Making Things Right!

By Jesus, speaking in prophecy

Download Audio (8.24MB)

“If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”1

Confession and being honest about your mistakes or failings plays an important role in the whole process of learning from your failure, receiving My forgiveness, and setting things right.

Taking responsibility for the problem is an important part of learning from your errors. As long as you’re thinking that what went wrong was someone else’s fault, how can you learn from it personally, or even see the situation accurately and gain experience thereby? Why would you even need to? It’s not your problem, right?

The glitch with that reasoning is that if you were at all involved, there is probably something you can learn from it—and that you probably need to learn from it, to prevent it happening again. I want you to benefit from the things that go wrong, but until you’re willing to accept responsibility and face your failing in the matter, you won’t benefit thereby.

When you accept your role in a blunder, apologize sincerely from the heart, and humbly receive the forgiveness that I and others extend to you,then there’s no more dodging, no more justifying, no more energy wasted on the wrong part of the problem.

When something has gone wrong, it’s important to focus on what can be learned from it, how you can grow because of it, and how I want to turn that defeat into a victory.

The opportunity to gain from your mistakes and failings is a good thing in My eyes. But the only way to get past the hard, tough, unpleasant parts of the humiliation and guilt and into the lesson-learning and profiting is through the path of true humility, honesty, confession, and forgiveness. If you can make it past those difficult aspects by being honest and accepting responsibility and facing your faults, then you will make it to the other side and I will be able to enrich your life through the experience and help you to do better next time.

It’s a three-step process: First, you have to accept the blame and recognize that what you did wasn’t right and seek forgiveness. Next, you do what you can to make things right; sometimes an apology is enough, sometimes more is required. And finally, you learn from the event. You seek Me about what I have for you in that mistake, challenging Me to show you the silver lining and turn it into a learning and growing experience.

It’s been said that those who don’t study and learn from their failures are doomed to repeat them, and there’s a lot of truth to that. If you stop the process of learning and growing as soon as you apologize, and you figure, “Okay, well, I apologized, so it’s all fine now,” then you aren’t getting all the mileage you could be from the situation, and chances are that you may have to go through the same or a similar event again before you get the point.

If you really want to be stronger for it each time you face a failure, you have to look for the lesson and find the strengthening. That’s a proactive, useful way to look at mistakes and shortcomings. Condemnation and guilt don’t help you learn. They can overwhelm your thoughts, keeping you from seeing clearly the lesson and the progress I’m hoping that you will make. Mistakes should cause you to be contrite and humble before Me and others, and you should be willing to do whatever is necessary to make amends. But don’t let yourself fall into the pit of condemnation, because that will only prevent you from learning all that you can from the situation.

A victory is when you take that failure and allow Me to break it down for you, showing you what went wrong and how you can do better next time. It’s a good exercise to meditate on the event, give it some good, quiet thought, and let Me give you My perspective about what happened.

If you seek out that final stage of the process—the actual learning and growth from the experience—then you’re truly a man or woman wiser today than you were yesterday. You have “godly sorrow which worketh repentance,”2 and I will use that kind of attitude to aid in your future growth.

Every failure or mistake is a chance to learn. Every time you mess up, picture it as an opportunity in which I’m saying to you, “I’d like to give you a chance to strengthen your character. I have wisdom and maturity and experience that I’d like to add to your life. I’d also like to bring you closer to Me and to others. Are you interested?” In the spirit, that’s truly what a failure can represent. It can be a time of tremendous growth, and if you go through the steps in humility and true repentance, then there’s no way you won’t come out on the other side having gained something of great value.

There are no shortcuts, there’s no easy way out. Sometimes it’s extremely painful, as you have to own up to something that you did that let Me down or hurt someone. Sometimes there is pain or anger involved, and you don’t always get the satisfaction or comfort of knowing that everything is okay and all right just because you’re sorry. Sometimes the effects of your failure linger on and make things hard on you or others for some time.

Often the best treasures of wisdom and finest gems of experience and growth are hidden within the most embarrassing and humiliating of experiences.

As you go through this sometimes painful process, remember that you have a secret weapon on your side, something that can help you and hold you up—and that is your knowledge of My unconditional, unchanging love for you. Even if you’ve screwed up as badly as you possibly could; even if you feel totally humbled and worthless in the sight of others, I still love you, and I always will.

I love you when everyone else is mad at you. My love for you is not contingent upon your righteousness. Of course I want you to come to Me, to make things right when you’ve done something wrong, to repent. But even before you do that, I still love you. I love you without condition. You don’t have to do anything to earn My love; you just have it.

Rely on that love during the process of atoning for a failure and learning from it. It can be a difficult process, and often your apology doesn’t make it immediately better. You sometimes have to struggle through a very humbling process, and it can really break you and make you feel low. But at those times fight to remember how much I love you regardless, and let that be your ray of hope; it will be your lifesaver. I’ll be with you all the way if you’ll let Me.

I believe in you. I have faith in you. You can come through any error or misstep or failure with wisdom, humility, and lessons learned, and be the better for it.

Published September 2011. Read by Simon Peterson.copyright@thefamilyinternational

Read More

Nigel again telling them the truth!

Read More

Nigel Farage & the Euro Crisis!

Read More

Are the Gospels True?

http://y-jesus.com/wwrj/4-are-gospels-true.php/10/

Are the Gospels True?

Are the New Testament gospels the true eyewitness history of Jesus Christ, or could the story have been changed through the years? Must we simply take the New Testament accounts of Jesus by faith, or is there evidence for their reliability?

The late ABC News anchor Peter Jennings was in Israel broadcasting a television special on Jesus Christ. His program, “The Search for Jesus,” explored the question of whether the Jesus of the New Testament was historically accurate.

Jennings featured opinions on the Gospel accounts from DePaul professor John Dominic Crossan, three of Crossan’s colleagues from the Jesus Seminar, and two other Bible scholars. (The Jesus Seminar is a group of scholars who debate Jesus’ recorded words and actions and then use red, pink, gray, or black beads to cast votes indicating how trustworthy they believe statements in the Gospels are.)[1]

Some of the comments were stunning. There on national TV Dr. Crossan not only cast doubt on more than 80 percent of Jesus’ sayings but also denied Jesus’ claims to divinity, his miracles, and his resurrection. Jennings clearly was intrigued by the image of Jesus presented by Crossan.

Searching for true Bible history is always news, which is why every year Time and Newsweek go on a cover story quest for Mary, Jesus, Moses, or Abraham. Or—who knows?—maybe this year it will be “Bob: The Untold Story of the Missing 13th Disciple.”

This is entertainment, and so the investigation will never end nor yield answers, as that would eliminate future programming. Instead, those with radically different views are thrown together like an episode of Survivor, hopelessly convoluting the issue rather than bringing clarity.

