Bible Study
See other Bible Study Articles
Title: Document Recently Found Has Eyewitness Account of Jesus Performing Miracle (Hoax)
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://guardianlv.com/2014/10/docum ... t-of-jesus-performing-miracle/
Published: Oct 17, 2014
Author: Kimberly Ruble
Post Date: 2014-10-17 22:53:49 by A K A Stone
Keywords: None
Views: 46549
Comments: 96
In Rome, a document recently found has an eyewitness account of Jesus performing a miracle. An Italian professional was examining the paper written in the first century by the Roman historian Marcus Paterculus. It has only been recently found inside the annals of the Vatican and on it there was written what appears to be the very first eyewitness account ever documented of one of the miracles performed by Jesus. The author told of a scene that he supposedly observed, in which a prophet who he named Isous de Nazarenus, revived a baby who had been stillborn and gave him back to his mother.
Historian Ignazio Perrucci was employed by authorities of the Vatican in 2012 to go through and analyze over 6,000 antique documents that had been found in massive archive crypts. Perrucci had already been excited when he detected that the writer of the text was the celebrated Roman historian Paterculus, but he was totally shocked after he read the content of the document.
Professor Perrucci discovered the text in the collections of the Vatican, while he was looking through a packet of personal letters and other minor documents that dated back to the Roman period. The writing, when looked at as a complete narrative tells of the writer’s departing journey from Parthia to Rome, which happened in 31 AD. It was recorded on four pieces of parchment. He speaks of various events happening during his journey, like an intense sandstorm in Mesopotamia and when he visits a temple in Melitta which is now called Mdina in modern day Malta.
Yet the piece of text that really got the historian’s attention was when he read about an event occurring in the town of Sebaste. That would be close to the city of Nablus in the modern day, which is in the West Bank. The writer talked about the coming of a great leader into the city with his assembly of disciples. He also had many followers and this meant that a lot of the lower class people from nearby villages were gathering around the group. Paterculus stated that the great man’s name was Isous de Nazarenus, which was a Greco Latin translation of Jesus’ Hebrew name, Yeshua haNotzri.
The document stated that when he entered the town, it was written that Jesus had gone to the home of a woman by the name of Elisheba. She had just had a stillborn baby. Jesus reportedly picked up the dead infant and said a prayer in Aramaic. The writer stated that it was “immensus”, which meant that it was unintelligible. Next, right in front of the crown, to their wonder and astonishment, the baby returned to life crying and fidgeting like a vigorous newborn.
Marcus Paterculus, was a Roman officer of Campanian heritage, and it appears that he saw Jesus as some sort of great man who could perform miracles. He did not appear to associate him with the Christian idea of him being the Messiah.
There have been numerous tests and examinations done in the past few weeks to try and determine the manuscripts authenticity. The make-up of the parchment and the ink used to write on it, the literary panache and even the handwriting have been cautiously inspected and are believed to legitimate. The dating investigation also showed that the parchment on which the text was penned, did date from the 1st century, precisely from between 20-40 AD.
This text written by an author, who has always been known for his dependability, has brought a new viewpoint on the life of Jesus of Nazareth. An official translation of the manuscript is planned to be released and made available online in numerous different languages over the next couple of months. However, the effect of the discovery has already been felt in the scientific community. Numerous researchers believe this to be one of the greatest developments ever found toward the study of the life of Jesus, while many others think it is nothing but a fraud and have uttered doubts about the conclusions of all the tests and want many more done before they declare this to be any sign of that Jesus really lived. They do not trust the document.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-13) not displayed.
.
.
.
#14. To: A K A Stone (#7)
Just logged on with my old XP and Firefox and noticed I can click anywhere on what I posted before with IE and it will take me to the source, no need to post the whole article.
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
TC likes Duck Duck Go I believe it is called.
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)
ping
I use both Duck Duck and Bing, with Bing being the default.
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
Original source article and source disclaimer. The tablets depicted are the Vindolanda tablets, ... Tablet 343: Letter from Octavius to Candidus concerning supplies of wheat, hides and sinews.
Are you serious? A satire site? Sheesh. Well thanks for the cold water.
Well, satire or not, the theological model I subscribe to does not mean Jesus never lived and performed miracles. There may well have been a man named Jesus (or whatever the ancient version of his name was as it certainly wouldn't have been spelled in our present day alphabet), walking the earth, performing miracles and spreading a message of good will, and upsetting the establishment in the process. Supernatural events (aka miracles) can and do occur. The issue I have with Christianity is only that A) Reincarnation does occur, in almost certain contradiction of Hebrews 9:27. B) The bible, therefore, cannot be the "Word of God". At least in the sense of perfect divine inspiration. The original message could have been divinely true but then corrupted as passed from that point into written form (i.e. present day bible). C) In my personal view, because we are souls born in the spirit world that can and do exist independently of our human bodies, we are not *primarily* human beings. Our human identity is only a secondary identity. Because of that, the core of Christian theology, which holds that Jesus took human form to indentify with us, and died as one of us, for the salvation of our non-human souls, breaks down. That because some souls never incarnate, and others incarnate from time to time as non-humans, on alien worlds. IOW, our human identity is merely incidental. That being the case, a human sacrifice (Jesus dying on the cross for the salvation of us "humans") no longer makes sense. Again, that's my personal view. I'm sure there are others who do believe in reincarnation but also subscribe to that element of Christian theology. I understand the Gnostic Christians of the first few centuries AD did subscribe to reincarnation until Constantine declared it a heresy (for the purposes of political control of the masses). There is much is the gospels I do agree with. The golden rule for one, and that love is the greatest commandment (though not a commandment, per se). While the theological reasons for the death of Jesus I find erroneous, the message behind the story of his sacrifice is correct -- namely that we are all loved enormously, far more than we can humanly comprehend. Though in my view, the love is greater than that portrayed by Christian theology because I say we are never overtly judged or condemned to hell for all eternity. There will be judgement, but we will judge ourselves, and judge soundly, without the distraction of our human mind, and lovingly encouraged to grow and do better next time. Whether a soul can condemn itself to annihilation, I do not know, but free will is perfect in the spirit world. This theological model is, in my view, superior because we are loved more perfectly. God never gives up on us, as opposed to giving up on an unrepentant sinner when he dies, young or old. All of us are here because we chose to be here, knowing in advance (at the subconsciously/spiritual level) what our lives would be like, so life is in fact, fair. None of us suffers pain without a reason. Life has a real, practical purpose, and that is for us to grow and advance spiritually. In short, there are far more sound answers with this model than with the Christian model. But back on the subject of Jesus performing miracles, it's very possible. Souls do have that capability. The stronger, more advanced the souls, the more powerful, though most of us walking the earth are pretty weak (or we wouldn't be here). Best...
