Have you read lately on a billboard or in a magazine ad that the Judgment Day will be May 21, 2011? I have so many issues with this I don’t even know where to begin.
According to a pamphlet I picked up at a gas station, God has given us a head- up on the Day of Judgment. According to the pamphlet:

“..The Holy Bible tells us that Holy God is a God of great mercy, compassion and love. That is why He has given us in advance of the destruction the exact time of the Day of Judgment.”

The Bible does state that God has great mercy, compassion and love. However, the pamphlet does not say where exactly the Bible says that He give us the exact time of the Day of Judgment.

As you read further, you find that they quote 2 Peter 3:8 and as soon as you see that, you know where they are going with this. They take the passage, literally, to mean that one of God’s days is 1000 of our years. But if you read further to 2 Peter 3:10 it states the day will come like a ‘thief’. Given the context of the discourse, I would tend to lean toward a metaphorical figure of speech for understanding 2 Peter 3:8. Be that as it may, let’s read further to see what they do with a literal, out of context, interpretation of this passage.

Next, the pamphlet takes God’s warning of impending judgment from Genesis 7:4 and Genesis 7:10-11, where God says he will make it rain for 40 days and nights, to mean that in 7000 years God will destroy the earth with fire for good. (Side bar: 2 Peter 3:7 says that the first destruction was by water and was Noah’s flood and the second destruction would be by fire.) Here is what the pamphlet says:

“Therefore, with the correct understanding that the seven days referred to in Genesis 7:4 can be understood as 7,000 years, we learn that when God told Noah there were seven days to escape worldwide destruction, He was also telling the world there would be exactly 7,000 years (one day is as 1,000 years) to escape the wrath of God that would come when He destroys the world on Judgment Day.”

Issue 1 Context
Here, the passages are taken completely out of context. It is obvious to the casual reader of Genesis 7:4 that the seven days were seven, literal, 24 hour days before the rain would start. Genesis confirms this understanding in Genesis 7:10-11 when it states that it ‘came to pass’ that the rains started exactly seven 24 hour days later. What the pamphlet does to get around this is to imply that there are two fulfillments to Genesis 7:4, one, literal, 24 hour days and one, metaphorical, 1000 years per day.

Issue 2 1000 Years
First, I have a difficult time reading 2 Peter 3:8 literally that a day to God is like 1000 years to us. I think when you look at it literally; you have to ignore that God is eternal, which is to say He exists outside of time and space all together. (Read a past blog post on eternal) Time was created and is part of our universe, and as Einstein proved and current astrophysics teaches us, time is relative.

Second, are all those years 360 day years or 365.25 days? Originally, the earth’s orbit was 360 days and at some time in the BC era (I forget when) there was a change in the orbit to 365.25 days. For more information on prophetic years of 360 days I would recommend the book ‘The Coming Prince’ by Sir Robert Anderson; He demonstrates in his book that by using 360 day years you can take, at least on prophecy, from the Old Testament about the first coming of our Messiah to the exact day it was fulfilled in the New Testament.

Issue 3 The Bible as Whole
In order to buy this premise, you have to ignore everywhere else in the Bible that says we won’t know the day or the hour of the end. Here are a few passages: Matthew 25: 13 and Matthew 24:44.

Final Thoughts
This isn’t the first Church or group to give a date. I am betting these guys are wrong too. The problem is, it gives all Christians a bad name. Just look at the comments to a blogger’s post on the Christian obsession with the end.

I do know one other little tidbit from the Bible. In Deut. 18:20-22 the punishment for a false prophet is execution. If the End is May 21, 2011, I am ready. If the End is not May 21, 2011, are they ready?

One of the problems I have found with some Christian apologists is the propensity of some of them to be disingenuous, at best, when characterizing Satanists. Many of them fall into the trap of the informal fallacy of composition. In logic and reasoning, a fallacy of composition is when someone makes the assumption that what is true of a small portion of a population is true of the whole population. A composition fallacy is like asking one student in a classroom what their favorite color is and then making the assumption that it is the favorite color of all of the students in the classroom.

