new

CHRISTIAN MIRACLES AND HEALINGS APPARENTLY EASY TO RECEIVE IN JAPAN!

I'd like to report a direct contrast in the results of prayer in Jesus name for a certain type of miracle, physical object alteration (like water changed into wine) between Japan and Germany. In Japan, it was much easier to receive answers to such prayers.

I have had miracles of a more common type, the form of disease healing, occur in Japan, too. But I have no comparison in terms of a contrast in the results of such prayers made in Germany to compare Japan against.

Repeated, simple, short (minute or less), repeated prayer in Jesus' name could become the basis of a new wave or re-establishment of Christian revival and evangelism for the nation of Japan.

I've had case experiences in both places making requests for healing in prayer and dramatically receiving them. Simply put, it resembled most the Bible form of Elijah's prayer for rain. However, this is a distinctive form and type of prayer. I would call it even a novel type in the Bible.

First of all, the process was not short in total, but simple and direct in the manner of each prayer; it was a simple prayer of adoration or affirmation of faith in the efficacy/power of God, coupled with a request in Jesus name. It was also rather quiet, intense, and repeated in the form of continuous (back-to-back) prayers. That's HOW I prayed in both cases.

Prayers in faith trust Him to supply ALL things as needed. These simple, repeated prayers for specific things are supported or backed by a general practice of making daily prayers about all kinds of things and needs to the Lord.

Elijah made repeated meaningful, targeted prayers with the addition of a check or test conducted after each one as his deliberate form or approach to his prayer request. His modus operandi was to pray repeatedly UNTIL God answers with at least a minimal physical sign and check after each prayer. (1 Kings 18-19). After the sign is seen, then go praise. We ought to at least try his model. It was used at least once in the Old Testament, but likely it was at least one of Elijah's very typical manners of prayer. A lot of the details and reasoning are only implied, but Elijah had dramatic success in answered prayers we deem to be uncommon - miracles.

The model I am referring to was used by Elijah in the country-wide re-establishment of the physical cycle of distilled water creation, cloud formation and precipitation of rain for a whole country by Elijah and his servant, though initially just overhead. He had a target and persisted; enduring even sarcastic downplay/ridicule from his cloud-checking servant while during it. Still, he spoke from faith that God answers prayer mightily after the smallest sign or hint of it.

I was immersed in baptism most likely using the formulae of "in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, which is Jesus Christ" as an applied form of Matthew 28:19 and Acts 2:38. Both were added to the formulae used by Paul in Acts 19. The Apostle Paul said the form of baptism made a difference as to whether a person received the baptism of the Holy Spirit or not. I think it made a difference when my mother in her youth baptized a frail woman whose body was riddled with cancer in Jesus name. The woman was immediately healed when immersed using the baptismal formulae that simply called on the name of Lord Jesus. Paul demonstrated it to work here along with the laying on of his hands in prayer. My contrast here also used the laying on of hands at each prayer in Jesus name. My mother's baptizing of this woman was a simple demonstration of its efficacy, too. My mother also used importune (long) prayer in a field when praying for bus money to go and preach one of her scheduled revivals; while praying, she saw a twenty and five-dollar bill in the distance whirl up into the air in the field. It was a wonderful and very helpful surprise!

In late 1973, I was typing out a monthly newsletter for a church in Germany. In the middle of typing out the text, the IBM Selectric I was using stopped whirling. It stopped working. Turning the power switch on and off did nothing. No movement in the machine. It was not even humming anymore.

I needed to finish the typing. I had a deadline. So I prayed briefly in Jesus name. I turned the switch on then and nothing happened. I prayed again. Nothing changed. Prayed again. Nothing happened. But because Elijah didn't give up and altered the physical elements around him, I kept trying. After the 13th time of prayer to God while calling at the end on the name of Jesus, I flipped the power switch on again. The ball began to whirl around, the motor ran noisily, and the whole machine hummed as normal. No attempt at repair had been done. I didn't try to fix it; only pray and turn the power switch on and off.