Did you obtain your understanding of the life between life from personal hypnosis or a trained Newton hypnosis? How different are Newton's beliefs and methods to those practiced by Hollywood actress Shirley MacLaine? I read some of Newton's website. Frankly it is nothing new from the New Age era of the 70s and 80s. What he has done was marry the beliefs of human reincarnation, New Age mysticism and use hypnosis as a method to access past experiences. Again frankly not new as mediums have existed since the beginning of civilization. I also offer a concern of hypnosis. People voluntarily submit to hypnosis to stop smoking, lose weight etc. In such cases a person is willingly allowing someone to alter their behavior or thoughts whether it be to not pick up a pack of smokes or not eat that donut at midnight. Aren't you concerned someone you don't know is "getting inside" your head and has you in a vulnerable suggestive state? The testimonials of those who were personally under Newton for hypnosis or one of his many assistants boast similar or completely identical experiences and understanding. This might shock some but it is most obvious as those who are hypnotized not to smoke have similar testimonials. Why? The suggestive nature of hypnosis. This is akin to brain washing and very cultic. Also, what evidence can you provide the canonical scriptures are not the Word of God. You used "cannot be" which is an assertion and not based on evidence.
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)
No. I'm not particularly familiar with Shirley MacLaine's beliefs. My take is that Newton has not "married beliefs". What I like about his approach is that he has taken more of the scientific avenue. He has mentioned in interviews how he had purposely avoided conferences, books and outside information about the subject of reincarnation and such so as to not be biased. His effort was to restrict all his learning from his clients, and querying them in open ended fashion, not asking yes/no questions of what they see, which explicitly plants images in their minds but rather questions such as "what do you see?" He further claims he began his career as an atheist, but was brought kicking and screaming to the prospect of reincarnation by what his clients have told him. He claims that a very convincing factor in upholding the credibility of his findings is the consistency of the things his thousands of clients have told him over the years, regardless of their cultural or (conscious) religious beliefs. Could Newton be a fraud? Maybe, but if he is, then in my view he's an excellent one for coming up with a portrait of a spirit world that answers just about every challenging question about who and what we are and why we are here, and does so better than Christianity does. And two: if he is a fraud, there's about no web sites out I've found that discredit him in any credible way. My understanding is that hypnosis cannot make someone do something that they are not ultimately willing to do, like jump off a cliff. A hypnotist cannot force someone to be hypnotized. A hypnotist is only a guide such that any success with it is due to the ability of the person being hypnotized. Hollywood has embellished this with vampire movies and such which has put some misinformation out to the public, but I understand that is fiction. Having said that, I have seen TV programs in which a self-proclaimed hypnotist can supposedly hypnotise people instantly and make them do crazy things. I'm not sure if that could be real or just staged, but it's certainly different from what is practised therapeutically. Well, if Hebrews 9:27 can be taken to only mean that reincarnation does NOT occur, and reincarnation in reality DOES occur, then I consider that evidence that the bible cannot be the infallible "Word of God". That is a logical proof. Would you not agree? But perhaps Hebrews 9:27 doesn't quite say that, or perhaps reincarnation does not occur. If either of those are the case, then the bible could still be the "Word of God". I'm of the mind, however, that the passage is indisputably saying we get one life. I'm also of the mind that reincarnation is a real phenomenon, ergo.... Of course it seems apparent on it's face that reincarnation would undermine the core of biblical teaching... i.e. what I already posted above, so it's not just this single verse. Where is the proof that the bible IS the "Word of God?" You've mentioned before evidence in the way of fulfilled prophecies, but ultimately, can we base a faith on something because one ancient text corroborates another ancient text? How much can we ultimately know about how much or little one writer knew of another writer? And in any event, does true faith come from the academic knowledge in one's head, or from the heart?
There is absolutely no proof for that. To be honest it makes you sound kooky.
THE best and most secure: https://ixquick.com/
Supernatural events (aka miracles) can and do occur. First, let me say that I appreciate your deep thought, intellectual honesty, and search for the truth. Yes, the historical record of multiple witnesses testify not only to the very existence of Jesus or Yeshua, but of the miracles he'd performed, his verbatim speeches and messages, his philosophy (if we want to call it that), even his genealogy. Not the mention all the scriptural prophecies concerning his eventual emergence, the theme of man's sin and its requisite redemption and payment for the penalty for sin throughout the ages. The issue I have with Christianity is only that A) Reincarnation does occur, in almost certain contradiction of Hebrews 9:27. "Reincarnation" is defined as returning "in the flesh." After this mortal shell expires, those who are accept the gift of redemptive grace do not "return" anywhere -- not the least which is to the current physical realm of "earth." We shall also be reborn in a celestial body (please refer to 1 Corinthians 15.) There will also be a "new Heaven and Earth." (see Revelation 21:1) B) The bible, therefore, cannot be the "Word of God". At least in the sense of perfect divine inspiration. The original message could have been divinely true but then corrupted as passed from that point into written form (i.e. present day bible). Isn't this the presumptive narrative often cited to invalidate the entire Bible, its underpinnings of wisdom for living, and message of love and redemption? IF we can concede that an Almighty God and Creator of the Universe is capable of all things -- including divinely inspiring man to "transcribe" His message, laws, and word -- why must we presume He would allow His word(s) to be corrupted in the written form? (yes, I know -- because man is fundamentally corrupt. I get that part...) God's Word is incorruptible. This is what we must remember and maintain that faith. C) In my personal view, because we are souls born in the spirit world that can and do exist independently of our human bodies, we are not *primarily* human beings. Our human identity is only a secondary identity. Because of that, the core of Christian theology, which holds that Jesus took human form to indentify with us, and died as one of us, for the salvation of our non-human souls, breaks down. That because some souls never incarnate, and others incarnate from time to time as non-humans, on alien worlds. IOW, our human identity is merely incidental. That being the case, a human sacrifice (Jesus dying on the cross for the salvation of us "humans") no longer makes sense. Again, that's my personal view. I'm sure there are others who do believe in reincarnation but also subscribe to that element of Christian theology. I understand the Gnostic Christians of the first few centuries AD did subscribe to reincarnation until Constantine declared it a heresy (for the purposes of political control of the masses). Plenty here to expound upon... It could be said that we are spirits and souls born in the flesh -- human form (in the image of God.) We ARE indeed "human beings" while living on this earth -- again, [possessing spirits and souls that transcend the flesh. Some souls never "reincarnate" or move on to existing in a celestial form because as promised, many will themselves have chosen either one of TWO destinations for their eternal soul; To be reborn in their celestial, incorruptible form eternally in The Kingdom of God forever as promised, OR in the alternative -- Judgment for rejecting the Savior's redemptive gift of grace, and debt unpaid that re-routes the destination the soul (apart from God.) That is considered the Second Death. OR "Hell": “...furnace of fire…weeping and gnashing of teeth” ~ Matthew 13:50 In any context of the term "Reincarnation," it is totally incompatible with the "Christian" theology which punctuates the destination of the eternal soul once and for all. Either one must embrace Scripture and the Word of God as a matter of faith, OR reject ALL of it. But certainly, all the answers are there. IF we truly seek the truth and open our hearts for the Holy Spirit to imbue that faith.