When someone hears the term Satanist, they cannot help but imagine blood sacrifices, ritualistic murder, demon summoning and all sorts of other wild magical things. This perception of Satanism is actually taken from a very small minority of Satanists that have been popularized by the media and disingenuous apologists. The truth about most Satanists is much less exciting than the perception and, as it is in the newspaper business, not worthy of print. Most people don't know what a true Satanist is or even have a true perception on one.

John Smulo demonstrates this point in his article in the Sacred Tribes Journal called "Spiritual Warfare Profiles of Satanism: Are They Misleading?” John asks the question, are Satanists fairly portrayed in work by popular Christian authors? John then demonstrates that the truth is, most Satanists are actually atheists, and they don't even believe in an evil entity named Satan or Lucifer. A vast majority of them do not engage in animal sacrifice or conjure up demons.

We may wonder then, why do they choose to call themselves Satanist if they don't believe in Satan? When Saul D. Alinsky dedicates his book, Rules for Radicals; to Lucifer what does he really mean? Does he believe in the devil and sacrifice goats? Doubtful. Satan is an icon for Satanists and other people. Satan is an icon that, in their minds, stands in drastic opposition to the western culture and the Judeo-Christian ethic we call the “golden rule;” do unto others as you would have them do to you or love your neighbor as yourself. Satan stands as an icon of selfishness, self-fulfillment and do unto others before they do unto you.

Satan becomes an icon of their worldview and philosophy. He is viewed as a nonexistent representation of their philosophy. Notice how he is characterized in the Satanic Bible:

1. Satan represents indulgence instead of abstinence!
2. Satan represents vital existence instead of spiritual pipe dreams!
3. Satan represents undefiled wisdom instead of hypocritical self-deceit!
4. Satan represents kindness to those who deserve it instead of love wasted on ingrates!
5. Satan represents vengeance instead of turning the other cheek!
6. Satan represents responsibility to the responsible instead of concern for psychic vampires!
7. Satan represents man as just another animal, sometimes better, more often worse than those that walk on all-fours, who, because of his “divine spiritual and intellectual development,” has become the most vicious animal of all!
8. Satan represents all of the so-called sins, as they all lead to physical, mental, or emotional gratification!
9. Satan has been the best friend the Church has ever had, as He has kept it in business all these years!
Anton Szandor LaVey, The Satanic Bible

"Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgement to the very first radical; from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins - or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom - Lucifer." Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals

Why do Christian apologists tend to paint with a broad brush when characterizing Satanists? If I was only to read their books and then I ran in to a real live Satanist and started asking them about conjuring demons and animal sacrifices, they would look at me as if I was crazy. I would have lost all credibility I had up until that point. They won’t care what I have to say after that. I don’t know why some popular Christian apologists make such generalizations, but, if I am not careful to check their facts, I could end up looking like a fool.

We characterize people and make the assumption that the real difference between us is they worship a spiritual being called Satan, Lucifer or the Devil. In reality, the difference is one of philosophy. It is important to make sure we know where they are coming from if we want to engage in any type of meaningful dialog.

One of my Christian friends commented that my issue is just one of semantics, because Satan is still behind the philosophy. I don’t disagree that Satan is behind it because, technically, from a Christian point of view, Satan would be behind all the world’s false religions and teachings to one extent or another. However, the issue is how Satanists view themselves and their beliefs. We have to addresses them from where they are.

Check out my past blog on the Domains of Spiritual Warfare

Osama bin Laden is Dead
Now what? He is dead but al Qaeda is still alive and well. The question is, does his death change anything? Will it make him a martyr? Will that increase anger at the US? These are definitely some really tough questions. Should we all be happy that he is dead? I am given pause when I remember Proverbs 24:17.

