Katelyn tarver and david blaise

Wonderland Wives at Lakes Area Theatre ( Lisa Johnson, Echo Press)

2024.05.13 20:04 Timfromfargo Wonderland Wives at Lakes Area Theatre ( Lisa Johnson, Echo Press)

Wonderland Wives at Lakes Area Theatre ( Lisa Johnson, Echo Press) submitted by Timfromfargo to AlexandriaMN [link] [comments]

2024.05.08 22:40 NietzscheIsMyDog Love Joy Trump: A Chorus of Prophetic Voices [Part I]

Love Joy Trump: A Chorus of Prophetic Voices [Part I]
I should have known I was inviting all manner of "starseeds," "prophets," "twin flames," and Mike Lindell into my life when I opened this book. Did you know that Donald Trump is the rightful heir to the throne of Scotland, England, Ireland, AND Israel? Did you know that the entertainment industry is based on "African sun worship and Congo dances?" And did you know that "Presidential elections are a catalyst for the harvesting of souls in the end times?" I didn't, but I sure as hell do now!
https://preview.redd.it/fbehdb2nn8zc1.jpg?width=2000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=eee7f3d124a630453fe3c68523126593b2662696
Many a fundamentalist Christian had already explained to me why Donald Trump was going to win re-election in 2020. That much I was clear on, and there is a *lot* of that in this book. But I was entirely taken aback when I was abruptly informed that that Trump's initial 2016 election had been enforced by the Galactic Federation of Light's Ashtar Command, the air division of the Great White Brotherhood. But all things worth having take time to attain, and it took a few hundred pages of prayers, meandering essays, copypastas from obscure websites, and open letters from God himself to finally find out how the Ashtar Command managed to secure Trump's election at all. For the first time ever, I intend to break this into multiple parts simply because Ashtar Command deserves its own section. You'll see why.
Love Joy Trump contains two separate forwords, the first of which was written by Amanda Grace, a prophetess who frequently speaks for God on YouTube. Mike "Pillow" Lindell follows with his own introduction. The former compares Trump to King David, while the latter compares him to King Cyrus. I won't bore you with the details, but these Bible characters share essentially no similarities. Regardless, Lindell is emphatic that "we must win... to reelect President Donald John Trump whose name literally means 'World leader under the Grace of God who excels and triumphs.' That's pretty clear, isn't it?"
If you, like me, are not convinced by the etymology of Trump's name alone that the aforementioned imperative is "pretty clear," maybe Trump's energy in general will persuade you? Lindell offers this very solution: "Faith without works is dead and President Trump is the perfect example of that with an energy and purpose that can only be considered divine."
Yeah, that sentence didn't really make sense to me either.
Once you've read two separate forewords you will then find yourself reading two separate introductions as well (only one of which is aware it is an introduction), both authored by "BethAnon," the compiler of this book. And then the prayers, prophesies, and transcribed Trump speeches begin. BethAnon's 9 personally written pieces are littered randomly throughout the collection, which is comprised of 44 in total. That's about 1 in 5, and she is arguably the least interesting writer in this book. Be warned.
So, what are the contents?
Love Joy Trump sends the reader through a genuinely uncurated mess of Dominionist theology with drips and drabs of New Age nonsense, nearly all of which claim to be the transcribed voice of God speaking through the chosen recipients of his secret ambiguous messages. God seems to have some trouble choosing a consistent style of speech, and frequently ends his divine sentences with "thus saith the Lord," "says the Lord your God," etc. Here are some excerpts, emphasis is my own:
"And God says, they will say, 'We hated her, but now we love her.' For she shall take the oil of healing and pour it upon the scars of those left and those right and of the new party that has come forth and emerged, where they shall say, 'Christ will reign and we shall not implement socialism at all.'" - Kim Clements, potentially referring to herself.
As you can see, God has a way of having the EXACT opinions of those who speak for him. Here's an example:
"He wants to do what is right. He wants to stop the slaughter of the unborn! He wants the right of freedom of speech-back again! He does not want the transgender agenda! It is an abomination!" - Elisheva Elijah
The Lord works in mysterious ways, as you're about to see. Elisheva goes on to demonstrate the weird epistemology of prophesy in action in what I believe to be a transcription of a livestream of some sort:
Elisheva: "Oh yeah! Katherynyah had visions!"
Katherynyah: "I was asking her [Elisheva] if I should share what I saw, just a couple of things. I saw her [Elisheva] bowing before YAHUSHUA and HE had HIS Hand on her Head."
Elisheva: "Oh! Thank you! I needed that!"
Katherynyah: "And then..."
Elisheva: "Well Ezra's right there, wherever I am."
Katherynyah: "So I'm listening and I see a loaf of white bread with the top and it has pepper on it. And the top, is scraped off. I think it represents Donald Trump - like the top, maybe half an inch section scraped off and it's white underneath. Does that make sense?"
Elisheva: "Yeah! It's taking a layer of pepper-"
Katherynyah: "-but there's pepper on top which is dark spots, you know?"
Elisheva: "Yeah. Well, yeah."
Katherynyah: "But understand it's white. So we do, we lift him up to YOU FATHER."
If the Bible had been written by podcasters, this might be what it would look like. As a side note, I highly recommend you check out Elisheva's website. It's something else.
The Lord goes on to warn us about the dangers of paganism and abortion, and predicts that Israel will fully recover her ancient territory. The Lord endorses Trump every few paragraphs no matter who he is speaking through, and says "I have chosen you, Mr. Trump, and you will be a leader to many, not just of your own people, but of the world." God has the good sense to warn China and the entire continent of Africa that they face an impending invasion by the "Armies of Heaven" who will take "the kingdom" by force. Trump is predicted to be the hero of nearly every tale told in the future; the hero worship will make your jaw drop.
"Is it possible that one-day Trump may be remembered as the man who 'Made America Great Again' and revered by Christians as 'the Great?'" - Blaise Joseph
The politics are predictably shit. In one of BethAnon's screeds, she explains with full honesty the concept of Manifest Destiny in a chapter titled the same:
"It was based on a divine right of the American people to bring civilization and enlightenment to other races..."
Separation of Church and State also comes up:
"'What about separation of church and state?' That's bogus. There is no such thing as separation of church and state. If there is such a thing it means that the government should not stick their nose into the church." - Rodney Howard-Browne, having his cake and eating it too.
Rodney goes on to explain that the first ever megachurch was the US Capitol, and that the Marine Band "did the praise and worship."
So, what is all this? Love Joy Trump is a pandemonic cacophony of mutually exclusive messages from God himself, mixed with the occasional commentary from people who don't seem to actually know anything, all delivering the same message over and over and over again: Donald Trump is going to win re-election in 2020. In hindsight, none of these people should have any credibility. A complete moron could transcribe some podcasts at random, copy and paste poorly written articles off the internet, and as long as your Google searches had a theme you would create a product of identical quality.
Along the way, you may accidentally copy some content that is really out there. Such as this part, in a chapter titled "How We Realized Trump is Leading Our Earth into the Golden Age" by Lindsay and Conner, where the "Global Earth Alliance" overthrows the New World Order by loving one another, the Mayan calendar cycle ending in 2012 signaled the end of the 26000 year dark age, and the International Monetary Fund is controlled by Reptilians from the Draco constellation.
If this is your thing, you are invited by the authors to "look from the knowing of oneness and equality through the Archontic Artificial Intelligence programs into the spirits and hearts of the Annunaki [sic] "Royal" Bloodlines (Vampires of myth), Set (Ancient Egypt), Satanic (Masonic), The Draco Reptilians (Demons), and the Sirian Wolfen beings (Werewolves)."
I suppose it it would take intervention by the Galactic Federation of Light to defeat all that. How are we supposed to take on Hillary-supporting vampires and werewolves by traditional means? Even Q failed to mention what Trump's plan was for this very realistic scenario. But FEAR NOT, PATRIQTS! For all of your questions will be answered directly by Ashtar Command in Part II!
submitted by NietzscheIsMyDog to PieceOfShitBookClub [link] [comments]

2024.05.05 13:15 Cash_Banoca_Spons Neil Druckmann really likes to reuse actors in interesting ways

A lot of directors tend to find themselves working with one or more actors on a regular basis (think Tim Burton and Johnny Depp, Martin Scorsese and Robert De Niro), and it seems Neil Druckmann is no exception. Except he seems to like casting actors as very different characters in different projects. So far, we've got:
On a related note, I'm wonder if Druckmann went after Katelyn Dever to play Abby because he remembered working with her from Uncharted 4, or if it's just a coincidence. Either way, I'm curious to see what direction they go with Abby.
submitted by Cash_Banoca_Spons to thelastofus [link] [comments]

2024.05.02 03:46 Jonesjonesboy 100 Great Comics

I've made 100 entries so far in my list of top 300 comics! Time to look back at the comics I've listed -- any surprises on the list? Anything you want to know about any of them, or say about any of them?
(Dates given are date of original publication, as far as I can work them out)
(Links to specific entries here)
  1. Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe Deluxe Edition/Who's Who by Mark Gruenwald and a cast of thousands (1985)
  2. Understanding Comics by Scott McCloud (1993)
  3. Meat Cake Bible by Dame Darcy (1993)
  4. MAD by Harvey Kurtzman and the usual gang of idiots (1958)
  5. All-Star Squadron #50-#56 (the Crisis crossover issues) by Roy Thomas, Mike Clark, Arvell Jones et al (1985)
  6. Fuzz and Pluck by Ted Stearn (1999)
  7. Here by Richard McGuire (1989)
  8. 100%/Heavy Liquid by Paul Pope (1999)
  9. Various superhero comics by Marcos Martin (2003)
  10. The Goon by Eric Powell (1999)
  11. Various superhero comics by Javier Rodriguez (2010)
  12. Captain Marvel by CC Beck, Mac Raboy, Otto Binder et al (1939)
  13. New Mutants by Bret Blevins (1987)
  14. The World of Edena by Moebius (1983)
  15. The Wrenchies by Farel Dalrymple (2014)
  16. Keith Giffen ripping off Munoz on Legion of Superheroes by Keith Giffen, Paul Levitz and an uncredited and unaware Jose Munoz et al (1983)
  17. Madman by Mike Allred (1990)
  18. Mickey (Collection Disney/Glenat) by Lewis Trondheim, Alexis Nisme, Regis Loisel, Nicolas Keramidas, Cosey et al (2016)
282, Hawkman in The Brave and the Bold by Joe Kubert, Gardner Fox et al (1961)
  1. Adventures in Oz by Eric Shanower (1986)
  2. Blankets by Craig Thompson (2003)
  3. The Heart of Thomas by Moto Hagio (1974)
  4. Culture Corner, and other works, by Basil Wolverton (1946)
  5. Donald Duck/Uncle Scrooge by Don Rosa (1987) (in hindsight, this is too low in the list)
  6. The Left Bank Gang, and other works, by Jason (2006)
  7. Sandman by Neil Gaiman, Dave McKean, Dave Vozzo, Todd Klein and lots of other people (1989)
  8. Fables by Mark Buckingham, Bill Willingham, Steve Leialoha, Daniel Vozzo, Todd Klein, James Jean et al (2002)
  9. Nick Fury, Agent of S.H.I.E.L.D. by Jack Kirby, Jim Steranko et al – *Supreme Headquarters, International Espionage and Law-Enforcement Division (1965)
  10. Clue: Candlestick, and other works, by Dash Shaw (2020)
  11. Bacchus/Alex Box Set by Eddie Campbell (1984)
  12. Blue Teeth, and other works, by Uno Moralez (2017)
  13. The Cowboy Wally Show/Why I Hate Saturn, and other works, by Kyle Baker (1988)
  14. Shade the Changing Man by Steve Ditko et al. (1977)
  15. The Chaos Effect, by Enki Bilal and Pierre Christin, and other works by Bilal (1979)
  16. Detroit Metal City by Kiminori Wakasugi (2005)
  17. Even a monkey can draw manga by Koji Aihara and Kentaro Takekuma (1989)
  18. War comics by Garth Ennis and various collaborators (2001)
  19. A Week of Kindness/A Little Girl Dreams of Taking the Veil by Max Ernst (1930)
  20. Any Similarity to Persons Living or Dead is Purely Coincidental and Warts and All by Drew Friedman, with Josh Friedman (1980s)
  21. Vice Squad by Jordi Lafebre and Zidrou (2014)
  22. Comics for Creepy, and other works, by Richard Corben (1970)
  23. Bringing up Father (aka Maggie and Jiggs) by George McManus and assistants (1913)
  24. Abandon the Old in Tokyo/The Pushman/Goodbye by Yoshihiro Tatsumi (1957)
  25. Tijuana Bibles ed by Bob Adelman (1920s)
  26. Gil Jourdan by Maurice Tillieux (1956)
  27. Giant Days by John Allison, Max Sarin and Lissa Treiman (2015)
  28. Tristram Shandy by Martin Rowson and Laurence Sterne (1996)
  29. Pin-up by Philippe Berthet and Yann (1999)
  30. Blake and Mortimer by Edgar P Jacobs (1950)
  31. Batman Year One by David Mazzucchelli, Frank Miller et al (1987)
  32. Aaron by Ben Gijsemans (2021)
  33. X-9 Secret Agent Corrigan by Al Williamson and Archie Goodwin (1967)
  34. Strips for The Guardian, New Scientist and elsewhere by Tom Gauld (2005)(-ish)
  35. Gon by Masashi Tanaka (1991)
  36. Punisher MAX by Garth Ennis et al (2004)
  37. Social Fiction by Chantal Montellier (1974)
  38. Secret of the Stone Frog by David Nytra (2012)
  39. Preacher by Garth Ennis, Steve Dillon, Glenn Fabry et al (1995)
  40. I am a Hero by Hengo Hanazawa (2009)
  41. Dead Dead Demon’s Dededede Destruction by Inio Asano (2009)
  42. Hawkman/Atomic Knights/inks over Carmine Infantino by Murphy Anderson (1960)
  43. The Little Prince by Antoine de Saint-Exupery, adapted by Joann Sfar (2008)
  44. Concrete by Paul Chadwick (1986)
  45. Pim and Francie by Al Columbia (2009)
  46. Quatre Soeurs by Cati Baur and Malika Ferdjoukh (2011)
  47. Flash/Adam Strange by Carmine Infantino, Murphy Anderson et al (1956)
  48. Asterios Polyp by David Mazzucchelli (2009)
  49. Modesty Blaise by Peter O’Donnell, Jim Holdaway, Enrique Badia Romero et al (1963)
  50. Orc Stain, and other works, by James Stokoe (2010)
  51. Death Note by Tsugumi Ohba and Takeshi Obata (2003)
  52. Red Ketchup by Real Godbout and Pierre Fournier (1988)
  53. Sugar and Spike by Sheldon Mayer (1956)
  54. His Face All Red, and other works, by Emily Carroll (2010)
  55. Berserk by Kento Miura (1989)
  56. Jonas Fink by Vittorio Giardino (1994)
  57. The Sub-Mariner by Bill Everett (1939)
  58. Amphigorey and its sequels by Edward Gorey (1953)
  59. Dr Strange/Spider-Man by Steve Ditko with dialogue and captions by Stan Lee, et al. (1962)
  60. A.L.I.E.E.N. by Lewis Trondheim (2004)
  61. Ralph Azham by Lewis Trondheim (2011)
  62. Alley Oop by VT Hamlin (1932)
  63. Philemon by Fred (1972)
  64. Dork by Evan Dorkin (1993)
  65. Achewood by Chris Onstad (2001)
  66. Feiffer, and other works, by Jules Feiffer (1956)
  67. Introducing Kafka, aka Kafka, by R. Crumb and David Zane Mairowitz (1993)
  68. My Favorite Thing Is Monsters by Emil Ferris (2017)
  69. Prison Pit by Johnny Ryan (2009)
  70. Flight of the Raven/Matteo by Jean-Pierre Gibrat (2002)
  71. Dementia 21 by Shintaro Kago (2011)(I think?)
  72. Kona, Monarch of Monster Isle by Sam Glanzman, Don Segall et al (1962)
  73. Little Tulip/The Magician’s Wife/New York Cannibals/Billy Budd KGB, by Francois Boucq and Jerome Charyn (1986)
  74. 20th Century Boys by Naoki Urasawa (1999)
  75. Various opera adaptations by P Craig Russell (1984)
  76. Little Tommy Lost/Black Rat by Cole Closser (2013)
  77. Empowered by Adam Warren (2007)
  78. Louis by Metaphrog (2000)
  79. Planetes by Makoto Yukimura (1999)
  80. Alack Sinner by Jose Munoz and Carlos Sampayo (1977)
  81. Castle Waiting by Linda Medley (1996)
submitted by Jonesjonesboy to graphicnovels [link] [comments]

2024.05.01 17:52 VincentArcher May 2024 [Releases & Promotions]

