Interesting!

Interesting!

“I think I should/can/am able…”
“Should I…”
“I will…”

Thought-wise! Amazing when you truly consider it!
“I am not ‘nutty'” I/me is inside this body… Me feelings, my emotions, my thoughts. Even if I was walking prior and “I” unable to… “I used to…”

Let us take it a step further, “I wish…” Again, who are YOU?

We are at the same realization, who you are is within THAT body of yours… BODY? Now, we are getting somewhere… BODY

What can your body do?
The things that you allow it to!
Comments… “I think I can…” – body wise.
Inner thoughts “Yes, I can!”

A complex beginning to an easy answer.
God in three forms! A blessed “TRINITY” Three as/in ONE!

Now, we begin to figure these things out.
Seperation! “I” am inside “Me” The body is ONE thing!
In God’s likeness (directly) we are made.

A quick review:
“And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep: and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.” “Now the earth was formless and empty. Darkness was on the surface of the deep. God’s Spirit was hovering over the surface of the waters.”

In His Creation, no Time, no Space (or should I call it “Extent”… I do this because “Space” IS used to describe what is – outside of us!

Pallet? Michelangelo had ‘space’ to work on. The most extensive painting ever? Visit the Vatican, it is incredible! Yes, a much smaller painting is without price.
The Sistine Chapel ceiling, painted by Michelangelobetween 1508 and 1512, is a cornerstone work of High Renaissance art. The ceiling is that of the Sistine Chapel, the large papal chapel built within the Vatican between 1477 and 1480 by Pope Sixtus IV, for whom the chapel is named.

What do we mean “priceless?”
A dusty old painting stored behind a family sofa could be a Michelangelo worth up to$300 million (£190 million) and potentially one of the art finds of the century, according to an expert.

Painter, sculptor, architect and poet he was. A mystery for most. This information IS out there!
https://www.biography.com/people/michelangelo-9407628

More importantly, Michelangelo’s thoughts ‘spoke’ to his hands “Do this..” and he did.

Three Parts – Blessed Trinity! So many times The Body was directed by The Spirit and “led” by The Essence…
Then Jesus was led by The Spirit into the desert to be tempted by the devil. The verse makes clear that the Spirit, presumably the Holy Ghost prominently mentioned two verses before in Matthew 3:16, is The One Who leads Jesus into the desert.

We could go along this path, but we are trying to clarify what is poorly understood by so many.
Since the Bible affirms that Jesus is God, it is often perplexing to note that Jesus addresses God in prayer. The answer to this, as well as to all references to Jesus as being tired or hungry, weeping, lacking knowledge, etc., is that Jesus was a true man, as well as God.
The second Person of the Trinity, God the Son, took upon Himself complete humanity, except for our sinful nature, when He was conceived in Mary. He is described by theologians as one Divine Person having two natures, divine and human—the God-man.
Passages of Scripture which describe Jesus’ limitations are referring to His humanity. He lived His life as a true man, depending upon His heavenly Father day by day, just as we are expected to do. Many believe that even His miracles and supernatural knowledge were enabled by the Holy Spirit, not accomplished by switching back and forth between His divine and human natures.
When Jesus cried from the cross, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” He was expressing from His human consciousness the terrible sense of being separated from His heavenly Father as He suffered the penalty for the world’s sin. He, of course, with respect to His divine nature, could not suffer or die. In all of this great mystery, we have only glimmers of truth which is beyond human comprehension.
https://billygraham.org/answer/if-jesus-is-god-why-does-the-bible-

I agree 100% with the above statement made by Billy Graham. Again, I openly share where sources are from. ALL has been written and said prior, we ARE Hu-Man beings… We as well are a Unity as God is.

While painting the Sistine chapel; we can imagine the physical toll it took to create such an amazing work.

Hold up! I am in no way giving all credit to a creator/artist! I am giving ALL credit to The Creator.
We at times have heard a song so beautiful it brings tears to our eyes. Sorrow? No! Appreciation of beauty!

And a quick walk; the world’s greatest music composer’s?
https://www.discogs.com/lists/The-50-Greatest-Composers/1571

Again, I stress what IS stressed “In His form we are made.” It struck me, there are few if any creatures besides the Human species that have ALL these qualities!

Yes, we can train animals to do incredible things! Were you trained? Or was it within you and allowed to flourish with your input. So many times, I personally am impressed by the composition of talent we as a ‘species’ have.
Yes, knowing me… What is your talent?

