lørdag 30. mars 2013

Nr. 478: A tepid, proud and self-righteous Christianity is more offense to God, and He will not admit it!

Nr. 478:

A tepid, proud and self-righteous Christianity is more offense to God, and He will not admit it!

There are shepherds of the church of God which has the largest and most important responsibility in the church today. Morality and Ethics in the Christian message is something that never goes out of "fashion" of God when he examined says that without holiness we will not see God! When it appears to me almost incomprehensible how Christianity in Norway can both set up at Vision Norway where Pastor Jan Hanvold both driver with heresy, living in sin and is greedy. He is what the Bible describes as a false prophet, how can than then have something to do with him is a testimony that Christianity is deceived, misled and controlled by Satan. Scripture says that if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch. Illustration shows Evangelist and Dr. Emanuel Minos who provide in more fake so-called "Lord's Witnesses" such as January Aage Torp, Jan Hanvold, Ulf Ekman, etc. Let us take away from Emanuel Minos, he is a blind leader who leads other blind, where they all are in danger of ending in disaster.

Joh. Obvious. 3. 15 I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot, I wish you were cold or hot! 16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.

Ezekiel 34 2 Son of man Prophesy against the shepherds of Israel, prophesy and say to them, to the shepherds: Thus says the Lord God of Israel: Woe to the shepherds of Israel who feed themselves! Is it not the shepherds feed the flocks? 3 Fat ether I, with the wool clothe yourselves the fat butcher I; herd keeper I do not. 4 The weak you have not strengthened, the sick you have not healed, and the broken you have not connected, and the strayed you have not brought back, the lost you have not called on, but with violence and hardness have ye ruled over them.

Ten (10) characteristic of a lukewarm and apostate Christianity, Christianity in Norway and the western world has all the characteristics of it. Here the lukewarmness of Laodicea as an introduction:

In Laodicea had no fresh drinking water, but were provided from two aqueducts, fresh and cold mountain water fa Colosse and hot, mineral-rich spa water of Hierapolis. Before both sources reached Laodicea was lukewarm, however, they become affordable and undrinkable. Jesus uses the image understandable to the citizens of the town of Laodicea (Revelation 3.15 to 16) to explain how their indifference impossible did communion with Him, though He wanted a close relative (to spew something out, you must have drunk it !).

1) Feature number one for a lukewarm Christianity will always be that one is not careful SIN in the leadership and among the shepherds.

What led Jesus to the cross was sin and heresy among the leadership and the shepherds of Israel. Had it not been for the opposition and contempt Jesus had met there, as he had never finished on the Cross. How is it today too, leadership and shepherds of the church is a sure sign of the spiritual temperature of the church. As it appears to me, then shepherds of God church in eager and fervent in spirit, but lukewarm and groggy.

Rooms 12:11 Be not lukewarm in your zeal, be ardent in spirit, serve the Lord!

2) In a lukewarm Christianity things should be claptrap and not specific. In God is the opposite.

I fucked by the Christian Norway who contact regarding my view such on divorce and remarriage, and that I take "the goat horn" and mention who this is that even takes the liberty to marry again after a break up as preachers and pastors. I NEVER mention any individual Christian, but only and always the so-called SHEPHERDS THAT IS MARRIED, NEVER MORE! But is it good enough? Not for the lukewarm and apostate, they will never hear someone who is concrete and as thus have to deal with, but they ignore all smooth all the time. Jesus was tangible, it made him incorrectly and querulans among the apostate leadership of his time.

Joh 7:30 They sought therefore to take him: but no man laid hands on him, because his hour was not yet come. Joh 10:39 Therefore they sought again to take him: but he escaped out of their hand.

3) In a lukewarm church is not balance and holistic preaching. We see today that the homosexual person to be, and that's exactly right. But what about all the other sins? It will not even mention or relate to. When I know that eg. a Christian preacher as Jan Hanvold who himself has said that he is to blame for his many adulteries, but still holding on. When the train is gone for me, and sure duck more for the Lord. That there are nuances here, yes. But when something is so incredibly obvious, but it still will retain and develop. Then I do nothing more than that the Norwegian Christianity is apostate and lukewarm today, in 2013, as of this writing. As long than not confronting sin.

Psalm 119:160 The sum of Your word is truth, and forever is all your righteous law firm.

4) The world standard is the standard in God's church. The world has a standard, and the Church of God another. When there is a difference, and the world will characterize the church and the church does not characterize the world. Then Christianity and the church of God has been lukewarm.

Complain 1:10 enemy laid hands on all her treasures, for she saw pagan nations enter her sanctuary, those you had forbidden to enter your assembly.

5) A lukewarm church will always neglect, ridicule and do not understand those who went before. They'll think about themselves that they have gone further than they really come, therefore they need eye ointment. They think of themselves something they are not exactly like the church in Laodicea.

Joh. Obvious. 3. 14 And to the angel of the church in Laodicea: this he says the Amen, the faithful and true witness, ophavet of God's creation: 15 I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot, I wish you were cold or hot! 16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. 17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased abundance and need of nothing, and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked: 18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou may become rich, and white garments, that you may clothe thee in them and the shame of thy nakedness not be revealed, and eye-salve to anoint your eyes with, so that you can see! 19 All those I love, I rebuke and chasten I: be zealous therefore, and repent thee! 20 Behold, I stand at the door and knock, if anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with me. 21 He who overcomes, to him will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame and sat down with my Father on his throne. 22 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches!

6) A lukewarm church will not understand that they live in a spiritual sleep. They think that they are active, "fiery" and wholeheartedly. While they really do not know trouble, sick of sin both their own and others' lives. They do not have the sumtomene that they are awake, but they sleep.

Efes. 5. 14 Wherefore he saith, Awake, O sleeper, and arise from the dead, and Christ will shine for you.

7) A lukewarm church always feel embarrassed over the details, little things and what may seem insignificant. It's like a gear, the little tags make it go right. So it is in the spiritual realm, there is not a thing of the word of God is immaterial and that we should not ignore.

Matt 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or one tittle pass from the law till all is done. Luk 4:17 p.m. but before heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law shall not apply.

8) A lukewarm church will not be a prophetic course. They will "prophesy" always false and not correct! False prophecy will also be relieved of a coming apostasy. A promise of apostasy would rather be relieved by over upcoming revival. The prophecies will not strike.

5 Genesis 13 1. That is until a prophet in your midst, or who have dreams, and he warns thee a sign or a wonder, 2 and it really happen or characters under which he spoke to you about, saying, Let us go after other gods - such that you do not know - and let us serve them, 3 you shall not listen to the prophet's words or the man who had the dream, for the Lord your God is testing you to know whether ye love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 The Lord your God you shall follow, and him shall ye fear, his commandments you shall keep, and His voice shall hear, and to him shall you serve, and him shall ye preserve. 5 But the prophet, or one who had the dream shall be put to death, because he incite rebellion against the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt and redeemed you out of slavery, and because he wanted to lead you away from the path that the Lord your God has commanded you to walk: so shalt thou put away evil from your midst. 6 If your brother, your mother's son, or your son or your daughter or your wife in your bosom, or your friend, who you love as your own soul - if any of these lures thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods - such as you and your fathers have known, 7 gods of the peoples who live around you, whether near by you or far from you, from one end of the earth to the other - 8 you shall not consent and not listen to him, you should not save him and not have compassion on him, and not hide him: 9 But you shall kill him, you shall be first who raises his hand against him to kill him, and afterwards the hand of all the people the same. 10 And thou shalt stone him, so that he dies, because he sought to lead you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, the house of bondage, 11, and all Israel shall hear, and fear, and no more will be made so wickedness among you. 12 Hear you say about some of the cities which the Lord your God is giving you to live in: 13 It's been the wicked men of your midst, and they have seduced the inhabitants of their city, saying, Let us go and serve other gods - such that I do not know - 14 then you shall investigate and search and ask diligently after, and is it true, it is certainly that this abomination is done in your midst, 15 then you shall smite the inhabitants of that city to death with sword: you shall utterly destroy it and everything in it is, also feet where you will turn to the sword. 16 Everything changed you take where you should collect the middle of the square, and you shall burn the city and all the booty you have taken, with fire as a whole burnt offering to the LORD your God, and it shall be a gravel pile for all times, it should not build up anymore. 17 Not the least of the devoted things shall be suspended upon your hand, that the Lord will let his fierce anger, and you gracious and have compassion on you and make you numerous, as he has sworn to your fathers, 18 when you hear the Lord your God, as you take care of all his commandments which I command thee this day, and do that which is right in the Lord your God eyes.

9) A lukewarm church will never really experience the true presence, his vindication and supernatural leadership. There will probably be many pious promises, wishes and empty begjør yet. God is not present, answers and sanctions.

1Sam 28:15 And Samuel said to Saul, Why have you urodd me and picked me up? Saul answered, I am sore distressed; Philistines goes against me, and God is departed from me and answers me no more, either by prophets or by dreams, so I called on you, that you should let me know what I should do.

10) A lukewarm church will always take the "wrong" of the Lord's witnesses. Those who are the Lord's true witnesses will have excellent job opportunities, but those who are the Lord's true witnesses doors will always be closed for. The false prophets will be recognized equally and take you away. While those whom God has raised up in the future will experience the opposite. They will always oppose what God stands for, and recognize and disappeared last backslidden and lukewarm.

2 Chronicles 8:20 p.m. morning after they took an early and went off to the wilderness of Tekoa: and as soon as they went out, Jehoshaphat stood and said, Hear me, O Judah, and ye inhabitants of Jerusalem! Believe in the Lord your God, so shall ye stand! Believe in his prophets, so shall ye prosper you! 2 Chronicles 24:19 And the LORD sent prophets among them to bring them back to him, and they warned them but they did not listen to them.

Final Comment: What more can I say? Recommend everyone to study and read the blog and our website to set up than more into what I want and want to have said. Secondly also come with questions and other than wanting to bring forward. Do you write yourself and can not publish your articles? Write to me, I look at it and it is of value and we can stand understand it, we run it more than happy! I have even been in that game and were shut out, so I want to help you to be able to publish other substances, articles and testimony!

Related links: http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2012/12/nr-422-pentecostal-charismatic.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2011/10/nr-71-emanuel-minos-had-gone-from-being.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2011/09/nr-44-false-prophets-or-rubs-us-lords.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2011/09/emanuel-minos-and-co-are-like-bileam.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2013/03/nr-475-how-could-it-go-so-crazy-t.html

onsdag 27. mars 2013

Nr. 477: The couple Elizabeth and Robert Muren will have 100 Mill. of the Christians in Norway to tell a lie about the Apostle Peter that he met the Emperor Nero and died in Rome!

Nr. 477:

The couple Elizabeth and Robert Muren will have 100 Mill. of the Christians in Norway to tell a lie about the Apostle Peter that he met the Emperor Nero and died in Rome!

