, Paul that this is happening to you. Is it possible that someone is doing this, because you have been so hostile and unforgiving to those who (for their own personal reasons) choose to post anonymously on this blog?
I think Constance is going to need to call Roto Rooter to dislodge these jammers.
I wonder if they are recruited from the ranks of the prison population, because they seem to have nothing else to do.
Anyway, good morning everyone. This blizzard is awesome! The Lord is awesome.
Bless his holy name.
Like the Christmas song says:
Jesus, Jesus, oh what a wonderful child
Jesus, Jesus, so lowly meek and mild.
New life, new hope, new joy you bring
Won't you listen to the angels sing
Glory, glory! glory to the new born king.
Yes, I can be a little rough sometimes but I've still got time for the new non-jammers out there!
Once again good morning everyone (Christine and you others, how's that jail breakfast tasting?).
I hope even you jammers can learn to be a little meeker and milder too!
This is the real genuine and bona fide paul again, none of the last 3 posts are mine!
It's time for Constance to vet all posts before they're visible, that'll stop Justina and her jammer army in its tracks!
Have a great day to all.
I believe the ones “taken” in Luke 17 are the Children of God. In verse 32 where it says “remember Lot’s wife” I interpret to mean don’t look back because this is the mistake she made. Also consider Noah – he was saved out of the flood in the ark. A better translation for verse 37 is “where the body is, there the eagles will gather” meaning the body of Christ and eagles which are prophesied in Revelation 12:14 to take “the woman” (Israel of God) to a safe place “for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent”. Consider where it says in Exodus 19:4 “Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and how I bare you on eagles' wings, and brought you unto myself” which similarly is a rescue from tribulation. Thus my understanding is that those saved are taken to a safe place and those remaining are destroyed which is the harvest in Rev 14.
Getting back to the original focus of this episode of Constance's blog, I was looking at the people that Clark considered so illuminated or superhuman. Initially I couldn't find anything wrong with Laubach, in the wikipedia article.
but this is another matter: http://www.dwillard.org/articles/artview.asp?artID=43
the connected link on these men, was a weakness on Christian exclusivity. Laubach's effort to follow God moment by moment is all very well, but remember he has that background of that 12 group. And you can see that he was engaged in some biofeedback loop self training to a state that essentially asked God to use his fingers and feet for him. This is almost like seeking possession, except God doesn't operate like that.
Not finding any scandals about Laubach (yet) it is probably a fleshly deception he got into, not demonic, but the description on his ways with the Moro indicates he wasn't preaching Christ so much as "love" which adds up to coddling. How many actually converted because of him? Laubach was considered a friend of islam and "he is islam." hmmmmm. I think there are some compromises going on here.
The one point islam won't budge on, is the facts about Jesus Christ - His divinity, real death and therefore real resurrection.
"he writes with confidence that if enough praying people could be rallied to constant prayer there is divinely-ordained power in prayer to change the course of history for the better. It is a daring assertion but one our Lord would support.
Laubach writes, “There are a hundred chinks of time every day in the busiest lives, and into these chinks they could shoot flash prayers for the builders of the new world.” How about adding this aspect of prayer to our habit of daily devotions?
To those who have the notion that for prayers to be powerful they have to be loud, and highly energized he writes, “Prayer is powerful but it is not the power of a sledgehammer that crushes with one blow. It is the power of sun rays and rain drops which bless, because there are so many of them.”
He goes on, “Instead of a minute a day, we Christians must learn to flash hundreds of instantaneous prayers at people near and far, knowing that many prayers may show no visible results, but that at least some of them will hit their mark.”
sending prayers AT PEOPLE, not TO God about people? There is a difference.
"You are an all out flaming narcissist."
Isn't she just?! I would not be shocked if it's her causing all the under the radar mess here. Well, even if she hasn't directly, she certainly has been the main hand in it!
I'm just surprized she's been let off so easy!
I think she and her mother will always be inseparable: it's a kinda Norman Bates thing (or a Mary Christine Erikson thing)!
Go away Mary.
I've had little blogging time last few days but will try to make it up once I get through a client's emergency later today. In the meantime, I am watching weather events on the East Coast with no small degree of concern, especially for one of our active participants, Susanna, who lives in Springfield, Massachusetts. I ask prayers from all for she and her family's protection from these fearsome elements.