I believe there is an assertion or rather resumption that NO written word of man or its "evidence" can be trusted as uncorrupted or valid. That ALL history is a lie or subverted. As an aside, on what "evidence" is the theory of "reincarnation" based? This [hypnosis] is akin to brain washing and very cultic. Aren't you concerned someone you don't know is "getting inside" your head and has you in a vulnerable suggestive state? Hypnosis IS a form of brain washing. It works when our "firewall" of consciousness is breached. Moreover, it exposes one's mind and spirit to much vulnerability as this is an "open door" to demonic intrusion and invasion. A matter NOT often discussed.
Newton in his videos and books states people attain the past and present soul world via hypnosis by Newton himself or a trained hypnotist. Am I to conclude you believe his beliefs and others based on testimony of others and not your own experiences?
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)
That's the key point no? He's not trying to have these nice people commit something they know is morally wrong. He is offering 'an' answer which to people answers a lot of their questions without the trappings or concerns of a higher power. Newton is offering people in a post modern world exactly what they want and doing so through hypnosis. I am surprised you are not alarmed by this. In the late 60s people used LSD to reach such "understandings."
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)
You are saying the scriptures are wrong because your understanding of things is different, therefore scriptures must be wrong. I am truly amazed with this assertion. It's the same as a Christian saying "you are wrong because the Bible says don't consult mediums and false prophets." By your reasoning they too would have to be correct. You believe reincarnation is real. Jesus Christ and Paul say no, you have one mortal life and then after you either await the resurrection unto life eternal or eternal punishment. So it's Newton's word against Yeshua of Nazareth. At least as you have presented above. That is why I have not focused our discussion on "either or" but how one in Newton's view, his clients or even you come to your truth claims. Because that is what this about...coming to an understanding, a faith in the truth claims.
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)
#25 a most excellent and logical reply. Good work Bro.
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)
There are many ways to sound kooky. One way is to talk about God. Another is to tell everyone about Jesus. Attempting sail around the world, if it were flat, would be beyond kooky and be absolutely insane. In short, anyone who acts on a faith in something unseen can be perceived as a kook, particularly by those who possess erroneous assumptions about the subject at hand. In regards to reincarnation, it makes no sense to someone who assumes we are primarily human, and/or that souls, if they exist at all, are somehow a byproduct of human conception. But given a scenario where souls are created in the spirit world having nothing to do with human conception, and make up our primary identity, reincarnation becomes a reasonable concept. In my case, reincarnation is one element of many which fit together to present the most beautiful and complete explanation I have ever had for who and what we are, why we are here, and why life is the way it is with all it's hardships and wonder. That complete explanation, and yes, even the beauty of it, exceeds that presented by Christian theology, and appears also to be corroborated by present day observations. So to me, believing in reincarnation is not kooky at all.
Thank you, sir. As if Satan hasn't already booby-trapped man with pitfalls and quicksand in this life, within that "wide" road of deception is a maze designed to bog down and entrap those who sincerely seek the truth. That's where the power of God's mustard seed of faith and Holy Spirit must be called on to help guide them out and back onto the narrow.
On its surface it's the easiest and most beautiful way to help create a happy ending for everyone. But it conveniently omits the issues justice, accountability, and morality. How does it explain why we are here and to what reason and purpose? By whose authority? By whose rationale? It then leads to questions -- BIG questions about our creation AND creator.
Thank you very much. I think I can accurately and honestly say that's been one of my elements throughout life. But if we are willing to concede that God is capable of all things as you say, why does that NOT include the ability to save someone who has died with sin? The Christian answer is that God, capable of all things, is nonetheless bound by his own nature of not tolerating sin in his presence. Or perhaps stated more accurately, sin cannot tolerate God in its presence. In essence then it is not God whom is almighty, but God's nature, because God is bound by his nature... i.e. unable to act upon his own love for all of us because he cannot help himself. Is that not a contradiction? In the theological model derived from Newton's observations, this contradiction does not exist. As for the bible, yes one can have faith that God would simply not allow it to become corrupted. But what would this faith be based upon? The bible itself? That's circular logic. My take: We are not humans which possess souls. That is always how it is stated, and it implies that we are primarily human. Does a glove possess a hand, or a shoe possess a foot? No. we always say you need gloves for your hands, and shoes for your feet. I.e. it's the hands and feet which possess things, not our clothing which possesses us. And it is a soul that possesses a human body. We are souls first, with human bodies as "clothing" of sorts for the soul. We do not "have" souls. We ARE souls, and we HAVE bodies. An important distinction, in my book. I can agree we are created in God's image. I've no problem with that description, but our human bodies are NOT that image. We as souls are that image. Does that not make more sense? I agree with you that reincarnation is not compatible with the core of Christian theology. That is why I did not arrive at my present conclusions lightly. Still, I am not rejecting all aspects of the bible, as I hope I made clear in prior posts. The love Christianity teaches IS real. It's just that it's even better than what Christianity teaches because God never gives up on us even when we (our bodies) die. Also, we are indeed called to love and develop spiritually toward perfection, as the bible states. But with reincarnation, that opportunity becomes endless, as a single lifetime is hardly enough time to overcome a single vice, not to mention many. Is this not a more beautiful setup? Endless love with endless patience? If God is capable of all things as we agree, why would he not have thought of this model and used it? Well, I believe he did! The only thing true about your description: "Either one must embrace Scripture and the Word of God as a matter of faith, OR reject ALL of it." is the notion of whether or not it is, in its present form, the infallible "Word of God". But just because it may not be that does not mean it doesn't possess much truth. It certainly does --I recognize that-- or it would not have survived through the ages. But given my present view of things, I cannot consider it a divinely infallible document. Thank you for your response.