This page is aimed to help users find new litrpg content on a month-to-month basis by constructing a list of new releases. This post will be updated based on multiple sources, like Reddit, discord, and other locations. This page is not meant to replace promotional posts like on reddit but to make it easier for users to find them. The list is also hosted out of Reddit, just in case, and the calendar gives you some pre-orders for the future: https://www.theinfinitelabyrinth.info/litrpg/
Due to the increasing size of this list, links to the original posts (if any) might appear only on the page above, but the link column should bring you to the relevant book.
This page contains exclusively litRPG or adjacent content. Progression fantasy or cultivation without any gamelit elements are not included.
Promoted Webseries are included only once every five months. If your Webseries does not include a significant number of chapters or pages at the time of promotion, I might delay inclusion until it does.
If you missed all the content from April, there were 79 ebook releases, 42 audiobooks, 11 promoted web series, 2 novella-sized releases, and it's omnibus time with 7 releases.
Note: Some entries for April may have been recorded too late, in which case they are included at the top of this month's list.
Here's what the new month brings you!
​
Ebooks:
Title Author Link
Exploration (Level Up - It's an RPG world #3) Craig Zerf AMZ
Seth the Abyssal Assassin #2 V.A. Lewis & Extra26 AMZ
The Swordwing Saga #1 Dawson George AMZ
Tales of Limina: Axel's Quest Joshua Swayne AMZ
Accidental Goblin King #3 Leon West AMZ
The Spellslinger (Firebrand #4) D.E. Olesen AMZ
Young Gods Tournament #2 Alex Beaumont & Cale Plamann AMZ
The Last Dragonsoul (Kara #1) V.A. Lewis AMZ
Fateless #3 Martin McKenzie AMZ
How I, A Normal High School Student,... #7 Kal Griffith AMZ
Disharmony (Eternal Dominion #27) Bern Dean AMZ
System Consolidation (Path of the Titans #3) Timothy McGowen AMZ
Villager Three Kruos Voidcat AMZ
The Primeval Apocalypse #4 Robert S. Keene & Alex Raizman AMZ
The Phoenix Peaks (Beneath the Dragoneye Moons #12) Selkie Myth AMZ
Wish Upon the Stars #4 Malcolm Trent AMZ
Collapse (Welcome to the Multiverse #3) Sean Oswald AMZ
System Warrior (Champions of the Arena #2) Shane Hammond AMZ
Sponsored Apocalypse #1 Blaise Corvin AMZ
Ballet in a Winter Storm (Tournament of Cheaters #3) Joshua Brown AMZ
All the Dust that Falls #3 Zaifyr AMZ
The Primal Hunter #9 Zogarth AMZ
Second Chance Swordsman #3 Jakob Tanner AMZ
How to Survive at the End of the World #2 RC Joshua AMZ
Hearthomancy #2 M.E. Thorne AMZ
​
Simultaneous Releases:
Title Author & Narrator Link
Tartaruga Town (Kaiju City #1) Adam Sampson (Narrated by: Exo Lio) AMZ & AUD
ShipCore #2 Erios909 (Narrated by: Reba Buhr) AMZ & AUD
Fimbulwinter (Stranger Than Fiction #3) T. B. Mare (Narrated by: Eric Jason Martin) AMZ & AUD
The Daily Grind #4 Argus (Narrated by: Pavi Proczko) AMZ & AUD
The Games of Olympus (Theos #2) Arthur Wordsmith (Narrated by: Seth Podowitz) AMZ & AUD
Dino Tribes Marcus Sloss (Narrated by: Jonathan Waters, Cassandra Quinn) AMZ & AUD
​
Audiobook Releases:
Title Author & Narrator Link
Inneshys (Game of Two Worlds #2) Boyd Lee (Narrated by: Austin Rising) AUD
An Ideal World for a Sociopath #2 Oleg Sapphire (Narrated by: Matt Godfrey) AUD
Dungeon Tour Guide #3 Aaron Shih (Narrated by: Travis Baldree) AUD
Survivor (Battleforged #1) M.H. Johnson (Narrated by: Wayne Mitchell & Kasi Hollowell) AUD
City in the Clouds (Rise of Kers #2) Daniel Weber (Narrated by: Justin Thomas James, Jeff Hays, Annie Ellicott & Dorrie Sacks) AUD
Torn Shroud (Resonance Cycle #5) Aaron Renfroe (Narrated by: Christian J. Gilliland) AUD
Proven Strength (Aether's Revival #8) Daniel Schinhofen (Narrated by: Andrea Parsneau) AUD
Gravesong (Singer of Terandria #1) pirateaba (Narrated by: Andrea Parsneau) AUD
Road to Mastery #3 Valerios (Narrated by: Jeremy Frazier) AUD
Speedrunning the Multiverse #3 Adastra339 (Narrated by: Graham Halstead) AUD
Threads of Fate (Ascend Online #5) Luke Chmilenko (Narrated by: Luke Daniels) AUD
Dead Tired #2 Ravensdagger (Narrated by: Justin Thomas James, Dorrie Sacks, Jeff Hays, Annie Ellicott & Gary Furlong) AUD
​
Pre-order:
Title Author Link Date
Reborn as a Demonic Tree #2 XKarnation (Narrated by: Ramon De Ocampo) AUD moved to 5/28
Goddess Rising (Mirror World #3) Rain Harlow AMZ 5/10
Trust me, I'm a Hero (Dungeon Creep #2) G.E. Metzel AMZ 5/10
Snap Craft #2 Cássio Ferreira AMZ 5/10
Explorer (Arise #5) Jez Cajiao AMZ 5/10
Obelisk - System Integration #1 Conor Malachi AMZ 5/12
Nullform #8 Dem Mikhailov AMZ 5/13
Player Manager #3 Ted Steel (Narrated by: Luke Francis) AMZ & AUD 5/14
Hell Difficulty Tutorial #1 Cerim AMZ 5/14
Preservation (Battle Mage Farmer #6) Seth Ring (Narrated by: Michael Kramer) AUD 5/14
Mythica Reforged (Mythica #2) Dean Henegar AMZ 5/15
The First Set (Aced #1) Jonathan Smidt AMZ 5/14
Psychokinetic Eyeball Pulling #2 FreeID (Narrated by: Amanda Dolan) AUD 5/14
World Seal (Guardian of Aster Fall #7) David North (Narrated by: John Pirhalla, Stephanie Nemeth-Parker) AUD 5/14
Psychokinetic Eyeball Pulling #3 FreeID AMZ 5/15
Apocalypse City (Apocalypse Me #2) Noct AMZ 5/15
Assassin (Ends of Magic #3) Alexander Olson AMZ 5/15
Samurai Reborn (Zero Box #2) Zeph Baxter AMZ 5/18
Who Chooses to Be a Mermaid in a Desert City Coffee Quills SHRT 5/19
Saintess Summons Skeletons #2 Mornn AMZ 5/20
The Shatterplate War (Outworld's Blood #4) Willpowah AMZ 5/21
Knight Apocalyptica #1 Zach Skye AMZ 5/21
Battlemaster (Victor of Tucson #5) Plum Parrot (Narrated by: Robb Moreira) AMZ & AUD 5/21
The Shatterplate War (Outworlder's Blood #4) Willpowah AMZ 5/21
Tartarus (Wolf of the Blood Moon #3) Shane Purdy AMZ 5/21
Master of the World (Dragon Core Chronicles #6) Lars Machmüller AMZ 5/22
Portals of Aperra (Nameless Chronicles #3) Joshua Kern AMZ 5/22
Blood for Power #2 Scott W. James AMZ 5/22
Reborn as a Demonic Tree #3 XKarnation AMZ 5/22
Conservation (Battle Mage Farmer #8) Seth Ring AMZ 5/22
Ignite the Dark (Resonance Cycle #7) Aaron Renfroe AMZ 5/23
Dreamer's Throne #3 Seth Ring (Narrated by: Michael Kramer) AUD 5/28
Tropical Hazard (Arachnomancer #3) Dustin Tigner AMZ 5/28
Hide and Seek (Apocalypse Parenting #3) Erin Ampersand AMZ 5/28
Unprepared Healer (Earthen Contenders #2) Jonathan Brooks AMZ 5/28
Redemption's Cost (Lich Lord #1) Levi Werner AMZ 5/28
Plague Tank (Getting Hard #2) G.D. Temple AMZ 5/29
Dragon Warrior (Rise of the Devourer #3) Krazekode AMZ 5/29
America (Artorian's Archives #18) Dennis Vanderkerken & Dakota Krout AMZ 5/29
Don't Try this at Home (Dungeon Core TV #5) Michael Todd & Michael Anderle AMZ 5/29
My Secret Portal to a Fantasy World #3 D. Levesque AMZ 5/31
Small-Town Sleuth #1 Tom Watts AMZ 5/31
​
submitted by VincentArcher to litrpg [link] [comments]

2024.05.01 00:42 RustyNDull Katelyn Tarver and Lucy Hale

Katelyn Tarver and Lucy Hale submitted by RustyNDull to LadiesofNickelodeon [link] [comments]

2024.04.30 18:52 Full-Personality-169 Which animators would you like to have be involved with full-length animated films based on Nintendo video games?

Which animators would you like to have be involved with full-length animated films based on Nintendo video games?
Since The Super Mario Bros. Movie in 2023 from Universal Pictures and Illumination, many people would wonder what other animated feature films based on Nintendo games would be produced by either Universal Pictures (Mario Universe) or Warner Bros (other Nintendo properties (including Pokémon and Kirby)) and which animators would potentially be involved in numerous ways, here's a list of several animators that might potentially be involved with future Nintendo animated films:
1) Hendel Butoy 2) Eric Goldberg 3) Don Hahn 4) Fergel Reilly 5) Clay Caytis 6) Thurop Van Orman 7) Don Hall 8) Chris Williams 9) Byron Howard 10) Roger Allers 11) Eric Darnell 12) Kris Pearn 13) Paul Briggs 14) Peter Sohn 15) Greg Tiernan 16) Mike Gabriel 17) Nathan Greno 18) Aaron Blaise 19) Kirk DeMicco 20) Will Finn 21) Steve Martino 22) Chris Buck 23) David Soren 24) Mark Andrews 25) Lauren Faust 26) Brenda Chapman 27) Steve Hickner 28) Simon Wells 29) Dean Wellins 30) Tom Bancroft 31) Tony Bancroft 32) Tony Leondis 33) Peter Ackerman 34) Frederik Du Chau 35) Chris Appelhans 36) Jared Stern
submitted by Full-Personality-169 to NintendoAmerica [link] [comments]

2024.04.29 21:15 RustyNDull Katelyn Tarver and Lucy Hale

Katelyn Tarver and Lucy Hale submitted by RustyNDull to LadiesofNickelodeon [link] [comments]

2024.04.29 21:13 RustyNDull Katelyn Tarver and Lucy Hale

Katelyn Tarver and Lucy Hale submitted by RustyNDull to CelebrityFeetPosts [link] [comments]

2024.04.28 17:40 RustyNDull Selfies with Katelyn and Amanda Tarver IG April 2024

Selfies with Katelyn and Amanda Tarver IG April 2024 submitted by RustyNDull to LucyHale [link] [comments]

2024.04.28 00:24 Leather_Focus_6535 The currently 73 inmates executed by Alabama and their crimes since the 1970s (warning, graphic content, please read at your own risk)

