MIRACLES

[Reggie Belafonte]

hope you understand Reg that we understand you are just meaning to opine here, but you are not stating them as opinions or beliefs, but as Absolute Truths.
So iow it becomes valid to ask you if you have a crystal ball, or are you consulting the spirits of the dead or something?

How else do you think Paul was talking about, if it was not of the Holy Spirit.
One can convey that it was in the Holy Spirit he was talking about.
If it was not as such then what was it, was he packing cones.

 

[bbyrd009]

How else do you think Paul was talking about, if it was not of the Holy Spirit.
One can convey that it was in the Holy Spirit he was talking about.
If it was not as such then what was it, was he packing cones.

well, i don't mean that i disagree necessarily. But your statement "Paul was taken up to the third heaven" does not even match the account, see

 

[Reggie Belafonte]

well, i don't mean that i disagree necessarily. But your statement "Paul was taken up to the third heaven" does not even match the account, see

What do you think he was doing then.

 

[JesusIsFaithful]

What do you think he was doing then.

Paul was talking about knowing a man that went up to the third heaven; I believe he was talking about the apostle John from which the Book of Revelation had come.

2 Corinthians 12:1It is not expedient for me doubtless to glory. I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord. 2 I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth such an one caught up to the third heaven. 3 And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth 4 How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter. 5 Of such an one will I glory:..........

 

[Reggie Belafonte]

Paul was talking about knowing a man that went up to the third heaven; I believe he was talking about the apostle John from which the Book of Revelation had come.

2 Corinthians 12:1It is not expedient for me doubtless to glory. I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord. 2 I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth such an one caught up to the third heaven. 3 And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth 4 How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter. 5 Of such an one will I glory:..........

He is speaking of himself in the third person,.
Paul was at the time was totally abstracted from the senses, as in ecstasy.
The third heaven, paradise, the abode of the blessed.
12:9-10 proves this.

 

[bbyrd009]

What do you think he was doing then.

He is speaking of himself in the third person

Paul was at the time was totally abstracted from the senses, as in ecstasy.

i would have called it rapture, but ya. So we agree he did not actually go anywhere right

 

[bbyrd009]

1Boasting is necessary. It is not profitable, but I will move on to visionsa and revelationsb of the Lord.

and the point might be to relate what happens when we get too holy? maybe? dunno

10So I take pleasure in weaknesses, insults, catastrophes, persecutions, and in pressures, because of Christ.l For when I am weak, then I am strong.

 

[Miss Hepburn]

Ecstasy, bliss, nirvana, enraptured, rapture, swept up in the Divine, intoxicated (spiritually), cosmic consciousness, a glimpse of Heaven...
Yup, all the same to me!

 

[JesusIsFaithful]

He is speaking of himself in the third person,.
Paul was at the time was totally abstracted from the senses, as in ecstasy.
The third heaven, paradise, the abode of the blessed.
12:9-10 proves this.

That is incorrect. Paul is writing a second letter to the Corinthians which hardly started off with that for you to infer that he was still enraptured and speaking in a third person. He plainly testified to comparing himself to another person in whom he would glory in that person, but when it comes to himself, he would glory in his infirmities.

Those infirmities was that he was given a thorn in the flesh so that others would not exalt him higher than they should because of all the revelations and edification coming by him through his letters to the churches. Indeed, a messenger of Satan to buffet him in the flesh would suggest what psych doctors would label as mentally ill, for hearing voices; modern day psych doctors would be wrong, but that infirmity would certainly keep other believers from exalting Paul higher than they ought to as any one today would when they hear of a fellow believer hearing voices.

Some think his infirmity was failing eyesight, and although he did have failing eyesight, that was hardly an infirmity that would prevent any believer from exalting higher than they ought to think.

Anyway, Paul was not in any rapture state in writing in a third person as that would not make any sense for applying verses 9-10 to mean, when Paul was citing an infirmity that he believes would certainly prevent believers from exalting him higher than they ought to.

Paul gloried in that person taken to the third heavens and cited that it was unlawful to speak of it which is how the Book of Revelation was written in that no one could add to or take away a word out of that Book of Revelation without dire consequence as written by the apostle John.

Since scripture is not of any private interpretation, then I suggest you check with Him at that throne of grace for wisdom and discernment in the reading of His words in 2 Corinthians 12 th chapter if you desire to be in truth and speaking truth in serving Him as well as representing Him as His disciple.

I rely on Him as my Good shepherd to correct me when I am wrong as each and every believer should also; not just in proving what others teach but with their own conclusions when reading the scripture.

James 1:5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.

 

[bbyrd009]

1Boasting is necessary. It is not profitable, but I will move on to visionsa and revelationsb of the Lord.

might even be a primer for interpreting the Rev i guess

 

[epostle1]

MODERN MIRACLES HAVE STRICT RULES

BY DAVID VAN BIEMA

The paradox of human miracle assessment is that the only way to discern whether a phenomenon is supernatural is by having trained rationalists testify that it outstrips their training. Since most wonders admitted by the modern church are medical cures, it consults with doctors. Di Ruberto has access to a pool of 60 - "We've got all the medical branches covered," says his colleague, Dr. Ennio Ensoli - and assigns each purported miracle to two specialists on the vanquished ailment.