I believe Newton and most therapeutic hypnotists, if not all of them, would disagree with this. For at least this type of hypnosis, one cannot be unwillingly hypnotised, and even under hypnosis, cannot be made to do things they would not do in everyday life. A hypnotised subject is always aware of what's going on and in control. That's the message I get, at least.
That is not a correct conclusion. First, according to his books, Newton's "beliefs" stem from the things his clients have told him while under hypnosis. His first 2 books are written as "case studies" in which he has transcripts of discussions he's had with his clients while they are hypnotised. His approach is very scientific and that's one of the things I really like about him. His books are not simply musings about life that came to him while meditating on a mountaintop or whatever. But to your question, no, I've not been hypnotized myself. Still I do have my own experiences and observations with life in general, and Michael Newton's findings do the best job I've ever found of explaining them, and does so better that Christian theology ever has. That is why I am compelled to subscribe to it.
Evidence can take many forms. Accounts people give of past life recall, under hypnosis or not is "evidence" though not necessarily proof. (Evidence and proof are not the same thing, afterall). But here is a video that presents the most compelling case I know of in favor of reincarnation. If one is to honestly NOT believe in reincarnation, one must have an alternate explanation for this account. What is it? Alternate explanations might be fraud, but a news station would be committing suicide if they falsely reported this. Maybe the family made up the whole thing, but if they did, the sister of the WWII pilot that died would have to be in on it, and also the pilot's crewmates. How likely is it they would be willing to let a family defame the memory of this pilot for their own personal gain? I'd put it at near zero. So to me, fraud cannot explain it. A supernatural explanation might be demons. My problem with that: Demons are always the scapegoat, brought up to explain any unknown that contradicts one's Christian beliefs. Seems to me a convenient way of ignoring things. Not that it can't be that, but such an explanation cannot be proven. All in all, evidence like the above should be considered, not in a vacuum, but together with all other evidence, such as Newton's findings as well as those of many other authors on the subject. To me, shutting eyes to evidence that contradicts our beliefs is not an honest way to go about things. I should add though that reincarnation is not just a present day concept. It dates back thousands of years in many cultures, so some evidence the theory of reincarnation is based upon must also be very ancient.
Your description is not consistent with his stated purpose and mode of operation. As I said, he began his practice as an atheist and was brought by his clients into the realm of past life and between life regression. He claims he lets each client express what they perceive in their recall of both past and between life stages, without imparting into them what he wants them to perceive. At least that is what he claims. In his books he does make occasional references to how his own understandings are corrected by clients that say unexpected things, which is characteristic of an honest search. Perhaps Newton is a fraud. But if he has/had a fraudulent agenda, then #1) he's done an ingenius job coming up with the portrait of the spirit world that he has, and #2) no one has yet made any point to discredit him.
As opposed to saying the scriptures must be right in spite of contradicting direct observations? My point is, how do we know the scriptures are right? If we start from the premise they are divine, then yes, you'll reach all the conclusions you have. You've stated before a faith based on fulfilled prophecies. Okay, that's evidence, but is it proof? It's not simply what Newton (and others) have written, but how it fits so well in explaining observations, like the video above. My own observations at least. I most respectfully correct: The bible says Jesus and Paul said these things. But did they really? Obviously you have complete faith they not only said this but had the divine authority to say it. You base your faith in evidence in the form of fulfilled prophecies that the bible is divine. I, on the other hand, have evidence it is not, one piece in the form of the video above. Can either of us prove our positions? Probably not. But my views are not based solely on Newton's findings. I hope that's understood. My best...
Actually it doesn't. All 3 of those elements are covered in this model. Morality, being kind and fair, not to mention loving others is an offshoot of spiritual development and progress. (I should add that Newton claims that souls which progress far enough eventually stop incarnating, and continue their progress in the spirit world, so that is our goal). On justice and accountability, Newton reports that those who live a life harming others will voluntarily choose future lives in which they will suffer just as they have made others to suffer. This for the purpose of understanding and empathizing with those whom they have harmed. The lives we live were chosen by us from the spirit world, knowing in advance what difficulties, if any, we would face. So the points you list are indeed covered. We are here to develop and advance spiritually. The earth is a spiritual gymnasium. You go to the gym to work out and sweat, and when you return, you are stronger and healthier, and you keep taking trips to the gym to get better and better. Well, the earth is a spiritual gymnasium where we come to work out spiritually, and we do so by suffering hardships, difficulty and even tragedy, and the test of our strength is how we respond. Do we hurt others, flee and wallow in self-pity, or do we rise up and continue loving and helping others charitably? So here again, Newton presents an extremely practical explanation not just for life and it's hardships but for the existence of the entire universe. This as opposed to the Christian/biblical explanation which is, quite obtusely, "the glory of God". And then I ask, wouldn't Newton's explanation glorify God much more than the Christian explanation?
Might I add that you are giving Newton and his case studies the benefit of the doubt where you and many others hold the testimony of Jesus Christ and His apostles to a much higher if not unreasonable standard? For example most atheists and agnostics throw out the historical evidence for Christ because Christians are doing most of the writing. However Roman historians are taken at face value without flinching. Jesus Christ needs contemporaneous historical accounts about Him but Caesar, Homer, and Plato do not according to the relativistic standards of atheists today. They trust the copying of Julius Caesar's Gaulic Wars from 1st Century fragments in the 10th century by Catholic monks in a monastery, but not the Christian manuscripts of Matthew and 7 other separate authors. Everything we know of the early Caesars is lost to papyrus decaying. In fact the earliest and most copied manuscripts from the 1st century are from NT scriptures. So do you see the double standard? Newton comes no where close to the truth claims of Christianity. He or one of his therapists sits in a room with one person at a time. Newton collects the information, controls access to the data and concludes all the experiences are similar if not identical, and done with the aid of hypnosis. If Christians claimed such one on one experiences they would be laughed out of a room. Jesus did miracles in public in front of hundreds and in some cases thousands. Even doing miracles some rejected Him because they did not like what He had to say. They did not want to submit to The Son of God who came not only in the flesh, in the word but with power. Jesus Christ confirmed His truth claims with the Power of God. That is why people today deny the historicity of Scriptures. Because if they admit they are historical, they can't deny the attested to truth claims. And therefore will have to admit they are rejecting the Son of God as did those who denied Him no matter how many miracles they witnessed. So frankly Newton does not come close to validating his truth claims. Infomercial type testimonials may be convincing enough for Pharaohs magicians who could match some of Moses' miracles but not all of them. When Newton or any of those under his hypnosis can feed 5,000 with a few fish and a loaf of bread, calm a raging sea with a command, raise a man dead for four days to vibrant life (no walking dead zombie there) and after dying rise from the dead three days later the same person in a glorified body...let me know. It is up to us to figure these issues out. Do we put our trust in a fellow flawed human being or the Man from Galilee who proclaimed He was the Son of God and One with The Father? Your posts show me you are a seeker of truth with a kind heart. The very same type of heart Jesus plucked up to follow Him on earth.