Recently, our Sony BRAVIA TV went out while watching a program. It was the middle of May, 2016. My wife got out the operation manual and we found the troubleshooting section. We followed every troubleshooting step it said. Nothing repaired it. Nothing it said to check and do worked.

Then I remembered the IBM Selectric incident in 1973. I decided to pray for the TV until it was healed. Each time after the quiet though audible prayer, I checked to see whether the TV had come back to life. This power switch was different. It was only a small button. But after the fifth prayer made calling on the name of Jesus, then checking with the power button if operation had been restored after it, the TV worked. Full operation had been restored. It took 13 prayers back-to-back in Germany; 5 prayers in a row in Japan to `heal' different kinds of machines. Miracles done in Jesus' name are easier to obtain in Japan than in Germany. Maybe the angel of the Lord is able to get down to Japan and bring the answer quicker (Daniel 10:12-13).

I think that we tend to not pray for broken or needed physical objects, though Jesus and prophets of the Old Testament did. Maybe we don't even use the practice of repeated prayers because Jesus warned against using the vain repetition of prayers (Matthew 6:7). But he was referring to a very specific, commonly known practice performed by a particular group of people. I don't think praying with expectancy is vain prayer. And Elijah used repeated prayers for the same thing at one sitting. Paul prayed three times for the removal of a "thorn" or aggravation in the flesh; probably an understatement for a physical affliction. Maybe it was cataracts, for instance. But after the third prayer, the Lord told Paul to cease in his requesting, adding: "My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness." (2 Corinthians 12:9).

Life is both precious and precarious. But the Lord promised in the Gospels that our needs will be supplied. I believe when we pray with expectancy in Jesus name and are daily submitted and obedient to Him, we will indeed receive miracles, the dynamics of which are much left unseen, or else we will hear directly from Him why not whenever we have or feel a need.

You might have to pray seventy times seven. But by the 491st prayer, you will either receive an answer or miracle from God. What's that? About eight hours in minute-long prayer followed by a quick check. 491? How so? You won't be required to forgive the angel bringing the answer down from God more than that. Jesus said to forgive only up to seventy times seven ...
Reply to this post

The first one is all that's necessary to show atheism fails - empirical adequacy.

Its demonstrable by using IF , THEN statements.

IF atheism is true , THEN the universe is either eternal, or "nature" caused it to begin or it leaped into existence out of nothing uncaused.

Ok - let see if there is any evidence to support any of those scenarios:
1. the universe is external: False

A portion of the the evidence:

"Philosophically, the notion of a beginning of the present order of Nature is repugnant to me ... I should like to find a genuine loophole."
Arthur Eddington
"The End of the World: From the Standpoint of Mathematical Physics"
Nature, vol. 127 (1931) p. 450

-Arthur Eddington - "The beginning seems to present insuperable difficulties unless we agree to look on it as frankly supernatural."

-Stephen Hawking: "In real time.....the universe had a beginning."

-Steven Hawking: "It has been interesting to watch the change in the climate of opinion on singularities. When I was a graduate student, almost no one took singularities seriously. Now, as a result of the singularity theorems, nearly everyone believes that the universe began with a singularity. In the meantime, however, I have changed my mind: I still believe that the universe had a beginning, but that it was not a singularity."
Text of `Origin of the Universe' by S.W. Hawking
(Copyright 1988 Stephen W. Hawking. All rights reserved.)

-Dr Guillermo Gonzales: "Like Einstein, most astronomers of the early twentieth century, including the young Hubble, believed in a static and eternal universe. Even after Einstein conceded his error in the late 1920s, many scientists would not accept the implications of an expanding universe-namely, that it can into existence sometime in the finite past."
The Privileged Planet, Gonzales & Richards.

"The picture today is more complete and much richer. The cosmos began 13.7 billion years ago with the big bang." " In our journey back to the beginning of creation, cosmologists first travel through the well-established history of the universe back to the first microsecond; then to within 10-34 second of the beginning, ..."
Scientific American, Sep 2009

-Dr. Robert Jastrow-who until his recent death was the director of the Mount Wilson observatory once led by Edwin Hubble: "Now we see how the astronomical evidence leads to a biblical view of the origin of the world. The details differ, but the essential elements in the astronomical and biblical accounts of Genesis are the same: the chain of events leading to man commenced suddenly and sharply at a definite moment in time, in a flash of light and energy."

