I Am A Bill O'Reilly Fan. But.... An Open Letter To Bill O' And Whosoever

Don't Be Confused. I Am A Bill O'Reilly Fan. But He Is Wrong About This Particular Thing: The Seven Last Words Of Jesus on the Cross, Happened.

The last words Of Jesus, commonly referred to as the seven last words of Jesus on the Cross, happened. And it is not only spiritually reasonable, but scientifically and historically possible and logical.

In the pithy Bill O'Reilly 60 Minutes interview last Sunday with Norah O'Donnell, Bill O'Reilly made some comments about the Crucifixion of Jesus. Some of those comments were historically good and accurate facts, while other comments was Bill personally opining using fact, and a little spin to sell his book, Killing Jesus.

A few quick thoughts.

1) Bill is absolutely correct that though with God the Father and Jesus, His death was entirely spiritual and for the sins of the world (the greatest sin being no faith in God and His ability to deliver us from evil and make us righteous), but with the people, especially with the Pharisees, it was about the money and that Jesus was messing up the flow of money in the temple, and power with Rome.

1) Bill spoke about crucifixions being common, and that the nails were through the wrist and not the hands, because if through the hands, the body weight would not be supported. He is right. So now does that mean that the bible is wrong when it talks about Jesus and His nail scarred hands? No.

Consider. This is one of those things that doesn't really matter and was just lost in translation as the writers of the bible wrote down the story. Remember that, as said above, crucifixions is not one of those supernatural occurrences like the virgin birth. They were common occurrences and punishments. So, foe what purpose and sense would it make to tell an untruth, or simply get the story wrong. Someone would have corrected the matter, or disbelieved everything, unless the phrasing "nails in the hands" was as common as crucifixions themselves.

See a modern day example. I as a law enforcer use "hand" cuffs. Yet, do they actually bind the hands, or the wrists?

3)Bill O said that it would be impossible for one being crucified, because it causes asphyxiation, to talk. The specific focus was on the line, "Father, Forgive them for they know not what they do". Well from an Atheist and Agnostic, I would accept the statement. But from a good Catholic boy like Bill?! Dude! He's God!! You mean to tell me that you believe He is risen from the dead, but He couldn't have spoken on the Cross?!!! That's why Atheists think were not only wrong, but unreasonable. How is it possible for one to believe one and not the other?!

But to look at it scientifically. Take note that crucifixions was a  process, meant to cause a slow death, full of suffering, by EVENTUAL choking. There would have been time enough to talk for a space of time, before fully choked out. Not only did Jesus talk, and actually said at least seven last phrases that we know of, but the two thieves that hung on crosses to His right and to His left also spoke.

Luke 23:39

And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself and us.

Luke 23:40

But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation?

Luke 23:41

And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss.

Luke 23:42

And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.

Here are the Last Seven Phrases of Jesus, spoken from His Cross and commonly called the Seven Last Words of Jesus.

1) Matthew 27:46

About three o'clock Jesus cried out with a loud voice, “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?”, which means, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” 

2) Luke 23:34

Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do. And they parted his raiment, and cast lots.

3) Luke 23:43

And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.

4) Luke 23:46

Jesus cried out in a loud voice, "Father, into your hands I entrust my spirit." After he said this, he died. 

5) John 19:26

When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son! 27 Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home.

6) John 19:28

After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, I thirst.

7) John 19:30

When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

Graced and Sent,

Yulanda K.

PS. Don't be confused, I really am a Bill O'Reilly fan :)

Published with Blogger-droid v2.0.10

Is It God's Grace, Or Something Else?

1 Corinthians 15:10

But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.

I am what I am by the Grace of God. Many today are using the line, "I am what I am".  Yes. You may be what you are, but is it by God's grace, or by some other way? That is thē question.

Let us take a look at the scripture passage below:

Matthew 22:10

(The Lord's) servants went out into the highways, and gathered together all as many as they found, both bad and good: and the wedding was furnished with guests.

God said His House shall be a House of prayer for all people.

Isaiah 56:7

Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer:......for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people.

In the scripture above, taken from the gospel of Matthew, that both the good and bad are invited in to be GUESTS at the wedding. Many Churches are stopping at this truth, as if it means that God ultimately will receive us all. But God's end goal is not attendance. He is interested in who will be qualified and chosen to participate in the main event, the wedding itself. Who will be CHOSEN, among those that even bothered to answer the invitation, to BE the Bride of the Lamb and actually BE the Church, rather than attend only.