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)
One alternate explanation could be Carl Jung's theory of a collective unconscious, among many. And you do not strike me as a zealous sort at all, but the conversation reminds me of a humorous event years ago. I was attending a lecture by an Indian Orthodox Bishop, who in part of his discourse stated that much of what happens to us after death is a Mystery. A New Ager approached him after the lecture, and stated that surely since he was from India that he believed in reincarnation. He again restated that much of what happens to us is a mystery, and she went hysterical -- shouting that reincarnation is a "fact" and that Christians don't accept it because of their dogmatism. ;P Anyway, Jung's model is just one example of an alternate explanation for experiences such as featured in the video or the phenomena of "idiot savants" -- people with severe mental disabilities who display some amazing gift and knowledge of a very specialized sort. On the subject of hypnosis, while I would agree with you that it is not some dangerous Svengali type of mind-control, studies have shown that it has some inherent limitations for scientific use. You are correct that people cannot be compelled to do something that they would object to doing in normal consciousness. In my youth I took several years of psychology courses in college and one of the demonstrations bolsters you in this but also presents a weakness too. The professor was trying to demonstrate the above -- that hypnotized people will not do something that they morally object to -- so after he hypnotized a number of student volunteers, he asked them to do a few minor silly things -- which they all did. Then he asked them to completely undress in front of the class, and almost all of them froze and took no action. One girl, however, began to comply with his request. Of course, he immediately told her to stop, and after bringing them all out of hypnosis it was learned from her that she was paying her way through college by working as a stripper. So in your own examples, if people do not have a moral objection to the idea of reincarnation, they can "remember" things even if it was not really the case. In part of our classes, the professor discussed some of the benefits and drawbacks to hypnosis for information gathering. In police work, hypnosis is normally only allowed if other avenues for gathering leads has been exhausted. One valid use has been to use it to try to help a crime victim remember something like a briefly glimpsed car license plate. If they remember a number, that hypnotically gathered evidence would not be admissible in court -- the only benefit would be if police trace the license number and discover other evidence when investigating the owner of the car. A key problem with using hypnosis for information gathering is that one of the main traits of someone under hypnosis is that they are highly suggestible. One example of where this can lead to horrible results was the hysteria over "Satanic Ritual Abuse" during the 1980's. With that phenomena, we had the unusual pairing of fundamentalist Christians with psychotherapists. Children taken in for therapy would "remember" being subjected to horrible abuse at the hands of an organized and widespread conspiracy of Satanists. The only problem was that further investigation showed that the overwhelming majority of the accusations were false, and innocent people had been accused of horrible things based upon hypnotically gathered "evidence" that when the physical evidence was investigated proved that the allegations were false. As a result, psychology even now has a term for the phenomena -- false memory syndrome. www.britannica.com/EBchec...171/false-memory-syndrome In terms of Mr. Newton's studies and many of the people who "remember past lives", it is entirely possible that the overwhelming majority of them have no negative ulterior motive for their experiences. But just as with the SRA cases, sometimes people are drawn to fantastic scenarios when under hypnotic suggestion. In the SRA cases, "secular" therapists were no longer treating people for mundane things like eating disorders or sexual disfunction -- no, they were saving society from a band of crazed Satanists sacrificing babies right under our unknowing noses! And likewise with hypnotically guided "past life regression", people gain things that they like. They get an explanation, a new world view. In many cases, they get to feel like that in the past they were someone heroic and powerful. The video featured a child "remembering" that he was a WWII fighter pilot! What young boy would not want to be able to believe that was their own history? I have yet to ever meet someone claiming to have remembered a past life where they remember being something like a garbage collector or a drug addict. They are almost always something exciting and glamorous, something that the average person in a humdrum life wishes they could be. Anyway, thank you for thought-provoking discussion, I've enjoyed it and I enjoy reading your posts.
Thanks for sharing your experiences and education on the topic discussion. I went to college with a guy who would complain of shooting pain in his back in twelve spots. He figured he was Caesar in a past life. Of course none of us believed him as in ROTC he failed miserably in tactics 101.
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)
Here's a video of a researcher on the subject of false memories.
I went to college with a guy who would complain of shooting pain in his back in twelve spots. He figured he was Caesar in a past life. Of course none of us believed him as in ROTC he failed miserably in tactics 101. Indeed, LOL. And to expand my earlier response. It would be entirely plausible to me for the other people involved in the interactions with that child in that video to innocently plant false memories. Why? For the parents, their child is no longer just an average kid. Nope, he is now extra special! For the child himself, well as said above, now he is transformed into a WWII fighter pilot, a hero! For the family and friends of the dead airman: Their loved one is with them once again, they feel confirmation that death is just a phase and that someday they will be with the folks that they love again. If anything, the friends and family have the strongest motivation to inadvertently ask leading questions that could guide the child into giving "amazing" answers. I'm sorry, but the mom trying to suggest that a young boy would have no knowledge of WWII just because he was homeschooled is ridiculous. WWII was a major event in our nation and the world's history. Tons of movies, television programs, and even kids cartoons and video games (such as the one which the child was shown playing) show things about it. So at least in my view, it is entirely possible that folks inadvertently provided guiding questions -- or even if the child really did have supernatural knowledge of past events, models like Jung's can provide alternative explanations without it necessarily having to have been reincarnation.
