Replies

***Why would Paul refer to random lumps and bruises as "the marks of the Lord Jesus"? How would such traumas be "marks" of the Lord?***

Random lumps and bruises? What an insult to the apostle! Those cruel lashes were received for one reason only, because he preached the resurrected Christ!

When in Ecuador, I met a number of young pastors who bore on their bodies the scars of similar beatings from those who were now members of their churches.

Random lumps and bruises??? Shame on you.

Our Lord was beaten prior to His crucifixion, were those mere "random lumps and bruises"??? No they were evidence of hatred inflicted by those for whom He was to give His life.

Paul's beatings were inflicted by those who hated the message of Christ. Paul endured them because he was constrained by the love of Christ!

You insult him in order to maintain a superstition. In doing so, you also shame the Lord.

Shame on you.

Random lumps and bruises??? Shame on you.

Spare me. I meant no disrespect. "Random" indicates that they make no pattern, like stigmata do.

Which was my point, that stigmata are "the marks of the Lord Jesus" in a significant (literally) way that random marks are not.

Whether Hermann and Dave's interpretation of scripture is correct or not, I think that the phenomena of the stigmata goes further than just being mere superstition.
These cases have been observed and documented, fraud has been ruled out in the more recent cases of saints who had these wounds. Blood has been observed pouring out of gaping wounds which often rapidly heal. Whether these are the authentic wounds of Christ, a psychological phenomena or are caused by satan can be debated. But thre is plenty of evidence that they are authentic.

>>Random lumps and bruises? What an insult to the apostle!>>

Umm, you're the one insisting that they were random lumps and bruises, though you feign shock and horror at sych a description.

Superstition? Please tell me how they are superstition.

1. An irrational belief that an object, action, or circumstance not logically related to a course of events influences its outcome.
2. 1. A belief, practice, or rite irrationally maintained by ignorance of the laws of nature or by faith in magic or chance.
2. A fearful or abject state of mind resulting from such ignorance or irrationality.
3. Idolatry.

So you equate empathy for Christ with idolatry? Do you accuse stigmatists of being of a "fearful or abject state of mind." Quite the opposite. Or is it that you hold that Christ is "not logically related to a course of events"? Of course you don't, but that's what you say when you call such things superstition.
Stigmata do not magically appear. These people are so in love with Christ that they joyfully share in his suffering, and by doing so enter into an unfathomably deep sense of prayer. It is not a cruelty they are inflicted with. Most describe being able to reach an ecstatic level of prayer which is truly experiencing Heaven on Earth.

Random lumps and bruises?

Yeah, more than likely Paul's back was one giant scar. After a few of his beatings, quite honestly, they may have become easier for him...simply because his back and nerves were scarred beyond repair. The nerve damage was probably immense. Paul suffered immeasurably for his beliefs and loyalty to Christ. Of course, it wasn't just Paul. Not sure the exact numbers, but didn't most of the apostles take several beatings and weren't most crucified?