But Jennings’s report did focus on one issue that ought to be given some serious thought. Crossan implied that the original accounts of Jesus were embellished by oral tradition and were not written down until after the apostles were dead. Thus they are largely unreliable and fail to give us an accurate picture of the real Jesus. How are we to know if this is really true?

Lost In Translation?

So, what does the evidence show? We begin with two simple questions: When were the original documents of the New Testament written? And who wrote them?

The importance of these questions should be obvious. If the accounts of Jesus were written after the eyewitnesses were dead, no one could verify their accuracy. But if the New Testament accounts were written while the original apostles were still alive, then their authenticity could be established. Peter could say of a forgery in his name, “Hey, I didn’t write that.” And Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John could respond to questions or challenges aimed at their accounts of Jesus.

The New Testament writers claimed to be rendering eyewitness accounts of Jesus. The apostle Peter stated it this way in one letter: “We were not making up clever stories when we told you about the power of our Lord Jesus Christ and his coming again. We have seen his majestic splendor with our own eyes” (2 Peter 1:16NLT).

 major part of the New Testament is the apostle Paul’s 13 letters to young churches and individuals. Paul’s letters, dated between the mid 40s and the mid 60s (12 to 33 years after Christ), constitute the earliest witnesses to Jesus’ life and teaching. Will Durant wrote of the historical importance of Paul’s letters, “The Christian evidence for Christ begins with the letters ascribed to Saint Paul. … No one has questioned the existence of Paul, or his repeated meetings with Peter, James, and John; and Paul enviously admits that these men had known Christ in the flesh.”

But Is It True?

In books, magazines, and TV documentaries, the Jesus Seminar suggests the Gospels were written as late as a.d. 130 to 150 by unknown authors. If those later dates are correct, there would be a gap of approximately 100 years from Christ’s death (scholars put Jesus’ death between a.d. 30 and 33). And since all the eyewitnesses would have been dead, the Gospels could only have been written by unknown, fraudulent authors.

So, what evidence do we have concerning when the Gospel accounts of Jesus were really written? The consensus of most scholars is that the Gospels were written by the apostles during the first century. They cite several reasons that we will review later in this article. For now, however, note that three primary forms of evidence appear to build a solid case for their conclusions:

Early documents from heretics such as Marcion and the school of Valentinus citing New Testament books, themes, and passages (See “Mona Lisa’s Smirk”) numerous writings of early Christian sources, such as Clement of Rome, Ignatius, and Polycarp discovered copies of Gospel fragments carbon-dated as early as 117 A.D.Biblical archaeologist William Albright concluded on the basis of his research that all the New Testament books were written while most of the apostles were still alive. He wrote, “We can already say emphatically that there is no longer any solid basis for dating any book after about 80 A.D., two full generations before the date of between 130 and 150 A.D.given by the more radical New Testament critics of today.”[4] Elsewhere Albright put the writing of the entire New Testament at “very probably sometime between about 50 A.D. and 75 A.D.”[5]

The notoriously skeptical scholar John A. T. Robinson dates the New Testament earlier than even most conservative scholars. In Redating the New Testament Robinson asserts that most of the New Testament was written between 40 A.D. and 65 A.D. That puts its writing as early as seven years after Christ lived.[6] If that is true, any historical errors would have been immediately exposed by both eyewitnesses and the enemies of Christianity.

So let’s look at the trail of clues that takes us from the original documents to our New Testament copies today.

Who Needs Kinko’s ?

The original writings of the apostles were revered. Churches studied them, shared them, carefully preserved them and stored them away like buried treasure.

But, alas, Roman confiscations, the passage of 2,000 years, and the second law of thermodynamics have taken their toll. So, today, what do we have of those original writings? Nothing. The original manuscripts are all gone (though each week Bible scholars, no doubt, tune in to Antiques Roadshow hoping one might emerge).

Yet the New Testament is not alone in this fate; no other comparable document from ancient history exists today either. Historians aren’t troubled by the lack of original manuscripts if they have reliable copies to examine. But are there ancient copies of the New Testament available, and if so, are they faithful to the originals?

As the number of churches multiplied, hundreds of copies were carefully made under the supervision of church leaders. Every letter was meticulously penned in ink on parchment or papyrus. And so, today, scholars can study the surviving copies (and the copies of copies, and the copies of copies of copies—you get it), to determine authenticity and arrive at a very close approximation of the original documents.

In fact, scholars studying ancient literature have devised the science of textual criticism to examine documents such as The Odyssey, comparing them with other ancient documents to determine their accuracy. More recently, military historian Charles Sanders augmented textual criticism by devising a three-part test that looks at not only the faithfulness of the copy but also the credibility of the authors. His tests are these:

The bibliographical test

The internal evidence test

The external evidence test[7]

Let’s see what happens when we apply these tests to the early New Testament manuscripts.

Bibliographical Test

This test compares a document with other ancient history from the same period. It asks:

How many copies of the original document are in existence?

How large of a time gap is there between the original writings and the earliest copies?

How well does a document compare with other ancient history?

Imagine if we had only two or three copies of the original New Testament manuscripts. The sampling would be so small that we couldn’t possibly verify accuracy. On the other hand, if we had hundreds or even thousands, we could easily weed out the errors of poorly transmitted documents.

So, how well does the New Testament compare with other ancient writings with regard to both the number of copies and the time gap from the originals? More than 5,000 manuscripts of the New Testament exist today in the original Greek language. Many of these manuscripts are merely fragments, while others are virtually complete books. When counting translations into other languages, the number is a staggering 24,000 – dating from the second to the fifteenth century.

Compare that with the second-best-documented ancient historical manuscript, Homer’s Iliad, with 643 copies.[8] And remember that most ancient historical works have far fewer existing manuscripts than that one does (usually fewer than 10). New Testament scholar Bruce Metzger remarked, “In contrast with these figures [of other ancient manuscripts], the textual critic of the New Testament is embarrassed by the wealth of his material.”[9]

Time Gap

Not only is the number of manuscripts significant, but so is the time gap between when the original was written and the date of the copy. Over the course of a thousand years of copying, there’s no telling what a text could evolve into—But over a hundred years, that’s a different story.

German critic Ferdinand Christian Baur (1792–1860) once contended that John’s Gospel was not written until about a.d. 160; therefore, it could not have been written by John. This, if true, would have not only undermined John’s writings but cast suspicion on the entire New Testament as well. But then, when a cache of New Testament papyri fragments were discovered in Egypt, among them was a fragment of the Gospel of John (specifically, P52: John 18:31-33) dated to roughly 25 years after John wrote the original.

