WHEN THE SAINTS GO MARCHING IN- [Samuel 3- John 2,4]
3:1 And the child Samuel ministered unto the LORD before Eli. And the word of
the LORD was precious in those days; there was no open vision.
MY LINKS [on John and Samuel]
ON VIDEO- [new notes below On Samuel and John]
.The Fire Dept. snake oil salesman
.Why water into wine in John’s gospel only?
.Stocks down 500 points after Brexit [no big thing] media
portrays it as devastating crash- 2 trillion lost!![true]
.3 months ago it was down about 4,000 [8 times more losses]
and the media acted like all was fine. I want you to see media manipulation-why
did they do this? Most were surprised when Britain actually voted to leave the
E.U- because the same thing that dove that vote- is driving the Trump vote.
Now- the media actually wanted a devastating crash [believe me] they didn’t get
it- so they ‘made’ one out of a blip- 400 point drop- while a 4000 point drop
was nothing [to them].
Now- they want to associate Trump with ‘disaster’ and
Hillary as ‘stable’- that’s why they are doing this. I personally believe the
market will crash- but because of all the stuff I’ve written about. I guarantee
you if we see a recession in the U.S. soon [remember- last month’s jobs number
was 38,000- a sign the crash was already coming] the media will say ‘it was the
Brexit’- watch and see]
.Historical analysis- 1st
I’ve been commenting on the book of Samuel- brief overview.
Samuel is born at a time in Israel’s history where ‘the word
of the Lord was rare- no open vision’.
God had stopped communicating to his people- because they
were lukewarm- not serious about God.
God was looking for at least one passionate person- to cry out
to him with all their heart.
He found that person in Hannah.
She was barren- could not get pregnant- and one day her desperate
plea came to God.
‘Give me a child- and I’ll dedicate him to you’.
This might have ‘surprised’ God [I know- not really] because
that type of desperation was missing from his people.
So- she has a son- Samuel- and she drops him off at the
church one day [the tabernacle] and leaves him for good.
He’s raised under the leadership of Eli- and his 2 sons- who
These sons were using ‘their religion’ for personal benefit-
they were wicked and sleeping around- and Eli knew this was going on- and didn’t
Yet- Eli has this woman [Hannah] who left her son- so he
could ‘live for God’.
I’m sure Eli must have felt guilty ‘geez- this lady is
living in the past- when people really did sell out to God’
And his own boys- were using religion as a scam.
One day [Samuel chapter 3] the young boy hears someone calling
Samuel gets up and thinks it’s Eli- he goes to Eli ‘what do
you want- I heard you call my name’.
Eli has no idea what Samuel is saying- and tells him to go
It happens 2 more times- and Eli realizes ‘Maybe God is
calling the boy’.
He gives Samuel instructions to go lay down- and when he hears
the voice again- to say ‘Speak God- I’m hear’.
Sure enough it does happen again- and God gives Samuel a
He tells Eli what God said- and the news was not good.
God will judge the wicked priests- Eli’s 2 sons- and God
will clean house.
I mention on the video how God revealed himself to Samuel
thru his voice- and I have been teaching about the Logos recently.
Hebrews 11:3 Through faith we understand that
the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were
not made of things which do appear.
God’s word comes first- then the ‘flesh’ the actual outworking
of what he wants to do-
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God,
and the Word was God.
John 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
John 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any
thing made that was made.
Samuel is an important figure in the nation at this time-
because he will be the one to anoint the first 2 kings that Israel has- Saul
God was willing to start speaking to his people again- but
there would be a cleansing first.
The prophet Amos said ‘woe to you who ae looking for God’s
day- asking ‘why is God not speaking anymore’.
Because there’s usually a reason his communication is cut
off from his people- and that’s because his people are not hearing [hearing in
the bible is not simply ‘hearing’ but it means you obey what is said] him
Yet- if we want to hear his prophets again- see his miracles-
then that entails repentance on our part.
For many years Eli’s wicked sons were ‘doing ministry’ and
the things they were getting away with seemed
a common practice.
All the people knew it was wrong- they despised ‘the church’
because bad stuff was going on.
Yet- that’s just the way things were.
But then God had a vessel for his voice- a prophet- dedicated
by a passionate mother- who kept her vow.