They apply criteria established in the 1700s by Pope Benedict XIV: among them, that the disease was serious; that there was objective proof of its existence; that other treatments failed; and that the cure was rapid and lasting. Any one can be a stumbling block. Pain, explains Ensoli, means little: "Someone might say he feels bad, but how do you measure that?" Leukemia remissions are not considered until they have lasted a decade. A cure attributable to human effort, however prayed for, is insufficient. "Sometimes we have cases that you could call exceptional, but that's not enough." says Ensoli. "Exceptional doesn't mean inexplicable."

"Inexplicable," or inspiegabile, is the happy label that Di Ruberto, the doctors and several other clerics in the Vatican's "medical conference" give to a case if it survives their scrutiny. It then passes to a panel of theologians, who must determine whether the inexplicable resulted from prayer. If so, the miracle is usually approved by a caucus of Cardinals and the Pope.

Some find the process all too rigorous. Says Father Paolino Rossi, whose job, in effect, is lobbying for would-be saints from his own Capuchin order: "It's pretty disappointing when you work for years and years and then see the miracle get rejected." But others suggest it could be stricter still.

There is another major miracle-validating body in the Catholic world: the International Medical Committee for the shrine at Lourdes. Since miracles at Lourdes are all ascribed to the intercession of the Virgin Mary, (God heals, not Mary) it is not caught up in the saint-making process, which some believe the Pope has running overtime. Roger Pilon, the head of Lourdes' committee, notes that he and his colleagues have not approved a miracle since 1989, while the Vatican recommended 12 in 1994 alone. "Are we too severe?" he wonders out loud. "Are they really using the same criteria?"

Reported by Greg Burke/Lourdes
Copyright 1995 Time Inc. All rights reserved.
http://doxa.ws/other/Miracles.html

 

[bbyrd009]

i'd be listening to the lobsters and ignoring the pope wadr

 

[Reggie Belafonte]

MODERN MIRACLES HAVE STRICT RULES

BY DAVID VAN BIEMA

The paradox of human miracle assessment is that the only way to discern whether a phenomenon is supernatural is by having trained rationalists testify that it outstrips their training. Since most wonders admitted by the modern church are medical cures, it consults with doctors. Di Ruberto has access to a pool of 60 - "We've got all the medical branches covered," says his colleague, Dr. Ennio Ensoli - and assigns each purported miracle to two specialists on the vanquished ailment.

They apply criteria established in the 1700s by Pope Benedict XIV: among them, that the disease was serious; that there was objective proof of its existence; that other treatments failed; and that the cure was rapid and lasting. Any one can be a stumbling block. Pain, explains Ensoli, means little: "Someone might say he feels bad, but how do you measure that?" Leukemia remissions are not considered until they have lasted a decade. A cure attributable to human effort, however prayed for, is insufficient. "Sometimes we have cases that you could call exceptional, but that's not enough." says Ensoli. "Exceptional doesn't mean inexplicable."

"Inexplicable," or inspiegabile, is the happy label that Di Ruberto, the doctors and several other clerics in the Vatican's "medical conference" give to a case if it survives their scrutiny. It then passes to a panel of theologians, who must determine whether the inexplicable resulted from prayer. If so, the miracle is usually approved by a caucus of Cardinals and the Pope.

Some find the process all too rigorous. Says Father Paolino Rossi, whose job, in effect, is lobbying for would-be saints from his own Capuchin order: "It's pretty disappointing when you work for years and years and then see the miracle get rejected." But others suggest it could be stricter still.

There is another major miracle-validating body in the Catholic world: the International Medical Committee for the shrine at Lourdes. Since miracles at Lourdes are all ascribed to the intercession of the Virgin Mary, (God heals, not Mary) it is not caught up in the saint-making process, which some believe the Pope has running overtime. Roger Pilon, the head of Lourdes' committee, notes that he and his colleagues have not approved a miracle since 1989, while the Vatican recommended 12 in 1994 alone. "Are we too severe?" he wonders out loud. "Are they really using the same criteria?"

Reported by Greg Burke/Lourdes
Copyright 1995 Time Inc. All rights reserved.
http://doxa.ws/other/Miracles.html

Well they are not using the same criteria now for sure.
Ever angle was looked into before Vatican II Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur is not used any more.

 

[Reggie Belafonte]

i would have called it rapture, but ya. So we agree he did not actually go anywhere right

Correct he did not in his body go anywhere.

 

[Reggie Belafonte]

That is incorrect. Paul is writing a second letter to the Corinthians which hardly started off with that for you to infer that he was still enraptured and speaking in a third person. He plainly testified to comparing himself to another person in whom he would glory in that person, but when it comes to himself, he would glory in his infirmities.