Metzger explained, “Just as Robinson Crusoe, seeing but a single footprint in the sand, concluded that another human being, with two feet, was present on the island with him, so P52 [the label of the fragment] proves the existence and use of the Fourth Gospel during the first half of the second century in a provincial town along the Nile far removed from its traditional place of composition (Ephesus in Asia Minor).”[10] Find after find, archeology has unearthed copies of major portions of the New Testament dated to within 150 years of the originals.[11]

Most other ancient documents have time gaps of from 400 to 1,400 years. For example, Aristotle’s Poetics was written about 343 b.c., yet the earliest copy is dated a.d. 1100, with only five copies in existence. And yet no one is going in search of the historical Plato, claiming he was actually a fireman and not a philosopher.

In fact, there is a nearly complete copy of the Bible called, Codex Vaticanus, that was written only about 250 to 300 years after the apostles’ original writing. The oldest known complete copy of the New Testament in ancient uncial script is named, Codex Sinaiticus, now housed at the British Museum.

Like Codex Vaticanus, it is dated from the fourth century. Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, going back to early in Christian history, are like other early biblical manuscripts in that they differ minimally from each other and give us a very good picture of what the original documents must have said.

Even critical scholar John A. T. Robinson has admitted, “The wealth of manuscripts, and above all the narrow interval of time between the writing and the earliest extant copies, make it by far the best attested text of any ancient writing in the world.”[12] Professor of law John Warwick Montgomery affirmed, “To be skeptical of the resultant text of the New Testament books is to allow all of classical antiquity to slip into obscurity, for no documents of the ancient period are as well attested bibliographically as the New Testament.”[13]

The point is this: If the New Testament records were made and circulated so closely to the actual events, their portrayal of Jesus is most likely accurate. But external evidence is not the only way to answer the question of reliability; scholars also use internal evidence to answer this question.

The Discovery Of Codex Sinaiticus

In 1844 the German scholar Constantine Tischendorf was searching for New Testament manuscripts. By accident, he noticed a basket filled with old pages in the library of the monastery of St. Catherine at Mount Sinai. The German scholar was both elated and shocked. He had never seen Greek manuscripts that old.

Tischendorf asked the librarian about them and was horrified to learn that the pages had been discarded to be used as fuel. Two basketloads of such papers had already been burned!

Tischendorf’s enthusiasm made the monks wary, and they would not show him any more manuscripts. However, they did allow Tischendorf to take the 43 pages he had discovered.

Fifteen years later, Tischendorf returned to the Sinai monastery, this time with help from the Russian Tsar Alexander II. Once he was there, a monk took Tischendorf to his room and pulled down a cloth-wrapped manuscript that had been stored on a shelf with cups and dishes. Tischendorf immediately recognized the valuable remaining portions of the manuscripts he had seen earlier.

The monastery agreed to present the manuscript to the tsar of Russia as protector of the Greek Church. In 1933 the Soviet Union sold the manuscript to the British Museum for £100,000.

Codex Sinaiticus is one of the earliest complete manuscripts of the New Testament we have, and it is among the most important. Some speculate that it is one of the 50 Bibles the emperor Constantine commissioned Eusebius to prepare in the early fourth century. Codex Sinaiticus has been of enormous help to scholars in verifying the accuracy of the New Testament.

Internal Evidence Test

Like good detectives, historians verify reliability by looking at internal clues. Such clues reveal motives of the authors and their willingness to disclose details and other features that could be verified. The key internal clues these scholars use to test for reliability are the following:

consistency of eyewitness reports

details of names, places, and events

letters to individuals or small groups

features embarrassing to the authors

the presence of irrelevant or counterproductive material

lack of relevant material[14]

Let’s take as an example the movie Friday Night Lights. It purports to be based on historical events, but like so many movies loosely based on actual events, it leaves you constantly questioning, “Did things really happen that way?” So, how would you determine its historical reliability?

One clue would be the presence of irrelevant material. Let’s say that in the middle of the film the coach, for no apparent reason, gets a phone call informing him that his mother has brain cancer. The event has nothing to do with the plot and is never mentioned again. The only explanation for the presence of this irrelevant fact would be that it actually happened and that the director had a desire to be historically accurate.

Another example, same movie. Following the flow of the drama, we want the Permian Panthers to win the state championship. But they don’t. This feels counterproductive to the drama, and immediately we know it’s there because in real life Permian lost the game. The presence of counterproductive material is also a clue to historical accuracy.

Finally, the use of actual towns and familiar landmarks such as the Houston Astrodome leads us to take as history those elements of the story, because they’re too easy to corroborate or falsify.

These are but a few examples of how internal evidence leads either toward or away from the conclusion that a document is historically reliable. We’ll look briefly at the internal evidence for the historicity of the New Testament.Several aspects of the New Testament help us determine its reliability based on its own content and qualities.

Consistency

Phony documents either leave out eyewitness reports or are inconsistent. So outright contradiction among the Gospels would prove that they contain errors. But at the same time, if each Gospel said exactly the same thing, it would raise suspicions of collusion. It would be like co-conspirators trying to agree on every detail of their scheme. Too much consistency is as doubtful as too little.

Eyewitnesses to a crime or an accident generally get the big events right but see it from different perspectives. Likewise, the four Gospels describe the events of Jesus’ life from different perspectives. Yet, regardless of these perspectives, Bible scholars are amazed at the consistency of their accounts and the clear picture of Jesus and his teaching they put together with their complementary reports.

Details

Historians love details in a document because they make it easy to verify reliability. Paul’s letters are filled with details. And the Gospels abound with them. For example, both Luke’s Gospel and his Book of Acts were written to a nobleman named Theophilus, who was undoubtedly a well-known individual at the time.

If these writings had been mere inventions of the apostles, phony names, places, and events would have quickly been spotted by their enemies, the Jewish and Roman leaders. This would have become the Watergate of the first century. Yet many of the New Testament details have been proved true by independent verification. Classical historian Colin Hemer, for example, “identifies 84 facts in the last 16 chapters of Acts that have been confirmed by Archaeological research.”[15]

In the previous few centuries, skeptical Bible scholars attacked both Luke’s authorship and its dating, asserting that it was written in the second century by an unknown author. Archaeologist Sir William Ramsey was convinced they were right, and he began to investigate. After extensive research, the archaeologist reversed his opinion. Ramsey conceded, “Luke is a historian of the first rank. … This author should be placed along with the very greatest historians. … Luke’s history is unsurpassed in respect of its trustworthiness.”[16]

Acts chronicles Paul’s missionary voyages, listing places he visited, people he saw, messages he delivered, and persecution he suffered. Could all these details have been faked? Roman historian A. N. Sherwin-White wrote, “For Acts the confirmation of historicity is overwhelming. … Any attempt to reject its basic historicity must now appear absurd. Roman historians have long taken it for granted.”[17]

From the Gospel accounts to Paul’s letters, the New Testament authors openly described details, even citing the names of individuals who were alive at the time. Historians have verified at least thirty of these names.[18]

Letters To Small Groups

Most forged texts are from documents both general and public in nature, like this magazine article (no doubt countless forgeries are already circulating on the black market). Historical expert Louis Gottschalk notes that personal letters intended for small audiences have a high probability of being reliable.[19] Which category do the New Testament documents fall into?