Hello Orthodoxa, Thanks for your contributions and good words. I appreciate reading your comments as well. I've watched the video. I'm quite aware myself, I think, of my own limitations in accurately recalling events. I suspect if I'm ever called as a witness in a trial I'm probably going to disappoint just about anyone who asks me any questions about things I saw only one time. In the case of James Leininger, who recalled being a WWII pilot, many details of what he claimed to recall were accurate. There are a number of other videos on youtube that go into more detail in his case. The name of the ship James Houston (the pilot's name) served on (and there were hundreds of light carriers in service in the Pacific by war's end), the ship commander, the names of crewmates who died in the war. As a child he knew the difference between a drop tank and a bomb which his parents did not. (A drop tank looks like a bomb but is an external fuel tank dropped from the plane when empty). He also knew the F-4 Corsair had a problem with getting flat tires, which turned out to be accurate which is something I never new even though I was always had an interest in WWII aircraft, so that is a WWII detail the modern public isn't even aware of. There is even a claim of him recognizing by face and identifying by name the veterans Huston served with at a reunion for the crew of the carrier Huston served on. It would seem to me facial recognition is something that goes beyond what false memory implantation could explain. I'm confident all of these things would at least rule out *innocent* false memory implant by the parents of James Leininger, making fraud in the case of the family the next candidate explanation, with the sister and crewmates of Houston being the victims of deception, and acting on false memories. My view: This would involve the parents setting up their 6-7 year old kid to carry out the deception. Granted the kid would be innocent, but even so it is a real stretch to suggest, not that there are parents out there that would attempt such a thing as regrettably I'm sure there are, but that such an effort would actually succeed, and not only with a single person, but with 2 and probably at least a half dozen more. I can't imagine strangers, including WWII vets who've seen combat, upon being told that a 7 year old kid remembers them from many decades ago, not putting the kid to the test by asking open ended questions for the chance to be amazed by an accurate answer. With all of this... no, I can't see false memory implant being a reasonable explanation for James Leininger. At best I'd say theoretically possible but in reality nigh impossible.
Okay, now you're putting me on trial! :^) First, am I doing this? As opposed to accepting what the bible claims Jesus said as (quite literally) gospel without applying any critical review? I understand and accept that you have come to this table totally convinced that is the case, but the bible doesn't even claim to contain any of his direct writings. The gospels are, as I know you must concede, claimed to be "according to" Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, not Jesus himself. There are minor inconsistencies between them, such as whether Jesus served the bread or the wine first at the last supper. Matthew and Luke list them in opposite orders. Is not such a detail significant in considering today's bible divinely accurate? We're obviously starting from a different set of conceded facts. That may make discussion fruitless. A difference may be that no one considers alleged writings of Ceasar and other ancient non-Christians to be divinely inspired. It's accepted "as is", as a personal perception of things from an ancient time. Studying them exposes not just what may have happened but also bias on the part of the writer. I'm confident the ancient gospel versions, such as the dead sea scrolls, are given the same weight and considered for their historical value in the same way. They are just not considered divine by secular historians. What test or corroboration can we apply or find today to verify the events that took place back then, and/or the theology presented? Is there any, or is it correct to base faith only on the results of studying these documents, because one ancient writing corroborates the prophecies of a more ancient writing (frankly without knowing if the later writer was already aware of the more ancient writings when the more recent document was penned)? Honestly, not much beyond the writings themselves, in my view. And what test or corroboration applies to Newton's work? We have the video above of little James claim of reincarnation. We have people with unexplained phobias, which Newton (and other independent authors such as Brian Weiss) claim often stem from traumatic past-life events (and treatable in that context). We have accounts of child prodigies, young children who have remarkable, advanced abilities to play golf, shoot pool and play piano. And of course we have accounts of past life recall that are verified as accurate, granted to various degrees, not just by Newton but by numerous others. Weiss even cites a case of two independent clients corroborating each other's past life accounts dating back to the Roman empire age. So what we have is evidence that corroborates Newton's claims. And the reason I cite Newton more than others is because Newton's (claimed) speciality is not so much past life recall, but between life recall, which presents a spiritual/theological model that makes an incredible and in my view an ingenius amount of sense, quite frankly more sense (to me) than the bible does. It does that because we are loved MORE in this model. Because life and the universe now has a practical purpose beyond "glorifying God" through something akin to a wonderful divine painting, because people are not condemned to an eternity of indescribable suffering because they never heard of the gospel, or committed a single sin such as in the hypothetical example I gave earlier of a 3 or 4-year old girl who disobeys her mom by taking a cookie from a cookie jar 5 minutes before dying in a earthquake. This is God we're talking about! God for whom you even say there is nothing that is impossible. Except of course saving a soul who dies with sin. That is the one and only thing even the Almighty God cannot do!! That in spite of the fact that he loves this soul even more than the entire universe and he knew from the beginning what would happen?!?! So he arranged all this so that so many souls he loves dearly would not just perish but suffer? Wouldn't that mean that he really doesn't love the soul as much as he loves his own plan? Redleg, tell me where the logic is in this? The portrait of the spirit world given to us by Newton is *superior* than that given to us in the bible, by every logical reasoning, because everything falls into place so much better. I'm sure that's a hard thing for you and any devout Christian to consider. It was hard for me. But if we are indeed called to be strong in our honesty, which I believe we are regardless of whether the biblical or Newton model is correct, then it's something no honest man or woman can shirk from, even if its from fear of eternal damnation. Why? Because fear is NEVER a valid reason for faith. If it were, then converting to Islam when a knife is put to your throat would be acceptable. Even the bible calls us children, but what do children do? They GROW UP. And under Newton's model, that's what we are doing. Is that not more beautiful than the one life/one chance/no need to grow presentation given in the bible? As I mentioned in my first post on this thread, Newton's model does not mean supernatural events cannot occur, such as those cited in the bible. To the contrary, we as souls will develop supernatural powers (powers natural to the soul) as we develop and grow stronger, according to Newton. There are people with various strengths walking the earth today just as long ago, though generally, anyone walking the the earth is pretty dang weak or we wouldn't be here. Thank you! I do appreciate your taking the time to converse and consider my views. I am enjoying this challenging discussion.
