McCanns' Christmas Message 2014

plebgate wrote:I wonder if there were any donations in the hundreds of cards they received?

AlexBG wrote:

 When someone mentions what everyone else thinks as evidence of their version of events, they are appealing to the masses.

plebgate wrote:I wonder if there were any donations in the hundreds of cards they received?

PeterMac wrote:

Realist wrote:

AlexBG wrote:

 When someone mentions what everyone else thinks as evidence of their version of events, they are appealing to the masses.

A lie doesn't become the truth no matter how many people repeat it. A classic example being the feeding of the 5000 with a loaf of bread and a couple of fish

There is a very good explanation of that particular "miracle", in fact.
In the near East, and I speak of a good friend who hails from Cyprus, a wedding is a celebration not only between the two people, and the two families, but of the two villages concerned.
Everyone is invited to the 'reception'. The near families provide food and drink for the near families, and open barbecues for the rest.  
At the wedding of my friend there were 1500 people, - probably -  no one counted them
Every family from the surrounding villages bring food and wine, and will remain in their extended family group eating and drinking, and will be visited by the bride and groom who will then pin the money on the bride's gown.  And will then dance and drink some more,
At a significant gathering, since each family will have slightly over-catered, there will be a lot of food left over.

It makes perfect sense.  It was "true" and you can see it in action to this day. ( In fact it happens in rural Spain  . . . )
The 'Spin" was to claim it as a miracle, rather than leave it as something that is perfectly normal and explicable.
Much of the Bible is normal and perfectly explicable as an historical account - even to someone like me.

The loaves and fishes were all that the disciples had thought to bring.  
Five loaves of "peasant bread" can be 7 kg - more than enough for a few disciples, and who knows how large were the two fish ?
One of my favourite lunchtime snacks is a a couple of slices of toast, with two small fillets of Anchovy squished over them and some of my own olive
oil with a slice of tomato anbd a bit of sea salt.   There is almost a whole tin of anchovies left over !

secrets and lies wrote:I assume Mr. and Mrs. do get their fair share of Christmas cards each year and lots of "fanmail" throughout the year.

But I wonder, if, on the very deepest level of their being, these members of the public KNOW there is something amiss with regard to this story.

Are they caught up in a sort of mania, such as the behaviour of those who write to and develop relationships with serial killers etc.?

Indeed, is this the same psychological profile of many of the "pro" shills who are so vocal on social media. Do they harbour a sort of "esteem" for the potentially diabolical actions of those they support?

Realist wrote:

A lie doesn't become the truth no matter how many people repeat it. A classic example being the feeding of the 5000 with a loaf of bread and a couple of fish

Tony Bennett wrote:

Realist wrote:

A lie doesn't become the truth no matter how many people repeat it. A classic example being the feeding of the 5000 with a loaf of bread and a couple of fish

Well, that is a brave accusation, Realist.

And PeterMac's explanation I can characterise as ingenious.

I believe in the plain account we have of this event in all the Gospels, in other words, that this was a supernatural miracle performed by Christ, the Eternal Son of God, our Creator.

I wonder if there are credible explanations for the raising of the dead Lazarus after he had been dead for four days (John's Gospel, Chapter 11).

When Christ was challenged by some of the Jews: 'Could not this man, which opened the eyes of the blind, have caused that even this man [Lazarus - T.B.] should not have died' (verse 37), Christ replied: "Take ye away the stone".

And Martha [Lazarus's sister - T.B.] replied: "Lord, by this time he stinketh: for he hath been dead four days".

Cadaver odour was most certainly present, but on this occasion, there was a corpse there as well.

Christ replied (verses 40-43): "Said I not unto thee, that, if thou wouldest believe, thou shouldest see the glory of God?"

The people took away the stone.

And, the record says, Christ cried with a loud voice: "Lazarus, come forth".

And then we read (verse 44): 'And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with grave clothes: and his face was bound about with a napkin. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him, and let him go'.

Verse 45 informs us: 'Then many of the Jews which came to Mary, and had seen the things which Jesus did, believed on him.

Verses 47-53 inform us that, by contrast, the religious leaders of the day convened a special council, and 'took counsel together for to put him to death'.

++++++

And for that matter, what alternative explanation can there possibly be for the fact of Christ's resurrection, three days after a powerful earthquake and three hours of pitch blackness - recorded by the secular world at the time - accompanied His crucifixion?