Elizabeth and Robert Muren tells a lie when they want to make a movie that will cost approx. 100 Mill to produce and distribute. It was the Apostle Paul, the apostle Peter, who met the Emperor Nero. Here are a couple that will have the 100 Mill. to promote and bring out a Catholic and demonic rogue and lying history, which of course is not true but built and sustained by the Catholic church will have power and influence, even if they do not tell the truth!

Here is an article I wrote some years ago:

Paul new courage!

Acts 28.15: "The brothers there had heard about us, and met us just outside the Forum Appi and Tres Tabernæ. When Paul saw his brothers, he thanked God and taken courage ".

Paul was on his way to Rome in what is now Italy. At that time the capital of what was then the great Roman Empire. Emperor Nero was the lord and Emperor who demanded worship and full obedience to Rome and himself. Emperor Nero was not the easy kind to deal with. Here's a description of him taken from the internet:

Emperor Nero

Emperor Nero became emperor in 54 years and when he was only 17 years old. Nero is often referred to as the mad emperor from Rome. He became emperor after his mother poisoned his stepfather. One year after this murder Nero stepbrother so that he would not be emperor instead of him. In year 59 got emperor Nero also killed his mother after the two had been enemies.

In year 64, there was a major fire in Rome, while this fire be passed, it is said that Nero did not do anything to get it stopped, but he went, humming and singing the while he saw much of Rome burned. Afterwards he got built a large palace on a large area of ​​the city that was lost in the fire. The palace was named Domus Aurea (Golden Palace).

It started to rumor that emperor himself had started the fire to get built this palace. To let go and be seen as a scapegoat gave the Emperor Nero blamed the Christians for the fire. The Christians were after this persecution in the Roman Empire, some were thrown to the lions, some were crucified, others were burned at night as torches in Nero's garden. The following year there were people who tried to kill Nero. When this was discovered 19 people were killed by Nero and Nero disliked people who received a letter to take suicide. In year 68 Nero had not a few supporters left in the Roman Empire. He got only more and more enemies. He eventually chose to take his own life.

Paul had longed to come to Rome for many years. He was born Roman citizen. After he was saved and got called to be hednigens Apostle, as he longed to come to Rome and where few gospel.

Now he was on his way to Rome, but depressed. Why?

I think Paul had set for himself to come to Rome under completely different circumstances. Paul had probably been deceived by their own illusions and his own thoughts that we all sometimes being cheated and misled by.

Should Paul be performing his work in Rome and meet with Emperor Nero, he had come as a prisoner, not as a free man.

Although Paul here was defeated, he was my God's will for their lives and in their service to God! There were some simple redeemed brothers did the trick for Paul. They sacrificed a little extra for him and they got him out of discouragement and forsakthetens quagmire.

The story of Paul was a great blessing to the faithful in Rome with his visit. He had written the letter to the Romans some years before, which is perhaps the letter that Paul brings out the spiritual truth that God had entrusted him in the strongest way. And it has been a blessing for millions in hindsight, also for us today. History tells us that Paul met Nero and it was he who was responsible for his death.

We read about discouraging Emperor Nero, yet there were many who were won to God through Paul's work in Rome, as well as a prisoner. He writes in Fil.1 that this has happened to him has been for the best.

Is not the Lord works in mysterious?

We may be my God's will for our lives right where we are now, but we do not always. So be bold and go the way of God for your life. The Lord has shown you, he will implement in your life. Give therefore for both the external and internal pressures. Lord used Paul. And he will use you and me as we're obedient. And persevere in faith and patience! (End of quote).

This writing couple Wall:

- Jesus as He is

The film "Yeshua - Words Are Not Enough" will begin in Rome with the Apostle Peter is taken prisoner, confronted with his faith of the Emperor Nero, and begins to tell the stories of Jesus as he found them, the other doomed children, women and men, before being taken to the Roman arena.

- Jesus says only what is written in biblical texts, but we are yet to know Him in a new way, as we shall see Him through the eyes of people who lived with him. We go "behind the scenes" and meet children, women and men, their struggles, thoughts and doubts. We get a clear and strong impression of the society they lived in. This will help us understand better how revolutionary Jesus' life and teachings were, says Elizabeth. (End of quote).

Why tell a lie, or more lies and say that this is a story about Jesus? The Apostle Peter never met Nero, it was the Apostle Paul. I smell the embrace of the Catholic robber story that Apostle Peter came to Rome, the first Pope that and the other wrapped and lying story that the Catholic church is built on. Peter was never Pope, and he was there, he was not in Rome but in Jerusalem and among his own people, the Jews. He was never Apostle of the Gentiles, but the Jews.

From my commentaries Galatians 2 7 On the contrary, they understood that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter to the circumcised.

Acts 1. 8 But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you, and ye shall be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth. "Jesus' teaching was that the gospel should be preached until the end of the earth from the day. 1. Since the disciples did not quite managed to cope with this, God had to raise up Paul. Peter remained faithful to the gospel, but Paul led the baton.

8 For he who with his power did Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, he did me the same way as an apostle to the uncircumcised. It was the same God and Lord who had called them both. They were in an equal relation to each other and thus completed the other. I do not think Peter was disobedient, but the task needed to be shared. Therefore, Paul was apostle to the Gentiles and Peter Jews. (End of quote).


Here one should make a movie like fleas Christians for 100 Mill. Mr. and Mrs. Wall is Pentecostal and betting on when to bring the majority of Free Church communities. But is this right? Using such an enormous sum on a lie story? This is, and-will be incorrect, demonic and Catholic!

Terminating comment:

This couple says Muren: "We seek advice from the best." But why do not they seek the advice of the Lord? There had to be a lot better? Getting within its God in the Word and prayer, then fixes "everything" up and lies must go! And the blog and our website where we have more articles about this topic? When the Apostle Peter never met Nero, but it was the Apostle Paul did. Why should one Catholic robber story even more legs to go on? That I do not understand, and you are hereby warned against supporting this film, but rather support us, huh-huh! Imagine if I could get 100 Mill. into Smyrna Oslo? When should we put Norway on the head!

Support us either, the money will be used better than anyone anywhere else:

Account number in the entry to the church Smyrna Oslo: 0535 06 05 845

Account number in the record for the Bible translation project: 1204 33 59 280

Related links: http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2011/10/nr-108-lovely-church-of-ephesus.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2012/11/nr-402-if-jesus-apostles-or-any-one-of.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2012/11/nr-411-we-live-in-time-period-of.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2012/12/nr-419-old-testament-and-new-testament.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2013/03/nr-473-which-models-is-next-generation.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2012/11/nr-403-pauls-trip-to-spain.html

søndag 24. mars 2013

Nr. 476: Paul concluded his service among the children of Israel!

Nr. 476:

Paul concluded his service among the children of Israel!

The Apostle Paul was saved to preach in a threefold mission: Gentiles and kings and the children of Israel. Paul concluded his service with preaching to the Israelites who are between Acts 28 and 2 Tim. 4. That is a period of 2 years as we find little mention of the word of God, but still important. There, he was probably among the Jews of Spain? And he was probably also the last time in Jerusalem? Illustration: Jerusalem where Apostle Peter dead and buried, not in Rome as the apostle Paul died. Recommend a visit to St. Paul's church but not Peter's Church in Rome (nb, provokes I now believe?). Illustrative image shows active Cutting mosque that will soon be demolished to make room for the first Antichrist Temple, then Ezekiel temple that will be there during the 1000 year kingdom.

Paul vocation, mission and service!

Acts 9:15 But the Lord said unto him, Go! for me he is a chosen vessel to bear my name before the Gentiles and kings and the children of Israel;


There is very little in God's word on this. What the apostle Paul concluded his service with preaching to Israel, which is between Acts 28 and 2 Tim. 4. Which is than the period of approx. 2 years that we find little mention of the word of God, but still important. There, he was probably among the Jews of Spain? And he was sure one last time in Jerusalem?

This is from the article: "Where did the twelve apostles?"

Where Peter spent most of his time after twelve years in Palestine? The Greek historian Metaphrastes says that "Peter was not only in these western areas"? the western Mediterranean? "But specifically that he was there for a long time." Here we see Peter's thesis in his work for the ten lost tribes. ". . . A long time in England, where he converted many nations to the faith. "(See margin note on page 45 in Caves Antiquitates Apostolicae.)

Peter preached the gospel in England, not in Rome. The true gospel was not preached publicly at Rome before Paul arrived in the year 59 AD Paul never mentions Peter in his letter to the brethren in Rome? most of these had been converted at Pentecost in 30 AD Not even the Jews at Rome had heard the Gospel be preached before Paul arrived. Here we find Luke's inspired account of Paul's arrival to Rome: "After three days he called [Paul] together the leading men among the Jews in that city" (Acts 28.17). And again: "They said to him: We have not received any letters from Judea concerning you. Nor is there come brothers here who has reported or said anything bad about you. But we want to hear what you think, because we know that this sect everywhere meet contradiction. After they had appointed him a day, came even more to him at his lodging. He then laid out for them and testified the kingdom of God and tried to convince them about Jesus from the Law of Moses and the prophets, from morning till evening "(Acts 28.21? 23).

Here are decisive proofs that the Jews of Rome had never heard the apostle Peter preach.

But it had been a "Peter" in Rome? right from Claudius Caesar days. This Peter sat in a prominent position. He was the top leader of the Babylonian mysteries. His ministry was to be a "Peter"? an interpreter, or one that allows for secrets. In Babylonian and Hebrew means Peter "an opening", therefore, the term used in Hebrew for "first born, one that first opens the womb."

This Peter in Rome was also called Simon? Simon Magus, Simon Magus (Acts 8). He was the leader of the conspiracy was hatched by the priests of the Babylonian-Samaritan mysteries. These conspirators tried to use Jesus' name as a cloak for their diabolical religion. They founded what today parading as a false "Christian religion" (see 3 John.). Simon Peter, an apostle of Jesus, was in England and not in Rome. It was in England he preached the gospel of the kingdom of God. The fact that Peter preached in the British Isles is in itself a proof that the ten lost tribes of Israel were already there. Simon Peter had been asked to go to the lost ten tribes. And striking enough began more inner warrior to strike England around the year 60 AD This is what James warns in his letter (chapter 4, verse 1) to the twelve tribes of Israel. Can history be clearer?

Where did Peter and Paul buried?

For several hundred years, the Christian world has taken for granted that Peter and Paul were buried in Rome. It seems that no one has thought to challenge tradition. We know that Paul was brought to Rome in 67 AD He was beheaded and buried on the road to Ostia. But are his remains still there? The usual tradition holds that the apostle Peter was brought to Rome during Nero's time and was martyred about the same time. There are a number of ancient literature? Something false, and something real? Affirming that Simon Magus, the false apostle who paraded as Peter, also died in Rome. The question is: Which Simon is that today are buried under the Vatican? Is there evidence that the remains of the apostles Paul and Peter were moved from Rome? And where in which case they are located today?