“Do not gloat when your enemy falls; when he stumbles, do not let your heart rejoice” (NIV)

A question that always pops into my mind when people judge people is, “How does Jesus view that person?” I am reminded of that question in this situation as well. How does Jesus view Osama bin Laden? Jesus sees him as a man in need of a savior. He sees him as someone He died for. He sees him as someone He loved. The obvious question then is, how should I see Osama bin Laden? I can’t help but think that had bin Laden experienced true Christian love, his life would have been radically different and that even the events of 9-11-01 may have been avoided.

I think we forget that our enemy is not ourselves (the human race). In this instance, our enemy is a philosophy; a philosophy of hate and revenge and selfishness on both sides. The only weapon against such an enemy is love. I know it sounds like a 1960s’ clich, but it is, logically, the only answer.

So, who is our real enemy?

Investigation Baptismal Regeneration in Mark 16:16

I am going to look at a number of passages in their immediate context and then later in a broader context. I have to make a comment upfront and acknowledge that the authenticity of the longer ending or Mark (Mark 16:9-20) is questioned by many scholars. I do not intend to address this issue, rather, for argument sake, I will make the assumption that this longer ending is authentic. However, if we did find any significant meaning in a disputed section of scripture, we must be extremely cautious in building doctrine on questionable scripture.

ὁ πιστεύσας καὶ βαπτισθεὶς σωθήσεται, ὁ δὲ ἀπιστήσας κατακριθήσεται. (Mark 16:16) [Holmes, M. W. (2010; 2010). The Greek New Testament: SBL Edition]

“Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.” - Mark 16:16 HCSB

Let’s take a look at this passage logically and see what we can determine.

1. According to Mark 16:16 who will be saved?
2. According to Mark 16:16 who will be condemned?

When you read this passage, you will note that the passage talks about those that are saved and those that are not (condemned) and that there is an imbalance in the statement.¹  The question is, did the author of Mark imply that both belief and baptism are required to be saved and not condemned or did the author imply that only belief was needed to be saved and not condemned. This, then, raises the question as to why baptism was mentioned. Many possible explanations can be given from baptism being our response to our salvation to a work out of faith. However, this passage does not address this issue and anything we propose is speculation.

When we take the passage and balance the statement in order to determine the intent of the author, we have one of two possible meanings:

• Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe and is not baptized will be condemned
• Whoever believes will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned

	Salvation	Condemnation
Mark 16:16	belief and baptism	unbelief
Possibility A	belief and baptism	unbelief and no baptism
Possibility B	belief	unbelief

Because the statement is ambiguous, we must infer the intent of the author from one of two possible meanings. Those who believe in baptismal regeneration (the need of baptism for salvation) will insist that inference A is the correct meaning. While those who support sola fida (salvation by faith alone) will insist that inference B is the correct meaning.

Because the author of Mark gives no indication in this portion of the discourse, we cannot assume either possible meaning. If we infer either possible meaning, we run the danger of putting meaning into the text or taking meaning out of the text.²  With that in mind, this passage by itself is neutral to either possible meaning. It neither supports baptismal generation nor rejects it.

To understand what God has for us, we will need to take the scriptures as a whole.³

1. This is sometimes referred to as a negative inference.

2. The general exhortation in Revelation 22:18-19 and the command in Deuteronomy 4:1-2 warns us not to add or subtract anything from God’s Word.

3. With the assumption that the Bible is God inspired we have the principle of non-contradiction. Meaning that God inspired the words in the Bible and as such there is a logical consistency across 66 books with over 30 different authors.

Your Emotions Can't Tell Time

The other day I was browsing Facebook when I noticed a suggested friend who was someone I went to school with long ago. The problem was this 'suggested friend' was a schoolmate who was a total jerk to me. I noticed very quickly I remembered what he said and did to me and I found myself upset and angry as if he had just done it or said it to me.

This is the problem with emotions. In order to trigger them, you just need to remember or think about something that made you feel that way once before. Then, bam! The emotions are back just like that. Even if, intellectually, you forgave the person or you now realize it was minor or long enough ago to not matter anymore.

After a few seconds, I realized that kids are mean and that what he said and did was mean, but it was over 20 years ago. Does it matter to me now? Not at all. However, emotions don't understand time they just react to what you are thinking.