Here is the list of the currently 73 inmates executed by the state of Alabama that I wrote for my post Furman death penalty project. Alabama has set plans to carry out additional executions in the next few months, and this list might be reposted with the updated information if they happen as scheduled.
Something that should also be clarified is the dates given here are an approximate timeline of their earliest known criminal activities to their executions rather then time spent on death row. Many of the cases here are quite graphic by nature, and I don't shy away from it in my descriptions. Please read at your own risk.
The states I have left are Georgia, Florida, Missouri, Virginia, Oklahoma, and the still in progress Texas. I'll probably post my list for Georgia next whenever I have time next week.
The currently executed 73 offenders:
1. John Evans III (~1976+-1983, electric chair): A year after Evans was paroled, he and another ex convict, Wayne Ritter, went on a two month long crime spree that involved 30 armed robberies, 9 kidnappings, and 2 extortion incidents. Their rampage ended when they shot dead 34 year old Edward Nassar in front of his daughters while robbing his pawn shop. Evans' execution was controversial, as it took 24 minutes and three pulls of the switch to electrocute him. Any information on his crimes before his 1977 spree is unavailable to me.
2. Arthur Jones (1981-1986, electric chair): Jones gunned down Vaughn Thompson, a 21 year old storekeeper, and William Waymon, a 72 year old cab driver, in two robberies.
3. Wayne Ritter (1976-1986, electric chair): Ritter was the accomplice of the above mentioned John Evans. After being released from prison, he assisted him in several robberies, abductions, and the murder of Edward Nassar. Like Evans, Ritter's earlier criminal history wasn't disclosed in the sources on hand.
4. Michael Lindsey (1981-1989, electric chair): Lindsey broke in the home of 64 year old Rosemary Rutland. After tying her up, he shot and stabbed Rutland to death, and stole her Christmas presents.
5. Horace Dunkins Jr. (1980-1989, electric chair): Dunkins abducted 26 year old Lynn McCurry, bound her to a tree, and raped her. He stabbed McCurry 66 times, and left her body on the tree she was tied to. His execution was a source of controversy, as Dunkins was allegedly cognitively disabled.
6. Herbert Richardson (1977-1989, electric chair): Richardson threw a pipe bomb into the home of one of his ex girlfriend's family members in retaliation for her breaking up with him. Her niece, 11 year old Rena Callins, was killed in the attack.
7. Arthur Julius (1972-1989, electric chair): In 1972, Julius beat his boss, 74 year old Herbert Chisenhall, to death during an argument over his wages. He was given a life sentence, but was able to leave custody in 1978 on a one day release. Julius took advantage of his leave to rape his cousin, 29 year old Susie Sanders, in her home. She was strangled to death during the assault.
8. Wallace Thomas (1976-1990, electric chair): Thomas and a partner abducted 21 year old Quenette Shehane from a convenience store. She was raped, robbed, and shot to death.
9. Larry Heath (1981-1992, electric chair): Out of a desire to marry another woman, Heath orchestrated the kidnapping of his 21 year old wife Rebecca (who was 9 months pregnant with their child) with the help of some men he hired. She was abducted from their home and shot in the head.
10. Cornelius Singleton (~1972-1992, electric chair): Singleton was condemned for the robbery of a Catholic monastery that ended with the fatal strangulation of a nun, 51 year old Ann Hogan. His execution was hotly contested by his lawyers and supporters, who have alleged misconduct in the trial and investigation. Despite the controversy, Hogan's stolen watch was found in Singleton's possession. Singleton was previously convicted for a 1972 incident involving arson and burglary.
11. Willie Clisby Jr. (1979-1995, electric chair): Clisby broke into the home of 58 year old Fletcher Handley, beat him to death with an ax handle, and left with $80 in hand.
12. Varnell Weeks (1981-1995, electric chair): Weeks abducted and carjacked 24 year old Mark Batts. He bound Batts, placed a pillowcase on his head, and shot him through it. While driving Batts' stolen car in Ohio, he was flagged down by police officers, and Weeks fired on them in the confrontation. In the shootout, Weeks was captured without any causalities to the responding officers. His execution was controversial, as his lawyers claimed that he was a paranoid schizophrenic.
13. Edward Horsley Jr. (~1976-1996, electric chair): After escaping from prison with Brian Baldwin, Horsley abducted 16 year old Naomi Rolon while she was hitchhiking. Horsley raped and dismembered Rolon with an ax, and ran her body over. Although Horlsey's culpability is an overwhelming certainty, the extent of Baldwin's alleged involvement is a significant source of contention. Horsley was previously convicted of a string of robberies that ended up with a non-fatal shooting of a police officer.
14. Billy Waldrop (1982-1997, electric chair): Waldrop snuck into the home of 72 year old Thurman Donahoo and shot him in the head. He then stole $130 and a 5-carat diamond ring. To destroy any evidence of his crime, Waldrop burned the house down, and fled to California. While in hiding, he was detained by the local law enforcement for a DUI and extradited back to Alabama to face trial.
15. Walter Hill (~1952-1997, electric chair): As a teenager in the early 50s, Hill beat Sam Atmore (age unknown) to death. He was given a 10 year sentence for that murder, and took part in an escape attempt that was temporarily successful because of the watchman's negligence. After his release, Hill became a career criminal and was involved with several abduction robberies, and wound up in a cycle of repeatedly being in and out of prison. During one of his incarcerations, Hill stabbed an unidentified inmate to death, but was cleared of any charges on the grounds of self defense. In 1977, Hill started an illicit "relationship" with a 13 year old girl, and sought the permission of her stepmother, 60 year old Willie Hammock, to marry but she refused. Out of anger, Hill shot Hammock, her 34 year old daughter Lois Tatum, and Lois' 36 year old husband John dead in their home, and abducted the girl and her 16 year old adopted brother. The brother managed to escape, but Hill kidnapped a motorist he encountered in Georgia. The man escaped captivity in North Carolina, and reported Hill and the abducted girl to the local police.
16. Henry Hays (1981-1997, electric chair): Hays was a member of a local Ku Klux Klan chapter, and the son of one of the most prominent KKK leaders in Alabama. In the area, the sentencing of a black man, who was accused of murdering a white policeman, kept on getting delayed due to a string of mistrials. Hays and other members of the KKK chapter interpreted it as a sign that blacks will be able to get away with murdering whites, and sought revenge by lynching a black person at random. The unfortunate victim was 19 year old Michael Donald, who was abducted while walking home from a gas station. Donald was beaten with a tree stump, strangled with a rope, and his throat slit by Hays and his fellow Klansmen. His body was hung on a nearby tree.
17. Steven Thompson (1984-1998, electric chair): Thompson abducted 25 year old Robin Balarzs, a friend's fiancee, from her home. After he tied up and gagged her, Thompson raped Balarz and penetrated her with a knife, shaved her head, and dragged her to death with his car over a distance of 3,000 feet. He stole Balarz's wedding ring and a dollar from her purse, and sexually mutilated her body.
18. Brian Baldwin (~1977-1998, electric chair): Baldwin was the accused accomplice of the above mentioned Edward Horsley, and allegedly helped him with the sex murder of Naomi Rolon after they escaped from prison together. As mentioned in Horsley's section, Baldwin's involvement with Rolon's killing remains hotly contested to this day, and he and his supporters alleged that he was set up by institutionalized racism and tortured into confessing by investigating police officers. He was previously in prison for stealing a car.
19. Victor Kennedy (~1980-1999, electric chair): Kennedy, a career burglar, and an accomplice, Darrell Grayson, broke into the home of 86 year old Annie Orr to search for money. They bound, beat, raped, and suffocated her with a pillow case. When they failed to find any money, Kennedy and Grayson left the residence empty handed.
20. David Duren (1983-2000, electric chair): Duren and an accomplice kidnapped 16 year old Kathleen Bedsole and her date, 17 year old Charles Leonard, and stole $20 that was given to them by Bedsole's father. The couple were tied together, and locked in the trunk for several hours. When Duren stoped his car, he shot both of the teenagers. Bedsole was killed, while Leonard managed to survive and escape.
21. Freddie Wright (1977-2000, electric chair): Wright was convicted of robbing a store owned by couple, 40 year old Warren and 37 year old Lois Green, with 3 other men. The Greens were tied together, dragged into a backroom, and shot to death. Their watches and $900 were stolen in the robbery. His execution was controversial, as his attorneys and supporters push that he was convicted both out of racism and the participants allegedly naming him to avoid death sentences.
22. Robert Tarver Jr. (1984-2000, electric chair): Tarver fatally shot 63 year old Hugh Kite, while he and an accomplice were robbing him outside of his store. Kite was just done closing his store when he was attacked, and had $80 taken from him.
23. Pernell Ford (1983-2000, electric chair): Ford forced himself into the home that 70 year old Willie Griffin shared with her 42 year old daughter Linda. He stabbed both of them to death after a struggle. Several undisclosed items were stolen from the Griffin home, and Ford used their car to flee to Illinois.
24. Lynda Block (1992-2002, electric chair): Block, her common law husband, George Sibley, and her 9 year old son were sitting in car that was parked in a Walmart parking lot. A passerby was concerned by Block's son apparently looking distressed, and reported them to the police. When a police officer, 38 year old Roger Motley, came to question them, Block and Sibley shot him to death. The couple was previously involved in assaulting and stabbing Block's ex husband in a dispute over their home, a crime they were on the run from at the time of Motley's murder.
25. Anthony Johnson (1984-2002, lethal injection): While Johnson and two unidentified men were robbing a jewelry store, they engaged in a gun-battle with the owner, 51 year Kenneth Cattrell, and killed him. Although Johnson's wasn't directly responsible for Cattrell's death and only acted as a lookout, he was the only member of the gang to be captured, and thus bore the brunt of the judicial retributions when he refused to testify against them.
26. Michael Thompson (1984-2003, lethal injection): During a nighttime convenience store robbery, Thompson kidnapped the clerk, 57 year old Maisie Gray. Thompson forced Gray into his car, drove her to a well, and tossed her inside it. He then shot a trapped Gray to death with his married girlfriend holding a torch for him. His girlfriend had a longstanding record for armed robberies, and Thompson's defense tried to use the argument that she goaded him into the killing or did it herself.
27. Gary Brown (1996-2003, lethal injection): Brown and a few other men went to the home of Jack McGraw, a 59 year old Korean War veteran, to "party." On numerous previous occasions, McGraw had paid them for sex acts. They planned on robbing McGraw's house after he passed out drunk, but he refused to drink as he had work the next morning. Undeterred, Brown and his accomplices attacked McGraw, and stabbed him a combined total of 78 times. More specifically, McGraw's back was stabbed 59 times, his throat and neck were slashed 16 times, and he had 3 cut wounds on his head. The group then stole $67 and a VCR set from his home.
28. Thomas Fortenberry (1984-2004, lethal injection): Fortenberry fatally shot four people, 51 year old Wilbur Nelson, 43 year old Robert Payne, Robert's 29 year old wife Nancy, and 21 year old Ronald Guest, while attempting to rob a gas station.
29. James Hubbard (~1957-2004, lethal injection): In 1957, Hubbard shot and killed 28 year old Carl Dockery in what was described as a "domestic disturbance." He was paroled in 1976 with the help of 62 year old Lillian Montgomery, a woman he befriended behind bars. Hubbard repaid the favor by shooting and killing her while robbing a store she owned in the following year. He stole $500 and her diamond watch, and tried to stage Montgomery's death as a suicide despite the fact that he shot her in the face, head, and shoulder.
30. David Hocker (1998-2004, lethal injection): Hocker was living in a motel and didn't have a car at hand. Thus, he asked his boss, 47 year old Jerry Robinson, to drive him around for an errand. When they were in the car together, Hocker stabbed Robinson to death, stole his credit card, and withdrew $400 from it to buy cocaine. Hocker had an extensive criminal history, but the specifics weren't given in my sources.
31. Mario Centobie (1995-2005, lethal injection): Centobie and another prisoner escaped from a Georgia prison during his 40 year sentence for the double kidnappings of his ex wife and son. They fled to Alabama, and were pulled over by local policemen. Centobie opened fire on them and killed Keith Turner, a 29 year old officer, and wounded another. The pair were recaptured in Georgia near the home of Centobie's ex wife. While awaiting trial, Centobie yet again escaped by seducing a guard, but was quickly recaptured.
32. Jerry Henderson (1984-2005, lethal injection): On his sister-in-law's payroll, Henderson lured her husband, 33 year Jerry Haney, outside of his house and shot him dead.
33. George Sibley Jr. (1992-2005, lethal injection): Sibley was the common law husband of the above mentioned Lynda Block, and assisted her in the killing of officer Roger Motley. He also took part in the assault of her ex husband.
34. John Peoples Jr. (1983-2005, lethal injection): Enraged that 34 year old Paul Franklin refused to sell him his car that he coveted, Peoples broke into his home, and beat him to death with a rifle. Peoples stole the car and abducted Paul's wife, 34 year old Judy, and their 10 year old son John. They were also beaten to death with Peoples' rifle.
35. Larry Hutcherson (1992-2006, lethal injection): Hutcherson broke into the home of 89 year old Irma Gray, and slit her throat. He stole her air conditioner and microwave in the robbery.
36. Aaron Jones (1978-2006, lethal injection): After being fired by them, Jones and his partner invaded the home of their former employers, 61 year old Carl and 45 year old Williene Nelson. They shot Carl and Willene dead and chopped their bodies into several pieces. The pair also shot their 3 children, 21 year old Tony, 13 year old Brenda, and 10 year old Charlie, and Carl's mother, 85 year old Annie, but they all managed to survive their injuries.
37. Darrell Grayson (1980-2007, lethal injection): Grayson was the accomplice of the previously mentioned Victor Kennedy, and partook in the rape and murder of Annie Orr and the burglary of her home.
38. Luther Williams (1988-2007, lethal injection): While John Kirk, a 63 year old WW2 veteran, was driving home from work, his truck broke down. He was found and abducted by Williams and 2 other men, and shot to death by them. The trio then stole money from Kirk's body and his truck.
39. James Callahan (1982-2009, lethal injection): Callahan kidnapped 26 year old Becky Howell, while she was walking from a club her fiance was performing to switch laundry that she left at a laundromat. Howell was raped and strangled to death.
40. Danny Bradley (1983-2009, lethal injection): When his wife was hospitalized, Bradley was left to care for his stepdaughter, 12 year old Rhonda Hardin, and his stepson. After he put his stepson to bed, Bradley sodomized Hardin and choked her to death with his bare hands.
41. Jimmy Dill (~1983-2009, lethal injection) Dill shot his dealer, 33 year old Leon Shaw, in the head during a deal gone bad, and stole $200 and a few bags of cocaine. Shaw was left comatose and died of his injuries 9 months later. Dill had an extensive criminal record for theft and drug possession.
42. Willie McNair (1990-2009, lethal injection): McNair and an accomplice went to the home of his occasional employer, 68 year old Ella Riley, to ask for some money. When Riley declined to give them any, McNair tricked her into letting him inside by asking for a drink of water. After walking in, he stabbed Riley in the neck and strangled her to death. The pair then fled with her purse.
43. Jack Trawick (~1972-2009, lethal injection): Trawick was convicted or credibly confessed to a minimum of 3 murders. His verified victims consist of 27 year old Aileen Pruitt, 21 year old Stephanie Gach, and 17 year old Betty Richards. In his known murders, he forcibly abducted his victims from public locations, and raped and tortured them. They were then stabbed and beaten to death with a hammer. Trawick bragged in graphic details about committing other murders on a website made for death row inmates, which he also used to taunt the victims' families. However, investigations into the alleged additional killings brought no results, and are now believed to have been fictionalized by Trawick for clout.
44. Max Payne (1992-2009, lethal injection): Payne robbed a store at gunpoint, and kidnapped the owner, 58 year old Braxton Brown. He took Brown to his sister's house and tried forcing him into giving them money. When his sister objected, Payne dragged Brown to a bridge, shot him in the head, and dumped his body in the nearby creek. A total of $1,085 in cash and many of Brown's belongings were stolen, which included bank deposit checks, rings, cigarettes, food stamps, and a handgun.
45. Thomas Whisenhant (~1963-2010, lethal injection): At the age of 16, Whisenhant fatally shot 72 year old Lexie Haynes in one incident and robbed an unidentified blind woman in another. For uknown reasons, the charges were dropped against him, and he was able to join the air force. A few years later, he assaulted Rose Covington, a 22 year old WAF servicewoman, with an ashtray, and was discharged and sentenced to 20 years of hard labor for the attack. Whisenhant was granted parole in 1972. Another couple years later, he went on a crime spree, and abducted 3 women that worked in convenience stores he robbed. His victims, 44 year old Venora Hyatt, 28 year old Patricia Hitt, and 23 year old Cheryl Payton, were all raped and shot in the head.
46. John Parker (1988-2010, lethal injection): Parker and his accomplice Kenneth Smith was hired to kill 42 year old Elizabeth Sennett, by her husband, who wanted to use her life insurance policy to fund his ministering. Her husband was also Parker's landlord. The pair tricked Sennett into letting them inside the house by pretending to be hunters inquiring about for a hunting spot, and stabbed her to death. Sennett's husband then gave Parker and Smith their stereo and video cassette recorders to make it look like a robbery.
47. Michael Land (~1990-2010, lethal injection): Land kidnapped 30 year old Candace Brown from her apartment after he cut her telephone line. He raped Brown, shot her in the head, and stole her purse. Land had prior convictions of burglaries and receiving stolen goods, and previously met Brown in prison when she ministered to him.
48. Holly Wood (~1981-2010, lethal injection): In 1994, Wood shot his ex girlfriend, 34 year old Ruby Gosha, at point blank range in front of her children at her mother's home. He had also (non-fatally) shot another ex girlfriend from outside her bedroom window several years before Gosha's murder. His criminal history was extensive, and had 18 different felonies on his record. Some of the charges pertained to incidents of assault.
49. Phillip Hallford (~1978-2010, lethal injection): Hallford was jealousy enraged that his 15 year old daughter, whom he had been sexually abusing since she was 7, was dating 16 year old Charles Shannon. He forced her to lure Shannon to a bridge, gunned him down, and stole his wallet. With the coerced help of his stepson, Hallford dumped Shannon's body into a river. As a memento, Hallford forced his daughter to wear a necklace with the shell casing used in the murder.
50. Leroy White (1988-2011, lethal injection): White shot his estranged wife, 35 year old Ruby, dead while she was visiting her sister out of anger at their upcoming divorce. Ruby's sister was wounded in the shooting. White had also previously shot and injured Ruby's leg during an argument.
51. William Boyd (1986-2011, lethal injection): Boyd and a partner broke into the home of married couple, 76 year old Fred and 41 year old Evelyn Blackmon, and duped them into thinking that Evelyn's daughter (whom Boyd previously dated against her mother's wishes) was kidnapped. They made the couple believe that they had to pay a $3,000 ransom for her safe return. The couple were then both tied up, forcibly separated into their captors' cars, and beaten and shot to death.
52. Jason Williams (1992-2011, lethal injection): Under the influence of cocaine, Williams shot his roommate, 46 year old Gerald Paravicini dead in the trailer they shared. William then walked over to his neighbors, the Barber family (consisting of parents, 50 year old Freddie and 45 year old Linda, and their sons, 22 year old Bryan and 16 year old Brad) and intruded into their home. He shot and killed Freddie, Linda, and Bryan, and wounded Brad. Cash and credit cards were taken and Williams fled in the family van.
53. Eddie Powell III (~1990s-2011, lethal injection): Powell broke into the home of 70 year old Mattie Wesson, and repeatedly sexually assaulted her. Wesson was beaten and shot in the attack, but she managed to drag herself to a neighbor's house for help before she succumbed to her injuries. Powell had several previous convictions for burglary, theft, and assault.
54. Derrick Mason (1994-2011, lethal injection): Mason held up a convenience store, and forced the clerk, 25 year old Angela Cagle to turn off the cameras and undress. However, he shot Cagle in the head before any assault could occur. He then tried to open the register, but ran off when he failed to open it.
55. Christopher Johnson (2005-2011, lethal injection): To avoid paying child support and to spite his estranged wife, Johnson smothered his 6 month old son Eilas with his fingers, and struck him in the head.
56. Andrew Lackey (2005-2013, lethal injection): After being told about the existence of a vault inside the home of Charles Newman, a 80 year old WW2 veteran, by Newman's grandson, Lackey decided to steal it from him. He invaded Newman's house, and shot and stabbed him 70 times in the ensuring confrontation. Despite Lackey waiving his appeals and actively petitioning for his own execution, his death sentence attracted controversy due to him being diagnosed with Asperger's.
57. Christopher Brooks (1992-2016, lethal injection): Brooks snuck into the apartment of 23 year old Jo Campbell. He sexually assaulted Campbell in her bedroom, and bludgeoned her to death with a barbell. Several items, including a credit card, were stolen from the scene.
58. Ronald Smith Jr. (1994-2016, lethal injection): Smith and some accomplices robbed a convenience store, and fatally shot the clerk, 26 year old Casey Wilson. According to Smith's attorneys, Smith and Wilson were allegedly involved in a love triangle with a local stripper. If such accounts are to be believed, he shot him dead in a dispute over her, and Smith staged it as a robbery to avoid embarrassing his parents. However, the stripper strongly denied having any connections with both men. His execution sparked controversy, as witnesses reported him coughing and heaving for 13 minutes during it.
59. Thomas Arthur (1982-2017, lethal injection): Arthur's married girlfriend hired him to kill her husband, 35 year old Troy Wicker, for his insurance policy. He gunned down Wicker while he was sleeping in his bedroom. To mislead investigators, Wicker's wife claimed that an intruder broke into her home, shot her husband dead, and raped her.
60. Robert Melson (1994-2017, lethal injection): Melson and his partner held up a Popeyes store at gunpoint. They rounded up the employees, 23 year old Darrell Collier, 18 year old Tamika Collins, 17 year old Nathaniel Baker, and 17 year Bryant Archer, into a freezer, and shot them. Archer was the sole survivor, and identified Melson's accomplice, a former employee, to the police. Although Melson's accomplice was initially given a life sentence due to him being a minor at the time, he was later also sentenced to death for killing a cellmate, and is currently awaiting execution.
61. Torrey McNabb (1997-2017, lethal injection): McNabb skipped bail when he was facing charges for receiving stolen property and drug possession. He was tracked down by a bondsman sent to bring him back to court, but he shot at him when he appeared at his doorsteps. The bondsman then called the police for support. One of the responding officers, 30 year old Anderson Gordon, was killed in the standoff with McNabb.
62. Michael Eggers (2000-2018, lethal injection): Eggers and his ex employer, 67 year old Bennie Murray, were in talks about him returning to his former job at her carnival. While Murray was driving Eggers and his 15 year old son, they got into an argument. During the fight, Murray slapped Eggers, which enraged him. He beat and choked her with his hands until she went unconscious, and tossed Murray out of her car. Eggers continued to beat and kick Murray, and crushed her throat with a tree branch. After she was killed, Eggers stole money from Murray's purse, and drove away in her car.
63. Walter Moody (~1972-2018, lethal injection): In 1972, Moody was building a bomb to kill an auto dealer that repossessed his car. However, the bomb exploded prematurely, and critically injured Moody's then wife instead. Although Moody was cleared of charges relating to the construction of the bomb, he was still convicted of it being in his possession. His appeals were thrown away, which gave him a resentment against the justice system. After Moody was released from prison, he murdered a federal judge, 58 year old Robert Vance, and a civil rights attorney, 42 year old Robbie Robinson, and injured Vance's wife, in two separate bombings. To disguise his attacks, Moody sent bombs and hate letters to various NAACP targets.
64. Domineque Ray (1992-2019, lethal injection): Ray shot and killed two brothers, 18 year old Ernest and 13 year old Reinhard Mabins, for refusing to join his gang. In the following year, Ray and his gang members kidnapped 15 year old Tiffany Harville from her home and raped her. Her throat was slit and she was dumped in a remote cotton field.
65. Michael Samra (1997-2019, lethal injection): During an argument over a pick up truck, Samra and his teenage friend shot and killed his friend's father, 39 year old Randy Duke, and step mother, 29 year old Dedra Hunt. The pair also slit the throats of Dedra's two children, 7 year old Chelsea and 6 year old Chelisa.
66. Christopher Price (~1990-2019, lethal injection): Price invaded the home of Bill Lynn, a 57 year old pastor, while he was busy wrapping Christmas presents for his grandchildren. He stabbed Bill 30 times with a sword and injured his wife Bessie when they confronted him. Despite being only 19 at the time, Price had an extensive criminal history that involved trespassing, auto theft, and "criminal mischief."
67. Nathaniel Woods (~2004-2020, lethal injection): A squad of 4 police officers, 58 year old Carlos Owen, 40 year old Harley Chisholm III, 37 year old Michael Collins, and 33 year old Charles Bennett, were searching a drug house that Woods, a long time dealer, had been operating in. As they were arresting Woods, one of his associates opened fire on them and killed Chisholm, Bennett, and Owen. Collins was wounded, but managed to flee to safety. Wood's execution was extremely controversial, as he wasn't the triggerman in the shootings. His supporters and the shooter himself claimed that he was an entirely innocent party, while the prosecutors pushed that he deliberately lured the officers to their deaths.
68. Willie Smith III (1991-2021, lethal injection): Smith kidnapped 22 year old Sharma Johnson at gunpoint near a bank, and forced her to withdraw $80 from an ATM machine. He locked Johnson in the trunk of her own car, and shot her dead while she was trapped in it. The car was then burned to destroy the evidence.
69. Matthew Reeves (1996-2022, lethal injection): Reeves and two other men pretended to be hitchhikers on a remote highway as a ruse to lure motorists. The target they ensnared was 38 year old Willie Johnson Jr. They robbed Johnson of $360 when he stopped to pick them up, and Reeves shot him to death with a shotgun. Reeves then attended a party reportedly still covered with Johnson's blood, and celebrated by pretending to pump the gun and mockingly mimicked his death throes to the other guests.
70. Joe James Jr. (1993-2022, lethal injection): James tracked down his ex girlfriend, 26 year old Faith Hill, at her friend's apartment. She was in the company of her children, her friend, and her friend's children. The friend shielded the children from James with her body, while Hill tried desperately to calm him down. Despite her efforts, she was shot dead. His execution sparked controversy for it taking over 3 hours to complete, and caused the state of Alabama to delay executions until 2023. James was previously arrested and reported several times for harassing Hill's family, which included an incident of him burglarizing her grandmother's home.
71. James Barber (2001-2023, lethal injection): Barber assaulted 75 year old Dorothy Epps, who was both his ex girlfriend's mother and a former employer, with a claw hammer in her home. Despite her efforts at fighting him off, Epps was beaten to death, and Barber stole her purse.
72. Casey McWhorter (1993-2023, lethal injection): McWhorter conspired with a 15 year old friend and a 16 year old friend to kill 34 year old Edward Williams, the father of the 15 year old. The group tried to force Williams to had over a safe, but he tried to fight back. They shot him a total of 11 times with a .22 rifle equipped with a makeshift silencer in his home and took his truck, wallet, and an undisclosed amount of money. The stolen truck was destroyed in order to sell the parts for scrap metal.
73. Kenneth Smith (1988-2024, nitrogen hypoxia): Smith assisted John Parker in the contract killing of Elizabeth Sennett on the behalf of her husband. His case attracted controversy when he survived a botched execution in 2022, and received international attention for being the first inmate in history to be executed with the controversially experimental nitrogen hypoxia method.
submitted by Leather_Focus_6535 to TrueCrimeDiscussion [link] [comments]

2024.04.22 21:21 WeTheLiving27 Sonos Era 300 - To Sub Gen 3 or To Not Sub Gen 3...