There is a reason that the Vatican has been so reluctant to claim that the tomb of the Apostle Peter is found. They are aware that it is Simon Magus, the false Peter, who is buried there, and the apostle Peter. Here's what happened: In the year 656 AD Pope decided Vita Lian that the Roman Catholic Church was not interested in the remains of the Apostles Peter and Paul. The Pope therefore ordered the remains sent to the English King Oswy. Here is part of the Pope's letter to King Oswy:

"We have therefore ordered that the blessed gifts of the holy martyrs, that is, the relics of the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by the Holy Martyrs Laurentius, John, Paul, Gregory and Pancratius, should be left to those who voted carries this letter, that they should hand them to Your Excellency "(Bede's Ecclesiastical History, Book III, Chapter 29 Can anything be more astounding? Pope sent the bones of Peter and Paul (termed" relics "in the Pope's letter) from Rome to England? to "Israel".

Approx. 150 years earlier Constantius of Lyons took the relics of all the apostles and martyrs from Gaul and buried them in a special tomb in St. Albans, England (see Life of St. Germanus).

Paul was also in England?

Now let's look at yet more evidence that the apostles worked for the lost sheep of the house of Israel in the British Isles. From an old work, published by William Camden in 1674, we read: "The true Christianity was the earliest planted here by Joseph of Arimathea, Simon the Zealot, Aristobulus, Peter and Paul, as set by Dorotheus, Theodoretus and Sephronius" (Remains of Britain, p 5). Paul is also included! Had Paul plans to go from Italy to Spain and then to England? Here is the answer: ". . . I will go the way of you to Spain "(Rom. 15:28). In his letter to the Corinthians, Clement of Rome confirms the travels of Paul in the west. But including the England?

The Greek church historian Theodoret has this to say: "That St. Paul brought salvation to the islands in the ocean" (book 1 of Psalms cxvi, p 870). The British Isles! But this was only to preach to the Gentiles? Perfectly not. Do not forget that the third and final part of the great commission given to Paul, after he had preached Jesus to the kings and rulers of Rome, was to lift up the name of Jesus to "Israel" (Acts 9.15)? the ten lost tribes. This is not a prophecy about the Jews, whom Paul had previously preached in the Greek part of the world in the Eastern Mediterranean. This is a prophecy about the task Paul had in the British Isles. (End of quote).

What should we believe? He is the Apostle of the Gentiles

The main thing about Paul was that he preached the gospel to non-Jews. It is important to note that, because Christianity in the beginning was perceived as a special edition of Judaism, or what you could call a Jewish sect. With that one would express that neither the Christians themselves or society around them regarded Christianity as a new faith, but as a special interpretation of Judaism.

In Acts it is described that first and foremost, Paul began to preach Christ to the people who were not Jews, pagans and non-Jews were often called in the New Testament. Christianity soon became an independent religion. It has enough connections to Judaism, but it is something more than that. Gradually it grew into a worldwide religion, as Christianity is today. Rightly therefore call Paul for Christianity's founder. It is largely the merits that it was established as a separate faith and that Christianity became widespread outside Jewish circles.

Paul then says in some of his letters that it is not necessary for Christians to be circumcised nor to live by the special religious dietary code or the like is an important part of Judaism. All in all, do not the Christians to live according to the Jewish law of Moses. It is because of Jesus' death and resurrection makes you a Christian is set free from the law. It is a very important theme in the letters that Paul wrote to the Galatians and Romans.

But he had commissioned to preach to the kings of Israel

We read about the encounter with King Agrippa in Acts 25. Paul collided again and again to the Jews and the Jewish authorities - pharisees and scribes - not least in their defense that they had committed judicial murder of Jesus - that was their Messiah. They should understand the basis of the GT - not least by the prophets who foretold his coming in detail. He their great savior as they denied and led to lower death.

It ended with several murders plans on Paul, detention, interrogation or trial until his great defense understand Festus and King Agrippa. It was a legal settlement! Some try to spiritualize and neutralizing this great defense of Paul so that it almost only teaching in question. They seem to want to reduce the relevance of the items for the current situation, where we again have to drive apologetics, attacking government operations in the earthly kingdom, and their laws and unfair judgments. Such that affects individuals and institutions when getting a wicked law - even refusing preaching for the little ones in school. Mon explain away that Paul fully operated as his own defense attorney - to their right - about the great controversy within the Jewish religion he was accused of. Prosecutors Festus found so foolish that he really would release Paul - and also thought he was mad. Mon explains Paul's voice as a pure spiritual teachings that have nothing to defense and law making. This is completely wrong. It is clear from the text where Paul speaks to King Agrippa in these words in Acts kp 25-26: 1 Paul's defense before King Agrippa, he speaks about his life and his faith, his conversion, his calling and apostleship, 1-23. Festus and King Agrippa expresses himself about Paul's speech, 24-29. His innocence sannes, 30-32. All with clear relevance if he was jailed and convicted.

And he continues: "For the sake of these things took me some Jews in the temple and tried to kill me. 22 Thus have I gotten help from God, and are to this day and testify both to small and great, as I do not say anything other than what the prophets and Moses said would happen: 23 that Christ should suffer, and that he as the first of the resurrection of the dead should proclaim light to the people and to the Gentiles. 24 But when he defended himself thus, Festus said with a loud voice: You are mad, Paul; Your megen lessons driver you crazy. 25 But he said: I am not mad, most powerful Festus! but I am speaking true and sober words. 26 For the king knows of these things, and to him I speak too boldly, for I can not believe any of this is unknown to him, This is not done in a corner. 27 Do you, King Agrippa, the prophets? I know you think. 28 Then Agrippa said to Paul: It lacks little that can persuade me to become a Christian. 29 Paul said, I would wish to God, either missing or very small, that not only you but also all who hear me this day, had become such as I am, only without those links. 30 Then the king arose, and the governor and Bernice and those who sat with them, 31 and they went aside and spoke among themselves, saying, This man does nothing worthy of death or chains. 32 Then Agrippa said unto Festus, This man might be released, if he had not appealed his case to Caesar. '

Paul stood accused before a court and was killed because he wanted taught truths about their Messiah beliefs and activities that Jews believed conflicted with their faith, doctrine and law. He had a case under Jewish law. He put up his defense just by telling about - the truth of - that what he said was true and right and that he therefore was innocent accused. He expressed also his joy that he was facing the Crown who knew the reality of what he was talking about - indeed, that when Paul told the plain facts - he added with great confidence, a personal request from the King's claim that he believed the prophets - that what he said was true even for the King. His defense was so good and convincing that when Festus and Agrippa went a little apart for conversation, it came thus: And Agrippa said unto Festus, This man might be released, if he had not appealed his case to Caesar. '

Paul is the last part of the service was to teach the children of Israel, which he did in the last 2 years of his life

Acts 9:15 But the Lord said unto him, Go! for me he is a chosen vessel to bear my name before the Gentiles and kings and the children of Israel;

The third and final part of Paul the Apostle and missionary work, we find little mention and also misleading discussed. But the writing is clear and history tells us that Paul ended his work among his own people! Therefore, it is in many ways the "forgotten" and "excluded" part of Paul's life and ministry! Have something more to contribute here, so either write to me or write on the blog dear friends! The legend also says the following: "As a Roman citizen he had a right to be beheaded, a significantly less painful death than crucifixion. This should have happened at the Via Ostia, near the monastery of Tre Fontane. Kloster name, three sources, refer to the legend that his avhugde head bounced three times (!), And each place it hit the ground sprang up a source. (This is of course nonsense). http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2012/11/nr-403-pauls-trip-to-spain.html

Emperor Constantine built a church over his grave, which over time has been extended to St. Paul's Basilica, one of Rome's largest churches. In 2006 it became known that a sarcophagus with his name was found in this church. "

Related links: http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2011/09/nr-66-are-israel-and-jews-chosen-people.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2012/09/nr-372-israel-of-gods-eye.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2012/05/nr-310-apostle-peter-was-never-apostle.html

onsdag 20. mars 2013

Nr. 475: How could it go so crazy `t?

Nr. 475:

How could it go so crazy `t?

We find too many that are gjengiftetde as Christians, preaching the word of God is still and empty both TV entrepreneurs, evangelists, leaders of thousands of others, have penetrated deeply into the word of God, etc. All this makes me sick, sick and I get angry over the laxity that is among the evangelicals. Here's someone who's remarriage one or more times as believers, living in adultery by the word of God and should therefore not teach and preach. Here are some preachers that exists today, but is re-married as believers and thus fornicators:

Ivar Helge Bolsø from Trondheim


Carola og Runar Søgård

Amy Grant

Donnie Swaggart

Jim Bakkker

Ray Bevan

Ray McCauley

Solveig Leithaug

Peter Ljunggren

Bishop Per Oskar Kjølaas

TV founder and Pastor Jan Hanvold

Bible teacher and editor of the Pearl website Ivar Helmersen

Evangelist Albert Aanensen

Marita Johnsen Aanensen

Evangelist Jan Eriksen

Apostle, Prophet and Pastor Jan Aage Torp

What I think and what God's word says is really only one thing. Never line up in the pulpit, sing or communicate the Christian message.

Here is an article I wrote a few years back that is more current and urgent than ever:

Pay the price or not!

Daniel 1 8 Daniel undertook that he would not defile himself with the food and wine from the king. He asked the chief official for permission not to defile himself.

Luke 14 25 Large crowds came to Jesus, and he turned to them and said: 26 "If anyone comes to me and does not set this higher than father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, higher than his own life, he can not be my disciple. 27 Whoever does not bear his cross and come after me can not be my disciple. 28 If one of you wants to build a tower, does he not first sit down and estimate the cost, to see if he has enough money to complete it? 29 For if he lays the foundation, but not able to finish it, everyone who sees it will ridicule him, 30 and say, 'This man began to build and was not able to finish it.' 31 Or what king would go to war against another king, Will he not first sit down and consider whether he is able with ten thousand men strong enough to oppose the one coming against him with twenty thousand? 32 And he will send his men off to pray for peace while the enemy is still far away. 33 How is it then: None of you can be my disciple without giving up everything he owns.

God has spoken to me about many things and that I'm here to get into God has spoken to me since youth. God wants wholehearted Christians and that we should serve him wholeheartedly. If not, we let each!

God is careful with our lives whether there is forgiveness to get. But forgiveness is Knuttes up against confession and repentance. We can never fool God and we should know that people can "authorize" us, but to believe that God "accepts" us just like that is to trick and deceive themselves if not our lives right with God's word.

We humans do many times God defenseless and stupid. Think my wife occasionally cheated, went out with others and constantly took liberties that most Christians take themselves to God?????????????

I'd give her an ultimatum. Either let the weather or the orcs and I will not continue this marriage. Now I have never experienced this, or think I'm going to do it. But to illustrate. But biledelig spoken so is it all too many of God's children live. God can use a wish, it pleases and suits oneself. But when one lives in a hypocrisy primarily with himself but also to God and their brothers and sisters in the faith! God is actually jealous and wants us all to himself.

James 4 5 Or do you think it's empty words when the Scripture says: With the zeal of God makes demands on the spirit he has made to dwell in us?

