Duncan Campbell on True Revival

t has to begin with a strong conviction of sin, a wave of fear of God possessing peopoe.  

 (Audio) The Revival On The Isle Of Lewis by Duncan Campbell - YouTube

Then a round tab le with three authors on the subject of the heritage of the West:

Happened on a You Tube channel carrying biographies of Christian leaders and stories of revivals.   D L Moody was the first I saw, then the Weslewy borthers first John and then Charles, then the Welcsh revival of 1904, though I may have skipped something in between, not sure.  Then they did a program on the Millerites which became the SSeventh Day Adventists.  Not your orthodox denomination, especially when you see Ellen G White's strange eyes.    All interesting nevertheless.  

But then Azusa Street and the Pentcostal movement and I knew I was in a fringe part of the Christian universe.I's the usual uncritical presentation that makes much of the phenomena such as tongues speaking as evidence of the "baptism in the Holy Spirit"  whicfh  only succeeds in confusing things .   I thought John MacArthur's Strange First Conference did a great job of showing that the 
girffts of the PSirit" claimed by the charismatic movement are nothing like the gifsts described in the New Testament, and I could echo that from my own experience of having received the "tonguies" which I know are some kind of bogus experience and not at all the tongues of the Bible.  I was glad to  finally be set free from the charismtaic influence that had continued to hold me in spirte of my own recognition of its falseness.

B ut at the same time I've always felt that the reason people get involved in that movement has a valid basis, , that most Christians really do live on a level of experience much beneath what is possib le and woulde be a powerful impetus to the Churuch if God would bring it about.  

I acce[t the basic Reformed theology that says we are born again at the point that we truly believe in the salvatgion given us by Christ .   I don't think what some call the baptism in the Holy Spirit subsequent to that is in fact that baptism, but is in most cases either conversion itself which hadn'[t happened earlier in spite of the claim that it had, or was a fuller inpouring of the Holy Spirit, and it's this latter that I continue to wish for myself as well as the Church.

The episode I saw about D. >L. Moody described his first conversion as rather dramatic, so it is easy to impute tto him the regeneration experience at that time and I have no reason to doub t it.  He was powerfully changed and moved to preach the gospel, major signs that he had in fact been tborn again.

Nevertheless later on some women in his congregation prayed for him and he recieving a deeper experience of the Holy Spirit, which  brought a definite increase in power to his preaching.  While he didn't preach anything new, what he praeched converted many more people than it had done before, although he'd had a a csuccessful ministry of conversions to that p[oint.   So  whatever this "second blessing" is it's not the born again experience, it's not the oirigianl baptism in the Holy Spirit like what was experienced in Acts 2 at the beginning of the Church, it must be simply a greater empowering in the Spirit, and it must be something we could and should seek.  When it comes to a whole congregation or community it's simply revival.

Seems to me we all need this and the Church needs it.  I know that if we are in the very last days, and there seems to be every rason to think we are, that many teach that we can't expect any more rfevivals, it's all down hill from here.  That may be true, b ut why should we just accept this idea?  Surely we always need more power of the Holy Spirit as individuals and as congregations and communitiies.  Why should that need some to an end just because the eworld is sliding into the last days, and even most of the churches?   Even if we have to accept that there is a great apostasy underway that doesn't inclucdde ALL the churches, there are still strue churches, there is still "the remnant" that looks forward to the Rapture.

TGhe charismatic "revivals of the nineties are some kind of sick joke.  While I'm wiloling to consider that some of those who experienced them did have genuine experiences of the Holy Spirit, as a whiole the revivals are obviously profane and unChristian.  There is a frivolousness at least that is not fitting a work of the Holy Spirit, a giddiness or jokiness about the tone of them.  Where is the powerful praching that draws people to Chrfist?  I don';t see it any of those so called revivals.  The Laughing Revival is maybe the most obvious bogus event.  Watchman Nee identifies that laughter as "soul power" and not of the Holy Spirit.

A genuine revival produces fear of God, a hatred of sin and a condenmnation of oneself as a sinner while Jesus death on the cross is magnified and preached with greater depth than usual.This may not describ e all genuine revivals but something of that tone must be present it seems to me or it's not genuine.

Just because we have to give up on the charismatic version of revival soesn't mean we should tive up on revival as such, but unfortunatley that does seem to happen. John MacArthur has always seemed to me to be positively allergied to any idea of  that we could have and certainly should seek more power from god.  If the bible is being preached conscientiously and conversions are happening that's enough for him.   

It's not for me.Revival True and False

 \\\Bret and Heather 156th DarkHorse Podcast Livestream: Who Lost the Plot? - YouTube

Prime numbers again

 For some reason the silly dialogues between Bret and Heather on their Dark Horse Podcast about prime numbers inspire me to think about such things which normally I wouldn't.  Ive done a few blog posts about them already, and managed to flub up one that I've never gone back to correct.  But anyway, since this week they are going on and on about the subject on their nonprime nmber e episode 157 which is a prime number, I thought I'd try to explain what I think is the best way to figure out whether a number is prime or not according to my own stumblings around on the topic.

You look at the last ndigit in the number,  No matter who large the number that last digit is the key to whether it is prime or not.  If it's an even number you know it is not prime because it is always divisible by at least 2.   If it is a five it is not a prime number because it is always divisible by five.  If it is a zero it is always divisible by both five and two.  

