#but it's also on twitter and facebook etc (like what smarter people than me have pointed out)

[protaetia]

🐞

[straycatboogie]

2023/02/18 English

BGM: Daryl Hall & John Oates - Private Eyes

Listening to Daryl Hall and John Oates randomly,  I read Yoshio Kataoka's "Life of Words". Kataoka tries to find the real figures of the words (the ones I am also certainly the user of them) which are filled in this world, and think about them referring to his experience of life. For example, a lot of "katakana words", Japanese English, dead words, and traditional words, etc. I also like to think about words, so his discussions are interesting to read. I learned how the Japanese language "eats" various foreign words and concept easily, and puts them as the Japanese (the result of this phenomenon is the scene of Japanese society that is full of "katakana") from his writings. However, I can't stop used those words. Even if people point out that there is a word to describe Twitter and Facebook as "social media", I would use the Japanese English "social networking service (often shorten as SNS)" in the area of Japanese language. 

 Today I worked early. This morning, I prepared for today's work with Lloyd Cole's love songs. Suddenly, writing my notes of these things (about the books I read, music I enjoy, and the things in my mind, etc.) I thought that, "why do I write my memos in English?". If I try to answer this seriously, it becomes that "it suits my nature". It never means that I am smarter than anyone (this is the true opinion of mine). I heard that people can be divided as two types as thinking in Japanese way or doing in English way, and I am born as the latter person by chance. That's all I think. Once I went to Tokyu Hands when this corona panic just started, and bought the memo pad I am still using, then it "suit" me, so I can keep on writing. It's the simple fact.

Indeed, I have been writing my bad memories and complaints in this diary, and today I also thought that "I am the person who can never be someone. I am that type" at lunch break. Quoting Haruki Murakami's famous wording, I would say it as "eggs" of "Of Walls and Eggs". I have had a difficulty to live this life. When I was a teenager, I felt that I was caught fully by a nightmare. A closed situation as Tears For Fears's song as "Mad World", so I just spent that period with Haruki Murakami's novels. At that time, I believed somewhere in my mind that I could be happy if I went to a university, or Tokyo. But, after entering the university, I started having an emptiness that crucified me and made me think, "what on earth I want to do?". I experienced the change from living in the countryside to Tokyo suddenly, and that change was too hard for me because I was weak and also autistic, in other words, having a serious hardship. Holding big depression, I stayed on the bed in my apartment. And after that, I experienced a lot of troubles... but I survived like this.

A Japanese musician, Motoharu Sano, influenced me to listen to Hall and Oates's music, and it suits my feeling well right now. There is still unknown music for me. There are various things that are listed up on the one lineup flatly, and I choose my favorite things freely. I listened to Sonny Rollins yesterday, but today I choose TOTO to enjoy. That's my real life. At the library I choose Yoshio Kataoka like today, and also have an interest in Raymond Carver. What things are contained and "mixed" in my head? I don't care in its history. I just ignore the roots or tradition. Likewise, I just choose what I want, that's my. Today I also read books, listen to music, and "bar-f-out" my thoughts like this. I am basically "hybrid", so I can never be any writers' fan or any ideology's believer, and I never want to become them. I live on and on.

[laynemorgan]

These past few weeks -- this past presidency really -- have been wildly eye opening for me. As a liberal white person, I’ve spent the better part of the last few years learning and unlearning, checking myself, checking my peers, etc. But these last few weeks it has been even more so. Unsure of what to do with my voice in the din of twitter, and preferring to elevate voices of people of color around me, I wound up taking to facebook, spending the better part of the last months sharing political posts that I had died off on posting after Trmp’s election, confronting relatives and family friends that i had, a few years ago, decided i’d need to just come to terms with. Through all of it, I have seen a lot of grace. I’ve seen a lot of learning. And I’ve scene a lot of stubborn refusal to learn. And I’ve been those people. I’ve been learning but I’ve also refused to. I’m hoping to change that now. 

A few months ago, a girl on twitter approached me. She was angry. She confronted me flat out about how I felt that it was okay for me to preach equality and social issues as someone who had been so bad at confronting and apologizing for my own missteps in the past. As someone who had hurt people without consequence. She was right. I told her that. She told me that my previous apologies had been shitty and selfish. And she was right. I promised her I’d write a new one. 

And then I never did. 

When our world erupted into protests and marches and major social movement this last month, I became immediately embarrassed. The words I had promised had never made it out. I prioritized a million other things in my life instead of the people I had hurt. I regret that. So so so much. I regret not immediately writing an apology that I truly meant when it was pointed out to me how much I had let it all fall off my radar. I regret only thanking that one girl on twitter for her time and education and not the many, many other voices who had been trying to reach me over the years. I should have done that right away. I should have done that even before, without it having to be brought to my attention. I thought that because I had learned and knew better, because I personally knew where I had gone wrong and wouldn’t do it again, that it was over. But the truth is, that was a lesson I hadn’t been ready to learn either. That the people we’ve hurt don’t go away, that shitty apologies don’t make up for pain, that having selfish things to do with our time doesn’t excuse not prioritizing growth and reflection and acknowledgement. So for starters, I am sorry for that. I am sorry that it took me four years to say anywhere on the internet that i KNEW that apology I wrote was shitty. I’m sorry it took me four years to acknowledge to anyone how wrong it was that I was constantly requiring them to push me toward change. I am so sorry it has still taken me a months since that twitter exchange this year, and a full month since I realize I’d STILL forgotten about it to be here. And writing this. I’ve been selfish. I’ve shoved all of your important words and experiences and thoughts and lessons to a place where I could look at them when it was convenient for me. And that was fucking selfish. And ignorant. 

To now skip all of that intro and go into more detail, this whole story begins in my fandom days. When I loved and adored The 100 and was a very active member of that fandom. The reveal of Clarke’s bisexuality, the introduction of their Lesbian character, Lexa were important to me. In making that clear, I said in a tweet that another character, Bellamy (portrayed by Filipino actor Bob Morley) was less important and received preferential treatment by the fans due to his ability to be seen as a “hot white guy.” In short, I entirely erased Bob’s lived experience as a non-white man, I erased the visibility that Bellamy created for men like him, and when it was pointed out to me, I doubled down. I defended my stance, I fumbled to explain myself over and over. I thought that because my intent was not to harm that it excused me from the impact of what I had said. And it didn’t. What I said was wrong. It was erasure, it was ignorant and came from my own unchecked racism. I know that now. I didn’t then. I was embarrassed and upset that people thought the worst of me. When what I should have been was humble and willing to listen. And THAT is what is truly embarrassing. 

Then came the apology, several years later. I had spent time arguing about a cause that effected me personally and suddenly, was moved to more properly address what I had done. But again, my apology was about me. It came on my time, a day late and a dollar short. It wasn’t an apology at all. It was an explanation, a plea for understanding, laden with white fragility that I hadn’t yet examined. It was an apology that had learned how to fix what went wrong but hadn’t actually learned what was wrong about what I’d said and done. It stepped over the voices of the people who had been fighting to teach me. It re-centered myself, my experience, my emotions. And again, it was selfish. 

To be explicitly clear: the way I behaved toward the people who corrected me and tried to educate me in both of those instances was shameful. My inability to listen something I am actively working on as much as I can. I am so so sorry to those people especially, to Bob whether he knew about this incident or not, and to the entire fandom community at large for setting such a shitty example. 

This apology isn’t only about that moment, though. I’ve been doing a lot of reflecting lately, and I wanted to make sure to talk about other stuff too. Other stuff that no one has been publicly calling me out for, but that is still bad. Whether it’s pointed out to me or not. Because I think growth is important and I think it’s important to humble ourselves to know when we were wrong, to look back on our actions once we have learned better and pull out the bad parts, show people, teach others. In my years in fandom, I made a thousand missteps. I was quick to get upset, when someone said a show or character I loved was racist or had done something racist. I was the person always shouting that not everything is racist. I was a fucking ignorant. I dug my heels in simply to defend things, without taking time to listen, without understanding the history of pain that people of color face when it comes to stories and representation. I thought I was smarter than I was. 

I didn’t listen when I was told that you can’t dreamcast a next gen character of a mixed race couple with just one of those races. I didn’t listen when white washing was explained to me. I was too stubbornly wrapped up in the things I wanted and my own perceived kindness and correctness to think that I could get something wrong, that I could need to put in a modicum of effort to change my ways. “There just aren’t that many mixed actors,” I’d say. But because I couldn’t name any off the top of my head didn’t mean they didn’t exist. And frankly, the fact that I couldn’t name any was shameful too. I know now, how important racial representation is. Again, I am sorry for not listening. I am sorry for whitewashing and for thinking that simply dubbing myself a good person and good ally didn’t make it so. I was too proud to learn. I’m working on dismantling that fragility too. 

I work in television now. I work in television because I want nothing more than to tell stories about everyone. This year I got my first script. And that same girl who called me on twitter a few months ago told me she didn’t want to support the show I worked on because she didn’t trust a project that I worked on. That fucking devastated me. I wanted to proudly wave the expectational diverse show I loved over my head and say “but look what we did!!” And when that instinct hit me, this time, for the first time, I checked myself. Because what I did didn’t matter without fixing what I had done. Without earning that trust back, without making it abundantly clear where my head and my heart are now. Something that felt “so long ago” to me was fresh and painful for other people. Being able to shove it away was a privilege I had and didn’t see. I had sat in the writers’ room on that show and advocated for our representation and felt proud of the stories we told. But none of that matters if I haven’t checked myself, and fixed the hurt that I’ve caused, personally first. 

I am truly sorry. I’m sorry for the mistakes I inevitably forgot about making that did not make this post. I’m sorry for the ignorance that made them less important to me than they are still to the people of color who witnessed them and the things I perpetuated. I’m sorry for not understanding that I can contribute to the problem, that I can BE the problem. I’m sorry for talking over you, for not listening to you, for letting you be the villain in my head and my heart and out here on my public profile for so long. I’m ashamed of my past, but I don’t want to keep letting time go without talking about. I want to bring my selfishness and my ignorance into the light and talk about it. I don’t want to cause anyone hurt for any longer than I need to, and I’m so sorry for never giving anyone closure on any of this before, even when I thought I had gotten it for myself. Thank you for reading this. Thank you for trying so hard to explain shit to me that I just didn’t hear. I know I’m inclined to wordy bullshit. I want you all to know that I’m listening. I’m late. But I’m listening. And again, I am sorry for having hurt you in the first place. I was wrong. I will likely be wrong again. But I promise you that I will do everything in my power to never, ever be as unwilling as I have been to learn. I am educating myself all the time now, in hopes that you won’t ever have to educate me again. But should that day come, I promise to meet you with the grace, humility, and open mind that I should have a long time ago. 

[invisibleliquid]

Ingredients Of Covid Vaccine

The ingredients of the mRNA Covid vaccines are being kept a secret from the public and of course, from those who administer them to the unsuspecting recipients. (See video below)

The Connecticut Department of Public Health has published the Ingredients list for the Moderna COVID “Vaccine” and that data sheet confirms it contains a chemical “SM-102.” (This list does not include the hydrogel nanobot component) Moderna has in the past referred to their ‘vaccine’ technology as an ‘operating system’

The SM-102 Material Safety Data Sheet describes this chemical as “NOT FOR HUMAN OR VETERINARY USE”

According to the manufacturer, Cayman Chemical Company in their filing with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), this chemical causes “Acute Toxicity “Fatal in contact with skin.”

In that same OSHA filing, the manufacturer declares SM-102 “Causes damage to the central nervous system, the kidneys, the liver and the respiratory system through prolonged or repeated exposure.”

This appears to be what they are injecting into YOUR arm when you take the Moderna COVID Vax.  You are APPARENTLY being POISONED!

Perhaps this is why so many people are having “adverse reactions” to the so-called “vaccine?”

Yet Health departments all over this country are running TV and Radio ads telling the general public this vaccine is “safe.”  That seems to be FALSE ADVERTISING.

Now that this information is out, YOU may wish to carefully re-think whether or not you want someone injecting this into YOU.

For those who made the decision to get this vaccine, you may want to get in touch with a good personal injury lawyer and present this information to that attorney.   (While you’re still alive.)

Clearly very many of you made the decision to receive this vaccine based on deliberately false claims by politicians, celebrities, public health officials,  TV and Radio Stations, the print and electronic NEWS MEDIA (ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, CNBS, etc.) and perhaps others.

Maybe THOSE PEOPLE SHOULD BE SUED for what their false information has done to you. Where was their Due Diligence?   Did they even bother to look up the ingredients before they went out and told the public this was “safe?”

Why were they out there telling people this was “safe” when the ingredients list clearly shows a chemical “not for human … use” that is known to “cause cancer” and “damage to central nervous system . . .”

Oh, and how about social media giants (with deep pockets) like Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, Google/Youtube? They not only pushed false information, but also actively and aggressively BLOCKED truthful information about the bad reactions taking place, and CENSORED or SHUT OFF accounts trying to get facts to the public. What price should they pay for what they’ve done?

Their CENSHORSHIP seems to have been an effort to aid and abet the flow of false safety information which ultimately may have damaged YOU!  Maybe the social media companies need to get sued too?

I can’t help but feel that if the big mouth, holier-than-thou celebrities, actors, left-wing media pundits, and politicians, all find themselves getting sued for what they’ve publicly told people to do, maybe these folks will (finally) shut up . . . or go out of business.

Those of you who work or attend school at places where the bosses or school administration REQUIRED you to get the vaccine as a condition of continued employment or condition of attending school, maybe THEY SHOULD GET SUED AS WELL.

OSHA has made clear that when an employer REQUIRES people to take an experimental vaccine, the employer is responsible under Workman’s Compensation Laws for any injuries or deaths caused by their requirement!

A lot of these people seem to think they’re so much smarter than everyone else, and they somehow needed to tell all us “little people” what was best for us.

Let them explain how injecting a cancer-causing chemical clearly labelled NOT FOR HUMAN USE, was “good” for us. Let’s see what a jury thinks of that.

Let their vast personal intellect, that they seem to think makes them so much smarter than the rest of us, hit their pocketbook; maybe they’ll start minding their own business . . . if they have a business left after all these lawsuits!

Given the information above, it seems to me that people who took the Moderna “jab” are likely to get sicker and sicker until they die.  Maybe I’m wrong.   Yet the Material Safety Data Sheet clearly states “Causes damage to the central nervous system, the kidneys, the liver and the respiratory system through prolonged or repeated exposure”  so to me, that means every time your heart beats and your blood flows, that chemical is REPEATEDLY hitting the cells in your body.  To me, that makes it “prolonged and repeated exposure.”

Those of you who are suffering from “the jab” should ask a lawyer.

Of course, the lawyer may tell you the vaccine companies were granted immunity as a condition of releasing their experimental vaccine.  But the US Supreme Court has held in the past that “fraud vitiates everything” (See “UNITED STATES v. THROCKMORTON” 98 U.S. 61) and if these vaccine companies told the government their vaccine was “safe” when their own ingredients list says otherwise, then it may be that those companies committed fraud . . . and . . .  fraud vitiates everything.  Thus, maybe a court holds those vaccine companies have NO immunity?

Of course, proving fraud is a tough legal thing to do.  But maybe this will help; Pharmaceutical Companies are required to put an INSERT into their products that list ingredients and all known side effect.   But as the images below will show, those inserts boxed with the “vaccines” . . . .  ARE BLANK!

Now, I’m no pharmaceutical expert, so I don’t know why the companies left this insert blank.  Someone I know worked for a big pharmaceutical MANUFACTURER,  and he told me that these inserts are called “Ancillary labels” and when he worked in the industry, he was instructed by the company that these are an FDA requirement; they could not ship product without them.

Yet, Moderna (and some others) shipped product with blank inserts.  Why?

Were they worried people would look up the ingredients, find out they’re not for human or veterinary use, and go bonkers?  In criminal law, might the decision to use blank inserts be “consciousness of guilt?”  I’m not an attorney, so I don’t have the answers.

Those of you who have NOT taken the vaccine, should maybe think an awful lot longer before you do.

[afroggyfrog]

SuperStraight

A brand new sexuality that is trending on twitter and being super popular.

Definition:

A superstraight person is someone attracted to members of the opposite gender who are not transexual.

This was created as a response to people who sometimes say things like this:

(source:BBC)

Let’s give a name to the people who insist that not being attracted to trans people makes you transphobic, since I’m not about to describe them every time i wanna bring them up, I’ll call them trans-incels because just like incels they resent people for not wanting to have sex with them.

It’s worth it to remember that trans-incels aren’t representative of all trans people. or even of a majority of them, if i were to bet, they are about as popular as actual incels.

In all the comment sections I checked the anti trans-incel side was a clear majority, and having searched for “superstraight” on youtube to see what people have to say, the first video on the list, from a trans man, is definetely anti trans-incel .

> If you don’t want to date a trans person that’s fine, and if somebody is trying to force you they’re just an asshole

-probably most trans people

From the perspective of a trans-incel (and how we’re all assuming too much)

Imagine a person.

Imagine the probability that they are racist.

Imagine that same person saying “i wouldn’t date a black person”

Has the probability increased at all? be honest, it hasn’t gone up to 100% (which would be the race-incel response) but it must have gone up by at least a little.

But why did it go up by a little? Because now the chance they’ll say something like “because blacks disgust me” has also gone up.

Now imagine being into internet drama (ew) and as a trans person, you’re especially interested in people being transphobic and you probably see transphobia every day because people like talking about it as much as anti-sjw(tm) people like to talk about the trans-incels.

If discussions about trans people only gets to you when it causes drama you’ll probably never see “i wouldn’t date trans men/women...” without having it be followed by “...because they’re not real men/women”.

And even though the whole point of being superstraight is to explain why people wouldn’t date trans men/women without calling them ‘not real men/women’ lets see what the original guy who started the whole superstraight meme has to say at second 15.

https://youtu.be/z8vQhkPnEE4

It’s like instead of throwing bait, they’re just throwing food.

The more you see “...because they’re not real men/women” the more likely you are to expect it, and as someone who subscribes to people posting drama 24/7 you’ll see that hundreds of times until you end up answering ...

the probability that the person who says ‘i wouldn’t date trans men/women’ to be transphobic is 100%

...and even if they don’t follow up with something transphobic it’s always easier to imagine they’re just hiding it rather than to change your whole worldview on the spot.

And if you think “why do they even predict transphobia before its spoken”, well, this might sound crazy to you, but everyone is assuming things all the time, our whole perception of reality is nothing but a hallucination that our brain comes up with using not only stimulus from the world but also assumptions.

There’s a blind spot on each 1 of your eyes, your brain simply fills it in without you knowing, it also adds color to the edge of your vision and makes the whole thing less blurry.

When someone says “i won’t date trans people” some people will simply fill in the blanks, they’ll assume every bit of info about who you are what you believe in what your personality is from just a sentence, because the brain is literally designed for it.

IQ tests are just patterns where a spot is blanked out and you’re supposed to fill it in, your intelligence is measured by your ability to fill in the blanks, and low intelligence people will just make mistakes more often, but everyone smart or dumb will constantly make assumptions about everything, and dumb people will be proven wrong about their assumptions more often.

And this happens all the time even when you’re not talking about politics or having a fight.

Someone talking about the earth being curved? well, every time I saw someone do that they called it a sphere so let me just fill in the blanks.

Someone saying they wouldn’t date trans women? well, every time I see screenshots of people saying that in my drama facebook group i see them being transphobic, so let me just fill in the blanks

That’s just how incels operate.

Building legitimacy

Have you ever noticed that every sexual preference eventually gets assigned a flag, on that note, why does every country have a flag?

If you ask a regular person to guess why their country has a flag you’ll get something related to aesthetics, our flags represent our country.

For example Romania and Hungary:

In school we are taught that each colour on our flag has a different meaning, I searched on google and everyone disagrees on what they mean but as an example.

Liberty (sky-blue), Justice (field yellow), Fraternity (blood red) 

Outside of school I was taught by my grandma that the Hungarian flag, much like the Romanian flag, also has a meaning.

The green represents a wide field of green grass, the white represents a white dog playing on the field of grass, rolling around on his back, and the red represents his red dog cock.

Both of these meanings are pretty much just something that a Romanian randomly came up with so i don’t think most people know why countries have flags.

Flags originate from war, that way the armies know not to attack their own allies when they see they carry the same flag, having an army grants you true legitimacy because you can just beat people up into believing you’re legitimate, so countries with no armies probably still had flags because it would be really hard to pretend you have an army otherwise.

Nowadays every country has a flag even if war is illegal, simply because every country has been using one for so long that it became convention. If you don’t follow convention you will be seen as illegitimate. It’s an unwritten rule, but a rule nonetheless, that you need a flag, and much like not following written rules makes you illegitimate (and illegal) so does not following unwritten rules.

And sexualities having their own flags and names probably feels like an even stronger convention than countries having flags for some people.

It’s very often brought up that you have to feel “valid” (which more or less means “legitimate”) 

I still don’t know why, but it’s apparent that people need to be reassured that their sexuality is “valid” and then there’s also this:

Why does a sexual preference have to be distinct from a sexuality? I don’t know, but I’m pretty sure the only difference between the two is legitimacy, to confirm to the conventions of flags and labels.

Q: So why do superstraights get a label and a flag and copy everything that LGBT people do, like tweets talking about how valid their followers are or using the word bigot etc

A: Because to get true legitimacy you need to copy the conventions.

The cargo cult

(wikipedia) Some primitive tribes of people would look at colonists from the civilised world and notice that after they’d built some plane lanes, the planes would come bringing cargo full of valuable stuff.

The tribesmen have made the observation that planes land if you build lanes for them to land on, they made the hypothesis that building the lanes causes the planes to come, and like scientists, they set out to test it.

They made lanes, they made fake planes, they tried to copy everything that the colonists did hoping it would be enough.

Superstraight is a lot like a cargo cult of sexualities, they have a flag, they have a label, they call everyone bigots all the time.

This is the first pic I sent before cropping it.

Because, like a cargo cultist who does not see the plane factories from the colonists homelands, the superstraight person does not see the LGBT community from outside his filter bubble, the filter bubble where only the most obnoxious people like the trans-incels can get through.

So when the superstraight person who thinks every LGBT person is just an obnoxious incel tries to “fit in” with the LGBT, they will act like an obnoxious incel, and when everyone is angry at him, he thinks to himself “they've all proven themselves hypocrites! i baited them so hard! i won!!!”

Even tho there’s a bunch of LGBT people from the comment sections I read who don’t even know the trans-incels even exist, because their filters simply don’t show them the same things you superstraight people are shown.

It gets worse

There’s some people who are so cocky and think they’re so much smarter than the LGBT community that they can just sneak in the nazi SS symbol into their flag and not just fuck up the bait completely.

hehe Schutzstaffel fla- wait! you cant call me a nazi! this is just another sexuality you hypocriteeeee

But this is also just a minority of the people who get superstraight trending, its so popular that I’m pretty sure most of the people getting it to trend are actual normies who wouldn’t even recognise the SS symbol and who have never been to 4chan.