I have a pair of Sonos Era 300 in a smallemedium room. I am very happy with the sound quality.
I stream from the highest quality Apple Music from an iPad most of the time.
Bass is quite good for the size. I don't listen super loud. Maybe 30-35 volume. I'm not trying to thump the whole house.
I'm torn whether to add a Sub Gen 3. In the past with other systems I tend to over tinker, spend more and not improve or make the sound worse.
Has anyone started with the Era 300 pair and added the Sub Gen 3? Thoughts? Good choice? Or stay put?
I don't know what "perfect" sounds like. I am impressed with the Era 300 and the general overall quality. There are always differences in recording qualities and genres. I have had KEF LS50 and Meta systems with and without a sub and some songs would sound amazing and others quite awful. I've had systems that get loud, but don't sound good at lower volumes. Or vice versa.
Katelyn Tarver - Hurt Like That is a good "test" song for me. Or something from Lake Street Dive like Mistakes or So Far Away (cover).
Overthinking? Just get the Sub Gen 3?
submitted by WeTheLiving27 to sonos [link] [comments]

2024.04.17 04:20 Full-Personality-169 Predictions of the English dub of the Pokémon Anime sequel series

Predictions of the English dub of the Pokémon Anime sequel series
Since the release of Pokémon Horizons the Series exclusively on Netflix in the USA, who else would you like to hear in the English dub of Pokémon Horizons the Series and beyond, I’ve got a list of voice-overs who you would like to hear in Pokémon Horizons the Series and later on: 1. ⁠⁠Aaron Dismuke 2. ⁠⁠Howard Wang (returning from Pokémon Ultimate Journeys: The Series) 3. ⁠⁠Kevin Thelwell 4. ⁠⁠Rachel Robinson 5. ⁠⁠Alexis Tipton 6. ⁠⁠Hayden Daviau (returning from Pokémon Ultimate Journeys: The Series) 7. ⁠⁠Skyler McIntosh 8. ⁠⁠Christina Marie Kelly 9. ⁠⁠Leah Clark (returning from Pokémon Black & White: The Series) 10. ⁠⁠Dani Chambers 11. ⁠⁠Johnny Yong Bosch 12. ⁠⁠Derick Snow 13. ⁠⁠Doug Stone 14. ⁠⁠Joe Ochman 15. ⁠⁠Coriana Boettger (returning from Pokémon Master Journeys: The Series) 16. ⁠⁠Bridget Hoffman 17. ⁠⁠Barbara Goodson 18. ⁠⁠Joey D’Auria 19. ⁠⁠Kevin Schon 20. ⁠⁠Jad Saxton 21. ⁠⁠Michael Sorich 22. ⁠⁠Andrew Kishino 23. ⁠⁠Mark Moseley 24. ⁠⁠Eric Bauza 25. ⁠⁠Mallorie Rodak 26. ⁠⁠Jad Saxton 27. ⁠⁠Amber Lee Connors (returning from Pokémon Ultimate Journeys: The Series) 28. ⁠⁠Robbie Rist 29. ⁠⁠Matthew Yang King 30. ⁠⁠Dino Andrade 31. ⁠⁠James Sie 32. ⁠⁠Colleen Clinkenbeard (returning from Pokémon: Distant Blue Sky) 33. ⁠⁠Alexis Nichols 34. ⁠⁠Lara Woodhull 35. ⁠⁠Mick Wingert (returning from Pokémon: Aim to Become a Pokémon Master) 36. ⁠⁠John Kassir 37. ⁠⁠Barry Yandell 38. ⁠⁠Liam O’Brien 39. ⁠⁠Yuri Lowenthal 40. ⁠⁠Kari Wahlgren 41. ⁠⁠Jessica Gee George 42. ⁠⁠Alicyn Packard 43. ⁠⁠David Trosko 44. ⁠⁠Morgan Lauré 45. ⁠⁠Felicia Angelle 46. ⁠⁠Michael Haimoto 47. ⁠⁠Vargus Mason 48. ⁠⁠Orion Pitts 49. ⁠⁠Melissa Hutchison 50. ⁠⁠Sarah Wiedenheft 51. ⁠⁠Jennifer Green 52. ⁠⁠Monica Rial 53. ⁠⁠Luci Christian 54. ⁠⁠Stephen Fu (returning from Pokémon Ultimate Journeys: The Series) 55. ⁠⁠Brad Hawkins 56. ⁠⁠Kyle Igneczi 57. ⁠⁠Sara Ragsdale 58. ⁠⁠Michelle Rojas 59. ⁠⁠Austin Tindle 60. ⁠⁠Alejandro Saab (returning from Pokémon Journeys: The Series, Pokémon Master Journeys: The Series, and Pokémon Ultimate Journeys: The Series) 61. ⁠⁠Eden Riegel 62. ⁠⁠Brittney Karbowski 63. ⁠⁠Alejandra E. Cazares 64. ⁠⁠Greg Chun 65. ⁠⁠Jennifer Hale 66. ⁠⁠Brittany Lauda 67. ⁠⁠Bryn Apprill 68. ⁠⁠Maurice LaMarche 69. ⁠⁠Carli Mosier 70. ⁠⁠Katelyn Barr 71. ⁠⁠Laura Stahl 72. ⁠⁠Justin Briner 73. Cassandra Lee Morris (returning from Pokémon Black & White: The Series) 74. Wally Wingert 75. Ryan Bartley (returning from Pokémon Ultimate Journeys: The Series) 76. Dorothy Elias Fahn 77. Tom Fahn 78. Kristi Rothrock 79. Stuart Scott Bullock 80. Paul Greenberg 81. Ali Hillis 82. Ray Chase 83. Tony Azzolino 84. Laura Stahl
submitted by Full-Personality-169 to pokemonanime [link] [comments]

2024.04.06 21:52 bradsonemanband Producing music for pop singers

I'm exploring producing bedroom pop kind of tracks for someone else to sing on. I don't have any vocalists lined up or anything, but that's kind of why I'm making this post. I can write and record tracks all day, but when I'm done with the instrumental, I'm not sure where to go from there.
I want the songs to potentially go to up and coming vocalists. Stuff in the realm of Lily Kincaid, Maris, Eva Rose, Katelyn Tarver, etc.
Besides reaching out to vocalists I like who put this kind of stuff out, are there any other places/resources I should upload my tracks to for singers to use?
If a singer says they want to use my track, where do we go from there? How do I charge them? How much? Do I need to provide some sort of contract/licensing? Do they pay for a mix/master of the song?
Also, when I send them a track, should I record a demo vocal with my melody ideas, or should I leave it just as an instrumental and let them take it wherever they want, unless they ask for my ideas?
And for anyone here who might produce this kind of music for people, is it more likely that a singer has an acoustic demo and wants you just to elevate it, or is it more common for singers to pick a producer's instrumental tracks?
What else am I missing???
My brain is scattered! Hold my hand! haha THANKS IN ADVANCE
submitted by bradsonemanband to musicindustry [link] [comments]

2024.04.03 05:11 Bishop-Boomer Bible Studies From The Daily Office Wednesday April 3, 2024

The Collect
O God, whose blessed Son made himself known to his disciples in the breaking of bread: Open the eyes of our faith, that we may behold him in all his redeeming work; who lives and reigns with you, in the unity of the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever. Amen.
Readings:
Acts 3:1–10https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+3%3A1%E2%80%9310&version=KJV
Psalm 105:1–8https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm+105%3A1%E2%80%938+&version=KJV
Gospel: Luke 24:13–35
13 And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs.
14 And they talked together of all these things which had happened.
15 And it came to pass, that, while they communed together and reasoned, Jesus himself drew near, and went with them.
16 But their eyes were holden that they should not know him.
17 And he said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and are sad?
18 And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days?
19 And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people:
20 And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him.
21 But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done.
22 Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, which were early at the sepulchre;
23 And when they found not his body, they came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive.
24 And certain of them which were with us went to the sepulchre, and found it even so as the women had said: but him they saw not.
25 Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:
26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?
27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.
28 And they drew nigh unto the village, whither they went: and he made as though he would have gone further.
29 But they constrained him, saying, Abide with us: for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent. And he went in to tarry with them.
30 And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them.
31 And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight.
32 And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?
33 And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them,
34 Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon.
35 And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread.
Commentary:
We continue to look at the evidence of the resurrection of Christ, as presented by the Gospel writers. Today we look at events near the end of the Gospel according to Luke, which was written near the end of the first century when the vast majority of the Christian faithful had not yet been born, and had not been blessed with having witnessed Jesus first hand, in the flesh, so to speak.
This story connects us, just as it did the Christians of the first century, who did get the pleasure of seeing him, with Christ, who is still revealed through the reading and interpretation of scripture (v. 27) and the Lord’s Supper (vv. 30-31).
This story mirrors the events as told in the story of the angels appearing to Abraham and Sarah at Mamre (Genesis 18:1-15) in that these people in Luke 24, like Abraham and Sarah, fail to recognize the significance of their visitors, but extend hospitality nevertheless. In both stories, hospitality leads to revelation and to blessing.
Here we find words of a liturgical nature, such as, “he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them.” (v. 30) “The Lord is risen indeed,” (v. 34) and “breaking of bread.” (v. 35). Therefore, the evidence that Christ is risen, is revealed through the telling of the story of these eyewitnesses, the interpretation of scripture, and the breaking of bread, by Jesus, just as he did at the last supper.
“And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs. And they talked together of all these things which had happened. And it came to pass, that, while they communed together and reasoned, Jesus himself drew near, and went with them. But their eyes were holden that they should not know him.” (vs. 13-16)
Here we have two of the followers of Jesus walking to Emmaus, which has been identified with the modern el-Kubeibeh, lying over 7 miles north-west of Jerusalem. We ae given to assume that this is Cleopas is never mentioned in any list of the apostles, so these two are among “the rest” rather than being of the remaining eleven apostles.
Bergant suggests that they are husband and wife, in part because they offer hospitality jointly as would a husband and wife (Bergant, 170). Assuming they are indeed husband and wife, naturally, they would be talking about the events of that day, trying desperately to make sense of it all, the details of their concerns are revealed in the following verses.
As they are discussing the perplexing chain of events, Jesus walks up to join them as they made their way along the road to Emmaus. “But their eyes were holden (ekratounto—held) ” “ The problem is not that Jesus’ appearance has changed or that the Emmaus disciples are distracted. The verb is passive, indicating that these two disciples are being acted upon. God is preventing them from seeing what would otherwise be obvious.” (Donovan)
“And he said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and are sad?” (v. 17) The Risen Christ—in a more contemporary vernacular—asks them, “What is this that you are talking about?” Anyone walking near them would have overheard all the things they were ranting about. “And why are you so sad?”
“And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days? And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people: And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him. But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done. Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, which were early at the sepulchre; And when they found not his body, they came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive. And certain of them which were with us went to the sepulchre, and found it even so as the women had said: but him they saw not.” (vs. 18-24)
“whose name was Cleopas,” This is the only mention of Cleopas in the New Testament. We know nothing more about him or his companion.
“Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days?” This statement by Cleopas demonstrates that he and his companion truly did not know who it was that they were talking to at the time. How ironic it is that Jesus, more than anyone else, knew exactly what it was that had transpired; and yet here, Cleopas—with a presumably sarcastic tone of voice—implies that the person he is addressing must be a stranger to Jerusalem, someone who had no knowledge of anything that had transpired there or the region these past three days or even the past three years.
Jesus, always the teacher, slyly, with the intention of cornering the student, asks them; “And he said unto them, What things? ” “ In saying this, Jesus skillfully played along with the conversation, encouraging the men to reveal their hearts. Even though He knew their hearts, there was value in them saying it to Jesus. ” (Guzik)
Cleopas begins to lecture his new found friend—whom he believes is ignorant of all the recent happenings in Judea—telling this stranger that Jesus was:
• “a prophet ” “This is true. Jesus is a prophet and spoke of himself as such in 4:24 and 13:33. He is a prophet like Moses. Acts 7:22 (also written by Luke) describes Moses as “mighty in his words and works.” Now Cleopas describes Jesus as “a prophet mighty in deed and word” (v. 19). But this description of Jesus as a prophet is inadequate. He is a prophet, but he is also the Son of God (1:34, 49; 3:18; 5:25; 11:4, 27; 20:31). ” (Donovan)
• “mighty in deed and word before God and all the people” Jesus had performed many miracles, healing the sick, making the lame to walk and the blind to see, and even raising the dead. Even some of the pharisees knew that he was sent by God, “ Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.” (Nicodemus, John 3:2) The word of Jesus’ work had spread far and wide, everywhere he had traveled these past three years the crowds—once learning if his approach—ran out to petition for his healing or blessing.
• “And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him.” “ No mention is made of the Roman authorities or crowds. Luke holds the Jewish leaders responsible for Jesus’ death.” (Donovan)
• “But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel:” Here we have the issue that Jesus himself often spoke against; that of the people believing that the Messiah, prophesied by the prophets of old, would be a political warrior leader fighting to redeem Israel form the oppression of the Romans who had occupied their land. For these disciples, “the redemption of Israel meant Israel’s liberation from their enemies, i.e., the Romans. For Luke, however, Jesus did in fact redeem Israel and brought the kingdom of God. Yet it was by his death that Jesus accomplished this redemption and sealed this new covenant (Luke 22:20)” (Stein, 611).Even the disciples, the twelve closest to him, often thought that he would establish an earthly/worldly kingdom, not unlike that of the Jewish Kings of ancient times.
• “ to day is the third day since these things were done.” With his own words the student (Cleopas) has embarrassed himself in front of the teacher (The Risen Christ) by demonstrating his failure to remember the words of the teacher. Jesus plainly told them he would rise up on the third day.“The irony is that, although each passing day has deepened their despair, Luke’s readers know that Jesus predicted his resurrection on the third day (9:22; 13:32; 18:33; 24:7). The mention of the third day is itself full of hope to those who know how the story ends.” (Donovan)
• “Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, which were early at the sepulchre; And when they found not his body, they came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive. And certain of them which were with us went to the sepulchre, and found it even so as the women had said: but him they saw not.” This testimony by the women that made them astonished, is found in Luke 24:8-10. That account names three women, Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, but it also says that other women with them also bore witness.It should be noted that, in such a patriarchal culture as that which existed in most parts of the world until relatively recently, testimony given by women, was not deemed to be credible, and not admissible in judicial proceedings of the time.When these women found the empty tomb and returned to the closest disciples, Peter—according to Luke—runs to the tomb (Luke 24:12) “and found it even so as the women had said: but him they saw not”
“Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?” (vs. 25-26) . Jesus reprimands the two disciples for failing to believe the prophets (v. 25).
“O fools,” “When Christ forbade us to say to our brother, Thou fool, it was intended to restrain us from giving unreasonable reproaches, not from giving just reproofs. Christ called them fools, not as it signifies wicked men, in which sense he forbade it to us, but as it signifies weak men. He might call them fools, for he knows our foolishness, the foolishness that is bound in our hearts.” (Henry)
“slow of heart to believe” “Jesus told them that the problem with their belief was more in their heart than their head. We often think the main obstacles to belief are in the head, but they are actually in the heart.” (Guzik)
“Ought not Christ to have” “(Greek: dei) This little word, dei, suggests a divine imperative—something ordained by God. Jesus is implying that God ordained the Messiah’s suffering prior to his entering into his glory. While this was not self-evident to the first disciples, the Emmaus disciples have identified Jesus as a prophet, reminding us that prophets were persecuted (6:23-26) and killed (11:47-49; 13:34)—Jesus’ own words. God’s ways are not our ways. God chose the foolishness of the cross, because “the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men” (1 Corinthians 1:25). We should not be surprised that God—who chose young David and Gideon’s tiny army and little Israel—would also choose a cross.”
“Was it not decreed, and was not that decree declared, that the promised Messiah must first suffer and then reign, that he must go by his cross to his crown?" Had they never read the fifty-third of Isaiah and the ninth of Daniel, where the prophets speak so very plainly of the sufferings of Christ and the glory that should follow?” (Henry)
“And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.” (v. 27)
“Jesus begins by revealing himself through the scriptures, but Luke doesn’t tell us which scriptures. Some possibilities include Deuteronomy 18:15; Psalm 2:7; 16:10; 110:1; 118:21-23; Isaiah 53; Daniel 7:13-15; Hosea 6:2; and Amos 9:11.”
“We are left to wonder whether Jesus explicitly connected the suffering and death of the prophets with his own suffering and death. Certainly the prophets served as a model for the crucifixion—and for the humble, sacrificial service that God expects of us.”
“Scripture is a powerful vehicle for revealing Christ. Scripture guides and strengthens Christians. Scripture has the potential to convert unbelievers. Gideons tell true stories about people whose lives have been changed by reading the Bible. We give the reading of scripture a prominent place in our worship, because it witnesses powerfully to Christ.” (Donovan)
“And they drew nigh unto the village, whither they went: and he made as though he would have gone further. But they constrained him, saying, Abide with us: for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent. And he went in to tarry with them. And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them. And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight. And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?” (vs. 28-32)
Cleopas and his unnamed companion—some believe to be his wife—finally reached the village of Emmaus, along with Jesus, the stranger they had met along the way and whose true identity was still denied to them. In keeping with with the traditions of hospitality that was the universal norm until our modern progressive times, they invite this stranger to eat and stay the night with them.
“But they constrained him,” “Shows that even though they didn’t know this was Jesus in their midst, they knew they wanted to spend as much time as they could with this man.”
“It is a very strong word that, ‘they constrained him’; it is akin to the one which Jesus used when he said, ‘The kingdom of heaven suffereth violence.’ They not only invited him, but they held him, they grasped his hand, they tugged at his skirts, they said he should not go.” (Spurgeon)
At the meal, “ he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them. And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight.” “These are almost exactly the words that Luke used to describe Jesus’ actions at the Last Supper (22:19). Note especially the four verbs: took, blessed, broke, and gave. Jesus took these same actions at the feeding of the five thousand (9:12-17). Normally, the host would perform these actions in a home and the celebrant would perform them in a worship service. Jesus, the guest, becomes both host and celebrant at this table.” (Donovan)
“It was in no sense a sacramental meal, as we use that word sacrament in our theology. It was a frugal supper in a village home of two tired travellers, and another. Yet it was then – in the breaking of bread, and not in any vision of resurrection splendor – that they knew that their companion was the Lord.” (Morrison)
“Presently their eyes were opened, and then they saw who it was, and knew him well enough. Whatever it was which had hitherto concealed him from them, it was now taken out of the way; the mists were scattered, the veil was taken off, and then they made no question but it was their Master. He might, for wise and holy ends, put on the shape of another, but no other could put on his; and therefore it must be he. See how Christ by his Spirit and grace makes himself known to the souls of his people.” (Henry)
“Jesus may be right in front of you, walking with you and sitting down with you at every meal – and your eyes could be restrained from seeing Him. We therefore should pray that God would open our eyes to see Jesus as He is, as being with us all the time.” (Guzik)
“and he vanished out of their sight” As soon as their eyes were opened to who Jesus was, He left miraculously and they both said what was on their hearts. Their hearts burned as they heard Him speak and teach.
“ As soon as he had given his disciples one glimpse of him he was gone presently. Such short and transient views have we of Christ in this world; we see him, but in a little while lose the sight of him again. When we come to heaven the vision of him will have no interruptions.” (Henry)
“And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?” Even when they didn’t know it was Jesus, even when they didn’t believe He was risen from the dead, their heart still burned because of the ministry of God’s Word and of Jesus, the Living Word of God. At the time, these two disciples did not understand what was happening, but Jesus was preparing them for the revelation that would come with the breaking of bread—preparing them to recognize him.
“And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them, Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon. And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread.” (vs. 33-35) It would have—by that time—been quite late, even dark outside, but these two enthusiastically jump ed form the dinner table to return to Jerusalem and the other to report what had just happened to them.
“After a seven mile walk one way, they were so excited that they went seven miles back – and probably much faster on the return. They had the passion to tell the great news of Jesus’ resurrection.” (Guzik)
“found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them, Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon” “The Emmaus disciples hasten to share their story with the disciples in Jerusalem.They had to walk seven miles to get to Jerusalem, and the hour was late, but their good news energized them for their journey. Once the Emmaus disciples arrive in Jerusalem, they find the eleven apostles and their companions discussing Jesus’ appearance to Peter.”
“and them that were with them” Presumably these include the women and others, totaling about one hundred twenty, mentioned in Acts 1:14-15.
“And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread.” The Emmaus disciples share their testimony only with other disciples. In due time, they will share it in a public setting (Acts 2:1-42).
“They told what things were done in the way. The words that were spoken by Christ to them in the way, having a wonderful effect and influence upon them, are here called the things that were done in the way; for the words that Christ speaks are not an empty sound, but they are spirit and they are life, and wondrous things are done by them, done by the way, by the by as it were, where it is not expected.” (Henry)
“The Lord is risen indeed” They had mutual confirmation of the resurrection of Jesus. Though the risen Jesus was not physically in their midst, His resurrection had been confirmed by more than two witnesses. Mary Magdalene and those with her at the tomb and now these two who had been confronted by the Risen Christ on the rod to Emmaus.
“And they told what things were done in the way” “The words that were spoken by Christ to them in the way, having a wonderful effect and influence upon them, are here called the things that were done in the way; for the words that Christ speaks are not an empty sound, but they are spirit and they are life, and wondrous things are done by them, done by the way, by the by as it were, where it is not expected. They told also how he was at length known to them in the breaking of bread; then, when he was carving out blessings to them, God opened their eyes to discern who it was. ” (Henry)
In this excerpt from his commentary on the entire Bible, Matthew Henry goes on to give his opinion; “ It would be of great use for the discovery and confirmation of truth if the disciples of Christ would compare their observations and experiences, and communicate to each other what they know and have felt in themselves.” This sharing of experiences, was at one time common in most Christian communities, especially of late in those of our Pentecostal and charismatic brethren. In these troubling times when we see a great falling away from the church, perhaps we should once again make this sharing a part of our practice. In doing so, perhaps we can inspire others to open their hearts and not be blind to the Holy Spirit that surrounds all of us, as these disciples were blind to the identity of the stranger on the road to Emmaus.
Benediction
Blessed Lord, who caused all holy Scriptures to be written for our learning: Grant us so to hear them, read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest them, that we may embrace and ever hold fast the blessed hope of everlasting life, which you have given us in our Savior Jesus Christ; who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.
Thought for the Day:
“In faith there is enough light for those who want to believe and enough shadows to blind those who don’t.”--Blaise Pascal
submitted by Bishop-Boomer to ChristianityUnfilter [link] [comments]

