A rather strange misconception some PHIAists and WOFers seem to be making.

[SpiritPsalmist]

Gee.... JFO disagrees with something I said.
That is something new!!!

You know Jim.... when you disagree with EVERYTHING someone says, they stop listening to you.

I have posted over 10500 posts here and you have NEVER agreed with anything in all those posts.

You'd think I would say something in all those posts that would deserve an "amen" or a "thank you very much" or even a disinterested "I guess so."

Nope... nothing.

(A Freudian would see some deep seated meaning in that behavior that I will not share...)

Thats a good point! I know I for one need to tell people more often how much I enjoy what they write here. I don't always agree but they don't always agree with me either, and that's OK. However from reading the differings ideas and thoughts it has caused me to look more at what I believe and why.

As I think I pointed out earlier, don't quite remember, a lot of the time both sides are actually agreeing with each other but just coming from a different direction. It reminds me of the time I had my boss stand beside me and she asked me to use the calculator to type in 9 times 13. I typed it in as 13 times 9 and she became infuriated saying that I never listened to her and that the answer was not the same either way. Often, I sit here and read both sides and in many areas there is agreeing yet one group stomps off and starts a thread in their protective area about all the "unbelievers" and the other group stomps to their area and starts threads about heritics.

Even in this thread someone came in spouting off things about what others supposedly are not believing, meaning those others don't belong here and not in any post did anyone even state what they did or did not believe.

There was one poster who came into another area of the forum to ask a question regarding things that are common to the Penticostal/WOF/Charismatic. She was asking if anyone there could explain it to her. She said she'd come into this forum and asked the question and she was immediately attacked for asking

 

[Atlantians]

PHIA= Physical Healing in the atonement (People who have read Matthew 8:17).

A verse that has absolutely nothing to do with the Cross and doesn't quote the verse Lismore seems to think it does.
The verse quoted verbatem in Mathew 8:17 is this:
"He took up our infirmities
and carried our diseases."

It was said by Mathew that this prophesy was fullfilled when Jesus healed several people in His ministry.

Lismore, you are taking that verse out of context, and saying it is talking about something it isn't.

Isaiah 53:5 was fullfilled at the Cross, not in the 8th chapter of Mathew.
And when Isaiah 53:5 was fullfilled, IT WAS NEVER claimed that Jesus's punishment and death was in any way related to or for Physical Healing from infirmities.

Even in this thread someone came in spouting off things about what others supposedly are not believing, meaning those others don't belong here and not in any post did anyone even state what they did or did not believe.

Agreed. And good observation.

There was one poster who came into another area of the forum to ask a question regarding things that are common to the Penticostal/WOF/Charismatic. She was asking if anyone there could explain it to her. She said she'd come into this forum and asked the question and she was immediately attacked for asking.

Could you post a link, I would like to read that.

 

[RevJdK]

Ok...let me see if I get this straight (and Jim, feel free to put your .02 in...LOL)
Adam was created into a perfect world...no sickness, no disease, no lack in spirit, soul, or body.
Adam chose to disobey, thus cursing all of mankind and polluting it with sin.
Christ, the second Adam came, lived a sinless life, died on a cross as a sacrifice for mankind....BUT, from what I am reading some of you believe here, it was only a partial redemption? Hmmm...very interesting.
So, in some of the views I have read here, Adams sin was greater than Christs sacrifice.....Or, to put it another way, The curse of sin is greater than the sacrifice of Christ....interesting viewpoint.....sad..but interesting.
And Jim...I let your last comment directed at me slide....Please dont reply in that condescending manner again. I am a VERY educated adult and would like to be addressed as such.
Thank you in advance.
God bless all,
RevJ

 

[nephilimiyr]

Aw... come on guys.
I know church people are sheltered... but please tell me you know who Pink Floyd is!!!!!

I knew it and even had the melody playing along in my head while I read it.

I thought it was a very kewl thing to post.

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

Could you post a link, I would like to read that.

It's been a few months, I don't know if I can find it, but I'll look.

 

[Atlantians]

At Pentecost they were all filled with the Holy SPirit and all spoke in tongues! Dear reader, If this statement makes your stomach turn, then you are not pentecostal!

Then I am Pentacostal by your statement.
Thank you.