-Dr. Robert Jastrow- "Astronomers now find they have painted themselves into a corner because they have proven, by their own methods, that the world began abruptly in an act of creation to which you can trace the seeds of every star, every planet, every living thing in this cosmos and on the earth. And they have found that all this happened as a product of forces they cannot hope to discover. . . . That there are what I or anyone would call supernatural forces at work is now, I think, a scientifically proven fact."

- Einstein tried to avoid such a beginning by creating and holding onto his cosmological "fudge factor" in his equations until 1931, when Hubble's astronomical observations caused him to grudgingly accept "the necessity for a beginning."
A. Vibert Douglas
"Forty Minutes With Einstein"
Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada
Vol. 50 (1956), p. 100

"Many once believed that the universe had no beginning or end and was truly infinite. Through the inception of the Big Bang theory, however, no longer could the universe be considered infinite. The universe was forced to take on the properties of a finite phenomenon, possessing a history and a beginning." Chris
LaRocco and Blair Rothstein, University of Michigan http://www.umich.edu/~gs265/bigbang.htm

The present location and velocities of galaxies are a result of a primordial blast known as the BIG BANG. It marked: THE BEGINNING OF THE UNIVERSE! THE BEGINNING OF TIME!" Terry Herter, Cornell University http://web.archive.org/web/200607182...o101/lec29.htm

"That radiation is residual heat from the Big Bang, the event that sparked the beginning of the universe some 13 billion years ago." Craig Hogan, University of Washington http://www.washington.edu/newsroom/n.../k032102a.html

Ok - so an eternal universe is ruled out via evidence - that leaves atheism:
1. nature causing the universe to begin
2. an uncaused universe

Lets examine the remainin 2 options for atheism:
1. "nature did it" - what natural forces cause time, space and matter to leap into existence from nothing? There are none - so this option fails.

The last: an uncaused universe.
Preposterous scientifically and logically as this violates the Law of Causality.

So this leaves us a universe that began due to a cause;
1. The universe CANNOT be eternal or static because:

1. The First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics: this says that matter cannot be created or destroyed, it just changes form. The universe contains a FINITE about of energy/matter. The universe still contains usable energy so therefore, the universe cannot be eternal because all the usable energy would have been used up by now.
2. The Cosmic Background Radiation: A static and eternal universe would not have the afterglow of its beginning.
3. Universal Expansion: The universe is still expanding. If the universe was static and eternal it would not be expanding. If it were eternal all the matter in the universe would be an infinite distance apart. Expansion requires a single point of origin in order to have a place to expand from.
4. The Cosmic Rebound Theory is false: Charles Bennet of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center;" The universe will expand forever. It will not turn back on itself and collapse in a great crunch." There is not enough matter in the universe to collapse it back again, therefore the universe had a beginning.
5. This assumes no energy would be lost in each successive crunch/bang.
6. There is no evidence for a Big Bang, Bang, Bang, Bang.
7. The Kalam Cosmological Argument:
a. An infinite number of days has no end.
b. But today is the end of history(history being a collection of all days)
c. Therefore there were not an infinite number of days before today.
d. Another way of saying this is one cannot add anything to infinity. But tomorrow we will add another day, so the number of days must be finite. Thus a finite number of days has a beginning.
Therefore I conclude that the universe had a beginning. An infinite anything within the material universe is theoretically possible, but not actually possible.
8. The Law of Causality: the universe is one big effect, an effect has to have a cause. This is the foundation of all science. If you reject this then you reject science itself and we cannot go any further.

The universe is finite, therefore it had a beginning. Relativity demands a beginning to space-time-matter and has been mathematically verified to 5 decimal places and confirmed by the above empirical evidence (which Relativity predicted such as expansion as well as others, such as parallax (which Relativity predicted also).