Well, some of them were clearly intended to be circulated widely. Yet large portions of the New Testament consist of personal letters written to small groups and individuals. These documents, at least, would not be considered prime candidates for falsification.

Embarrassing Features

Most writers don’t want to publicly embarrass themselves. Historians have therefore observed that documents containing embarrassing revelations about the authors are generally to be trusted. What did the New Testament authors say about themselves?

Surprisingly, the authors of the New Testament presented themselves as all too frequently dimwitted, cowardly, and faithless. For example, consider Peter’s threefold denial of Jesus or the disciples’ arguments over which of them was the greatest—both stories recorded in the Gospels. As respect for the apostles was crucial in the early church, inclusion of this kind of material doesn’t make sense unless the apostles were reporting truthfully.[20]

In The Story of Civilization, Will Durant wrote about the apostles, “These men were hardly of the type that one would have chosen to remold the world. The Gospels realistically differentiate their characters, and honestly expose their faults.”[21]

Counterproductive Or Irrelevant Material

The Gospels tell us that the empty tomb of Jesus was discovered by a woman, even though in Israel the testimony of women was considered to be virtually worthless and was not even admissible in court. Jesus’ mother and family are recorded as stating their belief that he had lost his mind. Some of Jesus’ final words on the cross are said to have been “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” And so goes the list of incidents recorded in the New Testament that are counterproductive if the intent of the author were anything but the accurate transmission of the life and teachings of Jesus Christ.

Lack of Relevant Material

It is ironic (or perhaps logical) that few of the major issues facing the first-century church—the Gentile mission, spiritual gifts, baptism, leadership—were addressed directly in the recorded words of Jesus. If his followers were simply generating the material to encourage the growing church, it is inexplicable why they would not have made up instructions from Jesus on these issues. In one case, the apostle Paul flatly stated about a certain subject, “On this we have no teaching from the Lord.”

External Evidence Test

The third and final measure of a document’s reliability is the external evidence test, which asks, “Do historical records outside the New Testament confirm its reliability?” So, what did non-Christian historians say about Jesus Christ?

“Overall, at least seventeen non-Christian writings record more than fifty details concerning the life, teachings, death, and resurrection of Jesus, plus details concerning the early church.”[22] This is astounding, considering the lack of other history we possess from this time period. Jesus is mentioned by more sources than the conquests of Caesar during this same period. It is even more astounding since these confirmations of New Testament details date from 20 to 150 years after Christ, “quite early by the standards of ancient historiography.”[23]

The reliability of the New Testament is further substantiated by over 36,000 extra-biblical Christian documents (quotes from church leaders of the first three centuries) dating as early as ten years after the last writing of the New Testament).[24] If all the copies of the New Testament were lost, you could reproduce it from these other letters and documents with the exception of a few verses.[25]

Boston University professor emeritus Howard Clark Kee concludes, “The result of the examination of the sources outside the New Testament that bear … on our knowledge of Jesus is to confirm his historical existence, his unusual powers, the devotion of his followers, the continued existence of the movement after his death … and the penetration of Christianity … in Rome itself by the later first century.”[26]

The external evidence test thus builds on the evidence provided by other tests. In spite of the conjecture of a few radical skeptics, the New Testament portrait of the real Jesus Christ is virtually smudge-proof. Although there are a few dissenters such as the Jesus Seminar, the consensus of experts, regardless of their religious beliefs, confirms that the New Testament we read today faithfully represents both the words and events of Jesus’ life.

Clark Pinnock, professor of interpretations at McMaster Divinity College, summed it up well when he said, “There exists no document from the ancient world witnessed by so excellent a set of textual and historical testimonies. … An honest [person] cannot dismiss a source of this kind. Skepticism regarding the historical credentials of Christianity is based upon an irrational basis.”[27]

Read More

God´s Omnipresence!

The Heart of It All: The Nature and Character of God

By P. Amsterdam:

God’s Omnipresence:

When God created the universe and the world within it, He created matter, energy, time, and space. The world we live in is a three-dimensional material world, and we are limited by its physical laws. In this world, a material object or body can only exist in one space at one time, can only occupy its space at one time, and to get from one place to the next must pass through the intervening space.[1] God is different. He is an infinite Being who is not limited by anything, including the world’s physical laws of space. As explained in an earlier article:

Jesus said God is spirit. God is also uncreated, thus He is uncreated spirit. That God is uncreated makes Him different in essence or being from all created things. He’s not made of anything which was created—He’s not made of matter. He’s not just energy, air, or space, all of which are created things. He possesses a different mode of being; He exists in a manner that is distinctly different from all that has been created, including angels and human spirits. Human beings are corporeal beings with spirits, while angels are incorporeal immaterial beings; yet both are created beings, which makes them different from God.[2]

One of the differences between God and all of His creation is that He is a non-spatial Being, and thus transcends any spatial limits. He can’t be spatially contained by any space, no matter how large.

Will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold, heaven and the highest heaven cannot contain You; how much less this house that I have built![3]

Besides not being limited by space, the Bible also speaks of God as being present everywhere, which means that He is present in all space at all times. This attribute of God is called omnipresence. It is expressed in various ways throughout the Bible, including examples such as God “filling heaven and earth,” or David’s expressions in the Psalms of God being with him no matter where in the universe he might be.

“Can a man hide himself in secret places so that I cannot see him?” declares the Lord. “Do I not fill heaven and earth?” declares the Lord.[4]

Where shall I go from Your Spirit? Or where shall I flee from Your presence? If I ascend to heaven, You are there! If I make my bed in Sheol, You are there! If I take the wings of the morning and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea, even there Your hand shall lead me, and Your right hand shall hold me.[5]

He is actually not far from each one of us, for “In Him we live and move and have our being.”[6]

In stating that God is omnipresent, that His presence is everywhere, that is not to say that He is bigger than everything, or that He is so immense that He’s stretched throughout the universe, so that His foot is in one location and His head is billions of light years away. To put it in those terms would be to say that God is spatial, which He isn’t; and that He is the biggest thing that exists, when actually location, distance, and size don’t apply to Him. It would be better to avoid thinking of God as having size or being spatial and to instead think of Him as being present everywhere in His full being.

Wayne Grudem gives some helpful insight:

Before God created the universe, there was no matter or material, so there was no space either. Yet God still existed. Where was God? He was not in a place that we could call a “where,” for there was no “where” or space. But God still was! This fact makes us realize that God relates to space in a far different way than we do or than any created thing does. He exists as a kind of being that is far different and far greater than we can imagine.[7]

When the Samaritan woman spoke to Jesus about the right place to worship, Jesus’ answer expressed the notion that God isn’t confined to one space, but rather is spirit, non-spatial, and can be worshiped wherever one is. Other verses describe God’s omniscient presence in a similar manner.

The hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father is seeking such people to worship Him. God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.[8]

The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man.[9]

While there aren’t Bible verses which explicitly state that God is present in His fullness in every point in space, there are many verses (some quoted throughout this article) that express that God is present everywhere. Throughout history theologians have agreed that it’s not as if a part of God is in one place and a different part is somewhere else, like His fingernail is in Europe and His ear is on Mars. The inference from Scripture is that God is present in His fullness everywhere. Theologians across the spectrum of Christian belief agree upon and teach this. Here are the ways some of them express it:

Arminian:

Because God is not limited by space, He is universally present to all space at all times … To understand God’s omnipresence we should think in terms of the divine dimension and its relation to the material dimension. The divine dimension does not simply physically surround the space-time universe, nor is it invisibly present within it. Rather, the divine dimension intersects every point of space; it interfaces with the material dimension everywhere.[10]

Reformed:

God’s omnipresence may be defined as follows: God does not have size or spatial dimensions and is present at every point of space with His whole being, yet God acts differently in different places.[11]

Catholic:

The whole Divine Essence fills the whole created space and every one of its parts. On account of the absolute simplicity of God, however, the repletive omnipresence must not be conceived as an infinite extension (expansion or diffusion) of the Divine Substance.[12]

Charismatic:

Omnipresence signifies that God is totally present everywhere in creation. Hence we are not to understand God as spatially spread throughout the universe, so that a part of Him is here, and another part there. God’s filling heaven and earth means rather He is totally and equally present everywhere. He is as much present to a single atom as to the most distant star, to a single seed as to all the plants and trees of the world.[13]

God’s presence is also spoken of in Scripture as sustaining all things, keeping the universe functioning as He intends it to on a continual basis.

He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.[14]

[Jesus] is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of His nature, and He upholds the universe by the word of His power.[15]

Besides creating the physical world, God also created a spiritual dimension in which spiritual beings—angels and demons—dwell. These spiritual beings are creations of God, and thus are spatial beings as well. Though the spiritual dimension is different from the material dimension in which we exist, it nevertheless has spatial limitations. The inhabitants of the spiritual dimension have limitations, unlike God, who is unlimited. An example of an angel’s spatial limitations is seen when the angel sent to help Daniel spent twenty-one days fighting to get there. The angel obviously couldn’t be in more than one place at a time.

[The angel] said to me, “Fear not, Daniel, for from the first day that you set your heart to understand and humbled yourself before your God, your words have been heard, and I have come because of your words. The prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me twenty-one days, but Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, for I was left there with the kings of Persia.”[16]

We’ve been talking about God’s omnipresence, and specifically focusing on His presence in connection with His creation—that He is fully present in every point of creation. While God Himself is omnipresent, His presence has been manifested in certain specific ways and times. He has appeared in some instances in what are called theophanies, where He has taken on a physical form that is visible. Some examples are when He showed Himself as a pillar of smoke by day and of fire by night, or when He descended on Mount Sinai. He was also present in God Incarnate, Jesus. The fact that He has appeared through theophanies, and that God the Son became Incarnate, doesn’t mean that God was not present everywhere at those times, for as shown in Scripture, God is unlimited by space.

The Lord went before them by day in a pillar of cloud to lead them along the way, and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light, that they might travel by day and by night.[17]

There were thunders and lightnings and a thick cloud on the mountain and a very loud trumpet blast, so that all the people in the camp trembled. Then Moses brought the people out of the camp to meet God, and they took their stand at the foot of the mountain. Now Mount Sinai was wrapped in smoke because the Lord had descended on it in fire. The smoke of it went up like the smoke of a kiln, and the whole mountain trembled greatly. And as the sound of the trumpet grew louder and louder, Moses spoke, and God answered him in thunder.[18]

The Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen His glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.[19]

Though not necessarily connected to God’s omnipresence, God’s presence is spoken of in another sense throughout the Bible to express His favor or displeasure by His being near or far. In this context, God being near or far isn’t speaking of spatial distance, as in being physically close or distant, but it’s speaking relationally. When Scripture says that God is far from evildoers, it doesn’t mean that somehow His presence is not with them as it is everywhere else in creation, or that His presence is somehow more with believers than it is with all of the rest of creation. God is always everywhere. The distance spoken of in connection with God’s favor or displeasure isn’t physical. Instead it is spoken of figuratively, expressing that God is pleased or displeased, that the evildoer is relationally separated or far from God, and that those who love God are relationally close to Him.

Jack Cottrell expresses this point in this way:

God’s ontological presence, His omnipresence, is constant and does not change. But depending on our own attitude toward Him, His presence takes on different meanings for us. To those who arouse His anger, His presence is as barren as His absence; to those who seek Him aright, His presence becomes a fountain of blessing.[20]

God is said to be far, and to hide His face, from those who are wicked and who sin against Him.

The Lord is far from the wicked, but He hears the prayer of the righteous.[21]

Your iniquities have made a separation between you and your God, and your sins have hidden His face from you so that He does not hear.[22]

I dealt with them according to their uncleanness and their transgressions, and hid My face from them.[23]

God speaks of the nearness of His presence as an expression of His pleasure with those who love Him, who seek Him, and who do good.

The Lord is near to all who call on Him, to all who call on Him in truth.[24]

Draw near to God, and He will draw near to you.[25]

You have upheld me because of my integrity, and set me in Your presence forever.[26]

The Lord has taken away the judgments against you; He has cleared away your enemies. The King of Israel, the Lord, is in your midst; you shall never again fear evil.[27]

Now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.[28]

God is present in times of need. His Spirit dwells within us, and He is with us always.

Why are you in despair, O my soul? And why have you become disturbed within me? Hope in God, for I shall again praise Him for the help of His presence.[29]

Do you not know that you are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in you?[30]

In Him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit.[31]

Teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.[32]

God’s omnipresence, one of His many amazing attributes, can be meaningful to each of us in our relationship with Him. It helps us see that we love, worship, and serve a wonderfully powerful God, one who is always everywhere in the universe, and who always dwells within us as well.

Notes

Unless otherwise indicated, all scriptures are from the Holy Bible, English Standard Version, copyright © 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a division of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved. Other versions cited are The New International Version (NIV), the New American Standard Bible (NASB), The New Revised Standard Version (NRS), The New King James Version (NKJV), and the King James Version (KJV).

[1] Paraphrased from Jack Cottrell, What the Bible Says About God the Creator (Eugene: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1983), 264.

[2] The Heart of It All: The Nature and Character of God: God Is Spirit.