Let's continue on and see the rest of this passage verse by verse. And it happens to be the words of Jesus Himself.

Matthew 22:11

And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment:

Matthew 22:12

And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless.

Matthew 22:13

Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Matthew 22:14

For many are called, but few are chosen.

So, we must view the whole matter. Do you have the proper wedding garments on?  Are you who you are by the grace of God? As a result of His ways, or by some other way? Judge for yourself, for as you see, God will judge.

Here's a companion scripture passage:

Matthew 13:47 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind: 48 Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away.

I can truly say with my whole heart, that I ONLY am what I am ONLY by God's great grace. I shall be forever grateful.

Consider all. Meditate. Study. BE Chosen.

Yulanda K.

PS. To be fair, on the other side of the coin, many Churches do well by allowing all into the House of God, which is right, though then some teach wrong, while there are others who are teaching right, but not allowing ALL in the House. That is just as wrong.

Published with Blogger-droid v2.0.10

Love Conquers And Includes All. Hate Divides and Kills. It Eventually Kills Societies.

There are many reasons God said that I am to preach like a flood until the people of God and the true lovers of the world deliver and promote me, and put me in my rightful place.

One of the reasons is to hold a mirror up to those that say they love, and preach love to everyone else, and let them see for themselves whether or not love is reflected back. Do they really practice what they preach, or are they only repeating self serving platitudes designed to free themselves, and sure up their own rights, and special interests only.

One example can be found in the cultural, political battle, and sometimes personal friction between those with specific sexual orientations, the LBGTQ community, and with people of certain beliefs and religions, especially Christianity and specifically Evangelicals, that because of their religion may not believe in the homosexual life style.

Many gays have passionately spoken about the pain and fear of even thinking about "coming out" to their families and to the world. And often after they reveal themselves, many have testimonies of painful rejection; unfriended, unloved, and unwanted just because they are gay. Above all that, there then is also all the hate, abuse, bashing, bias and discrimination in some form or another, by society.

Some never "come out" because of what they have seen others go through, preferring to hide their entire way of BEing, rather than suffer the consequences of being exposed.

The stories of those in the LBGT community; each individual testimony, some of eventual joy, if not in the beginning, and some of terror, fear, violence, loneliness, rejection, and great suffering, just because of their sexual inclinations, have moved many in the world and society who are not gay. Many have taken up their cause and vowed to do all that they can do to make things easier, fair, and just for that community, and show them great compassion. The compassion and love deserved by all human beings.  It is the right thing to do. But there is another side to this story if we are all going to be fair and just to all. And if we are going to love all.

The LBGTQ community and we that support them, must treat those of faiths that don't believe in that lifestyle, the way we expect homosexuals to be treated. Those of faith should be able to openly BE and express who and all that they are, and believe openly, as long as they do not infringe upon the public rights and liberties of others, and allows others to do the same. To not do so, is two faced. All of you that will fight for gay rights, but are alright with taking liberties from others, and/or will reject them just for believing differently, means you may not be as loving as you portray yourselves or pretend to be.

I think SNL should do a skit where a born again child has to "come out" to their gay parents. I am not sure if I ever posted that or not. I am a sport. I think it would be hilarious, but as SNL is so good at, a more serious point would be made. Would it be more acceptable for the gay parents to reject that child?

I also think that it would be wonderful if Glee wrote in and developed a "saved and sanctified" character that is not confused, silly, a hypocrite, hateful, bigoted, or only Christian because his or her parents are, but is a real and serious 3 dimensional, deep and loving character. If we are going to move the world towards true peace, and justice for all, all sides should be seen. Everyone talks about diversity, but that character is rarely seen.

I will be the first to admit that religion, especially the Christian Church has not been kind. They have gone far beyond following the doctrine of their religious beliefs and remaining personally faithful to it. There has been hate, discrimination and bias. We did in the past use faith as a basis to hurt and justify hate, and have transgressed the very thing commandment at the heart of our religion. With our actions, we broke the only one commandment left and that can never be fulfilled; Love.

But now, many of you that came and come to the rescue of homosexuals, do the same things that some in the Church did, and discriminate against some religions and religious beliefs, and seek to force your way upon the Church.