Furthermore, we read the introductory words about my Daniel as set out. He decided, he would follow God's word and his inner convictions anyway. As a prerequisite for living as a wholehearted Christian; total surrender and submission to God's word and God's will for their lives.

Furthermore, Jesus says that we should count the cost. If we go to war and will face an enemy that is stronger than us and or to build a tower that is difficult to build. Will one do it? Otherwise it's better to let each go to war and to build the tower. This illustrates that one should calculate and think about one really wants and is able to follow Jesus. This is essentially the ABC lessons.

I've pointed Vision Norway and the editor and founder there, Pastor Jan Hanvold. Why? When a man preaches a false gospel and live as darkness reigns in him, then he earns not God but Satan. And anyone who supports the business, come under the same judgment, and it applies to everyone one. But he had never tried to do something for the Lord and lived the way he does, everything had been different. By then, has not gone entirely sure others to destruction! God being made a fool of this, he does not condone it. But the Christians do it tells me that they allow themselves to be deceived! That is when we will serve the Lord and begin to walk the path of God, that everything must and will be on the Lord's terms, not our own! There are many other examples, but I try to take out the ones that are so clear that even a newly saved Christian should and can understand that Hanvold is a wolf in sheep's clothing.

Is this harsh speech? Think about it! I run daily buses in Oslo and it is expected that I mastered the job or they can not have me employed. If I had not mastered the job, I had to find something else to do or got fired. Had it been unreasonable? No, but God is different? He requires of us something, especially those who will preach and lead the congregation. Jacob. 3.1. Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we teachers should get as much stricter judgment.

We make God stupid and naive to permissible sin and heresy, but he does not. We create God in our image and after our desire, but it is a deception. Hanvold, the newly gjengiftetde bishop of DNK, Adventists to follow both Jesus and keep the commandments and all others who do not follow the Lord on his terms and his terms have been "fired"! They are an obstacle to the true Church and the Lord's side. They are actually under demonic influence.

But today they put everything on the head. Those who follow the Lord and His Word experience ostracism and boycott, but those who live in the will of God and preaches another gospel being opened up and accepted as within its evangelical Christians. Sadly true but tragic. This is especially obvious but it's the way a lot yesterday!

Rom.16. 17 I beseech you, brethren, to keep an eye on those who cause divisions and causes others to fall by going against the teachings you have received. Stay away from them! 18 The kind of people do not serve our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly. With the nice words and platitudes leads the gullible people astray. 19 But everyone has heard about your obedience, so I rejoice over you. I want you to be wise in what is good, but innocent of evil. 20 May the God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet! Our Lord Jesus's grace be with you!

Moreover, it is wrong focus and disbelief that paralyzes the church of God! A scream when the state will remove support if one does not accept homosexuals. Then simply let each accepting state aid'll do everything themselves. So attacking a homosexual and Muslims, but it is not here the problem is the church of God. It is to have the wrong focus and really wonder itself. Muslims are too extreme for them to have any impact on us and the homosexual sin is obvious that the sin should really be able to fool a true Christian.

There must be a turnaround for the church today for what it has become - not to be - a Laodicean church is the Norwegian church anno 2010. Åpenb.3. 14 Write to the angel of the church in Laodicea: this he says the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of God's creation: 15 I know your works - you are neither cold nor hot. If only you were cold or hot! 16 But thou art lukewarm, not hot and not cold. Therefore, I will spit you out of my mouth. 17 You say, 'I am rich, I have abundance and lacks nothing. "But you do not know that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked. 18 Therefore I counsel you to buy from me gold refined in the fire, so you can become rich, and white garments that you can dress up with and hide your naked shame, and ointment to smear on your eyes so you can see. 19 I rebuke and raise all those I hold dear. So be earnest and repent! 20 Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat, I'm with him and he with me. 21 He who overcomes, I will sit with me on my throne, as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father on his throne. 22 He who has ears, hear what the Spirit says to the churches!

Eye Salve needed for the church today in Norway because of lukewarmness, not burning and not totally apostate. One believes in Jesus and His Word, but not in the right way and do not follow Jesus completely. Something my while, not quite with God but really against God becomes! God is not unreasonable, he wants us all to himself.

Then serve a God but not really evil. Serious, but a must and will follow the rules if one should succeed and be usable by God, and worthy of him. One can not follow baseball rules when playing football or vice versa. It is all too many believers and trying to imagine. And they go hard against those who pointed out errors contained and they feel attacked. But I will never accept that Satan will prevail, only the Lord and no other! God does not condone sin. I have my background in the free movement where I was saved. Because it so I should easily written a book of at least 2000 pages referred to the charismatic movement with false prophecies and unbiblical teachings. But I can and will not. Why? Whatever one comes with so the vast majority of which are occupied by these spiritual powers keep on with what they are doing, they thrive on it. How was the book of days, and so it is today. Nothing new under the sun.

2. Tim.2.25b. Because maybe God will once again give them to return, as they learn the truth. 26 When they wake of rapture and get out of the devil's snare, where they are held so they do his will.

Here is humbug and seduction! But what is the solution? Want to focus on two things.

1) Study the Bible itself on its own.

2) Be yourself led by the Spirit of God.

It is my recommendation and we have started a church here in Oslo that we want to be like a warm and safe haven for all who will!

Final Comment: Actually, the message is clear, crystal clear. It is that if one does not live according to the Bible's message to a never stand on a pulpit of a Christian congregation or in any way communicate the Christian message. As believers, there are only two options in a marriage, either live life in the same or LIVING ALONE! ALL OFF THIS IS A PITY!

Either we live with what we have agreed, or single life: 1 Cor. 7. 10 The married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, that a wife should not separate herself from her husband; 11 but she is separated from him when she vedbli being unmarried or reconciled with her husband - and that a man to separate himself from his wife.

Related links: http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2013/04/nr-492-caring-school-leaders-in.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2012/10/nr-388-marriage.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2012/06/nr-323-dr-emanuel-minos-and-evangelist.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2012/11/nr-410-jan-hanvold-is-prototype-of.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2012/06/nr-326-pastor-juggler-and-entertainer.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2012/07/nr-338-peter-ljunggren-divorced-and-re.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2012/07/nr-337-terje-berntzen-former-great.html

Nr. 474: Not being able to cope with relationship problems, blaming lack of maturity very often!

Nr. 474:

Not being able to cope with relationship problems, blaming lack of maturity very often!

This is of course simplified, but maturity is something that prevents than from experience being divorced or have major problems in the relationship. We need to be like the giraffe, who see the problems and difficulties. And handles things with the intent that a new marriage is always the question for a Christian. Either we live with what we have agreed, or single life: 1 Cor. 7. 10 The married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, that a wife should not separate herself from her husband; 11 but she is separated from him when she vedbli being unmarried or reconciled with her husband - and that a man to separate himself from his wife.

This is from a marriage our promises to each other as real people:

I take you, NN, to my spouse. I will love and honor you and be faithful to you in good times and bad until death do us part. This is my promise to you.

OR NN, in God's name do I accept you as my husband. I will be with you and share what the future holds. I want to give and receive; speaking and listening, inspire and provide answers. And in our life together I will be faithful and loyal to all of me, as long as we both live.

OR NN, I love you. I want to live my life with you. With my love I will honor you in good times and bad, in sickness and in health, as long as we both live. This is my promise to you. (End of quote).

God creates us male and female and to each other, there are two likebyrdige partners.

In psychology the maturity ability to react to the environment in an appropriate manner. This response is generally learned rather than instinctive, and is not determined by one's age. (From the English Wikipedia).

Maturity has to react and deal with things straight, healthy and so the best comes out of the situation. As believers is the "success" to have a lifelong marriage that was what God created us, between a man and a woman.

Then God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. They will rule the oceans of fish and birds, the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him, male and female he created them. And God blessed them and said to them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the earth, subdue it and have dominion over the sea fishes and birds, and over every living thing that moves on the earth. (Gen. 1 1.26 to 28). We are created by God. We are willed by God. We are created in His image. Here rests our dignity. And since some seem to believe that the Christian church has not always claimed it: It rests our equality. "God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him, male and female he created them." "Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh. And the Lord God built the rib he had taken from man, a woman, and brought her to the man . " (2.21 to 22). And she received a jubilant reception. "And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh. She shall be called Woman, because from man she was taken." (2.23). "Man Inside - man" is a pun in Hebrew: "ISJ" mean man, "isjsja" she is taken from the man. There's a great effort to make the same pun in Nynorsk: "It shall be called woman, because she is teki of a man." (Nynorsk 1933). Do we see how it is again a question of equality - the same nature, if you will - but the difference? It is located in the very name of the man and woman, "ISJ" like me, "bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh," but "isjsja", also something else, something unique. Equality is emphasized again when so called: "Therefore shall a man leave his father and mother and cleave unto his wife and they shall become one flesh." (2.24). It is a comprehensive and deep communion between two equal partners. We can not go into the scope of it today. But it's supposed to be a re brilliance of the relationship between God and his people, between Christ and the church. Paul quotes this verse in Ephesians: "Therefore shall a man leave his father and mother and cleave unto his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh." He explains: "This is a great mystery - but I speak concerning Christ and the church." (Ephesians 5.31 to 32).

How, then, have a happy, life-long and fruitful marriage? Of course this is not a definitive answer, thankfully. But some "keys" will I give you, want to set up ten (10) different aspects or ways to get out and have a life-long marriage. Did not get to elaborate on these points when I've written so much about this and similar topics. And you'll find relevant articles on this blog and our website on this topic.

1) Resolve to be faithful for life!

2) Regular sex.

3) Do not woo by others or flirting, it creates jealousy and enmity.

4) As a Christian, it is never permitted remarriage.

5) Work hard together.

6) Be agreed upbringing.

7) Parent and healthy economy.

8) Be regularly and have family devotions stuck together.

9) Travel on vacation separately, but together.

10) Always try to facilitate that do not do things on their own, but together.

Want to read more about this topic? Look at the blog and our website:

Related links: http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/ http://janchristensen.net/ http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2012/04/nr-290-pornography-in-all-shapes-and.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2012/04/nr-288-its-narcissistic-and-false.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2012/02/nr-251.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2011/10/nr-78-divorce-and-remarriage-is-only.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2011/10/nr-74-allowing-female-pastors-and.html

Nr. 473: Which models is the next generation of meetings? World empowers managers and skilled people, Christ is calling followers! Part 2

Nr. 473:

Which models is the next generation of meetings? World empowers managers and skilled people, Christ is calling followers! Part 2

Paul wanted the believers would have him as a role model. Paul was truly a role model for other believers, not just for his generation but for all generations since. In many ways, we can say that Paul is the largest model in the New Testament that he brought the Gospel to us Gentiles. While Joseph is the largest model in the Old Testament because its purity. illustration picture of what lures and deceives today more than anything else for the vast majority of Christian leaders, it is what goes on sex and desire. Here bows many wonders for morale is the most important quality a good and true Christian leader must have, without it no leader or shepherd. Failing to maintain a moral standard that is required and should be expected to be a leader, including where one currently does gjengiftetde preachers and leaders who are a disgrace and demean God to be one with Satan. When the leaders and preachers show people who God is, therefore, they saw a big responsibility that not many become preachers and leaders and they will be judged the more stringent. James 3 1 "My brothers and sisters, not many of you become teachers, knowing that we shall receive a stricter judgment." Unfortunately, many fail in that they have a low moral standard by example. to be re-married as believers or to allow others to be as Christian. We know that God's word says that if a believer marries a divorced or are themselves divorced and married when driver than adultery. Luke 16 18 "Whosoever putteth away his wife and marries another woman commits adultery, and whoever marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery."