You will find another example of this with actors. Good actors will draw on thoughts to create the emotions they need for the scene they are in. If they need anger, they will focus their thoughts on something that angers them and if they need to show love, they focus on thoughts of love.

I wonder if this means we can control our emotions based upon controlling our thoughts?

Here is a related quote:

“Words can never adequately convey the incredible impact of our attitudes toward life. The longer I live the more convinced I become that life is 10 percent what happens to us and 90 percent how we respond to it.” - Charles R. Swindoll

When researching the topic of spiritual warfare, one of the problems you will run into is the vast majority of books on the topic center on what I call the spiritual dimension with things like witchcraft, demonology, possession and Satanism. The problem with this narrow interpretation is that it focuses on only one of the domains of spiritual warfare.

What are domains of warfare? In modern combat, the US military has determined that there are five (5) domains of warfare. You may have heard of air, land and sea as the 3 traditional domains of war. Recently, the US military has added space and cyberspace as new domains of war for the 21st century. Having been a Marine and understanding the basics of combat and warfare has led me to the conclusion that spiritual warfare is far larger than a single domain.

Have you ever thought about missions as spiritual warfare? Every time we bring the good news to a lost person, the adversary risks losing one of his tortured souls. When a person becomes a Christian as a result of a missionary or evangelist, the adversary loses ground and the Church gains ground. Missions and evangelism are offensive military actions against our enemy. There are no two ways about it.

Have you ever struggled with sin in your life? You are battling the sin-nature that seeks to take you out of the fight. If it can’t take you out, it seeks to neutralize you on the battlefield. If you overcome the sin, the adversary loses his hold on your life. If our adversary can't take us out, the next best thing is to render our actions ineffectual.

In combat, the first thing to do is understand the battlefield. I have come up with three (3) domains of spiritual warfare. You can view spiritual warfare as being internal, external or spiritual.

• The internal battlefield is your mind and will, the sin-nature we are born with. As Paul puts it, “For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out.” Romans 7:18 (NIV)
• Next, we have the battlefield that is external to us. This would be things like false ideologies, people, injustice, etc. These are the areas we encounter every day. “Jesus said to them, ‘Watch out! Beware of the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees!’" Matthew 16:6 (ISV)
• Then finally we have the spiritual, the non-corporeal realm or dimension, where the dark adversary resides. This is where we see witchcraft, demon possession and exorcisms. As Paul puts it, “For we are not fighting against flesh-and-blood enemies, but against evil rulers and authorities of the unseen world, against mighty powers in this dark world, and against evil spirits in the heavenly places.” Ephesians 6:12 (NLT)

Like it or not we are at war. Understanding the domains of spiritual warfare will aid us in better understanding the war that we are in. It will help remind us not to focus on one domain of warfare to the neglect of the others.

Remember: If the enemy is in range, so are you.

I've thought of three domains of spiritual warfare. What are some others that you've thought of?

Notes of a Baptist Exorcist: New Testament Teachings and Examples for Exorcising Demons Today
by Dr. Roderick H. Pyatt Ph.D.

I really liked this book and the balanced approach of Dr. Pyatt. The problem of most Protestants is they tend to gravitate to the extremes on the topic of possession and exorcism. Either they ignore the topic politely out of some sort of embarrassment or concern of how they will look to others or they see demons in everything and anything bad that happens to you is a direct action of the devil. Neither of those positions is supported by scripture. Dr. Pyatt addresses the topic in a manner that is biblical and not to the extreme. The book is more or less his notes on the subject. I think it would get better reception if it was more academic. For example, I would like to see it include footnotes and endnotes and if he spent time teasing out some of the finer points.

Characteristics of Possession

Pyatt also relates one way in which people can be possessed. Demons have to have some type of entry, in other words, they are invited. Often people will consult items such as Ouiji boards for some selfish reason. The items do not necessarily have power, for example the Demon is not in the Ouija board. He does however recommend disposing of such items. Not because they have power but for the sake of others.