Speaking of 4chan

Of course people don’t think superstraight is legitimate when you have 4chan taking credit for it.

They pick up on all the superficial customs like the flag the label the speech patterns and think “this is their, logic, im using it against them, and they’re all mad because of this alone and not just because a we’re comparing ourselves to the Schutzstaffel”

In a turing test a computer attempts to pass as a human.

In the ideological turing test a human tries to pass as someone of a different ideology.

Are people afraid of passing the ideological turing test? do they think if they can think like the enemy, then they’ll become the enemy? there was no need for people on 4chan to talk so openly about superstraight being a ruse, there was no need to make nazi memes with it, there is no need to post “we used their logic against them”, to constantly tell “yes this is all a lie”.

And yet people have to constantly break character and expose superstraight for being a fake sexuality, why? what’s even the point of it then?

What it could have been

Imagine a world in which instead of making a cargo cult sexuality and just delegitimizing it yourself with all the actual nazi symbolism, you were able to cancel trans-incels.

Imagine if they were able to say things like “the trans-incels are trying to create a new rape culture in which superstraight people are coerced into having sex with transexual people” with a straight face

Imagine if they even tried to coin the term “trans-incels”, since incels are hated by progressives for misogyny and are often associated with 4chan.

Imagine if they could get people banned for hate-speech against the superstraight

Imagine if they had the balls to denounce the people amongst them trying to delegitimise superstraight with their nazi SS and obvious parodying of the  points that aren’t taken seriously by anyone who doesn’t call themselves anti-sjw.

Maybe then there’d be some divide between “pro-superstraight” and “anti-superstraight” instead of everyone who’s not anti-trans agreeing that superstraights aren’t legit.

Maybe they’d be able to get some people canceled, there’s been at least one actual celebrity (India Willoughby) who is a trans-incel, they  could have canceled her! but nobody is even trying.

And oh how much “applying their own logic against them” would have been true if as a response to “but not all trans people are calling you transphobic for having a sexual preference!” you dusted off the “not all men are like that” memes that was popular with feminists.

If they would go on the offensive, cancelling people, spreading trans-incel screenshots to everyone who says they’ve never seen one, mocking people who stand up against them the way feminists used to and say “nOt aLl TrANs pEopLe aRE liKE THat” to anyone who says “not all trans people are like that”, to tell them that “silence is violence” and to make them cancel eachother.

Imagine how much more effective that would have been.

In the end this isn’t gonna make a difference, it will be forgotten, maybe in a couple months, or a year, or a week, some people are  angry today because a counterculture hashtag is trending, but they’ll forget about it too, maybe a couple dozen people will permanently have superstraight on their twitter bios, but really, nothing interesting is gonna come out of it, and if someone tries to make something like whitesexual/blacksexual/asiansexual etc a thing the well will have already been poisoned by superstraight.

[jellyfishmanlove]

Media Log Assignment

Constructing You, Deconstructing Others on Social Media

I shared my first post on Instagram on May 15, 2015. I was 10 years old. 5 years later and it’s one of the most used social media apps, especially for younger age groups. The issue with this is that Instagram is deemed to be very harmful. An article by CNN wrote, “Instagram is the most detrimental social networking app for young people’s mental health”. As a frequent user of the app, I can understand why it’s bad for mental health.

Instagram is an app made for “bringing you closer to the people and things you love”, as described by Instagram, Inc. It’s used for sharing pictures and videos, texting friends and making new friends. In theory, this is a brilliant idea, but in reality, there are consequences to combining your social life with the internet. 

I’m going to use my own Instagram account as an example.

 This post is a construction because this isn’t how I usually look. I don’t usually wear this much makeup or wear fake lashes or do my hair like this but I thought I looked nice and I wanted people to see me looking nice. I turned on my ring light to get the best lighting and took around 12 pictures of myself. I looked through the pictures for around 10 minutes and picked the one that made me look the best. Then I asked my friends if they liked it. Then I had to think of a caption. I wanted people to think I was pretty but also funny so I wrote something that was kind of humorous. This is a character I've created. I wanted people to see me a certain way and I made it happen. Nobody questioned it for a second because we’re so used to this construction.

But, I didn’t create this character by myself. Other Instagram users helped me. After years of scrolling through constructed images, I collaged all my favorite constructions and my character came to life. And I’m sure some of my posts had an impact on other people’s constructions. Constructions construct other constructions, and the cycle continues.

I think one of the main reasons social media is so constructed is because we are also constructed in real life. We are all collages of what we admire in others. If we let these collages build up they will hide who we really are and we will deconstruct ourselves.

I’m on TikTok and I Have No Shame

I feel that TikTok as a social networking app is much more casual than others. I think this is because nobody expects you to use or even have the app. This might relate to the app TikTok is deprived from, Musical.ly. If you had Musical.ly, you were instantly seen as “basic” or “cringy”. TikTok is different from Musical.ly because TikTok has more of a variety of content. Musical.ly was mainly used for music and dance but TikTok  can be used for comedy, dance, music, makeup, fashion, etc. I think the reason the app was so successful is because of the variety of content- it makes the app seem more accepting and inclusive for various groups and cultures that were suppressed in the past.

 Though this app is also seen as “cringy” to some, the humour of youth today is quite ironic and sarcastic. We often find humour in things we originally think are stupid or weird and we eventually forget that we’re being ironic. Then we start having fun with it and might even start liking it. TikTok is now very popular but despite its popularity, it is still being seen as a joke so nobody is really taking it seriously, probably because of its common theme of comedy. In my opinion, it’s important to not take social media too seriously and to not feel obligated to use it.

 The down side of the app is that people feel comfortable expressing their opinions, which isn’t always bad, but unfortunately most of the opinions are negative and sometimes even racist, sexist, homophobic/transphobic, ableist, and classist. And people aren’t scared of any backlash because the informality of the app takes away the shame of posting whatever. Overall, there are pros and cons of having no shame on social media. I think it’s up to the individual to decide if it’s worth the negativity to have fun on an app without fear of embarrassment.

“Has the Smartphone Destroyed a Generation?”

The first smartphone was unveiled by IBM in 1992. It was called the Simon Personal Communicator. Two years later and they’re being sold for $1,100. In 2007, Steve Jobs teamed up with Macworld and then came the iPhone. The iPhone was a game changer. It gained popularity because of its sleek look, touch screen, and access to the internet. I was two years old when the first iPhone was created, completely unaware of how this device would affect my life and the world around me. 

Other generations like to blame us for our general addiction to smartphones, but it’s nearly unavoidable growing up in the digital age. At a certain age, my parents wanted me to get a phone. I didn’t really want one at the time because I saw the way it affected my sister and I didn’t want that to happen to me. But, I knew that they only wanted me to get one so I could stay connected with them at all times and in return I got more freedom. So, I got a phone and I was using it at a healthy rate, until I discovered social  media. First it was Facebook, then Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok and Twitter. Eventually, I noticed myself dedicating hours of my day to my online presence and it hasn’t stopped. 

Smartphone addiction is a real thing. A study by Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) states that there is “an imbalance in the brain chemistry of young people addicted to smartphones and the internet”. Continuing with the bad habits we obtain in our youth, the more likely we are to have mental illness in the future. Statistically, mental health problems have been increasing at an alarming rate since the beginning of the digital age.  

Sometimes I try to blame my parents for my phone addiction-they wanted me to have a phone in the first place-but I know that’s unreasonable. Smartphones are going to keep evolving and if it wasn’t my generation to get consumed by these devices, then it would be the next.

I don’t think smartphones destroyed a generation, because smartphones also caused an entire generation to retain information much faster than the generations before us. We constantly have learning utilities at our fingertips. Smartphones technically make us smarter. I think social media is the real reason this generation has such a high rate of mental health problems.

(Smartphone addiction creates imbalance in brain, study suggests. ScienceDaily. November 30, 2017) (History and Evolution of Smartphones. SimpleTextin. August 19, 2019)

[omgbrainstorming]

The Librarians Periscope Live

Since I can’t watch UPtv because I live outside the US (not salty about that, not at all), I’ve watched the Live on Periscope that was supposed to be on Facebook, but Facebook was dead, so here’s what happened:

UPtv has given us a new home and said that if they get enough “love” they might do something for either a new movie or season 5

Dean had an ear piece to hear the questions and was playing FBI/CIA agent 

First “on screen” was John Kim to “talk behind the girls’ backs” (they were all behind the cameras)

Dean would have loved to explore the Mayan Mythology in season 5 (and again said it still might happen)

John was asked if he thought that Ezekiel would have changed had he picked up the Apple of Discord in season 4 since he didn’t change in season 1, and he said absolutely no and Dean added that there’s a freaking reason why the answer is a big fat no and it’s in the special that they did so, hey, those of you who can watch UPtv will find out! (n.d.a. Not salty at all, really). Also he said that Ezekiel is always both the best and the worst version of himself, so really, no.

John said his fave memory is his first day because he knew nothing, where Portland was (”it’s west of New Hampshire, right?”), what he was supposed to do etc., but everyone was really welcoming 

Dean said that the actors really helped shaped it all (the show) because they had lots of great ideas (like Lindy’s idea of having Cassandra smitten with Jenkins)

John was asked if Ezekiel kept any of the werewolf’s traits and he said that even though the “fetch the ball” scene with Christian at the end of the episode was hilarious, no, he’s just himself, “Ezekiel’s superpower is that he doesn’t know what he’s doing”

Here an alarm went off and, hilariously, it was the sound guy’s alarm 

Here came Lindy “on screen”

MY SHIPPER SISTER WAS MENTIONED: they asked a @jenksel ‘s question (I’m so proud??) where she asked if Casskins was going anywhere and Lindy was all “Listen here, I AM THIS SHIP’S CAPTAIN AND IMMA GO DOWN WITH IT!” so she certainly hopes so, she loves the idea that the thing keeping them (Cassandra and Jenkins) apart was their mortality/immortality and when Jenkins became mortal “it was... maybe maybe maybe!” and Dean and John echoed her “Maybe maybe maybe” and she concluded with: “I would be interested!”

Question: “We know Flynn has a special bond with Excalibur, what would your character choose?” (As something to bond with) And both Lindy and Dean had to suggest Stumpy to John, and Lindy said that Cassandra bonded with no objects, but with her power.

Lindy started making fun of Dean for his ear piece

Q: “In an hypothetical s5, would Cassandra and Jenkins remember the stuff from s4 that was erased when they went back and flipped it?” Because, Dean explains, we know that Flynn remembers and we think that Baird remembers. Lindy said that Cassandra and Jenkins’ relationship is so special that maybe it was imprinted on their hearts ”If I can be super romantic about the entire thing, and I think that kind of thing never goes away, and so maybe, if the details of it had gotten away, they still would have had a sense of that” (n.d.a. Lindy is our ship’s captain through and through, gotta love her)

Q: John and Lindy, what was you fave scene together? They both went “The Minotaur scene” when they are inside the Labyrinth (n.d.a. I’m not crying, go away), John said that it was beautiful because up until this point we see Ezekiel not caring for anyone but himself, and here and throughout all the seasons we see how he has a soft spot for Cassandra and he opens up to her before, and then to the rest of the team (n.d.a. my Casekiel babiiiies), he loved shooting with Lindy because they felt really at ease with each other; and then the final scene of the Morgan episode where Ezekiel gives her the trophy

Q: What was your (Lindy) fave costume? Lindy loved this question. She loved many of her outfits, creating them as well, but if she has to pick one, it’s the Cindy’s episode costume, where she is really colourful, yellow skirt, striped shirt underneath, a blue vest, an extremely short tie and a lovely big bee brooch on it. She doesn’t know why, but this outfit just makes her happy. 

Dean made fun of Christian before he came on screen “don’t know if you can hear it, but there was the sound of a motorbike and a horse running, so that tells me that Christian Kane is in the house”, Christian acted as if he was winded and didn’t know what was happening (he truly didn’t know it was a Periscope and not a Fb Live)

Q: What was your (Christian) fave myth? Was it in the show or not? Christian loved the Frankenstein thing, he was jealous of John Kim for this, he knows that Flynn has killed Dracula so that’s out of the table, but he would have loved more Frankenstein. 

Question for Christian: Which series required more stunts? Leverage or The Librarians? Leverage. And Dean is still salty about the fact that Christian makes him hire stunts for him and then goes and does the stunts himself.

Question for Christian: did you have to watch The Librarian movies or did you just wing it? He said he was lucky because the role was written with him in mind, so no, he knows what Flynn did in the past, but he didn’t

Q: What was your fave interactions with the fans of the show? Christian likes that both 5yo kids and 100yo watch the show together and can both be fan. For John it was at the DragonCon because two girls went up to them (Christian was with him) dressed as Eve and Cassandra and he was like “I know those outfits”, they (the girls) told them they were Eve and Cassandra (Prince Charming Cassandra and a jumpsuit for Eve) and John couldn’t believe he hadn’t recognised them. For Lindy all the girls who thanked her via Instagram or Twitter for representing them, the “weird ones”, who said that Cassandra really meant something for them and that helped them through a difficult time. Lindy herself said she “was always a weirdo” never fitting anywhere, so it was really special, “for all of you ladies out there, hiiiiii” and waved. 

Question for Christian: how did the character of Jacob help you evolve as an actor? He said that he was really lucky to work with amazing people (said all the cast’s names, but paused before John Kim’s name lol), and he said that Jacob was smarter than him, so he kinda had to get smarter.

Q: how was it to work with Rachel Nichols? They all said she was really nice.

Q: what was the funniest behind the scenes moment? They couldn’t really pick one, they loved playing UNO together, but turns out they gave a nickname to John Kim at 2 a.m. because John Kim is a really common name for korean actors and... they brainstormed. Lindy, laughing, said “and then he said he wanted a traditional Australian name!” and... they came up with Koala Newton John. They all agreed it would have been a hit

Q: would you (Dean) have liked to have an episode with all the villains together? Yes, Dean would have loved it, mainly because they all like the actors who played them, Christian was like “yeah, man, we can take ‘em, bring ‘em in!” and Dean “We got Baird, we can win anybody”

Rebecca arrived on screen

Question for Rebecca: what was your fave action and fave emotional scene? She loved the bar fight with Christian in the very first episode because they had played brother and sister in a previous show and had a fight together, so she liked that as the action scene. As the emotional scene she said Jenkins’ deathbed was tough, everyone chimed in saying it was so very emotional, but she added the scene in s4 where she is trying to make them remember The Library and she forgets it herself (in the alternate reality).

Q: we want to know everything that happened with those bunk beds from the summer camp episode. They said that there weren’t many funny outtakes, but that Ezekiel was bunking with Jacob and that Cassandra was under Eve’s bed. They had funny pj’s (”sleeping bonnet” for Lindy, alien pj’s for Ezekiel). But, on Rebecca’s Instagram there are pictures of them in bunk beds, it’s from the time loop episode. They said that maybe they liked bunk beds so much that they (the characters) sleep in bunk beds in The Library. 

Dean said that the location for the time loop episode is an actual prison, never used before, but still a prison.  John then said that, talking about emotional scenes, the one where Eve tells Ezekiel the WW2 story was really emotional, he didn’t want to know the story ‘till their close up and it worked well because he was genuinely tearing up when Rebecca/Eve told him for the first time during the shoot.

Question for Rebecca: fave memory from working on the show? Probably The Silver Screen episode because she likes that it’s not, as usual, Flynn explaining things to Eve, it’s Eve who knows this world and explains it to him. And then the fact that they (Rebecca and Noah) were really beautifully dressed as noir movies want and they (Lindy, Christian and John) showed up dressed up as anything but. They started laughing, John’s fond memories of Jab Jab, Christian was really embarassed because of his cowboy outfit so out of context with their beautiful world. Then everyone laughed because Dean brought up Christian’s yodeling in that episode. 

Q: what was something you wanted to see your character doing/going that we didn’t get to do in s5?  John likes that he (Ezekiel) was almost at the point of being responsible and he would have liked to shoot that.  Lindy would have liked to know more about her past, her parents etc. She has so many ideas because we only got a glimpse of her goth phase in high school, she would have loved to have a particular actress as her mother (n.d.a. sorry guys, I didn’t catch her name, did you?) because she thinks she could portay the same energy Cassandra has, and Christian said he actually often visualise the same actress as his mother and thinks she’d be perfect.  Rebecca would have loved to see an immortal Eve. Christian said that Jacob has found his family in s3, so he thinks he just wants to be like Eve, not in any romantic way, but he wants her to have to focus only on protecting Cassandra and Ezekiel, he wants to be able to fight at the same level, he wants to be great in a fight. 

Dean reveals (to them as well) that he knew what the opening scene of s5 would have been: right back in the middle of the Tethering Ceremony with Nicole barging in and yelling “Stop! If you tether the world ends!” and end of teaser. He knows nothing after that, but he wanted to “screw everything up”

Q: if you had to do a body swapping episode, who would you like your character to body swap with?  John, without a second of hesitation: “Baird.” And then “Aaaaaah, to kiss Noah Wyle” and everyone started laughing. Because he likes the idea of changing the Librarian-Guardian thing. Rebecca agrees that watching her as Ezekiel would have been fun. Lindy to Christian “Does that leave you and me?”  Christian would be ecstatic to play Cassandra, he thinks he’d be great with his hands (for the visions), “I think I’d be fabolous!” and Lindy said she’s be impressive as Jacob because no one expects her to be able to fight, but she actually, in real life, is, Christian knows this and was “yes, she can throw a punch, I believe she knocked me back 3 feet”

Q: in tribute to John Larroquette who’s not here, your fave scene with John Larroquette. Lindy made a whining pained sound (she can’t choose one, “All of them!”). Dean: I think as a group, you all agree on his death scene.  Everyone: yes. Dean: that was a rip-your-heart-out scene. But what about your one on one scene? Christian: the episode where Jenkins and Jacob had the talk after the stuff with Jake’s father. Christian went up to John (Larroquette) and told him, before they even knew about that episode, “<You have to understand something, man, you’re going to be my dad in this>, and I told John that, and you (Dean) before that episode with my dad, <I’m looking at you because I have nothing, you know what I mean? I don’t trust this guys (points at the others), so you- you’re the guy>” and it went exactly as he imagined it, and said that just getting to have a cup of coffe in the morning with John is amazing. Lindy: it was the entire episode she directed (Some Dude Named Jeff) because she says that what he gave her during that episode is so incredible. Her fave scene between him and Cassandra is “the vampire episode”. Christian: “At the very end?” Lindy: “No, no, at the beginning! Where she confesses her undying love to Jenkins! And asks him out on a date! And I just remember John (Larroquette) being so awkard about this and was like (tries to deepen her voice to speak like John) <Ooooh, nooo, I don’t think you would ever ask me out on a date!> and I was like, <Listen John, don’t tell me what I wouldn’t do>” and everyone laughs. She said that she likes their fight over mortality and immortality (same episode) and “he’s just a dream to work with” and stares dreamily into the void.  John Kim says it’s when Ezekiel confronts Jenkins when he’s going away in the Apple of Discord. Dean said that his fave scene between John Larroquette and Rebecca was in the second episode, under the bridge, when he gives her the pep talk.  Rebecca agrees, but also like the scene just before his death, when Eve has brought them all back and “he was there and gave me the biggest hug in the world”

Christian: “If I can speak for the panel, none of our tears (in the death scene) were acting, I was crying”. Everyone: yes. He (John Larroquette) was powerful.

Question: which episode was the funniest to film? Or which moment?  Rebecca can’t pick, but said that the episode when they know they can work together, the four of them, without Flynn, the fairytale episode, they had lots of fun then, especially at Eve being mad for being a princess. Christian remembers going up to Rebecca: “as someone <that claims to know about stunts> I said <you’re in high heels, be careful with them> and she looked at me and she goes <Christian, there’s nothing I can’t do in high heels>” and everyone started laughing. Christian “and you know what? She’s absolutely right”

Question for John: can you actually pick a lock and have you ever stolen something? Yes, he can actually pick a lock, he learned, he can do it in under a minute. Christian “what did you steal that’s worth the most money?” Lindy at John “Nooooo! Do not admit to that!” Chaos ensued and Dean calmed them: “I’ll answer the question for him” then looks in the camera “A million hearts”. 

Q: if there could only be one Librarian, who would make the best Librarian? Dean is sure this will start a fight. John: Ezekiel Jones. No questions, no hesitation. Everyone laughs. Lindy raises her hand and goes: “Guys, like, who else’s ever read a book? Who else could it be?!”  Christian “I’ll be honest with you: it wouldn’t be Jacob Stone” and “sure as hell wouldn’t be Ezekiel” and “It would have been Cassandra. Because she thinks about things before jumping in and because she has the power of magic” 

Dean thinks Captain Marvel stole the idea from them: the fact that Cassandra has powers, then gets rid of the brain grape and her powers go boom.

Lindy: “I actually think that not one of them can be The Librarian, even Flynn admitted it, after muuuuch discussion, that they are all better together.” Dean: 100% agrees with Lindy

Q: would any of you consider being a librarian as an alternative career?  Rebecca volounteers at her kids’ library Lindy spends lots of time with children literacy causes, she wouldn’t be a librarian, “but the library is my happy place” Christian “I don’t wanna have to do with any card catalogue whatsoever!” (he’d only be a Librarian, capital L).   John: nope, his fondest memory of a library is him behind other children scaring them.

Dean: can any of you actually use the card catalogue? John: NO. Rebecca and Lindy: yes, no problem. Christian: it’s the easiest thing in the world. Then to John “of course you can’t” And Christian Kane is an actual honorary librarian, because he made some publicity for the show and the NY Library gave him an honorary position.

Q: What do you think The Librarians have been doing since the last episode? Christian wants everybody to know that Jacob Stone has perfected and probably marketed his own line of beef jerky - everyone explodes in laughs - which is called Chupacabra. Lindy (n.d.a. who totally wanted to say “Jenkins”) says that Cassandra is probably re-organizing everything in The Library. John thinks Ezekiel is being lazy, sleeping in, getting bald.

Lindy directed an episode, John asked what she did for it and she said she normally just reads the script and thinks what would Cassandra wants, here she had to do it with all of them, mostly Jenkins.  Christian said she was amazing, especially because it was her idea the opening scene (when they come into The Library, it’s shot all in one, no room for error, they are shouting news of the escaped animals at each other)

Dean asked: Did directing changed the way she acts? (Lindy) Not really, just made her want to be better.

Q: if you could use the Magic Door to take you anywhere in the world, where would you go?  Lindy: can we travel in time? Rebecca: No, it’s not a time machine.  Lindy: I kno- Rebecca: Do you even remember the show we were in? The thing escalated when they asked Dean if they could swap the magic doors for a time machine.  Christian: magic door, same day, same time. Go. Lindy: Ok. Becca? Rebecca: ahm.......................... Christian: John Kim? They laugh.  Rebecca: Come back to me! Dean: I’ll tell you where I would go!  Rebecca: ok Dean: I would take all of you and we’d go through the Magic Door and we’d arrive at The Library. Everyone: Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaawwwwwwwww!