Well... gee.
I looked around for places where someone did this evil thing....
But I could not find any.
Maybe they erased them to cover their tracks!
Those tricksie Wofers.

My instant reaction to you is Sock Puppet... your post count is not that large either.
And I have not seen you before here.
However I would not be so bold as to make that judgement.

They may have been deleted. They may just be lost in the several dozen long healing threads. Everyone in this thread knows what I am reffering to. If you don't, that is unfortunate.

I can understand wanting to keep those out who are here only to disagree with a doctrine that makes a group a group. Speaking in tongues is a vital part of being Spirit Filled, Penticostal, and/or WOF. I agree that if a poster does not believe that speaking in tongues is for today then this is not the forum for them. However, rising up AS hunting dogs chasing a rabbit is not what I think the Lord had in mind when he tells us to reprove.

Agreed. But this is where things get harry.
One group will claim another's beliefs on Tongues are not Charismatic/Pentacostal enough, and thus that person should not be here.
I believe tongues should never be spoken in Public without interpretation.
Some justify public mass ranting by saying "prayer languages" which is still tongues, and thus still under the guidelines set by Paul.
They will then respond and accuse me of not truly being spirit filled or Pentacostal.
Simply because my belief doesn't align enough with their dogma.

Hi there

I believe everyone is more than welcome to post here!

But I think that only charismatic/ pentecostal/ WOF should be allowed to debate here..................

I would delete WOF from that list do to it being a sub-sect of Charismatic and Pentacostal, not a true denomination unto itself.
Thus it falls under the other two parts, making its inclussion in the list redundant.
Why did I tell you this?
Not sure.
But I am right.

People who do not speak in tongues should not be allowed to debate on it. Same with all the gifts.

Well that is logically fallacious.
How can they debate if they already agree?

Anyone can debate the healing doctrines of WOF on this forum, not just those who already accept them as right.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that "speaking in tongues" is a requirement to post OR debate on this forum.

Very very good point/observation.
You just summed up everything I said in a simple way.
My blasted intellectuallism often causes overuse of my fingers tender muscles.

Adam was created into a perfect world...no sickness, no disease, no lack in spirit, soul, or body.

Yep.

Adam chose to disobey, thus cursing all of mankind and polluting it with sin.

Yep.

Christ, the second Adam came, lived a sinless life, died on a cross as a sacrifice for mankind.

Yes.
He died to restore our relationship with Him, and free us from the punishment of the sin we commit.
We have not been freed from the sin nature itself however, and remain in imperfect bodies.
We will all be ressurected,
which is the Hope of the Believer.
That will restore us in our physical beings to what we should have been,
and are without sin or the marring of the sin nature.
His redemption was full.

I disagree with the Doctrine that physical healing today was part of the atonement.
I find that doctrine false, and unsupported by scripture.
I believe healing is a seperate gift, apart from the saving of our spirit and soul.

So if that seperate gift is guarranteed or not is not at issue in my debate.
My issue is strictly with the idea that it is guarranteed by Christ's sufferings, which from my study is unsupported in scripture, save for the misquotation, twisting, and misapplication of Mathew 8:17 and misinterpretation of Isaiah 53 thereof.

Whether healing is assured or not, is to me, a seperate issue.

God has the power to heal people regardless of their status of redemtption.
God's power to heal is unrelated to forgiveness from Sin.

We will all be restored to perfect Bodies in the ressurection.

As for current temporal healing being assured, again, I believe that is a seperate issue from whether or not Christ suffered for physical healing.

BUT, from what I am reading some of you believe here, it was only a partial redemption?

Nope. Full redemption,
yet to be fully actualized.

So, in some of the views I have read here, Adams sin was greater than Christs sacrifice.....Or, to put it another way, The curse of sin is greater than the sacrifice of Christ....interesting viewpoint.....sad..but interesting.

Nope.

It's been a few months, I don't know if I can find it, but I'll look.

Thank you.

 

[TreeOfLife]

I do believe that physical healing is in the atonement. I don't understand all the reasons and the why's to it not always manifesting but I do believe healing is there and waiting for the receiver to use it. I am not meaning to put anyone down with this statement 'cause there are things in my own life that I'm still waiting for manifestation. My not seeing them does not nullify what God has done.

Excellent post Q.

 

[JustAFadedMemory]

Then I am Pentacostal by your statement.
Thank you.