Thank you!
Constance
For the record, Davos, and most of the other "planetary" gatherings have been openly on the New Age religion scene, at least as long as I've been following them, since 1981. I warned of this and the three pronged agenda of (1) New World Order; (2) New World Religion; and (3) New Age leader/"Messiah"/Christ cum "Maitreya" from the beginning.
Walter Martin and others went out of their way to say that "the New Age leaders are not politically networked in any way."
Not true.
Better late than never and I'm happy that others are now reporting on it, but it is FAR from a new development.
CONSTANCE
Laubach was very much into the occult mystical mess on many levels and when I get a little more time, I'll put some of it up here!
Constance
Constance, I am not surprised that there is info about occultism and Laubach, I only looked briefly.
That bit about praying AT rather than FOR people made me suspicious of this occult thing. A lot of people talk about sending prayers your way or our prayers and thoughts are with you, this sounds like broadcasting influence to someone, not asking God to influence or help them.
The former, as you pointed out somewhere, I think regarding some New Age influenced semi Christian woman's ideas about child rearing, is really a kind of witchcraft.
I think people like Laubach played a role in getting evangelicals (I think nowdays "evangelical" is a synonymn for "sloppy thinkers" or "sloppy thinkers mostly some only sort of in Christ") to think and write in terms of "the power of prayer," which on the face of it is about prayer having power in itself, not about the power of God.
This may be the one and only wrong line of thought a Christian individual might have, but it could be the key to their moving more and more into New Age thinking.
Christine, good post and good points. I am seeing a change in your posts bit by bit for the better. Let's hope Paul can post something worthwhile too instead of just bullying. Let's hope he's learned his lesson, you can leave off him now. Keep it up!
I wasn't doing anything to Paul, paul, whoever. I don't do anon posts. i've just been watching you all make fools of yourselves.
And while I thank you for the compliment, the only reason I got onto issues of anatomy of the soul is because someone challenged me to repent of preaching hinduism, which I wasn't doing, on the previous blog. I have ALWAYS made posts of this immediate last sort in addition to anything you don't like.
The issue of "power of prayer," though some may read that as meaning prayer to God and results when He answers, its meaning is apparently an effort to project psychic influence. or worse. What the whole New Age, and lots of Christians, don't get, is that "satan can transform himself into an angel of light." So can the flesh of course. Interestingly enough, Paul lists witchcraft under "works of the flesh," and while that would address motives, and of course there are spirits involved there could also be quite literally an invisible kind of invasion by the mind (which when oriented badly is "the flesh,") into another's mind. While some of examples of "the flesh" in that list are physical actions, many are mental actions.
Since the hindu Indians experimented with smallpox vaccination long before the west did, and some other things, and several other things, you might just as well accuse anyone interested in such of preaching Hinduism and/or anything associated with it. While the vimaanika shaastra is channelled fraud, there is a good possibility they were messing with crude (likely failed) flight attempts and directed energy weapons at one point. Something in the mahabharata sounds suspiciously like someone's crude memory who didn't understand, of a mass production of children by in vitro fertilization.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Indian_inventions_and_discoveries
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSnGNX2zNJmq+1cc+GNW20140123?irpc=932
HeartMath promoted by world economic forum award winner. List of companies to avoid. Getting closer to insurance coverage for brain entrainment products?
***
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/01/23/idUSnGNX2zNJmq+1cc+GNW20140123
desktop link ...
http://www.heartmath.org/free-services/solutions-for-stress/gps-for-the-soul.html
they now call it gps for the soul, no thanks, I will stick to the Bible. Ha, what deceivers, they said it was about the brain and heart joining in harmony with the earth's waves into a yogi trance like state, liars, we knew it was about ours souls. Again, this is used in public schools and the military, who needs LSD anymore, when you can mifrowave your brain?
Google search shows three videos on Gregg Braden, Bruce Lipton and heartmath.
http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0LEV182EshUIc8AZgrBGOd_?ei=UTF-8&fr=crmas&p=gregg+braden+bruce+lipton+heartmath&SpellState=&fr2=sp-qrw-corr-top
***
Post a Comment