And that’s it. 

Now it’s almost 6 a.m. here and I want the extended episodes of The Librarians. No, I don’t need sleep, someone gives those episodes to me, please

[checanty]

so two questions (love your work for the record. you've become one of my primary inspirations over the years! thank you for exposing us to your talent :D ) with the issues surrounding social media at the moment - cancel culture, censorship, algorithm issues etc. How do you feel this is currently affecting current and upcoming talent? Do you think it will get better or worse and why? for my second question - how can one have a relatively humble career in freelance without the social media fame?

Thank youuu!!

Okay, okay, question one: First up regarding the censorship I can’t really say very much since I’m not doing any photography with nudity or any pornographic artwork. I know non sexual artistic nudety does sometimes get flagged, but usually those decisions get gevised if you ask. It’s annoying, but nothing career deciding. I also started sharing my artwork on a website where pornographic (and gore) content was always inaccessible to minors, so this whole thing doesn’t seem particularly outlandish to me. You’ll find your audience, but have to sell ‘under the counter’, you know? Cancel culture on the other hand … it doesn’t really affect me because I’m not usually spreading my opinions far and wide on the internet and my artwork isn’t exactly divisive. Now back in my youth on Animexx (that German website with the adult filter. Where every artwork you uploaded had to be approved by a human being by the way.) I did write and post some questionable things. Hell, I did a whole comic based on a super cringeworthy premise which was rather ableist and contained at least one rape joke. There’s a reason you won’t find it on the internet anymore. I didn’t see it as problematic when I was 15, despite people gently trying to explain to me why it was (In hindsight I understand and am grateful for those folks. But they were patient. they were adults talking to a child. You know.) There’s a lot of stuff I thought was cool and edgy at 15 or even 18 that would make me take a serious double take nowadays. I’d like to think I’ve grown since then. I’d like to think I’m still growing and I’m very aware that a lot of what I think now might have to be seriously re-evaluated a few years from now. Heck, sometimes I catch myself saying stuff and realize it’s messed up a second later.So I’m a bit afraid for young artists out there getting torn apart over stupid (and also harmful) things they say and create. Or artists getting torn apart other stuff they said or created years ago. Like, call them out, yes. but. People can grow. Especially teenagers are not exactly the product of an environment of their choice. It took some depression and alienation (it was horrible, but also, ah, character building?) from my friends to realize some of their jokes were not actually funny and being a sadist is not a cool thing to call yourself. Like the human brain isn’t done rewiring until your mid to late twenties. Let people evolve.  On the other people growing up more involved in social media and ‘cancel culture’ might be used to being smarter about what they say and maybe also a tiny bit less ignorent because they have reason and all the options to educate themselves? There are a lot of pretty amazing teens around. Maybe I was just super slow. (Sometimes I try to imagine being on Tumblr earlier in life and it’s usually a mix of ‘I would have been a better person and all those mental health resources would have helped me so much’ and ‘Nah, I was a brat and would have been eaten alive.’ It’s kind of like people are complicated.)Algorithm issues are horrible, they’re even making a difference for established artists who rely on social media to sell their stuff. BUT. If people do great work and share it, it usually still ends up getting seen.Also, it’s all already different from when I started out. If I was 18 years old today I might look at this ancient 25 year old lady and tell her to stop whining because she can’t deal with all that modern stuff. I don’t want to underestimate the young folks. They’re often underestimated. (Yes, I think teenage me was often horrible and stupid and arrogant, but in other matters pretty smart and actually funny and capable. It’s like you can be a lot of things. Like I’m still all those things and others.)I have no idea what is going to happen. I guess it can always get worse. But if it does get worse we don’t really need to bother with the social media for promotion any more and can go back to blogging on our websites again.It’s doubtful Zuckerberg is going to make Facebook or Instagram ‘better’ again. If anything there’s probably be something new. I mean Patreon and Twitch are already kind of new developments and they work great for some folks! That’s lot of income they wouldn’t have had otherwise! There’s always some good, some bad happening. You get what you get and then figure out to make it work for yourself :/I’m going to let this stand as an answer to your first question because I can already feel myself contemplating in the back of my mind if I actually agree with myself on everything said so far. It seemed right at the time! I’m not doing this ‘opinions on the internet’ game very much for a reason :DQuestion number 2: THIS IS EASY!First up, you can have a great career in freelance without social media fame. Not speaking from experience, but it’s possible. (’fame’ I consider something like 100k plus Instagram/FB or anything followers)Social media fame is important in two cases: When you make most of your money selling small products (say prints, books, but also membership stuff like Patreon) and need to reach a huge audience to sell enough to live on. (because maybe 5% of your audience actually buys things.) And when you actually want to make money being an influencer. There are times where clients hire you as an illustrator AND some sort of influencer because they want to make use of your fan base, but that’s like back in the old days when a famous artist gets hires because they’re already well known to the fans/bring their own fans to the product. That would be a nice position to be in, but it’s not exactly standard procedure.When you’re a freelance illustrator you’re not selling small things to a huge audience. You want a few hopefully high paying jobs. Most clients hire you because you’re good and reliable and fit their budget. They need the art. Not your fans. They don’t care about your fans.And you know, most social media followers will not want or be able to hire you for a 300,00-10.000,00 USD (or more. I guess if you go into advertising you can get more.) job. You need to be more selective. Do the networking thing. Be seen by the right people. How? Well, do your research! Look at who might need your work and send them nice e-mails, postcards, whatever. Have a nice portfolio website. If they’re part of a community, become part of that. Now, social media are still useful for let’s say art directors to find you. But having a small artists all working in the same genre as you do the chances that if they share your work an AD also working in the same genre might be following *them* and see your artwork like this is much higher than if folks not in the ‘business’ share your work even if there is a higher number of them. It’s quality vs quantity thing. One reason I like Twitter is because a lot of writers hang out there. Writers might not be responsible for chosing cover artists (most of the time), but self publishers are. And do like doing cover artworks for self publishers. And writers are friends with other writers and other artists and editors and publishing people and so on and so on. So no, no social media fame needed to succeed, BUT try to be known in the right circles. And be nice and reliable so people hire you again and tell their friends. It happens.  Also, yes I’m definitely procrastinating right now. I should be working on the table of contents for my mermaid book.

[hanzi83]

This may be my last blog

I feel the end is coming near for me. I don’t know where to start because more and more they are suspending me from different platforms for being hateful, when it is clearly something bigger at work. I refuse to believe these social media sites who help let right wing bigoted assholes spew their views with no repercussions, but someone like me who is venting to get it off his chest and defending myself from attacks, where I feel these attacks are coordinated on purpose to fuck with my mind and instill more fear and paranoia. I literally don’t feel like I have anyone on my side, and even if I did have people on my side, I am sure I would just lose my fucking mind and accused them of being against me at some fucking point.

I think the problem lately I have not been able to express myself in my private thoughts and when my notes got deleted I have not felt like putting effort into doing it and normally it is full of wrestling analysis and what conspiracies are happening mostly and I am not even good at doing this anymore because so much thoughts poor into my psyche and I hope that it is somehow recorded by some advancement and is being extracted in some kind of manner and I am already getting bored with writing this because I have nowhere to start, so lately I have wanted to keep up with what is going on so I can have material from what is happening in the social landscape around the world, and then I figure it might be better if I react and retweet other people a lot smarter than me.

I have become a lot more aggressive with my irrational rants, and it feels like people push me to react this way and I feel I have to fight back, so if I do fight back, they can suspend me for telling someone to fuck themselves, or tickling themselves with a razor blade and if I don’t react then they get away with it. I have cried out for people within media establishment would help but I don’t know if they are allowed to do anything or even say anything, especially when it is Howard Stern, as irrelevant as he is in the lexicon of popular culture, I still feel I am being targeted by him. It is not a coincidence that he has gotten Leslee Dart to be his publicist for his book, who also represented Woody Allen, and I could bet money she is behind help censoring the online stuff and pushing back against the negative reaction to his book, not that I know for sure.

He has always had his own followers, who I feel are employed fans who bad mouth others and even bad mouth Stern as well, so it gives off this notion that the right wing contingent of the fan base is against him simply for being a little more liberal about his views, when I feel he is a neoliberal, and even people messaging me on twitter thanking me for being right all along because Alyssa Milano was promoted the book etc. These people are sick, they have dedicated a sub reddit to me, that has to be a sub reddit of another sub reddit which is Howard Stern, and that is done because they used to encourage that on their reddit, but now that I have called it out and put eyes on it, they have since then made another one and the people on the Stern Show reddit are “against” any Hanzi comments and pretend it is me, so now this troll who is obsessed with me, will project his feelings on me, and act like I am the problem.

I have no idea who this dude Gorilla Baconator is, but he will always post my periscopes and misrepresent what I am saying and because these periscopes are deleted afterwards, if someone goes online to look about things about me, they might seen the titles of some of these threads and not see it is being misrepresented. I always upload most of the scopes onto my public facebook page, but lately since I have been off twitter I have been on different periscopes that happen. I have met some cool people, and some people hated me. It is a variety, whether it is religious people wanting to pray for me, some wrestling ones, or women trying to get guys to pay for private shows while I just name drop I was on Stern Show and ask conspiracy questions. I do that because I literally have nothing else interesting about me, and also want to see if the trolls who stalk me, will pop out and I have caught some of them doing that, so I boasted about feeling better going on periscope and meeting new people, the trolls then have to say “Hanzi is stalking black teens” and I get if it was just a joke, but their goal to do this is for me to get in trouble, and because these people are paid to do it and have no soul, they will make me crazy even more.

One screen grab I put out was about them making insinuations that I am trying to pick up underage girls and that an arrest is eminent and even as untrue that is, it puts paranoia that they can control this narrative and I have no one to watch my back. I posted the screen grab on my facebook to show people how fucked up this is, and I like documenting it so people can see what kind of shit they are trying to misrepresent and character assassinate me.

I certainly cannot count on anyone I know because I think all my friendships and relationships have been strained severely with my subtle jabs because of my hatred for not being connected with my city over this Toronto Raptors thing. I have voiced my displeasure, as irrational as it is, and then valid displeasure came out because it was reported the owner of the Raptors wants to take the team to Israel, and anyone pushing back against that, is seen as an anti Semite since they purposely pile lump in criticism of Israel and Zionism in with the white supremacists who hate Jewish people. So this made me not want to root for the team, and it made me not want to care about it.

I couldn’t even go a day without social media where I did not see any footage of celebration, and as much as I think it is cool the Toronto team won a championship, it makes me overwhelmed because I see a lot of Canadian exceptionalism taking place and more and more it is like Toronto is becoming like the United States, and while the hatred for that is overwhelming, the fact that people I know are part of this type of shit it makes me regret even knowing these people, and the media can show a Sikh guy who owns his own car dealership and has gone to every game etc and then say “Hey look Toronto is diverse, we’re not as racist as the US” is horrible, I am happy that we are celebrating people uniting and feeling good about a sports team winning, but I can already see the pretentious cockiness about this and how smug people will become because of all of this and because I have not handled this well, and have been taking jabs at people I presume are in group chats, and people who have used my “fame” to get what they want systemically while I have to suffer and if I even say anything back to them, I really think people will plot to kill me or fuck with me.

People have hinted they sneak into my house and move shit in my house. I don’t know if it is all true, but if people are targeted I could see how they have “regular” people to become agents and do the bidding at the elite’s behest and I feel like they have done it to me and will continue, until they get me offline or until I attempt suicide and they will keep pushing me more and more. If I do a periscope to do air my thoughts out and don’t have any comments on, they will take it personal, if I take my anger out on them because they are adding to my mental stress, they will then carry on to fuck with me over everything.

I don’t think it is a coincidence I got suspended on twitter the week of the championship game, and now on facebook I have been suspended off of, when people are reporting my lives for being “suicidal” when it is clear I am not going to do anything and I can tell it is a plethora of people in my life who do that. It is scary to think that people I know, or people at the top are taking the time to fuck with me like this, and I don’t know what they are capable of and how they could kill me, since people can be bought off for the access in the elite. They will gossip about me constantly in group chats, posting whatever move I make, what I tweet out, what pictures is being put out there or whatever blog I post. I think they even shut down the Hanzi83 sub reddit, because they said they wouldn’t shut it down until the mission was complete. Are they disguising the truth under the guise of shit post, or they actually trying to instill paranoia in me. I would not be surprised because a plethora of whack packers are going down and are sick in the hospital, and it feels like sacrifices could be made, even though they would not officially expose that, and maybe my time is coming since I have to pay for the fame I got, even though I have paid the ultimate price for it, and instead of killing me, they will just imprison me even more mentally. I think the end is near for me unfortunately. This blog will only be seen officially by a couple of hundred people, because I can’t post this on facebook or twitter.

I think they will kill me. My parents are ashamed of me, and why wouldn’t they be? Look at me. I should have never been alive this long, but around my house I can sense this dark energy of silence and it feels like the elite have warned them about something that is going to happen. I could be wrong, but my life has been a fucking waste. I will never be able to trust anyone in my life, and they will never take accountability for anything and I feel people with power in the system will use it to fuck with others and bully them, without making it look obvious. Everyone in the system is corrupt and fucked up. Why would you let me be on this planet, I can never look at these people the same again, they all fucking hate me and sometimes I feel the same way and I never want to feel like that

I need to take a break from the internet and get active again. I have to try, because as much as I loved making new friends on Scope, and actually trying to have a connection on a human level because it is a fresh start for friendship, because I don’t think I will ever have a good rapport with people I already know because of the damage that has culminated and I always hoped I would be at peace with people now because whatever has been creeping on behind the scenes, I thought would be done now. I think I have become such an asshole and political about this Raptors shit, and maybe it is my insecurity of never reaching to do great things because I did not sell my soul, and I kick myself sometimes for not doing it because maybe I need to be praised and cheered on, and then I get back down to earth and just want a revolution to take place. I don’t know if I am going to be sacrificed. I feel people have used me and set me up, because I am going to have to be fucked with and put away in some hospital. I might have to decide to check in and disappear for a bit.

It is funny that I am a joke in my town, but in my fucked up head, I feel I helped get people their connections without even knowing it because of the alleged politicking that existed behind the scenes, and it fucks with me that so much has happened to me behind my back and now I am so hurt emotionally that I have no choice but to vent so I can get out whatever is in my head, but no one sees that. I really don’t mean harm on anyone. I just wish the world would just let me go because I will never fit in with anyone every again. I have angered the brass and their minions are hard at work trying to get rid of me.

Even if my twitter and facebook is restored, I should just get off. I can try deactivating it but time to time I would like to see what is going on in the world in the news since we are at a dangerous times, I feel that way. I just lessen the amount I take in because I am so hell bent to catch up on everything, I don’t have time to want to leave my fucking house. I have to get going and do something. Lately my desire to catch up with anything or even write has lessened but then when I want to go do something active I become worried I will not know things or get references because I still fancy myself a comedian in training, but never actually doing stage time, but still finding ways to creatively vent. I can feel them coming for me, I don’t know if they will further hinder my attempt at a career, and then it could just be that I suck. I don’t fucking know. Even if this is kind of funny, can I use this again? Or did I just waste material and left it open for anyone to just take from me, and I will never get any credit.

I apologize to people I have hurt but keep in mind you have hurt me and I will never get the answers because none of you would ever admit what you are supposed to be accountable for, or at least in my fucked up head, I wish it was not like this but this is all I have, to vent and I just rather act irrational. I should just take a break and work on my notes and at least save them for my own journal, and then gradually bring it out but even when I am typing in my own journal, I don’t think it is actually private because I feel these people are watching me. I am afraid of doing things because whatever I do, I wonder if people are paid agents and always meant to keep tabs on me, and it feels like there is literally no one to talk to about anything and that is why I have been addicted to periscope for the last week because I felt I was seeing all walks of life doing different things, whether it was shit talking, presumed sex workers trying to advertise themselves, debates about prison reform,  Christian women praying for me, it was just fresh of interacting with people, and also me trying to cram it in that I was on the Stern Show because there is literally nothing interesting about me, because of my limited experiences and knowledge, and only way to sound kind of interesting is having discussions of conspiracies and then tying it in that I might be the victim of a conspiracy and having great discussions about it. I am also worried because I would go in scopes where it might come across like women were being forced to do it, or maybe they are legitimate sexy workers, I did not indulge further than just dropping conspiracy talk and asking how old they were. But when I would go on random scopes of musicians or just regular people if they were underage or just barely legal, I would walk out of the conversation pretty quickly. Anyone within my age range I was never going on to these places to get off, and maybe that is because I am medicated so much that I don’t even have a sex drive anymore, so I was really looking for good conversation with people within my age range because I need some mature conversation. It was just good talking to different people, there are a lot black and brown people on there that I gelled with and even being made fun of and busting their balls back. I even got felt like someone important with a couple of people, whether they were just feeding my ego or genuinely interested in my story and the fact that I am kind of known, it felt good and maybe it was one of the best things that happened, because it has made me want to try and get my shit together. I don’t know if these people will come for me, and try to frame me for shit because of how much I have tried to speak up about the world and what my theories are, and they punish people like me for doing things.

I can see the disgust in people’s demeanors around me more and more. I really don’t feel like I fucking belong. I get fucking scared when there are certain things these people admit to and then act like it is for real but they know there is nothing for me to do about it because literally everyone is compromised and since I feel targeted, and it gets scarier when they spread horrible lies about me, and accuse me of being a pedophile when it is not fucking true, and it makes me think since they have my computer hacked and have showcased what they can do, whether it’s moving my keyboard, taking from my actual document on my computer and pasting it on reddit before I even posted it in the blog site I use, or stopping music being played on my device when it is somewhere else, or posting under my name on my public page with my personal account, there is no telling what they have done to my computer and even if I wanted to indulge to see if they did any funny business, what the fuck am I supposed to look up to know if anything shady is on my computer if anything at all. These people really love to mess with me. I might just have to check myself in the hospital, but I will probably get abused there or I will be put through torture or something. I don’t fucking know. I wonder if they want me out of commission it will be so I don’t have to be present for something people in my life can’t hide.

I am going through so many emotions. I need to break from twitter, even if it is restored, as attempting as it is going to be seeing the jokes about OJ getting on twitter and then me complaining how they are beating a dead horse since it is all planned out anyways because they needed to make twitter interesting before it completely becomes nothing, like it is WCW, “You know what will keep people invested with twitter? OJ SIMPSON”  I am already getting sick of the responding with a GIF movement that has taken a light of its own, and then people thinking the GIF chosen is such a genius move.

Anyways I am happy Raptors won but then I am not because it brings joy and I hate that I am not included in it probably. I really don’t know how I fucking feel. I know that putting that out there makes people come bust my balls, even subtly just to try and trigger me. Then if I go off on this shit, then people act like I am the guy who is treating people like shit so then I put people down for their tactics and how they act behind the scenes, and since this “fan base” is not getting paid by me, and maybe they would be a little more supportive if I did like anyone else with a fan base who pay their fans indirectly and do it with perks etc, in my opinion, but I don’t pay these people and they might be paid by other people to harass certain people, they will try to set me up by asking what they can do or what are the orders, even if it is something small. I tell people to act on their own.

Anyways this blog is out of control because I am doing random thoughts because I have not written much in my journal, so I am all over the fucking map, but who cares I am not credible and no one is going to read this, and even if they do, they don’t care. It does hurt that people who are leftist could be part of the group that decides I need to be put out of commission online as well, because some of them don’t seem to want to bring attention to it, and maybe their battles are limited, it is like wrestling, and any decent person would ask “Why aren’t the other good guys helping this dude who seems to being outnumbered with mental abuse as the referee continues to ring  the fucking bell” and it feels like that is what is happening, all the other good guys can’t help or I have been such a fucking asshole, that people don’t think I am worth saving, until the narrative changes then conveniently people will start fucking caring. I realize neoliberals wouldn’t help because we know they don’t care, and the republican types won’t care because they will justify it why I am the bad guy, but people are leftist, I would expect they would at least make mention of it, but even their word is limited, even though they are also speaking out on other evil, so maybe some fat delusional Pakistani in mommy’s basement is not high on their list. No one cares or it feels that way and because of that I will always feel aggressive with my shit talking because I am so hurt by no one seemingly caring and letting all this alleged harassment to go on and make me feel so fucking horrible, that I fucking want to die. When I speak with my case worker, I might have to really ask about going away for a bit. I know that is what you want anyways.

[christianstevefinnell]

A TRANSLITERATION THAT LEADS TO CONFUSION BY STEVE FINNELL

Transliterate Defined: To change (letters, words, etc.) into corresponding characters of another alphabet or language.

To transliterate is not translating.

Mark 16:16 He who has believed and been baptized shall be saved...(NASB) The word baptized is a transliterations used here. Baptize is not a translated word.

Examples of Mark 16:16 that have been translated as opposed to having been transliterated.

1. Mark 16:16 He who has believed and has been immersed, will be saved....(The Better Version of The New Testament by Chester Estes)

2. Mark 16:16 Whoever trusts and is immersed will be saved...( CJB Complete Jewish Bible )

3. Mark 16:16 He who believes and is immersed shall be saved...(TLV Tree of Life)

4. Mark 16:16 He who believes and is immersed will be saved..(WMB World Messianic Bible)

5. Mark 16:16 He who believes and is immersed shall be saved... (TEG The Everlasting Gospel)

There are no translations of Mark 16:16 that read, He who believes and is sprinkled or poured shall be saved..

The fact that a trained professional says sprinkling and pouring are modes of baptism does make it true.

There are not modes of baptism, there is just immersion in water.

Posted by

Steve Finnell

at

2:16 PM

No comments:

Email This

BlogThis!

Share to Twitter

Share to Facebook

Share to Pinterest

WAS JESUS GOD IN THE FLESH? BY STEVE FINNELL

While Jesus walked the earth He was God in the flesh. He was completely God and fully human.

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (NASB)

John 1:14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.(NASB)

Jesus was God in the flesh.

Hebrews 2:17 Therefore, He had to made like His brethren in all things.....(NASB)

[NOTE: 1  The fact that Jesus was made like His brethren proves the the doctrine of original sin is false. Jesus was not conceived as a sinner and He was not born guilty of Adam's sin.]

[NOTE:2 A certain denomination claims that Jesus, John The Baptist, and the Virgin Mary got a pass from God so they would not be guilty of Adam's sin. Point, there is no Scripture that states anyone needs to be forgiven of Adam's sin. Point, there no Scripture that exempts anyone from original sin; because Adam is the only one guilty of his sin.

Jesus lived a sinless life. Hebrews 4:14-15..Jesus the Son of God...15 ...One who has been tempted in all things  as we are, yet without sin.(NASB)

The Virgin Mary and John The Baptists were guilty of sin because they themselves committed sin, not because of original sin.

Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God (NASB

[NOTE:3 The false doctrine of original sin has been passed down either by masters of deceit or theologians that were honestly confused.

-------------------------------------------------

Back to Jesus as God in the flesh.

John 20:28 Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!"

Thomas knew that Jesus was God in the flesh.

Acts 20:28 Be on your guard for yourselves and all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.(NASB)

Yes, Jesus was God in the flesh. Jesus is the head of the church, He bought the church.

Hebrews 1:1-8......8 But of the Son He says, "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, And the righteous scepter is the scepter of His kingdom.(NASB)

God the Father called Jesus God. Jesus was God in the flesh.

QUESTIONS OF THE DAY: Can anyone be an honest seeker of God's truth and believe that Jesus did not walk the earth as God in the flesh?

Is it possible to believe that all mankind are sinners at conception and are born guilty of Adam's sin, and at the same time be a prayerful student of the Bible?

Pride is the stumbling block to God's truth. Are you smarter than God, He wrote the Bible. Believe it.

When men study to prove man-made tradition are God's will, then, they will convince themselves they correct and the Bible is in error.  

Posted by

Steve Finnell

at

8:50 AM

No comments:

Email This

BlogThis!

Share to Twitter

Share to Facebook

Share to Pinterest

DID JUDE JUST LIKE TO HEAR HIMSELF WRITE? BY STEVE FINNELL

Is it possible to fall from God's grace? Calvinist doctrine proclaims that once you are saved you can never be lost. Jude sent a letter to the churches of Christ warning of ungodly men in their congregations and giving them examples of men and angels falling away and the punishment for unrepentant sin. Was he warning of a possibility of falling from grace or did Jude just like to hear himself write?

Jude 1:5 Now I desire to remind you, though you know all things once for all, that the Lord, after saving a people out of the land of Egypt, subsequently destroyed those who did not believe.

Why would Jude mention this if there was no chance of ever falling from grace? Did Jude just like to hear himself write?

Jude 1:6 And angels who did not keep their own domain, but abandoned their proper abode, He has kept in eternal bonds under darkness for judgment of the great day,

Was Jude giving an inconsequential history lesson or a warning to the churches? Did Jude just like to hear himself write?

Jude 1:7 just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example in undergoing the punishment of fire.

Why would Jude be pointing out the punishment of fire, if all Christians have eternal security. Did Jude just like to hear himself write?

It makes no sense that Jude would warn Christians about ungodly men in their churches; if all Christians are "once saved always saved."  The actions of ungodly men would have been on no threat to eternally secure Christians. Why would Jude warn the churches of an impossibility? Did Jude just like to hear himself write?

(All Scripture quotes from: NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE)

Posted by

Steve Finnell

at

2:30 AM

No comments:

Email This

BlogThis!

Share to Twitter

Share to Facebook

Share to Pinterest

FRIDAY, DECEMBER 30, 2016

WILL MANKIND BE AFFECTED BY GLOBAL WARMING? BY STEVE FINNELL

Will mankind be affected by global warming in the future? Have men suffered from global warming in the past? The short answer is yes.

Jude 1:7 just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire. (NASB) 2 Peter 2:6 and if He condemned the cites of Sodom and Gomorrah to destruction by reducing them to ashes, having made an example to those who would live ungodly lives thereafter.(NASB) Genesis 19:Then the Lord rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven,(NASB)

Yes, men can cause temperatures to rise due to their behavior.

2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up.(NASB)

Global warming is inevitable. Controlling man-made CO2 emissions will not prevent global warming.

In the end most people in the world today will experience extreme heat.

Revelation 20:14-15 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. 15 And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.(NASB)

Yes, you can escape the extreme heat to come. How? Have your name written in the book of life.

People in the book of life need to be qualified. Qualifications: FAITH John 3:16---REPENTANCE Acts 2:38, Acts 3:19---CONFESSION Romans 10:9---WATER IMMERSION Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38, 1 Peter 3:21

Revelation 20:10 And the devil who deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and false prophet are also; and they will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.(NASB)

Heat is on the way.

Matthew 41, 46 "Then He will say to those on His left, 'Depart from Me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels; 46 These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.(NASB)

It will be hot for the unrighteous.

Men can only become righteous through Jesus Christ. His terms for pardon. His qualifications.

Without Jesus as Lord and Savior all men will feel God's heat.

Posted by

Steve Finnell

at

7:15 AM

No comments:

Email This

BlogThis!

Share to Twitter

Share to Facebook

Share to Pinterest

SCRIPTURAL HERMENEUTICS AND SALVATION? BY STEVE FINNELL

Those who deny that water baptism is essential for salvation are guilty of improper Scriptural hermeneutics. When studying the Bible to find the answer to the question, "What must I do to be saved," proper hermeneutics is a must. All the Scriptures about salvation must be considered.

Some assert that men are saved by "faith alone." They claim that if water baptism was essential for salvation it would be mentioned every time the gospel was preached and every time salvation is addressed. That argument is nothing less than fallacious, hypocritical rhetoric.

Acts 15:11 "But we believe that through the grace of of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved in the same manner as they." (NKJV)

Does the fact that Acts 15:11 only mentions grace prove that men can be saved without faith, without water baptism, without confessing that Jesus was raised from the dead by God, without confessing that Jesus is the Son of God, or without repenting? No, it does not. Proper hermeneutics dictates all relevant Scriptures must be considered.

Ephesians 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and not that of yourselves; it is the gift of God,(NKJV)

Does Ephesians 2:8 prove we are saved by grace only or faith only? No, it does not.

Mark 16:16 "He who believes and is baptized will be saved...(NKJV)

Because Mark 16:16 does not mention grace. Does that prove  that men can be saved without God's grace? Of course not.

Titus 3:5 not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit. (NKJV)

In Titus 3:5 we are told we are saved because of God's mercy. Since mercy is not mentioned in every Scripture concerning salvation, does that mean God's mercy is not essential in order to be saved? No it does not.

Romans 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus Christ and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.(NKJV)

Seeing that Romans 10:9 does not state that grace and immersion in water are part of salvation, does that prove they are not essential in order to be saved? No, it does not.

1 Peter 3:21 There is also an antitype which now saves us, namely baptism(not the removal of filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,(NKJV)

Does 1 Peter 3:21 prove that water baptism alone saves men? Of course not.

WHAT MEN HAVE TO DO TO BE SAVED? They need to obey the gospel. 2 Thessalonians 1:8 in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God and those who not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. (NKJV).

THE GOSPEL

Ephesians 2:8

John 3:16

Acts 16:30-31

Acts 2:38

Acts 3:19

Mark 16:16

John 3:5

Romans 10:9

Acts 15:11

Romans 10:13

Acts 22:16

1 Peter 3:21

Galatians 3:27

Romans 6:3-7

Acts 2:21

Ephesians 5:25-27

John 8:24

Acts 8:35-38

Matthew 28:19

John 14:6

Acts 4:10-12

Luke 24:46-47

Acts 2:29-41 ---THE FIRST DAY OF THE LORD'S CHURCH--

--------------------------------------------------

MEN ARE NOT SAVED BY GRACE ALONE.

MEN ARE NOT SAVED BY WATER BAPTISM ALONE.

MEN ARE NOT SAVED BY FAITH ALONE.

MEN ARE NOT SAVED BY CONFESSION ALONE.

Jesus made salvation very simple. HE THAT BELIEVES AND IS BAPTIZED SHALL BE SAVED.    

 Posted by

Steve Finnell

at

2:04 AM

No comments:

Email This

BlogThis!

Share to Twitter

Share to Facebook

Share to Pinterest

THURSDAY, DECEMBER 29, 2016

THE ORIGINAL SIN MYTH BY STEVE FINNELL

The doctrine of original sin is that all men inherited the guilt of the sin of Adam and Eve; therefore all men are guilty of sin at conception. Nothing could be further from the truth.

If all men inherited Adam's sin that would mean Jesus was born a sinner. Jesus was born free from sin as was every other man and women.

Hebrews 4:14-15...Jesus the Son of God....15 For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weakness, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin. (NASB)

Jesus not born with sin nor did He commit any sin.

Ezekiel 18:20 The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity....(NASB)

Jeremiah 31:30 But everyone will die for his own iniquity....(NASB)

Deuteronomy 24:16 "Fathers shall not be put to death for their sons, nor shall sons be put to death for their fathers; everyone shall be put to death for his own sins. (NASB)

No man will die spiritually because of the sin they inherited from Adam. No one will be separated from God because of the sin of Adam. Sin is committed not inherited.

Men will die spiritually and be separated from God because of the unforgiven sins they commit.

Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. (NASB)

 The Bible does not say all are guilty of Adam's sin and fall short of the glory of God.

Psalm 14:3 They have all turned aside, together they have become corrupt; There is no one who does good, not even one.(NASB)

The Scripture does not say they were born corrupt, it says they have become corrupt.

Romans 5:12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned---(NASB)

Spiritually death has spread to all men because all men have sinned, not because of the inherited sin of Adam.

If a drug dealer introduces a deadly drug into your community and all die, they do not all die because the drug was introduced, but because they all used the drug. Adam introduced sin, he did not force people to sin nor were they guilty of his sin.

1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.(NASB)

No Scripture states that Christians need to confess Adam's sin in order to be forgiven of original sin. Men are only guilty of sins they themselves commit.

The doctrine of original sin is taught because of honest misunderstanding as well as the deceitfulness of certain men.

No person will ever go to hell because they inherited the guilt of Adam's sin. Men are separated from God because of the unforgiven sins they themselves commit.

     Posted by

Steve Finnell

at

9:20 AM

1 comment:

Email This

BlogThis!

Share to Twitter

Share to Facebook

Share to Pinterest

WHAT IS THE UPSIDE FOR ATHEISTS? BY STEVE FINNELL

Atheist deny the existence of God. Is there an upside for atheist? Atheist believe when they die they will simply cease to exist.Where is the upside?

THE UPSIDE LIST FOR ATHEISTS

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

THE DOWNSIDE LIST

1. Revelation 20:15 And if anyone's name was not written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.

If atheists are correct in believing that there is no God, there is no upside for them. If they are wrong, there is a big downside for them.

If Christians are wrong they lose nothing. They are rewarded just as the atheist. If Christians are correct, they gain eternal life and live in the presence of God.

Psalms 14:1 The fool has said in his heart, "There is no God.".........

WHAT IS THE UPSIDE FOR ATHEISTS?

Posted by

Steve Finnell

at

1:55 AM

No comments:

Email This

BlogThis!

Share to Twitter

Share to Facebook

Share to Pinterest

WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 28, 2016

NO VOTE WILL BE TAKEN ON JUDGMENT DAY BY STEVE FINNELL

There are many who believe that when judgment day arrives; that, majority opinion will determine entry into heaven. Many people believe that God will not send people to hell just because they reject Jesus as the Christ.

Acts 4:10-12 ....by the name of Jesus Christ....12 And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved.

On judgment day, some would have you believe there will be a listed ballot from which you can cast your vote for the Savior of your choice.

CHECK THE REDEEMER OF YOUR CHOICE

1. Jesus

2. Kiou-tse

3. Kriskna

4. Dhouvanai

5. Horus

6. Balder

7. Hiram Abiff

8. Sosiosch

9. None of the above.

There is just one choice "JESUS." That selection has to be made prior to judgment day.

THERE WILL NOT BE A SAVIOR VOTE TAKEN ON JUDGMENT DAY!

Many also believe God gives believer in Christ "multiple choice" plans of salvation from which to cast a vote.

1. The grace only plan.

2. The faith only plan.

3. The sinner's prayer plan.

4. The good works plan.

5. The water baptism only plan.

6. The confessing Jesus as the Christ only plan.

7. The repentance only plan.

8. The deathbed conversion plan.

9. The universal plan of salvation.

THERE WILL BE NO VOTE TAKEN, ON JUDGMENT DAY. THERE IS JUST ONE PLAN OF SALVATION..

There is one way to be saved.

FAITH: John 3:16

REPENTANCE: Acts 3:19, Acts 2:38

CONFESSION: Romans 10:9-10, Acts 8:37

WATER IMMERSION: Acts 2:38, Mark 16:16, John 3:5, Titus 3:5, Acts 22:16, Galatians 3:27, Romans 6:4, Colossians 2:12-13, Ephesians 5:25-27, 1 Peter 3:20-21.

ALL OF THESE ARE ESSENTIAL IN ORDER TO BE SAVED. Then remain faithful: Revelation 2:10

THERE WILL BE NO VOTE TAKEN ON JUDGMENT DAY!

Matthew 7:13-14 "Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. 14 For the gate is small and the way is narrow  that leads to life, and there are few who find it.

There are 2.2 billion people who claim they are Christians. Do you believe that they will all enter through that narrow gate? If not, why not?

ON JUDGMENT DAY THERE WILL BE NO MAJORITY VOTE TAKEN TO DETERMINE WHO WILL BE SAVED!

JESUS HAS THE ONLY VOTE THAT WILL BE COUNTED!

       Posted by

Steve Finnell

at

11:50 AM

No comments:

Email This

BlogThis!

Share to Twitter

Share to Facebook

Share to Pinterest

CAN YOU IMAGINE JESUS SAYING....?  BY STEVE FINNELL

Acts 22:16 Now why do you delay? Get up and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on His Name.

What if Jesus had said; "Saul, your baptism in water was just an act of obedience, it had nothing to do with washing away your sins.

CAN YOU IMAGINE JESUS SAYING THAT?

John 8:24 'Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for unless you believe that I am He, you will die in your sins."

What if Jesus had said; "You do not have to worry about believing the I am the Son of God, because I will impute to those,  I have preselected for salvation, the faith to believe and be saved. Have you not heard of the doctrine, saved by grace alone? Those who will die in their sins are those who have been selected for hell."

CAN YOU IMAGINE JESUS SAYING THAT?

Acts 9:11 And the Lord said to him, "Get up and go to the street called Straight, and inquire at the house of Judas for a man from Tarsus named Saul, for he is praying,

What if Jesus had told Ananias, "Go lay hands your on Saul so he may receive his sight, however, you do not have to baptize him and have him call on My name; because he believed in me on the road to Damascus and has said the sinner's prayer, so he already has his sins forgiven."

CAN YOU IMAGINE JESUS SAYING THAT?

What if Jesus had said; "Ananias, you should baptize Saul so he can join the 1st Ananias Church of Damascus?"

CAN YOU IMAGINE JESUS SAYING THAT?

What if Jesus had said to Saul; "If you die on the way to your baptism it is not important because I know what is in your heart?"

CAN YOU IMAGINE JESUS SAYING THAT?

What if Jesus had said to Saul; "Water baptism is just symbolic,  it has nothing to do with actual forgiveness and besides remember I forgave the paralytic and he had not been baptized, he was forgiven because of his friend's faith. You did not even have to believe to be saved, you could have been saved like the paralytic?"

CAN YOU IMAGINE JESUS SAYING THAT?

What if Jesus had said; "Saul, when the apostle Peter said to be baptized for the forgiveness of your sins, he really meant to say you are baptized because your sins have already been forgiven?"

CAN YOU IMAGINE JESUS SAYING THAT?

Hebrews 9:22.....without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.

What if Jesus had said; "I shed My blood on the cross as an act of obedience to the Father, but it had absolutely nothing to do with the forgiveness of men's sins?"

CAN YOU IMAGINE JESUS SAYING THAT?

Mark 16:16 He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.

What if Jesus had said; "The conjunction"and" does not mean "and" in the original Greek; therefore belief and baptism are not linked together as a condition for salvation?"

What if Jesus had said; "Has been baptized shall be saved, means you were saved when you believed and then were baptized as an example of your faith to the community?"

What if Jesus had said; "Mark 16:16 Is missing from some manuscript copies of Scripture, so you cannot believe what I said here?"

What if Jesus had said; " I did not mention, in Mark 16:16, that you would be condemned if you rejected water baptism; therefore you can be saved without being baptized?"

CAN YOU IMAGINE JESUS SAYING THESE THINGS?

MEN NEED TO BE CAREFUL WHAT THEY IMAGINE JESUS SAID!

Proverbs 14:12 There is a way which seems right to a man, But its end is the way of death.        

Posted by

Steve Finnell

at

1:53 AM

No comments:

Email This

BlogThis!

Share to Twitter

Share to Facebook

Share to Pinterest

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 27, 2016

FEAR CAN BE POSITIVE! BY STEVE FINNELL

Why do some reject Jesus as Lord and Savior and others accept Him? Why is it, some accept the teaching found in Scripture concerning the terms for pardon and other believe in the man-made traditions found in creed books and statements of faith? Could there be a direct correlation between rejecting the truth and not fearing God?

FEAR OF GOD IS A POSITIVE

Proverbs 1:7 The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge; Fools despise wisdom and instruction.

Fear of the Lord is when knowledge originates.

Psalm 111:10 The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom; A good understanding all those who do His commandments; His praise endures forever.

Fear of the Lord is the introduction to wisdom. Lack of fear produces the absence of wisdom.

Proverbs 10:27 The fear of the Lord prolongs life, But the years of the wicked will be shortened.

Fear of the Lord lengthens your days here on earth.

Proverbs 16:6 By lovingkindness and truth iniquity is atoned for, And by the fear of the Lord one keeps away from evil.

Fear of the Lord helps men avoid evil.

THE TWO CRIMINALS AND FEAR OF GOD

Luke 23:39-43 One of the criminals who were hanged there was hurling abuse at Him, saying , "Are you not the Christ? Save Yourself and us!" 40 But the other answered, and rebuking him said, "Do you not even fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? 41 And we indeed are suffering justly, for we are receiving what we deserve for our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong." 42 And he was saying, "Jesus, remember me when You come in Your kingdom!" 43 And He said to him, "Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise."

THE FIRST CRIMINAL DID NOT FEAR GOD

Proverbs 9:10 The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, And the knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.

Without fear of God there is no way men can understand the truth. Without wisdom, knowledge, and understanding men are left hanging on the cross with the first criminal.

FEAR OF THE LORD IS THE FIRST STEP TO ACCEPTING THE TRUTH ABOUT THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST.

John 12:42 Nevertheless many even of the rulers believed in Him, but because of the Pharisees they were not confessing Him, for fear that they would be put out of the synagogue;

The rulers did not confess Jesus because they feared the Pharisees more than they feared the Lord. The question is; how many preachers today will not preach water baptism as being essential for salvation because they fear losing their jobs more than they fear God?

Why do some men fear saying, Jesus is the only way to the Father?(John14:6)

Why do men fear teaching the terms of pardon.

FAITH: John 3:16

REPENTANCE: Acts 2:38, Acts 3:19

CONFESSION: Romans 10:9-10, Acts 8:37

BAPTISM: Acts 2:38, Mark 16:16, 1 Peter 3:21, Acts 22:16

Do men preach their doctrine because they fear God or do they fear that they might be ostracized by their family, friends, lodge brothers, church members, and society in general if they preach the truth?

DO MEN REFRAIN FROM PREACHING THE COMPLETE TRUTH BECAUSE THEY FEAR LOSING THEIR POSITION IN THE CHURCH?

ACCEPTING JESUS AND TEACHING THE TRUTH STARTS WITH FEAR OF THE LORD!

  Posted by

Steve Finnell

at

2:05 AM

No comments:

Email This

BlogThis!

Share to Twitter

Share to Facebook

Share to Pinterest

MONDAY, DECEMBER 26, 2016

Modern-Day Miracles, Tongue-Speaking, and Holy Spirit Baptism: A Refutation--EXTENDED VERSIONby

Dave Miller, Ph.D.

Numerous religious groups commonly claim the assistance of the Holy Spirit in their lives. Famed religious television personalities boldly announce the active influence of the Holy Spirit even as they speak. Supposedly, the Holy Spirit talks to them personally, heals viewers instantaneously, and enables them to babble uncontrollably in an “unknown tongue.” All of this is claimed to be “proof positive” of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Do miracles still happen? Can people speak in tongues today? Does God, in the twenty-first century, supernaturally countermand the laws of nature and heal people miraculously?“Come now, and let us reason together,” Isaiah said (1:18). It is absolutely imperative that we examine

Scripture

—not our feelings, not what someone else says happened to them, and not our own experience. The only sure and certain approach is to ask: What does the Bible teach? The reader must ask: “Do I honestly believe the Bible to be the Word of God?” Answers to critical questions of human existence require that a person be willing to spend time in the Word, “rightly dividing the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15). One must “search the scriptures” (Acts 17:11). One must be honest and willing to go where the evidence takes him. If you had to choose between what you genuinely think you have experienced or seen firsthand and what the Bible actually says, which would you choose? You must ask yourself: “Will I honestly accept God’s written Word on the matter of miracles?” If you will, I invite you to join me in an examination of what the Bible teaches pertaining to miracles.

THE DEFINITION OF MIRACLES

First of all, what exactly is a “miracle”? How does the Bible use the word? The three central terms used in the Bible to designate a supernatural (as contrasted with a natural) manifestation are: (1) “miracle” (

dunamis

); (2) “sign” (

semeion

); and (3) “wonder” (

teras

). All three terms occur together in Acts 2:22, Hebrews 2:4, and 2 Corinthians 12:12. Related terms include “work” (

ergon

) and “mighty deed” (

kratos

). The occurrence of a miracle in the Bible meant that God worked

outside

the laws of nature. W.E. Vine, whose Greek scholarship, according to F.F. Bruce, was “wide, accurate and up-to-date” (Vine, 1952, Foreword), stated that “miracle” (

dunamis

) is used in the New Testament of “works of a

supernatural

origin and character, such as could not be produced by

natural

agents and means” (1952, p. 75, emp. added). Otfried Hofius noted that a “sign” (

semeion

) “contradicts the

natural

course of things” (1976, 2:626, emp. added) and, similarly, “wonder” (

teras

) referred to events that “contradict the ordered unity of

nature

” (2:633, emp. added). Thus a miracle in the Bible was not merely an event that was astonishing, incredible, extraordinary, or unusual (e.g., the birth of a baby, a flower, or the narrow avoidance of an accident). A miracle in the Bible was a

supernatural

act. It was an event that was contrary to the usual course of nature (Arndt and Gingrich, 1957, p. 755). The miraculous is not to be confused with the

providential

, where God operates

within

the usual course of nature.