2024.04.03 05:11 Bishop-Boomer Bible Studies From The Daily Office Wednesday April 3, 2024

The Collect
O God, whose blessed Son made himself known to his disciples in the breaking of bread: Open the eyes of our faith, that we may behold him in all his redeeming work; who lives and reigns with you, in the unity of the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever. Amen.
Readings:
Acts 3:1–10 https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+3%3A1%E2%80%9310&version=KJV
Psalm 105:1–8 https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm+105%3A1%E2%80%938+&version=KJV
Gospel: Luke 24:13–35
13 And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs.
14 And they talked together of all these things which had happened.
15 And it came to pass, that, while they communed together and reasoned, Jesus himself drew near, and went with them.
16 But their eyes were holden that they should not know him.
17 And he said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and are sad?
18 And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days?
19 And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people:
20 And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him.
21 But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done.
22 Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, which were early at the sepulchre;
23 And when they found not his body, they came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive.
24 And certain of them which were with us went to the sepulchre, and found it even so as the women had said: but him they saw not.
25 Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:
26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?
27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.
28 And they drew nigh unto the village, whither they went: and he made as though he would have gone further.
29 But they constrained him, saying, Abide with us: for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent. And he went in to tarry with them.
30 And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them.
31 And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight.
32 And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?
33 And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them,
34 Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon.
35 And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread.
Commentary:
We continue to look at the evidence of the resurrection of Christ, as presented by the Gospel writers. Today we look at events near the end of the Gospel according to Luke, which was written near the end of the first century when the vast majority of the Christian faithful had not yet been born, and had not been blessed with having witnessed Jesus first hand, in the flesh, so to speak.
This story connects us, just as it did the Christians of the first century, who did get the pleasure of seeing him, with Christ, who is still revealed through the reading and interpretation of scripture (v. 27) and the Lord’s Supper (vv. 30-31).
This story mirrors the events as told in the story of the angels appearing to Abraham and Sarah at Mamre (Genesis 18:1-15) in that these people in Luke 24, like Abraham and Sarah, fail to recognize the significance of their visitors, but extend hospitality nevertheless. In both stories, hospitality leads to revelation and to blessing.
Here we find words of a liturgical nature, such as, “he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them.” (v. 30) “The Lord is risen indeed,” (v. 34) and “breaking of bread.” (v. 35). Therefore, the evidence that Christ is risen, is revealed through the telling of the story of these eyewitnesses, the interpretation of scripture, and the breaking of bread, by Jesus, just as he did at the last supper.
“And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs. And they talked together of all these things which had happened. And it came to pass, that, while they communed together and reasoned, Jesus himself drew near, and went with them. But their eyes were holden that they should not know him.” (vs. 13-16)
Here we have two of the followers of Jesus walking to Emmaus, which has been identified with the modern el-Kubeibeh, lying over 7 miles north-west of Jerusalem. We ae given to assume that this is Cleopas is never mentioned in any list of the apostles, so these two are among “the rest” rather than being of the remaining eleven apostles.
Bergant suggests that they are husband and wife, in part because they offer hospitality jointly as would a husband and wife (Bergant, 170). Assuming they are indeed husband and wife, naturally, they would be talking about the events of that day, trying desperately to make sense of it all, the details of their concerns are revealed in the following verses.
As they are discussing the perplexing chain of events, Jesus walks up to join them as they made their way along the road to Emmaus. “But their eyes were holden (ekratounto—held) ” “ The problem is not that Jesus’ appearance has changed or that the Emmaus disciples are distracted. The verb is passive, indicating that these two disciples are being acted upon. God is preventing them from seeing what would otherwise be obvious.” (Donovan)
“And he said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and are sad?” (v. 17) The Risen Christ—in a more contemporary vernacular—asks them, “What is this that you are talking about?” Anyone walking near them would have overheard all the things they were ranting about. “And why are you so sad?”
“And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days? And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people: And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him. But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done. Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, which were early at the sepulchre; And when they found not his body, they came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive. And certain of them which were with us went to the sepulchre, and found it even so as the women had said: but him they saw not.” (vs. 18-24)
“whose name was Cleopas,” This is the only mention of Cleopas in the New Testament. We know nothing more about him or his companion.
“Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days?” This statement by Cleopas demonstrates that he and his companion truly did not know who it was that they were talking to at the time. How ironic it is that Jesus, more than anyone else, knew exactly what it was that had transpired; and yet here, Cleopas—with a presumably sarcastic tone of voice—implies that the person he is addressing must be a stranger to Jerusalem, someone who had no knowledge of anything that had transpired there or the region these past three days or even the past three years.
Jesus, always the teacher, slyly, with the intention of cornering the student, asks them; “And he said unto them, What things? ” “ In saying this, Jesus skillfully played along with the conversation, encouraging the men to reveal their hearts. Even though He knew their hearts, there was value in them saying it to Jesus. ” (Guzik)
Cleopas begins to lecture his new found friend—whom he believes is ignorant of all the recent happenings in Judea—telling this stranger that Jesus was:
​
“Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?” (vs. 25-26) . Jesus reprimands the two disciples for failing to believe the prophets (v. 25).
“O fools,” “When Christ forbade us to say to our brother, Thou fool, it was intended to restrain us from giving unreasonable reproaches, not from giving just reproofs. Christ called them fools, not as it signifies wicked men, in which sense he forbade it to us, but as it signifies weak men. He might call them fools, for he knows our foolishness, the foolishness that is bound in our hearts.” (Henry)
“slow of heart to believe” “Jesus told them that the problem with their belief was more in their heart than their head. We often think the main obstacles to belief are in the head, but they are actually in the heart.” (Guzik)
“Ought not Christ to have” “(Greek: dei) This little word, dei, suggests a divine imperative—something ordained by God. Jesus is implying that God ordained the Messiah’s suffering prior to his entering into his glory. While this was not self-evident to the first disciples, the Emmaus disciples have identified Jesus as a prophet, reminding us that prophets were persecuted (6:23-26) and killed (11:47-49; 13:34)—Jesus’ own words. God’s ways are not our ways. God chose the foolishness of the cross, because “the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men” (1 Corinthians 1:25). We should not be surprised that God—who chose young David and Gideon’s tiny army and little Israel—would also choose a cross.”
“Was it not decreed, and was not that decree declared, that the promised Messiah must first suffer and then reign, that he must go by his cross to his crown?" Had they never read the fifty-third of Isaiah and the ninth of Daniel, where the prophets speak so very plainly of the sufferings of Christ and the glory that should follow?” (Henry)
“And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.” (v. 27)
“Jesus begins by revealing himself through the scriptures, but Luke doesn’t tell us which scriptures. Some possibilities include Deuteronomy 18:15; Psalm 2:7; 16:10; 110:1; 118:21-23; Isaiah 53; Daniel 7:13-15; Hosea 6:2; and Amos 9:11.”
“We are left to wonder whether Jesus explicitly connected the suffering and death of the prophets with his own suffering and death. Certainly the prophets served as a model for the crucifixion—and for the humble, sacrificial service that God expects of us.”
“Scripture is a powerful vehicle for revealing Christ. Scripture guides and strengthens Christians. Scripture has the potential to convert unbelievers. Gideons tell true stories about people whose lives have been changed by reading the Bible. We give the reading of scripture a prominent place in our worship, because it witnesses powerfully to Christ.” (Donovan)
“And they drew nigh unto the village, whither they went: and he made as though he would have gone further. But they constrained him, saying, Abide with us: for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent. And he went in to tarry with them. And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them. And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight. And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?” (vs. 28-32)
Cleopas and his unnamed companion—some believe to be his wife—finally reached the village of Emmaus, along with Jesus, the stranger they had met along the way and whose true identity was still denied to them. In keeping with with the traditions of hospitality that was the universal norm until our modern progressive times, they invite this stranger to eat and stay the night with them.
“But they constrained him,” “Shows that even though they didn’t know this was Jesus in their midst, they knew they wanted to spend as much time as they could with this man.”
“It is a very strong word that, ‘they constrained him’; it is akin to the one which Jesus used when he said, ‘The kingdom of heaven suffereth violence.’ They not only invited him, but they held him, they grasped his hand, they tugged at his skirts, they said he should not go.” (Spurgeon)
At the meal, “ he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them. And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight.” “These are almost exactly the words that Luke used to describe Jesus’ actions at the Last Supper (22:19). Note especially the four verbs: took, blessed, broke, and gave. Jesus took these same actions at the feeding of the five thousand (9:12-17). Normally, the host would perform these actions in a home and the celebrant would perform them in a worship service. Jesus, the guest, becomes both host and celebrant at this table.” (Donovan)
“It was in no sense a sacramental meal, as we use that word sacrament in our theology. It was a frugal supper in a village home of two tired travellers, and another. Yet it was then – in the breaking of bread, and not in any vision of resurrection splendor – that they knew that their companion was the Lord.” (Morrison)
“Presently their eyes were opened, and then they saw who it was, and knew him well enough. Whatever it was which had hitherto concealed him from them, it was now taken out of the way; the mists were scattered, the veil was taken off, and then they made no question but it was their Master. He might, for wise and holy ends, put on the shape of another, but no other could put on his; and therefore it must be he. See how Christ by his Spirit and grace makes himself known to the souls of his people.” (Henry)
“Jesus may be right in front of you, walking with you and sitting down with you at every meal – and your eyes could be restrained from seeing Him. We therefore should pray that God would open our eyes to see Jesus as He is, as being with us all the time.” (Guzik)
“and he vanished out of their sight” As soon as their eyes were opened to who Jesus was, He left miraculously and they both said what was on their hearts. Their hearts burned as they heard Him speak and teach.
“ As soon as he had given his disciples one glimpse of him he was gone presently. Such short and transient views have we of Christ in this world; we see him, but in a little while lose the sight of him again. When we come to heaven the vision of him will have no interruptions.” (Henry)
“And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?” Even when they didn’t know it was Jesus, even when they didn’t believe He was risen from the dead, their heart still burned because of the ministry of God’s Word and of Jesus, the Living Word of God. At the time, these two disciples did not understand what was happening, but Jesus was preparing them for the revelation that would come with the breaking of bread—preparing them to recognize him.
“And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them, Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon. And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread.” (vs. 33-35) It would have—by that time—been quite late, even dark outside, but these two enthusiastically jump ed form the dinner table to return to Jerusalem and the other to report what had just happened to them.
“After a seven mile walk one way, they were so excited that they went seven miles back – and probably much faster on the return. They had the passion to tell the great news of Jesus’ resurrection.” (Guzik)
“found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them, Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon” “The Emmaus disciples hasten to share their story with the disciples in Jerusalem.They had to walk seven miles to get to Jerusalem, and the hour was late, but their good news energized them for their journey. Once the Emmaus disciples arrive in Jerusalem, they find the eleven apostles and their companions discussing Jesus’ appearance to Peter.”
“and them that were with them” Presumably these include the women and others, totaling about one hundred twenty, mentioned in Acts 1:14-15.
“And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread.” The Emmaus disciples share their testimony only with other disciples. In due time, they will share it in a public setting (Acts 2:1-42).
“They told what things were done in the way. The words that were spoken by Christ to them in the way, having a wonderful effect and influence upon them, are here called the things that were done in the way; for the words that Christ speaks are not an empty sound, but they are spirit and they are life, and wondrous things are done by them, done by the way, by the by as it were, where it is not expected.” (Henry)
“The Lord is risen indeed” They had mutual confirmation of the resurrection of Jesus. Though the risen Jesus was not physically in their midst, His resurrection had been confirmed by more than two witnesses. Mary Magdalene and those with her at the tomb and now these two who had been confronted by the Risen Christ on the rod to Emmaus.
“And they told what things were done in the way” “The words that were spoken by Christ to them in the way, having a wonderful effect and influence upon them, are here called the things that were done in the way; for the words that Christ speaks are not an empty sound, but they are spirit and they are life, and wondrous things are done by them, done by the way, by the by as it were, where it is not expected. They told also how he was at length known to them in the breaking of bread; then, when he was carving out blessings to them, God opened their eyes to discern who it was. ” (Henry)
In this excerpt from his commentary on the entire Bible, Matthew Henry goes on to give his opinion; “ It would be of great use for the discovery and confirmation of truth if the disciples of Christ would compare their observations and experiences, and communicate to each other what they know and have felt in themselves.” This sharing of experiences, was at one time common in most Christian communities, especially of late in those of our Pentecostal and charismatic brethren. In these troubling times when we see a great falling away from the church, perhaps we should once again make this sharing a part of our practice. In doing so, perhaps we can inspire others to open their hearts and not be blind to the Holy Spirit that surrounds all of us, as these disciples were blind to the identity of the stranger on the road to Emmaus.
Benediction
Blessed Lord, who caused all holy Scriptures to be written for our learning: Grant us so to hear them, read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest them, that we may embrace and ever hold fast the blessed hope of everlasting life, which you have given us in our Savior Jesus Christ; who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.
Thought for the Day:
“In faith there is enough light for those who want to believe and enough shadows to blind those who don’t.” --Blaise Pascal
submitted by Bishop-Boomer to Christianity [link] [comments]

2024.04.03 05:10 Bishop-Boomer Bible Studies From The Daily Office Wednesday April 3, 2024