[3] 1 Kings 8:27.

[4] Jeremiah 23:24.

[5] Psalm 139:7–10.

[6] Acts 17:27–28.

[7] Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology, An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids: InterVarsity Press 2000), 175.

[8] John 4:23–24.

[9] Acts 17:24.

[10] Jack Cottrell, What the Bible Says About God the Creator (Eugene: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1983), 267.

[11] Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology, An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids: InterVarsity Press 2000), 173.

[12] Ludwig Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma (Rockford: Tan Books and Publishers, Inc., 1960), 29.

[13] J. Rodman Williams, Renewal Theology, Systematic Theology from a Charismatic Perspective (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), Vol 1, p. 77.

[14] Colossians 1:17.

[15] Hebrews 1:3.

[16] Daniel 10:12–13.

[17] Exodus 13:21.

[18] Exodus 19:16–19.

[19] John 1:14.

[20] Jack Cottrell, What the Bible Says About God the Creator (Eugene: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1983), 258.

[21] Proverbs 15:29.

[22] Isaiah 59:2

[23] Ezekiel 39:24.

[24] Psalm 145:18.

[25] James 4:8.

[26] Psalm 41:12.

[27] Zephaniah 3:15.

[28] Ephesians 2:13.

[29] Psalm 42:5 NAU.

[30] 1 Corinthians 3:16.

[31] Ephesians 2:22.

[32] Matthew 28:20.

Copyright © 2012 The Family International.

Read More

The Word of God- A Bible study for you!

By David Brandt Berg

Download Audio (14.1MB)
The Bible

God wrote the 66 books of the Bible through about 40 men who were yielded to His Holy Spirit. As Peter said, “The prophecy came not in old time by the will of man; but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost” (2 Peter 1:21).

The fulfilled prophecies contained in its books are the greatest proof that the Bible is the Word of God. Some outstanding examples of fulfilled prophecy are seen in the Old Testament predictions about the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

There are approximately 300, all written four to five centuries before His birth. Micah 5:2, Isaiah 7:14 and 9:6 foretold that the Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem of a virgin and was to be called “the Prince of Peace,” who had been in existence “from everlasting.” His betrayal by Judas is seen in Zechariah 11:12–13 for “thirty pieces of silver,” crucifixion in Psalm 22:16,18 (“pierced my hands and my feet”), and resurrection in Psalm 16:10 (“will not leave my soul in hell”).

These prophecies, of course, are merely a few of the literally thousands of fulfilled prophecies about empires, individuals, and world events which the biblical prophets have predicted and which prove the Bible’s divine authorship.

As Jesus said of His own prophecies, “These things have I spoken to you ... before it come to pass, that when it is come to pass, ye might believe” (John 14:25,29).
What the Bible means to us

The Bible is God’s plan for eternal life: the solid, genuine foundation of truth on which we’re building, whose giver is God. It is the Bible that gives genuine and eternal immortality through the resurrection, to everlasting heavenly bliss with God. The Bible is the greatest book in the world, with the only author in the world who can guarantee life and love and happiness and heaven forever.

The Bible is our foundation, our guide, our standard, and the rod of measurement whereby we judge all things, even the words that God gives us today.

“The law of his God is in his heart; none of his steps shall slide” (Psalm 37:31). If it isn’t in his heart, his steps will slide and he’ll get off the right track.
Why we need God’s Word

If you think you don’t need the Word now that you have the Spirit, let me tell you, Jesus said, “My words are Spirit and they are life” (John 6:63). I didn’t find the truth until I began to heed His Spirit, but it was the voice of His Spirit in His Word. For “Thy Word is a lamp into my feet and a light unto my path” (Psalm 119:105).

It is impossible to have faith unless you have the Word, because your faith is something that is built by faithful study of God’s Word. “Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God” (Romans 10:17). The main thing is to know the Word; that’s the contract and the law. That’s why you can claim it and command the Lord to fulfill His promises. You have to quote the terms of the contract (the Word) to the contract maker (God) and hold Him to it.

Faith in the Word not only heals our souls, but also our bodies. “I am the Lord that healeth thee.” “Who forgiveth all thine iniquities; who healeth all thy diseases.” “He sent His word, and healed them.” “Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature” (Exodus 15:26; Psalm 103:3, 107:20; 2 Peter 1:4).

The Word is our weapon against the Enemy and his strongholds on people’s minds and hearts. “For the weapons of our warfare are (spiritual) not carnal, (and) mighty through God to the pulling down of strongholds” (2 Corinthians 10:4). When the Devil tempted Jesus and lied to Him, He just quoted the scriptures: “It is written” (Matthew 4:3–10). The Devil is a liar and the father of it, and he knows it and he can’t take the Word. “Resist the Enemy and he’ll flee from you” (James 4:7). He’ll turn tail and run. Take up the white-hot sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God, and cut the Devil to the heart! Lay it on him. Sock it to him. Drive him away! Tell him he has no part in you, and that he’s got no business there.

The Word also gives us examples of how God has worked in the past. What is always the first thing you should think about when you begin to think and pray about God’s answer? Think about similar situations in the Word: What did they do then? “All these things happened unto them for ensamples” and “were written for our learning” (1 Corinthians 10:11).

We are going to be teachers of the world, as the prophet Daniel predicted. “They that understand ... shall instruct many” (Daniel 11:33). This should cause you to study and memorize, not only for your own sake and to be a better witness to many, but also to be able to teach them to teach others, to teach others, to teach others, to teach others, to teach others, to teach others.
Obeying the Word

If you obey what you know God wants you to do, then He will show you more truth; and when you obey that, He’ll give you a little more, and step by step, as you follow Him, He shows you more and more. It’s like Solomon said, “The path of the just is as the shining light, that shineth more and more unto the perfect day” (Proverbs 4:18).

The minute we begin to listen to the Lord’s recorded, written Word, immediately we put ourselves in the position of being willing to listen, so then the Lord begins to speak and give us the living Word.

Jesus said, “If a man love Me, he will keep My words (written words): and My Father will love him, and we (the living Word) will come unto him, and make our abode with him” (John 14:23).

Originally published September 1974. Updated and republished June 2012.
Read by Simon Peterson. copyright@thefamilyinternational

Read More

Psalm 103 - Beautiful

A Psalm of David:

Bless the Lord, O my soul: and all that is within me, bless his holy name.

Bless the Lord, O my soul, and forget not all his benefits:

Who forgives all your iniquities; who heals all your diseases;

Who redeems your life from destruction; who crowns you with loving kindness and tender mercies;

Who satisfies your mouth with good things; so that your youth is renewed like the eagle´s.

The Lord executes righteousness and judgment for all that are oppressed.

He made known his ways unto Moses, his acts unto the children of Israel.

The Lord is merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and plenteous in mercy.