High achievements in all fields require hours of training. This refers to music, chess, sciences, sports and what not. Buckminster Fuller said, “I’m not a genius. I’m just a tremendous bundle of experience.”
https://www.google.com/amp/s/medium.com/amp/p/746de0ce2ec9

Albert Einstein was 16 years old when he first flirted with the idea of special relativity.
He was a daydreamer. The pioneering theory that lead him to establish the foundation of modern physics was actually envisioned in one of his many famous thought experiments.
He wondered, specifically, what would happen if he were to ride a moving light wave at a constant speed, say, like a surfer. Given that they would be travelling at the same speed in such an instance, he went on to predict that the light wave would appear frozen to him.
He didn’t know it then, but that simple thought would lead to the downfall of some of the most impressive work done in physics over the past few centuries. It changed everything.
The funny thing is that stories of such brilliant insights spurring out of deep thought aren’t unique. Throughout history, luminaries ranging from Charles Darwin to Friedrich Nietzsche have attributed much of their genius to the many hours they spent lost in their mind.
Darwin had a “thinking path” that he would walk down to ruminate, and Nietzsche is said to have strolled around in nature for hours and hours on end to make sense of his ideas.
Behaviors that have been chastised today as being unproductive by a culture that mostly fetishizes measurable outputs like hours worked and reports produced seem to actually be some of the most productive. It begs an interesting question.
Is it just a coincidence? If not, what gives?
https://medium.com/personal-growth/the-2-hour-rule-the-genius-of-einstein-darwin-and-nietzsche-applied-b276acce84c

One surprising insight:
Great achievers constantly push themselves to beyond their abilities

Michael Jordan didn’t make varsity in 10th grade. Einstein flunked his first entrance exam to Zurich Polytechnic. Mozart’s early compositions were mere imitations of other people’s work.
http://time.com/collection-post/4043706/david-shenk-what-does-it-mean-to-be-genius/

We may have shied away from where we started, but I simply move to define who, what and where WE are. The hours, days, months, years? But still, ‘experts’ work on their skills.
One last series of examples:
Even in the ‘time’ of mid-40 year olds in the latter portion of the 1990’s MANY things became apparent!
Music went from in person performances, to group performances, to recordings LP, 8-track, Cassette, Computer, MP-3 now digital!

https://www.computerhope.com/issues/ch000984.htm

It then becomes simple to state: “Everything has been done before.”
We ARE human. Now, we do them with improvements but it has all been done before. In the generation of power? Fire, wind, water, coal, oil…and what has always existed solar energy!

What has happened before will happen again. What has been done before will be done again. There is nothing new in the whole world. “Look,” they say, “here is something new!” But no, it has all happened before, long before we were born.  No one remembers what has happened in the past, and no one in days to come will remember what happens between now and then. I, the Philosopher, have been king over Israel in Jerusalem.  I determined that I would examine and study all the things that are done in this world. God has laid a miserable fate upon us.  I have seen everything done in this world, and I tell you, it is all useless. It is like chasing the wind. You can’t straighten out what is crooked; you can’t count things that aren’t there.  I told myself, “I have become a great man, far wiser than anyone who ruled Jerusalem before me. I know what wisdom and knowledge really are.” I was determined to learn the difference between knowledge and foolishness, wisdom and madness. But I found out that I might as well be chasing the wind.  The wiser you are, the more worries you have; the more you know, the more it hurts.
Ecclesiastes 1:9-18

Interesting how we move from the Spiritual, to Art to Science…ALL is connected. Tiny story in The Bible that goes to explain these things. Again, written before the time of advancement so noone can put their naysaying words without first thinking…

Now the whole world had one language and a common speech.  As people moved eastward, they found a plain in Shinar and settled there.
They said to each other, “Come, let’s make bricks and bake them thoroughly.” They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar. Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves; otherwise we will be scattered over the face of the whole earth.”
But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower the people were building. The Lordsaid, “If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them.  Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.”
So the Lord scattered them from there over all the earth, and they stopped building the city. That is why it was called Babel—because there the Lord confused the language of the whole world. From there the Lord scattered them over the face of the whole earth.
Genesis 11:1-9

For the naysayers:
The Tower of Babel (Hebrew: מִגְדַּל בָּבֶל‬‎, Migdal Bavel) as told in Genesis 11:1-9 is an origin mythmeant to explain why the world’s peoples speak different languages.[1][2][3][4]
According to the story, a united humanity in the generations following the Great Flood, speaking a single language and migrating eastward, comes to the land of Shinar (שִׁנְעָר‬). There they agree to build a city and a tower tall enough to reach heaven. God, observing their city and tower, confounds their speech so that they can no longer understand each other, and scatters them around the world.
Some modern scholars have associated the Tower of Babel with known structures, notably the Etemenanki, a ziggurat dedicated to the Mesopotamian god Marduk by Nabopolassar, the king of Babylonia circa 610 BCE. The Great Ziggurat of Babylon was 91 metres (300 ft) in height. Alexander the Great ordered it to be demolished circa 331 BCE in preparation for a reconstruction that his death forestalled. A Sumerian story with some similar elements is told in Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta.