The Collect
O God, whose blessed Son made himself known to his disciples in the breaking of bread: Open the eyes of our faith, that we may behold him in all his redeeming work; who lives and reigns with you, in the unity of the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever. Amen.
Readings:
Acts 3:1–10 https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+3%3A1%E2%80%9310&version=KJV
Psalm 105:1–8 https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm+105%3A1%E2%80%938+&version=KJV
Gospel: Luke 24:13–35
13 And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs.
14 And they talked together of all these things which had happened.
15 And it came to pass, that, while they communed together and reasoned, Jesus himself drew near, and went with them.
16 But their eyes were holden that they should not know him.
17 And he said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and are sad?
18 And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days?
19 And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people:
20 And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him.
21 But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done.
22 Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, which were early at the sepulchre;
23 And when they found not his body, they came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive.
24 And certain of them which were with us went to the sepulchre, and found it even so as the women had said: but him they saw not.
25 Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:
26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?
27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.
28 And they drew nigh unto the village, whither they went: and he made as though he would have gone further.
29 But they constrained him, saying, Abide with us: for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent. And he went in to tarry with them.
30 And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them.
31 And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight.
32 And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?
33 And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them,
34 Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon.
35 And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread.
Commentary:
We continue to look at the evidence of the resurrection of Christ, as presented by the Gospel writers. Today we look at events near the end of the Gospel according to Luke, which was written near the end of the first century when the vast majority of the Christian faithful had not yet been born, and had not been blessed with having witnessed Jesus first hand, in the flesh, so to speak.
This story connects us, just as it did the Christians of the first century, who did get the pleasure of seeing him, with Christ, who is still revealed through the reading and interpretation of scripture (v. 27) and the Lord’s Supper (vv. 30-31).
This story mirrors the events as told in the story of the angels appearing to Abraham and Sarah at Mamre (Genesis 18:1-15) in that these people in Luke 24, like Abraham and Sarah, fail to recognize the significance of their visitors, but extend hospitality nevertheless. In both stories, hospitality leads to revelation and to blessing.
Here we find words of a liturgical nature, such as, “he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them.” (v. 30) “The Lord is risen indeed,” (v. 34) and “breaking of bread.” (v. 35). Therefore, the evidence that Christ is risen, is revealed through the telling of the story of these eyewitnesses, the interpretation of scripture, and the breaking of bread, by Jesus, just as he did at the last supper.
“And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs. And they talked together of all these things which had happened. And it came to pass, that, while they communed together and reasoned, Jesus himself drew near, and went with them. But their eyes were holden that they should not know him.” (vs. 13-16)
Here we have two of the followers of Jesus walking to Emmaus, which has been identified with the modern el-Kubeibeh, lying over 7 miles north-west of Jerusalem. We ae given to assume that this is Cleopas is never mentioned in any list of the apostles, so these two are among “the rest” rather than being of the remaining eleven apostles.
Bergant suggests that they are husband and wife, in part because they offer hospitality jointly as would a husband and wife (Bergant, 170). Assuming they are indeed husband and wife, naturally, they would be talking about the events of that day, trying desperately to make sense of it all, the details of their concerns are revealed in the following verses.
As they are discussing the perplexing chain of events, Jesus walks up to join them as they made their way along the road to Emmaus. “But their eyes were holden (ekratounto—held) ” “ The problem is not that Jesus’ appearance has changed or that the Emmaus disciples are distracted. The verb is passive, indicating that these two disciples are being acted upon. God is preventing them from seeing what would otherwise be obvious.” (Donovan)
“And he said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and are sad?” (v. 17) The Risen Christ—in a more contemporary vernacular—asks them, “What is this that you are talking about?” Anyone walking near them would have overheard all the things they were ranting about. “And why are you so sad?”
“And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days? And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people: And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him. But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done. Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, which were early at the sepulchre; And when they found not his body, they came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive. And certain of them which were with us went to the sepulchre, and found it even so as the women had said: but him they saw not.” (vs. 18-24)
“whose name was Cleopas,” This is the only mention of Cleopas in the New Testament. We know nothing more about him or his companion.
“Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days?” This statement by Cleopas demonstrates that he and his companion truly did not know who it was that they were talking to at the time. How ironic it is that Jesus, more than anyone else, knew exactly what it was that had transpired; and yet here, Cleopas—with a presumably sarcastic tone of voice—implies that the person he is addressing must be a stranger to Jerusalem, someone who had no knowledge of anything that had transpired there or the region these past three days or even the past three years.
Jesus, always the teacher, slyly, with the intention of cornering the student, asks them; “And he said unto them, What things? ” “ In saying this, Jesus skillfully played along with the conversation, encouraging the men to reveal their hearts. Even though He knew their hearts, there was value in them saying it to Jesus. ” (Guzik)
Cleopas begins to lecture his new found friend—whom he believes is ignorant of all the recent happenings in Judea—telling this stranger that Jesus was:
​
“Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?” (vs. 25-26) . Jesus reprimands the two disciples for failing to believe the prophets (v. 25).
“O fools,” “When Christ forbade us to say to our brother, Thou fool, it was intended to restrain us from giving unreasonable reproaches, not from giving just reproofs. Christ called them fools, not as it signifies wicked men, in which sense he forbade it to us, but as it signifies weak men. He might call them fools, for he knows our foolishness, the foolishness that is bound in our hearts.” (Henry)
“slow of heart to believe” “Jesus told them that the problem with their belief was more in their heart than their head. We often think the main obstacles to belief are in the head, but they are actually in the heart.” (Guzik)
“Ought not Christ to have” “(Greek: dei) This little word, dei, suggests a divine imperative—something ordained by God. Jesus is implying that God ordained the Messiah’s suffering prior to his entering into his glory. While this was not self-evident to the first disciples, the Emmaus disciples have identified Jesus as a prophet, reminding us that prophets were persecuted (6:23-26) and killed (11:47-49; 13:34)—Jesus’ own words. God’s ways are not our ways. God chose the foolishness of the cross, because “the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men” (1 Corinthians 1:25). We should not be surprised that God—who chose young David and Gideon’s tiny army and little Israel—would also choose a cross.”
“Was it not decreed, and was not that decree declared, that the promised Messiah must first suffer and then reign, that he must go by his cross to his crown?" Had they never read the fifty-third of Isaiah and the ninth of Daniel, where the prophets speak so very plainly of the sufferings of Christ and the glory that should follow?” (Henry)
“And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.” (v. 27)
“Jesus begins by revealing himself through the scriptures, but Luke doesn’t tell us which scriptures. Some possibilities include Deuteronomy 18:15; Psalm 2:7; 16:10; 110:1; 118:21-23; Isaiah 53; Daniel 7:13-15; Hosea 6:2; and Amos 9:11.”
“We are left to wonder whether Jesus explicitly connected the suffering and death of the prophets with his own suffering and death. Certainly the prophets served as a model for the crucifixion—and for the humble, sacrificial service that God expects of us.”
“Scripture is a powerful vehicle for revealing Christ. Scripture guides and strengthens Christians. Scripture has the potential to convert unbelievers. Gideons tell true stories about people whose lives have been changed by reading the Bible. We give the reading of scripture a prominent place in our worship, because it witnesses powerfully to Christ.” (Donovan)
“And they drew nigh unto the village, whither they went: and he made as though he would have gone further. But they constrained him, saying, Abide with us: for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent. And he went in to tarry with them. And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them. And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight. And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?” (vs. 28-32)
Cleopas and his unnamed companion—some believe to be his wife—finally reached the village of Emmaus, along with Jesus, the stranger they had met along the way and whose true identity was still denied to them. In keeping with with the traditions of hospitality that was the universal norm until our modern progressive times, they invite this stranger to eat and stay the night with them.
“But they constrained him,” “Shows that even though they didn’t know this was Jesus in their midst, they knew they wanted to spend as much time as they could with this man.”
“It is a very strong word that, ‘they constrained him’; it is akin to the one which Jesus used when he said, ‘The kingdom of heaven suffereth violence.’ They not only invited him, but they held him, they grasped his hand, they tugged at his skirts, they said he should not go.” (Spurgeon)
At the meal, “ he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them. And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight.” “These are almost exactly the words that Luke used to describe Jesus’ actions at the Last Supper (22:19). Note especially the four verbs: took, blessed, broke, and gave. Jesus took these same actions at the feeding of the five thousand (9:12-17). Normally, the host would perform these actions in a home and the celebrant would perform them in a worship service. Jesus, the guest, becomes both host and celebrant at this table.” (Donovan)
“It was in no sense a sacramental meal, as we use that word sacrament in our theology. It was a frugal supper in a village home of two tired travellers, and another. Yet it was then – in the breaking of bread, and not in any vision of resurrection splendor – that they knew that their companion was the Lord.” (Morrison)
“Presently their eyes were opened, and then they saw who it was, and knew him well enough. Whatever it was which had hitherto concealed him from them, it was now taken out of the way; the mists were scattered, the veil was taken off, and then they made no question but it was their Master. He might, for wise and holy ends, put on the shape of another, but no other could put on his; and therefore it must be he. See how Christ by his Spirit and grace makes himself known to the souls of his people.” (Henry)
“Jesus may be right in front of you, walking with you and sitting down with you at every meal – and your eyes could be restrained from seeing Him. We therefore should pray that God would open our eyes to see Jesus as He is, as being with us all the time.” (Guzik)
“and he vanished out of their sight” As soon as their eyes were opened to who Jesus was, He left miraculously and they both said what was on their hearts. Their hearts burned as they heard Him speak and teach.
“ As soon as he had given his disciples one glimpse of him he was gone presently. Such short and transient views have we of Christ in this world; we see him, but in a little while lose the sight of him again. When we come to heaven the vision of him will have no interruptions.” (Henry)
“And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?” Even when they didn’t know it was Jesus, even when they didn’t believe He was risen from the dead, their heart still burned because of the ministry of God’s Word and of Jesus, the Living Word of God. At the time, these two disciples did not understand what was happening, but Jesus was preparing them for the revelation that would come with the breaking of bread—preparing them to recognize him.
“And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them, Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon. And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread.” (vs. 33-35) It would have—by that time—been quite late, even dark outside, but these two enthusiastically jump ed form the dinner table to return to Jerusalem and the other to report what had just happened to them.
“After a seven mile walk one way, they were so excited that they went seven miles back – and probably much faster on the return. They had the passion to tell the great news of Jesus’ resurrection.” (Guzik)
“found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them, Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon” “The Emmaus disciples hasten to share their story with the disciples in Jerusalem.They had to walk seven miles to get to Jerusalem, and the hour was late, but their good news energized them for their journey. Once the Emmaus disciples arrive in Jerusalem, they find the eleven apostles and their companions discussing Jesus’ appearance to Peter.”
“and them that were with them” Presumably these include the women and others, totaling about one hundred twenty, mentioned in Acts 1:14-15.
“And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread.” The Emmaus disciples share their testimony only with other disciples. In due time, they will share it in a public setting (Acts 2:1-42).
“They told what things were done in the way. The words that were spoken by Christ to them in the way, having a wonderful effect and influence upon them, are here called the things that were done in the way; for the words that Christ speaks are not an empty sound, but they are spirit and they are life, and wondrous things are done by them, done by the way, by the by as it were, where it is not expected.” (Henry)
“The Lord is risen indeed” They had mutual confirmation of the resurrection of Jesus. Though the risen Jesus was not physically in their midst, His resurrection had been confirmed by more than two witnesses. Mary Magdalene and those with her at the tomb and now these two who had been confronted by the Risen Christ on the rod to Emmaus.
“And they told what things were done in the way” “The words that were spoken by Christ to them in the way, having a wonderful effect and influence upon them, are here called the things that were done in the way; for the words that Christ speaks are not an empty sound, but they are spirit and they are life, and wondrous things are done by them, done by the way, by the by as it were, where it is not expected. They told also how he was at length known to them in the breaking of bread; then, when he was carving out blessings to them, God opened their eyes to discern who it was. ” (Henry)
In this excerpt from his commentary on the entire Bible, Matthew Henry goes on to give his opinion; “ It would be of great use for the discovery and confirmation of truth if the disciples of Christ would compare their observations and experiences, and communicate to each other what they know and have felt in themselves.” This sharing of experiences, was at one time common in most Christian communities, especially of late in those of our Pentecostal and charismatic brethren. In these troubling times when we see a great falling away from the church, perhaps we should once again make this sharing a part of our practice. In doing so, perhaps we can inspire others to open their hearts and not be blind to the Holy Spirit that surrounds all of us, as these disciples were blind to the identity of the stranger on the road to Emmaus.
Benediction
Blessed Lord, who caused all holy Scriptures to be written for our learning: Grant us so to hear them, read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest them, that we may embrace and ever hold fast the blessed hope of everlasting life, which you have given us in our Savior Jesus Christ; who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.
Thought for the Day:
“In faith there is enough light for those who want to believe and enough shadows to blind those who don’t.” --Blaise Pascal
submitted by Bishop-Boomer to AngloCatholicism [link] [comments]

2024.04.03 05:10 Bishop-Boomer Bible Studies From The Daily Office Wednesday April 3, 2024

The Collect
O God, whose blessed Son made himself known to his disciples in the breaking of bread: Open the eyes of our faith, that we may behold him in all his redeeming work; who lives and reigns with you, in the unity of the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever. Amen.
Readings:
Acts 3:1–10 https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+3%3A1%E2%80%9310&version=KJV
Psalm 105:1–8 https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm+105%3A1%E2%80%938+&version=KJV
Gospel: Luke 24:13–35
13 And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs.
14 And they talked together of all these things which had happened.
15 And it came to pass, that, while they communed together and reasoned, Jesus himself drew near, and went with them.
16 But their eyes were holden that they should not know him.
17 And he said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and are sad?
18 And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days?
19 And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people:
20 And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him.
21 But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done.
22 Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, which were early at the sepulchre;
23 And when they found not his body, they came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive.
24 And certain of them which were with us went to the sepulchre, and found it even so as the women had said: but him they saw not.
25 Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:
26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?
27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.
28 And they drew nigh unto the village, whither they went: and he made as though he would have gone further.
29 But they constrained him, saying, Abide with us: for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent. And he went in to tarry with them.
30 And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them.
31 And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight.
32 And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?
33 And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them,
34 Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon.
35 And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread.
Commentary:
We continue to look at the evidence of the resurrection of Christ, as presented by the Gospel writers. Today we look at events near the end of the Gospel according to Luke, which was written near the end of the first century when the vast majority of the Christian faithful had not yet been born, and had not been blessed with having witnessed Jesus first hand, in the flesh, so to speak.
This story connects us, just as it did the Christians of the first century, who did get the pleasure of seeing him, with Christ, who is still revealed through the reading and interpretation of scripture (v. 27) and the Lord’s Supper (vv. 30-31).
This story mirrors the events as told in the story of the angels appearing to Abraham and Sarah at Mamre (Genesis 18:1-15) in that these people in Luke 24, like Abraham and Sarah, fail to recognize the significance of their visitors, but extend hospitality nevertheless. In both stories, hospitality leads to revelation and to blessing.
Here we find words of a liturgical nature, such as, “he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them.” (v. 30) “The Lord is risen indeed,” (v. 34) and “breaking of bread.” (v. 35). Therefore, the evidence that Christ is risen, is revealed through the telling of the story of these eyewitnesses, the interpretation of scripture, and the breaking of bread, by Jesus, just as he did at the last supper.
“And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs. And they talked together of all these things which had happened. And it came to pass, that, while they communed together and reasoned, Jesus himself drew near, and went with them. But their eyes were holden that they should not know him.” (vs. 13-16)
Here we have two of the followers of Jesus walking to Emmaus, which has been identified with the modern el-Kubeibeh, lying over 7 miles north-west of Jerusalem. We ae given to assume that this is Cleopas is never mentioned in any list of the apostles, so these two are among “the rest” rather than being of the remaining eleven apostles.
Bergant suggests that they are husband and wife, in part because they offer hospitality jointly as would a husband and wife (Bergant, 170). Assuming they are indeed husband and wife, naturally, they would be talking about the events of that day, trying desperately to make sense of it all, the details of their concerns are revealed in the following verses.
As they are discussing the perplexing chain of events, Jesus walks up to join them as they made their way along the road to Emmaus. “But their eyes were holden (ekratounto—held) ” “ The problem is not that Jesus’ appearance has changed or that the Emmaus disciples are distracted. The verb is passive, indicating that these two disciples are being acted upon. God is preventing them from seeing what would otherwise be obvious.” (Donovan)
“And he said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and are sad?” (v. 17) The Risen Christ—in a more contemporary vernacular—asks them, “What is this that you are talking about?” Anyone walking near them would have overheard all the things they were ranting about. “And why are you so sad?”
“And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days? And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people: And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him. But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done. Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, which were early at the sepulchre; And when they found not his body, they came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive. And certain of them which were with us went to the sepulchre, and found it even so as the women had said: but him they saw not.” (vs. 18-24)
“whose name was Cleopas,” This is the only mention of Cleopas in the New Testament. We know nothing more about him or his companion.
“Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days?” This statement by Cleopas demonstrates that he and his companion truly did not know who it was that they were talking to at the time. How ironic it is that Jesus, more than anyone else, knew exactly what it was that had transpired; and yet here, Cleopas—with a presumably sarcastic tone of voice—implies that the person he is addressing must be a stranger to Jerusalem, someone who had no knowledge of anything that had transpired there or the region these past three days or even the past three years.
Jesus, always the teacher, slyly, with the intention of cornering the student, asks them; “And he said unto them, What things? ” “ In saying this, Jesus skillfully played along with the conversation, encouraging the men to reveal their hearts. Even though He knew their hearts, there was value in them saying it to Jesus. ” (Guzik)
Cleopas begins to lecture his new found friend—whom he believes is ignorant of all the recent happenings in Judea—telling this stranger that Jesus was:
​
“Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?” (vs. 25-26) . Jesus reprimands the two disciples for failing to believe the prophets (v. 25).
“O fools,” “When Christ forbade us to say to our brother, Thou fool, it was intended to restrain us from giving unreasonable reproaches, not from giving just reproofs. Christ called them fools, not as it signifies wicked men, in which sense he forbade it to us, but as it signifies weak men. He might call them fools, for he knows our foolishness, the foolishness that is bound in our hearts.” (Henry)
“slow of heart to believe” “Jesus told them that the problem with their belief was more in their heart than their head. We often think the main obstacles to belief are in the head, but they are actually in the heart.” (Guzik)
“Ought not Christ to have” “(Greek: dei) This little word, dei, suggests a divine imperative—something ordained by God. Jesus is implying that God ordained the Messiah’s suffering prior to his entering into his glory. While this was not self-evident to the first disciples, the Emmaus disciples have identified Jesus as a prophet, reminding us that prophets were persecuted (6:23-26) and killed (11:47-49; 13:34)—Jesus’ own words. God’s ways are not our ways. God chose the foolishness of the cross, because “the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men” (1 Corinthians 1:25). We should not be surprised that God—who chose young David and Gideon’s tiny army and little Israel—would also choose a cross.”
“Was it not decreed, and was not that decree declared, that the promised Messiah must first suffer and then reign, that he must go by his cross to his crown?" Had they never read the fifty-third of Isaiah and the ninth of Daniel, where the prophets speak so very plainly of the sufferings of Christ and the glory that should follow?” (Henry)
“And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.” (v. 27)
“Jesus begins by revealing himself through the scriptures, but Luke doesn’t tell us which scriptures. Some possibilities include Deuteronomy 18:15; Psalm 2:7; 16:10; 110:1; 118:21-23; Isaiah 53; Daniel 7:13-15; Hosea 6:2; and Amos 9:11.”
“We are left to wonder whether Jesus explicitly connected the suffering and death of the prophets with his own suffering and death. Certainly the prophets served as a model for the crucifixion—and for the humble, sacrificial service that God expects of us.”
“Scripture is a powerful vehicle for revealing Christ. Scripture guides and strengthens Christians. Scripture has the potential to convert unbelievers. Gideons tell true stories about people whose lives have been changed by reading the Bible. We give the reading of scripture a prominent place in our worship, because it witnesses powerfully to Christ.” (Donovan)
“And they drew nigh unto the village, whither they went: and he made as though he would have gone further. But they constrained him, saying, Abide with us: for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent. And he went in to tarry with them. And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them. And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight. And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?” (vs. 28-32)
Cleopas and his unnamed companion—some believe to be his wife—finally reached the village of Emmaus, along with Jesus, the stranger they had met along the way and whose true identity was still denied to them. In keeping with with the traditions of hospitality that was the universal norm until our modern progressive times, they invite this stranger to eat and stay the night with them.
“But they constrained him,” “Shows that even though they didn’t know this was Jesus in their midst, they knew they wanted to spend as much time as they could with this man.”
“It is a very strong word that, ‘they constrained him’; it is akin to the one which Jesus used when he said, ‘The kingdom of heaven suffereth violence.’ They not only invited him, but they held him, they grasped his hand, they tugged at his skirts, they said he should not go.” (Spurgeon)
At the meal, “ he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them. And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight.” “These are almost exactly the words that Luke used to describe Jesus’ actions at the Last Supper (22:19). Note especially the four verbs: took, blessed, broke, and gave. Jesus took these same actions at the feeding of the five thousand (9:12-17). Normally, the host would perform these actions in a home and the celebrant would perform them in a worship service. Jesus, the guest, becomes both host and celebrant at this table.” (Donovan)
“It was in no sense a sacramental meal, as we use that word sacrament in our theology. It was a frugal supper in a village home of two tired travellers, and another. Yet it was then – in the breaking of bread, and not in any vision of resurrection splendor – that they knew that their companion was the Lord.” (Morrison)
“Presently their eyes were opened, and then they saw who it was, and knew him well enough. Whatever it was which had hitherto concealed him from them, it was now taken out of the way; the mists were scattered, the veil was taken off, and then they made no question but it was their Master. He might, for wise and holy ends, put on the shape of another, but no other could put on his; and therefore it must be he. See how Christ by his Spirit and grace makes himself known to the souls of his people.” (Henry)
“Jesus may be right in front of you, walking with you and sitting down with you at every meal – and your eyes could be restrained from seeing Him. We therefore should pray that God would open our eyes to see Jesus as He is, as being with us all the time.” (Guzik)
“and he vanished out of their sight” As soon as their eyes were opened to who Jesus was, He left miraculously and they both said what was on their hearts. Their hearts burned as they heard Him speak and teach.
“ As soon as he had given his disciples one glimpse of him he was gone presently. Such short and transient views have we of Christ in this world; we see him, but in a little while lose the sight of him again. When we come to heaven the vision of him will have no interruptions.” (Henry)
“And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?” Even when they didn’t know it was Jesus, even when they didn’t believe He was risen from the dead, their heart still burned because of the ministry of God’s Word and of Jesus, the Living Word of God. At the time, these two disciples did not understand what was happening, but Jesus was preparing them for the revelation that would come with the breaking of bread—preparing them to recognize him.
“And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them, Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon. And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread.” (vs. 33-35) It would have—by that time—been quite late, even dark outside, but these two enthusiastically jump ed form the dinner table to return to Jerusalem and the other to report what had just happened to them.
“After a seven mile walk one way, they were so excited that they went seven miles back – and probably much faster on the return. They had the passion to tell the great news of Jesus’ resurrection.” (Guzik)
“found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them, Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon” “The Emmaus disciples hasten to share their story with the disciples in Jerusalem.They had to walk seven miles to get to Jerusalem, and the hour was late, but their good news energized them for their journey. Once the Emmaus disciples arrive in Jerusalem, they find the eleven apostles and their companions discussing Jesus’ appearance to Peter.”
“and them that were with them” Presumably these include the women and others, totaling about one hundred twenty, mentioned in Acts 1:14-15.
“And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread.” The Emmaus disciples share their testimony only with other disciples. In due time, they will share it in a public setting (Acts 2:1-42).
“They told what things were done in the way. The words that were spoken by Christ to them in the way, having a wonderful effect and influence upon them, are here called the things that were done in the way; for the words that Christ speaks are not an empty sound, but they are spirit and they are life, and wondrous things are done by them, done by the way, by the by as it were, where it is not expected.” (Henry)
“The Lord is risen indeed” They had mutual confirmation of the resurrection of Jesus. Though the risen Jesus was not physically in their midst, His resurrection had been confirmed by more than two witnesses. Mary Magdalene and those with her at the tomb and now these two who had been confronted by the Risen Christ on the rod to Emmaus.
“And they told what things were done in the way” “The words that were spoken by Christ to them in the way, having a wonderful effect and influence upon them, are here called the things that were done in the way; for the words that Christ speaks are not an empty sound, but they are spirit and they are life, and wondrous things are done by them, done by the way, by the by as it were, where it is not expected. They told also how he was at length known to them in the breaking of bread; then, when he was carving out blessings to them, God opened their eyes to discern who it was. ” (Henry)
In this excerpt from his commentary on the entire Bible, Matthew Henry goes on to give his opinion; “ It would be of great use for the discovery and confirmation of truth if the disciples of Christ would compare their observations and experiences, and communicate to each other what they know and have felt in themselves.” This sharing of experiences, was at one time common in most Christian communities, especially of late in those of our Pentecostal and charismatic brethren. In these troubling times when we see a great falling away from the church, perhaps we should once again make this sharing a part of our practice. In doing so, perhaps we can inspire others to open their hearts and not be blind to the Holy Spirit that surrounds all of us, as these disciples were blind to the identity of the stranger on the road to Emmaus.
Benediction
Blessed Lord, who caused all holy Scriptures to be written for our learning: Grant us so to hear them, read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest them, that we may embrace and ever hold fast the blessed hope of everlasting life, which you have given us in our Savior Jesus Christ; who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.
Thought for the Day:
“In faith there is enough light for those who want to believe and enough shadows to blind those who don’t.” --Blaise Pascal
submitted by Bishop-Boomer to Anglicanism [link] [comments]