Hobs wrote:

In statement analysis, 3 is known as the liars number (Mark McClish).  When a guilty person spins a story that is not entirely truthful, when asked for example what time did you last see them, how many were there, what floor etc often they will use the number 3. The exception is when DUI when the subject will often say 2 or just a couple.

REPLY: I bow to your vastly superior knowledge on statement analysis, and so far as '3' being the 'liar's number' (or sometimes '2') is concerned, I'll have to take that on trust for now.

'3' is also recommended by the way as an oratorial technique, e.g.  "When we come to power, I promise that we'll do A, B and C" hopefully building up to a round of applause as the speaker finishes point 'C'. Or, for example, Tony Blair's famous three priorities: 'Education, education, education'. Politicians are taught to practise this 'rule of 3'. May be it is also an aid to memory for the speaker.

It is one thing to say: 'Liars often mention things in threes'. I can't disagree, as I don't know enough about the subject. 

But it's quite another thing, and a complete non sequitur, to claim: "I know a book with lots of threes in it, therefore it must be full of lies". It doesn't follow at all.

In the Bible there is an awful lot of the use of the number 3.

REPLY:  There are indeed several instances of three in the Bible, the Triune God - God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit - being one such example. There is no doubt that some numbers have special significance in the Bible; I believe God is inter alia a brilliant mathematician as well as designer and creator. But arguably other numbers are more common and seem to represent certain things. Examples:

7 is the six days of creation plus one day of rest, also applied in the Old Testamant to the treatment of land and servants; one year in seven, the land was to remain fallow - for rest - and any servants were to be set free after six years and made free of any debts they owed. Additionally after 7 x 7 years, there was to be a special, additional 'jubilee year' in the 50th year - the land therefore remained fallow for 2 years   

12 - twelve sons of Jacob to form the twelve tribes of Israel; 12 apostles chosen by Christ

13 - a number which appears to be connected with evil in the Bible and seems to be favoured by occultists

40 - years or days of temptation: 40 years in the wilderness for the Israelites after the Exodus, 40 days of temptation for Christ.

There are other interesting assocations; 8 seems to be associated with resurrection: 8 resurrections occur in the Bible

Bear in mind the Bible has been translated and rewritten thousands of times to suit whoever was in charge at the time.

REPLY: The Bible has never been 're-written'. The Bible, in its many translations worldwide - hundreds if not thousands of languages - is always derived from the original writings of the authors. These have been copied down the centuries. These copies were not entirely error-free, but copying mistakes were rare. 

Christians worldwide believe that those who wrote the words of the Bible - in the original Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek - did so under divine direction or 'inspiration, producing a book that is God's Word to mankind, and without error as originally written. And no-one has yet proved any mistake so far as the Bible's historical and prophetic record is concerned; where the Bible deals in verifiable facts, time and again it has proved 100% accurate. Godly men before and after Christ have, we believe, been led by God over the centuries to produce this perfect book. It is sadly the case that some people, for wrong motives, have tried to add to it or subtract from it.

Basically the King James Bible was a result of King James forcing the Church of England and the Puritans to work togeather to come up with a version that kept both sides happy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_James_Version

REPLY: That's very true up to a point. King Alfred had translated parts of the Bible. John Wycliffe followed in the 14th century and gave us a very accurate translation. He was up against the Roman Catholic hierarchy of the day, who used a Latin Bible and later, in the 15th century, deemed it a capital offence to have a Bible in the English language.

After his death, they exhumed his body, burnt it, and cast his ashes into the River Soar at Lutterworth, Leicesterhsire - not far from Rothley. Thereby they hoped to extinguish his translation and his writings, but instead they spread to Europe where they were read by the likes of Jan Hus and Martin Luther.

The Reformation followed shortly after the invention of the printing press, and in the 16th century several attempts were made to translate the original Hebrew and Greek texts, notably the translation by William Tyndale. King James did indeed commission a new translation and to his credit, after 7 years' hard work, the Anglicans, Puritans and Catholics etc. agreed on a meticulous translation of the original Scriptures which has very much stood the test of time             

Tony Bennett wrote:

Hobs wrote:

In statement analysis, 3 is known as the liars number (Mark McClish).  When a guilty person spins a story that is not entirely truthful, when asked for example what time did you last see them, how many were there, what floor etc often they will use the number 3. The exception is when DUI when the subject will often say 2 or just a couple.