THE DESIGN OF MIRACLES

Second, it is absolutely imperative that one recognizes the purpose of the miraculous. Miracles in the New Testament served the singular function of

confirmation

. When an inspired speaker stepped forward to declare God’s Word, God

validated

or

endorsed

the speaker’s remarks by empowering the speaker to perform a miracle. Many New Testament passages articulate this fact quite plainly. For example, the apostles “went forth, and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and

confirming

the word by the

signs

that followed” (Mark 16:20, emp. added). The Hebrews writer asked: “[H]ow shall we escape, if we neglect so great a salvation; which having at the first been

spoken

through the Lord, was

confirmed

unto us by them that heard; God also

bearing witness

with them, both by

signs and wonders

, and by manifold powers, and by gifts of the Holy Spirit” (Hebrews 2:3-4, emp. added). Referring to the initial proclamation of the Gospel to the Samaritans, Luke stated: “[A]nd the multitudes gave heed with one accord unto

the things that were spoken

by Philip, when they heard, and saw the

signs

which he did” (Acts 8:6, emp. added). The apostles prayed to God: “[G]rant unto thy servants to speak thy

word

with all boldness, while thou stretchest forth thy hand to

heal;

and that

signs and wonders

may be done” (Acts 4:29-30, emp. added).These passages, and many others (e.g., Acts 13:12; 14:3; 15:12; Romans 15:18-19; 1 Corinthians 2:4; 1 Thessalonians 1:5; cf. Exodus 4:30), show that the purpose of miracles was to

authenticate

the oral/spoken word as God’s Word. Miracles

legitimized

and

verified

the teaching of God’s messengers, as over against the many false teachers (like Simon in Acts 8:9, or Pharaoh’s magicians in Exodus 7:11) who attempted to mislead the people. In the late nineteenth century, Greek lexicographer Joseph Thayer worded this point well when he noted that “sign” (

semeion

) was used in the New Testament “of miracles and wonders by which God authenticates the men sent by him, or by which men prove that the cause they are pleading is God’s” (1901, p. 573). Even the miracles that Jesus performed were designed to back up His claim (i.e., spoken words) to be deity. Consider two examples: (1) Using the parallel term “works” (a key word in the book of John), Jesus remarked to Philip, “Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? the

words

that I say unto you I speak not from myself: but the Father abiding in me doeth his

works

. Believe Me that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me: or else believe Me for the very

works’

sake” (John 14:10-11, emp. added); (2) Nicodemus said to Jesus: “Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God; for no one can do these

signs

that thou doest except God be with him” (John 3:2, emp. added). This pattern is repeated in the New Testament many times over (e.g., John 2:23; 5:36; 6:14; 7:31; 10:37-38,41-42; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22). In other words, Jesus performed signs and miracles to prove His divine identity and thereby authenticate His message. His message, in turn, generated faith in those who chose to believe His teachings (cf. Romans 10:17). Here is the consistent sequence presented in Scripture:

Signs → Word → Faith

. (1) Signs confirmed the Word; (2) the Word was presented to hearers; and (3) faith was created (by the Word) in those who received it.An excellent demonstration of this process was provided by Luke in his report of the conversion of the Roman proconsul, Sergius Paulus. Elymas the sorcerer attempted to thwart Paul’s effort to teach Sergius the Gospel. So Paul performed a miracle by striking Elymas blind. Luke next recorded: “Then the proconsul, when he saw what was done, believed, being astonished at the

teaching

of the Lord” (Acts 13:12, emp. added). One might well expect the text to have said that Sergius was astonished at the

miracle

that Paul performed. But Luke was careful to report the situation with precision. The miracle that Paul performed captured Sergius’ attention, causing him to recognize the divine origin of Paul’s Gospel message. The Gospel message, in turn, generated faith in the proconsul—in harmony with Paul’s later affirmation to Christians in Rome that faith comes by hearing the Word of God (Romans 10:17). Over and over again in the New Testament, a close correlation is seen between the performance of miracles and the preaching of the Word of God (cf. Mark 6:12-13; Luke 9:2,6).

MIRACLES CONFIRM THE WORD

PASSAGEMESSAGECONFIRMATIONRESPONSE

Acts 4:29-32“Speak Your Word with all boldness”“by stretching out Your hand to heal and that signs and wonders may be done”“those who believed were of one heart and soul”

Acts 8:5-12“the things spoken by Philip;” “Philip…preached Christ”“hearing and seeing the miracles which he did”“they believed Philip as he preached the things…and were baptized”

Acts 13:7-12“sought to hear the word of God”“You shall be blind, not seeing”“the proconsul believed…being astonished at the doctrine of the Lord”

Acts 14:2-3“speaking boldly in the Lord”“The Lord…was bearing witness to the word…granting signs/wonders to be done”“a great multitude…believed”

Romans 15:18-19“I have fully preached the gospel of Christ”“in mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God”“to make the Gentiles obedient”

1 Corinthians 2:4-5“my speech and my preaching”“in demonstration of the Spirit and of power”“that your faith should not be in the wisdom of men but in the power of God”

1 Thessalonians 1:5-6“our gospel did not come to you in word only”“but also in power, and in the Holy Spirit and in much assurance”“you became followers of us and the Lord, having received the word”

Hebrews 2:1-4“so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord”“God also bearing witness both with signs and wonders, with various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit”“give the more earnest heed”

Mark 16:15-20“preach the gospel…they went out and preached…the word”“the Lord working with them and confirming the word through the accompanying signs”“he who believes and is baptized will be saved”

John 2:22“He had said this...the Scripture and the word which Jesus had said”“when he had risen from the dead”“they believed”

John 2:23“in His name”“they saw the signs which He did”“many believed”

But some maintain that there are other reasons for divine healing and tongue-speaking. Some say tongue-speaking is a sign that the tongue-speaker is super-spiritual. Others say miraculous healing serves the purpose of making the believer well—a mere act of mercy to relieve his pain and suffering. They say God does not want us to suffer, and so He will heal us just to ease our pain in this life because we are His children.Regarding the first claim, in Paul’s admonitions directed to the church of Christ at Corinth, he insisted that the person who possessed the ability to speak in tongues was not spiritually superior to the one who had no such ability. The tongue-speaker had a responsibility to utilize his gift appropriately, i.e., to help others (1 Corinthians 14:6,9,12,19). His gift no more placed him in a spiritually superior position than did any other gift possessed by any other member—whether the ability was miraculous or non-miraculous (1 Corinthians 12:11-27). Tongue-speaking was simply one miraculous capability among many bestowed by God without regard to a member’s spiritual status, let alone his spiritual

superiority

over another member (1 Corinthians 12:7-11,28-30).Regarding the second claim, certainly, the compassion of God was evident when people received miraculous healing in New Testament times. And, surely, relief from suffering would have been a side effect of being healed. But the Bible teaches that

relieving suffering was not the purpose of miracles

. Such a purpose would contradict—even thwart—the divine intent of this created Earth as a place where hardship exists to prepare us for eternity (see Warren, 1972). Death and sin entered the world due to human choice, and God allows the circumstances caused by human decisions to take their course. God is not going to interfere with the natural order of things to show partiality to some over others. The Christian is subject to the same diseases, the same tragedies, and the same physical death that befall non-Christians: “for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return” (Genesis 3:19). The Bible, in fact, warns Christians that they can

expect

to be the recipients of all sorts of hardship, opposition, temptation, and suffering (e.g., 1 Corinthians 10:13; 2 Timothy 3:12; 1 Peter 4:12-17). Commenting on the purpose of miracles, J.W. McGarvey wrote: “[T]o say that they were wrought for the single purpose of showing divine compassion toward the sick, and those oppressed by the devil, would be to ignore a purpose which is easily discerned, which is openly avowed by Christ himself, and which is of much greater importance (1910, p. 354). That purpose was “to support his proclamation…a necessary proof of the claim of Jesus” (pp. 355-356).If God’s intention was to exempt Christians from sickness and disease, He certainly has fallen down on the job, since the vast majority of Christians throughout the last 2,000 years have experienced the exact same afflictions suffered by unbelievers. If miracles in the first century had as their object to improve the health or physical well-being of the recipient, then Jesus and the apostles were failures, because they left untouched a lot of sick and dying folk! Jesus healed the minority of the sick people of Palestine, and healed

none

outside of that tiny geographical region (with the exception of the Canaanite woman’s daughter). In fact, one would be forced to conclude that God’s compassion did not extend to

everybody

. But the Bible affirms that

God loves the entire world of humanity

(John 3:16; Romans 5:8). Hence, miracles did not have as their central purpose to demonstrate God’s compassion, nor to ease pain, sickness, and suffering. Writing in 1898, McGarvey made the following observations:

[U]nlike these modern advocates of “divine healing,” the apostles were never known to go about exhorting people to come forward for the healing of the body. They effected miraculous cures in a few instances, “as a sign to the unbelievers,” but they never proclaimed, either to saints or sinners, that the healing of all diseases was a part of the gospel which they were sent to preach. These so-called faith-cure churches, therefore, and the preachers who officiate in them as “divine healers,” or what not, are not modeled after the apostolic type, but are misleading the people by humbuggery (p. 351).

The usual rebuttal to these observations is that the reason some people do not receive a miracle is that “they do not have sufficient faith.” But this objection is likewise unscriptural. It is true that some individuals in the New Testament were commended for the faith that they possessed

prior

to being the recipient of a miracle (e.g., Mark 5:34). It does not automatically follow, however, that faith was a

necessary

prerequisite to miraculous reception. Many people were

not

required to have faith as a prerequisite. For example, all individuals who were raised from the dead obviously were not in a position to “have faith” (e.g., John 11:44). Nor did those possessed by demons have faith before being healed, since they were not in their right mind (e.g., Luke 9:42; 11:14). The man who was blind from birth actually showed uncertainty regarding the identity of Jesus (John 9:11-12,17,25,35-36). The man who was healed by Jesus as he laid beside a pool of water, in fact, did not even know who healed him (John 5:13). On one occasion, Jesus healed a paralytic after observing, not

his

faith, but the faith of

his companions

(Mark 2:5). Additional texts indicate that many who received the benefits of miracles were not required to have faith (Luke 13:12; 14:4; Acts 3:1-10).The opposite was true as well. There were individuals who possessed faith, and yet were not healed of their ailments. The apostle Paul obviously had plenty of faith. He had an “infirmity” that was so painful that he called it “a thorn in the flesh” and “a messenger of Satan” (2 Corinthians 12:7-10). Yet his earnest prayers to God for relief did not result in his being healed. Timothy was a faithful and effective servant of the Lord. He had “frequent illnesses” and stomach trouble of such severity as to warrant Paul referring to it by inspiration. But rather than simply healing him, or telling him to “pray for healing,” Paul advised him to use a little wine as a tonic (1 Timothy 5:23). Another Christian worker and companion of Paul in his evangelistic travels, Trophimus (Acts 20:4: 21:29), had to be left at Miletus due to his sickness (2 Timothy 4:20). Epaphroditus was an extremely valuable worker in the kingdom of Christ, so much so that Paul referred to him as “my brother and fellow-worker and fellow-soldier…and minister to my need” (Philippians 2:25). When he became sick “nigh unto death” (Philippians 2:27,30)—likely due to his exhausting kingdom activity and service to Paul—Paul did not heal him. These examples demonstrate that personal faith was not prerequisite to the reception of a miracle in the first century. Miracles were inextricably bound to the authentication of the spoken Word of God.But what about those verses that seem to indicate that faith

did

have something to do with whether a miracle would be forthcoming? For instance, what of Matthew’s observation that when Jesus went to His own country, He “did not many mighty works there because of their unbelief ” (Matthew 13:58)? Notice that the text cannot be correlating the presence of the miraculous with the presence of belief. After all, “not many” implies that

some

miracles were performed—even though unbelief was rampant. The point that Matthew was making, therefore, was that when Jesus performed a few miracles to authenticate His oral claim to deity, the evidence was rejected, making it superfluous for Christ to offer any further miraculous demonstrations. Albert Barnes explained this matter succinctly:

We are not to suppose that his [Jesus—DM] power was limited by the belief or unbelief of men; but they were so prejudiced, so set against him, that they were not in a condition to judge of evidence and to be convinced. … It would have been of no use, therefore, in proving to them that he was from God, to have worked miracles. … He gave sufficient proof of his mission, and left them in their chosen unbelief without excuse (1956, p. 150, emp. in orig.).

Jesus was simply doing what He instructed the Twelve to do: “whatsoever place shall not receive you, and they hear you not, …shake off the dust that is under your feet” (Mark 6:11). He also had said: “[N]either cast your pearls before the swine” (Matthew 7:6). If performing additional miracles would have confirmed the Word, Jesus would have performed them.John actually settled this question for the unbiased searcher. He worded the thematic statement of his Gospel record in the following words: “Many other

signs

therefore did Jesus in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book: but these are written,

that ye may believe

that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye may have life in His name” (John 20:30-31, emp. added). John said that belief occurs

after

the miracle—not before, in order to receive a miracle! The New Testament teaches the very opposite of those who claim that miracles occur today. They say a person must have faith

before

he or she can receive a miracle. The New Testament teaches that miracles were performed to authenticate the divine origin of the speaker’s message and/or identity. The message, in turn, generated faith in the hearer (cf. Romans 10:17). Hence,

miracles preceded faith

. Even tongue-speaking was designed to convince the

un

believer to give heed to the message (1 Corinthians 14:22).A good summary passage that pinpoints precisely the purpose of miracles throughout the Bible is seen in the incident concerning the widow of Zarephath to whom Elijah was sent for assistance in surviving the famine during the reign of King Ahab. When her son’s serious illness culminated in his death, Elijah brought the boy back to life, raising him from the dead. Her subsequent verbal observation summarizes succinctly the function of the miraculous: “Now by this I know that you are a man of God, and that the word of the LORD in your mouth is the truth” (1 Kings 17:24). The miracle fulfilled its intended purpose: to verify that, as a genuine emissary of the one true God, Elijah was a communicator of God’s Word.

THE DURATION OF MIRACLES

These observations bring us to a third extremely critical realization: once God revealed the entirety of the information that He wished to make available to mankind (later contained in what we call the New Testament), the need for miraculous confirmation of the oral Word came to an end. Now, people can sit down with a New Testament, the written Word of God, and, with honest and diligent study, conclude that it is God’s Word. Many preachers and teachers today have failed to acknowledge this crucial biblical factor. They fail to face the fact that we have absolutely no need for the miraculous. Since the purpose of miracles has been achieved, the miracles, themselves, have ceased. I repeat: the Bible teaches that miracles are no longer necessary. We have everything we need to function in this life, to be pleasing to God, and to survive spiritually (2 Peter 1:3). Spiritual maturity is now within the grasp of every single individual who chooses to access the means to maturity—the written Word of God. To insist that we have need for the miraculous today is to undermine, and to cast aspersions upon, the all-sufficiency of God’s Word (cf. 1 Corinthians 1:22; 2 Timothy 3:16-17).The most detailed treatment of the phenomena of miracles in the New Testament, including tongue-speaking, healing, and prophecy, is 1 Corinthians 12, 13, and 14. These three chapters were written to Christians at Corinth because miracles were being abused and misused. Chapter 12 defines the miracles. Chapter 13 indicates their duration. Chapter 14 explains their disposition. In 1 Corinthians 12, Paul argued that the body (the church) should function harmoniously by using miraculous gifts properly. In 1 Corinthians 13, Paul argued that love is a more excellent attribute than miraculous gifts. After all, miraculous gifts (i.e., prophecy, tongue-speaking, supernatural knowledge, etc.) were going to fail, cease, vanish, and be done away (13:8). These miraculous gifts are identified in the text with the expression “in part” (13:9-10). The “in part,” or miraculous, would cease and be done away when the “perfect” had come. But to what does the “perfect” refer?The Greek word translated “perfect” is

teleios

. The term does not refer to “perfect” in the sense typically understood by the average modern English reader, i.e., to be sinless. Following this faulty notion, some have concluded that the “perfect” refers to Jesus—since He has been the only perfect person. Other interpretations apply “perfect” to heaven (the only perfect place that will be free of sin and imperfection), or Christian maturity and perfect love (the perfect condition or quality). But, in context, Paul was not contrasting qualities or places. He was contrasting quantities, i.e., those things that were incomplete and partial (miraculous gifts) with that which would be total and complete (the fully revealed Word of God). The inaccuracy of these interpretations is seen further in the Greek definition of

teleios

. The word refers to totality, that which is whole, brought to its end, finished, and lacking nothing necessary to completeness (Delling, 1972, 8:73; Arndt and Gingrich, 1957, p. 816; Thayer, 1901, p. 618). When referring to persons,

teleios

refers to being full-grown, adult, and mature (Arndt and Gingrich, 1957, p. 817; Thayer, 1977, p. 618). Used in its neuter form, Paul was referring to a thing—not a person—something that, when completed or finished, would replace the incomplete or partial, i.e., the miraculous gifts—which clearly had only temporary significance. Commenting on the abolition of the miraculous gifts of prophecy and supernatural knowledge (mentioned in vss. 8 and 9), W.R. Nicoll observed that “these charisms are

partial

in scope, and therefore temporary: the

fragmentary

gives place to the

complete

” (1900, 2:900, emp. added). Kenneth Wuest agreed: “In I Corinthians 13:10, the word means ‘complete,’ and is contrasted to that which is incomplete” (1943a, pp. 117-118). Whereas James used the term

teleios

to refer to the all-sufficiency of God’s Word in its ability to achieve everything it was intended to do (James 1:25), the exegete is forced to conclude that Paul’s use of “perfect” referred to the completed revelation or totally revealed New Testament Scriptures. The revelation of God’s will was completed in its entirety when the final book of the New Testament, Revelation, was written by John prior toA.D. 100.Paul offered a useful illustration to clarify his point. When the church possessed only bits and pieces of God’s will, as revealed through scattered miraculous gifts and the gradual production, between approximately A.D. 57 and A.D. 95, of the written documents from the inspired writers of the New Testament, it could not achieve full spiritual maturity. It therefore was like a child (13:11). It lacked the necessary constituent elements to reach spiritual adulthood. However, when the totality of God’s will, which became the New Testament, had been revealed, the church then had the means available to become “a man” (13:11). Once the church had access to all of God’s written Word, the means by which the Word was given (i.e., miraculous gifts) would be obsolete, useless, and therefore “put away” (13:11). Notice that in this illustration, Paul likened miracles to “childish things” (13:11). In other words, miracles were the spiritual equivalents of pacifiers that were necessary while the church was in a state of infancy. Now that the church has access to “all truth” (John 16:13), the use of tongue-speaking and other miraculous enhancements in the church today would be comparable to an adult man or woman sucking on a pacifier!Paul then explained his point by making a contrast between the initial necessity of miracles to reveal and confirm God’s Word, and the idea of looking through a clouded mirror (see Workman, 1983, p. 8). Once the entire contents of the New Testament had been revealed, the miraculous gifts no longer would be necessary. Having all of God’s revealed Word would enable one to be face to face with that Word rather than “looking through a clouded mirror,” i.e., having partial access. Paul wrote (13:11): “Now I know in part [i.e., my knowledge of God’s revelation is incomplete and partial due to limited access via the miraculous element—DM], but then [i.e., when all of God’s Word is revealed—DM] shall I know fully even as also I was fully known [i.e., I shall be made to know or taught thoroughly (which is the figure of speech known as heterosis of the verb in which the intransitive is put for the transitive—see Bullinger, 1898, p. 512)—DM].”Paul made essentially the same point to the Ephesians that he made to the Corinthians. Miracles—the “gifts” given by Christ (Ephesians 4:8)—were to last “

till

the unity of

the

faith and

the

knowledge of the Son of God” (Ephesians 4:13, emp. added). Two significant observations emerge from this latter verse. First, the word translated “till” (Middle English for “until”) is

mechri

, and was used as a conjunction to indicate the

terminus ad quem

[finishing point] of the miraculous offices (mentioned in vs. 11) bestowed as gifts by Christ. [For treatments of the use of

mechri

in this verse, see Thayer, 1977, p. 408; Arndt and Gingrich, 1957, p. 517; Moulton and Milligan, 1982, p. 407; Blass, et al., 1961, pp. 193-194; Robertson, 1934, pp. 974-975; Dana and Mantey, 1927, p. 281; see also the use of the term in Mark 13:30 and Galatians 4:19]. Nicoll observed: “The statement of the great object of Christ’s gifts and the provision made by Him for its fulfillment is now followed by a statement of the

time

this provision and the consequent service are to last” (1900, 3:332, emp. in orig.). Paul was “[s]pecifying the

time

up to which this ministry and impartation of gifts are to last” (Vincent, 1890, p. 390, emp. added).Second, the phrase “the unity of the faith and the knowledge of the Son of God” often is misunderstood to refer to the eventual

unifying

of all believers in Christ. But this conclusion cannot be correct. Both Scripture and common sense dispel such a notion. Complete unity within Christendom will never occur. Those who profess affiliation with Christianity are in a hopeless state of disunity. Catholicism and Protestant denominationalism are fractured into a plethora of factions and splinter groups—literally thousands of divisions and disagreements. Besides, Protestant denominationalism did not exist in the New Testament era, and the New Testament neither countenances nor legitimizes any such “manifestation” of Christianity. Nor will unity ever be achieved even within churches of Christ. The first-century congregations did not attain complete internal unity. Nor have the post first-century congregations achieved unity within.In contrast with this interpretation, notice the use of the articles in the phrases: “

the

faith” and “

the

knowledge.” Contextually, Paul was referring to

the system of faith

alluded to so often in the New Testament. Jude urged his readers to “contend earnestly for

the

faith” (Jude 3). Paul referred to himself when he quoted others as saying, “He that once persecuted us now preacheth

the

faith of which he once made havoc” (Galatians 1:23). Luke reported that “a great company of the priests were obedient to

the

faith” (Acts 6:7). Elymas sought to “turn aside the proconsul from

the

faith” (Acts 13:8). The early disciples were exhorted to “continue in

the

faith” (Acts 14:22). Due to Paul’s repeat visits in Lycaonia, “the churches were strengthened in

the

faith” (Acts 16:5).So “the faith” and “the knowledge” refer to the

completed body of information

that constitutes the Christian religion. Indeed, eight verses earlier (Ephesians 4:5), Paul already had referred to “the faith” as the summation and totality of Christian doctrine—now situated in the repository of the New Testament. An honest exegete is driven to conclude that once the precepts of New Testament Christianity were revealed on Earth, the miraculous element no longer was necessary. Miracles lasted until “the faith” was completely revealed. They had served their purpose, in the same way that scaffolding is useful while a building is under construction. However, once construction is complete, the scaffolding is removed and discarded as unnecessary and superfluous paraphernalia.

