Posts Tagged ‘reflections’

2015imagesWhatsoever is good, whatsoever is right, whatsoever is kind … whenever in doubt always err on the side of kindness. One can never go wrong with actions or words of kindness. No matter how bad the situation, kindness always makes things better, kindness always takes the higher road. People always flourish more with kindness and a difficult path is much easier to walk.

 

Mercy is one of the many aspects of kindness which would serve the world well if more people practiced it. One of the problems with the dogmas and doctrines of religion is that they tend to beat mercy and kindness out of those who feel compelled to “Keep the faith”, when faith means practicing and adhering to biased and unjust teachings.

 

This year let us all make the resolution to err on the side of kindness … it can only make the world a better place.

butterfly4images

My blog has been up for over four and a half years, during which time I have documented my journey from being immersed in the religious dogma of Christianity, to becoming an open minded free-thinker. My travels have led me from grounding my purpose in life in the god of the Bible, to finding a new and fresh understanding of living a meaningful life without the need for the presence of a divine being. I have discovered that the most rewarding and fruitful endeavors of life lie in helping and sharing our experiences with others, whether it be a spontaneous act of kindness, or working to leave the portion of the world you live in a better place than it was before … all reward your life with meaning. I cannot think of a greater joy than to share the freedom I have found in allowing my love of life to spill over onto others by my actions. The longer I live life as a free-thinker the more I realize how absolutely wonderful it is to be able to allow my mind to roam the expanse of the universe in search of understanding, not being constrained by constrictive dogmas and having to conform to the doctrines of religions. Here is a saying contained in the Kalama Sutra from the Buddha that sums up my philosophy.

 

“It is natural that doubt should arise in mind.  I tell you not to believe merely because it has been handed down by tradition… or because it is commonly believed, or because others have told it to you, or even because I myself have said it.  But whatever you are asked to believe, ask yourself whether it is true in the light of your experience, whether it is in conformity with reason and good principles, and whether it is conducive to the highest good and welfare of all beings.”

 

One of the main differences between religions and philosophies is that most religions are born out of an authoritarian mindset and are composed of a set of doctrines and dogmas given by a deity, whereas philosophies are generally learned through experience and critical thinking. As the words of the Buddha say … we should test all our beliefs against the highest good and welfare of all beings.

The differences in motherly love versus fatherly love become quit clear if one digs into the nature of each. A mother’s love for her baby begins as one of an unconditional nature; she must love her offspring regardless, because without that unconditional love her offspring cannot survive. This unconditional love continues all through the childhood years, and more often than not a mother’s love remains unconditional for a lifetime. Motherly love is unconditional, it is the love given to a child with no expectations; it is not earned, and requires no work. Nothing is done to deserve this love; it is given merely because the child exists. The child is loved because he is, “I am loved because I am”

 

Fatherly love on the other hand is many times based on a “conditional” love that must be deserved, it can be lost if one does not do what is expected. In the nature of fatherly love lies the fact that obedience becomes the main virtue and disobedience the main sin…its punishment the withdrawal of fatherly love. Since this love is conditional the child can do something to earn it, acquire it, or work for it. Its principle is “I love you because you fulfill my expectations” it says, “You did wrong and you must change your ways if you want me to like you.” The child is loved because he has earned it. This conditional love is the type of love one finds in the male god Yahweh, who is portrayed as, and called Father in Scripture. Jesus says of his father in John 12:26If any man serve me, let him follow me; and where I am, there shall also my servant be: if any man serve me, him will my Father honour”, showing the conditional aspect of earning God’s love. Read the rest of this entry »

Have you ever wondered why part of God’s plan for sacrificing his son included torturing him? If one looks back at the Hebrew sacrificial system contained in the Bible, held by believers to be given of the biblegod, it doesn’t include torturing the animals that are to be sacrificed. The animals are killed in a humane way by slitting their throats; this wasn’t the case with Jesus. Supposedly the whole plan of salvation, construed in the mind of Yahweh included not only the horrendous death of being crucified, but also the inhumane act of being beaten to a bloody pulp by flogging.

 

If the biblegod needed a human sacrifice to fulfill his plan of saving people from their sins, why was it necessary to torture that person to death? If it was the death itself that was needed, what was the use of the agonizing torture that led to it? Does Yahweh delight in human suffering? The authors of the Bible seem to think so. God could have chosen to have Jesus killed without torturing him, but he didn’t…why?