Feel free to research it:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tower_of_Babel

So, where did Caucasian, Asian, Black, Middle Eastern etc come from?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_people

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.cibmtr.org/DataManagement/TrainingReference/Manuals/DataManagement/Documents/appendix-i.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiKpaKJ-4PfAhVLmVkKHYuAD0sQFjAHegQIBxAB&usg=AOvVaw1dI45Fph5lf4hw7OHdY34p&cshid=1543850500926

According to the Bible, all humans on Earth today are descended from Noah and his wife, his three sons and their wives, and before that from Adam and Eve (Genesis 1-11). But today we have many different groups, often called “races,” with what seem to be greatly differing features. The most obvious of these is skin color. Many see this as a reason to doubt the Bible’s record of history. They believe that the various groups could have arisen only by evolving separately over tens of thousands of years. However, as we shall see, this does not follow from the biological evidence. The Bible tells us how the population that descended from Noah’s family had one language and by living in one place were disobeying God’s command to “fill the earth” (Genesis 9:1, 11:4). God confused their language, causing a break-up of the population into smaller groups which scattered over the Earth (Genesis 11:8-9). Modern genetics show how, following such a break-up of a population, variations in skin color, for example, can develop in only a few generations. There is good evidence that the various people groups we have today have not been separated for huge periods of time.1 What is a “race”? There is really only one race—the human race. The Bible teaches us that God has “made of one blood all nations of men” (Acts 17:26). Scripture distinguishes people by tribal or national groupings, not by skin color or physical appearance. Clearly, though, there are groups of people who have certain features (e.g., skin color) in common, which distinguish them from other groups. We prefer to call these “people groups” rather than “races,” to avoid the evolutionary connotations associated with the word “race.” All peoples can interbreed and produce fertile offspring. This shows that the biological differences between the “races” are not very great. In fact, the DNA differences are trivial. The DNA of any two people in the world would typically differ by just 0.2 percent.2 Of this, only 6 percent can be linked to racial categories; the rest is “within race” variation. The variation in DNA between human individuals shows that racial differences are trivial. This genetic unity means, for instance, that white Americans, although ostensibly far removed from black Americans in phenotype, can sometimes be better tissue matches for them than are other black Americans. Anthropologists generally classify people into a small number of main racial groups, such as the Caucasoid (European or “white”),3 the Mongoloid (which includes the Chinese, Inuit or Eskimo, and Native Americans), the Negroid (black Africans), and the Australoid (the Australian Aborigines). Within each classification, there may be many different sub-groups. Virtually all evolutionists would now say that the various people groups did not have separate origins. That is, different people groups did not each evolve from a different group of animals. So they would agree with the biblical creationist that all people groups have come from the same original population.
Of course, they believe that such groups as the Aborigines and the Chinese have had many tens of thousands of years of separation. Most believe that there are such vast differences between the groups that there had to be many years for these differences to develop.
One reason for this is that many people believe that the observable differences arise from some people having unique features in their hereditary make-up which others lack. This is an understandable but incorrect idea.

Let’s look at skin color, for instance. What about SKIN COLORS? It is easy to think that since different groups of people have “yellow” skin, “red” skin, “black” skin, “white” skin, and “brown” skin, there must be many different skin pigments or colorings. And since different chemicals for coloring would mean a different genetic recipe or code in the hereditary blueprint in each people group, it appears to be a real problem. How could all those differences develop within a short time? However, we all have the same coloring pigment in our skin—melanin. This is a dark-brownish pigment that is produced in different amounts in special cells in our skin. If we had none (as do people called albinos, who inherit a mutation-caused defect, and cannot produce melanin), then we would have a very white or pink skin coloring. If we produced a little melanin, we would be European white. If our skin produced a great deal of melanin, we would be a very dark black. And in between, of course, are all shades of brown. There are no other significant skin pigments.4 In summary, from currently available information, the really important factor in determining skin color is melanin—the amount produced. This situation is true not only for skin color. Generally, whatever feature we may look at, no people group has anything that is essentially different from that possessed by any other. For example, the Asian, or almond, eye differs from a typical Caucasian eye in having more fat around them.
Both Asian and Caucasian eyes have fat—the latter simply have less. What does melanin do? It protects the skin against damage by ultraviolet light from the sun. If you have too little melanin in a very sunny environment, you will easily suffer sunburn and skin cancer. If you have a great deal of melanin, and you live in a country where there is little sunshine, it will be harder for you to get enough vitamin D (which needs sunshine for its production in your body). You may then suffer from vitamin D deficiency, which could cause a bone disorder such as rickets. We also need to be aware that we are not born with a genetically fixed amount of melanin.