He will not always chide: neither will he keep his anger forever.

He has not dealt with us after our sins; nor rewarded us according to our iniquities.

For as the heaven is high above the earth, so great is his mercy toward them that fear him.

As far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from us.

Like as a father pities his children, so the Lord pities them that fear him.

For he knows our frame; he remembers that we are dust.

As for man his days are as grass: as a flower of the field, so he flourishes.

For the wind passes over it, and it is gone; and the place thereof shall know it no more.

But the mercy of the Lord is from everlasting upon them that fear him, and his righteousness unto children´s children;

To such as keep his covenant, and to those that remember his commandments to do them.

The Lord has prepared his throne in the heavens; and his kingdom rules over all.

Bless the Lord, you his angels, that excel in strength, that do his commandments, hearkening unto the voice of his word.

Bless ye the Lord, all ye his hosts; ye ministers of his, that do his pleasure.

Bless the Lord, all his works in all places of his dominion: bless the Lord, O my soul.

Read More

Christian GP facing disciplinary action!

Anger of Christian GP facing disciplinary action for discussing his faith as his accuser is heard in secret


By JAMES TOZER

PUBLISHED: 23:55 GMT, 11 June 2012 | UPDATED: 07:45 GMT, 12 June 2012



A doctor facing disciplinary action for discussing his faith in Jesus with a patient yesterday blamed 'anti-Christian' bias after his accuser was allowed to give evidence in secret.

Dr Richard Scott has spent two years under threat of an official warning after the 'suicidal' patient's mother complained about the conversation.

Yesterday a General Medical Council disciplinary hearing agreed to go ahead with the case against him, even though the unnamed patient refused to attend.



Prayer warning: Dr Richard Scott was reprimanded by the GMC for encouraging a young man to look to Jesus

Instead, the patient will be allowed to give evidence over the telephone with the Press and public barred from being present.

Last night Dr Scott accused the GMC of displaying bias against Christians, while his legal adviser said it was another example of 'over-zealous victimisation of Christians by public bodies'.


More...
Bishop's anger as wind turbine plans are sunk: Protesters were bullies, he claims
Megachurch pastor arrested after 'abusing his teenage daughter because she wanted to go to a party'



'I do not feel like I'm getting a fair trial,' the father-of-three said outside the hearing.

'It feels like it's become almost like a secret court or secret justice which is outrageous.

'Now I can't see my accuser. We can't see his body languages or expressions which is crucial for fair justice.'



Christian GP Dr Richard Scott outside the General Medical Council (GMC) hearing in Manchester last year

Last year Dr Scott said he was 'disgusted' by the GMC's stance when it agreed to continuing pursuing the case against him when the patient first refused to turn up to give evidence.

'The GMC have relentlessly pursued me and are determined to put me on trial,' the 51-year-old former missionary said yesterday.

'First he didn't turn up last year, now this.

'There definitely seems like there is an anti-Christian agenda here.

'This case should be thrown out, but now we have got to this outrageous situation where the whole thing is surrounded by secrecy and anonymity.' He is taking legal advice on applying for judicial review of the GMC decision to accept the patient's evidence by phone.

The case is the latest in a series of incidents in which hospitals and medical authorities have been accused of acting to suppress any expression of Christian beliefs.

Dr Scott spoke to the 24-year-old patient, described as suicidal and vulnerable, at the end of a consultation at the Bethesda Medical Centre in Margate, Kent in August 2010.

The practice declares its Christian orientation and informs prospective patients that they may be offered spiritual guidance as well as medical help.

'There definitely seems like there is an anti-Christian agenda here.'


He is said to have suggested to the patient that they might discuss religion.

The patient is believed to have replied 'go for it' and Dr Scott told him about the 'additional help which he might derive from Jesus' and added that he might feel better if he prayed, as the patient's own religion did not appear to be giving him comfort.

The patient's mother, who had recommended Dr Scott to her son, later complained.

Yesterday an investigation committee of the GMC, sitting in Manchester, agreed to hear the patient's evidence in private over the telephone.

Committee chairman Dr Christopher Hanning said the decision had been made after considering the man's physical and mental condition.



The patient, who was seen by the GP at the Bethesda Medical Centre in Margate, Kent, pictured, felt Dr Scott had 'belittled' his own faith, the GMC heard

In a statement afterwards, Dr Scott said: 'I, and every GP, should be outraged at this decision by our professional body.' He said thousands of doctors who carried out one-to-one consultations with patients every day ought to have the right to have them cross-examined if they made a complaint.

Andrea Williams, of the Christian Legal Centre, which has backed Dr Scott's case, added: 'I am appalled by what I'm witnessing today.

'The GMC is convening a secret court so that it can pursue disciplinary proceedings against a Christian doctor with an unblemished professional record, despite the complainant refusing to even turn up.

'This is unheard of and many doctors will be deeply concerned with the way this is being handled by the GMC.

'This is another example of the over-zealous victimisation of Christians by public bodies. Something has to change, and soon.' The committee has the power to give Dr Scott a warning, not to strike him off.

The hearing is due to begin today.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2157925/Anger-Christian-GP-accused-discussing-faith-patient-accuser-heard-secret.html#ixzz1xcicx3Fb

Read More

Jim Cramer: Financial Anarchy in Europe!

Jim Cramer Is Predicting Bank Runs In Spain And Italy And Financial Anarchy Throughout Europe
POSTED BY JOSEPH CANDEL – 2012/05/25POSTED IN: ECONOMIC CRISIS
Share 



When the crash happens, it could be the ideal opportunity for the coming Antichrist world government to take power. The world will be in such dire financial straits that they will welcome the Antichrist rule and hail him as a hero, since he will cunningly persuade the nations to cooperate with his plan for solving the economic situation (Daniel 11:21,24). - Joseph Candel

Via The Economic Collapse

During an appearance on Meet The Press on Sunday, Jim Cramer of CNBC boldly predicted that “financial anarchy” is coming to Europe and that there will be “bank runs” in Spain and Italy in the next few weeks. This is very strong language for the most famous personality on the most watched financial news channel in the United States to be using. In fact, if Cramer is not careful, people will start accusing him of sounding just like The Economic Collapse Blog. It may not happen in “the next few weeks”, but the truth is that the European banking system is in a massive amount of trouble and if Greece does leave the euro it is going to cause a tremendous loss of confidence in banks in countries such as Spain, Italy and Portugal. There are already rumors that the “smart money” is pulling out of Spanish and Italian banks. So could we see some of these banks collapse? Would they get bailed out if they do collapse? It is so hard to predict exactly how “financial anarchy” will play out, but it is becoming increasingly clear that the European financial system is heading for a massive amount of pain.

But what is Europe supposed to do? Even though “austerity measures” have been implemented in many eurozone nations, the truth is that they are all still running up more debt. Are European nations just supposed to run up massive amounts of debt indefinitely and pretend that there will never been any consequences?