In order for scientists to make a credible name for themselves, they are held to a very high standard. Not only are rigorous tests imposed upon them, but they are examined by their peers in minute detail and can only have articles published that hold up to scrutiny. Sad to say the same criteria is not applied to those who hold to the biblical account of creation. For the creationist there are no standards but the Bible; there are no peers to review one’s work; only fellow believers, so a creationist needs no evidence to back up his claims; only to state and defend what the Bible says. If a scientist must produce evidence to back up his theories, why is not the same standard applied to the creationist who merely states that because the Bible says that its god created everything it must be so. Of course no such testing can apply to the Bible, because the claims it makes have no evidence to be backed up with. Until such a time when creationists are held to the same standard of accountability as the scientists there can be no equality in comparison of evidence.

 

Creationists produce no proof of their own to verify the biblical story, they only take what scientists have to offer and try to discredit and disprove scientific theories because they don’t match the claims that are made in the Bible. It is time that people wake up and think for themselves with open minds and come to beliefs based on credible evidence that can be tested and holds up under scrutiny. Would a true god expect anything less? We are humans with minds that reason and think logically, why waste that ability on blind faith that gets a person nowhere? Nothing solid can be built upon a foundation of shifting sand, it only crumbles. We know if the foundation of evolution is false it will fall under the weight of truth; the same holds true for creationism, except it is being supported on the backs of those who refuse to let it go.

 

It’s hard to conceive of an intelligent mind that would allow itself to be confined and constrained to words written in an archaic book. If indeed there is a god who created male and female in his image, why would he then limit their ability to search for how this wonderful universe was made, and instead have his unlimited knowledge be limited to the constraints of the understanding of primitive minds still in their childhood of growth? The Bible narrows the mind and stifles its ability to learn, keeping those who follow it trapped within the timeframe of its pages. It’s time to imagine a god who is big enough and intelligent enough to have created this marvelous world we live in, and let go of the biblegod who only keeps people trapped in a very narrow mindset.

 

The wonderful thing about the true scientific approach is that the idea of a god or no god can be set aside. One does not need to posit either view in order to research, explore, experiment and discover. Whether an intelligent mind exists or not, plays no part in discovering how the universe operates, or if evolution is true or false. Christians should indeed applaud scientists, because each new discovery brings us that much closer to finding god, if he does in fact exist.

Knowledge is the key to finding freedom. When one opens their minds and explores the world around them, discovering the truth that lies in knowledge, then true freedom arrives. If I had to choose one message to share with the world, it would be the message of allowing oneself to freely explore all avenues of knowledge; wherever your heart leads you in pursuit of that quest…follow it. Don’t be afraid to ask questions, and always let your mind be open to receive the answers that come.

 

If you feel the need to believe in a god, please believe in a god who is intelligent enough to act in accordance with the creative and brilliant mind that you as a human possess. Do not limit your god to the primitive mindset of our ancestors who thought females were inferior and should not be given equal human rights, but rather reach as high as your human intellect will let you, and give to your god qualities befitting a superior being. Do not dig into the pit where all manner of dark and immoral behavior resides to color the face of your god; instead clothe the character of your god with the same kindness and compassion that you as a parent would treat your children with…and then follow that god.

The term entanglement was coined by the prominent physicist Erwin Schrodinger, one of the founders of quantum theory. He used this term to refer to the connections between separated particles that persist no matter how far the distance. If two particles share a common correlation whereby they influence each other that connection will mysteriously remain as a shared bond no matter how far apart they are separated.

 

I would like to use the same idea of entanglement and apply it to the relationship of bonding that is experienced with mother/child and identical twins. What every child shares with its mother is quite literally their flesh and bone, beginning with a single egg cell from the mother that becomes her child’s entire body. For that very reason I posit that because every cell in the child’s body had its origin in the child’s biological mother, and was nourished from the mother’s blood, an innate connection is established that allows the child to share a unique bond with his birth mother for life. The same holds true for identical twins who share the same original egg cell, many of whom exhibit an extraordinary ability to perceive each others feelings and characteristics, even when separated from birth. Any mother who has given birth to a child understands the profound depth of this bond is unlike any other relationship a person develops during their lifetime; your child is literally part of you. When a woman adopts a child from birth, the unique bond that is manifest from a biological child doesn’t exist because the entanglement of shared cells is missing. This is not to say that deep bonding and relationships cannot be established between non-related individuals, rather what I’m referring to here is the specific relational bond that is formed from entanglement.