Today's leaders lack what it takes to be great leaders of today and for the next generation. But a Christian leader is not necessarily a good leader for the world's standards. As for God, there are other criteria that is used. Want to mention the ten (10) pages by being a good Christian leader, but unfortunately. I do not think one can find many such Christian leaders in God's church today here in Norway, nor elsewhere in the Western world that the U.S. and other countries. But among the early Christians were many, and then I think it is possible even today to create the embryos and such. Portions of this article into two, therefore, five (5) points here, and five (5) points in the Forja article.

1) A good Christian leader redeems anything else. We find many examples in God's word.

1 Samuel 18 1. After his conversation with Saul, Jonathan's soul was drawn to David, and Jonathan loved him as his own life.

One of many examples of what a community creates between the two leaders is that they bring out the best in each other. Now it must not be understood as we can and look at things differently, but we know how to reach into the heart. Jonathan and David drew on each other, a good Christian leader draws on others, and it makes other better and himself better.

2) A good Christian leader has heart and room for people.

Luke 7 11 pass the day after, that he went to a town called Nain, and many of his disciples went with him, and much people. 12 When he came near the gate, behold, it was a death carried out, as was his mother's only son, and she was a widow, and a large crowd from the town was with her. 13 And when the Lord saw her, he had compassion on her and said to her: Weep not! 14 And he came and touched the coffin, and those carrying it stood still, and he said, Young man! I tell you, get up! 15 And the dead man sat up and began to speak: and he gave him to his mother. 16 Then fear came upon them all, and they glorified God, saying, A great prophet has risen up among us, and God has visited his people. 17 These words came out of him in all Judea and all the region round

We know the story of the widow of Nain where Jesus raised her only son from death. Jesus is the almighty love. That He is love - the good, meek love, it says every blade of his history of us.

When he saw the widow's pain and grief, as she wept over his only son, he says, - "He had compassion on her." He had compassion for her - he was not callous past misery, so that we might have done. It made an impression on His loving heart. His heart was when it moved to the deepest compassion. The widow's wail lit a jammer in the great human friend feeling full, pure heart. It took Him as the Good Samaritan, who also could not go past the insensitive unhappy. "He had compassion on her," - oh, how important is it not, that it is in the Scripture that the Son! How well does not arm sins! Such compassion He, too, when he saw and wept over Jerusalem and Israel, how perfectly it forgot to think about what earned her peace. Such compassion He also, when Adam and Eve by sin had plunged himself into misery. So Adam got the promise of Him who was crushed the serpent's head. Such compassion He Israel, as it sighed under the Egyptian bondage and under his bully kind. So He said to Moses: "I have heard their cry, and I will save them." How he had compassion when He saw the people walking in the wilderness - for he made it say: "I have taken your travels to the heart."

And how much we could not yet add? This is all of this sympathy, - of His mercy, His medlidenhets infinite depth. Such compassion He - therefore He became man, took on a slave and becoming like men. Who can fathom this mercy drift? Who can understand the long and wide, high and deep is the love of Christ which surpasses all understanding? Such compassion He still upon us all at this moment, when he sees how His love is so completely forgotten, - how we seek that which is our misery, where he is unknown to us. He relenting, such as a shepherd relenting when his will get lost. He will have compassion, as a mother compassion his only son's illness. "He had compassion" - to which key words! But the most important thing about it is, that he has such a loving heart - a heart that is not foreign to any human feeling. God so loved the world, that He has given it a high priest, just like the one in misery needed Him. A high priest, who is flesh of our flesh and blood of our blood, and are not ashamed to call us his brothers. A high priest, who felt like us and thought like us, yet without sin. A high priest, who was a human like us, who had a human, very compassionate heart, yet without sin. What would it help us if Jesus had not felt like a human being? If He had scarcely helped the sufferer, but had only done this according to his eternal and necessary will decision? Alas, we could then not have any confidence in him. We could not imagine trusting, not complain our need for Him, do not reveal our misery to Him, confess our sins to Him. But God be praised! Father gave us Jesus, a high priest with a human feeling heart. A high priest, that compassion when He sees our misery. "Do not cry!" He said to the unhappy widow in the Gospel. But this was not just said so, that when we comfort each other, often without copying, - at least without help. No, His words: "Do not cry!" was active and alive. .

3) A good Christian leader and others so that they get more and more freedom that as they mature and grow, "cut" the umbilical cord to their leader.

Joh 3:30 He must increase, I must decrease.

John the Baptist's ministry was replaced by Jesus service. Service at the Baptist was "minor" while the ministry of Jesus "grew." Have one a true servant so love than to see others grow, develop and mature. My "strong" service is for others to share in the same, albeit more! So it was for John the Baptist, so will it be for anyone else today too. Enjoy that others will take over the baton, and partake of the same service, and make up things better and more glorious than the "predecessor".

4) A good Christian leader sees in others not only who they are but what potential there is in others.

John 1:42-43 And he brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, You are Simon son of John: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is interpreted Peter.

We know that Jesus called Peter not for who he was, but what and who he would become. Jesus saw something in Peter that no other then, Jesus was the perfect leader. He showed what potential everyone had, so he could say what he said. Simon does two things: meaning "He (God) is heard." In Greek, the name Simon was also formed from the word Simoes, meaning "upwards". While Cephas means Πέτρος from Greek "Petros" through Latin Petrus, an Aramaic phrase of Kefa, meaning "stone" or "rock," "crag." In other words, Simon Peter would be something different than what he was in himself, he should be one that everyone could count on a rock. While his character was the opposite. The Roman Catholic skjøgekirken have made something out of this that is the opposite of the meaning and content than what Jesus himself said that we should build on Peter. We should never be based on anything other than what Jesus did for us on Calvary and when he carried his own blood within its Father, having obtained eternal redemption. Therefore, the false prophets speak it as the Roman Catholic Church stands for and teaching when they make Peter bigger than Jesus. While the scripture says that no one can be compared to Jesus and His sacrifice on the cross of Calvary.

1 Corinthians 3:11 For no one can lay a foundation other than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

5) A Good Christian leader lays a foundation and fosters up the people to serve God after he is gone.

2 Tim. 2. 2 and what you have heard from me in many martyrs presence, surrender it to the faithful people who are duel to also teach others!

To even be a leader and shepherd is that one should nurture others, to be equally devoted and Jesus focused. Than to be "good" for yourself to make others even "better". Having studied many of revival history's great men and women, and almost all have left this here. They have not brought up the heirs to take over 'legacy' on, therefore it has often been that it's gone. Notice what Paul says to Timothy, "what you have heard from me in many martyrs presence, surrender it to the faithful people who are duel to also teach others." Paul had taught Timothy, now going to have to do the same. He had to find the ones he could trust and who was willing to learn. They would he take the time and give out of their experience and what God had shown him. And they would again do the same so that the "revival" could go in the "inheritance"?

Final Comment: We read in Ezekiel 10:30 p.m. "I searched among them for a man who would brick up a wall and set down in the gap before me for the land, that I should not destroy it: but I found none." I hope and believe that so badly made it is not with the Norwegian Christianity but lacking in real good, spiritual leaders, and that is a true and good role model, that's it!

Related links: http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2011/10/nr-99-laziness.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2013/03/nr-472-which-models-is-next-generation.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2012/10/nr-387.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2013/02/nr-460-pastor-and-apostle-jan-aage-torp.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2011/10/nr-108-lovely-church-of-ephesus.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2012/11/nr-402-if-jesus-apostles-or-any-one-of.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2012/11/nr-411-we-live-in-time-period-of.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2012/12/nr-419-old-testament-and-new-testament.html

tirsdag 19. mars 2013

Nr. 472: Which models is the next generation of meetings? World empowers managers and skilled people, Christ is calling followers! Part 1

Nr. 472:

Which models is the next generation of meetings? World empowers managers and skilled people, Christ is calling followers! Part 1

Paul wanted the believers would have him as a role model. Paul was truly a role model for other believers, not just for his generation but for all generations since. In this generation we live today. I like Paul, in an illustrative picture of Paul

Today's leaders lack what it takes to be great leaders of today and for the next generation. But a Christian leader is not necessarily good leaders for the world's standards. As for God, there are other criteria that is used. Want to mention the ten (10) pages by being a good Christian leader, but unfortunately. I do not think one can find many such Christian leaders in God's church today here in Norway, nor elsewhere in the Western world that the U.S. and other countries. But among the early Christians were many, and then I think it is possible even today to create the embryos and such. Portions of this article into two, therefore, five (5) points here, and five (5) points in the next article.

World lederere and Christian leaders can basically not be compared, since morality and ethical standards are and remain the most important date in the Christian leaders. It does not help our good speaker and clever one is, if one is not one woman man and live in accordance with the Christian message. Therefore, morality and being a woman man, and more children No. 1 for a great Christian leader.

1) To live in accordance with the Christian message is the first and most important thing for a true, good and true Christian leader.

1 Cor. 9. 24 Know ye not that they which run in a race track, they run well all, but only one receives the prize? Ran thus, that you can win it! 25 Each participating in wager match, abstinence in all, hine to obtain a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable. 26 I shall become not the unknown, I do not like a fencer who turn in the weather; 27 but I keep under my body and bring it into bondage, lest I who preaches to others, myself should be a castaway.

This can not be stressed enough, but that's life and teachings are overstemmelse with a manager's life. It is the alpha and omega for both Christianity survival and triumph that we all as believers live in overstemmelse with the message we proclaim. And a leader in the church of God, or to use the biblical word; Shepherd. Is it more important, it can not be stressed enough.

2) To be a good speaker and communicator. Should one voice, one must master the course and could be a great communicator. We can not deny that having the word of his power, it is of no foreseen to be a good Christian leader.

1 Pet. 4. 10 After that everyone has received a gift, then serve each other with the good stewards of the manifold grace of God: 11 if any man speaketh, he speak the word of God, if any man serve in the church, he can earn as by the strength which God, that God be glorified in all things through Jesus Christ, the glory and power belong to eternity. Amen.

We should make a statement, it should not be artistic, as an actor or athlete. But it must be proclaimed verbally, so it is about to do to be most of the focus on that and develop to communicate is verbal message.

3) A good Christian leader must be able to set the standard with their own lives, so Paul said that as I follow Christ, you shall follow me. Therefore there to be a Jesus follower was to be a Paul follower, and being a Paul follower. It was to be a Jesus follower.