Dr. Pyatt’s relates the following characteristics of possession. People, while possessed, will speak in a voice that is not their own. The demons typically show themselves intermittently with no set schedule. Demons will have some type of entry, typically using the spiritual or paranormal for selfish reasons. During active possession, the person is usually locked out by the demon that is in total control. The activity, duration and intensity of possessions are variable. When the demon is not active, we don't know if it leaves or becomes dormant. Dr. Pyatt’s position is that locations can be possessed (or infested [my word]) in addition to people. Does that mean animals can be possessed? He also believes that ghosts are disembodied human spirits and that ghosts can be tormented be demons. In one story he relates a story of a ghost that was hiding from what the ghost communicated was the "Dark Man" (demon). When a demon is present, people can sense an instant subtle change in the atmosphere of the house or location. Once a demon is cast, out it may return and may bring friends. Dr. Pyatt also believes that property can be possessed.

Pyatt's Approach to Exorcism

Pyatt believes people can have the God-given gift of discernment. With this sense of discernment, people can sense when demons are near and when a person or property is possessed. We should look to God for guidance on all things, including exorcism. Catholics require diocese bishop approval "Official Permission" to perform exorcism. Dr. Pyatt feels all Christians have the authority. In contradistinction to Catholic exorcism, ritualism is not Biblical. In the Bible, exorcisms were plain and simple. For Pyatt, Christians don't need anything more than Jesus and the Holy Spirit. Not by our power but the power of Christ, simple faith on what Jesus promised He would do for us. Likewise, he views Holy or blessed items, such as crosses or Holy water, as having no innate power. In addition he feels knowing the name of the demon has no bearing what-so-ever on the success or failure of an exorcism.

For Pyatt the purpose of exorcism is to bring glory to God and not the exorcist. He warns anyone who uses paranormal or metaphysical powers for selfish means or profit should be avoided.

Pyatt has a Shot-gun exorcism (his definition) he uses when there is no definite target. He asks the Holy Spirit to touch everyone in the room. He references God as the One to whom he represents, the One who is with him. When he addresses the demons, he talks to them as if they are human adversaries. He takes the fight out of them by making them expend lots of energy by getting them angry and upset. Not sure if it is the demon that gets tired or the host. This may take many hours. Typically, the demon will leave suddenly and everyone will notice a sense of lightness in the room.

Demons

Pyatt relates a number of characteristics of demons in his book. First off, in secular paranormal genre, they are often referred to as elementals or poltergeists. Demons have a hierarchy. Prime demons are the most powerful of the demons and the subordinate, or lesser demons are less powerful. In spite of popular belief, demons are not in Hell. They are roaming around hunting. Not only do demons have the ability to speak but they have a will, intelligence, emotions and they are self-aware. Demons can make mistakes and have negative reactions.

Pyatt's Take on Ghosts

Pyatt does not have a problem with ghosts being disembodied spirits, although Some Churches teach the belief that ghosts are demons. There is no proof-positive either way and there is nothing pro or con in the Bible about ghosts being departed humans. Pyatt also makes the claims that ghosts cannot be exorcised because they are not demons.

Pyatt’s take on Sensitives

People that are 'Sensitive' can sense demons and ghosts. He warns us to be wary of them and extremely cautious because many are charlatans. He says there is nothing wrong with someone who is a sensitive. The only wrong part is if they use their gift for personal gain.

The Rite: The Making of a Modern Exorcist
by Matt Baglio

This was a good book, well written and engaging. I really liked the Catholic treatment of exorcism. They seem to have a very balance approach, not falling into the extremes such as seeing every illness as possession and not denying all possessions as frauds or myth. I have seen other Protestants criticism of Catholics for relying too much on the superstitious use of relics like crucifixes as if they were somehow endowed with magical power or having some spiritual energy or force in and of themselves. According to Baglio the focus is on the power of God and the faith of the exorcist and that the Rite and relics are only aids. Baglio quotes Father Candido Amantini, "We can do only our best, and then we must leave the final decision up to God."