 

An ironic twist to the concept of all human life being essentially flesh and bone of the woman is seen in the biblical story of human origins. Three major religions on the planet hold to the biblical account of creation, which states that God created woman from the rib of man, whereas in reality man comes from the flesh and bone of woman. The Christian faith has long propagated this teaching of woman’s mythical origin from Adam to keep her in submission to the man. Its premier teacher the apostle Paul uses Adams biblical order of formation as a weapon of submission to teach that the woman is to be in subjection to the man, and not to usurp authority over him. One of the main verse’s that is used to propagate this erroneous teaching, which has caused untold misery for women, comes from the book of Timothy.

 

1Tim.2:11-15 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

1Cor.11:8 For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man.

 

The more people are informed as to the truth, the less they will be trapped in the ignorance of religious teachings that only serve to enslave the mind and body. The truth will set you free from your bondage!

Genesis 1 speaks of the creation of the singular, androgynous man (both male and female) in Gods own image.

Genesis 2 speaks of the division of woman from man, ending with the two becoming one flesh in marriage.

Genesis 3 goes beyond the two becoming one by adding a third quality to the picture and that is desire.

This Hebrew word for desire is ta’avah, meaning a lustful or covetous desire; the first place this word is found is in Gen.3:6.

Gen.3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was desirable (ta’avah) to the eyes, and a tree to be desired (chamad) to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

When Eve is confronted with the naked (`aruwm) temptation of the serpent’s offer of the forbidden fruit it awakens within her a desire that was not present before, which she shares with Adam who is there by her side, resulting in the realization of their nakedness. This awareness of nakedness manifests itself as shame….thus a connection between man and woman forms that was not present before desire was woken up by temptation.

Pro.13:12 Hope deferred maketh the heart sick: but when the desire (ta’avah) cometh, it is a tree of life.

Pro.19:22 The desire (ta’avah) of a man is his kindness: and a poor man is better than a liar.

When man was created in the image of God he was created male and female, that is to say man contained within his being wholeness, at separation when the female was taken from the man each being now lacked completeness which would be the force at play attracting them back together, to once again become one flesh. The initial portrayal of Adams relationship with Eve was one of reunification, an attraction not based on lustful desire, but instead based on the need to be complete…bringing his own flesh back to himself in marriage as one flesh. It was only after they gained an awareness of lustful desire through eating the forbidden fruit did their love based on the completeness of being one flesh change to that of a lustful desire for each other, going beyond that of two halves simply reconnecting to become whole.

Man’s initial condition in the Garden of Eden is portrayed as that of complacency, so it is as if he needed to be tempted to give him the reason to go beyond complacency and grow. In the Garden all their needs were met, so an external attraction was required to awaken within them a reason to go beyond their status-quo. The archetypal figure of the Serpent was the instrument used in the story to cause Eve to break out of that complacency by sparking a lustful desire that goes beyond their static condition of having all their needs met….in a sense the Serpent figure was itself the desire Eve had for knowledge presented externally in the story as “the Tempter”. The Serpent could be viewed as Eves own desire awakening within her that compelled her to act upon the temptation of eating of the fruit that was desirable to her yet forbidden. In sharing this new found desire with Adam, both then could experience a connection between themselves not present before. This connection was manifest as the experience of shame in their realization of their nakedness.

The consequence of this awakened desire was banishment from the Garden which can be compared to a child who reaches maturity and leaves home to begin life on his own, never again being able to return to the innocence of childhood. Adam and Eve were now forever barred from re-entering the Garden through the same door with which they left, hence the imagery of angels with flaming swords guarding the entrance to the Garden. Now the way of access to the Tree of Life is through re-birth in Jesus, which is presented to us in the book of Revelation and takes place on a spiritual level.

Gen.3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

Rev.22:2 In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.

Rev.22:14 Blessed are they that do His commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

Gen.1:1-4 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. 2) And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: (God gave Light [Holy Spirit] to the world)

Gen.1:4-5 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day (Jesus is called the Day Star), and the darkness he called Night (absence of light). And the evening and the morning were the first day.