Much like the Virgin Mary- when the angel appeared to her-
she said ‘so be it’.
God needs willing people- then he too will speak again.
Yes- we too can hear his voice- and the word of the Lord
won’t be ‘scarce’.
I have also been commenting on John’s gospel.
John is unique- in many ways.
One of them is his gospel was written later than the other
Critics of the church have used this to take a shot at John-
sort of like ‘he shaped the story after to fit the narrative he wanted to
Well- I think he told the parts that the others left out-
and later on these became more important.
That’s why you only see the miracle of water into wine- in
I’ll give you my view- John wrote his 3 letters [1st
John]- and refuted the early Christian heresy
of Docetism [a form of Gnosticism].
They had a low view of matter- and formed a Christian cult- that
denied Jesus was really a man [because to them- flesh was bad].
So John says in his writings ‘those who deny Jesus has truly
come in the flesh- they are anti- Christ’.
And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God:
and this is that spirit ofantichrist, whereof ye have heard that it
should come; and even now already is it in the world. 1Jn. 4:3
Ok- when John tells us about Jesus turning water into wine-
he’s saying ‘look- Jesus interacted not just with people [the healings we read in the other gospels].
But also with matter- water- wine.
As in if John was saying ‘look- the created order is good-
God made it- Jesus even did miracles with it’.
John’s theme is Jesus is the Divine LOGOs- and he became
Just like in the story of Samuel- God needed a human vessel
to get his word back into the earth.
John tells us ‘we saw Jesus- and touched him’ –
John 1:1 That which was from the beginning, which
we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and
our hands have handled, of the Word of life;
Why tell us you touched him [our hands have handled of the
word of life]?
Because John was saying- SHOUTING ‘Jesus truly died on the
Cross- was really buried- and rose again- in the flesh’.
Just like the prophets of the bible- God needed vessel to get his Word into the earth- and in
the case of Jesus- he was THAT WORD.
And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his
name is called The Word of God. Rev. 19
1:18-31 Paul declares the actual preaching of the Cross to be the power of God.
The Jews sought for a sign [remember the sign of Jonas?] and the Greeks prided
themselves in wisdom. Paul declares that Jesus IS the wisdom and power of God.
In Christ is contained all the wisdom and power [signs] in the universe! Paul
says God destroyed the wisdom of unregenerate man and that Gods foolishness is
wiser than men’s greatest achievements apart from God. Wow, what an indictment
on enlightenment philosophy. Man goes thru stages of learning and knowledge
[renaissance, enlightenment. Industrial, scientific revolution] these are not
bad achievements in and of themselves. Many of the greatest scientists and
scientific discoveries were made by men of faith [Newton, Pascal, Faraday, etc]
the problem arises when men think that sheer humanistic reasoning, apart from
God, is the answer. Right now there is a movement [11-08] going on where some
atheists bought ad space on the sides of buses that say ‘why believe in a god?
Do good for goodness sake’. So they had both sides [Christian /Atheist] debate
it. The simple fact is, sheer humanism cannot even define ‘what good is’.
‘Good’ becomes a matter of what serves me best at the time of my decision.
Without God and special revelation [scripture-10 commandments] good can be
defined by Hitler’s regime as exterminating one class of society for the
benefit of the whole. Only Christian [or Deist, Jewish, Muslim] beliefs place
special value and dignity on human life. It is a common misconception to think
that all the enlightenment philosophers were atheists; this was not the case at
all. Locke, Hume and others simply believed that thru human logic and reason
people could arrive at a sort of naturalistic belief in God. This would form
the basis of Deism, the system of belief in God but a rejection of classic
Christian theology. Benjamin Franklin and other founding fathers of our country
were influenced by this style of belief. Now, getting back to the Greeks. Paul
says ‘God destroyed the wisdom of this world’. What wisdom is Paul talking
about? The enlightenment philosophers of
century had nothing on the Greek philosophers going all the
way back to a few centuries B.C. Plato, the Greek wrestler turned philosopher,
had one of the most famous schools of Greek philosophy. At the entrance of the
school the words were written ‘let non but geometers enter here’. Kind of
strange. Geometry simply meant ‘form’ in this use. Most of the great
theoretical physicists were also great mathematicians [Einstein]. The Greek
philosophers were seeking a sort of ‘unified theory’ that would explain all
other theories and bring all learning together under one intellectual ‘roof’.