1 Cor. 11. 1. Be my imitators, as I follow after Christ.

As a leader it is important to have others who can both correct and encourage you. But it is a model that stands above all others, and it is one that will correct and encourage you more than anyone. It is Christ Jesus. For the apostle Paul was Christ Jesus his biggest and most important role model. Therefore he could say as he follows Christ - as a leader - as they should succeed him.

4) A good Christian leader follows his calling, and takes care of its service. Trying to copy and follow others, but in the task and service that God calls the individual, he or she can enter in. Paul, Apostle of the Gentiles did not compete with the other apostles who went only to the children of Israel to preach about Paul concluded his service there.

1 Cor. 9. 2 Am I not an apostle to others, then I am there at least for you, for you are at my Seal Apostle-office in the Lord.

We will not take care of any services other than our own, and we should not copy anyone. Nor try to be an Old Testament prophet who live in the new covenant.

5) A good Christian leader does not regard himself as a solo Christian. However, to complement and have a task and work as part of a whole. Unfortunately, as have so many failed today, but to think that one is the only one that has to do with God, is and remains a dangerous and arrogant thought. It is also during this time 7000 that have not bowed to Baal corral. We as believers have a body which all have their place on the body.

1 Cor. 12. 12 For as the body is one and has many members, and all members of the body, though they are many, are one body, so also is Christ; 13 for we are all baptized by one Spirit into one body; whether Jews or Gentiles, whether we are slaves or free, and we've all got one Spirit to drink. 14 For the body is not one member, but many.

No one is an island, we are in a relationship with each other. Therefore it is also important to take care of the relationships that you have, they build stronger and not cut any of them off!

Final Comment: We read in Ezekiel 10:30 p.m. "I searched among them for a man who would brick up a wall and set down in the gap before me for the land, that I should not destroy it: but I found none." I hope and believe that so badly made it is not with the Norwegian Christianity but lacking in real good, spiritual leaders, and that is a true and good role model, that's it!

Related links: http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2011/10/nr-108-lovely-church-of-ephesus.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2012/11/nr-402-if-jesus-apostles-or-any-one-of.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2012/11/nr-411-we-live-in-time-period-of.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2012/12/nr-419-old-testament-and-new-testament.html http://the-heavenly-blog.janchristensen.net/2013/03/nr-473-which-models-is-next-generation.html

mandag 18. mars 2013

Nr. 471: Peter’s Tomb Recently Discovered In Jerusalem

Nr. 471: Peter’s Tomb Recently Discovered In Jerusalem

Saint Peter's Tomb


Photo of the Vatican where Peter never worked, died or been found any evidence that he has been. Photo taken by me in May 2012

While visiting a friend in Switzerland, I heard of what seemed to me, one of the greatest discoveries since the time of Christ—that Peter was buried in Jerusalem and not in Rome. The source of this rumor, written in Italian, was not clear; it left considerable room for doubt or rather wonder. Rome was the place where I could investigate the matter, and if such proved encouraging, a trip to Jerusalem might be necessary in order to gather valuable first hand information on the subject. I therefore went to Rome. After talking to many priests and investigating various sources of information, I finally was greatly rewarded by learning where I could buy the only known book on the subject, which was also written in Italian. It is called, "Gli Scavi del Dominus Flevit", printed in 1958 at the Tipografia del PP. Francescani, in Jerusalem. It was written by P. B. Bagatti and J. T. Milik, both Roman Catholic priests. The story of the discovery was there, but it seemed to be purposely hidden for much was lacking. I consequently determined to go to Jerusalem to see for myself, if possible, that which appeared to be almost unbelievable, especially since it came from priests, who naturally because of the existing tradition that Peter was buried in Rome, would be the last ones to welcome such a discovery or to bring it to the attention of the world. In Jerusalem I spoke to many Franciscan priests who all read, finally, though reluctantly, that the bones of Simon Bar Jona (St. Peter) were found in Jerusalem, on the Franciscan monastery site called, "Dominus Flevit" (where Jesus was supposed to have wept over [pg. 4] Jerusalem), on the Mount of Olives. The pictures show the story. The first show an excavation where the names of Christian Biblical characters were found on the ossuaries (bone boxes). The names of Mary and Martha were found on one box and right next to it was one with the name of Lazarus, their brother. Other names of early Christians were found on other boxes. Of greatest interest, however, was that which was found within twelve feet from the place where the remains of Mary, Martha and Lazarus were found—the remains of St. Peter. They were found in an ossuary, on the outside of which was clearly and beautifully written in Aramaic, "Simon Bar Jona".

The charcoal inscription reads: "Shimon Bar Yonah" which means "Simon [Peter] son of Jonah". Mat 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. I talked to a Yale professor, who is an archaeologist, and was director of the American School of Oriental Research in Jerusalem. He told me that it would be very improbable that a name with three words, and one so complete, could refer to any other than St. Peter.

But what makes the possibility of error more remote is that the remains were found in a Christian burial ground, and more yet, of the first century, the very time in which Peter lived. In fact, I have a letter from a noted scientist stating that he can tell by the writing that it was written just before the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus in 70 A.D. I talked to priest Milik, the co-writer of this Italian book, in the presence of my friend, a Christian Arab, Mr. S. J. Mattar, who now is the warden of the Garden Tomb, where Jesus was buried and rose again. This priest, Milik, admitted that he knew that the bones of St. Peter are not in Rome. I was very much surprised that he would admit that, so to confirm his admittance, I said, to which he also agreed, "There is a hundred times more evidence that Peter was buried in Jerusalem than in Rome." This was something of an understatement, for he knew as I know that there is absolutely no evidence at all that Peter was buried in Rome. I have spoken on the subject to many Franciscan priests who either were or had been in Jerusalem, and they all agree that the tomb and remains of St. Peter are in Jerusalem. There was just one exception which is interesting and which only proves the point. The Franciscan priest, Augusto Spykerman, who was in charge of the semi-private museum inside the walls of old Jerusalem, by the site of the Franciscan Church of the Flagellation, was that exception. When I asked to see the museum, he showed it to the three of us, Mr. Mattar, who in addition to being warden of the Tomb of Christ, had been the manager of an English bank in Jerusalem, a. professional photographer and myself. But he told us nothing of the discovery. I knew that the evidence of Peter’s burial was there, for priests had told me that relics from the Christian burial ground were preserved within this museum. People who lived in Jerusalem all their lives and official guides who are supposed to know every inch of the city, however, knew nothing of this [pg 5] discovery, so well was it withheld from the public. I had asked an elderly official guide where the tomb of St. Peter was. He responded in a very profound and majestic tone of voice, "The Tomb of St. Peter has never been found in Jerusalem." "Oh," I said, "but I have seen the burial place of Peter with my own eyes." He turned on me with a fierceness that is so common among Arabs. "What," he replied, "you a foreigner mean to tell me that you know where the tomb of St. Peter is when I have been an official guide for thirty-five years and know every inch of ground in Jerusalem?" I was afraid that he would jump at my throat. I managed to calm him as I said, "But sir, here are the pictures and you can see the ossuary, among others, with Peter’s name in Aramaic. You can also see this for yourself on the Mount of Olives on the Franciscan Convent site called, "Dominus Flevit". When I finished he slowly turned away in stunned amazement. A person who has seen this Christian burial ground and knows the circumstances surrounding the case could never doubt that this truly is the burial place of St. Peter and of other Christians. I, too, walked around in a dreamy amazement for about a week for I could hardly believe what I had seen and heard. Since the circulation of this article, they do not allow anyone to see this burial place.

Before things had gone very far, I had been quite discouraged for I could get no information from the many priests with whom I had talked. However, I continued questioning priests wherever I would find them. Finally one priest dropped some information. With that knowledge I approached another priest who warily asked me where I had acquired that information. I told him that a priest had told me. Then he admitted the point and dropped a little more information. It went on like that for some time until I got the whole picture, and I was finally directed to where I could see the evidence for myself. To get the story, it made me feel as though I had a bull by the tail and were trying to pull him through a key hole. But when I had gathered all the facts in the case, the priests could not deny the discovery of the tomb, but even confirmed it, though reluctantly. In fact, I have the statement from a Spanish priest on the Mount of Olives on a tape recorder, to that effect.

But here we were talking to this Franciscan priest in charge of the museum, asking him questions which he tried to evade but could not because of the information I had already gathered from the many priests with whom I had spoken. Finally after the pictures of the evidence were taken, which was nothing short of a miracle that he allowed us to do so, I complimented him on the marvelous discovery of the tomb of St. Peter in Jerusalem that the Franciscans had made. He was clearly nervous as he said, "Oh no, the tomb of St. Peter is in Rome." But as he said that, his voice faltered, a fact which even my [pg. 6] friend, Mr. Mattar, had noticed. Then I looked him squarely in the eyes and firmly said, "No, the tomb of St. Peter is in Jerusalem." He looked at me like a guilty school boy and held his peace. He was, no doubt, placed there to hide the facts, but his actions and words, spoke more convincingly about the discovery than those priests who finally admitted the truth. I also spoke to a Franciscan priest in authority at the priest’s printing plant within the walls of old Jerusalem, where their book on the subject was printed. He also admitted that the tomb of St. Peter is in Jerusalem. Then when I visited the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, I encountered a Franciscan monk. After telling him what I thought of the wonderful discovery the Franciscans had made, I asked him plainly, "Do you folks really believe that those are the remains of St. Peter?" He responded, "Yes we do, we have no choice in the matter. The clear evidence is there." I did not doubt the evidence, but what surprised me was that these priests and monks believed that which was against their own religion and on top of that, to admit it to others was something out of this world. Usually a Catholic, either because he is brainwashed or stubbornly doesn’t want to see anything only that which he has been taught, will not allow himself to believe anything against his religion, much less to admit it to others. But there is a growing, healthy attitude among many Catholics, to "prove all things, hold fast to that which is good" as the Master admonished us all. Then I asked, "Does Father Bagatti (co-writer of the book in Italian on the subject, and archaeologist) really believe that those are the bones of St. Peter?" "Yes, he does," was the reply. Then I asked, "But what does the Pope think of all this?" That was a thousand dollar question and he gave me a million dollar answer. "Well," he confidentially answered in a hushed voice, "Father Bagatti told me personally that three years ago he went to the Pope (Pius XII) in Rome and showed him the evidence and the Pope said to him, ‘Well, we will have to make some changes, but for the time being, keep this thing quiet’." In awe I asked also in a subdued voice, "So the Pope really believes that those are the bones of St. Peter?" "Yes," was his answer. "The documentary evidence is there, he could not help but believe."

