John MacArthur Didn't like to speak in tongues.

[Amanah]

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

Looking at Charles Kirk, Candace Owen’s also made the claim.

The article is a bit deceptive, since Kirk never referred to “preeminent mediatrix”, he simply explained some major difficulties with RCC doctrines, including the extra elevation of Mary.

It is definitely possible that Charles Kirk had an interest in Catholicism. And overall, the history of his RCC wife Erika does call for scrutiny, including elements of the memorial service.

One thing that was not discussed in the memorial service, how the views of Charlie Kirk on Israel and Netanyahu and Gaza and Jewish $$$ sources (similar to the AIPAC funding of Congress) were changing from an earlier gung-ho Christian Zionism. For one example, Charlie Kirk questioned forcefully if there was a stand-down order on Oct. 7, 2023. (Which would mean essentially that the Israelis allowed the events, to give an excuse for the destruction of Gaza, and the deaths of many 10s of thousands, a good percent women and children, to be followed by the ethnic cleansing of the land.) Also we had Bibi Netanyahu awkwardly interrupting approximately seven wars to quickly go on Social Media to discuss Charlie Kirk and claim him as a faithful ally, and that any intimation that Israel was involved in the events in Utah was absurd. Quite a performance.

After realizing that Kirk, Candace, and Tucker are embracing Catholicism, I wonder if that influences their critique of Israel's brutality towards Gaza since the Pope is calling for the end of violence and a two state solution.

Joe Rogan had a show about the shroud with a guy who was supporting it. The guy was non stop with the foul language though and I couldn't take it so didn't get to hear his supporting statements.

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

. Yet, Ron Wyatt claimed that the blood sample he scraped off the Mercy Seat just didn't have 24 chromosome. Ron Wyatt stated that the blood scraped off the Mercy Seat was unlike any blood in human history, the blood was alive. Also if on any other surface which would be under scrutiny this would show up in tests. Once again proving that Ron Wyatt was fraudulent in his claims.

You know the check boxes on Israeli blood tests?

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by Amanah

Joe Rogan had a show about the shroud with a guy who was supporting it. The guy was non stop with the foul language though and I couldn't take it so didn't get to hear his supporting statements.

He had an interview with Mel Gibson that had a shroud segment.
There is much better out there.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

John MacArthur...was also incredibly weak on the precious blood of Jesus...

And I also believe that the blood of Jesus went down through the earthquake crack at Golgotha, landing on the mercy seat of the ark of the covenant.

Are you saying, implicitly or explicitly, that if someone does not believe Christ's blood "went down through the earthquake crack at Golgotha" per the Ron Wyatt testimony, and landed "on the mercy seat of the ark of the covenant", that he or she, as you have accused John MacArthur of being, is also "incredibly weak on the precious blood of Jesus"?

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

Are you saying, implicitly or explicitly, that if someone does not believe Christ's blood "went down through the earthquake crack at Golgotha" per the Ron Wyatt testimony, and landed "on the mercy seat of the ark of the covenant", that he or she, as you have accused John MacArthur of being, is also "incredibly weak on the precious blood of Jesus"?

Nope.

Everyone who believes in the blood landing on the mercy seat will have a high view of the blood of Jesus.

Many who do not have that belief, or reject that historical narrative, can still have a high view.

“Oh, precious is that flow …”

“Nothing but the blood of Jesus ..”
“No other fount I Know …”

We sang that with great enthusiasm without knowing anything about the mercy seat on the Ark of the Covenant.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

One major problem with the "liar" approach to Ron Wyatt is that two of his major research areas are now largely accepted as the best sites.

Mt. Sinai in Arabia - Jabal al-Lawz
Hershel Shanks, editor for Biblical Archaeology Review, said, “Jabal al-Lawz is the most likely site for Mount Sinai ... ” (2019) in the video "The Search for the Real Mt. Sinai" (1998)

Noah's Ark - Durupinar site.
In the news this year, although in some media they downplay the fact that Ron Wyatt was the chief researcher for decades. A gentleman named Andrew Jones has done wonderful work and study the last years, giving proper credit to Ron Wyatt.

Here is article by Gordon Franz, also with Biblical Archaelogy Review, unequivocablly stating that Jabal al-Lawz IS NOT MOUNT SINAI:

https://biblearchaeology.org/researc...cal%20evidence.

An excerpt:

As popular as the idea that Mt. Sinai is at Jebel al-Lawz in Saudi Arabia may be in certain evangelical (and even Jewish) circles, there is no credible historical, geographical, archaeological, or biblical evidence for this thesis.

Here is an article disputing the claim that Durupinar is now considered the most likely resting place of Noah's Ark:

https://www.thearchaeologist.org/blo...t-from-fiction

An excerpt

Furthermore, despite the excitement surrounding the Durupinar formation, it's worth noting that the notion that it is the resting place of Noah's ark has been debunked multiple times. Archaeologists have repeatedly demonstrated that the formation's shape is entirely natural and coincidental, rather than a product of an ancient vessel's presence.

This excerpt links to another article:

https://www.csun.edu/~vcgeo005/bogus.html

The abstract:

A natural rock structure near Dogubayazit, Turkey, has been misidentified as Noah's Ark. Microscopic studies of a supposed iron bracket show that it is derived from weathered volcanic minerals. Supposed metal-braced walls are natural concentrations of limonite and magnetite in steeply inclined sedimentary layers in the limbs of a doubly plunging syncline. Supposed fossilized gopherwood bark is crinkled metamorphosed peridotite. Fossiliferous limestone, interpreted as cross cutting the syncline, preclude the structure from being Noah's Ark because these supposed "Flood" deposits are younger than the "Ark." Anchor stones at Kazan (Arzap) are derived from local andesite and not from Mesopotamia.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

Rebecca Tourbiaire goes into the proto-Aramaic in the discussion here:

THE ARK AND THE BLOOD – The discovery of the Ark of the Covenant
https://arkfiles.net/the-ark-and-the...-the-covenant/

Ron knew some about ancient languages and properly additional consulted with others and researched into it after he saw them. For many years before he started looking for the Ark, he studied ancient cultures in the Middle East. When I traveled with him several times in Egypt, he even read hieroglyphs for me and he also knew a lot about proto-Aramaic. Even though he did not have his education in archeology he was very learned. I remember being amazed at everything he actually knew.

He did claim it said the same as Exodus 20 written in the old paleo-Hebrew alphabet.
Ron Wyatt did not mention the size and so the CGI is not correct on either size or the look of the stone. It is just an example.

Steven, why are you quoting from a comment made by the Admin (see emboldened text above) at the article you linked in this post without citing that it's a quote made by someone else, i.e. NOT YOU?

You've given the impression you were the one travelling with Ron in Egypt.

Which is it? Was it you, or this Rebecca person?

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

So you call the two sons liars without listening to any of the videos.

Quite telling.

Try to learn how to have an honest discussion.

Asked and answered. Did you miss it?

You asked here:

https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.co...4&postcount=48

Evangelist Benincasa answered here:

https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.co...8&postcount=51

You've now accused an elder and minister in the Lord of not listening to videos he clearly said he listened to.

Perhaps zeal for the Wyatt family's testimony is blinding you, causing you to launch into an aggressive attack on a sanctified brother who has been nothing but forthright and honest with you?

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

Which is it? Was it you, or this Rebecca person?

Rebecca,
I thought that was clear,

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Yes

So then you should indicate the specific lies you claim in the nine videos.