My instant reaction to you is Sock Puppet... your post count is not that large either.
And I have not seen you before here.
However I would not be so bold as to make that judgement.

They may have been deleted. They may just be lost in the several dozen long healing threads. Everyone in this thread knows what I am reffering to. If you don't, that is unfortunate.


Agreed. But this is where things get harry.
One group will claim another's beliefs on Tongues are not Charismatic/Pentacostal enough, and thus that person should not be here.
I believe tongues should never be spoken in Public without interpretation.
Some justify public mass ranting by saying "prayer languages" which is still tongues, and thus still under the guidelines set by Paul.
They will then respond and accuse me of not truly being spirit filled or Pentacostal.
Simply because my belief doesn't align enough with their dogma.



I would delete WOF from that list do to it being a sub-sect of Charismatic and Pentacostal, not a true denomination unto itself.
Thus it falls under the other two parts, making its inclussion in the list redundant.
Why did I tell you this?
Not sure.
But I am right.



Well that is logically fallacious.
How can they debate if they already agree?

Anyone can debate the healing doctrines of WOF on this forum, not just those who already accept them as right.


Very very good point/observation.
You just summed up everything I said in a simple way.
My blasted intellectuallism often causes overuse of my fingers tender muscles.


Yep.


Yep.


Yes.
He died to restore our relationship with Him, and free us from the punishment of the sin we commit.
We have not been freed from the sin nature itself however, and remain in imperfect bodies.
We will all be ressurected,
which is the Hope of the Believer.
That will restore us in our physical beings to what we should have been,
and are without sin or the marring of the sin nature.
His redemption was full.

I disagree with the Doctrine that physical healing today was part of the atonement.
I find that doctrine false, and unsupported by scripture.
I believe healing is a seperate gift, apart from the saving of our spirit and soul.

So if that seperate gift is guarranteed or not is not at issue in my debate.
My issue is strictly with the idea that it is guarranteed by Christ's sufferings, which from my study is unsupported in scripture, save for the misquotation, twisting, and misapplication of Mathew 8:17 and misinterpretation of Isaiah 53 thereof.

Whether healing is assured or not, is to me, a seperate issue.

God has the power to heal people regardless of their status of redemtption.
God's power to heal is unrelated to forgiveness from Sin.

We will all be restored to perfect Bodies in the ressurection.

As for current temporal healing being assured, again, I believe that is a seperate issue from whether or not Christ suffered for physical healing.


Nope. Full redemption,
yet to be fully actualized.


Nope.


Thank you.

Another "nobody is right but me" fellow.

Get ready for a very lonely life.

 

[RevJdK]

Well, since sickness came as a result of sin, simple logic says that if there be redemption from sin, there is also for sickness.....
But that is all I`ll say on this. I`ve been around long enough to know that nothing said on here is going to change anyone`s mind. The whole purpose of threads like this is to cause more strife and division in the body of Christ (as if there isnt enough already!!!) and so that those who start them can attempt to show off their warped theology. My comments can be deemed true by one simple glance up and down the page of threads.
RevJ

 

[J4Jesus]

I've heard the name, but don't have a clue otherwise.

Pink Floyd oh come on. I thought I got away from them guys when I left home.

 

[Atlantians]

Another "nobody is right but me" fellow.

Get ready for a very lonely life.

I would prefer you show your mental proficiency by actually trying to debate the issue, rather then incessantly insulting, demeaning, and undermining the debater.

Well, since sickness came as a result of sin, simple logic says that if there be redemption from sin, there is also for sickness.

No, not exactly.
Sin is the root cause of sickness.
The atonement accounted for the cause and its punishment, ressurection and temporal healing account for the physical results and effects.
Redemption from sin is not equal to the removal of its personal and collective consequences.

Furthermor our redemption is positional, and progressive.
We still are sinners, we still inhabit the same imperfect body.

Jesus certainly was not whiped by a roman cat of nine tails laced with glass and metal prongs, which litterally tore off his flesh, allowed himself to be beaten, and then hung to sufficate and bleed to death on a Cross all for physical healing, oh, and spiritual restoration.
No. Peter makes it very clear why He endured that.
All the Apostles make it very clear, and none of them even hint at or mention physical healing.