My humble and sincere apologies as I did sound like a prosecutor in my last post. I must have forgot this is LF and not LP or FR:)
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)
Thanks for the friendly and thought-provoking discussion. I would still maintain that in my view it would be entirely possible for the child to unconsciously absorb quite a lot of trivia about WWII without any sort of attempts at fraud by his parents or anyone else. WWII is not an obscure subject. A large portion of the American populace had members of their families involved in it. It is an extremely popular subject in television, movies, cartoons, books, and video games. I'll give just one example from my own childhood. My dad fought in WWII. He was badly wounded in the Battle of the Bulge. My brothers and I kidded him during our teenage years because it was extremely common for us to encounter him watching yet another WWII documentary or other program on TV. It was cathartic for him, which we understood later. But anyway, just for one example of very detailed information in an unlikely source -- one time I picked up a WWII FPS video game -- Medal of Honor: European Assault. I saw that it had a level in it that was at the exact location where my dad had fought, so I waited until he was home from work to play it. An amazing thing happened. Electronic Arts, the maker of the game, had digitally mapped out the Belgian city of Krinkelt so that it was an extremely accurate depiction of the village at the time of the German attack. My dad was literally able to tell me in advance which way to go to reach various landmarks in the game, such as the American HQ. As you can see, the game makers also intersperse actual WWII news footage in the game as well. So a child who had that particular game would be able to amaze a veteran of WWII, who had fought in the Battle of the Bulge, by accurately describing a pretty obscure little village in Belgium. He would "know" many trivial things about that battle. In the video that you posted, we literally see the child playing a WWII flight simulator. As mentioned above, a lot of these games are packed with very accurate information -- after all, the game makers were aware that many of their customers would likely have had a family member that would know first hand what things were like, and I'm sure that it helps them sell more games if they make them accurate in many details (aside from the genre fiction of a video game where you can get magically healed from injuries and just keep on fighting. ;) ) A HUGE part of my personal enjoyment of the game that I played was a result of it being so accurate in it's digital environment. Before that event playing it with my dad, like most vets of that era, he had not discussed hardly anything about his wartime experiences. When he was watching the game with wide eyes and guiding me toward the next landmark that I needed to go to, he opened up and long after I had put the game down talked for a long time about what it had been like. And that is from just a single video game! Like I said earlier, there is a wealth of information out there about WWII, it does not surprise me in the least that a young boy fascinated by the subject would learn a lot of minor details about it. I know many kids in my family and family friends who have learned amazing things about it themselves. One darling little family friend was taken by her dad to a flight history museum in Colorado that had a display about the Flying Tigers. She had the amazing experience while there of an elderly veteran pointing to one of the photographs in the display and showing his own face from back then. He spent a good amount of time telling her many details about his experience. So again I would maintain that there is no need to believe that fraud was involved. A small child could do something as simple as play a game for a few months and absorb some incredibly detailed information that could amaze a veteran who had actually been in the conflict. Additionally, if you have interacted with small children of that age, you will know firsthand that they very often have great difficulty in distinguishing the difference between pretend fantasy and real life. So is it possible that the little boy remembered a "past life"? Yes, that is one possibility. But it is also possible that he just developed false memories that were reinforced by adults who quite innocently very much wanted the "past life" scenario to be true.
I can understand your criticism of a theology where God is seemingly bound by necessity. But I would caution you that the viewpoint with which you disagree (as do I) is not a universally accepted viewpoint among Christians. Here is an article by Alexander Kalomiros concerning the very issue which you raise. In my view, his preface is perhaps overly broad in that he tends to paint most Protestants with the more extreme views of die-hard Calvinists, but his exposition of the Orthodox view of God and sin are quite good, IMHO. Orthodox believe in original sin, not original guilt. If an ancestor of yours poisoned the well that provides the water for you to drink, you are not guilty of his crime at all. But nevertheless you are left with the tragic consequences of the train of events that he set in motion. That water will eventually kill you too... unless of course you make use of the antidote freely given by Christ.
Thanks I will read it.
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)
Good stuff to discuss....been follow the convo. I'll weigh in tomorrow.... FWIW, for some reason, my brother claimed he's fought (and died) at Iwo Jima....(about a half hour after watching the movie, 'Sands of Iwo Jima' when we were kids) lol
That's about it in a nutshell.
Comments (54 - 96) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#15. To: CZ82, TooConservative (#13)
#16. To: pinguinite (#0)
#17. To: redleghunter (#15)
#18. To: A K A Stone (#0)
World News Daily Report is a news and political satire web publication, which may or may not use real names, often in semi-real or mostly fictitious ways. All news articles contained within worldnewsdailyreport.com are fiction, and presumably fake news.
The Vindolanda tablets are the oldest surviving handwritten documents in Britain. They are also probably the best source of information about life on Hadrian's Wall.
#19. To: nolu chan (#18)
#20. To: A K A Stone (#16)
ping
#21. To: Pinguinite, A K A Stone, Don, liberator, out damned spot (#20)
#22. To: redleghunter (#21)
Did you obtain your understanding of the life between life from personal hypnosis or a trained Newton hypnosis?
How different are Newton's beliefs and methods to those practiced by Hollywood actress Shirley MacLaine?
I read some of Newton's website. Frankly it is nothing new from the New Age era of the 70s and 80s. What he has done was marry the beliefs of human reincarnation, New Age mysticism and use hypnosis as a method to access past experiences.
I also offer a concern of hypnosis. People voluntarily submit to hypnosis to stop smoking, lose weight etc. In such cases a person is willingly allowing someone to alter their behavior or thoughts whether it be to not pick up a pack of smokes or not eat that donut at midnight. Aren't you concerned someone you don't know is "getting inside" your head and has you in a vulnerable suggestive state?
Also, what evidence can you provide the canonical scriptures are not the Word of God. You used "cannot be" which is an assertion and not based on evidence.
#23. To: Pinguinite (#20)
A) Reincarnation does occur, in almost certain contradiction of Hebrews 9:27.
#24. To: CZ82, redleghunter (#17)
#25. To: Pinguinite (#20)
Well, satire or not, the theological model I subscribe to does not mean Jesus never lived and performed miracles. There may well have been a man named Jesus (or whatever the ancient version of his name was as it certainly wouldn't have been spelled in our present day alphabet), walking the earth, performing miracles and spreading a message of good will, and upsetting the establishment in the process.
“....where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched”~ Mark 9:48
“...he will be tormented with fire and brimstone”~ Revelation 14:10
#26. To: redleghunter, A K A Stone, Don, out damned spot (#21)
What evidence can you provide the canonical scriptures are not the Word of God. You used "cannot be" which is an assertion and not based on evidence.
#27. To: Pinguinite (#22)
#28. To: Pinguinite (#22)
My understanding is that hypnosis cannot make someone do something that they are not ultimately willing to do, like jump off a cliff.
#29. To: Pinguinite (#22)
But perhaps Hebrews 9:27 doesn't quite say that, or perhaps reincarnation does not occur. If either of those are the case, then the bible could still be the "Word of God". I'm of the mind, however, that the passage is indisputably saying we get one life. I'm also of the mind that reincarnation is a real phenomenon, ergo....
#30. To: Liberator (#25)
#31. To: A K A Stone (#23)
To be honest it makes you sound kooky.
#32. To: redleghunter (#30)
(Edited)
#33. To: Pinguinite (#31)
(Edited)
In my case, reincarnation is one element of many which fit together to present the most beautiful and complete explanation I have ever had for who and what we are, why we are here, and why life is the way it is with all it's hardships and wonder.