When we think about our Redeemer do we see Him as our Savior who gets us into heaven or do we see Him as the one who takes what is broken and uses it for ultimate good? Intellectually I have always agreed that it is more than a ticket to heaven but practically I did not know how that worked out in my own life. Recently at a men's retreat I get a fresh and vivid look out how Jesus does more than redeem me, He redeems my past. When Paul's tells us the God causes all things to work out for good for us (Rom 8:28) does he really mean it? I have things in my past, skeletons in the closet, which I thought were better of left buried in the past and forgotten. However, our Savoir wants to redeem those past events, mistakes, pains and our current troubles. He wants to turn them into good. God can use those incidents for good, redeeming the broken and using it for a good purpose that ultimately shows His glory.

We are not the only people on the planet who have had to deal with those same issues. People struggle with them all the time. The question is will we allow God to use our struggles to help others? If we allow Him to use our past failings to draw people to Him, He takes a bad situation and redeems it for good. If we sit back ignore or pretend everything is ok He can't redeem those situations.

Kenny Luck, the guest speaker at the men's retreat said, "no risk without loss, no loss without pain and no pain without purpose." It is the hard and narrow road. People may wonder why I would want to drudge up past. Especially mistakes or painful memories that most people think are better left deep and forgotten. This is a valid question. With mistakes and memories come the emotions that are tide to them. Avoid the pain, right? Our Redeemer will redeem those situations. Our Redeemer will see us through the loss and the pain and will ultimately show us the purpose. I would like to think my mistakes have a purpose other than my failure.

Opening ourselves up like this is a big risk. Are we willing to take the risk? Do we trust our Redeemer? Yes it is a leap of faith. I am ready to jump, hesitant but ready.

The exorcism account in the book of Tobit is an important story for us to study as it gives us an understanding of second temple period Judaism and early Christian views on the topic of demon possession and exorcism.

Background of Tobit
Tobit was from Israel and part of the deportation to Assyria. This story should give some insight in how Jews saw demon possession. This would be either from the time of the exile, although others would give the book a later date sometime during second temple period.

Situation
A girl named Sarah was possessed by a demon named Asmodeus and that demon caused the death of 7 of her husbands. I have to wonder how the 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 husbands felt about their respective engagements. I would be leery if I was husband 2 let alone 7. Sarah's solution to this problem was suicide; however, she did not go through with it. Instead she prayed to God to take her life, rather than bring dishonor to her father by committing suicide. Her concern about suicide was not the disposition of her soul; she wanted to protect her families honor over relief from her possession.

One noteworthy part of this story is the desire for the possessed person to seek death. Sarah sought suicide but ultimately did not. Contemporary cases of supposed demon possession often include suicidal tendencies. Her we have a correlate between ancient evens and contemporary events leading us to the conclusion that one indication of possession is the desire to relief themselves by committing suicide.

In answer to Sarah's prayer, Raphael (one of the 7 archangels) was dispatched and Sarah was given Tobit's son Tobis for marriage. God answered her prayer to take her life with an alternative she did not ask for. I wonder why she did not ask for a solution other than death. In any case God answer the prayer with angelic assistance.

Events were arranged to bring Tobis to Sarah. Raphael disguised as a distant relative agrees to accompany Tobis for protection on a trip for him to recover money for his father. Raphael accompanied Tobis on that trip, and during their travels they stop along the way and Raphael tells him to catch a fish and gut it.

“Cut open the fish and take out its gall, heart, and liver. Keep them with you, but throw away the intestines. For its gall, heart, and liver are useful as medicine.” Tobit 6:5 NRSV

Raphael later explains why he wanted Tobis to keep the fish guts.

“As for the fish’s heart and liver, you must burn them to make a smoke in the presence of a man or woman afflicted by a demon or evil spirit, and every affliction will flee away and never remain with that person any longer. And as for the gall, anoint a person’s eyes where white films have appeared on them; blow upon them, upon the white films, and the eyes will be healed.” Tobit 6:8–9 NRSV

Raphael arranges for Tobis to meet Sarah and take her as wife. Raphael gives Tobis instructions on how to expel the demon.