2024.04.03 05:09 Bishop-Boomer Bible Studies From The Daily Office Wednesday April 3, 2024

The Collect
O God, whose blessed Son made himself known to his disciples in the breaking of bread: Open the eyes of our faith, that we may behold him in all his redeeming work; who lives and reigns with you, in the unity of the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever. Amen.
Readings:
Acts 3:1–10 https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+3%3A1%E2%80%9310&version=KJV
Psalm 105:1–8 https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm+105%3A1%E2%80%938+&version=KJV
Gospel: Luke 24:13–35
13 And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs.
14 And they talked together of all these things which had happened.
15 And it came to pass, that, while they communed together and reasoned, Jesus himself drew near, and went with them.
16 But their eyes were holden that they should not know him.
17 And he said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and are sad?
18 And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days?
19 And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people:
20 And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him.
21 But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done.
22 Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, which were early at the sepulchre;
23 And when they found not his body, they came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive.
24 And certain of them which were with us went to the sepulchre, and found it even so as the women had said: but him they saw not.
25 Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:
26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?
27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.
28 And they drew nigh unto the village, whither they went: and he made as though he would have gone further.
29 But they constrained him, saying, Abide with us: for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent. And he went in to tarry with them.
30 And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them.
31 And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight.
32 And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?
33 And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them,
34 Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon.
35 And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread.
Commentary:
We continue to look at the evidence of the resurrection of Christ, as presented by the Gospel writers. Today we look at events near the end of the Gospel according to Luke, which was written near the end of the first century when the vast majority of the Christian faithful had not yet been born, and had not been blessed with having witnessed Jesus first hand, in the flesh, so to speak.
This story connects us, just as it did the Christians of the first century, who did get the pleasure of seeing him, with Christ, who is still revealed through the reading and interpretation of scripture (v. 27) and the Lord’s Supper (vv. 30-31).
This story mirrors the events as told in the story of the angels appearing to Abraham and Sarah at Mamre (Genesis 18:1-15) in that these people in Luke 24, like Abraham and Sarah, fail to recognize the significance of their visitors, but extend hospitality nevertheless. In both stories, hospitality leads to revelation and to blessing.
Here we find words of a liturgical nature, such as, “he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them.” (v. 30) “The Lord is risen indeed,” (v. 34) and “breaking of bread.” (v. 35). Therefore, the evidence that Christ is risen, is revealed through the telling of the story of these eyewitnesses, the interpretation of scripture, and the breaking of bread, by Jesus, just as he did at the last supper.
“And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs. And they talked together of all these things which had happened. And it came to pass, that, while they communed together and reasoned, Jesus himself drew near, and went with them. But their eyes were holden that they should not know him.” (vs. 13-16)
Here we have two of the followers of Jesus walking to Emmaus, which has been identified with the modern el-Kubeibeh, lying over 7 miles north-west of Jerusalem. We ae given to assume that this is Cleopas is never mentioned in any list of the apostles, so these two are among “the rest” rather than being of the remaining eleven apostles.
Bergant suggests that they are husband and wife, in part because they offer hospitality jointly as would a husband and wife (Bergant, 170). Assuming they are indeed husband and wife, naturally, they would be talking about the events of that day, trying desperately to make sense of it all, the details of their concerns are revealed in the following verses.
As they are discussing the perplexing chain of events, Jesus walks up to join them as they made their way along the road to Emmaus. “But their eyes were holden (ekratounto—held) ” “ The problem is not that Jesus’ appearance has changed or that the Emmaus disciples are distracted. The verb is passive, indicating that these two disciples are being acted upon. God is preventing them from seeing what would otherwise be obvious.” (Donovan)
“And he said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and are sad?” (v. 17) The Risen Christ—in a more contemporary vernacular—asks them, “What is this that you are talking about?” Anyone walking near them would have overheard all the things they were ranting about. “And why are you so sad?”
“And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days? And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people: And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him. But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done. Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, which were early at the sepulchre; And when they found not his body, they came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive. And certain of them which were with us went to the sepulchre, and found it even so as the women had said: but him they saw not.” (vs. 18-24)
“whose name was Cleopas,” This is the only mention of Cleopas in the New Testament. We know nothing more about him or his companion.
“Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days?” This statement by Cleopas demonstrates that he and his companion truly did not know who it was that they were talking to at the time. How ironic it is that Jesus, more than anyone else, knew exactly what it was that had transpired; and yet here, Cleopas—with a presumably sarcastic tone of voice—implies that the person he is addressing must be a stranger to Jerusalem, someone who had no knowledge of anything that had transpired there or the region these past three days or even the past three years.
Jesus, always the teacher, slyly, with the intention of cornering the student, asks them; “And he said unto them, What things? ” “ In saying this, Jesus skillfully played along with the conversation, encouraging the men to reveal their hearts. Even though He knew their hearts, there was value in them saying it to Jesus. ” (Guzik)
Cleopas begins to lecture his new found friend—whom he believes is ignorant of all the recent happenings in Judea—telling this stranger that Jesus was:
​
“Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?” (vs. 25-26) . Jesus reprimands the two disciples for failing to believe the prophets (v. 25).
“O fools,” “When Christ forbade us to say to our brother, Thou fool, it was intended to restrain us from giving unreasonable reproaches, not from giving just reproofs. Christ called them fools, not as it signifies wicked men, in which sense he forbade it to us, but as it signifies weak men. He might call them fools, for he knows our foolishness, the foolishness that is bound in our hearts.” (Henry)
“slow of heart to believe” “Jesus told them that the problem with their belief was more in their heart than their head. We often think the main obstacles to belief are in the head, but they are actually in the heart.” (Guzik)
“Ought not Christ to have” “(Greek: dei) This little word, dei, suggests a divine imperative—something ordained by God. Jesus is implying that God ordained the Messiah’s suffering prior to his entering into his glory. While this was not self-evident to the first disciples, the Emmaus disciples have identified Jesus as a prophet, reminding us that prophets were persecuted (6:23-26) and killed (11:47-49; 13:34)—Jesus’ own words. God’s ways are not our ways. God chose the foolishness of the cross, because “the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men” (1 Corinthians 1:25). We should not be surprised that God—who chose young David and Gideon’s tiny army and little Israel—would also choose a cross.”
“Was it not decreed, and was not that decree declared, that the promised Messiah must first suffer and then reign, that he must go by his cross to his crown?" Had they never read the fifty-third of Isaiah and the ninth of Daniel, where the prophets speak so very plainly of the sufferings of Christ and the glory that should follow?” (Henry)
“And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.” (v. 27)
“Jesus begins by revealing himself through the scriptures, but Luke doesn’t tell us which scriptures. Some possibilities include Deuteronomy 18:15; Psalm 2:7; 16:10; 110:1; 118:21-23; Isaiah 53; Daniel 7:13-15; Hosea 6:2; and Amos 9:11.”
“We are left to wonder whether Jesus explicitly connected the suffering and death of the prophets with his own suffering and death. Certainly the prophets served as a model for the crucifixion—and for the humble, sacrificial service that God expects of us.”
“Scripture is a powerful vehicle for revealing Christ. Scripture guides and strengthens Christians. Scripture has the potential to convert unbelievers. Gideons tell true stories about people whose lives have been changed by reading the Bible. We give the reading of scripture a prominent place in our worship, because it witnesses powerfully to Christ.” (Donovan)
“And they drew nigh unto the village, whither they went: and he made as though he would have gone further. But they constrained him, saying, Abide with us: for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent. And he went in to tarry with them. And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them. And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight. And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?” (vs. 28-32)
Cleopas and his unnamed companion—some believe to be his wife—finally reached the village of Emmaus, along with Jesus, the stranger they had met along the way and whose true identity was still denied to them. In keeping with with the traditions of hospitality that was the universal norm until our modern progressive times, they invite this stranger to eat and stay the night with them.
“But they constrained him,” “Shows that even though they didn’t know this was Jesus in their midst, they knew they wanted to spend as much time as they could with this man.”
“It is a very strong word that, ‘they constrained him’; it is akin to the one which Jesus used when he said, ‘The kingdom of heaven suffereth violence.’ They not only invited him, but they held him, they grasped his hand, they tugged at his skirts, they said he should not go.” (Spurgeon)
At the meal, “ he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them. And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight.” “These are almost exactly the words that Luke used to describe Jesus’ actions at the Last Supper (22:19). Note especially the four verbs: took, blessed, broke, and gave. Jesus took these same actions at the feeding of the five thousand (9:12-17). Normally, the host would perform these actions in a home and the celebrant would perform them in a worship service. Jesus, the guest, becomes both host and celebrant at this table.” (Donovan)
“It was in no sense a sacramental meal, as we use that word sacrament in our theology. It was a frugal supper in a village home of two tired travellers, and another. Yet it was then – in the breaking of bread, and not in any vision of resurrection splendor – that they knew that their companion was the Lord.” (Morrison)
“Presently their eyes were opened, and then they saw who it was, and knew him well enough. Whatever it was which had hitherto concealed him from them, it was now taken out of the way; the mists were scattered, the veil was taken off, and then they made no question but it was their Master. He might, for wise and holy ends, put on the shape of another, but no other could put on his; and therefore it must be he. See how Christ by his Spirit and grace makes himself known to the souls of his people.” (Henry)
“Jesus may be right in front of you, walking with you and sitting down with you at every meal – and your eyes could be restrained from seeing Him. We therefore should pray that God would open our eyes to see Jesus as He is, as being with us all the time.” (Guzik)
“and he vanished out of their sight” As soon as their eyes were opened to who Jesus was, He left miraculously and they both said what was on their hearts. Their hearts burned as they heard Him speak and teach.
“ As soon as he had given his disciples one glimpse of him he was gone presently. Such short and transient views have we of Christ in this world; we see him, but in a little while lose the sight of him again. When we come to heaven the vision of him will have no interruptions.” (Henry)
“And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?” Even when they didn’t know it was Jesus, even when they didn’t believe He was risen from the dead, their heart still burned because of the ministry of God’s Word and of Jesus, the Living Word of God. At the time, these two disciples did not understand what was happening, but Jesus was preparing them for the revelation that would come with the breaking of bread—preparing them to recognize him.
“And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them, Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon. And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread.” (vs. 33-35) It would have—by that time—been quite late, even dark outside, but these two enthusiastically jump ed form the dinner table to return to Jerusalem and the other to report what had just happened to them.
“After a seven mile walk one way, they were so excited that they went seven miles back – and probably much faster on the return. They had the passion to tell the great news of Jesus’ resurrection.” (Guzik)
“found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them, Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon” “The Emmaus disciples hasten to share their story with the disciples in Jerusalem.They had to walk seven miles to get to Jerusalem, and the hour was late, but their good news energized them for their journey. Once the Emmaus disciples arrive in Jerusalem, they find the eleven apostles and their companions discussing Jesus’ appearance to Peter.”
“and them that were with them” Presumably these include the women and others, totaling about one hundred twenty, mentioned in Acts 1:14-15.
“And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread.” The Emmaus disciples share their testimony only with other disciples. In due time, they will share it in a public setting (Acts 2:1-42).
“They told what things were done in the way. The words that were spoken by Christ to them in the way, having a wonderful effect and influence upon them, are here called the things that were done in the way; for the words that Christ speaks are not an empty sound, but they are spirit and they are life, and wondrous things are done by them, done by the way, by the by as it were, where it is not expected.” (Henry)
“The Lord is risen indeed” They had mutual confirmation of the resurrection of Jesus. Though the risen Jesus was not physically in their midst, His resurrection had been confirmed by more than two witnesses. Mary Magdalene and those with her at the tomb and now these two who had been confronted by the Risen Christ on the rod to Emmaus.
“And they told what things were done in the way” “The words that were spoken by Christ to them in the way, having a wonderful effect and influence upon them, are here called the things that were done in the way; for the words that Christ speaks are not an empty sound, but they are spirit and they are life, and wondrous things are done by them, done by the way, by the by as it were, where it is not expected. They told also how he was at length known to them in the breaking of bread; then, when he was carving out blessings to them, God opened their eyes to discern who it was. ” (Henry)
In this excerpt from his commentary on the entire Bible, Matthew Henry goes on to give his opinion; “ It would be of great use for the discovery and confirmation of truth if the disciples of Christ would compare their observations and experiences, and communicate to each other what they know and have felt in themselves.” This sharing of experiences, was at one time common in most Christian communities, especially of late in those of our Pentecostal and charismatic brethren. In these troubling times when we see a great falling away from the church, perhaps we should once again make this sharing a part of our practice. In doing so, perhaps we can inspire others to open their hearts and not be blind to the Holy Spirit that surrounds all of us, as these disciples were blind to the identity of the stranger on the road to Emmaus.
Benediction
Blessed Lord, who caused all holy Scriptures to be written for our learning: Grant us so to hear them, read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest them, that we may embrace and ever hold fast the blessed hope of everlasting life, which you have given us in our Savior Jesus Christ; who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.
Thought for the Day:
“In faith there is enough light for those who want to believe and enough shadows to blind those who don’t.” --Blaise Pascal
submitted by Bishop-Boomer to All_About_Him [link] [comments]

2024.03.20 22:43 ConsciousRun6137 Conspiracy Theories in Philosophy Part 2

ii. Individual Trust (C6)

Trust plays a role in two different ways when it comes to conspiracy theories. First, Räikkä (2009b, section 4) raises the question of whether we can trust the motives of the author(s) or proponents of a conspiracy theory. Some conspiracy theorists may not themselves believe the theory they propose, and instead may have other motives for proposing the theory; for example, to manipulate the political debate or make money. Other conspiracy theorists may genuinely believe the conspiracy theory they propose, but the fact that the alleged conspirators are the political enemy of the theory’s proponent may cast doubt on the likelihood of the theory. The general question here is whether the author or proponent of a conspiracy theory has a motive to lie or mislead. Here, Räikkä uses as an example the conspiracy theory about global warming (p.462). If a person working for the fossil-fuel industry claims that there is a global conspiracy propagating the idea of global warming, the financial motive is clear. Conversely, people who reject a particular theory as “just” a conspiracy theory may also have a motive to mislead. As an example, Pidgen disscusses the case of Tony Blair,who labeled the idea that the Iraq war was fought for oil a mere conspiracy theory.
A second way in which trust enters into the analysis of conspiracy theories is in terms of epistemic authority. Many conspiracy theories refer to various authorities for the justification of certain claims. For instance, a 9/11 conspiracy theory may refer to a structural engineer who made a certain claim regarding the collapse of the World Trade Center. The question arises as to what extent we should trust claims of alleged epistemic authorities, that is, people who have relevant expertise in a particular domain. Levy (2007) takes a radically socialized view of knowledge: Since knowledge can only be produced by a complex network of inquiry in which the relevant epistemic authorities are embedded, a conspiracy theory conflicting with the official story coming out of this network is “prima facie unwarranted” (p.182, italics in the original). According to Levy, the best epistemic strategy is simply to “adjust one’s degree of belief in an explanation of an event or process to the degree to which the epistemic authorities accept that explanation” (p.190). Dentith (2018) criticizes Levy’s trust in epistemic authority. First, Dentith argues that since conspiracy theories cross disciplinary boundaries, there is no obvious group of experts when it comes to evaluating a conspiracy theory, since a conspiracy theory will usually involve claims connecting various disciplines. Furthermore, Dentith points out that the fact that a theory has authority in the sense of being official does not necessarily mean that it has epistemic authority, a point Levy also makes. Related to our first point about trust, Dentith also points out that epistemic authorities might have a motive to mislead, for example, when the funding sources might have influenced research. Finally, our trust in epistemic authority will also depend on the trust we place in the institutions accrediting expertise, and hence questions of individual trustworthiness relate to questions of institutional trustworthiness.

iii. Institutional Trust (C7)

As mentioned when discussing individual trust, when we want to assess the credibility of experts, part of that credibility judgment will depend on the extent to which we trust the institution accrediting the expertise, assuming there is such an institution to which the expert is linked. The question of institutional trust is relevant more generally when it comes to conspiracy theories, and this issue has been discussed at length in the philosophical literature on conspiracy theories.
The starting point of the discussion of institutional trust is Keeley (1999, p.121ff) who argues that the problem with conspiracy theories is that these theories cast doubt on precisely those institutions which are the guarantors of reliable data. If a conspiracy theory contradicts an official theory based on scientific expertise, this produces skepticism not only with regard to the institution of science, but may also produce skepticism with regard to other public institutions, for example the press, which accepts the official story instead of uncovering the conspiracy, the parliament and the government, which produce or propagate the conspiracy theory in the first place. Thus, the claim is that believing in a conspiracy theory implies a quite widespread distrust of our public institutions. If this implication is true, it can be used in two ways: Either to discredit the conspiracy theory, which is the route Keeley advocates, or to discredit our public institutions. In any case, our trust in our public institutions will influence the extent to which we hold a particular conspiracy theory to be likely. For this reason, both Keeley (1999, p.121ff) and Coady (2006a, p.10) think that conspiracy theories are more trustworthy in non-democratic societies.
Basham (2001, p.270ff) argues that it would be a mistake to simply assume our public institutions to be trustworthy and dismiss conspiracy theories. His position is one he calls “studied agnosticism” (p.275): In general, we are not in a position to decide for or against a conspiracy theory, except—and this is where the “studied” comes in—where a conspiracy theory can be dismissed due to internal faults (see C1). In fact, we are caught in a vicious circle: “We cannot help but assume an answer to the essential issue of how conspirational our society is in order to derive a well justified position on it” (p.274). Put differently, while an open society provides fewer grounds for believing in conspiracy theories, we cannot really know how open our society actually is (Basham 2003, p.99). In any case, an individual who tries to assess a particular conspiracy theory should thus also consider to what extent they trust or distrust our public institutions.
Clarke (2002,p.139ff) questions Keeley’s link between belief in conspiracy theories and general distrust in our public institutions. He claims that conspiracy theories actually do not require general institutional skepticism. Instead, in order to believe in a conspiracy theory, it will usually suffice to confine one’s skepticism to particular people and issues. Räikkä (2009a) also criticizes Keeley’s supposed link between conspiracy theories and institutional distrust, claiming that most conspiracy theories do not entail such pervasive institutional distrust, but that if such pervasive distrust were entailed by a conspiracy theory, it would lower the conspiracy theory’s credibility. A global conspiracy theory like the Flat Earth theory tends to involve more pervasive institutional distrust, since it involves multiple institutions from various societal domains, than a local conspiracy theory like the Watergate conspiracy. According to Clarke, even the latter does not have to engender institutional distrust with regard to the United States government as an institution, since distrust could remain limited to specific agents within the government.