John 1:4-5 In him was life (zoe); and the life (zoe) was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

John 1:6-9 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe. He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. 9) That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.      (God gave Light [Holy Spirit] to the world)


John 5:26 For as the Father has life in himself; so has he given to the Son to have life in himself;

God > Life > Jesus        Life = Holy Spirit

God’s Life = Holy Spirit    Light of Jesus = Holy Spirit    Light of men = Holy Spirit

The description of creation in Genesis 1:4-5 mirrors the description of creation in John 1:4-5. Both speak of God giving light and that light being divided from the darkness.

John 3:19-21 And this is the judgment, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

Throughout the history of the written Bible, scholars have long noted the unique qualities each of the Gospels display in their presentation of Christ. Each of the 4 Gospels presents a different aspect of our Lord, all the while giving an accurate account of His life and teaching.

One such example is the phrase “Kingdom of Heaven”. The only place in the entire Bible that the term Kingdom of Heaven is used is in the book of Matthew, and it happens 32 times! What is the Apostle Matthew conveying to us in his usage of “Heaven”? The other Gospels, and the rest of the Bible uses the term “Kingdom of God”, even in parallel passages where the other Gospels use Kingdom of God, Matthew will use Kingdom of Heaven. One good example is in the Beatitudes….

Matt. 5:3 Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Luke 6:20 And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples, and said, Blessed be yepoor: for yours is the kingdom of God.

…. and there are many more.

Another interesting reflection of Christ portrayed differently in a parallel passage of the Gospel of Matt. then it is in Luke, is where Matthew speaks of confessing Christ before “my Father which is in heaven”, whereas Luke relates the same event but uses very different wording. Luke uses the words of confessing Christ before “the angels of God” giving a different reflection on the same teaching. The color that Matthew seems to be painting is one of a very personal nature. He speaks of “my Father in heaven”, giving the teaching a very intimate touch, whereas in Luke it is comes across as more of a “reporting the facts” tone in keeping with the theme of the Gospel of man.

Luke 12:6-10 Are not five sparrows sold for two farthings, and not one of them is forgotten before God? But even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear not therefore: ye are of more value than many sparrows. Also I say unto you, Whosoever shall confess me before men, him shall the Son of man also confess before the angels of God: But he that denieth me before men shall be denied before the angels of God. And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven.

Matt. 10:29-33 Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing?and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father. But the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear ye not therefore, ye are of more value than many sparrows. Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven. But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.

Another wonderful example of Matthew’s personal tone is found again in parallel passages of Matthew, Mark and Luke where we see that once again Matthew refers to God as “my Father”, whereas in the other two Gospels it says Kingdom of God.

Matt.26:29 But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.

Mark 14:25 Verily I say unto you, I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine, until that day that I drink it new in the kingdom of God.

Luke 22:18 For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come.

There are numerous examples such as these that the Bible Wheel greatly exemplifies, displaying the unique qualities of the Gospels by the way the books line up on the Spokes which are each governed by a specific Hebrew letter. http://www.biblewheel.com/default.asp

Another occurrence of differences in the parallel passages, that adds great depth to our understanding of Jesus through the eyes of the Gospel writers is in this account where Matthew mentions “my Father in heaven” and “kingdom of heaven” whereas the parallel passage in Mark does not. This once again displays the emphasized usage of Father, and Heaven found only in the Gospel of Matthew, giving us an intimate reflection of Christ through the eyes of Matthew.

Matt. 16:15-20 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. 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. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. 20.) Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.

Mark 8:29-30 And he saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Peter answereth and saith unto him, Thou art the Christ. ————–> 30.) And he charged them that they should tell no man of him.

Another point to note in these two parallel passages between Matthew and Mark, is that Mark being well noted as the “Gospel that runs” continues to be true to his character displaying a very condensed version of this account of Peter’s confession of Jesus as the Christ.

Again we see a parallel passage in the Gospels in which Matthew speaks of “my Father in heaven” and the parallel passage uses another term. In this case it is Mark who uses the term “will of God” instead of Matthews “will of my Father which is in heaven”, once more showing us in subtle ways the reflection of intimate reverence that colors Matthew’s Gospel.

Matt. 12:50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.

Mark 3:35 For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.

The grand finale occurs in the Garden of Gethsemane, as we have seen in other parallel verses, Matthew shows an intimate reverence when recording the Words of Christ as He speaks to His Father. In this grand finale of events, which has parallel verses in all the Gospels, once again we see Matthew’s choice of words to be in keeping with the theme of personal reverence that has been displayed in many other parallel verses throughout the Gospels.