Rather, we have a genetically fixed potential to produce a certain amount, and the amount increases in response to sunlight. For example, you may have noticed that when your Caucasian friends (who spent their time indoors during winter) headed for the beach at the beginning of summer they all had more or less the same pale white skin color. As the summer went on, however, some became much darker than others. How is it that many different skin colors can arise in a short time? Remember, whenever we speak of different “colors” we are referring to different shades of the one color, melanin. If a person from a very black people group marries someone from a very white group, their offspring (called mulattos) are mid-brown. It has long been known that when mulattos marry each other, their offspring may be virtually any “color,” ranging from very dark to very light. Understanding this gives us the clues we need to answer our question, but first we must look, in a simple way, at some of the basic principles of heredity. Heredity DNA drawing. Copyright, Films for Christ. Each of us carries information in our body that describes us in the way a blueprint and specifications describe a furnished building. It determines not only that we will be human beings, rather than cabbages or crocodiles, but also whether we will have blue eyes, short nose, long legs, etc. When a sperm fertilizes an egg, all the information that specifies how the person will be built (ignoring such superimposed factors as exercise and diet) is already present. Most of this information is in coded form in our DNA.5 To illustrate coding, a piece of string with beads on it can carry a message in Morse code. The piece of string, by the use of a simple sequence of short beads, long beads (to represent the dots and dashes of Morse code), and spaces, can carry the same information as the English word “help” typed on a sheet of paper. The entire Bible could be written thus in Morse code on a long enough piece of string. In a similar way, the human blueprint is written in a code (or language convention) which is carried on very long chemical strings of DNA. This is by far the most efficient information storage system known, greatly surpassing any foreseeable computer technology.6 This information is copied (and reshuffled) from generation to generation as people reproduce. The word “gene” refers to a small part of that information which has the instructions for only one type of enzyme, for example.7 It may be simply understood as a portion of the “message string” containing only one specification. For example, there is one gene that carries the instructions for making hemoglobin, the protein that carries oxygen in your red blood cells. If that gene has been damaged by mutation (such as copying mistakes during reproduction), the instructions will be faulty, so it will often make a crippled form of hemoglobin, if any. (Diseases such as sickle-cell anemia and thalassemia result from such mistakes.) So, with an egg which has just been fertilized—where does all its information, its genes, come from? One half comes from the father (carried in the sperm), and the other half from the mother (carried in the egg). Genes come in pairs, so in the case of hemoglobin, for example, we have two sets of code (instruction) for hemoglobin manufacture, one coming from the mother and one from the father. This is a very useful arrangement, because if you inherit a damaged gene from one parent that could instruct your cells to produce a defective hemoglobin, you are still likely to get a normal one from the other parent which will continue to give the right instructions. Thus, only half the hemoglobin in your body will be defective. (In fact, each of us carries hundreds of genetic mistakes, inherited from one or the other of our parents, which are usefully “covered up” by being matched with a normal gene from the other parent—see “Where Did Cain Get His Wife?”)

There are questions and I accept that there are glaring inconsistencies now. But there are undeniable facts. One line is the ‘colored’ line.
The descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are the Arab and Jewish peoples. For Abraham, this is not only through his son Isaac, who is an ancestor of the Jewish people, but also through his son Ishmael, who is an ancestor of the Arab people. Abraham also had other sons by his second wife Keturah, who are the ancestors of various Arab tribal groups (Gen. 25:1-18).
Abraham’s son Isaac not only had Jacob as a son, the primary ancestor of the Jewish people, but also a son Esau, the ancestor of the Edomites, a tribe that settled to the east of Israel in what is today the nation of Jordan. Edom is mentioned in many Biblical events (Gen. 36). In New Testament times, the Edomites came to be known as Idumeans (Mark 3:8). Many converted to Judaism, which helps explain how Herod the Great, whose father was Idumean, became king of the Jews at the time of the birth of Jesus (Matt. 2:1, Luke 1:5).
The descendants of Jacob were twelve sons, the ancestors of the twelve tribes of Israel, and one daughter, Dinah. After the death of Solomon, the nation of Israel broke into two kingdoms. The northern kingdom, known as the Kingdom of Israel, and sometimes called Ephraim after the leading northern tribe, was taken into exile by the Assyrians. These then mixed among the peoples of the world, and so came to be known as the Lost Tribes of Israel. However, not all were lost. Some isolated groups maintained their Israelite identity and are today returning to the modern nation of Israel. Others returned already in ancient times. But many others completely lost their identity among the peoples of the world, and as a result of population mixing are today among the ancestors of everyone on earth. Contrary to the claims of some, though, this doesn’t immediately make us all Israelite. The northern tribes went into exile only after being divorced by God (“You are not my people and I am not your God,” Hosea 1:9). This meant they were no longer included in the covenant that God made with Israel at Mt. Sinai, but were cut off because of their disobedience. The evidence for this can be seen in the requirement that returning members of the Lost Tribes be converted to Judaism in order to be considered Jewish in the modern nation of Israel.
The southern kingdom, known as the Kingdom of Judah, is what became the Jewish people that we know today.
In the New Testament, Gentile Christians are considered to be spiritual descendants of Abraham by faith (Gal. 3:7). But this did not include them in the covenant on Mt. Sinai, despite their marginal descent from the Lost Tribes (Acts 15:10,19,20). Instead, they were given the new Law of Messiah, the New Covenant recorded in the New Testament, which they shared with Jewish believers in Jesus. In its earliest years, Christianity understood itself to be made up of these two primary groups: believers from the circumcision (Jewish believers in Jesus) and believers from the uncircumcision (Gentile believers in Jesus).