Once you've eliminated all the numbers as above, the remaining possibilities are one, three, seven and n nine.   At that point you consider what two-digit number ending in each of those is prime or noneprime.  It turns out that there are very few that are nonprime.  For instance, two digit numbers ending in one are eleven, twentyone,  thirtyone, fortyone and son on.  Of all those two digit numbers only twentyone and eightyone are divisible by a number other than one or itself.  Twentyone is divisible by seven and three, eightyone is divisiable by nineand three , so if your target number can be reduced to either of those as you divide it out in your head you know it is not a prime number,  But allt he other numbers ending in one are prime.  

Same method with three:  thirty three sixty three and ninety three are all divisible by three and eleven or two etc.  

Same process with seven and nine.  Lots more prime numbers than nonprime ones with these four numbers.  

I think it works but I'm no mathematician.  If it works it reduces the toil of figuring out what's prime and what isn't as much as possible for a methmatical klutz.  That's my opinion.

Oops, no, two is not divisible into anything that ends in three.  Oops.  thirtythree, sixtythree and ninety three are divisible by eleven, nine and of course three.  Brain very tired though so even this may need to be corrected in turn.  Sigh.

Some interesting nanotgechnology but so far too many limitations for some criminal uses, or so it seems to me

Update:  ere's the link to the latest Jan Markell radio show, which is about  how Christians are being targeted by demons to an alarming frequency.

Fear No Evil – Pastor Brandon Holthaus - YouTube

Doing a little research into tech capabilities, found videos of "Autonomous Insect Drones" at You Tube.  Drones that mimic bees, flyies, ants, etc, drones that are actual living insects whos brains have been implanted with electrodes that force them to move in certain ways, something called scallop0s... robo scallops?  microscallops?  dont' rememer the name of them, but they can perform tasks at a microscopic level inside the body, in blood vessels for instance.  How they are delivered there wasn't explained, nor exactly how they work.  They are little things that look to my bad eyes something like a blood cell itself, or a tiny disclike candy, lifesave, lozenge etc.  

All these devices are very expensive with just a few exceptions, have ifferent kinds of capabilities and limitations.   The life span of those that work inside the body must be pretty short but they don't say.  

There is a pill, yes a pill, a capsule, developed for the sake of insulin users that otherwise have to take injections at the rate of hundreds a year.  The pill can be swallowed and once in the stomach a needle like appendage pricks the wall of the stomach to deliver the drug, since it must be injected, can't survive the stomach acid.  the prick is apparently shallow so will not actually perforate the stomach wall, just inject its contect into the stomach lining itself from which location it can apparently spread throughout the body.

The Technology is quite amazing and no doubt being perfected all the time, and obviously couple be used for evil purposes althoguh I haven't yet found a discussion alalong those lines.

I haven't yet seen a drone tiny enough to get in nside the body on its own, or even by control, without the person being aware of it or having to participate in its ingestion cuh as by swallowing it intentionally or something along those lines, so ideas some have that they can just get into you without your knowing it such as by entering through mouth or nose, aren't feasible.  Of course supposedly they could have been developed but not publicized but that's hard to imagine since people who develop such things like to show off their creations such as on you tube.  However, I guess if their only purpose is something that must be kept secret it would be kept secret.  Nevertheless, the capabilities so far displayed by thee  inventions so seem too limited for any such use at this time.

A;; tjios re;ates tp ,u r[revopis [pst wjere O wamted tp fomd pit ,pre abpit tje jarass,emt amd [pssobo;otu jar,fi; attacl pm targeted omdovodia;s sicj as [erja[s tje imvaccomated/  Sp far O see a ;pt pf a,azomg tecjmp;pgu tjat a;,pst a[[rpacjues sicj c;ao,ed ex[eroemces bit pm;u a;,pst/   Mpt tjere uet/

10 TINY Micro Robots and Nano Drones - YouTube

LLater:  I listened to the post and found out that last paragraph is a mess of gibberish.  Don't even know what I was trying to say there.  But what I want to add here is that I'd lieft out the fact that the microscallop nanomacjine is powered externally by an electromagnetic field or something like that.  Still no hint about how they get them into the body in the first place, if it could be done without the person'as being aware of the rpprocess.        Or how long they are able to "live" inside the body etc.

lATER, HRE'S A VIDEO OF AN INTERVIEW WITH THREE NANOTECH SCIENTISTS IN WHICH THE FIST EXAMPLE IS A ROBOT THE  SIZE OF HALF A POPPY SEED THAT IS EITHER BEING USED OR PLANNED TO BE USED IN THE BODY TO SEARCH OUT CANCERS OR SOME SUCH THING.  iT'S THE SIZE THAT'S INTERESTING, IT'S NOT MICROSCOPIC BUT IT'S CERTAINLY MUCH SMALL ER THAN ANY OF THE DRONES O OTHER ROBOS i'VE LOOKED AT RECENTLY.    i'M STILL LISTENING TO IT AND HOPE THEY'LL EVENTUALLYSAY MORE ABOUT THIS KIND OF WORK BUT THEY'VE GONE OFF INTO OTHER TOPICS FOR NOW.

Cellular Surgeons: The New Era of Nanomedicine - YouTube

Added:  Here I'm going to put a link to something completely different because I lost the source and am afraid of losing the link.  Thisx is a talk by  warren Smith about the many false teachers in the churches today, including those  I've mentioned show up in a Bible Study I attended in my apartment building:  Jesus Calling is top of his list as a New Age false Jesus.  He also mentions David Jeremiah who is usually pretty trustworthy but apparently has endorsed false teacher Leonard  Sweet ==  not sure I have that name right but Smith talks a lot about him.  Smith came out of the New Ag himsel

nizes New Age teaching whereas many Christians won't.

Warren B Smith - Be Still and Know That You are Not God! (Berean Call Bible Conference) - YouTube