Those infirmities was that he was given a thorn in the flesh so that others would not exalt him higher than they should because of all the revelations and edification coming by him through his letters to the churches. Indeed, a messenger of Satan to buffet him in the flesh would suggest what psych doctors would label as mentally ill, for hearing voices; modern day psych doctors would be wrong, but that infirmity would certainly keep other believers from exalting Paul higher than they ought to as any one today would when they hear of a fellow believer hearing voices.

Some think his infirmity was failing eyesight, and although he did have failing eyesight, that was hardly an infirmity that would prevent any believer from exalting higher than they ought to think.

Anyway, Paul was not in any rapture state in writing in a third person as that would not make any sense for applying verses 9-10 to mean, when Paul was citing an infirmity that he believes would certainly prevent believers from exalting him higher than they ought to.

Paul gloried in that person taken to the third heavens and cited that it was unlawful to speak of it which is how the Book of Revelation was written in that no one could add to or take away a word out of that Book of Revelation without dire consequence as written by the apostle John.

Since scripture is not of any private interpretation, then I suggest you check with Him at that throne of grace for wisdom and discernment in the reading of His words in 2 Corinthians 12 th chapter if you desire to be in truth and speaking truth in serving Him as well as representing Him as His disciple.

I rely on Him as my Good shepherd to correct me when I am wrong as each and every believer should also; not just in proving what others teach but with their own conclusions when reading the scripture.

James 1:5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.

Paul is not hearing voices at all or any such rot.
There is no other person he is talking about, it's himself, you are taking it literally.
Great people talk of them selves in the third person, so as to others not to get mixed up with there genius.

 

[JesusIsFaithful]

Paul is not hearing voices at all or any such rot.

You can prove that by explaining what Paul meant by that thorn in the flesh being a messenger of Satan to buffet him in the flesh.

There is no other person he is talking about, it's himself, you are taking it literally.

Since Paul did not know how that person was taken up to the third heaven, then he cannot be talking about himself.

Great people talk of them selves in the third person, so as to others not to get mixed up with there genius.

Seeing how Paul was going to great length to debase himself by testifying to his thorn in the flesh so other believers will not see him as not so great, I fail to see how you classify what he was doing with that group of "great people" that you are talking about that speak about themselves in the third person.

 

[Reggie Belafonte]

You can prove that by explaining what Paul meant by that thorn in the flesh being a messenger of Satan to buffet him in the flesh.



Since Paul did not know how that person was taken up to the third heaven, then he cannot be talking about himself.



Seeing how Paul was going to great length to debase himself by testifying to his thorn in the flesh so other believers will not see him as not so great, I fail to see how you classify what he was doing with that group of "great people" that you are talking about that speak about themselves in the third person.

That thorn is his flesh I would think as to it's meaning.

He did not know how it was so, that it was beyond him.

The Original Sin buffets him in the flesh I would think.

Great people ? people of extinction among others may talk of themselves in the third person only to remove themselves apart from their greatness, so as to humble themselves before others.
Hercule Poirot the great detective does this and a Premier or Statesman etc may refer to his time in office as in this way, because that is separated from what he is at present and it's not boasting at all, but some may think it is. it just distinguishes this from that like so.

So the point Paul is making is a Spiritual comprehension here with his flesh and one who does not understand spiritual things can not pick up on the reality of what he is truly saying, because they do not have the Holy Spirit to give guidance in such matters.

So you see, Belafonte she speaks.

 

[bbyrd009]

Since Paul did not know how that person was taken up to the third heaven, then he cannot be talking about himself.

how is it that your dreams seem so real? Even after you have become lucid in them?
Paul was talking about himself, almost surely. Maybe even giving a primer on how to relate a concept without appearing to be boasting, by going into 3rd person, only not being as obvious about it as he was there, and wadr he was being pretty obvious?

The thorn in his flesh i guess we can agree could have been figurative even, some kinda-jealous type constantly giving him grief even, just like we use the term today?

 

[bbyrd009]

He did not know how it was so, that it was beyond him.

pretty good description of our pov of an adversary or someone envious of us i guess. Relating concepts in the third person would prolly head that off

 

[Ac28]

John 3:13
"And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven."

There is zero evidence that this has ever changed. Except for Christ, no human has EVER gone to Heaven. The 3rd Heaven is the future 3rd Heaven in time = the New Heaven(s). We are now in the 2nd Heaven. Tradition says that Paul spoke of himself in 2Cor 12:1-5. It sure doesn't sound like it, in that passage. I think the man Paul knew was John, when he was at Patmos in the Spirit and had his vision. One thing for sure - no one except Christ has ever gone to Heaven. Not that kid or those other pretenders. Not Jesse Duplantis. Not Paul or John. Not Elijah, Enoch, or Moses. Not the malefactor on the cross - Lk 23:43. Not anyone that says they did. Not anyone that has died. NO ONE EVER, PERIOD - except Christ, if you believe your Bible.