This is all complex, understood! But, I move to establish ‘thought’. Blood is in ALL! Except for the sickle cell trait (which we will examine)Sickle cells developed secondary to decrease in oxygen.
In the annals of medical history, 1910 is regarded as the date of the discovery of sickle cell disease, making 2010 the 100th anniversary of that discovery, but just what does it mean to say the disease was “discovered”? The disorder we call “Sickle Cell Disease” often abbreviated as SCD, had been present in Africa for at least five thousand years and has been known by many names in many tribal languages. What we call its “discovery” in 1910 occurred, not in Africa, but in the United States. A young man named Walter Clement Noel from the island of Grenada, a dental student studying in Chicago, went to Dr. James B. Herrick with complaints of pain episodes, and symptoms of anemia. Herrick was a cardiologist and not too interested in Noel’s case so he assigned a resident, Dr. Ernest Irons to the case. Irons examined Noel’s blood under the microscope and saw red blood cells he described as “having the shape of a sickle”. When Herrick saw this in the chart, he became interested because he saw that this might be a new, unknown, disease. He subsequently published a paper in one of the medical journals in which he used the term “sickle shaped cells”.
As more cases began to surface, the mystery of just what this disease was only deepened. It was clear that for whatever reason, it occurred only or primarily in persons of African origin. In 1927, Hahn and Gillespie discovered that red blood cells from persons with the disease could be made to sickle by removing oxygen. This was exciting because red cells are the oxygen transporters of the body. The trouble was, that there were people –often relatives of the patient – whose red cells had this trait of sickling when deprived of oxygen but who had no disease. This condition became known as “sickle trait”.
In the late 1940’s and early 1950’s the nature of the disease began to become clearer.
In 1949, two articles appeared independently showing conclusively that SCD was inherited and that people with sickle trait were heterozygous (carriers or AS) for the gene whereas people with the disease were homozygous – i.e., had a double dose of the gene (SS). One was published by a military doctor in what was then known as Portuguese East Africa (now Mozambique) named Col. E. A. Beet. His article was in an African medical journal. The other was by Dr. James V. Neel, Chairman and founder of the Department of Human Genetics at the University of Michigan. It was in his department that I worked for seven years and was on the staff of one of the first Centers for Sickle Cell Disease in 1972. Neel published his article in the prestigious American journal Science. As a result of the much wider readership of that journal, Neel usually gets the credit for the discovery although most authors are careful to cite both and many people think that Neel and Beet worked together. As an aside, some years ago, I visited Dr. Neel (he has died since), and I remarked that I always tell my classes about his discovery and the 1949 article and the dual publication by Beet. He smiled, got up from his desk and opened a file drawer. He pulled out a reprint of a 1947 paper he had written, also from Science as I recall, and showed me where he had said, “this [referring to data in the paper] almost certainly shows that sickle cell anemia is hereditary. I prefer to cite this paper these days,” he said with a puckish grin on his face.
Two years later, in 1951, the famous Nobel Prize-winning chemist, Dr. Linus Pauling and his colleague Dr. Harvey Itano, discovered that the red, oxygen-carrying protein called “hemoglobin” had a different chemical structure in persons with SCD. This led Dr. Pauling to coin the term “molecular disease” for disorders that resulted from proteins with abnormal chemical structures. Today, thousands of such diseases are known but in 1951, SCD was the first. The details of the abnormality were worked out by Dr. Vernon Ingram in 1956. In the 1970’s, more details of how this abnormal structure affects the red blood cells were revealed and better tests for the detection of the disease were developed. In the years following, better ways of treating sickle cell patients and potential treatments appeared. The life span and the quality of life of patients were improved. Genetic counseling became an important tool for informing people about the risks of having a child with sickle cell disease. Today, 100 years later, physicians and scientists continue to move forward in new understanding of the disease and new ways to treat it. The goal of a total cure has not been reached but great progress has been made. Perhaps within the lifetime of some of us, that goal will be reached.
In summary, in 1910, Herrick described an anemia characterized by bizarre, sickle-shaped cells. The role of deoxygenation was discovered in the 1920’s by Hahn and Gillespie. The hereditary nature of the disease was suspected but not demonstrated until 1949 by Dr. James V. Neel. The association with hemoglobin was discovered by Linus Pauling and Harvey Itano in 1951 and the actual amino acid substitution by Vernon Ingram in 1956. Thus the 100th anniversary marks the discovery of this ancient disease from Africa by western medicine and naming of the disease for a simple agricultural implement to which a medical resident in 1910 likened the shape of the abnormal cells he saw under the microscope.