THE TEMPORARY NATURE OF MIRACLES IN CORINTH AND EPHESUS

1 Corinthians 12-14Ephesians 4

“Gifts” (12:4,9, 28,30,31)“Gifts” (4:7-8)

“no schism in the body” (12:25)“joined and knit together” (4:16)

“one body, many members” (12:12,14,18-20,27)“whole body, every part” (4:16)

“apostles, prophets, teachers” (12:29)“apostles, prophets, pastor-teachers” (4:11)

“prophecies, knowledge” (13:8)“prophets, evangelists, pastor-teachers” (4:11)

“fail, cease, vanish, done away” (13:8-10)“until” (4:13)

“we come to the unity of the faith” (4:13)

“when perfect comes” (13:10)“the knowledge/the fullness of Christ” (4:13)

“shall know” (13:12)“the knowledge/the fullness of Christ” (4:13)

“child” (13:11)“children” (4:14)

“man” (13:11)“man” (4:13)

“put away childish things” (13:11)“grow up” (4:15)

“love” (13:1-8)“love” (4:15-16)

“edification of the church” (14:3-5,12,17)“edifying the body of Christ” (4:12)

THE DISPLAY AND DISPOSITION OF MIRACLES

Fourth, the actual exercise of miraculous gifts by Christians is addressed in 1 Corinthians 14. In this context, Paul used the term “gifts” (

charismata,

from

charisma

) in a technical sense (like

pneumatika

) to refer to miraculous abilities, designated by Thayer “

extraordinary

powers…by the Holy Spirit” (1901, p. 667, emp. added; cf. Arndt and Gingrich, 1957, p. 887). Hans Conzelmann stated that the term indicated that “[t]he operations are

supernatural

” and of “

supernatural

potency” (1974, 9:405, emp. added). [The word is so used in the Pauline corpus in ten of its sixteen occurrences (Romans 1:11; 12:6; 1 Corinthians 1:7; 12:4,9,28,30,31; 1 Timothy 4:14; 2 Timothy 1:6). The only other occurrence of the word in the New Testament was Peter’s comparable use, i.e., to refer to supernatural ability (1 Peter 4:10)—see Moulton, et al., 1978, p. 1005]. In the Corinthian context of chapter 14, special attention was given by Paul to two of the miraculous gifts in particular: prophecy and tongue-speaking. Several relevant points occur with regard to the gift of tongue-speaking that help one to understand both the temporary nature of miracles as well as their irrelevance to a contemporary pursuit and practice of New Testament Christianity.Tongue-SpeakingFirst, in 1 Corinthians 14, the term “unknown” (in regard to tongues) was italicized in the KJVbecause it does not appear in the original Greek text (14:2,4,13-14,19,27). By inserting this word into their translation, the translators were attempting to aid the English reader. They undoubtedly were hoping to convey the idea that the languages to which Paul referred were

unknown

to the speaker, i.e., the speaker had no prior training by which to learn or know the language. He spoke the language strictly by God’s miraculous empowerment. “Unknown” certainly was not intended to convey the idea that the tongues were unknown

to all humans

and, as such, were non-earthly, non-human languages.Second, the events reported at the very beginning of the Christian religion (Acts 2) set the precedent for understanding that tongue-speaking entailed no more than the ability to speak a foreign human language (which the speaker had not studied) to people from a variety of geographical locales (e.g., Parthians, Medes, Arabians—Acts 2:9-11). The unbiased Bible student must conclude that what is described in detail in Acts 2 is the same phenomenon alluded to in 1 Corinthians 14. All tongue-speaking in the Bible consisted of known human languages (ideally known to the very audience being addressed) that were unknown (i.e., unstudied, unlearned) by the one who was speaking the language.Third, there is simply no such thing as an “ecstatic utterance” in the New Testament. The tongue-speaking of 1 Corinthians 14 entailed human language—not incoherent gibberish. A simple reading of the chapter demonstrates that known human languages are under consideration. For example, Paul paralleled tongue-speaking with the use of the trumpet in warfare. If the bugler sounded meaningless noise, the military would be thrown into confusion. It was imperative for the bugler to blow the proper notes and tones, i.e., meaningful musical “language,” so that the army would understand what was being communicated (whether to charge, engage, or retreat). Sound without sense fails to achieve the very purpose of tongue-speaking. Paul then stated:

So likewise ye, unless ye utter by the tongue speech easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye will be speaking into the air. There are, it may be, so many kinds of languages in the world, and no kind is without signification. If then I know not the meaning of the language, I shall be to him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh will be a barbarian unto me (1 Corinthians 14:9-11, emp. added).

Obviously, Paul was referring to human languages—those that exist “in the world.” He envisioned a scenario where two individuals, who spoke different languages, are attempting to communicate with each other. If one speaks in Spanish and the other in German, as they attempt to speak to one another, each would be a “foreigner” to the other. Neither would understand what the other was attempting to say. Hence the need for tongue-speaking, i.e., the ability to speak human language unknown to the speaker but known to the recipient.Later in the chapter, Paul quoted Isaiah 28:11-12 where God threatened the Israelites with the fact that their failure to listen to Him (by means of the words spoken by His prophets) meant that He soon would be communicating to them through the language of their Assyrian conquerors—conquerors whom God would send against them. This powerful illustration presupposes the fact that in both Isaiah and 1 Corinthians, human languages are under consideration. After quoting Isaiah, Paul drew the conclusion that tongue-speaking was intended by God to be directed to

un

believers. Why? Because it would prove to the unbeliever that the tongue-speaker, who did not possess the natural ability to speak that language, was being empowered by God to speak in the language spoken by the unbeliever. The unbeliever would recognize the divine origin of the tongue-speaker’s ability, and thereby be willing to consider the words being spoken as the instructions of God. Again, an examination of 1 Corinthians 14 yields the result that no contextual justification exists for drawing the conclusion that the Bible refers to, let alone endorses, the notion of “

ecstatic

” speech.Tongues of Angels?But what about Paul’s passing reference to the “tongues of angels” in 1 Corinthians 13:1? Would not this reference prove that tongue-speaking could involve languages beyond those spoken by humans? In the first place, consider the role, purpose, and activity of angels described in the Bible. The word “angel” (Greek—

angelos

; Hebrew—

malak

) simply means “messenger”—one who “speaks and acts in the place of the one who has sent him” (Bietenhard, 1975, 1:101; Botterweck, et al., 1997, 8:308; Grundmann, 1964, 1:74ff; Gesenius, 1847, p. 475; Arndt and Gingrich, 1957, p. 7). It does not mean merely “to send,” but rather “to send a messenger/message” (Ringgren, 1997, 8:310). It is true that angels in both the Old and New Testaments carried out a wide range of activities beyond message-bearing, including: worshipping God (Revelation 5:11-12); comforting, aiding, and protecting (Daniel 6:22; Matthew 4:11; Luke 22:43; Acts 5:19; Hebrews 1:14); and executing judgment and inflicting punishment and death (e.g., Matthew 13:49; Acts 12:23). But it still remains true to say that the meaning of the term “angel” is a messenger—one who communicates a spoken message. Therefore, their principal role in God’s scheme of things was to function as messengers to humans (Grundmann, 1964, 1:74). Consequently, angels always are represented in Scripture as communicating in human language.In the second place, what logical reason exists for humans to speak in an alleged “angelic” language that is different from human language? What would be the spiritual benefit? The Bible certainly makes no provision for humans to communicate with angels in such a language, nor would there be any need for an angel to communicate to a human in a non-earthly language. The whole point of 1 Corinthians 12-13 was to stress the need to function in the church in ways that were meaningful and understandable. Since God, by His very nature, never would do anything that is superfluous, unnecessary, or frivolous, it follows that He would not bestow upon a human being the ability to speak in a non-human language. The ability would serve no purpose! The Bible simply offers no rationale nor justification for identifying the “tongues of angels” in 1 Corinthians 13:1 with some heavenly, otherworldly, non-earthly languages.In the third place, if, in fact, the “tongues of angels” refers to known human languages, what was Paul’s point? Since angels were God’s appointed spokesmen, they naturally would perform their assignment in such a way that God would be represented as He would want to be. God’s own angelic emissaries would have complied with their responsibility in such a way and manner that they would have God’s approval. In other words, angels would naturally articulate God’s message as well as it could be expressed (i.e., perfectly). When God inspired mere humans to communicate His will, He integrated their own educational background, stylistic idiosyncrasies, and vocabulary into their oral and literary productions. No such need would have existed for angels. Their communications would have been unfiltered through human agency. Their announcements would have been the epitome and pinnacle of eloquence and oratorical skill.Perhaps, then, Paul was not drawing a contrast between human and nonhuman languages at all. Before referring to the “tongues of angels,” he referred to “the tongues of men.” Why would Paul say, “Though I speak with the tongues of men”? After all, isn’t that precisely what all adult humans do? We humans speak at least one human language! Paul must have been referring, then, not to the ability to speak a human language, but to the ability to speak

all

human languages. No tongue-speaker in the first-century church had the ability to speak all human languages. In fact, the textual evidence indicates that most tongue-speakers probably had the ability to speak only one human language—which he, himself, did not understand—thus necessitating the need for an inspired interpreter (1 Corinthians 12:30; 14:26-28). Paul could apparently speak more languages than any of the others (1 Corinthians 14:18). If the “tongues of men” referred to the number of human languages (rather than referring to the ability to speak a human language), then the “tongues of angels” would refer—not to the ability to speak an angelic language—but to the ability to speak human languages

the way angels do

.Here, then, would have been Paul’s point: even if a tongue-speaker could speak every human language known to man, and even if that tongue-speaker could speak those human languages with the efficiency, skill, and perfection that God’s angelic messengers have spoken them in history, without love, the ability would be wasted. With this understanding of the text, Paul was not contrasting human with nonhuman language. He was encompassing both the quantity (if I could speak all human languages) and the quality (if I could speak them perfectly) of speaking human language.One final point on the matter of the “tongues of angels” merits mention. Even if the expression actually refers to angelic tongues that are nonhuman, it still is likely that tongue-speakers were incapable of speaking such languages. Why? Paul was speaking hypothetically and hyperbolically. No human being (with the exception of perhaps Jesus) has ever been able to speak in all human languages. For Paul to suggest such was to pose a hypothetical situation. It was to exaggerate the facts. So Paul’s meaning was: “even if I were capable of speaking all human languages—which I’m not.” Likewise, no human being has ever been able to speak the tongues of angels. So Paul’s meaning was: “even if I were capable of speaking the languages of angels—which I’m not.” This conclusion is supported further by the verse that follows the reference to the “tongues of angels.” There, Paul used two additional hypothetical events when he said, “if I…know all mysteries and all knowledge” and “if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains” (1 Corinthians 13:2). But no one on the planet (with the exception of deity) has understood all mysteries and all knowledge, nor has had faith that could literally remove mountains. Again, Paul was merely saying, “even if I could do such things—which I can’t.”Fourth, Paul stated very clearly that tongue-speaking was a sign to

un

believers—not believers (14:22). Tongue-speaking was to be done in

their

presence, to convince

them

of the truth being spoken, i.e., to confirm the Word. The tongue-speaking being practiced today is done in the presence of those who

already believe

that tongue-speaking is occurring and, when an unbeliever, who is skeptical of the genuineness of the activity, makes an appearance in such an assembly, the claim often is made that tongue-speaking cannot occur because of the presence of unbelief. Once again, the New Testament teaches the very opposite of those who claim the ability to speak in tongues today.Fifth, the recipient of a miraculous gift in the New Testament could control himself (14:32). He was not overwhelmed by the Holy Spirit so that he began to babble or flail about. Tongue-speaking today is frequently practiced in a setting where the individuals who claim to be exercising the gift are speaking uncontrollably at the very time that others are either doing the same thing or engaging in some other action. This overlapping activity is in direct violation of three of Paul’s commands: (1) that each individual take their turn one at a time; (2) that no more than three tongue-speakers speak per service; and (3) that tongue-speakers remain silent if no interpreter is present (14:27-28).The claim by many today to be able to speak in tongues is simply out of harmony with New Testament teaching. Anyone can babble, make up sounds, and claim he or she is speaking in tongues. But such conduct is no

sign

today. It is precisely the same phenomenon that pagan religions have practiced through the centuries. In the New Testament, however, no one questioned the authenticity of tongue-speaking. Why? The speaker was speaking a known human language that could be understood by those present who knew that language and knew that that particular speaker did not know that language beforehand. As McGarvey observed about Acts 2: “Not only did the apostles speak in foreign languages that were understood by the hearers, some understanding one and some another, but the fact that this was done by Galileans, who knew only their mother tongue, was the one significant fact that gave to Peter’s speech which followed all of its power over the multitude” (1910, p. 318). If and when self-proclaimed tongue-speakers today demonstrate that genuine New Testament gift, their message could be accepted as being from God. But no one today has demonstrated that genuine New Testament gift.Holy Spirit BaptismWhere does the baptism of the Holy Spirit fit into this discussion? Today’s alleged practitioners typically associate the expression “Holy Spirit baptism” with the phenomenon that enables the believer to speak in tongues, heal someone, or work other miracles. In other words, Holy Spirit baptism is simply a generic reference to miraculous empowerment. Anyone who can speak in a tongue or perform any other miraculous action is said to have been baptized in the Holy Spirit. He is said to be “Spirit-filled.” However, it might surprise the reader to find that the Bible alludes to Holy Spirit baptism in a very narrow, specialized, even technical sense. Just because a person could speak in tongues or work miracles did not necessarily mean he had been baptized in the Holy Spirit.The very first allusion to Holy Spirit baptism in the New Testament is John’s statement: “I indeed baptize you in water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me...will

baptize

you

in the Holy Spirit

” (Matthew 3:11, emp. added). From this statement alone, one might be tempted to assume that Christians

in general

would be baptized in the Holy Spirit. But this assumption would be a premature conclusion. John was not addressing a Christian audience. He was speaking to Jews. Nothing in the context allows the interpreter to distinguish John’s intended recipients of the promise of Holy Spirit baptism—whether all humans, all Jews, all Christians, or merely some of those in one or more of these categories. Likewise, the exact recipients of the baptism of fire (i.e., hell) are not specified. However, as is often the case in the Bible, the specific recipients of this promise are clarified in later passages.Just before His ascension, Jesus told the apostles to wait in Jerusalem until “clothed with power from on high” (Luke 24:49). In John chapters 14-16, Jesus made several specific promises to the apostles concerning the coming of the Spirit—the “Comforter” or “Helper” (

parakletos

)—upon them, to empower them to do the peculiar work of an apostle (i.e., to recall the words Jesus had spoken to them, to speak and write by inspiration, and to launch the Christian religion). If these verses apply to all Christians, then all Christians ought to have been personally guided “into all the truth” (John 16:13), and thus would have absolutely no need of written Scripture (John 14:26). However, in context, these verses clearly refer to

the apostolic office

.Jesus further clarified the application of Holy Spirit baptism when He told the apostles that the earlier statement made in Luke 24:49 applied to

them

, and would come to pass “not many days hence” (Acts 1:4-5). Jesus also stated that the “power” that they would receive would be from the Holy Spirit, which would enable them to witness to the world what they had experienced by being with Jesus (Acts 1:8). Notice very carefully that on this occasion Jesus made an explicit reference to the very statement that John had uttered previously in Matthew 3: “for John indeed baptized with water; but

ye

[apostles—DM] shall be

baptized in the Holy Spirit

not many days hence” (Acts 1:5, emp. added). Jesus specifically and explicitly identified the Holy Spirit baptism that He would administer (in keeping with John’s prediction) would take place within a few days, and would be confined to the apostles.All one need do is turn the page to see the promise of Holy Spirit baptism achieve dramatic and climactic fulfillment in Acts 2 when the Spirit was poured out only upon the apostles. The antecedent of “they” in Acts 2:4 is “the apostles” in Acts 1:26. The apostles were the ones who spoke in tongues and taught the people.

They

were the recipients of the baptism of the Holy Spirit, as is evident from the following contextual indicators: (1) “are not all these that speak

Galileans

?” (2:7); (2) “Peter, standing up with

the eleven

” (2:14); (3) “they...said unto Peter and the rest of

the apostles

” (2:37); (4) Peter quoted Joel 2:28-32 and applied it to that occasion as proof that

the apostles

were not intoxicated; and (5) the text even states explicitly that the signs and wonders were “done through

the apostles

” (2:43). This pattern continues in the book of Acts: “And by the hands of

the apostles

were many signs and wonders wrought among the people” (5:12); “the Lord, who bare witness unto the word of his grace, granting signs and wonders to be done by

their hands

” (14:3); “what signs and wonders God had wrought…through

them

” (15:12).The next direct reference to Holy Spirit baptism consisted of Peter describing the experience of the Gentiles in Acts 10. Referring to their empowerment to speak in tongues, Peter explicitly identified it as being comparable to the experience of the apostles in Acts 2. Note his explanation: “And as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them, even as on

us

[apostles—DM] at the beginning. And I remembered the word of the Lord, how he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized in the Holy Spirit. If then God gave unto them the like gift as he did also unto

us

[apostles—DM]…” (Acts 11:15-17, emp. added). Peter unmistakably linked the baptism of the Holy Spirit predicted by John in Matthew 3:11, and applied by Jesus to the apostles in Acts 1:5, with the unique and exclusive bestowal of the same on the first Gentile candidates of salvation. If the baptism of the Holy Spirit had occurred between Acts 2 and Acts 10, why did Peter compare the Gentiles’ experience with the experience of the

apostles

—rather than comparing it with many other Christians who allegedly would have received it during the intervening years? The answer lies in the fact that the baptism of the Holy Spirit did not occur during the intervening years. Baptism of the Holy Spirit was a unique and infrequent occurrence that came directly from deity.This understanding harmonizes with additional facts. The great prophecy of the Old Testament, which made special reference to the coming New Testament era as the dispensation of the Spirit, incorporated a most noteworthy expression. God declared, “I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh” (Joel 2:28). Peter repeated it on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:17). What did God mean by the expression “

all flesh

”? Members of the charismatic community insist that “all flesh” means “all

Christians

.” They maintain that every Christian can receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit. They claim that to narrow the application of the promise of Holy Spirit baptism to a select group of individuals would deprive all other Christians of the opportunity to receive miraculous power. However, upon what

biblical

basis may such a claim be made?Those who claim the presence of miraculous gifts are guilty of the very thing they condemn—narrowing the expression “all flesh.” Surely no one would take the position that it means all

animal

flesh—since animals are not the recipients of God’s spiritual provisions. Nor would anyone contend that it means all

human

flesh—since all wicked, disobedient, unbelieving people would hardly expect, let alone desire, to receive God’s Spirit. Those who agree that the expression “all flesh” must undoubtedly be qualified to exclude the animals and the unbelieving will nonetheless insist that narrowing the meaning to less than “all Christians” is unjustifiable.To understand the proper meaning and application of the expression “all flesh,” one must examine the

biblical

use of the expression. “All flesh” often is used in the Bible to refer to the bulk of humanity (e.g., Genesis 6:12-13). It also can include all animal flesh (e.g., Genesis 6:17,19). However, with God’s special utilization of the descendants of Abraham in His scheme of redemption, “all flesh” often has the more technical meaning of “all

nationalities

.” The primary reason for this specialized use of the expression was due to the fact that most of the Old Testament was written against the backdrop of the presence of the nation of Israel. God is certainly “no respecter of persons” (Romans 2:11; Ephesians 6:9; Colossians 3:25; 1 Peter 1:17; Acts 10:34-35). He does not favor one ethnic group over another. However, since His redemptive intention included bringing Jesus into the world for the benefit of all, someone had to be selected through whom Jesus’ arrival might be achieved. That man was Abraham (Galatians 3:8,16) and, consequently, his descendents.As a result of this circumstance, the Jewish writers of the Bible frequently divided humanity into

only two

racial groupings, i.e., Jew and non-Jew (Gentile). For example, in what is obviously a strongly Messianic passage, Isaiah (the “Messianic prophet”) predicted the coming of John the baptizer who would prepare the way for Jesus. He exclaimed: “The glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together” (40:5). The reference to “all flesh” was an unmistakable reference to the availability of salvation to both Jew and Gentile in the Christian era, as evinced by Luke’s quotation of the passage (Luke 3:6). The same is true in another prophecy that Isaiah uttered pertaining to the coming Christian era: “All flesh shall come to worship before Me” (Isaiah 66:23). The Jews of Isaiah’s day would not have been very pleased with Isaiah’s declarations, since they most certainly would have understood him to be predicting the incorporation of Gentiles into God’s favor—which the Jews felt they alone enjoyed.Paul cinched the meaning of “all flesh” in his premiere treatise on justification by faith. He drew a clear distinction between the two ethnic categories by first declaring the sins of the Gentiles (Romans 1:18-32) and then declaring the sins of the Jews (Romans 2:1-3:8). Notice carefully his concluding remarks as he brought the first section of the book to its climax: “What then? are

we

[the Jews—DM] better than

they

[the Gentiles—DM]? No, in no wise: for we before laid to the charge

both

of Jews and Greeks, that they are

all

under sin” (Romans 3:9, emp. added). He then quoted a series of Old Testament verses, which verified his emphasis upon the two (and only two) categories of human flesh, using two significant terms: “none” and “all.” “None” means neither Jew nor Gentile. “All” means both Jew and Gentile. Then he articulated his grand and climactic conclusion: “because by the works of the law shall

no flesh

be justified” (Romans 3:20, emp. added). “No flesh” referred to Jew and Gentile. In other words, neither Jew nor Gentile could be justified by law alone. “No flesh” and “all flesh” were technical allusions to the two

categories

of human flesh, i.e., Jew and non-Jew (cf. John 17:2).Observe, then, that the first recipients of Holy Spirit baptism, as we have seen, were the

Jewish

apostles on the day of Pentecost in Acts 2. It equipped them to establish the church and to write, speak, and confirm inspired truth. The second recipients of Holy Spirit baptism were the

Gentile

members of the household of Cornelius in Acts 10. It convinced Jewish Christians that Gentiles were fit prospects for the reception of the Gospel, and valid candidates for entrance into the kingdom (Acts 10:34-35,45; 11:18). So Joel’s statement, that God would pour out His Spirit on “all flesh,” applied to the outpouring on