Sort of like Einstein's last great obsession. The Greeks actually referred to
this great unknown future ‘unifier’ as ‘the Logos’. Now, some atheists will use
this truth to undercut the New Testament. They will take the common use of
these words ‘The Logos’ and say that Johns writings [Gospel, letters] were
simply stolen ideas from Greek philosophy. This is why believers need to have a
better understanding of the inspiration of scripture. John’s writings were no
doubt inspired, he of course calls Jesus the ‘Logos’ [word] of God. But he was
simply saying to the Greek/Gnostic mind ‘look, you guys have been waiting for
centuries for the one special ‘Word/Logos’ that would be the answer to all
learning, I declare unto you that Jesus is this Logos’! So eventually you would
have ‘the wisdom of the world’ [both Greek and enlightenment and all other
types] falling short of the ultimate answer. They could only go so far in their
journey for truth, and ultimately they either wind up at the foot of the Cross
[the wisdom of God] or the ‘tree of the knowledge of good and evil’. God said this
‘tree’ [sources of wisdom and knowledge apart from God] would ultimately lead
to death if not submitted to ‘the tree of life’ [the Cross]. You would have
some of the enlightenment philosophers eat from this tree all the way to the
‘death of God’ movement. Man in his wisdom would come to the conclusion that
‘God is dead’. If this is true, then the slaughter of millions of Jews is no
moral dilemma. If God is dead then man is not created in his image, he is just
this piece of flesh that you can dispose of at will. To all you intellectual
types, it’s Okay to have a mind, but you must love God with it. If all your
doing is feeding from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you will
GODS UNIQUE CREATION- Okay, we already saw how God made the animals and fish
and birds, but when he describes mans creation he shows us that it is unique.
Out of all the other created things, man alone is in ‘Gods image’ and bears his
likeness. Man is a moral being with a built in conscience, he has the capacity
to know God and live with him forever. This is the basis of the Judeao
Christian value on human life. Those religions who believe in the Genesis
account of creation, see man as having special value. The Darwinian worldview
[social Darwinism] sees man as a simple blob of meaningless flesh, no different
than the other life forms along the line. I always found the atheists reasoning
to be a little illogical; they will argue that they are the real intellectuals,
the so called ‘brights’ [a recent term they have come up with to describe their
group] they will then explain to you how their view of their mind and brain is
purely naturalistic, their brains are simply these jumbled masses of cells that
are the result of thousands of years of meaningless process. Their whole being
started as an accident, they have no initial purpose or final end. They see
themselves, and along with it, all their reasoning and education and knowledge
as being the result of years and years of luck and chance, and then they want you
to trust in their conclusions! Ah, the utter foolishness of mans wisdom. God
formed man from the dust of the earth and breathed into him his own breath and
man became a living soul. Though the basic material of man is the same as the
other material things God made, yet he only breathed his own image into man.
The great 17th
century philosopher/mathematician Blaise Pascal was
reading the gospel of John one night, he was meditating on John 17 and had an
awakening, he began to see that God was ‘the God of Jesus’ not the God of the
philosophers. He saw that having a real relationship with God was different
than simply knowing the things about him. God built into man the capacity to
know him, while all other creatures are valuable and special to him [Jesus said
not even a little sparrow dies without God caring about it!] yet man alone has
the capacity to know and be in true communion with his creator, man was created
in Gods image.
(1360) Lets do a little Catholic/Protestant stuff. First,
those of you who have read this site for any period of time know that as a
Protestant I am ‘pro Catholic’ that is I read and study Catholic scholars,
believe in the ECT statement [Evangelicals and Catholics together] and for the most part am pro Catholic in that
sense. I have offended more Protestants because of this stance than Catholics.
But sometimes I need to state the differences and be honest about them, true
ecumenical unity should never be achieved on the altar of doctrine, we should
not sacrifice sincerely held beliefs while seeking unity for Christ’s church.