We are returning to our out setting focus. We now begin to understand differences – briefly is my hope. Something I can say personally which trended my introduction of sickle cell is blood type.
O positive is the most common blood type present in 37 percent of the U.S. population. Blood types vary by ethnic group, with more Hispanic people possessing O blood type, while Asian people are more likely to be type B. Meanwhile, the universal red cell donor has type O negative blood type.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3595629/&ved=2ahUKEwivxOTOgITfAhWLTN8KHVl1BJgQFjASegQIBhAB&usg=AOvVaw3dUIDl1RCq5gSsy9rHmyLR

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.medicaldaily.com/human-blood-facts-why-blood-type-o-positive-more-common-ab-negative-400629&ved=2ahUKEwivxOTOgITfAhWLTN8KHVl1BJgQwaICMAx6BAgSEC8&usg=AOvVaw0kOR-SN1bLHBMBgXuy3XZP

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.redcrossblood.org/donate-blood/how-to-donate/types-of-blood-donations/blood-types.html&ved=2ahUKEwivxOTOgITfAhWLTN8KHVl1BJgQFjAPegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw04i5iyZy3DAYlLk517e23Z

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://obi.org/blood-donation/scientific-facts/&ved=2ahUKEwivxOTOgITfAhWLTN8KHVl1BJgQFjARegQICBAB&usg=AOvVaw3API8-rQbMUq_Ig9JhI-hq

If I being black were to donate blood (which I have done.) The recipients can be of anypositive Race. Yes, there are individuals who will refuse to accept blood from ANY OTHER race! Frankly, it is their loss.
Interesting enough, there are transplants. In this day and age at the Department of Motor Vehicles in the United States of America there is a move to volunteer to be an organ donor if in a life ‘challenging’ experience. Without saying too much more about this.
https://dmv.ny.gov/more-info/register-become-organ-eye-or-tissue-donor

We have shown that the most unchangeable features are those within! Blood, organs…
I recently watched a science program of a face transplant.
https://www.googleadservices.com/pagead/aclk?sa=L&ai=DChcSEwi5-LXng4TfAhUQjsgKHRaLBYkYABAAGgJxdQ&ae=1&ohost=www.google.com&cid=CAESEeD2KlNNdjK2d3ls6fvs74vg&sig=AOD64_1yzNhTTttPQnMFgrmHPiW2zwUHUw&q&adurl=https://nyulangone.org/locations/nyu-langone-transplant-institute?cid%3Dsem_google%26googadcamp%3DTransplant_Brand%26googadgroup%3DBrand%26googkeyword%3D%252Bnyu%2520%252Btransplant%26googmatchtype%3Db%26insitesid%3D1297%26gclid%3DCj0KCQiAxZPgBRCmARIsAOrTHSb6I9d_m6w4qwEkSox9jWUij6Q7lEaflIhxX9Db6EhumXoK4e2McLsaAudBEALw_wcB&ved=2ahUKEwjQmq3ng4TfAhWSmOAKHfA_BQ0Q0Qx6BAgJEAE

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://mashable.com/video/face-transplant-nyu/&ved=2ahUKEwjQmq3ng4TfAhWSmOAKHfA_BQ0QwqsBMAB6BAgREAU&usg=AOvVaw0IJrqNfYVnOdodSieq62d3

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://nypost.com/2018/11/30/face-transplant-for-man-who-shot-himself-cost-1-5m/amp/&ved=2ahUKEwjQmq3ng4TfAhWSmOAKHfA_BQ0QiJQBMBV6BAgHEAQ&usg=AOvVaw0HDTle_XeNsiqvYh-V2GcB&ampcf=1

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://nypost.com/2018/11/30/face-transplant-for-man-who-shot-himself-cost-1-5m/amp/&ved=2ahUKEwjQmq3ng4TfAhWSmOAKHfA_BQ0QqUMwGXoECAcQFw&usg=AOvVaw0HDTle_XeNsiqvYh-V2GcB

Yes, I am aware that we are spending time on this! But need fully so. I am a Scientist and Physician once interested in Transplant Immunology thanks to my Dad!

I am sure there are questions: how did we get here?
There is a similarity in all. Some may not be willing to accept that. Let us return to The Word.

Abraham, the father of many (if not all nations) is used by Jesus – God- in the flesh in one of His parables.
occurs in only one New Testament passage, the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, which is only in the gospel of Luke (16:19–31; see Luke 16:22 and Luke 16:23). …Abraham’s bosom contrasts with the destination of a rich man who ends up in Hades.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosom_of_Abraham

By His death and Resurrection, Jesus opened Heaven. Prior to that time all who died went to “hell”; however, the just went to a place in hell referred to as “the Bosom of Abraham,” where they would be comforted. The parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31) seems to indicate that there were two parts of hell. Both Lazarus and the rich man died and went to hell, but Lazarus was comforted in the bosom of Abraham while the rich man was in a place of torment. A great chasm separated the two parts.