That is apparently what Barack Obama wants. During the G-8 summit that just concluded, Obama urged European leaders to pursue a “pro-growth” path.

Of course to Obama a “pro-growth” economic plan includes spending trillions of dollars that you do not have without any regard for what you are doing to future generations.

Germany has been trying to get the rest of the eurozone to move much closer to living within their means, but as the recent elections in France and Greece demonstrated, much of the rest of the eurozone is not too thrilled with the end of debt-fueled prosperity.

In Greece, the recent elections failed to produce a new government, so new elections will be held on June 17th.

Many EU politicians are trying to turn these upcoming elections into a referendum on whether Greece stays in the eurozone or not. If the next Greek government is willing to honor the austerity agreements that have been previously agreed to, then Greece will probably stay in the eurozone for a while longer. If the next Greek government is not willing to honor the austerity agreements that have been previously agreed to, then Greece will probably be forced out of the eurozone.

The following is what John Praveen, the chief investment strategist at Prudential International Investments Advisers, had to say about the political situation in Greece recently….


“If the pro-euro major parties fail to muster enough support to form a coalition and the radical left Syriza party and other anti-euro, anti-austerity parties secure a majority, the risk of a disorderly Greek exit from the Euro increases and could roil markets”

Right now, polls show the leading anti-austerity party, Syriza, doing very well. The leader of Syriza, Alexis Tsipras, has declared that he plans “to stop the experiment” with austerity and that what the rest of the eurozone has tried to do in Greece is a “crime against the Greek people“.

But the Germans do not see it that way. The Germans just want the Greeks to stop spending far more money than they bring in.

The Germans do not want to endlessly bail out the Greeks if the Greeks are not willing to show some financial discipline.

As we approach the June 17th elections, the financial markets are likely to be quite nervous. According to Art Hogan of Lazard Capital Partners, many investors are deeply concerned about how “sloppy” a great exit from the euro could be….


“Next week is only one of the four weeks we have to wait until the Greek election. Every utterance out of Greece makes us think about their [possible] exit and how sloppy that could be”

Most Greek citizens want to remain in the eurozone and most European politicians want Greece to remain in the eurozone, but it is looking increasingly likely as if that may not happen.

In fact, there are reports that preparations are rapidly being made for a Greek exit. According to Reuters, “contingency plans” for the printing of Greek drachmas have already been drawn up….


De La Rue (DLAR.L) has drawn up contingency plans to print drachma banknotes should Greece exit the euro and approach the British money printer, an industry source told Reuters on Friday.

And even EU officials are now acknowledging that plans for a Greek exit from the euro are being developed. The following is what EU Trade Commissioner Karel De Gucht said during one recent interview….



“A year and a half ago, there may have been the danger of a domino effect,” he said, “but today there are, both within the European Central Bank and the European Commission, services that are working on emergency scenarios in case Greece doesn’t make it.”

When these kinds of things start to become public, that is a sign that officials really do not expect Greece to remain a part of the euro.

And Greece is rapidly beginning to run out of money. According to a recent Ekathimerini article, the Greek government is likely to run out of money at the end of June….


The public coffers are seen running dry at the end of June, but this will depend on two key factors. First, revenue collection: In the first 10 days of May, inflows were about 15 percent lower than projected but there are fears that the slide may reach 50 percent. The GAO will have a picture for the first 20 days on May 23, while the last three days of the month are considered crucial, when 1.5 billion euros of the month’s budgeted total of 3.6 billion are expected to flow in.

Second, whether the IMF and EFSF installments are disbursed: This is not certain, as the decision will be purely political for both providers and evidently partly linked to political developments. Earlier this month the eurozone approved a disbursement 1 billion short of the 5 billion euros that were expected.

If Greece runs out of money and if the rest of Europe cuts off the flow of euros, Greece would essentially be forced to leave the euro.

So the last half of June looks like it could potentially be a key moment for Greece.

Meanwhile, the Greek banking system is struggling to survive as hundreds of millions of euros get pulled out of it. The following is from a recent CNN article….


The Greek financial system is straining hard for cash.

Consumers and businesses are making massive withdrawals from Greece’s banks — leading to concern the beleaguered nation could be forced out of the eurozone by a banking crisis even before its government runs out of cash.

Deposits are the lifeblood of any bank, and Greeks pulled 800 million euros out of the banking system on Tuesday alone, the most recent day for which figures are available.

If Greece does leave the euro and the Greek banking system does collapse, that is going to be a clear signal that a similar scenario will be allowed to play out in other eurozone nations.

That is why Jim Cramer, myself and many others are warning that there could soon be bank runs all over the eurozone.

Sadly, the banking crisis in Europe just seems to get worse with each passing day.

For example, the Telegraph has reported that wealthy individuals are starting to pull money out of Spanish banking giant Santander….


Customers with large deposits have started withdrawing cash from Santander, the bank has admitted, as it tried to reassure concerned members of the public that their money is safe.

Round and round we go. Where all this will stop nobody knows.

If Greece does end up leaving the euro, that could set off a chain of cascading events that could potentially be absolutely catastrophic.

Former Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi recently stated that the “whole house of cards will come down” if Greece leaves the euro.

And if the “house of cards” does come down in Europe, that is going to greatly destabilize the global derivatives market.

You see, the truth is that the global derivatives market is very delicately balanced. The assumption most firms make is that things are not going to deviate too much from what is considered “normal”.

If we do end up seeing “financial anarchy” in Europe, that is going to greatly destabilize the system and we could rapidly have a huge derivatives crisis on our hands.

And as we saw with JP Morgan recently, losses from derivatives can add up really fast.

Originally, we were told that the derivatives losses that JP Morgan experienced recently came to a total of only about 2 billion dollars.

Now, we are told that it could be a whole lot more than that. According to the Wall Street Journal, JP Morgan could end up losing about 5 billion dollars (or more) before it is all said and done….


J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. is struggling to extricate itself from disastrous wagers by traders such as the “London whale,” in a sign that the size of its bets could bog down the bank’s unwinding of the trades and deepen its losses by billions of dollars.

The nation’s largest bank has said publicly that its losses on the trades have surpassed $2 billion, and people familiar with the matter have said they could over time reach $5 billion.

And if Europe experiences a financial collapse, the losses experienced by U.S. firms could make that 5 billion dollars look like pocket change. The following is from a recent article by Graham Summers….


According to Reuters once you include Spain and Italy as well as Credit Default Swaps and indirect exposure to Europe, US banks have roughly $4 TRILLION in potential exposure to the EU.

To put that number in perspective, the entire US banking system is $12 trillion in size.

Interesting days are ahead my friends.

Let us hope for the best, but let us also prepare for the worst.

Read More