Last night I caught the journey home show with Marcus Grodi as well as Catholic
scholar Scott Hahn [EWTN- the Catholic network]. Scott was doing a teaching on
the sacraments of the church and shared a common belief in the ‘incarnational’
aspect of matter. Some theologians believe [both Catholic and Protestant] that
since God became man in Jesus, that this united/sanctified matter in a way that
never occurred before. They will carry this thought into sacramental theology
and teach a kind of ‘connection’ with God thru material things; both Baptism
and the Eucharist would be major examples. I believe the historic church was
well intended when they developed this idea, they were combating the popular
Greek/Gnostic belief that matter is inherently evil, not a biblical doctrine.
As Scott Hahn made the argument I simply felt that he gave too much weight to
the idea that because of the incarnation [God becoming man] that now there is a
special ‘sanctity’ to material things when connected with the sacraments. Does
the bible teach that there are actual physical things in this world that carry
out the truth of the incarnation in a material way? Actually it does, the bible
teaches that the bodies of believers have this special aspect because Gods
Spirit lives in us. In essence the idea of ‘special matter’ that is often
taught by well meaning scholars can be applied to the physical church in the
earth, all who believe. I do not totally dismiss sacramental theology, many Protestants
who dismiss it out of hand are not aware of the strong beliefs that the
reformers held too in these areas. Luther is often misunderstood when it comes
to his disagreement with Calvin, many teach and think that he split with Calvin
over the doctrine of Predestination, he did not- Luther’s written views on the
doctrine were just as strong [if not stronger] on the subject. Calvin never
wrote a book dedicated solely to the doctrine, Luther did [bondage of the
will]. But they did split on the sacrament of the Eucharist, Luther’s view
[consubstantiation] was much closer to the Catholic view than Calvin, and
Zwingli [the Swiss reformer] was further away than both Calvin and Luther.
Lutheranism would eventually be developed by a protégé of Luther, Philip Melanchthon,
and the Lutheran church would bear the image of Melanchthon more than Luther.
The point being many good men have held to very strong views on these matters.
I believe the biblical doctrine leans more heavily on the ‘material body’ of
the believer as being the major material change since the incarnation, I do not
hold to the idea that ‘God becoming man’ fundamentally changed the nature of
matter when dealing with the sacraments. Matter is not [nor ever was]
intrinsically evil, Greek dualism got it wrong from the start- we do not need a
strong sacramental theology to refute this, scripture itself will do.
. He had a few theological battles in his day. With
Pelagianism and Donatism- these were early Christian movements that broke away
from the standard teaching of the church- they derive their names form the
Bishops/priests who espoused these ideas.
Pelagius denied the doctrine of original sin- and he taught
that men were indeed capable of obeying Gods law- out of their own moral
integrity- and thus ‘save themselves’. Augustine rejected this view and taught
that men were saved only by the grace of God- that men were indeed sinful and
corrupt- and if left to their own designs would end up in hell.
There were various adherents to Pelagius’ view- and his
ideas have carried down thru the centuries to varying degrees- sometimes you
will hear [read] the term ‘Semi- Pelagian’ this refers to those who have
various ideas about man’s ability to save himself through good works.
Some in the Reformed church [the original Protestant belief
system that came out from the 16th
century Reformation] accuse the
Catholic Church of this very thing- yet the Catholic Church has made it clear
that they do reject Pelagianism- and they agree with Augustine on the matter.
The Donatists taught that the Sacraments were dependent upon
the ‘holiness’ of the Priest who ministers them. That if you were in a Parish
where the priests were bad- lived in sin- rejected a holy life- then if you
were Baptized by these men- that the Baptism didn’t ‘stick’.
The Donatists formed there own break away church in the 3rd
century- and a few very influential men would join the group. A well respected
early church father- Tertullian- eventually joined their ranks.
Augustine argued against the Donatists teaching- and taught
that Gods grace- and the grace given to believers thru the sacraments were not
derived from the holiness of any priest or preacher- but if a believer in good
conscience received the sacraments- that that’s what really counted.
Saint Augustine is one of the titans of church history- he
is loved by Protestants and Catholics alike. He is famous for his belief in the
doctrine of Predestination [that those who are saved were chosen by God before
they were born] and for this reason he is loved by the original protestant
theologians [Luther, Calvin, etc.]