REPLY: I bow to your vastly superior knowledge on statement analysis, and so far as '3' being the 'liar's number' (or sometimes '2') is concerned, I'll have to take that on trust for now.

'3' is also recommended by the way as an oratorial technique, e.g.  "When we come to power, I promise that we'll do A, B and C" hopefully building up to a round of applause as the speaker finishes point 'C'. Or, for example, Tony Blair's famous three priorities: 'Education, education, education'. Politicians are taught to practise this 'rule of 3'. May be it is also an aid to memory for the speaker.

It is one thing to say: 'Liars often mention things in threes'. I can't disagree, as I don't know enough about the subject. 

But it's quite another thing, and a complete non sequitur, to claim: "I know a book with lots of threes in it, therefore it must be full of lies". It doesn't follow at all.

In the Bible there is an awful lot of the use of the number 3.

REPLY:  There are indeed several instances of three in the Bible, the Triune God - God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit - being one such example. There is no doubt that some numbers have special significance in the Bible; I believe God is inter alia a brilliant mathematician as well as designer and creator. But arguably other numbers are more common and seem to represent certain things. Examples:

7 is the six days of creation plus one day of rest, also applied in the Old Testamant to the treatment of land and servants; one year in seven, the land was to remain fallow - for rest - and any servants were to be set free after six years and made free of any debts they owed. Additionally after 7 x 7 years, there was to be a special, additional 'jubilee year' in the 50th year - the land therefore remained fallow for 2 years   

12 - twelve sons of Jacob to form the twelve tribes of Israel; 12 apostles chosen by Christ

13 - a number which appears to be connected with evil in the Bible and seems to be favoured by occultists

40 - years or days of temptation: 40 years in the wilderness for the Israelites after the Exodus, 40 days of temptation for Christ.

There are other interesting assocations; 8 seems to be associated with resurrection: 8 resurrections occur in the Bible

Bear in mind the Bible has been translated and rewritten thousands of times to suit whoever was in charge at the time.

REPLY: The Bible has never been 're-written'. The Bible, in its many translations worldwide - hundreds if not thousands of languages - is always derived from the original writings of the authors. These have been copied down the centuries. These copies were not entirely error-free, but copying mistakes were rare. 

Christians worldwide believe that those who wrote the words of the Bible - in the original Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek - did so under divine direction or 'inspiration, producing a book that is God's Word to mankind, and without error as originally written. And no-one has yet proved any mistake so far as the Bible's historical and prophetic record is concerned; where the Bible deals in verifiable facts, time and again it has proved 100% accurate. Godly men before and after Christ have, we believe, been led by God over the centuries to produce this perfect book. It is sadly the case that some people, for wrong motives, have tried to add to it or subtract from it.

Basically the King James Bible was a result of King James forcing the Church of England and the Puritans to work togeather to come up with a version that kept both sides happy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_James_Version

REPLY: That's very true up to a point. King Alfred had translated parts of the Bible. John Wycliffe followed in the 14th century and gave us a very accurate translation. He was up against the Roman Catholic hierarchy of the day, who used a Latin Bible and later, in the 15th century, deemed it a capital offence to have a Bible in the English language.

After his death, they exhumed his body, burnt it, and cast his ashes into the River Soar at Lutterworth, Leicesterhsire - not far from Rothley. Thereby they hoped to extinguish his translation and his writings, but instead they spread to Europe where they were read by the likes of Jan Hus and Martin Luther.

The Reformation followed shortly after the invention of the printing press, and in the 16th century several attempts were made to translate the original Hebrew and Greek texts, notably the translation by William Tyndale. King James did indeed commission a new translation and to his credit, after 7 years' hard work, the Anglicans, Puritans and Catholics etc. agreed on a meticulous translation of the original Scriptures which has very much stood the test of time             

PeterMac wrote:Summed up the courage to look, and found that this has been posted in the photos section
And I thought how very apt it really was

" />

Sow contempt for professional police officers trying to find your daughter, and you will reap the contempt of decent people.
Try to destroy the lives of others and in turn you may find that people are not sympathetic to you.
Say you wish to 'Kill' a man who was voluntarily giving his time to help you, and you may find others do not wish you well.
When you say you see "hatred' in others, rather then legitimate concern - look at yourselves
When by your actions you cause someone to take their own life -( if that is what happened) - you may find a great many more people turn against you.