Matt. 26:36-44 Then cometh Jesus with them unto a place called Gethsemane, and saith unto the disciples, Sit ye here, while I go and pray yonder. And he took with him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, and began to be sorrowful and very heavy. Then saith he unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death: tarry ye here, and watch with me. And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt. And he cometh unto the disciples, and findeth them asleep, and saith unto Peter, What, could ye not watch with me one hour? Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh weak. He went away again the second time, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, thy will be done. And he came and found them asleep again: for their eyes were heavy. And he left them, and went away again, and prayed the third time, saying the same words.

Mark 14:32-41 And they came to a place which was named Gethsemane: and he saith to his disciples, Sit ye here, while I shall pray. And he taketh with him Peter and James and John, and began to be sore amazed, and to be very heavy; And saith unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful unto death: tarry ye here, and watch. And he went forward a little, and fell on the ground, and prayed that, if it were possible, the hour might pass from him. And he said, Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee; take away this cup from me: nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt. And he cometh, and findeth them sleeping, and saith unto Peter, Simon, sleepest thou? couldest not thou watch one hour? Watch ye and pray, lest ye enter into temptation. The spirit truly is ready, but the flesh is weak. And again he went away, and prayed, and spake the same words. And when he returned, he found them asleep again, (for their eyes were heavy,) neither wist they what to answer him. And he cometh the third time, and saith unto them, Sleep on now, and take your rest: it is enough, the hour is come; behold, the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners.

Luke 22:39-46 And he came out, and went, as he was wont, to the mount of Olives; and his disciples also followed him. And when he was at the place, he said unto them, Pray that ye enter not into temptation. And he was withdrawn from them about a stone’s cast, and kneeled down, and prayed, Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done. And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him. And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground. And when he rose up from prayer, and was come to his disciples, he found them sleeping for sorrow, And said unto them, Why sleep ye? rise and pray, lest ye enter into temptation.

Reverence of the Father which the Gospel of Matthew displays by using the term “my Father” is wrapped up in the theme of “Righteousness” that is the hallmark of Matthew’s Gospel on Spoke 18, which is governed by the Hebrew letter “Tzaddi”, meaning righteousness http://www.biblewheel.com/Wheel/Spokes/Tzaddi_God.asp.

Righteousness colors the Gospel of Matthew in many ways, first being the dominant usage of the word righteousness above all the other Gospels, occurring 15 times compared to 5 times or less in the other Gospels. Then there is the inclusion of righteousness in at least 7 of the parallel passages, that is left out in the other Gospels.

Here is another passage in Matthew, colored once again by his personification of God, speaking in reverential terms by calling Him “my Father“.

Matt.24:35-36 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my (mou) Father only.

Mark 13:31 Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away. But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.

In looking at the account of the betrayal of Jesus in the Synoptic Gospels, again only in Matthew is the term “my Father” used, but what really blew me away was when I noticed that in the account of the servant of the high priests whose ear was cut off, only in the Gospel of Luke (the physician) does it mention that Jesus touched his ear and “healed” it!

Matt. 26:51-56 And, behold, one of them which were with Jesus stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest’s, and smote off his ear. Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword. Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels? But how then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be? In that same hour said Jesus to the multitudes, Are ye come out as against a thief with swords and staves for to take me? I sat daily with you teaching in the temple, and ye laid no hold on me. But all this was done, that the scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled. Then all the disciples forsook him, and fled.

Mark 14:47-50 And one of them that stood by drew a sword, and smote a servant of the high priest, and cut off his ear. And Jesus answered and said unto them, Are ye come out, as against a thief, with swords and with staves to take me? I was daily with you in the temple teaching, and ye took me not: but the scriptures must be fulfilled. And they all forsook him, and fled.

Luke 22:50 And one of them smote the servant of the high priest, and cut off his right ear. And Jesus answered and said, Suffer ye thus far. And he touched his ear, and healed him. Then Jesus said unto the chief priests, and captains of the temple, and the elders, which were come to him, Be ye come out, as against a thief, with swords and staves? When I was daily with you in the temple, ye stretched forth no hands against me: but this is your hour, and the power of darkness.

The Gospel pallet truly paints a magnificent picture of our Lord!

Ads by Google
February 2017
M T W T F S S
« Nov    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728  
Ads by Google

Designed by Gadgets, In collaboration with  Health Advisor, web hosting, and Webhosting Philippines .