Jews

in Acts 2 and on

Gentiles

in Acts 10. The only other conceivable occurrence of Holy Spirit baptism would have been Paul, who would have received direct miraculous ability from God as well. His reception was obviously unique because (1) he was not an apostle when the Twelve received the Spirit, and (2) he was “one born out of due time” (1 Corinthians 15:8). Holy Spirit baptism, then, filled two unique and exclusive purposes: (1) to prepare the apostles for their apostolic (not Christian) roles, and (2) to provide divine demonstration that Gentiles were to be allowed to become Christians.One additional consideration deserves comment regarding Joel’s prophecy. If “all flesh” referred exclusively to the Jewish apostles and the first Gentile converts, why did Joel include “sons, daughters, old men, young men, servants, and handmaids” in the reception of God’s Spirit (Joel 2:28-29)? As was typical of Hebrew prophecy, progressive, sequential, and complete fulfillment would be forthcoming. A prophecy could possess several features that found fulfillment in a variety of circumstances. It is apparent, on the basis of the references already discussed (e.g., Matthew 3:11; Acts 1:5; 11:15-17), that only the

first part

of Joel’s prophecy was fulfilled on the day of Pentecost. The “last days” (Acts 2:17) referred to the

entire

Christian dispensation from Pentecost to the Judgment. The outpouring of the Spirit, therefore, would include more than just the baptism of the Holy Spirit that was confined to the Jewish apostles on Pentecost and the Gentiles a few years later. Though the peculiar phenomenon of Holy Spirit baptism was limited to those two specific ethnic groups (i.e., the twelve apostles and the household of Cornelius),

additional

activity of the Spirit would include the impartation of miraculous gifts through the laying on of the apostles’ hands (discussed below). This conclusion is evident from the fact that no “

daughters

” or “

handmaids

” received Holy Spirit baptism on Pentecost. Nor is there any evidence of the occurrence of “

dreams

” or “

visions

” on Pentecost. With the Holy Spirit’s expanded presence in the instigation of Christianity in the first century came the eventual impartation of miraculous ability separate and apart from Holy Spirit baptism. The broadened fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy (subsequent to Acts 2) is seen in the references to Philip’s

daughters

who prophesied (Acts 21:9) and in the occurrence of

visions

(Acts 9:10; 10:3,10; 16:9). However, these miraculous manifestations, though included in Joel’s prophecy, were not instances of Holy Spirit baptism. The common link in the Holy Spirit’s outpouring on Pentecost and the manifestations of the Spirit thereafter was the baptism of the Holy Spirit on

the apostles

—who were the keys to the further distribution of miraculous power in the early years of Christianity.1 Corinthians 12:13But what about Paul’s statement to the Corinthians? He wrote: “For in one Spirit were we all baptized into one body…and were all made to drink of one Spirit” (1 Corinthians 12:13). Some have insisted that this verse teaches that the baptism of the Holy Spirit is imparted to

all Christians

. Careful analysis of the verse, however, demonstrates that Paul was not referring to the baptism of the Holy Spirit that was received only twice in the New Testament (if you omit Paul). If the Corinthians had been baptized in the Holy Spirit, Paul likely would have worded the verse: “We were all baptized in one Spirit into one body.” This wording would have made it plain that their baptism was Holy Spirit baptism. However, Paul connected “baptized” with “into one body,” and placed “in one Spirit”

before

both “baptized” and “into one body.” Did he mean to say that their baptism entailed being indwelt with the Spirit, or having the Spirit overwhelm (i.e., immerse) them, or come upon them, i.e., that the Holy Spirit,

Himself

, was what the Corinthians had received or been baptized in?The grammar of the passage provides a decisive and definitive answer. The word “Spirit” is in the instrumental case in Greek, indicating personal agency. The personal agent in the passage who did the baptizing is the Holy Spirit. His baptizing resulted in the placement of the individuals into the one body of Christ. The verb is aorist, showing that Paul was referring to a once-for-all act in the past. Wuest explained: “It is not the baptism

with

the Spirit or

of

the Spirit, in the sense that the Holy Spirit is the element which is applied to us. It is the baptism

by

the Spirit. This baptism does not bring the Spirit to us in the sense that God places the Spirit

upon

or

in

us. Rather, this baptism brings the believer into vital union with Jesus Christ” (1943b, p. 86, emp. added). The Corinthians were the beneficiaries—not of the Spirit—but of the Spirit’s guidance or assistance. They were baptized

by

the Spirit (cf.KJV, NKJV, NASV, RSV, NIV).Further grammatical evidence in the context supports this conclusion. Earlier in the chapter, Paul said that no person could say that Jesus is Lord “but in the Holy Spirit” (vs. 3). A person could say Jesus is Lord without being

in

the Spirit or having the Holy Spirit

in

or

on

him. But a person could not say Jesus is Lord if the Holy Spirit had not revealed such information about Jesus—as He did by empowering the apostles to produce written revelation. A few verses later, Paul pinpointed several gifts that were given “through the Spirit,” “according to the same Spirit,” and “in the same Spirit” (vss. 8-9, ASV). All three phrases are equivalent, and refer to the Holy Spirit’s

action

, not the

state of being

in the Holy Spirit. Paul’s summary of the section verifies that this meaning is intended: “But one and the same Spirit

works

all these things,

distributing to

each one individually as He wills” (vs. 11).In view of these contextual details, one is forced to conclude that in verse 13, Paul could be referring to no other baptism than the baptism enjoined by Christ in the Great Commission, i.e., the “one baptism” of Ephesians 4:5, the baptism which Paul, himself, administered to the Corinthians (Acts 18:8)—

water

baptism. The Holy Spirit was the agent through Whom Christ enjoined water baptism by means of the preached message. When a person complies with the instruction to be baptized in water, that person is baptized into the one body of Christ. Other verses in the New Testament confirm this understanding. Jesus announced: “[U]nless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God” (John 3:5). Jesus meant what Paul meant, that when one obeys the teaching of the Spirit to be baptized in water, he is granted entrance into the kingdom. Paul reiterated this same teaching on two other occasions. To the Ephesian church, he pointed out that Jesus gave His life for the church “that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word” (Ephesians 5:26). He meant that an individual is permitted to be a part of the cleansed church of Christ when he submits to water baptism in accordance with the Holy Spirit’s inspired Word. Likewise, Paul told young Titus that Jesus “saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit” (Titus 3:5). Again, he meant that one is saved (and hence added to the body) at the point of water immersion, in which spiritual renewal is extended by the Holy Spirit.We are forced to conclude that 1 Corinthians 12:13 does not refer to Holy Spirit baptism (see also McGarvey, 1910, pp. 254-256, and Reese, 1976, p. 76). The two instances of Holy Spirit baptism previously discussed (i.e., in Acts 2 and 10) stand unmistakably in stark contrast with the baptism alluded to by Paul in 1 Corinthians 12:13. The Corinthian baptism placed the Corinthians into the body of Christ, i.e., at their conversion. But when the apostles were baptized in the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost, they were

already

saved. When the household of Cornelius was baptized in the Holy Spirit, they were not yet saved and were inducted into the body of Christ only

after

Peter called for “water” (Acts 10:47-48).Laying on of HandsIf Acts 2 and Acts 10 are the only instances of Holy Spirit baptism in the New Testament, how then do we account for the fact that many others in the New Testament performed miracles or spoke in tongues? If they were not recipients of Holy Spirit baptism, how did they get the ability? The New Testament dictates only one other way to receive miraculous capability: through the laying on of the apostles’ hands. Only the apostles possessed the ability to transfer miraculous capability to others. This phenomenon is described succinctly by Luke:

Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit. Now when Simon saw that through the laying on of the apostles’ hands the Holy Spirit was given, he offered them money, saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Spirit. But Peter said unto him, Thy silver perish with thee, because thou hast thought to obtain the gift of God with money. Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right before God” (Acts 8:17-21, emp. added).

This description establishes two important facts: (1) only the apostles had the ability to impart to others the ability to perform miracles; and (2) those other than the apostles who could perform miracles received their ability

indirectly

through the

apostles

—not

directly

from God via Holy Spirit baptism

.This fascinating feature of the existence of the miraculous in the first century makes it possible to understand how other individuals received their supernatural powers. For example, Philip, who was not an apostle, possessed the ability to perform miracles (Acts 8:6,13). If he was not an apostle, and he did not receive direct ability from God via baptism of the Holy Spirit, where, then, did he derive his ability? Luke informs us that Philip previously received the laying on of the apostles’ hands (Acts 6:5-6). Likewise, the first Christians in Ephesus were enabled to speak in tongues when the apostle Paul laid his hands on them (Acts 19:6). Even Timothy received his gift from the laying on of Paul’s hands (2 Timothy 1:6).Some have challenged the exclusivity of the role of the apostles in their unique ability to impart the miraculous element by calling attention to the admonition given by Paul to Timothy: “Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands

of the presbytery

” (1 Timothy 4:14, emp. added). Even though Paul plainly declared that the “gift of God” which Timothy possessed was conferred “through the laying on of my hands” (2 Timothy 1:6), how does one explain the fact that Paul also stated that Timothy’s gift came through the presbytery (i.e., the eldership) as well? Once again, the grammar of the text provides the answer. In 2 Timothy 1:6, where Paul claimed sole credit for imparting the gift to Timothy, he employed the Greek preposition

dia

with the genitive, which means “through” or “by means of ” (Machen, 1923, p. 41; Dana and Mantey, 1927, p. 101). However, in 1 Timothy 4:14, where Paul included the eldership in the action of impartation, he employed a completely different Greek preposition—

meta

. The root meaning of

meta

is “in the midst of ” (Dana and Mantey, p. 107). It denotes the

attendant circumstances

of something that takes place—the

accompanying

phenomena (Arndt and Gingrich, 1957, pp. 510-511). It means “in association with” or “accompanied by” (Moule, 1959, p. 61; Thayer, 1901, p. 404; cf. Robertson, 1934, p. 611). In other words, Paul—as an apostle—imparted the miraculous gift to Timothy. It came from God through Paul. However, on that occasion, the local eldership of the church was present and participated with Paul in the event, lending their simultaneous support and accompanying commendation. After examining the grammatical data on the matter, Nicoll concluded: “[I]t was the imposition of hands by St. Paul that was the instrument used by God in the communication of the charisma to Timothy” (1900, 4:127; cf. Jamieson, et al., n.d., 2:414; Williams, 1960, p. 956). Consequently, 1 Timothy 4:14 provides no proof that miraculous capability could be received through other means in addition to apostolic imposition of hands and the two clear instances of Holy Spirit baptism.

CONCLUSION

In light of all the biblical data set forth in this study, certain conclusions are quite evident. Since there are no apostles living today, and since Holy Spirit baptism was unique to the apostles (Acts 2) and the first Gentile converts (Acts 10), there is no Holy Spirit baptism today. Likewise, there is no miraculous healing today. There are no tongue-speakers today. The miraculous element in the Christian religion was terminated by God near the close of the first century. Once the last apostle died, the means by which miraculous capability was made available was dissolved. With the completion of God’s revelation to humanity, now available in the Bible, people living today have all that is needed to be complete and to enjoy the fullness of Christian existence (2 Timothy 3:16-17; 2 Peter 1:3; Ephesians 4:14).The alleged miracles and tongue-speaking of today simply do not measure up to the Bible’s description of the miraculous. They are unverifiable, ambiguous, and counterfeit. Today’s “divine healing” consists of vague, unseen, non-quantifiable aches and pains like arthritis and headaches. But in the New Testament, people were raised from the dead—even days after death (e.g., John 11:17). Severed body parts were instantly restored (e.g., Luke 22:50-51). People who had been

born

blind had their sight restored (e.g., John 9:1). Those lame

from birth

were empowered to walk (Acts 3:2). First-century miracles were not limited only to certain ailments and psychosomatic illnesses that could be cured through natural means, or by mental adjustments on the part of the infirm. Jesus healed “

all

kinds of sickness and

all

kinds of disease” (Matthew 4:23, emp. added). No disease or sickness was exempt in the New Testament (cf. Acts 28:8-9). Where are these instances today? When has anyone restored a severed limb lost in an accident? When has a self-proclaimed “faith-healer” raised anyone from the dead? Where are the miracle workers who have healed the blind, the crippled, the paralyzed, and those whose infirmities have been documented as having been in existence for many years (John 5:3,5)? Where are the televangelists who will go to the children’s hospitals and rectify birth defects and childhood diseases? Where are those who have ingested poison or been bitten by a venomous snake and remained unharmed (Mark 16:18; Acts 28:3-5)? An honest searcher for the truth is forced to conclude that the miraculous age has passed.But human beings always are looking for something new, something exciting, and something flashy. They grasp for the attractive and the appealing, they want the easy way out, and they want something that makes them

feel

religious and secure—without having to face up to personal responsibilities. Hence, there will always be those who, instead of searching the Scriptures to find out whether these things are so (Acts 17:11), will simply disengage their minds, their spiritual sense, and their ability to assess “the words of truth and reason” (Acts 26:25).Genuine Christianity today consists of simply taking the written Word of God, and studying it carefully in order to learn what God expects of us: simple meditation and reflection upon the Word of God—no brass bands or circus theatrics, no flash of light, or dream, or vision, no sudden rush attributable to the Holy Spirit. The pathway to heaven consists of honest, intensive investigation of written revelation, and a life of diligent self-discipline and self-denial that strives to incorporate spiritual attributes into one’s life—attributes like patience, compassion, kindness, humility, forgiveness, honesty, integrity, peace of soul, joy, and clean, moral living. There are no short cuts to spirituality.

The miraculous is no answer

. Even in the first century, miracles were not designed to develop these spiritual attributes.Certainly, God loves us and has promised to care for us (e.g., Matthew 6:33). But His workings in the Universe and in our lives are undertaken today providentially through the natural laws that He set into motion. After the first century, He has not—and will not—violate His own purposes by interfering with these laws in order to perform a miracle. In the final analysis, we are under obligation to seek His assistance by listening to the instructions found in His written Word. Only words from God, then and now, will equip us and prepare us for eternity. As Peter said to Jesus, “Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the

words

of eternal life” (John 6:68, emp. added). Jesus said to the Father, “Sanctify them in the truth: thy

word

is truth” (John 17:17, emp. added). When Satan attempted to prod Jesus into performing a miracle, Jesus said to him, “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every

word

that proceedeth out of the mouth of God” (Matthew 4:4, emp. added).[NOTE: To listen to an audio sermon on this subject,

click here

.]

REFERENCES

Arndt, William and F.W. Gingrich (1957),

A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature

(Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press).Barnes, Albert (1956 reprint),

Notes on the New Testament: Matthew and Mark

(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).Bietenhard, Hans (1975), “Angel,”

The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology

, ed. Colin Brown (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan).Blass, F., A. Debrunner, and Robert Funk (1961),

A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature

(Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press).Botterweck, G. Johannes, Helmer Ringgren, and Heinz-Josef Fabry, eds. (1997),

Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament

(Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).Bullinger, E.W. (1898),

Figures of Speech Used in the Bible

(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1968 reprint).Conzelmann, Hans (1974), “

charismata

,”

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament

, ed. Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).Dana, H.E. and Julius Mantey (1927),

A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament

(Toronto, Canada: Macmillan).Delling, Gerhard (1972),

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament

, ed. Gerhard Friedrich (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).Gesenius, William (1847),

Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament

(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1979 reprint).Grundmann, Walter (1964), “

angelos

,”

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament

, ed. Gerhard Kittel (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).Hofius, Otfried (1976), “Miracle,”

The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology

, ed. Colin Brown (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan).Jamieson, Robert, A.R. Fausset, and David Brown (no date),

A Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

(Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan).Machen, J. Gresham (1923),

New Testament Greek for Beginners

(Toronto, Canada: Macmillan).McGarvey, J.W. (1910),

Biblical Criticism

(Cincinnati, OH: Standard).Moule, C.F.D. (1959),

An Idiom-Book of New Testament Greek

(Cambridge: University Press, 1977 reprint).Moulton, W.F., A.S. Geden, and H.K. Moulton (1978),

A Concordance to the Greek Testament

(Edinburgh: T.&T. Clark), fifth edition.Moulton, James and George Milligan (1982 reprint),

Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament Illustrated from the Papyri and Other Non-literary Sources

(Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).Nicoll, W. Robertson, ed. (1900),

The Expositor’s Greek Testament

(Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).Reese, Gareth (1976),

New Testament History—Acts

(Joplin, MO: College Press).Ringgren, Helmer (1997), “

malak

,”

Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament

, ed. G. Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren, and Heinz-Josef Fabry (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).Robertson, A.T. (1934),

A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research

(Nashville, TN: Broadman Press).Thayer, J.H. (1901),

Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament

(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1977 reprint).Vincent, M.R. (1890),

Word Studies in the New Testament

(Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1946 reprint).Vine, W.E. (1952),

An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words

(Old Tappan, NJ: Revell).Warren, Thomas B. (1972),

Have Atheists Proved There Is No God

(Jonesboro, AR: National Christian Press).Williams, George (1960),

The Student’s Commentary on the Holy Scriptures

(Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel), sixth edition.Workman, Gary (1983), “That Which Is Perfect,”

The Restorer

, 3[9]:6-9, September.Wuest, Kenneth S. (1943a),

Treasures from the Greek New Testament

(Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).Wuest, Kenneth S. (1943b),

Untranslatable Riches from the Greek New Testament

(Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).

Copyright © 2003 Apologetics Press, Inc. All rights reserved.

We are happy to grant permission for items in the "Doctrinal Matters" section to be reproduced in part or in their entirety, as long as the following stipulations are observed: (1) Apologetics Press must be designated as the original publisher; (2) the specific Apologetics Press Web site URL must be noted; (3) the author’s name must remain attached to the materials; (4) textual alterations of any kind are strictly forbidden; (5) Some illustrations (e.g., photographs, charts, graphics, etc.) are not the intellectual property of Apologetics Press and as such cannot be reproduced from our site without consent from the person or organization that maintains those intellectual rights; (6) serialization of written material (e.g., running an article in several parts) is permitted, as long as the whole of the material is made available, without editing, in a reasonable length of time; (7) articles, excepting brief quotations, may not be offered for sale or included in items offered for sale; and (8) articles may be reproduced in electronic form for posting on Web sites pending they are not edited or altered from their original content and that credit is given to Apologetics Press, including the web location from which the articles were taken.

For catalog, samples, or further information, contact:

Apologetics Press

230 Landmark Drive

Montgomery, Alabama 36117

U.S.A.

Phone (334) 272-8558

http://www.apologeticspress.org

[sweatblvvdtears]

I do have numbers and pictures although no face much but don't mistakenly for I am being selfish or etc , and no , I don't want to fucking share . It giving me trauma and bad thinking also wrong point of views about them like they will do everything bad or hateful or painful to me . I have bad past about it due to sharing even not by opening it much . I keep it safe on somewhere inside my memory card . Fuck you . You want it ? Try to get it from me . And hell no , I don't do media social or talk or want to be open , I am the personal and private type , unlike most of my friends irl or YOU ALL , open all of it and I can't do things like that and enough with every assumptions from every of moronic people on here . I will probably deactivate or delete my media social accounts after that if I received bad things or etc and it will be so fucking hurting on me and why the hell did I should accept more problems more than on here ? I had to solve with mental disorders and problems irl and soon , I will be working and then on that media social sites too ? Tons of problems more ? Fuck no , I will probably will try to kill myself again lol or triggered a lot and I did learnt that this hell site will constantly have assumers , bad stalkers that a bit badder than usual and there is no way I will open or sign up for it . Good fucking bye fuckers who ever been asking me to open an account for myself , and even if I did after this , I will kick you out in constant or just lock you out outside my account or make it as private or just for me . No matter if it's a Facebook , a fucking any media social like Instagram , Twitter , Skype , and etc . Even if it's under gaming sites too . I will be picky . For my own good . You can't trust people much on here . I will quickly assume that you are a hacker or bad people . I will kill you and cut you out immediately ♥️🗡🔫🔥 No . I don't know you and you probably aren't even my mutual at all . I know who's you been chasing all about and I don't fucking care . Go kneel and make them as a fucking god or worship them till you die or something and stop on assuming real badly about me you shitty people . No , no face . I'm a ghost and demon person even irl + online . Personality mostly . I will chase you till you go out while bringing my shot gun in my hands and aiming at you . Just fucking stop asking me and assuming me , I already wrote lots of things on here that I don't and never had any accounts on what ever on that media socials , don't label me with something , don't fucking do it because I wouldn't do it in the first place plus you will be sounded as assumptionist and an asshole yourself . Just fucking stop . I don't trust anybody . Ever . Just a few people on this site only are I am trusting lol . You probably just want to dig something from me by pretending to be my friend so you can follow me and dig and assuming also labelling me or etc , what ever hurting to me or to you & I hate it . "Real nice and clever ." I am actually are more smarter than you , either probably 2 or 1 steps behind but I will get 3 or 4 steps forward quickly . You already are breaking my heart and trust and kindness if you want to do that to me or been telling yourself to do it . You're not my friend or someone can be trusted then . 💔 You probably will just hurt me in the end so why should I (?) .

[versatileitsol]

What are the advantages of having an app for your business?

Application development company in Hyderabad: having a mobile application is necessary for your business today. You will get more traffic through mobile users because people are more addicted to mobile than computers. There are many benefits to having a mobile app development company in India by your side to build effective apps for your business. In the years to come, you will see increasing change in the mobile world. Mobile apps make it easy for people like me. People prefer to use the mobile version of a website because it's easy to open and use, and you can't take your computer everywhere. You are just one call away from a app development company in India to help you build an app for your business.

Mobile apps are gaining more popularity than websites because most of their customers are on mobile. Android application development service in Hyderabad The reason for this popularity is that the mobiles are lighter, easier to use and easier to interact with people. This is why businesses that make mobile are growing every day, and their motivation for updating daily is to improve the user experience. Mobiles have it all these days, better camera, great working processor, memory storage is wonderful, gaming experience is much better than computers etc.

What features of an app make a business popular?

1) 24 * 7 availability: Apps are available 24 * 7, which means your customers are also available 24 * 7. 24/7 availability is useful for booking taxi, food, online shopping, etc.. Good thing we have an app to track your driver because you can't take the laptop with you to track your driver's path and location.

2) Barcode Scan: This feature is useful for those who have an eCommerce business and you cannot scan the barcode through the website.

3) Payment Gateway: There is now a payment application. You don't need to have cash with you every time, because you just pay through the apps.

4) Connectivity: It can connect easily through social sites. Nowadays, every website has an app version. You can connect with your audience and easily interact with them. Mobile Application Development Service in Hyderabad is here to help your business grow through mobile applications.

The latest trends in mobile applications that you will see:

These trends make your life a little better. After many technological developments, mobile applications are not left out with its inventions to improve the user experience.

1) IoT: IoT stands for the Internet of Things which connects physical objects to your mobile phone to exchange information. This makes the city a smart city. It helps to control the traffic and helps the user to find parking lots. The IoT detects everything in the environment and makes the city smarter.

2) Chatbots: I have already told you why chatbots are all the rage these days and will increase in the years to come. Chatbots are virtual assistants that enhance the user experience of text messaging. For example, Siri, which is a great virtual assistant for typing messages for you.

3) Wearable techniques: This technology is new nowadays but it will take over. With this wearable watch, you can check your heartbeat, take calls, check your emails and messages, lock your doors, etc.

Mobile application development services in India are trying to create an application that provides better user experience for their customers. It boosts customer loyalty by giving them the right to say reviews and experience with us. So we try to create exactly this application according to the needs of our customers. Call now a mobile app development company in India to create an app for your business

If you find the post useful and worth sharing, don’t forget to share it on Twitter, Facebook, and Google Plus!

