Posted on 10/15/2001 6:54:40 AM PDT by malakhi
| Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams |
I really didn't plan to. But after the first few series, I found myself pulling for the Patriots. I guess I just wanted to see the underdog pull off the upset.
70 offensive plays for the Rams, and only 17 runs by Marshall Faulk. Doesn't make much sense considering the strength of the Rams' run blocking, and the number of men the Pats were dropping into pass coverage. I think Belichick outcoached Martz. Martz went in wanting to win with his vertical passing game. The Pats defense took that away by dropping the safeties, forcing the Rams to run more slant patterns. They got the Rams moving more East-West than North-South. Had the Rams gone to the run, the Patriots would have had to respond by putting more men in the box. But Martz never did this.
But if you rooted for the Pats, how did they win?
I don't know! Maybe their destiny was stronger than the curse of my support. ;o)
What did you think of the first e-Trade commercial? I also liked the Barry Bonds/ Hank Aaron spot.
Did the Father have to pre-exist the Logos in order to be the Father of the Logos?
Why? If the Mother is mortal and the Son is Divine, why does the Mother need to be older than the Son?
Exactly. At that point, the Rams offense had momentum. If the game goes to overtime, and the Rams get the ball first, its very likely that the Patriots never get a shot to score.
Theotokos means Mother of God. It, like "Trinity", does not appear in Scripture. The appropriateness of its use was affirmed by the Church at the Council of Ephesus in 431, although it was in popular use before this time.
So I guess God became flesh twice? Somehow, I don't think this is rightly dividing the Word of truth.
If this were the case, then the Yankees would have won the World Series. Even the Rams fans here agree that the Patriots outplayed them. The Rams never adequately responded to all the different looks the Patriots showed them on both sides of the ball.
Yeah, it's Monday ... but it's still a day the Lord has made!
| Monday, February 4, 2002 | ||
|
Many ancient cultures believed unquestioningly in demons. They were said to dwell in dark, desolate places such as woods, deserts, and tombs like those where Jesus encountered a man suffering greatly under demonic influence.This was quite a dramatic meeting, which we might be too eager to ascribe to ancient legend. But what about today? Can we recognize the influence of the devil in our own time? Do we look only for the dramatic, and when we fail to find it, claim that there is no devil? If so, we risk missing his subtle ways of acting.
This is exactly what the devil wants! He knows that if we deny his existence he has free rein, because we won't bother to use our God-given authority over him. As a result, we will remain in bondage to sin, mental torment, and weaknesses.
While we can't use the devil as an excuse for every problem we face, it is important to recognize the subtle ways in which he tries to sway our minds. For example, have you ever found yourself dwelling excessively on a situation--worrying uncontrollably about your children, persistently doubting God's forgiveness of confessed sins, or baselessly suspecting another person's motives? What about flashbacks to unhappy events or past hurts? Such things can be works of the evil one who seeks to rob us of our joy, peace, hope, and faith.
Most of us won't struggle to the degree that we'll end up gashing ourselves with stones, but we can all identify with tormenting thoughts. Let's fight them by placing our confidence in Jesus. He is far more powerful than the devil (1 John 4:4). Liberation will come as we claim his protection and forgiveness for whatever sins have made us vulnerable to attack. Then as we recognize the devil's lies, we can refuse and ignore them. Jesus has won the victory, and in him we can truly be free.
"Jesus, I run to the protection of your precious blood. Moment by moment, continue to work in me all that your great love accomplished for me on the cross."
--------------------
Have a great day, everyone!
AC
Well, I'm glad it was a good call. It would really have sucked if a bad call had totally changed the complexion of the game.
Good points. I did say I was sceptical, but I didn't say I was sure of a script. It was a good game to watch ... I really enjoyed it and was rooting for the underdog, too.
See my last response. It does not appear in Scripture. Its use was confirmed by the Church at the Council of Ephesus in 431.
By this term it is impied that Mary is the mother of the Father God, t the Son of God, and the Holy Spirit. Did she give birth to triplets, or am I missing something?
The Trinity is properly understood as Three Persons, One God. The Second Person of the Trinity is the indivisible Word made flesh, the Son of God, Jesus Christ. Mary is the mother of the Son of God. You are mistaken in your implication. A parallel - my wife and I are two persons, one flesh. My mother is not the mother of my wife. She is my mother.
Did God exist before Mary was a twinkle in her father's eye, so how could she precede him? Was Jesus the Son of God long before she took her first breath?
God has always existed. He is beyond time. You are mistaken in assuming that, in the ever-unique Incarnation where the Divine is born of the mortal, the mother needs to pre-exist the Son.
Isn't it true that the most and highest thing that Scripture says about Mary is that she was the "mother of Jesus".? And to leap from that to RCC and OC Marian claims requires a highly active imagination?
Yes, she is the mother of Jesus. So I ask you - who is Jesus? Is He one Person or two?
Peter was the Apostle to the Uncircumcision as Scripture clearly says. He visited areas of Asia Minor where the "sojurners" [Jews} from Jerusalem werre scattered -- not Rome. Rome is never mentioned. And when he wrote his First Epistle from Babylon, where there was a large Jewish community and scholars busy compiling the Babylonian Talmud, he addresses it to those "sojourners from Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia". He never wrote from Rome nor wrote to Rome.
Very few Jews were Roman citizens and unless one was a Roman citizen, they were personna non-grata in Rome, visitors only. Paul was a Roman citizen but Peter was not.
And the flag was thrown before the defender picked up the ball.
Thank you for the correction, I believe you're right. Obviously, not all Orthodox are up on their Greek!
Not right now, as I am at a jobsite, but Wordsmith has provided some information on Theotokos.
Huh? Please elaborate, you lost me.
Huh?
Go easy on me. I'm not really "here".
We have all known that for a long long time. :)
BigMack
Let me reword this and take the word "God" out of there and use "Divine being" instead.
Allend said:
The confusion is on the part of folks who try to divide Jesus in two, the human Jesus and the divine Jesus, and say that Mary was the mother of the first but not the second.
So if Mary is mother of both, she pre-existed with Jesus in heaven right?
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.