Oh? It starts BEFORE December 21st?
Posted on 11/29/2012 2:55:12 PM PST by DaveMSmith
Everything in the Old Testament history leads up to the crossing of the Jordan, and yet the way the story is told in Joshua 3 and 4 has major inconsistencies and problems. Is there another way to read it?
Can the Bible be taken literally?
175. The Apostolic Church knew nothing of a trinity of Persons, or of three Persons from eternity, as is evident from the creed of that Church, called the Apostles' Creed, where it is said:
"I believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth; and in Jesus Christ, His only Son our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary; and in the Holy Ghost."
Here no mention is made of any Son from eternity, but of a Son conceived by the Holy Ghost, and born of the Virgin Mary; for those who framed that creed knew from the Apostles
that Jesus Christ was the true God, 1 John v. 20;
that in Him dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, Coloss. ii. 9;
that the Apostles preached faith in Him, Acts xx. 21; and that He had all power in heaven and in earth, Matt. xxviii. 18.
This is the first month of Summer...
Nana sometimes had a bad sunburn with blisters this time of year...
There was a ban on popping the blisters of other children at my school...
Fer real...
Santa arrived on a bright red fire engine...
we sat down to Christmas dinner in our swimmies or shorts...
The main meat was spring lamb...
We were forever dreamin of a white Christmas
:)
Oh? It starts BEFORE December 21st?
bb-""The title King of Kings is NOT taken from Maccabees""
Yes it is.
2 Macc. 13:4.... But the King of kings stirred up the mind of Antiochus against the sinner, and upon Lysias suggesting that he was the cause of all the evils, he commanded (as the custom is with them) that he should be apprehended and put to death in the same place.
...and Rev-17;14
These shall fight with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them, because he is Lord of lords, and King of kings, and they that are with him are called, and elect, and faithful.
bb-""Except Tobit 13:18 doesn't say that"",
Yes it does as you read on through verses 13 through 23
From Tobit 13;18-23
Blessed are all they that love thee, and that rejoice in thy peace. [19] My soul, bless thou the Lord, because the Lord our God hath delivered Jerusalem his city from all her troubles. [20] Happy shall I be if there shall remain of my seed, to see the glory of Jerusalem.
[21] The gates of Jerusalem shall be built of sapphire, and of emerald, and all the walls thereof round about of precious stones. [22] All its streets shall be paved with white and clean stones: and Alleluia shall be sung in its streets. [23] Blessed be the Lord, who hath exalted it, and may he reign over it for ever and ever, Amen
Amen!
Revelation 22:3 NKJV And there shall be no more curse, but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it, and His servants shall serve Him.
A throne does not indicate a person.
Yeppers...
In NZ you can get sunburnt BEFORE 21 Dec if ya wanna...
Youre using your Yankee calendar...
Everythings different in the Southern hemisphere...
Ya notice I didnt say “down under” ???
Ozzie is down under...
Theyre dizzy cause they have to think standing upside down...
anyhoo, the SUMMER HOLIDAYS started BEFORE 21 December...
See how the date is structured different too ???
The Friday around about the 10th was the last day of school for the year...
so the 14th is probably the last day this year if theyre still doing it the same way...
We went back the Monday of the first week of Feb for a whole new school year and a new higher grade...
they were called “primers” and then “standards” and in the higher grades “forms”
Very English...
school 6 days a week..
SEVEN weeks of summer holidays
The school year was cut into 3 intervals
Feb to the middle of May and then 2 weeks holiday...
May to the middle of August then 2 weeks for elementry schools called “primary school” and 3 weeks for high schools..
and then the last bit ended in Dec...
No more school
No more books
No more teachers’ dirty looks
:)
Rather, what is “typical” is another RC post which seeks to deny the truth which was abundantly substantiated because Catholics will not look at or accept evidence that refutes them, and then falsely accuse them of fabrication.
However, the fact remains that none of those councils were ecumenical (http://www.newadvent.org/library/almanac_14388a.htm), thus they did not issue infallble decrees, and thus debate was allowed and took place right into Trent until (after a divided vote) an infallible decree was finally provided, that being the first one as RC sources themselves state.
If the canon had been infallibly defined then there could be no such debate over disputed books as was allowed and seen.
As much as RCs obfuscate the difference btwn a generally settled yet disputable canon and one that was infallible and thus indisputable, the fact is that,
The Canon of the New Testament, like that of the Old, is the result of a development, of a process at once stimulated by disputes with doubters, both within and without the Church, and retarded by certain obscurities and natural hesitations, and which did not reach its final term until the dogmatic definition of the Tridentine Council. (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htm)
...it also put a full stop to the 1000-year-old development of the biblical canon (History of the Council of Trent [London, 1961] 91, quoted by Raymond Edward Brown, American Roman Catholic priest and Biblical scholar, in The New Jerome biblical commentary, p. 1168)
“For the first fifteen centuries of Christianity, no Christian Church put forth a definitive list of biblical books. Most Christians had followed St. Augustine and included the ‘Apocrypha’ in the canon, but St. Jerome, who excluded them, had always had his defenders.” (Joseph Lienhard, S.J., A.B., classics, Fordham University, “The Bible, The Church, And Authority;” [Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1995], p. 59)
Thus the canon was not indisputably “settled” (which was the issue of this exchange) until then, and debate continued. Now cease your obfuscation and apologize for your false allegations.
Morever, there is the debate over 1 Esdras under its various nomenclature (http://peacebyjesus.tripod.com/ancients_on_scripture.html#Is) and the Orthodox canon which also disagrees with Rome, even if by additional books.
and then there was 5 days off for Easter Friday through Tuesday
Queens Birthday Weekend...the Monday off
Labour Day ..1st weekend in Sept...a Monday off...
and ANZAC Day ..April 25.. for Gallipoli ..1915..