Follow us on :

Facebook      https://bit.ly/2U2YvE3

Instagram      https://bit.ly/2TX5QFa

LinkedIn         https://bit.ly/2Xmozfy

Twitter            https://bit.ly/2Mnv5MC

CONTACT Versatile Mobitech Pvt. Ltd., 3rd Floor, Uni Space Business Center, Modern Profound Tech Park, Survey No: 12, Kondapur, Hyderabad-500032 To Contact: +91 9701930011 E-Mail ID: sales@versatilemobitech.com

[ladyslounge-blog-blog]

If you're bored, you're boring

Dear Jennifer June, I follow you on Instagram, Facebook and twitter. You seem so down to earth and fun, even now, during this global disaster. I don't know how you do it! Sorry for writing about something so depressing, I'm sure you have more interesting things to do than read this, but I'm having a hard time coping with this whole Corona Virus thing and you're basically my idol and there's nobody's advice I would cherish more than yours at a time like this. It's hard enough living alone in this 3 story house, with nobody to talk to but my extraordinarily independent, mute, non-shedding, hypoallergenic cat, and nothing to do but play my baby grand piano, cook in my Wolfgang Puck inspired kitchen, and watch the plants in the solarium grow, without having to try to make sense of all the contradicting political and public service announcements on the news - on top of it all. How do you stay so grounded and levelheaded during this crisis? Anxious and alone, with nobody to share any of my wine with, Samantha P.S. I love your hair like that. You’re so pretty. Dear Samantha, Thank you so much for following me, and for your very kind words. I know that times like these can be very trying for anyone, and I honestly can't imagine how hard it must be for you to have all that empty quiet space to occupy all by yourself. The solarium alone sounds dreadful. I don't know if they will be of any use to you but here are 10 of the tools that have kept me calm, reflective and mentally grounded over the last few weeks. Regular exercise - At least 4 times a week (weight training, cardio, stretching etc.) Ritual - meditation, prayer, lighting candles, manifesting and projecting feelings of love and positivity for others, iChing, vision cards, visualizing acts of kindness etc... Weekly check-ins with a fabulous therapist who reminds me to honour all of my feelings and be true to myself. Minimum of 90 minutes daily gentle hand-picking of individual cat hairs out of every single inch of fabric/carpet/my body that I can find. Poking my lettuce seedlings with a chopstick several times a day to "check" if they're growing. Robert Mondavi Private Selection Cabernet Sauvignon Bourbon Barrels Sartori Valpolicella Superiore True Zin Puglia Boisseaux-Estivant Réserve de la Chèvre Noire Bourgogne Santa Julia Biologique Cabernet-Sauvignon Mendoza Hope this helps!  JJC Dear Jennifer June, I've been to pretty much every single show you've ever done, and I love how funny you are. Everything you say on stage is so relatable even though you're obviously cooler, smarter and prettier than me. I got 3 cats and 1 dog because of you and I named them Phoebe, Flo, Willow and Nina, just like yours! But not in a creepy way. Anyway, enough about me, but not really because I'm writing to you about me, because this quarantine vibe has me so down, I can't take it anymore. Ugh, Montreal is supposed to be the city of lights, or the city that never sleeps or whatever but I'm so lonely and bored, I literally almost thought about inviting my pharmacy delivery guy in for a drink yesterday when he came to deliver my topical rash ointment. You post the coolest stories on IG and you seem to be actually having fun. What do you do all day? How are you not dying of boredom right now? PS Prescription guy - cute a f Bored Becky  Dear Bored Becky,  Thank you so much for the kind words. I'm so glad you enjoy the shows. I'll be honest with you Becky; I have never once been bored in my adult life. I am actually fortunate enough to be able to work from home at the moment. I also have many projects on the go at all times.   I love spending time with my family, listening to music, reading, and cooking. I also try to truly  savour the rare moments that I get to just sit back and relax, whether it's in an Epsom salt bath, in a pile of blankets and cats (hair) on the sofa, or in a pool of my own nap drool /cry-orgasm-tears at the foot of the basement stairs. I think that first, it's important for you to ask yourself, are you truly bored? Or are you feeling something else. Possibly, what you're feeling is avoidant. Maybe you're trying to procrastinate.   Perhaps you're simply paralyzed with terror because the whole world has the fucking plague and people are smashing into each other in the streets like a swarm of contagious germ feast zombies. Or maybe you're truly bored, Becky. And if you are.... Well, I don't want to be the jerk who says "If you're bored, you're boring" but I am, and it's true. Seriously Becky, there are 22 different species of squirrel (in Canada) to post photographs of on Instagram, 165 shows on Netflix, over 100 knitting stitches you can learn, 19054 different red wines at the SAQ, millions of bananas that have not yet been baked into loaves of bread, and 64 editions of Guinness World Records, compiling thousands of really fun, super safe feats for you attempt to break, from the comfort of your own home, including heaviest weight lifted by human beard, most apples crushed with the bicep and longest fingernails grown by a woman. Hope this helps! JJC Dear Jen, First: You’re hilarious and I LOVE your dog. Second: I have a never-ending to-do list that I always say I don't have enough time to tackle. Thanks to the global pandemic, I am currently unemployed and under quarantine, which means that I have all the time in the world. I don't know why, but for some reason, I can't seem to get my shit together and do any of the things on my list. I basically just scroll through Instagram, watch television, drink wine and bake cookies. I feel so lazy, I'm even embarrassed to be sending this to you. I mean, I know that this kind of life changing event is enough to cause anybody trauma and make them feel creatively blocked, if not paralyzed. And I get that I should try to be self-compassionate and realistic about what I my limitations are under these times of great stress, but I can't help but feel a little bit guilty for not being able to do more. Is there something wrong with me? Shauna Dear Shauna, I think it's super important to remember that despite all the extra time you might have on your hands, it can be difficult to find inspiration for anyone right now. The fear of the unknown, being inundated with a storm of anxiety-inducing news and so much contradicting information that leaves us entirely confused as to whether to go for walks or not go for walks, wear masks or not wear masks, stay 6 feet from people or 6 meters from people etc... It's a lot and can be really demotivating and even completely draining. That having been said... Get off the damn sofa and do the shit on your god damn list. If months go by and you come out of this with nothing done but 15 new pounds gained on your lazy ass, you're going to fucking hate yourself. Study your damn Italian, post the dumplings on your vegan web site and do those stupid stair push-ups every stupid day or you will keep crying every time you can't do more than 10 of them. Oh! And write your book already!!! You have time to send 86 memes back and forth with your kids and post pictures of squirrels on Instagram every single day, sew 4 pairs of pyjamas, bake cookies you don't want to eat, watch every single episode of Game of Thrones in under 2 weeks, set up a photography corner in the basement that you don't use, and try all 19054 different red wines they sell at the SAQ, meditate, pray, light candles, manifest and project feelings of love and positivity for others, throw the iChing, pull vision cards, and visualize acts of kindness, and write not 1, not 2, but 3 drippy whiney love songs that you'll never let anybody hear because they're "not funny", "not done", and "not good enough", but you can't write a single chapter for your book? Are you kidding me right now? Jen seriously! Get it the fuck together. Hope this helps! PS My dog smells like rotting Doritos. JJC   Read the full article

[davewakeman]

Empty Seats Aren't About Price...

I wrote this in 2017. As I was thinking about the ongoing baseball cheating situation, I wanted to post this again…it will also be interesting to see how this plays out as the coronavirus continues to disrupt things. 

I came across an article on CNBC this morning about teams using “dynamic pricing” to help bring fans back into the stadiums.

The idea behind dynamic pricing is awesome.

It is the idea that a ticket isn’t some static thing and that some games or events have more perceived value to their buyers than others.

The thing is that this is true.

But where the article loses me is that it feels like the newest form of conventional wisdom that is going to weigh down sports is that variable pricing is going to solve all of our ills.

Simply put, “People only buy on price.”

Which if you are versed in any bit of marketing, you know that is simply not true.

Price is an easy excuse when you aren’t offering giving your customers enough value.

Jesse Lawrence from TicketIQ mentions that tickets are a “commodity.”

This is actually true, especially in the way that tickets and events are often sold in today’s market.

When you visit the website of any organization and the emphasis is placed on things like:

Free Parking

Spacious Seating

First-Class Catering

Then, yeah, you have a commodity on your hands.

Compare that to organizations that are selling based upon the value of the experience and the emphasis is on many different things. Instead of features, you’ll get the vivid language that focuses on things like:

Imagination

Creativity

Excitement

There’s a whole different world of expression that isn’t being used by the modern sports and entertainment marketer to maximize attendance and revenue and price alone isn’t going to fix it.

Why?

Because price is often a convenient excuse when the buyer doesn’t see the value in what you are offering.

If price isn’t the solution, what is?

First, price alone isn’t the solution. That’s correct. But that doesn’t mean that pricing isn’t a problem.

For the past several years, we’ve seen teams and leagues work to undercut the secondary by trying to price in a manner that captures all of the perceived revenue that the secondary market is making from the inventory that they sell.

It is very short-sighted for a number of reasons like:

The prices listed on the Internet are almost never the real selling prices and I don’t care what kind of data you think you have, the only people that really know what something sold for are the people doing the buying and selling.

From a psychological standpoint, it is harmful to the team’s brand. There’s an unfair psychological barrier that exists between the primary and secondary. This means that a fan is willing to spend a lot more for a ticket to a hot event on the secondary than they are from the primary in a lot of cases. If you charge $500 on the primary side, a lot of consumers are going to think you are gouging them. If you are on the secondary side, the same price and situation make the buyer feel like a winner! Unfair, but that’s psychology. People are just wired that way and the thing is, they don’t even know it.

By cutting out channels that have incentives to maximize pricing and revenue, this often leads to a downward spiral of having to find partners and channels that have an incentive to create the best “bargains” or “deals” for their consumers, causing a cycling downward of ticket pricing and perceived value of the ticket.

In doing research for an upcoming report on challenges and opportunities in the ticket market in 2018, I found that pricing is one of the top concerns of everyone involved in the ticket industry because they feel like even when tickets are selling well that the pricing mechanisms in place aren’t working well for everyone involved in the industry. Specifically, because the people I have surveyed recognize that an empty seat has a negative multiplying impact on everything about a fan’s experience which can lead to lower attendance and less revenue going forward.

The solution for pricing isn’t simple, but it is a necessity.

First, we need to stop the fighting between the primary and the secondary market.

Right now, the consumer doesn’t care where the ticket comes from. They just want to know that when they buy a ticket that it is valid.

In many instances, consumers go to sites like StubHub or Vivid Seats from the jump. They may not even know that your team has a website.

And, more than likely, they don’t care.

This means that the back and forth over who is right to sell tickets or who is wrong to sell tickets is inside baseball. No one cares.

While the industry is arguing about something that doesn’t seem meaningful to consumers, consumers are being harmed by less than faithful actors like people that are creating tickets to sell multiple times, scams to sell tickets that don’t exist, etc. Or, even worse, this wasted energy misses an opportunity to drive demand for games, concerts, and other events.

The best way forward is for the primary and secondary to work together to just sell tickets. There are billions of dollars in the live entertainment industry and that’s without people maximizing their marketing and selling efforts.

Trust me there is more money to be made by growing the industry further than trying to hoard all the current pennies for yourself.

A rising tide, or something.

Which is why I have been active in industry efforts to bridge the gap between primary and secondary market to create an opportunity to achieve higher attendance and higher revenues.

Instead of fighting like toddlers, we would be better served to work together on some smarter pricing policies.

Those might require that the primary and secondary share revenues or profits on ticket sales.

It might mean that the way sales teams are structured changes.

It likely means that change is going to have to happen.

Guess what?

Change is already happening anyway.

You can’t stop it, but you can embrace it to make it work for you.

That will mean that you can’t just offer up one-size-fits-none pricing and that you likely won’t be able to “set it and forget it.”

You’re going to have to work to constantly update and adjust your pricing to fit your market.

That’s just a fact.

Second, emphasize customer experience.

You’d think that after a new building boom in the States that the customer experience problem would be solved.

And, if you look at the experience as only being driven by rooms, facilities, and offerings…maybe you would have a point.

But the thing is that experience is everything.

In digital marketing, they use the term customer path or customer journey to talk about the steps and moments in a person’s buying experience with your brand.

In sports and entertainment, the path never really ends.

If you are a New York Mets fan, you likely are going to be a fan or customer for life. That means that your journey never ends.

With the advent of social media, it should be easier than ever to have an ongoing, long-term conversation with your fans and customers.

That isn’t the case.

In most instances, social media is a hit and run endeavor. Content is created and dropped onto a social media platform like Twitter, Facebook, or whatever.

If you see it, great!

If you don’t, great!

The thing is that just posting stuff on the Internet on social channels isn’t a great tool to ensure that your customer is always connected to your brand.

What happens if Twitter changes something in their timeline?

Or, Facebook changes their algorithm?

Screwed.

While I just talked about the experience of the digital customer experience extremely briefly, the same eye needs to be applied to every aspect of the customer relationship.

How is the ticket buying process?

Is it convoluted?

Is it smooth?

How is the in-game experience?

Are there huge lines at the gates?

Bottlenecks at certain stands?

Are your ushers and customer service reps strong on the service?

In today’s world, where reviews are only a few taps away, the need to generate a better experience and a more compassionate and considerate experience is more important than ever before.

Because we’ve all seen the scenario play out where one bad review or one bad experience sours a relationship for good.

Don’t do that.

Get everyone’s head into the practice of asking:

“How can we add value to…?”

Then have them answer the question and try to come up with actionable items that will enhance the experience of buying a ticket, being a fan, and being a customer.

Finally, after pricing and experience are looked at, spend a little bit of time on visiting what’s next.

In too many ways, the industry of sports and entertainment can often feel stuck because we get complacent and think that things are always going to be the way that they are today.

Even worse, not just thinking that things are going to stay the way that they are today is thinking that things haven’t really changed at all.

You see this in the reluctance of teams to change the way that they sell to the business community.

You see this in examples that I have heard of inside sales managers telling salespeople that using a personally curated email list to sell last-minute tickets “isn’t really selling.”

These are just two examples of a larger need for the industry to always ask themselves the famous Peter Drucker question, “What is the future that has already occurred?”

Then answering that question so that they can take advantage of the opportunities that change creates.

This is likely to help you get in front of customers’ changing wants and needs.

If when you ask this question you don’t allow your focus to stay only in sports and entertainment, it also allows you to capitalize on new technologies and new ideas that are already gaining traction in other industries.

The fact is that it is very easy to get stuck in what works today and to end up surprised when the entire theory of your business changes around you. The aim for any business, not just a sports business, should be to disrupt yourself by always asking what is working, what isn’t working, and what is coming or has already arrived that I am not paying attention to.

This introspection will lead to much wiser decision making and likely put you in a better position to not have to fall back on the idea that the only thing that matters is the price.

Please follow and like us:

Empty Seats Aren’t About Price… was originally published on Wakeman Consulting Group

[martinemdeiversen]

Top 6 Benefits Of Hiring A Virtual Assistant | Get More Done | 2020

I’ll in this video talk about the day one of my VA’s saved me for $5000 from what cost me $100 in salary to her. This was one of the biggest eye-openers to me when it comes using a VA for my business. To understand why you should use one in your business brings to all the benefits that I have got and still get when I use VA’s in general for tasks in my business.

How to Hire a Virtual Assistant?

The short answer is, no don’t. You don’t need a physical office! Hiring a VA (virtual assistant) can really save you for a lot of money because that person doesn’t need to go to an office every day. Depending on where you live, renting a physical office space can be quite expensive and basically not needed when you are dealing with the strength of using VA’s. Virtual Assistant enables you to start building your team while keeping your expenses low.

Is Virtual Assistants expensive?

No, they are inexpensive and you can find very skilled VA’s for low costs. The VA’s I’m hiring are mainly from India and the Philippines and I’m keeping the expense for a VA lower than $5 an hour. Most Virtual Assistants operate as independent contractors and depending on where they live, therefore you will see that their hourly rate may be significantly lower than what a local employee would cost you. In Scandinavia where I’m from, an assistant could cost me 30-35 dollars an hour and might not be as efficient as one from India and the Philippines. 

What is good about hiring a VA instead of finding a local talent?

A Virtual Assistant can technically work from anywhere in the world as long as they have an internet connection. So it gives you the freedom to not having to hire someone in your local area which also increases your number of potential candidates for specific roles significantly to your business. Another thing that is good about this option is that the VA is more likely to take a part-time job instead of a full-time job which might not be needed for the time you’re looking.

Why should I delegate my tasks to someone else when I can do it myself?

What will happen to your business if you burnout? Most likely your business will struggle to continue and become what you visualized at the start when you started your business.  Delegating specific tasks and responsibilities to a VA or VA’s is a huge step towards preventing burnout. I had 5-6 people working for me when it was at the highest and I got so much stuff done, or the company did. Unfortunately, there’re many entrepreneurs that are doing everything themselves and which leads to very long workdays were you at the end are losing focus and concentrations for the things that most important in your business. On top of that, you’ll also have little time for family, friends hobbies, etc.

How can I spend more time on the things I like doing?

For every task and process that is required to run your business (including the ones you don’t like or are terrible at doing!), there are other people who specialize in those tasks and actually enjoy them. So, why are you actually continuing to do these easy and time-consuming tasks when you can outsource it to smarter and more knowledgeable people? Do the things you are enjoying are good at, leave the rest to your skilled VA.

Should I start focusing more on high income-generating activities?

I remember at the time where I started to use VA’s. That was the time where I really enjoyed doing business because I found another way to generate income from. And the more sources of income I had the more relaxed I got. Because now I had 3-4 ways that could generate income to me and if one was shot down I could rely on the rest I left. It happened once where one of my main sources of income was shot down and I was panicking until I realized I had other assets that could keep me going.

The Best Website Builder: http://www.martin-md.com/ThriveThemes

Grow Your Business Today: http://www.martin-md.com/GetResponse

Get a FREE Domain Name: http://www.martin-md.com/Bluehost

Easily Start A Business Today: http://www.martin-md.com/Printful

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

VIEW MY BLOG POSTS AND PRODUCT REVIEWS

http://www.martin-md.com/blog-posts/

SUBSCRIBE TO MY YOUTUBE CHANNEL

http://www.martin-md.com/YouTube

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

CONNECT WITH ME 

WEBSITE: http://www.martin-md.com/

PINTEREST: http://www.martin-md.com/Pinterest

FACEBOOK: http://www.martin-md.com/Facebook

TWITTER: http://www.martin-md.com/Twitter

Affіlіаtе Dіѕсlаіmеr:  Whіlе I rесеіvе аffіlіаtе соmреnѕаtіоn fоr reviews / promotions оn this раgе, I’ll always offer honest opinion, relevant еxреrіеnсеѕ and gеnuіnе views related tо the рrоduсt or ѕеrvісе іtѕеlf. My gоаl іѕ tо hеlр уоu mаkе the bеѕt purchasing dесіѕіоnѕ, hоwеvеr, the views аnd оріnіоnѕ expressed are mine оnlу. Aѕ аlwауѕ уоu ѕhоuld dо уоur own duе diligence tо verify аnу сlаіmѕ, rеѕultѕ аnd ѕtаtіѕtісѕ before mаkіng аnу kіnd оf purchase. Clісkіng links оr purchasing рrоduсtѕ rесоmmеndеd оn this раgе may gеnеrаtе іnсоmе for thіѕ wеbѕіtе frоm affiliate commissions and you should assume I’m соmреnѕаtеd for any purchases уоu make.

Thanks for taking the time to watch this video

Wishing you lots of Success!

Martin MD Iversen

http://www.martin-md.com/

from Martin-MD https://ift.tt/2OmvCQm via

[imrosapark]

It’s been a while since I posted on my tumblr.. but things have been so rocky and difficult lately that idk where to turn to because if I turn to the people I care about, I’ll just hear the same things over and over again.. things that I already know.. things that I don’t need to continue hearing because... like i said, i already know..

I was cheated on.. and it wasn’t a situation where he was hanging out with a girl and one thing lead to another, etc.. it was the kind where he downloaded tinder, swiped on multiple girls, talked to them, invited one over, had sex with her, still kept contact with her all literally THE DAY BEFORE, I drove three hours to go visit him.. and he hid it so well..

Things were good at first. Until I found out he still had tinder. He admitted to talking to other girls and said that he was done with it and just wanted to be with me.. so I asked if he still kept contact with them.. he said no. I kept questioning, till the point I felt like I was going crazy, just questioning if he cut off all ties.. if he unfollowed on Instagram, deleted off Snapchat, twitter, Facebook, anything and everything and he said he did.. well, I’m smarter than that.. I knew one of the girls names so I told him to give me his phone.. her name was in Snapchat and still on Instagram.. I lost it.. he lied.. he proceeded to unfollow her on Instagram and some other girls that he said he didn’t know and that he was really done with that and that he’d deactivate everything if he had to... after much crying and yelling and talking, I gave him another chance.. how stupid of me. He swore that he cut off all ties with all the girls and I so stupidly believed him.. well, turns out he still had a girl he was following and still talked to.. when I confronted him, I asked him what she would say if I dmed her and asked about him... he said she’d tell me they met on tinder.. I told him I was going to dm her anyways because he is just so incapable of telling the truth.... I just had to.. unfortunately, she told me they hooked up the one weekend she was in town because she’s originally from out of state.. and that she was sorry and that she never would’ve met up with him if she knew about me..

This was it.. the disrespect. The hurt. The distrust. All he could say was that he fucked up.. laughable right? And here he is.. still trying. Saying he won’t give up.. but me... I’m the type of person that needs that shred of hope. Something he can’t give me.. maybe if he unfollowed her, I could say “well at least he really did cut ties” but no.. he hid it.. because he thought he could get away with it..

Now, he used to be a fuckboy.. like major fuckboy. And he said he missed that life but after he fucked her, he realized that he didn’t want that anymore and that he wanted to commit to me.. but he didn’t cut ties because he thought he could still be friends with her.. LIKE REALLY.. you thought you could fuck her and STILL BE FRIENDS WITH HER!?!! All behind my back!? I didn’t think my heart could continue breaking like it is.. I still don’t know what to do because as unfortunate as it fucking is.. I love him. But I mean that, and I would never do anything to hurt him the way he hurt me.. he was hurt so badly in the past that I find it un-fucking-believable that the victim became the abuser. I think it’s also important to note that his dad has cheated on his mom multiple times and he’s talked so much shit and disappointment with that.. even with other people and I’m like... you’re the worst one.

I told him that maybe I’d forgive him if he told his mom what he’s done.. I immediately changed my mind about that because I know what her husband did to her and she would hurt more if she knew that her son did the same thing.. or maybe if he continued to expose himself I could forgive him.. but then I realized the magnitude of this is just so great.. that we will never be the same again.. I told him not to hurt his mom again.. but he still told her because he wants to be with me and make things right again..

I feel dumb because I’m considering working things out even though I know I will never be able to bounce back from this.. even though I know I could easily find someone else.. even though I know that “sorry” doesn’t cut it, “I love you” doesn’t cut it... but only because his mother’s perceptions of him have changed forever... and he told her despite the uncertainty of our future together.. it doesn’t change a damn thing and doesn’t undo what he did. Just knowing he calls me every single day.. that on the day he cheated, he called me and talked to me normally... that the day after, he called to tell me how excited he was to see me.. it just hurts so fucking much but I just don’t know.. I wish I could understand but I can’t..

... you really fucked up.. but it is what it is