"When you enter the bridal chamber, take some of the fish’s liver and heart, and put them on the embers of the incense. An odor will be given off; the demon will smell it and flee, and will never be seen near her any more. Now when you are about to go to bed with her, both of you must first stand up and pray, imploring the Lord of heaven that mercy and safety may be granted to you. Do not be afraid, for she was set apart for you before the world was made. You will save her, and she will go with you." Tobit 6:17–18 NRSV

This is an interesting text. Apparently, according to this text, demons, which are spiritual entities, have senses here in the physical world. Did they use the senses of Sarah or did they have their own? Does the fish liver and heart have some sort of energy or power? Some exorcists claim that objects can by bless, that is imbued with some sort of spiritual power, most notably Catholics. Other exorcists, however, do not feel that objects such as holy water or crosses have any power or do anything to remove demons. They feel the power that removes the demon is the name of Jesus Christ or the faith of the exorcist in conjunction with the faith of the possessed. In this story the burning of the fish liver and heart acts as an irritant and there is no indication that there is some sort of spiritual power related to burning the dead fish parts. I guess dead fish smell is so bad it can scare demons away ;-).

Another interesting point here is that Raphael promises the demon will not return. However we will see later that Jesus indicates demons can return and even stronger (Luke 11:24-26). Raphael also tells them to pray for safety. Today paranormal investigators and sensitives will often prey for protection if they think they are going into a hostile area. Again we see a correlation between modern activities and ancient ones.

Tobis follows Raphael's instructions.

"Then Tobias remembered the words of Raphael, and he took the fish’s liver and heart out of the bag where he had them and put them on the embers of the incense. The odor of the fish so repelled the demon that he fled to the remotest parts of Egypt. But Raphael followed him, and at once bound him there hand and foot." Tobit 8:2–3 NRSV

I have to admit the resolution is not what I expected. The demons fled to Egypt and Raphael bound him there. What does that mean? Why did the demon go to Egypt? Is this how Raphael knows that the demon would not return because he was going to bind him?

Footnote
Tobit is an apocryphal book used by most Christian groups Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Ethiopian Orthodox and some Protestants. It is also included in LXX, [Septuagint], Vulgate and five fragments were found at Qumran.
The cannon was created to include books that were thought to be inspired by God. This does not mean books outside of cannon are not true, it simply means some people don't think it is inspired by God. I include this as an example of Jewish exorcism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_canon

Book: Secrets from Beyond the Grave, By Perry Stone

I actually never finished reading the book; I just could not get myself to finish it. I might add I am fairly open minded about differing points of view and willing to hear someone out. While some assertions where logical many where unsubstantiated. The hermeneutics are poor throughout the book. For example his claim that hell is under the Dead Sea or that it is one of many gateways to hell from here on Earth. The passages (biblical references) he uses are out of context and many require an illogical leap. Other points he makes in the book I have no issue with, however there is nothing new or groundbreaking on those topics. Sorry, I wanted to like it.

Secrets from Beyond The Grave

Post from previous blog. 

http://www.thirdeyeconcept.com/news/index.php?topic=9987.0

http://cosmicx.blogspot.com/2009/06/ethiopian-church-leader-to-announce.html

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/132067

 

This is a continuation of my ongoing report. I recently decided to listen to the Bible in an effort to gain a closer relationship with God. I purposefully listen not with the intent to study. I have a hard time reading the Bible I just start looking things up and I don't make much progress. I am listening to the Bible Experience (http://www.inspiredby.com/) which is a dramatized NIV version with many famous African American leaders, singers, actors and artists. (Even Samuel L. Jackson) As I listen through the Bible, hopefully I will make it all the way through, I will post notes and thoughts I have.

 

 

 

 

In reply Jesus declared, "I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again." "How can a man be born when he is old?" Nicodemus asked. "Surely he cannot enter a second time into his mother's womb to be born!" Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. You should not be surprised at my saying, 'You must be born again.' The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit." - John 3:3-8 (NIV)