#34. To: Liberator (#25)
First, let me say that I appreciate your deep thought, intellectual honesty, and search for the truth.
Isn't this the presumptive narrative often cited to invalidate the entire Bible, its underpinnings of wisdom for living, and message of love and redemption? IF we can concede that an Almighty God and Creator of the Universe is capable of all things -- including divinely inspiring man to "transcribe" His message, laws, and word -- why must we presume He would allow His word(s) to be corrupted in the written form? (yes, I know -- because man is fundamentally corrupt. I get that part...) God's Word is incorruptible. This is what we must remember and maintain that faith.
It could be said that we are spirits and souls born in the flesh -- human form (in the image of God.) We ARE indeed "human beings" while living on this earth -- again, [possessing spirits and souls that transcend the flesh.
In any context of the term "Reincarnation," it is totally incompatible with the "Christian" theology which punctuates the destination of the eternal soul once and for all. Either one must embrace Scripture and the Word of God as a matter of faith, OR reject ALL of it. But certainly, all the answers are there. IF we truly seek the truth and open our hearts for the Holy Spirit to imbue that faith.
#35. To: Liberator (#26)
Hypnosis IS a form of brain washing. It works when our "firewall" of consciousness is breached.
#36. To: redleghunter (#27)
Newton in his videos and books states people attain the past and present soul world via hypnosis by Newton himself or a trained hypnotist. Am I to conclude you believe his beliefs and others based on testimony of others and not your own experiences?
#37. To: Liberator (#26)
As an aside, on what "evidence" is the theory of "reincarnation" based?
#38. To: redleghunter (#28)
He is offering 'an' answer which to people answers a lot of their questions without the trappings or concerns of a higher power. Newton is offering people in a post modern world exactly what they want and doing so through hypnosis.
#39. To: redleghunter (#29)
You are saying the scriptures are wrong because your understanding of things is different, therefore scriptures must be wrong.
I am truly amazed with this assertion. It's the same as a Christian saying "you are wrong because the Bible says don't consult mediums and false prophets." By your reasoning they too would have to be correct.
You believe reincarnation is real. Jesus Christ and Paul say no, you have one mortal life and then after you either await the resurrection unto life eternal or eternal punishment. So it's Newton's word against Yeshua of Nazareth. At least as you have presented above.
#40. To: Liberator (#33)
On its surface it's the easiest and most beautiful way to help create a happy ending for everyone. But it conveniently omits the issues justice, accountability, and morality.
How does it explain why we are here and to what reason and purpose? By whose authority? By whose rationale? It then leads to questions -- BIG questions about our creation AND creator.
#41. To: Pinguinite, liberator, A K A Stone (#36)
First, according to his books, Newton's "beliefs" stem from the things his clients have told him while under hypnosis. His first 2 books are written as "case studies" in which he has transcripts of discussions he's had with his clients while they are hypnotised. His approach is very scientific and that's one of the things I really like about him. His books are not simply musings about life that came to him while meditating on a mountaintop or whatever.
#42. To: Pinguinite, redleghunter, Liberator (#37)
But here is a video that presents the most compelling case I know of in favor of reincarnation. If one is to honestly NOT believe in reincarnation, one must have an alternate explanation for this account. What is it?
#43. To: Orthodoxa (#42)
The video featured a child "remembering" that he was a WWII fighter pilot! What young boy would not want to be able to believe that was their own history? I have yet to ever meet someone claiming to have remembered a past life where they remember being something like a garbage collector or a drug addict. They are almost always something exciting and glamorous, something that the average person in a humdrum life wishes they could be.
#44. To: Pinguinite, redleghunter, Liberator (#42)
#45. To: redleghunter, Pinguinite, Liberator (#43)
Thanks for sharing your experiences and education on the topic discussion.
#46. To: Orthodoxa (#44)
#47. To: redleghunter (#41)
Might I add that you are giving Newton and his case studies the benefit of the doubt where you and many others hold the testimony of Jesus Christ and His apostles to a much higher if not unreasonable standard?
For example most atheists and agnostics throw out the historical evidence for Christ because Christians are doing most of the writing. However Roman historians are taken at face value without flinching. Jesus Christ needs contemporaneous historical accounts about Him but Caesar, Homer, and Plato do not according to the relativistic standards of atheists today. They trust the copying of Julius Caesar's Gaulic Wars from 1st Century fragments in the 10th century by Catholic monks in a monastery, but not the Christian manuscripts of Matthew and 7 other separate authors. Everything we know of the early Caesars is lost to papyrus decaying. In fact the earliest and most copied manuscripts from the 1st century are from NT scriptures.
So do you see the double standard? Newton comes no where close to the truth claims of Christianity. He or one of his therapists sits in a room with one person at a time. Newton collects the information, controls access to the data and concludes all the experiences are similar if not identical, and done with the aid of hypnosis. If Christians claimed such one on one experiences they would be laughed out of a room. Jesus did miracles in public in front of hundreds and in some cases thousands. Even doing miracles some rejected Him because they did not like what He had to say. They did not want to submit to The Son of God who came not only in the flesh, in the word but with power. Jesus Christ confirmed His truth claims with the Power of God.
That is why people today deny the historicity of Scriptures. Because if they admit they are historical, they can't deny the attested to truth claims. And therefore will have to admit they are rejecting the Son of God as did those who denied Him no matter how many miracles they witnessed.
So frankly Newton does not come close to validating his truth claims. Infomercial type testimonials may be convincing enough for Pharaohs magicians who could match some of Moses' miracles but not all of them. When Newton or any of those under his hypnosis can feed 5,000 with a few fish and a loaf of bread, calm a raging sea with a command, raise a man dead for four days to vibrant life (no walking dead zombie there) and after dying rise from the dead three days later the same person in a glorified body...let me know.
Your posts show me you are a seeker of truth with a kind heart. The very same type of heart Jesus plucked up to follow Him on earth.
#48. To: Pinguinite (#47)
#49. To: Pinguinite (#46)
#50. To: Pinguinite, redleghunter (#47)
#51. To: Orthodoxa (#50)
#52. To: Orthodoxa, redleghunter, Pinguinite (#45)
#53. To: redleghunter, Pinguinite (#29)
You believe reincarnation is real. Jesus Christ and Paul say no, you have one mortal life and then after you either await the resurrection unto life eternal or eternal punishment. So it's Newton's word against Yeshua of Nazareth. At least as you have presented above.
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]