I visited various renowned archaeologists on the subject. Dr. Albright, of the John Hopkins University in Baltimore, told me that he personally knew priest Bagatti and that he was a very competent archaeologist. I also spoke with Dr. Nelson Gluek, archaeologist and [pg. 7] president of the Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati, Ohio. I showed him the pictures found in this article, but being with him for only a few minutes I therefore could not show him the wealth of material that you have before you in this article. However, he quickly recognized the Aramaic words to be "Simon Bar Jona". (Aramaic is very similar to Hebrew). I asked him if he would write a statement to that effect. He said to do so would cast a reflection on the competency of the priest J. T. Milik, who he knew to be a very able scientist. But he said that he would write a note. I quote, "I regard Father J. T. Milik as a first class scholar in the Semitic field." He added, "I do not consider that names on ossuaries are conclusive evidence that they are those of the Apostles."

Nelson Glueck

I quote this letter of Dr. Glueck because it shows that priest Milik is a competent archaeologist. As I have mentioned, I was only able to be with him for a few minutes and was not able to show him but a very small part of the evidence. Anyone, including myself, would readily agree with Dr. Glueck that if only the name Simon Bar Jona on the ossuary was all the evidence that was available it would not be conclusive evidence that it was of the Apostle Peter, though it would certainly be a strong indication. The story of the cave and the ossuaries and the regular cemetery just outside of the Convent site is this: It was a Roman custom that when a person had died and after about ten years when the body had decomposed, the grave would be opened. The bones would be placed in a small ossuary with the name of the person carefully written on the outside front. These ossuaries would then be placed in a cave as in the case of this Christian burial ground and thus making room for others. But this cave or burial place where the ossuaries were found and which was created and brought about through the natural and disinterested sequence of events, without any reason to change facts or circumstances, was a greater testimony than if there were a witness recorded, stating that Peter was buried there. And yet, even that is unmistakenly recorded in the three words in Aramaic of the ossuary, Simon Bar Jona. Herein, lies the greatest proof that Peter never was a Pope, and never was in Rome, for if he had been, it would have certainly been proclaimed in the New Testament. History, likewise, would not have been silent on the subject, as they were not silent in the case of the Apostle Paul. Even the Catholic history would have claimed the above as a fact and not as fickle tradition. To omit Peter as being Pope and in

Rome (and the Papacy) would be like omitting the Law of Moses or the Prophets or the Acts of the Apostles from the Bible. Dr. Glueck, being Jewish, and having been to Jerusalem, no doubt, is fully aware of the fact that for centuries the Catholic Church bought up what were thought to be holy sites, some of which did not stand up to Biblical description. For instance, the priests say that the tomb of Jesus is within the walls of the old Jerusalem, in a hole in the ground; whereas, the Bible says that the tomb where Jesus was laid was hewn out of rock and a stone was rolled in front and not on top of it. The Garden Tomb at the foot of Golgotha, outside the walls of old Jerusalem, meets the Biblical description perfectly. In fact, all those who were hated by the Jewish leaders, as Jesus was, could never have been allowed to be buried within the gates of the Holy City. The tomb where Jesus lay was made for Joseph of Arimathaea. His family were all stout and short of stature. In this burial place you can see to this day where someone had carved deeper into the wall to make room for Jesus who was said to be about six feet tall. When Pope Pius XII declared the Assumption of Mary to be an article of faith in 1950, the Catholic Church in Jerusalem then quickly sold the tomb of Mary to the Armenian Church. Ex-priest Lavallo told me personally that there is another tomb of St. Mary in Ephesus. But the tomb of St. Peter is altogether different for they would rather that it never existed, and to buy or sell such a site would be out of the question. It fell upon them in this manner, as I was told by a Franciscan monk of the monastery of "Dominus Flevit". One of their members was spading the ground on this site in 1953, when his shovel fell through. Excavation was started and there, a large underground Christian burial ground was uncovered. The initial of Christ in Greek was written there which would never have been found in a Jewish, Arab or pagan cemetery. By the structure of the writings, it was established by scientists that they were of the days just before the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus in 70 A.D. On the ossuaries were found many names of the Christian of the early Church. It was prophesied in the Bible that Jesus would stand on the Mount of Olives at His return to earth. You can see then, how the Christians would be inclined to have their burial ground on the Mount, for here also, had been a favorite meeting place of Jesus and His disciples. In all the cemetery, nothing was found (as also in the Catacombs in Rome) which resemble Arab, Jewish, Catholic or pagan practices. Dr. Glueck, being Jewish, is not fully aware, no doubt, that such a discovery is very embarrassing since it undermines the very foundation of the Roman Catholic Church. Since Peter did not live in Rome and therefore was not martyred or buried there, it naturally follows that he [pg. 13] was not their first Pope.

The Catholic Church says that Peter was Pope in Rome from 41 to 66 A.D., a period of twenty-five years, but the Bible shows a different story. The book of the Acts of the Apostles (in either the Catholic or Protestant Bible) records the following: Peter was preaching the Gospel to the circumcision (the Jews) in Caesarea and Joppa in Palestine, ministering unto the household of Cornelius, which is a distance of 1,800 miles from Rome (Acts 10:23, 24). Soon after, about the year 44 A.D. (Acts 12), Peter was cast into prison in Jerusalem by Herod, but he was released by an angel. From 46 to 52 A.D., we read in the 13th chapter that he was in Jerusalem preaching the difference between Law and Grace. Saul was converted in 34 A.D. and became Paul the Apostle (Acts 9). Paul tells us that three years after his conversion in 37 A.D., he "went up to Jerusalem to see Peter" (Galatians 1:18), and in 51 A.D., fourteen years later, he again went up to Jerusalem (Gal. 2:1, 8), Peter being mentioned. Soon after that he met Peter in Antioch, and as Paul says, "Withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed," Gal. 2:11. The evidence is abundant, the truth is clear from the Scriptures which have never failed. It would be breathtaking to read of the boldness of Paul in dealing with Peter. Very few, if any, have withstood a Pope and lived (except in these days when everybody seems to withstand him). If Peter were Pope it would have been no different. Paul does not only withstand Peter but rebukes him and blames him of being at fault.

This reminds me of my visit to the St. Angelo Castle in Rome. This castle, which is a very strong fortress, is connected with the Vatican by a high arched viaduct of about a mile in length over which popes have fled in time of danger. The Roman Catholic guide showed me a prison room which had a small air-tight chamber in it. He told me that a Cardinal who had contended with a pope on doctrine was thrown into this air-tight chamber for nearly two hours until he almost smothered to death. He then was led to the guillotine a few feet away and his head was cut off. Another thing remained with me forcibly. The guide showed me through the apartments of the various popes who had taken refuge there. In each case he also showed me the apartment of the mistresses of each of the popes. I was amazed that he made no attempt to hide anything. I asked him "Are you not a Catholic?"

He humbly answered, "Oh yes, I am a Catholic, but I am ashamed of the history of many of the popes, but I trust that our modern popes are better." I then asked him, "Surely you are aware of the affair between Pope Pius XII and his housekeeper?" Many in Rome say that she ran [pg. 14] the affairs of the Pope and the Vatican as well. He hung his head in shame and sadly said, "Yes, I know." All this explains why the Catholic Church has been so careful to keep this discovery unknown. They were successful in doing just that from 1953, when it was discovered by the Franciscans on their own convent site, until 1959. Having succeeded for so long in keeping "this thing quiet," as the Pope had admonished, they were off guard when a fellow at that time came along who appeared harmless but persistent. Little did they know that this fellow would publish the news everywhere. Their position in the world is shaky enough without this discovery becoming generally known. As I have mentioned, I had a very agreeable talk with priest Milik, but I did not have the opportunity to see priest Bagatti while in Jerusalem. I wrote to him, however, on March 15, 1960, as follows: "I have spoken with a number of Franciscan priests and monks and they have told me about you and the book of which you are a co-writer. I had hoped to see you and to compliment you on such a great discovery, but time would not permit. Having heard so much about you and that you are an archaeologist (with the evidence in hand), I was convinced, with you, concerning the ancient burial ground that the remains found in the ossuary with the name on it, ‘Simon Bar Jona’, written in Aramaic, were those of St. Peter." It is remarkable that in his reply he did not contradict my statement, which he certainly would have done if he honestly could have done so. "I was very much convinced with you ... that the remains found in the ossuary ... were those of St. Peter." This confirms the talk I had with the Franciscan monk in Bethlehem and the story he told me of Priest Bagatti’s going to the Pope with the evidence concerning the bones of St. Peter in Jerusalem. In his letter one can see that he is careful because of the Pope’s admonition to keep this discovery quiet. He therefore wrote me that he leaves the whole explanation of the Aramaic words, "Simon Bar Jona", to priest Milik. This is a familiar way of getting out of a similar situation. In priest Bagatti’s letter one can see that he is in a difficult position. He cannot go against what he had written in 1953, at the time of the discovery of this Christian-Jewish burial ground, nor what he had said to the Franciscan monk about his visit to the Pope. However, he does raise a question which helps him to get out of the situation without altogether contradicting himself and at the same time putting a smoke screen around the truth. He wrote, "Supposing that it is ‘Jona’ (on the ossuary) as I believe, it may be some other relative of St. Peter, because names were passed on from family to family. To be able to propose the identification of it with St. Peter would go against a long tradition, which has its own value. Anyway, another volume will come [pg. 15] soon that will demonstrate that the cemetery was Christian and of the first century to the second century A.D.

The salute in God most devoted P. B. Bagatti C. F. M."

As I have shown, after the admonition of the Pope to "keep this thing quiet," priest Bagatti leaves the interpretation of the whole matter to priest Milik who offers several suggestions but in the end declares that the original statement of priest Bagatti may be true—that the inscription and the remains were of St. Peter. It is also very interesting and highly significant that priest Bagatti, in his attempt to neutralize his original statement and the consternation the discovery had and would have if it were generally known, says in reference to the name Simon Bar Jona (St. Peter), "It may be some other relative of St. Peter, because names were passed on from generation to generation." In other words he says that Peter’s name, Simon Bar Jona, could have been given him from a relative of the same name of generations before him, or, could belong to a relative generations after St. Peter. Both speculations are beyond the realm of the possible. First of all, it could not refer to a relative before St. Peter for the Christian burial ground could only have come into being after Jesus began. His public ministry and had converts; and therefore, could not belong to a relative before Peter’s time, since only those who were converted through Christ’s ministry were buried there. Titus destroyed Jerusalem in 70 A.D. and left it desolate. Therefore, it is impossible that the inscription could refer to a relative after Peter’s time. One encyclopedia explains the destruction in these words, ‘‘With this event the history of ancient Jerusalem came to a close, for it was left desolate and it’s inhabitants were scattered abroad." From all evidence, Peter was about fifty years old when Jesus called him to be an Apostle, and he died around the age of 82, or about the year 62 A.D. Since by these figures there was only eight years left from the time of Peter’s death until the destruction of Jerusalem, it was then impossible that the inscription and remains belonged to generations after Peter. In those days names were passed on to another only after a lapse of many years. But let us say that immediately after the death of St. Peter, a baby was christened, "Simon Bar Jona", the inscription still could not have been of this baby for the remains were of an adult and not of a child of eight years who had died just before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D., at which time "the history of ancient Jerusalem came to a close, for it was left desolate and its inhabitants were scattered abroad." [pg. 16]