I am born again. I am not ashamed. I am open about what I believe and I practice. But I also allow others to do the same. Should I be rejected by any, when I have not rejected any? Is that right?

Consider all I say, and let us all do unto others what we would have done to ourselves. Sadly though, still have need to discover what exactly is right and acceptable to be done to ourselves, first. Then, they will be clear on how to respond.

Without the First Amendment or an equivalent Law, and follow through by governments and personal applications, Liberty and all Pursuits of Happiness will be impossible.

Please greatly consider all.

Peace! And above all, treat EVERYBODY right!

Yulanda K. - An awesome Public Servant and Pastor right now.

Still preaching like a flood, until....

Published with Blogger-droid v2.0.10

Taking "No" For An Answer. I'm No Punk, But Sometimes It Is Right.

Sometimes it is right not to take "No" for an answer, when it is for the greater good.

Sometimes when you refuse to take "No" for an answer, and will not wait, you can be personally gratified, but the whole or community can be irrevocably fractured and harmed.

Look at American politics. Many think they are proving something; strength and an ability to lead, by bucking authority. That is no way to prove one's self, except to show a lack of good judgement even if you win. The things that have been going on is unwise, and globally embarrassing. Have the results been good for all? No. Look at the turmoil.

Perfect leadership and care means loving all AND yourself. It takes discipline to find the balance, and humility. That is why I balk at those that accuse me of pride. I am certainly not the one, and never have been in any pride; only confident and grateful.

To have the kind of personality and capacity to not take "No" for an answer is a good thing and the right way to be at times. But it should only be an option, and just another weapon in one's arsenal.

You must balance individual decisions and personal needs and desires with the needs and best decisions for the group. That is good and caring leadership. And sometimes yes, it means even taking "No" for an answer.

#InterDependence. It is necessary for civility. The wise get.

Peace and Love to all. And above all, treat everybody right.

Yulanda K. - At your good service right now.

Published with Blogger-droid v2.0.10

Fair For All?

Fair for all? What does that mean? I believe many today are struggling to define fairness. Without a proper definition of it, or any thing for that matter, it is nearly impossible to apply, and definitely fully impossible to maintain any semblance of fairness for all.

As I often say and have posted, equality begins with the giving of opportunity to all. We can also guide and help, but we can not guarantee equal results. Equality and equal results depends wholly  on what each of us does with the opportunities, help, and guidance given. The entire process is a universal process of life, whether we get involved or not, and is indeed fair to all.

Is it fair that Michael Jordon has 6 Championships, while some other NBA players have none? Yes. Because the rules were both fair and equal to all, and Jordan only took advantage of an opportunity to use his skills with in the rules laid out for all, and flourished.

Is it fair that some people will never have a chance to play in the NBA? Yes. There are other kinds of skills and abilities given to us all, that can lead to the proverbial "land of milk and honey". If you were to put Michael Jordan on the football field, where the rules are different, there may be different results. There WILL definitely be different results if he tries to play football playing by basketball rules. And then, there was his brief baseball career.

There are some that win every where they go, and in all they do. Fairness is in whether or not they do so by playing by the rules, waiting for opportunity, and doing your best. If you fair well under those circumstances, you have every right to boast. But if you have to break the rules, you are nothing. No matter how muck you are praised, nor how much you gain, you are nothing.

I marvel at the ones who cheat, and yet imagine to be some what. Your victory is not real. And you are probably aware of that fact, hence you cheat for an allusion and for gain. Even holding out, hoping the ones you cheated will eventually compromise. But integrity says, "No". To compromise under those circumstances, would be the equivalent to justifying and promoting cheating and injustice. It is better to stand on truth, continue to speak that which is right, and stay in expectation of justice.

Fair for all? I think of Robin Hood. He appeared to do well, but he did not do things the right way. So, why wouldn't those that oppose him, and who were robbed by him, be justified by regaining what was stolen from them, with robbery as well? The so-called good guy is the one that set the rule and precedent. How can either Robin Hood, or those he gave the stolen spoils to, then turn around and complain, if that were so?  The good must also set a good example.

Those who truly has a heart for justice, will find a way to act within justice. Fair to all would be that although the ones that are wrong may be adversely effected due to the applying of justice, and righting wrongs, they are still being treated fairly  because the actions are according to and within the rules of justice.