Australia and New Zealand Army Corps
Talk about obfuscating things; cults are not part of the evangelical movement (and in fact they typically operate more according to Rome), and instead, as a result of a common affirmation of basic core truths then evangelicals (S. Baptists, etc,) have historically contended for these against those who deny such things as the Trinity (WTS), eternal torment (SDA), the eternal nature of God (LDS), and revisionist liberal views of Scripture, such as seen in the American Catholic Bible, as well as unScriptural traditions of men..
Modern evangelicalism itself as a distinct movement began as a reaction against against liberalism and became the primary contenders against cults and cultic groups.
In fact, if they had not historically contended for such evangelical truths and shown much fruits of regeneration then Rome, which largely preaches herself, would not have found them so much of a threat, in contrast to liberal Protestant denoms, whose overall fruit is more like theirs. Yet overall all churches which are included under the “Christian” umbrella are in spiritual decline.
The Apostles Creed
Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem, Creatorem caeli et terrae,I'm sorry, but this indicates that the Apostles believed that Jesus was God, not just a top angel -- because the words "Ascended into heaven" doesn't quite translate the original which is "ascended of his own ability into heaven" -- only God could do that and also only God can judge the living and the dead
et in Iesum Christum, Filium Eius unicum, Dominum nostrum,
qui conceptus est de Spiritu Sancto, natus ex Maria Virgine,
passus sub Pontio Pilato, crucifixus, mortuus, et sepultus,
descendit ad inferos, tertia die resurrexit a mortuis,
ascendit ad caelos, sedet ad dexteram Patris omnipotentis,
inde venturus est iudicare vivos et mortuos.
Credo in Spiritum Sanctum,
sanctam Ecclesiam catholicam, sanctorum communionem, remissionem peccatorum,
carnis resurrectionem,
vitam aeternam.
AmenI believe in God,
the Father almighty,
Creator of heaven and earth,
and in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord,
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died and was buried;
he descended into hell;
on the third day he rose again from the dead;
he ascended into heaven,
and is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty;
from there he will come to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy Catholic Church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and life everlasting. Amen
This proves that the Apostles, being monotheistic Jews believed in the Trinity
And also note that Irenaeus in AD 189 says The three days before the luminaries were created are types of the Trinity: God, his Word, and his Wisdom"
And
"For the Church, although dispersed throughout the whole world even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and from their disciples the faith in one God, the Father Almighty . . . and in one Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who became flesh for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit" (Against Heresies 1:10:1 [A.D. 189]).
Yes, that's your posts in question, with voluminuous half-truths
So the Seventh Day Adventists are not part of this "movement" in your opinion?
What about the Word of God movement?
and the Oneness Pentecostals who deny the Trinity?
Yes, Jesus Christ IS God because He ascended of His own, as Swedenborg understood it correctly. We cannot understand the omnipresent infinite as 'persons' -- like I said before, that led to the notion that Jesus was Joseph's son.
The only NZ lamb I've had is frozen. The best lamb - bar none - anywhere in the world (including throughout NA and Europe) is right here in Iowa with fresh Iowa lamb. A local chain has the best meat department I've ever experienced and my oven produces fantastic leg o'lamb.
For a pretty please, I'll share the recipe...
Mormonism is something different — they took the Gnostic ideas and merged it with a lot of other ideas of the time
And conspicuously, in no letter to the churches are they told to particularly pray for or look to the holy father in Rome as the supreme head, or like language, nor is he even mentioned among Paul’s list of brethren in the epistle to the Romans, while the language of Gal. 2, in which Peter is listed second as those who “seemed to be pillars,” is contrary to toe-kissing Roman reference.
And thus to make up for this neglect, an autocratic entity declares itself infallible, and channels ethereal “tradition” to support itself, as well as making use of proven fabrications.
This does not negate Peter as the “leader among brethren” (as the Orthodox termed him) and of having a general pastoral office, but that is in contrast to its perpetuation and the demigod status seen in the historical papacy, and the exaltation of Rome and its manner of rule.
!
Then prove, such as that the councils you list were ecumenical councils that provided an infallible indisputable canon, seeing as you call my statement "Prior lists were by councils that were not ecumenical" an utter lie, (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2964191/posts?page=364#364) when you own CE does not list them as ecumenical (http://www.newadvent.org/library/almanac_14388a.htm, and which others affirm (http://peacebyjesus.tripod.com/ancients_on_scripture.html#Prior) and which meant that their canon was not considered infallible and that this precluded debate, but which continued until Trent, as shown.
Once again, It is you who are guilty of obfuscation by calling the canon "settled" (and that was the issue) when in fact it was disputable, besides the Esdras controversy.
we used to eat our own
spring lamb that is...
Dad would slaughter one and give half to a friend...
the other half was cut up into the roast for Christmas, chops, etc...
We had lamb or mutton about 4 times a week...
Lamb should not cost asd much as it does in the US...
sheep are much cheaper to raise than cattle...
the gestation period is much short6er, they are ready to slaughter sooner etc...
less fat better for you than beef...
though we need beef too...
Just dont put garlic on it and cook it well done...
Makes lovely gravy..
Mint Sauce, new potatoes and fresh peas..
YUM
(Of course since it was summer the mint, potatoes and peas were from Dads garden...)
I use to get a Leg of Lamb for Easter here but theyre hard to come by...
I’ll cautiously pretty please for the recipe you use...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.