Scripture calls the abode of the dead, to which the dead Christ went down, “hell”— Sheol in Hebrew or Hades in Greek—because those who are there are deprived of the vision of God. Such is the case for all the dead, whether evil or righteous, while they await the redeemer: which does not mean that their lot is identical, as Jesus shows through the parable of the poor man Lazarus who was received into “Abraham’s bosom”: “It is precisely these holy souls, who awaited their Savior in Abraham’s bosom, whom Christ the Lord delivered when he descended into hell.” Jesus did not descend into hell to deliver the damned, nor to destroy the hell of damnation, but to free the just who had gone before him.

Complexity upon complexity. Where are Moses and Elisha?
Elijah Taken Up to Heaven
When the Lord was about to take Elijah up to heaven in a whirlwind, Elijah and Elisha were on their way from Gilgal. Elijah said to Elisha, “Stay here; the Lord has sent me to Bethel.”
But Elisha said, “As surely as the Lord lives and as you live, I will not leave you.” So they went down to Bethel.
The company of the prophets at Bethel came out to Elisha and asked, “Do you know that theLord is going to take your master from you today?”
“Yes, I know,” Elisha replied, “so be quiet.”
 Then Elijah said to him, “Stay here, Elisha; theLord has sent me to Jericho.”
And he replied, “As surely as the Lord lives and as you live, I will not leave you.” So they went to Jericho.
 The company of the prophets at Jericho went up to Elisha and asked him, “Do you know that the Lord is going to take your master from you today?”
“Yes, I know,” he replied, “so be quiet.”
 Then Elijah said to him, “Stay here; the Lordhas sent me to the Jordan.”
And he replied, “As surely as the Lord lives and as you live, I will not leave you.” So the two of them walked on.
 Fifty men from the company of the prophets went and stood at a distance, facing the place where Elijah and Elisha had stopped at the Jordan. Elijah took his cloak, rolled it up and struck the water with it. The water divided to the right and to the left, and the two of them crossed over on dry ground.
When they had crossed, Elijah said to Elisha, “Tell me, what can I do for you before I am taken from you?”
“Let me inherit a double portion of your spirit,”Elisha replied.
“You have asked a difficult thing,” Elijah said, “yet if you see me when I am taken from you, it will be yours—otherwise, it will not.”
 As they were walking along and talking together, suddenly a chariot of fire and horses of fire appeared and separated the two of them, and Elijah went up to heaven in a whirlwind. Elisha saw this and cried out, “My father! My father! The chariots and horsemen of Israel!” And Elisha saw him no more. Then he took hold of his garment and tore it in two.
Elisha then picked up Elijah’s cloak that had fallen from him and went back and stood on the bank of the Jordan.  He took the cloak that had fallen from Elijah and struck the water with it. “Where now is the Lord, the God of Elijah?” he asked. When he struck the water, it divided to the right and to the left, and he crossed over.
The company of the prophets from Jericho, who were watching, said, “The spirit of Elijah is resting on Elisha.” And they went to meet him and bowed to the ground before him. 
2 Kings 2 New International Version (NIV)
The transfiguration of Jesus is an event reported in the New Testament when Jesus is transfigured and becomes radiant in glory upon a mountain. The Synoptic Gospels (Matthew 17:1–8, Mark 9:2–8, Luke 9:28–36) describe it, and the Second Epistle of Peter also refers to it (2 Peter 1:16–18). It has also been hypothesized that the first chapter of the Gospel of John alludes to it (John 1:14).
In these accounts, Jesus and three of his apostles, Peter, James, John, go to a mountain (the Mount of Transfiguration) to pray. On the mountain, Jesus begins to shine with bright rays of light. Then the prophets Moses and Elijah appear next to him and he speaks with them. Jesus is then called “Son” by a voice in the sky, assumed to be God the Father, as in the Baptism of Jesus.

We have two accounts of people taken up to Heaven before God came down to face a challenge to place Himself in the quandary that we as Man have. Jesus was totally human – God in the flesh! Amen.
Since Jesus’ conception by the Holy Spirit in the womb of the virgin Mary(Luke 1:26-38), the real identity of Jesus Christ has always been questioned by skeptics. It began with Mary’s fiancé, Joseph, who was afraid to marry her when she revealed that she was pregnant (Matthew 1:18-24). He took her as his wife only after the angel confirmed to him that the child she carried was the Son of God.

Hundreds of years before the birth of Christ, the prophet Isaiah foretold the coming of God’s Son: “For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace” (Isaiah 9:6). When the angel spoke to Joseph and announced the impending birth of Jesus, he alluded to Isaiah’s prophecy: “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel (which means ‘God with us’)” (Matthew 1:23). This did not mean they were to name the baby Immanuel; it meant that “God with us” was the baby’s identity. Jesus was God coming in the flesh to dwell with man.