He also taught a very ‘Catholic’ form of Ecclesiology
[church govt.] and is well loved by many Catholics as well.
The Catholic Church refers to him as the Doctor of Grace- later on in the 13th
century we will meet Saint Thomas Aquinas- who the church refers to as the
Both of these men played a major role in the development of
western thought and Augustine made an effort to distinguish true Christian
thought from the philosophy of Neo Platonism which was very strong in his day.
When reading Augustine [he wrote a lot] you need to be
careful to distinguish some of his earlier writings from his later ones.
Early on you still see forms of Platonic thought in
Augustine- but as the years rolled by his thinking
There’s more on the video- Kant, John Mill- Moral Theory-
Utilitarianism, Kantianism. Dead Sea Scroll-s ‘Lost Books’ of the bible-
Septuagint- Jerome- Alexander the Great- Ptolemy- Seleucids- Essenes- Qumran
community- Ecclesiology- Local Church
IS THERE MEANING TO THE ACTUAL ORDER OF BIBLE VERSES?
HOW DID THE SPIRIT ‘TESTIFY’ TO THE FINAL SACRIFICE?
WHY DOES THE WRITER CONTINUE TO SAY THE NEW COVENANT IS HARSHER?
‘For the law having a
SHADOW of good things to come, AND NOT the very image of the things, can never
with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the
comers thereunto perfect. For then would they not have ceased to be offered?
Because that the worshipers once purged should have no more conscience of sins.
But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year’.
Paul shows how the simple fact of ongoing sacrifices in and of itself testifies
of the insufficiency of the law. The on going sacrifices were a reminder that
the peoples sins were still there. If
When the angel tells Mary about her giving birth to this
Messiah- she replies ‘be it unto me according to thy word’. Mary goes on and
gives this ‘prophetic song’ which has come to be called The Magnificat- which
is a term that comes from the start of the song- in Latin. Mary’s response to the angel is a point of
contention between Catholic and Protestant scholars.
The Catholic church calls it ‘Mary’s Fiat’ which means Mary
used a commanding tone- sort of like saying ‘you do this Gabriel’ like she was
the one in charge. Protestant scholars view it more as a response of humility-
like she said ‘okay- whatever you say’.
The confusion over this can be attributed to an early Latin
translation of the bible- by the Catholic church Father Jerome. He wrote the
Latin Vulgate- the very famous Catholic bible- and in Latin- the word used in
this spot denotes ‘command’.
But when you go to the original Greek translation- the word
is more passive.
Now- even though this is an ancient disagreement between
very smart guys- how many Catholics and Protestants are even aware of this? So
like many things- we are taught to see the ‘other side’ in a negative light-
and often times we don’t even know why we don’t like them- we just know we
don’t like them!
Okay- maybe you should read the chapter today- it’s a long
chapter [Luke 1] and look for the language that talks about Jesus as being the
fulfillment of the promises that God made to Abraham and David- its interesting
to see the importance of the early Jewish people as seeing Jesus as one of
History will later show how the Jewish believers were
persecuted severely- and early on [2nd
century] they would be
forbidden to worship as a Jewish church [I think the emperor was Hadrian- he
outlawed all Jewish expressions of ‘Christianity’ that is- Jewish people- who
accepted Jesus as their Messiah].
This would leave only the gentile expression of
Christianity- which we all know of today as we study church history. But we
must not forget that the 1st
believers were all Jewish- and they saw
Jesus as the answer to the promises that God made to them centuries before-
Peter said God fulfilled the promise that he made to King David- that a Son
would sit on his throne- forever. Yes- the church recites this fulfillment
every Sunday ‘he is seated at the right hand of the Father and will come again
to judge the living and the dead’ amen and amen.
.GOV Christie and hot dogs
.Memories of a kid- train tunnel
.What church is the ‘true church’?
.Most amazing intellectual discourse
ever? Only if you don’t hear [have to watch to get it- sorry]
.I am homeless- can you spare a 5?
NOTE- I made the video- and typed the
notes sitting in my car at Hudson County Park [in the rain]
Ill upload tomorrow at Dunkin Donuts
[or somewhere else].
What big financial budget was needed
One of the things I want my minister
friends to see- is it’s not about money.
Sure- it would be easier to be at my
home office- or even a home.