Thus I come to this conclusion:
Healing may be promissed for all believers and guarranteed through our trust in God, but the Cross, the wounds of Christ, were for our salvation. Our spiritual restoration and redemption.

The whole purpose of threads like this is to cause more strife and division in the body of Christ (as if there isnt enough already!!!) and so that those who start them can attempt to show off their warped theology.

Be very aware that you are reffering to me.
And this thread was not started as a debate, but rather a thread of awareness to spark discussion and clearification.
It evolved into a theological debate, as most do.
My intentions were not to create strife or divide the body, actually they were the opposite...
and I was certainly not showing of theology, let alone warped theology.
My theology is not warped... and I have never claimed anyone elses were either.

My comments can be deemed true by one simple glance up and down the page of threads.
RevJ

True maybe for most, but I assure you, my intentions were not that for this one.
So watch your judgement.

 

[RevJdK]

Not judging at all...Simply stating the truth, considering the "displays" I have seen here. Its quite obvious that this is a topic which most PC`s disagree wholeheartedly with WOFers on and has caused MANY harsh words to fly and stirred strife and dissention, and someone as well spoken as yourself should know that it really doesnt matter WHO started the thread, its gonna get ugly before long....
As I said, I wont argue with you on this. I KNOW what I know.....I had full blown TB (to the point of coughing up tissue) yet was fully healed and restored....so you and I will get nowhere discussing this. You dont believe healing is covered, fine...thats your right and nobody will take away your right to be sick.....but, because of what I know to be true, you`ll never change my mind either. And I`m sure those statements apply for everyone on here, whether they be PC or WOF.

 

[Atlantians]

Not judging at all...Simply stating the truth, considering the "displays" I have seen here. Its quite obvious that this is a topic which most PC`s disagree wholeheartedly with WOFers on and has caused MANY harsh words to fly and stirred strife and dissention, and someone as well spoken as yourself should know that it really doesnt matter WHO started the thread, its gonna get ugly before long....
As I said, I wont argue with you on this.

Post Pentecostals I have met agree with the PHIA doctrine actually...

I KNOW what I know.....I had full blown TB (to the point of coughing up tissue) yet was fully healed and restored....so you and I will get nowhere discussing this.

God seems far too merciful to allow non-salvation-oriented doctrinal errors to keep Him from healing people.
What is TB by the way?

You dont believe healing is covered, fine...thats your right and nobody will take away your right to be sick.....

See, this is one of the doctrinal points we get off on:
You assert that if I don't believe in your brand of healing, I somehow want to be sick, or don't have faith to be healed.
I know the Doctrine of PHIA is wrong.
It is not supported scripturally.
In fact it is obvious only in its absense.
The only way to get it into the atonement is by misinterpreting, misquoting, and manhandling scripture.
Whoever uses Mathew 8:17 as a pretext,
is just flat out wrong, in that the fact is: That text specifically quotes ONE prophesy of a series, as being fullfilled. And this use of Mathew not only falls apart at the seems, but the point trying to be made is also flawed do to the fact that the verse Mathew 8:17 quotes has nothing to do with the atonement, and the verse later in the prophesy string that does, has nothing to do with the physical body.
When I say this, the opponent arguer then often makes some claim about how if I say that, then healing ended then or something...
which is essentially spray-and-pray debating.

Saying "thats your right and nobody will take away your right to be sick" is just wrong, and a poor doctrinal jab.
It doesn't really fit into any other catagory than Argumentum ad hominem, which is appealing to the person you disagree with rather then the issue at hand.

The thing is I never said that healing wasn't assured, rather that there is no scriptural basis for healing to be provided by means of the Atonement.
In fact scripture asserts the opposite, and reffutes the PHIA doctrine by its absense in all texts directly talking about the Cross and Jesus' death.

If you don't accept that, I really have nothing I can say to change that.
Anything I would like to say would be taken as an insult, in spite of its intent being anything but an insult.

but, because of what I know to be true, you`ll never change my mind either. And I`m sure those statements apply for everyone on here, whether they be PC or WOF.

So be it.
I would like it if you and other adherents of the PHIA doctrine would be more open to opposing views on this non-essential issue, but again, so be it.