Jesus Himself understood the speculation about His identity. He asked His disciples, “Who do people say that I am?” (Matthew 16:13; Mark 8:27). The answers varied, as they do today. Then Jesus asked a more pressing question: “Who do you say that I am?” (Matthew 16:15). Peter gave the right answer: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matthew 16:16). Jesus affirmed the truth of Peter’s answer and promised that, upon that truth, He would build His church (Matthew 16:18).

The true nature and identity of Jesus Christ has eternal significance. Every person must answer the question Jesus asked His disciples: “Who do you say that I am?”

He gave us the correct answer in many ways. In John 14:9-10, Jesus said, “Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work.”

The Bible is clear about the divine nature of the Lord Jesus Christ (see John 1:1-14). Philippians 2:6-7 says that, although Jesus was “in very nature God, He did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.” Colossians 2:9 says, “In Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form.”

Jesus is fully God and fully man, and the fact of His incarnation is of utmost importance. He lived a human life but did not possess a sin nature as we do. He was tempted but never sinned (Hebrews 2:14-18; 4:15). Sin entered the world through Adam, and Adam’s sinful nature has been transferred to every baby born into the world (Romans 5:12)—except for Jesus. Because Jesus did not have a human father, He did not inherit a sin nature. He possessed the divine nature from His Heavenly Father.

Jesus had to meet all the requirements of a holy God before He could be an acceptable sacrifice for our sin (John 8:29; Hebrews 9:14). He had to fulfill over three hundred prophecies about the Messiah that God, through the prophets, had foretold (Matthew 4:13-14; Luke 22:37; Isaiah 53; Micah 5:2).

Since the fall of man (Genesis 3:21-23), the only way to be made right with God has been the blood of an innocent sacrifice (Leviticus 9:2; Numbers 28:19; Deuteronomy 15:21; Hebrews 9:22). Jesus was the final, perfect sacrifice that satisfied forever God’s wrath against sin (Hebrews 10:14). His divine nature made Him fit for the work of Redeemer; His human body allowed Him to shed the blood necessary to redeem. No human being with a sin nature could pay such a debt. No one else could meet the requirements to become the sacrifice for the sins of the whole world (Matthew 26:28; 1 John 2:2). If Jesus were merely a good man as some claim, then He had a sin nature and was not perfect. In that case, His death and resurrection would have no power to save anyone.

Because Jesus was God in the flesh, He alone could pay the debt we owed to God. His victory over death and the grave won the victory for everyone who puts their trust in Him (John 1:12; 1 Corinthians 15:3-4, 17).

We are back here to where we started. The Three are One! Your hands are as much a part of you as your legs or eyes.
The body is a unit, though it is made up of many parts; and though all its parts are many, they form one body. So it is with Christ.

We as Christians are ONE body united in Love. We have and will continue to speak on this.

Gifts of The Sprit:
A spiritual gift or charism (plural: charisms or charismata; in Greek singular: χάρισμα charism, plural: χαρίσματα charismata) is an endowment or extraordinary power given by the Holy Spirit . These are the supernatural graces which individual Christians need (and were needed in the days of the Apostles) to fulfill the mission of the Church. In the narrowest sense, it is a theological term for the extraordinary graces given to individual Christians for the good of others and is distinguished from the graces given for personal sanctification, such as the Seven Gifts of the Holy Spirit and the fruit of the Holy Spirit.
These extraordinary spiritual gifts, often termed “charismatic gifts”, are the word of wisdom, the word of knowledge, increased faith, the gifts of healing, the gift of miracles, prophecy, the discernment of spirits, diverse kinds of tongues, interpretation of tongues. To these are added the gifts of apostles, prophets, teachers, helps (connected to service of the poor and sick), and governments (or leadership ability) which are connected with certain offices in the Church. These gifts are given by the Holy Spirit to individuals, but their purpose is to build up the entire Church.[1]They are described in the New Testament, primarily in 1 Corinthians 12, Romans 12, and Ephesians 4. 1 Peter 4 also touches on the spiritual gifts.
The gifts are related to both seemingly “natural” abilities and seemingly more “miraculous” abilities, empowered by the Holy Spirit. The two major opposing theological positions on their nature is that they ceased long ago or that they continue (Cessationism versus Continuationism).

We can state this a different way:
The 12 fruits are charity (or love), joy, peace, patience, benignity (or kindness), goodness, longanimity (or long-suffering), mildness (or gentleness), faith, modesty, continency (or self-control), and chastity. (Longanimity, modesty, and chastity are the three fruits found only in the longer version of the text.)

So, we have come to a point where reflection is important. We will continue to share along these lines. Be blessed.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s