This ancient Christian burial ground shows that Peter died and was buried in Jerusalem, which is easily understandable since neither history nor the Bible tells of Peter’s having been in Rome. To make matters more clear, the Bible tells us that Peter was the Apostle to the Jews. It was Paul who was the Apostle to the Gentiles, and both history and the Bible tells of his being in Rome. No wonder that the Roman Catholic Bishop, Strossmayer, in his great speech against papal infallibility before the Pope and the Council of 1870 said, "Scaliger, one of the most learned men, has not hesitated to say that St. Peter’s episcopate and residence in Rome ought to be classed with ridiculous legends." Eusebius, one of the most learned men of his time, wrote the Church history up to the year 325 A.D. He said that Peter never was in Rome. This Church history was translated by Jerome from the original Greek, but in his translation he added a fantastic story of Peter’s residence in Rome. This was a common practice in trying to create credence in their doctrines, using false statements, false letters and falsified history. This is another reason why we cannot rely on tradition, but only on the infallible Word of God. The secrecy surrounding this case is amazing, and yet understandable, since Catholics largely base their faith on the assumption that Peter was their first Pope and that he was martyred and buried there. But I am somewhat of the opinion that the Franciscan priests, those who are honest, would be glad to see the truth proclaimed, even if it displeased those who are over them. While visiting with priest Milik, I told him of the highly educated priest with whom I had spoken just before going from Rome to Jerusalem. He admitted to me that the remains of Peter are not in the tomb of St. Peter in the Vatican. I asked him what had happened to them? He responded, "We don’t know, but we think that the Saracens stole them away." First of all, the Saracens never got to Rome, but even if they had, what would they want with the bones of Peter? But they never got to Rome, so there it ends. We had a good laugh together, but more so when I told him of my discussion with a brilliant American priest in Rome. I asked this American priest if he knew that the bones of Peter were not in the "Tomb of St. Peter" in the Vatican. He admitted that they were not there. However, he said that a good friend of his, an archaeologist, had been excavating under St. Peter’s Basilica for the bones of St. Peter for a number of years and five years ago he found them. Now a man can be identified by his fingerprints, but never by his bones. So I asked him how he knew they were the bones of St. Peter? He hesitated and tried to change the subject, but on my insistence he finally explained that they had taken the bones to a chemist, and they were analyzed and it was judged that the bones were of a man who had died at about the age [pg. 17] of sixty-five; therefore, they must be Peter’s. How ridiculous can people be? Mark you, all the priests agree that the Vatican and St. Peter’s were built over a pagan cemetery. This was a very appropriate place for them to build since, as even Cardinal Newman admitted, there are many pagan practices in the Roman Catholic Church. You realize surely, that Christians would never bury their dead in a pagan cemetery, and you may be very sure that pagans would never allow a Christian to be buried in their cemetery. So, even if Peter died in Rome, which is out of the question, surely the pagan cemetery under St. Peter’s Basilica would be the last place in which he would have been buried. Also, Peter from every indication, lived to be over 80 and not 65 years old. The Pope was right, going back to the early Christian burial ground, they must make changes and many of them and fundamental ones at that. But I am afraid that the Pope’s (Pius XII) admittance of the discovery on Bagatti’s presentation of the documentary evidence was to satisfy Bagatti but at the same time admonishing him to keep the information quiet, hoping that the truth of the discovery would die out. But they have said that after all these years of excavation under the Vatican, they have discovered Greek words which read, "Peter is buried here," and it gives the date 160 A.D. First of all, the very structure of the sentence immediately gives one the impression that either quite recently or long ago, someone put the sign there hoping that it would be taken as authentic in order to establish that which then, and even now, has never been proven. Then there is a discrepancy in the date, for Peter was martyred around the year 62 A.D. and not 160 A.D. Thirdly, why is it that they mention nothing about finding bones under or around the sign? While visiting the Catacombs, one sees a few things which are not becoming to Christians, but which tend to indicate that the Christians had some pagan practices, similar to those of Rome today. Nothing is said about them and only after persistent questioning will the Roman Catholic priest, who acts as guide, tell you that those things, images, etc., were placed there centuries after the early Christian era.

In 1950, just a few years prior to the discovery of the Christian burial ground in Jerusalem, the Pope made the strange declaration that the bones of St. Peter were found under St. Peter’s in Rome. Strange it was, for since beginning to build the church in 1450 (finished in 1626) they erected, St. Peter’s Tomb (?) under the large dome and Bernini's serpentine columns. Since then multiplied millions were thereby deceived into believing that the remains of St. Peter were there, which the hierarchy had all along known was not true, as is proven by the late Pope’s declaration. The following was published in the Newsweek of [pg. 18] July 1, 1957: "It was in 1950 that Pope Pius XII in his Christmas message announced that the tomb of St. Peter had indeed been found, as tradition held, beneath the immense dome of the Cathedral (there was, however, no evidence that the bones uncovered there belonged to the body of the martyr)." The parentheses are Newsweek’s. To make an announcement of such importance when there is absolutely "no evidence" is rather ridiculous as is also brought out in the Time Magazine of October 28, 1957 (as in above, we quote the article word for word). "A thorough account in English of the discoveries beneath St. Peter’s is now available ... by British archaeologists Jocelyn Toynbee and John Ward Perkins. The authors were not members of the excavating team, but scholars Toynbee (a Roman Catholic) and Perkins (an Anglican) poured over the official Vatican reports painstakingly examined the diggings. Their careful independent conclusions fall short of the Pope’s flat statement." (The Pope’s statement that the remains of St. Peter were found under St. Peter’s in Rome). The excavation under St. Peter’s for the remains of St. Peter is still going on secretly, in spite of the Pope’s declaration of 1950. Then in 1965, an archaeologist at Rome University, Prof. Margherita Guarducci, tells of a new set of bones belonging to Peter. The story was fantastic but lacked common sense and even bordered on the infantile—but a drowning man will grab for a straw and a straw it was to many. But the Palo Alto Times (California), May 9, 1967, came out with an article on the subject, and I quote, "Other experts, among them Msgr. Joseph Ruysschaert, vice prefect of the Vatican Library are not convinced by Miss Guarducci’s evidence. ‘There are too many unknowns,’ he told reporters on a recent tour of the Vatican grottoes, ‘There is no continuous tracing of the bones. We lack historical proof. They could be anyone’s bones.’ The Vatican would seem to be on the monsignor's side because so far it has taken no steps to officially recognize the bones as St. Peter’s," continues the article. [A similar article in the Valley Independent, Monessen Pa., May 10, 1967] The intelligent priest of whom I have mentioned said that Peter’s bones were found and he was a man who died of about 62 years of age, the tests indicated. Pope Pius XII declared these bones were the bones of St. Peter, in his Christmas message of 1950. These were the same as claimed by Newsweek, "there was, however, no evidence that the bones uncovered there belonged to the body of the martyr (Peter)," as well as the above doubtful statements of the archaeologists working on the case. The Pope, notwithstanding, was overjoyed to think they had found the bones of St. Peter until further examination proved that these bones were those of a woman. This fact came out in an article on [pg. 19] the subject in the S. F. Chronicle of June 27, 1968.

To continue the history of another case in which they have erred: In spite of the statements by the high Papal authority above and the resultant lesson that should have been learned, the Pope, a year later claimed the Prof. Margherita bones as his very own, that is, those of St. Peter. When the bones were found there was little importance placed upon them and they were filed away as such. But when the first set of Peter’s bones turned out so tragically, there was a vacuum left and something had to be done. Again they turned their thoughts to the filed-away bones, the only hope they had of success. In them there was a ray of hopes for the bones were minus a skull, which could go along with the story of the supposed skull of St. Peter which had for centuries been guarded in the church of St. John Lateran in Rome. With a generous mixture of ideas, suppositions, theories and wishful thinking, a fairly logical story emerged. It was then declared by Pope Paul as the Gospel truth, that these now, were the genuine bones of St. Peter, and most of the faithful accepted them as such. For a while all was well until another hitch developed. This time, as fate would have it, the bones in connection with the skull which was guarded for centuries as that of St. Peter, were found incompatible to the more recent bones of St. Peter. The dilemma was terrible. They were between the Devil and the deep blue sea. They have juggled around the skulls of St. Peter causing confusion. It was a choice of claiming these bones championed by Prof. Margherita as fake, or claiming as fake the skull accepted by hundreds of Popes as that of St. Peter. They rejected the past rather than expose themselves to the ridicule of the present. Prof. Margherita claims in this article which appeared in the Manchester Guardian in London, as well as the S. F. Chronicle of June 27, 1968, concerning the long accepted skull of St. Peter, as "it is a fake." Then the article continues, "The hundreds of Popes and millions of Roman Catholics who have accepted and venerated the other skull were innocent victims of another early tradition." [A similar article in the Press Telegram, Long Beach Calif., Jan. 3, 1968] But the most astounding statement in the long article found in the above mentioned newspapers is, "The professor did not submit them (Peter’s bones?) to modern scientific tests, which would have determined the approximate age, because, she feared, the process would have reduced them to dust." How could any scientific study of bones be carried out without first scientifically determining the age of the person, or bones? This would be of the greatest interest and the most important for further research. Also any scientist or chemist knows that you do not have to submit the whole skeleton for testing to determine the age. A part of the shin bone or of a rib would be sufficient. It appears that she was protecting her "Peter’s bones" from another [pg. 20] possible disaster, which a wrong age would have caused. The Vatican and others have calculated through all existing evidence that Peter lived to be around 80 and 82 years, and that he died around the years of 62 or 64 A.D. These figures go along perfectly, as does everything else in the case, with the remains found in the Christian burial ground on the Mount of Olives and in the ossuary on which was "clearly and beautifully written," Simon Bar Jona in Aramaic. The following was taken from the book, Races of Mankind, page 161: "Strained attempts to have Peter, the Apostle to the Hebrews of the East, in Paul’s territory at Rome and martyred there are unworthy of serious consideration in the light of all contemporary evidence. At his age (eighty-two), that would not have been practicable. In none of Paul’s writings is there the slightest intimation that Peter ever had been or was at that city. All statements to the contrary were made centuries later and are fanciful and hearsay. The Papacy was not organized until the second half of the 8th century. It broke away from the Eastern Church (in the Ency. Brit., 13th Ed., vol. 21, page 636) under Pippin III; also the Papacy, by Abbe Guette."

The great historian, Schaff, states that the idea of Peter being in Rome is irreconcilable with the silence of the Scriptures, and even with the mere fact of Paul’s epistle to the Romans. In the year 58, Paul wrote his epistle to the Roman church, but does not mention Peter, although he does name 28 leaders in the church at Rome (Rom. 16:7). It must, therefore, be concluded that if the whole subject is faced with detached objectivity, the conclusion must inevitably be reached that Peter was never in Rome. Paul lived and wrote in Rome, but he declared that "Only Luke is with me." [1 Tim. 4:11]