 

[JimB]

Not judging at all...Simply stating the truth, considering the "displays" I have seen here. Its quite obvious that this is a topic which most PC`s disagree wholeheartedly with WOFers on and has caused MANY harsh words to fly and stirred strife and dissention, and someone as well spoken as yourself should know that it really doesnt matter WHO started the thread, its gonna get ugly before long....
As I said, I wont argue with you on this. I KNOW what I know.....I had full blown TB (to the point of coughing up tissue) yet was fully healed and restored....so you and I will get nowhere discussing this. You dont believe healing is covered, fine...thats your right and nobody will take away your right to be sick.....but, because of what I know to be true, you`ll never change my mind either. And I`m sure those statements apply for everyone on here, whether they be PC or WOF.

God did not heal you to confirm your doctrine, Rev. He healed you because He is a loving and merciful God who has a purpose for your life.

Do you really think WOF’ers are the only ones who really believe God heals? Sure sounds like it. Let me say this again where everyone hear it (watch my lips):

EVERYONE IN THIS FORUM BELIEVES IN HEALING!!

ALL OF US!!​

Where do you guys get off implying we don’t? I have seen terminal cancers healed, beginning as a child in 1953. As a young unsaved woman my own mother was miraculously healed of terminal cancer in the latter stages of malignancy (lymphatic, ovarian and breast) and was given up by medical doctors, shipped to MD Anderson Hospital in Houston for treatment and the inevitable, where God healed her on her hospital bed and she lived another fifty years. So, I (for one) have believed in healing longer than WOF has been a theology and long before you were even born. So I resent any implication that I/we do not believe God heals because I/we do not buy into WOF/PHIA. Since I left WOF (c.1992), I have witnessed God heal hundreds in my presence, many of them by using a PHIA-heretic like me. In fact, He uses me just as frequently post-WOF and He did when I was immersed (and drowning) in the doctrine.

Everyone in this forum ~ not just WOF’ers ~ believes God heals. We just do not believe we have some sort of healing contract (i.e., PHIA) where God is obligated to heal us on demand. I have seen WOF’ers (even WOF preachers) presumptuously wave their Bible at God and demand healing, “reminding Him of His Word” (as though God suffers from Alzheimer and has a bad long-term memory).

God does not heal just because we want it. He heals in response to His own good pleasure, compassion and mercy. I trust God no matter what happens to me because I know He loves me and always has my best interest at heart. So I am happy and humbled to pray, "Not my will but thine be done." I have learned to trust Him for His sake alone and not just for what He will do for me.

If God doesn’t heal when we ask Him to (and let’s truthfully face it, sometimes He doesn’t) then our duty at that point is to trust Him alone, knowing that He is working something in/through our lives that we will understand later. This is where our trusting-faith trumps your presumptuous-faith. Trusting God when things don’t go as we have prayed or hoped is where non-WOF’ers beat WOF’ers hands down. WOF theology does not seem to understand what it is to trust God when life or health is falling apart; to rest in Him for His sake alone and not in what He will do for me. WOF theology only knows what it is to claim some imagined entitlement like an obnoxious spoiled child thinking they have every right to every toy and privilege imaginable just because they are who they are.

I bought into WOF for about a decade during the 80’s and 90’s because it looked good on paper and its televangelist salesmen had an attractive pitch. But after I bought the product and discovered that it didn’t work in life like the salesmen promised, I stepped back and looked at it less-lovingly and more-objectively and realized that I had been sold a lemon and repented of my error. The further I get away from it the less sense it makes and the more I realize how it cripples, not supports, faith.

~Jim

Even a dime held close enough to the eye can blot out the sun.


​

 

[victoryword]

God did not heal you to confirm your doctrine, Rev. He healed you because He is a loving and merciful God who has a purpose for your life.

STRAWMAN ALERT!!!! The good Rev was not saying that God healed him to "confirm his doctrine." He was saying that because God healed him, no one can convince him that God does not heal nor is God unwilling to heal when asked to do so. Had nothing to do with doctrine.

Do you really think WOF’ers are the only ones who really believe God heals? Sure sounds like it. Let me say this again where everyone hear it (watch my lips):

EVERYONE IN THIS FORUM BELIEVES IN HEALING!!

ALL OF US!!

​

Many of you say you believe in healing. WoFers are usually the ones who put our beliefs into action. We do not presume upon some mysterious sovereignty but take God at His Word.