But you don’t need it- you can use the
things that you have.
This has been one of my ‘pet peeves’
for many years.
I want you to see how simple all of
this is- the friends you see [both in Texas and here] are just friends I made
along the way.
The kingdom is about relationships- and
sharing with one another- even Marie quoted Jesus- and as far as I know she’s
not a Christian.
So- maybe this whole unplanned
experience was God’s will.
To be honest- I never know- at least at
Be spontaneous- I left Texas on Sunday-
because I heard the song ‘Head East’ [or group?]
So yes- we all have limited time on the
Don’t live ‘too safe’ or you won’t
live- at all.
FRIDAY NIGHT- PARKING LOT-
Just finished the GW bridge walk a few
hours ago- and being it might be the last night sleeping in the car, I figured
I’d do a video for a few minutes.
This will probably be the last time
you’ll be able to see- real time- me living in the car like this.
But- like they say ‘you never know’.
I think it was a worthwhile experience-
but it’s drained me- and I’m tired at this stage.
Ok, this might be the last day ‘on the
streets’. It’s almost been a week- since I left Texas Sunday morning.
It’s early- and I’m tired.
I’m typing from the Walmart parking
lot- and I’m hoping the Dunkin Donuts is open- for coffee.
I’m looking [smelling?] like a homeless
guy at this point- and I don’t think the Dunkin donuts people think it’s worth
the price I pay for their coffee- for me to sit there and work on the laptop.
I want to go to church tomorrow- but
wouldn’t go like this.
But man could
not know all the truths about God and his nature without ‘special revelation’
[the bible and church tradition]. All Christians did not agree with Aquinas new
approach to Christian truth, the very influential bishop Bernard would
initially condemn Aquinas over this. Bernard said ‘the faith that believes unto
righteousness, believes! It does not doubt’. The Scholastic school taught that
the way you arrive at knowledge was thru the continuous questioning and
doubting of things until you come to some basic conclusions. These issues would
be debated for centuries, and even in the present hour many argue over the
issue of Divine revelation versus natural logical reasoning. Tertullian, an
early North Afrcian church father, said ‘I believe because it is preposterous,
illogical’ he became famous for his saying ‘what does Jerusalem
have to do with Athens
meaning he did not believe that Greek philosophy should have any part with
Christian truth. Origen, his contemporary, believed the other way. So the
debate rages on. Why talk about this here? Some believers ‘believe’ in a type
of knowledge called ‘revelation knowledge’ they mean something different than
the historic use of the term. Historically ‘revelation’ meant that which God
revealed to us THRU THE BIBLE, not something outside of the bible. For
instance, the first canon of scripture put together was by a man called
Marcion. His ‘bible’ contained the letters of Paul and parts of :Luke. He
believed the revelation God gave Paul was for us today, not the Old Testament
or the historical gospels. He was condemned by the church as a heretic. The
point being some took Paul’s writings about receiving knowledge from God as an
indicator that what God showed Paul was different than what the church got thru
the other apostles. In point of fact the things that God revealed to Paul, or
to you or me; all truth is consistent, it will not contradict any other part of
Gods truth. Paul’s letters are consistent with the gospels, not in
contradiction. When believers cling to an idea that their teachers are sharing
‘special revelation’ or a Rhema word that is somehow above the scrutiny of
scripture, then they are in dangerous territory. Paul did appeal to his
experience with God as a defense of his gospel, but he backed up everything he
said with Old Testament scripture. God wasn’t ‘revealing’ things to Paul that
were outside of the realm of true knowable ‘truth’. You could examine and test
the things Paul was saying, he wasn’t saying ‘because God showed it to me,
that’s why I’m correct’. So in today’s church world, we want all the things we
learn and believe to be consistent with what the church has believed thru out
the centuries. Sure there are always things that are going to be questioned and
true reform entails this, but beware of teachers who come to you with
‘revelation knowledge’ or a ‘Rhema word’ that goes against the already revealed
word of truth.
.Did we chase God into a book?
Past posts [verses below]
(835)ROMANS 7:1-4 Paul uses the analogy of a
married woman ‘don’t you know that the law has dominion over a person as long
as he is alive’? If a married woman leaves her husband and marries another man
she is guilty of breaking the law of adultery. Now, if her husband dies, she is
free to marry another man. The act that freed her from sin and guilt was death!