c. Other Realist Criteria

i. Fundamental Attribution Error (C8)

Starting with Clarke (2002; see also his response to criticism in 2006), philosophers have discussed whether conspiracy theories commit the fundamental attribution error (FAE). In psychology, the fundamental attribution error refers to the human tendency to overestimate dispositional factors and underestimate situational factors in explaining the behavior of others. Clarke (p.143ff) claims that conspiracy theories commit this error: They tend to be dispositional explanations whereas official theories often are more situational explanations. As an example, Clarke considers the funeral of Elvis Presley. The official account is situational since it explains the funeral in terms of his death due to heart problems. On the other hand, the conspiracy theory which claims Elvis is still alive and staged his funeral is dispositional since it sees Elvis and his possible co-conspirators as having the intention to deceive the public.
Dentith (2016, p.580) questions whether conspiracy theories are generally more dispositional than other theories. Also, like in the case of 9/11, the official theory may also be dispositional. Pigden (2006, footnotes 27 and 30, and p.29) is critical of the psychological literature about the FAE, claiming that “if we often act differently because of different dispositions, then the fundamental attribution error is not an error” (footnote 30). Pigden is also critical of Clarke’s application of the FAE to conspiracy theories: Given that conspiracies are common, what Pigden calls “situationism” is either false or it does not imply that conspiracies are unlikely. Hence, Pigden concludes, the FAE has no relevant implications for our thinking about conspiracy theories. Coady (2003) is also critical of the existence of the FAE. Furthermore, he claims that belief in the FAE is paradoxical in that it commits the FAE: Believing that people think dispositionally rather than situationally is itself dispositional thinking.

ii. Ontology: Existence Claims the Conspiracy Theory Makes (C9)

Some conspiracy theories claim the existence or non-existence of certain entities. Among the examples Hepfer (2015, p.45) cites is a theory by Heribert Illig that claims that the years between 614 and 911 never actually happened. Another example would be a theory claiming the existence of a perpetual motion machine that is kept secret. Both existence claims go against the scientific consensus of what exists and what does not. Hepfer (2015, p.42) claims that the more unusual a conspiracy theory’s existence claims are, the more we should doubt its truth. This is because of the ontological baggage (p.49) that comes with such existence claims: Accepting these claims will force us to revise a major part of our hitherto accepted knowledge, and the more substantial the revision needed, the more we should be suspicious of such a theory.

iii. Übermensch: Does the Conspiracy Theory Ascribe Superhuman Qualities to Conspirators? (C10)

Hepfer (2015, p.104) and Räikkä (2009a, p.197) note that some conspiracy theories ascribe superhuman qualities to the conspirators that border on divine attributes like omnipotence and omniscience. Examples here might be the idea that Freemasons, Jews or George Soros control the world economy or the world’s governments. Sometimes the superhuman qualities ascribed to conspirators are moral and negative, that is, conspirators are demonized (Hepfer, 2015, p.131f). The antichrist has not only been seen in Adolf Hitler but also in the pope. In general, the more extraordinary the qualities ascribed to the conspirators, the more they should lower the credibility of the conspiracy theory.

iv. Scale: The Size and Duration of the Conspiracy(C11)

The general claim here is that the more agents that are supposed to be involved in a conspiracy—its size—and the longer the conspiracy is supposed to be in existence—its duration—the less likely the conspiracy theory. Hepfer (2015, p.97) makes this point, and similarly Keeley (1999, p.122) says that the more institutions are supposed to be involved in a conspiracy, the less believable the theory should become. To some extent, this point is simply a matter of logic: The claim that A and B are involved in a conspiracy cannot be more likely than that A is involved in a conspiracy. Similarly, the claim that a conspiracy theory has been going on for at least 20 years cannot be more likely than the claim that it has been going on for at least 10 years. In this sense, conspiracy theories involving many agents over a long period of time will tend to be less likely than conspiracy theories involving fewer agents over a shorter period of time. Furthermore, Grimes (2016) has conducted simulations showing that large conspiracies with 1000 agents or more are unlikely to succeed due to problems with maintaining secrecy.
Basham (2001, p.272; 2003, p.93) takes an opposing view by referring to social hierarchies and mechanisms of control, saying that “the more fully developed and high placed a conspiracy is, the more experienced and able are its practitioners at controlling information and either co-opting, discrediting, or eliminating those who go astray or otherwise encounter the truth” (Basham 2001, p.272). Dentith (2019, section 7) also counters the scale argument by pointing out that any time an institution is involved in a conspiracy, only very few people of that institution actually are involved in the conspiracy. This reduces the number of total conspirators and questions the relevance of the results by Grimes of which Dentith is very critical.

d. Non-Realist Criteria

i. Instrumentalism: Conspiracy Theories as “as if” Theories (C12)

Grewal (2016) has shown how the philosophical opposition between scientific realism and various kinds of anti-realism also shows up in how we evaluate conspiracy theories. While most authors implicitly seem to interpret the claims of conspiracy theories along the lines of realism, Grewal has suggested that adherents of conspiracy theories may interpret or at least use these theories instrumentally. Viewed this way, conspiracy theories are “as-if”-theories which allow their adherents to make sense of a world that is causally opaque in a way that may often yield quite adequate predictions. “An assumption that the government operated as if it were controlled by a parallel and secret government may fit the historical data…while also providing better predictions than would, say, an exercise motivated by an analysis of constitutional authority or the statutory limitations to executive power” (p.36). As a more concrete example, Grewal mentions that “the most parsimonious way to understand financial decision making in the Eurozone might be to treat it as if it were run by and for the benefit of the Continent’s richest private banks” (p.37). Hence, our evaluation of a given conspiracy theory will also depend on basic philosophical commitments like what we expect our theories to do for us.

ii. Pragmatism (C13)

The previous arguments have mostly been epistemic or epistemological arguments, arguments that bear on the likelihood of a conspiracy theory to be true or at least epistemically useful. However, similar to Blaise Pascal’s pragmatic argument for belief in God (Pascal, 1995), some arguments concerning conspiracy theories that have nothing to do with their epistemic value can be reinterpreted pragmatically as arguments about belief: Pragmatically, our belief or disbelief should depend on the consequences the (dis)belief has for us personally or for society more generally.
Basham (2001) claims that epistemic rejection of conspiracy theories will often not work, and we have to be agnostic about their truth. Still, we should reject them for pragmatic reasons because “[t]here is nothing you can do,” given the impossibility of finding out the truth, and “[t]he futile pursuit of malevolent conspiracy theory sours and distracts us from what is good and valuable in life” (p.277). Similarly, Räikkä (2009a) says that “a person who strives for happiness in her personal life should not ponder on vicious conspiracies too much” (p.199). Then again, contrary to Basham’s claim, what you can do with regard to conspiracy theories will depend on your role. As a journalist, you may decide to investigate certain claims, and Räikkä (2009a, p.199f) thinks that “it is important that in every country there are some people who are interested in investigative journalism and political conspiracy theorizing.”
Like journalists, politicians play a special role when it comes to conspiracy theories. Muirhead and Rosenblum (2016) argue that politicians should oppose conspiracy theories if they (1) are fueled by hatred, or (2) when they present political opposition as treason and illegitimate, or (3) when they undermine epistemic or expert authority generally. Similarly, Räikkä (2018, p.213) argues that we must interfere with conspiracy theories when they include libels or hate speech. The presumed negative consequences of such conspiracy theories would be pragmatic reasons for disbelief.
Räikkä (2009b) lists both positive and negative effects of conspiracy theorizing, and we may apply these to concrete conspiracy theories to see which ones to believe in. The two positive effects he mentions are (a) that “the information gathering activities of conspiracy theorists and investigative journalists force governments and government agencies to watch out for their decisions and practices” (p.460) and (b) that conspiracy theories help to maintain openness in society. As negative effects, he mentions that a conspiracy theory “tends to undermine trust in democratic political institutions and its implications may be morally questionable, as it has close connections to populist discourse, as well as anti-Semitism and racism” (p.461). When a conspiracy theory blames certain people, Räikkä points out that there are moral costs for the people blamed. Furthermore, he thinks that the moral costs will depend on whether the people blamed are private individuals or public figures (p.463f).

5. Social and Political Effects of Conspiracy Theories

Räikkä (2009b, section 3) and Moore (2016, p.5) survey some of the social and political effects of conspiracy theories and conspiracy theorizing. One may look at the positive and negative effects of conspiracy theorizing in general, but it is also useful to consider the effects of a specific conspiracy theory, by looking at which effects mentioned below are likely to obtain for the conspiracy theory in question. Such an evaluation is related to the pragmatist evaluation criterion C13 just discussed, so some of the points mentioned there are revisited in what follows. Also, the effects of a conspiracy theory may be related to the type of conspiracy theory we are dealing with; see section 3 of this article.
On the positive side, conspiracy theories may be tools to uncover actual conspiracies, with the Watergate scandal as the standard example. When these conspiracies take place in our public institutions, conspiracy theories can thereby also help us to keep these institutions in check and to uncover institutional problems. Conspiracy theories can help us to remain critical of those holding power in politics, science and the media. One of the ways they can achieve this is by forcing these institutions to be more transparent. Since conspiracy theories claim the secret activity of certain agents, transparent decision making, open lines of communication and the public availability of documents are possible responses to conspiracy theories which can improve a democratic society, independent of whether they suffice to convince those believing conspiracy theories. We may call this the paradoxical effect of conspiracy theories: Conspiracy theories can help create or maintain the open society whose existence they deny.
Turning from positive to possible negative effects of conspiracy theories, a central point that already came up when discussing criterion C7 is institutional trust. Conspiracy theories can contribute to eroding trust in the institutions of politics, science and the media. The anti-vaccination conspiracy theory which claims that politicians and the pharmaceutical industry are hiding the ineffectiveness or even harmfulness of vaccines is an example of a conspiracy theory which can undermine public trust in science. Huneman and Vorms (2018) discuss how at times it can be difficult to draw the line between rational criticism of science and unwarranted skepticism. One fear is that eroding trust in institutions leads us via unwarranted skepticism to an all-out relativism or nihilism, a post-truth world where it suffices that a claim is repeated by a lot of people to make it acceptable (Muirhead and Rosenblum, 2019). Conspiracy theories have also been linked to increasing polarization, populism and racism (see Moore, 2016). Finally, as alluded to in section 1, Popper’s dislike of conspiracy theories was also because they create wrong ideas about the root causes of social events. By seeing social events as being caused by powerful people acting in secret, rather than as effects of structural social conditions, conspiracy theories arguably undermine effective political action and social change.
Bjerg and Presskorn-Thygesen (2017) have claimed that conspiracy theories cause a state of exception in the way introduced by Giorgio Agamben. Just like terrorism undermines democracy in such a way that it licenses a state of political exception justifying undemocratic measures, a conspiracy theory undermines rational discourse in such a way that it licenses a state of epistemic exception justifying irrational measures. Those measures consist in placing conspiracy theories outside of official public discourse, labeling them as irrational, as “just” conspiracy theories, and as not worthy of serious critical consideration and scrutiny. Seen in this way, conspiracy theories appear as a form of epistemic terrorism, through their erosion of trust in our knowledge-producing institutions.

6. What to Do about Conspiracy Theories?

Besides deciding to believe or not to believe in a conspiracy theory (section 4), there are other actions one may consider with regard to conspiracy theories. Philosophical discussion has mainly focused on what actions governments and politicians can or should take.
The seminal article concerning the question of government action is by Sunstein and Vermeule (2009). Besides describing different psychological and social mechanisms underlying belief in conspiracy theories, they consider a number of policy and legal responses a government might take when it comes to false and harmful conspiracy theories: banning conspiracy theories, taxing the dissemination of conspiracy theories, counterspeech and cognitive infiltration of groups producing conspiracy theories. While dismissing the first two options, Sunstein and Vermeule consider counterspeech and cognitive infiltration in more detail. First, the government may itself speak out against a conspiracy theory by providing its own account. However, Sunstein and Vermeule think that such official counterspeech will have only limited success, in particular when it comes to conspiracy theories involving the government. Alternatively, the government may try to involve private parties to infiltrate online fora and discussion groups associated with conspiracy theories in order to introduce cognitive diversity, breaking up one-sided discussion and introducing non-conspirational views.
The proposals by Sunstein and Vermeule have led to strong opposition, most explicitly by Coady (2018). He points out that Sunstein and Vermeule too easily assume good intentions on the part of the government. Furthermore, these policy proposals, coming from academics who have also been involved in governmental policy making, will only confirm the fears of the conspiracy theorists that the government is involved in conspirational activities. If the cognitive infiltration proposed by Sunstein and Vermeule were discovered, conspiracy theorists would be led to believe in conspiracy theories even more. Put differently, we are running the risk of a pragmatic inconsistency: The government would try to deceive, via covert cognitive infiltration, a certain part of the population to make it believe that it does not deceive, that it is not involved in conspiracies.
As mentioned when discussing evaluation criterion C13 in section 4, Muirhead and Rosenblum (2016) consider three kinds of conspiracy theories that should give politicians cause for official opposition. These are conspiracy theories that fuel hatred, equate political opposition with treason, or that express a general distrust of expertise. In these cases, politicians are called to speak truth to conspiracy, even though this might create a divide between them and their electorate. Muirhead and Rosenblum (2019) also consider what to do against new conspiracism (see the end of section 2). They note that such conspiracism is rampant in our society despite ever more transparency. As a counter measure, they not only advocate speaking truth to conspiracy, but also what they call “democratic enactment,” by which they mean “a strenuous adherence to the regular processes and forms of public decision-making” (p.175).
Both Sunstein and Vermeule, as well as Muirhead and Rosenblum, agree that what we should do about conspiracy theories will depend on the theory we are dealing with. They do not advocate action against all theories about groups acting in secret to achieve some aim. However, when a theory is of a particularly problematic kind—false and harmful, fueling hatred, and so forth—political action may be needed.

7. Related Disciplines

Philosophy is not the only discipline dealing with conspiracy theories, and in particular when it comes to discussing what to do about conspiracy theories, research from other fields is important. We have already seen some ways in which philosophical thinking about conspiracy theories touches on other disciplines, in particular in the previous section’s discussion of political science and law. As for other related fields, psychologists have done a lot of research about conspirational thinking and the psychological characteristics of people who believe in conspiracy theories. Historians have presented histories of conspiracy theories in the United States, the Arab world and elsewhere. Sociologists have studied how conspiracy theories can target racial minorities, as well as the structure and group dynamics of specific conspirational milieus. Uscinski (2018) covers many of the relevant disciplines which this article does not cover and also includes an interdisciplinary history of conspiracy theory research.

8. References and Further Reading

To get an overview of the philosophical thinking about conspiracy theories, the best works to start with are Dentith (2014), Coady (2006a) and Uscinski (2018).

Author Information

Marc Pauly Email: [m.pauly@rug.nl](mailto:m.pauly@rug.nl) University of Groningen The Netherlands
submitted by ConsciousRun6137 to u/ConsciousRun6137 [link] [comments]

2024.03.13 18:36 Used_Ad4527 Oceans Calling

Oceans Calling
Anyone going for day one to see Cage the Elephant??
submitted by Used_Ad4527 to CageTheElephant [link] [comments]

2024.03.12 22:51 chanma50 'The American Society of Magical Negroes' Review Thread

I will continue to update this post as reviews come in.
Rotten Tomatoes: Rotten
Critics Consensus: The American Society of Magical Negroes has a promising premise, but is too timid to fully engage with its most provocative ideas.
Score Number of Reviews Average Rating
All Critics 30% 47 4.90/10
Top Critics 20% 15 4.70/10
Metacritic: 54 (17 Reviews)
Sample Reviews:
“The American Society of Magical Negroes” is a deftly observant fantasy comedy that stays true to its own irreverence. - Owen Gleiberman, Variety
Though it’s clear that first-time director Libii was intending for the joke to be on white people, the Black characters are drawn with so much misery and self-loathing that the humor rarely lands. - Jourdain Searles, Hollywood Reporter
Unlike “American Fiction,” “Magical Negroes” lacks broad appeal. That doesn’t make it a film without merit, but it makes it harder to sell to a more mainstream Black audience. - Ronda Racha Penrice, TheWrap
“Society” too often panders to the very impulses it’s trying to lampoon. 2/4 - Michael O'Sullivan, Washington Post
Smith’s nimble performance is such a pleasure to watch that it almost doesn’t matter, but it’s fair to say that this film could have gone even further with its bold scenario. - Nicolas Rapold, New York Times
Kobi Libii only dips his toe in the water of the film's thesis, and seems unwilling to dissect or interrogate it in any meaningful fashion. D - Adam Graham, Detroit News
Libii, who’s also the screenwriter here, needs some storytelling magic. 1.5/4 - Randy Myers, San Jose Mercury News
This was always going to be a difficult flight of fancy to land, and Libii can’t – the final act devolves into an earnest manifesto that feels ripped from an Instagram live. 3/5 - Adrian Horton, Guardian
So many disparate ideas and tones are being mashed up here, and none of them gel. - Aisha Harris, NPR
American Society can’t decide whether to go full biting satire or charming rom-com, and as a result, it fails to do either genre justice. C - Devan Coggan, Entertainment Weekly
A socially conscious romantic comedy, and if those two modes don’t sound compatible, [writedirector] Libii does nothing to alter that impression. - Nick Schager, The Daily Beast
“The American Society of Magical Negroes” feels inexplicably watered-down(...), further saddled by an unnecessary late twist and a preachy tone that manages to say only the most obvious. C+ - Tomris Laffly, indieWire
The satire is Key & Peele by way of Harry Potter, but those disparate themes never completely gel. - Lyvie Scott, Inverse
Beneath the layers of magical realism and dot-com satire, American Society feels personal and raw. A- - Liz Shannon Miller, Consequence
You’re never totally sure if “The American Society of Magical Negroes” wants to critique the anti-Black world it exists in or is simply content smiling in the face of the status quo. 1/4 - Robert Daniels, RogerEbert.com
SYNOPSIS:
The American Society of Magical Negroes is a fresh, satirical comedy about a young man, Aren, who is recruited into a secret society of magical Black people who dedicate their lives to a cause of utmost importance: making white people’s lives easier.
CAST:
DIRECTED BY: Kobi Libii
WRITTEN BY: Kobi Libii
PRODUCED BY: Julia Lebedev, Eddie Vaisman, Angel Lopez, Kobi Libii
EXECUTIVE PRODUCERS: Mike Upton, Oren Moverman, Leonid Lebedev
DIRECTOR OF PHOTOGRAPHY: Doug Emmett
PRODUCTION DESIGNER: Laura Fox
EDITED BY: Brian Olds
COSTUME DESIGNER: Derica Cole Washington
MUSIC BY: Michael Abels
CASTING BY: Jeannie McCarthy, Nicole Abellera Hallman
RUNTIME: 105 Minutes
RELEASE DATE: March 15, 2024
submitted by chanma50 to boxoffice [link] [comments]

http://activeproperty.pl/