Many of you speak out of both sides of your mouth. You claim to believe God heals, you may even have some experiences of God working supernaturally among you. But most of you are practical CALVINISTS when it comes to this subject. Calvinists have salvations and conversions among them as well. Yet, many of them are not very zealous concerning the doctrines of intercession for the lost, evangelism, and missions. Why? Because it is not God's will to save all based on their doctrine.

They play the same semantical games with the promises for salvation and the new birth that people like you do with the promises for healing. They change the "whosoever," "world," and "all" to read "elect" and "chosen few". You and others do nearly the exact same thing with God's healing promises.

Where do you guys get off implying we don’t?

I think the "implication comes from your constant barrage of attacks against the doctrine. When you are backed in a corner you speak about how much you believe in this and you give your experiences as stated below.

Furthermore, you have personally launched so many strawman attacks against WoFers (including the one in this very post) that I can only laugh.

 

[churchlady]

[/size][/font][/color]

STRAWMAN ALERT!!!! The good Rev was not saying that God healed him to "confirm his doctrine." He was saying that because God healed him, no one can convince him that God does not heal nor is God unwilling to heal when asked to do so. Had nothing to do with doctrine.



Many of you say you believe in healing. WoFers are usually the ones who put our beliefs into action. We do not presume upon some mysterious sovereignty but take God at His Word.

Many of you speak out of both sides of your mouth. You claim to believe God heals, you may even have some experiences of God working supernaturally among you. But most of you are practical CALVINISTS when it comes to this subject. Calvinists have salvations and conversions among them as well. Yet, many of them are not very zealous concerning the doctrines of intercession for the lost, evangelism, and missions. Why? Because it is not God's will to save all based on their doctrine.

They play the same semantical games with the promises for salvation and the new birth that people like you do with the promises for healing. They change the "whosoever," "world," and "all" to read "elect" and "chosen few". You and others do nearly the exact same thing with God's healing promises.



I think the "implication comes from your constant barrage of attacks against the doctrine. When you are backed in a corner you speak about how much you believe in this and you give your experiences as stated below.

Furthermore, you have personally launched so many strawman attacks against WoFers (including the one in this very post) that I can only laugh.

And I'm still waiting for his reply to my question about his charges against us, here.....
http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=29973063#post29973063

In light of the recent thread with tons of healing testimonies of people on this forum, he just can't answer.

 

[victoryword]

And I'm still waiting for his reply to my question about his charges against us, here.....
http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=29973063#post29973063

In light of the recent thread with tons of healing testimonies of people on this forum, he just can't answer.

I doubt if he ever will CL, but I read it. Good job

 

[JimB]

*****

Many of you say you believe in healing. WoFers are usually the ones who put our beliefs into action. We do not presume upon some mysterious sovereignty but take God at His Word.

Many of you speak out of both sides of your mouth. You claim to believe God heals, you may even have some experiences of God working supernaturally among you. But most of you are practical CALVINISTS when it comes to this subject. Calvinists have salvations and conversions among them as well. Yet, many of them are not very zealous concerning the doctrines of intercession for the lost, evangelism, and missions. Why? Because it is not God's will to save all based on their doctrine.

They play the same semantical games with the promises for salvation and the new birth that people like you do with the promises for healing. They change the "whosoever," "world," and "all" to read "elect" and "chosen few". You and others do nearly the exact same thing with God's healing promises.


*****

It is these kind of lame statements that cause you to lose credibility. I have not found that great of healings among WOF’ers and PHIA'ers as I have among P/C’s outside their ranks. Mostly, WOF blows smoke to hide their lack of effectiveness. If WOF worked in life as it does in the mouths of its televangelist propagators, the whole world would be healed. But it doesn’t.

Unlike you, I have been on both sides of the doctrine, as a gullible (and frustrated) insider and now as an outsider. I can tell you, that healing works just as well (if not better) on this side of the doctrine as on that side.

BTW, I had the privilege of being used by God in healing someone this week. How about you?

~Jim

Even a dime held close enough to the eye can blot out the sun.​

 

[JimB]

And I'm still waiting for his reply to my question about his charges against us, here.....
http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=29973063#post29973063

In light of the recent thread with tons of healing testimonies of people on this forum, he just can't answer.

Um, I did answer your terrifying question CL. See #62 here
http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=29973063.

~Jim

Even a dime held close enough to the eye can blot out the sun.​

 

[msbojingles]