Every thing else in the scenario stayed the same. She still married another,
she still consummated the new marriage. But
1Samuel 3:1 And the child Samuel ministered unto the LORD before
Eli. And the word of the LORD was precious in those days; there was no open
1Samuel 3:2 And it came to pass at that time, when Eli was laid
down in his place, and his eyes began to wax dim, that he could not see;
1Samuel 3:3 And ere the lamp of God went out in the temple of the
LORD, where the ark of God was, and Samuel was laid down to sleep;
1Samuel 3:4 That the LORD called Samuel: and he answered, Here am
1Samuel 3:5 And he ran unto Eli, and said, Here am I; for thou
calledst me. And he said, I called not; lie down again. And he went and lay
1Samuel 3:6 And the LORD called yet again, Samuel. And Samuel
arose and went to Eli, and said, Here am I; for thou didst call me. And he
answered, I called not, my son; lie down again.
1Samuel 3:7 Now Samuel did not yet know the LORD, neither was the
word of the LORD yet revealed unto him.
1Samuel 3:8 And the LORD called Samuel again the third time. And
he arose and went to Eli, and said, Here am I; for thou didst call me. And Eli
perceived that the LORD had called the child.
1Samuel 3:9 Therefore Eli said unto Samuel, Go, lie down: and it
shall be, if he call thee, that thou shalt say, Speak, LORD; for thy servant
heareth. So Samuel went and lay down in his place.
1Samuel 3:10 And the LORD came, and stood, and called as at other
times, Samuel, Samuel. Then Samuel answered, Speak; for thy servant heareth.
1Samuel 3:11 And the LORD said to Samuel, Behold, I will do a
thing in Israel, at which both the ears of every one that heareth it shall
1Samuel 3:12 In that day I will perform against Eli all things
which I have spoken concerning his house: when I begin, I will also make an
1Samuel 3:13 For I have told him that I will judge his house for
ever for the iniquity which he knoweth; because his sons made themselves vile,
and he restrained them not.
1Samuel 3:14 And therefore I have sworn unto the house of Eli,
that the iniquity of Eli's house shall not be purged with sacrifice nor
offering for ever.
1Samuel 3:15 And Samuel lay until the morning, and opened the
doors of the house of the LORD. And Samuel feared to shew Eli the vision.
1Samuel 3:16 Then Eli called Samuel, and said, Samuel, my son. And
he answered, Here am I.
1Samuel 3:17 And he said, What is the thing that the LORD hath
said unto thee? I pray thee hide it not from me: God do so to thee, and more
also, if thou hide any thing from me of all the things that he said unto thee.
1Samuel 3:18 And Samuel told him every whit, and hid nothing from
him. And he said, It is the LORD: let him do what seemeth him good.
1Samuel 3:19 And Samuel grew, and the LORD was with him, and did
let none of his words fall to the ground.
1Samuel 3:20 And all Israel from Dan even to Beersheba knew that
Samuel was established to be a prophet of the LORD.
1Samuel 3:21 And the LORD appeared again in Shiloh: for the LORD
revealed himself to Samuel in Shiloh by the word of the LORD.
There was another link- I did not read it- or post it.
TITLE ‘Dems release Benghazi report’.
I know what it said- without reading it.
The Dems- in defense of Hillary- have said that other military
leaders said on the night of the attack- the U.S. did all they could do.
Now- the Marines on the ground disagree- but that’s what the Dems are
Our ambassador made around 1000 [yes- 1000] requests for more
security- the only reason his pleas were denied- is because it went against the
narrative that Libya was a success.
Our ambassador and his men said that the embassy was being scoped
out- and they even said they might get killed if they don’t get the help from
the state Dept. [that they asked for- 1000 times]run by Hillary.
Sure enough- they were killed.
Thats the crime- and the Dem’s don’t want to admit THAT.
Note- Please do me a favor, those who read/like the posts-
re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read them on. I deal with
issues at times that it would be beneficial for some of you to download and
save the file from the Word Press link. This creates a permanent record. The
on-line videos are only good if sites are not hacked- which has happened in the
past. Thanks- John.#