This morning I was watching Gloria Estevan on Tavis Smiley. She spoke about how musicians know the rules of music and performance, so that they can break them. As a singer myself, I fully know that she is absolutely right. Not only is this "rule defying" rule, right for music, but it is right for all the arts. Society and civilizations run into a problem however, when some then apply the same rule to areas of life that are supposed to be fact based or constants, such as history, some sciences, doctrines, and some mathematics. It is for this reason, the differences between art and science, that many are not well graced with an ability to prosper and excel in both the arts AND the sciences, truthfully and honorably. Many falsely boast that they can and/or are deceived. The "factual" and precise can not just go with the flow. And the "artsy" types many times can not stick to precision. There are gray areas.

The difference between the sciences and arts is found in the results. When some thing is being created, who is to say what is what? Its end is determined by the creator. The greatness, beauty or success is determined by the beholder. The creator has total license to use what ever process it takes to achieve the vision.

But the sciences are different. Yes. While the process of gathering information and experimenting may change over time, the result is always constant, consistent, and no one; neither the gatherer of facts and producer of results derived, nor the beholders, learners, or observers of the facts and truth, have the right or ability to judge that result and/or change it. It is what it is, as they say.

There are all sorts of "New Maths" where teachers no longer punish students for how they arrive at the right results. But each student still must explain their process using mathematical rules. They can't guess. They can get a way from traditions and norms, but then they are burdened with not only then coming up with the right answers to the problem, but also they must then prove that their methods will ALWAYS lead to the right result, or else every process and result built off that method has the potential of being wrong. 2 + 2 will ALWAYS = 4, no matter how you arrive to that conclusion.  There is no such thing as "2 + 2" in art. That is the difference between the art and science.

So, fair for all. The Republicans, and Speaker Boehner have been using the word fair and the phrase "fair for all" lately to justify much of what they do. I really, really like Speaker Boehner. I am neither Republican or Democrat. I only care about what is right and best.

To be fair to all, you must even be fair to your "enemies" or your opposition. To stake any claims of fairness, Republicans have to be fair to Democrats, and Democrats have to be fair to Republicans. In American Government, there are rules of procedure. While sometimes there are loopholes, those that are truly fair and want to be, will not look for and use them just to get their way.

Whether you like "Obamacare"; the Affordable Care Act or not, it is the Law, and President Obama and Democrats made it law by getting the votes needed in both Legislative Houses, and the President signing it into law. It was even declared to be wholly Constitutional by the Supreme Court.

If Republicans believe that the ACA, or any law this administration produces or has produced is not good for the country, then it is their job to play by the rules, rally support and convince members of the Houses, which means reaching across the aisle, to pass their own agenda, and repeal or over turn what they do not like. Or, their next step is to gain seats in the Houses and/or win the White House. That is the right and fair way of doing things. Without this, cries of "fair for ALL" is hypocritical. 

As far as what Republicans decry as unfair or unequal treatment by the President in the implementation of the ACA, their assessment is not exactly accurate, though it plays well politically.

A corporation and business has many more to think about in their decisions of how to comply with the new law. The President did not have to give them more time but it was a judgment call and the right thing to do. Individuals only have themselves to think about, and already has had plenty of time to think, study the new law and make decisions. If still unsure, every household, especially in this initial period, can even opt to pay the 95 dollar or 1% earnings penalty that will be applied this first year, if that is to their advantage. The entire thing is absolutely fair.

If certain individuals, such as the Presidents and CEOs of companies personally, concerning their individual households, as friends of the Obama administration, were getting a pass, while other individuals were not, as it is being suggested by Boehner and Republicans, then that would indeed be unfair. But that is not what is happening. And it is somewhat deceitful and unfair to the President and the American public to intimate otherwise.

Truth is fair. Let all stop the games. I speak to both sides of the aisle, those that are in and those that are out of politics, because there are many in the general public as well, that know what I state is true concerning these matters, but they seem to lean toward convenient "truths" just because they do not like Obama or this law. Dislikes do not justify. Our nation will not survive if we all do not reel it in, and stand on the sure principles and processes we were built on.

God Bless America. Let us get back to who we are and what that means. Back to the basics.

Yulanda K. - I love and live to serve.

Published with Blogger-droid v2.0.10