Apelles 2
- By JohnEmmett
- Visual Arts
- 0 Replies
John Emmett
Artwork partially created using artificial intelligence.
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
No because of what He did for God and His GloryBecause of what He does for man. God doesn't need man to exist at all, but obviously wants him to exist, and loves him intensely. Salvation is all about meeting man's needs, to the glory of God.
I’m still waiting for him to explain how free will is a “gnostic belief” after I already quoted Iranaeus refuting total depravity and unconditional election by explaining how God has given man the ability to choose either good or evil in Adversus Haereses. This is a clear example of just spewing out nonsense in complete ignorance for the sake of argument. I literally quoted a second century theologian refuting Gnosticism and two of Calvin’s doctrines and he didn’t pick up on why Iranaeus was refuting them. Absolutely incredible.As it is you don't know the truth, at least not in its fullness, or else you'd recognize it in that post. You're locked into a handful of concepts developed by people strictly by reading a book, God's Word, centuries after the fact, divorced from its original historical context and recipients of its revelation, The concepts are plausible enough in some places, strained in others, often wooden and isolated interpretations in any case.
The alternative is that God is the author of sin.
"See, I set before you today life and prosperity, death and destruction. For I command you today to love the Lord your God, to walk in obedience to him, and to keep his commands, decrees and laws; then you will live and increase, and the Lord your God will bless you in the land you are entering to possess."
"This day I call the heavens and the earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live and that you may love the Lord your God, listen to his voice, and hold fast to him." Duet 30:15-16, 19-20
"Seek good, and not evil, that you may live" Amos 5:14
"Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good." Rom 12:21
"Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” Matt 22:37-40
There's a reason why we pray, "Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven". And that reason is because of the fact that His will is not at all necessarily done on earth as it is in heaven. God allows evil here, for a time, for a season, for His purpose, after which the two: good and evil, will be eternally separated, no longer allowed to co-exist as His plans for His creation are fully consummated. All truth and beauty and goodness in this world come from God while evil is done by man, coming from those who oppose Him and His will. So tell the victims of abuse, of rape, of torture, of genocide, of the holocaust about how beautiful this world is. You may get a different opinion.
Geez! It was nothing but love-speech, calling man to God and the love He's shown us. But man preferred darkness. What else is new???? Are you saying the darkness is somehow preferable or superior to the light just because man rejected the light?
This is tied to how history is legitimately written. Chinese history is also canonized, and as a necessity or else historical information cannot convey legitimately. The Jews often quote from difference sources, including common stories, common theologies which are usually Pharisaic in nature, just as Jesus put, "the Pharisees are on Moses' seat" (the significance is that Canon needs an authority to legitimize it).
Quotes from common stories include how archangel Michael had a dispute with Satan on the corpse of Moses. When this was quoted, at best it means the source is partially reliable, or more strictly speaking only this part of the source book is legitimate. The quote itself doesn't automatically legitimize the whole book. Canonization on the other hand, authenticate the whole book as being legitimate and can be regarded as the Word of God. That lies a fundamental difference.
The OT canonization started (as authorized by God) with King Hezekiah. It's said that 17 out of the 24 books of the Jewish OT Canon are with the mark or seal of King Hezekiah. The more critical authentication is through Ezra (authorized by God). It seems that 22 out of the 24 canonical books are the effort more or less from Ezra. These 22 books were written in Hebrew. 2 more books were added later, more likely they are the book of Ezra (naturally so) and the book of Daniel (there's a reason for this as well, by God's will). These two books were written in Aramaic as a later add-in. They are legitimized by the Pharisees (more likely involving Pharisee elites inside the Great Sanhedrin) near Jesus' days. Even Josephus only reckoned the 22 book version of the Jewish Canon (Josephus is an elite Pharisee but not one in the inner circle of the Great Sanhedrin, Paul is a closer candidate to the Great Sanhedrin).
That said, Daniel was added (as by God's will) to the Canon, more likely because Daniel actually encountered Jesus, if you compare the description of Jesus' appearance in Revelation with that in Daniel. The Jews didn't reckon Daniel as a formal prophet, but Jesus authenticated Daniel by calling him a prophet directly.
In a nutshell, whenever an outside source is referenced, whether it's from a common story, a common Pharisaic theology or even from the Septuagint, it only means that part of the book is reliable, no less no more. In contrast, only a canonical book can be deemed as the Scripture or Word of God. Only the Scripture is not broken, as Jesus put.
[Habba's office dropped charges against Baraka, but has pursued assault charges with Congresswoman McIver from that same incident.]
Members of Congress are legally permitted to enter ICE facilities without prior notice.
Totally understand all you’ve shared—learnt the importance of study years ago.Ok, in some church cultures people are told to make sure we have confessed all our sins before taking "Holy Communion" or having "the Lord's Supper". The main attention of preparation can be making sure we ourselves are all set and not in trouble with Jesus. In 1 Corinthians 11:17-34, our Apostle Paul gives things about how the Corinthian church had abused the Lord's Supper, and what they needed to do, instead >
1 Corinthians 11:17-19 > our Apostle Paul says they had divisions. And so, they were not doing the Lord's Supper right, if they were divided. Even so, ones could see who was **not** involved in the divisions . . . and realize those were the "approved" leaders.
1 Corinthians 11:20-21 > people would bring their own food and drink and take it - - right while a poor Christian was sitting there with nothing to eat and drink. So . . . the problem here was not if the well-to-do person had confessed one's sins, but the person was being inconsiderate of the poor Christian . . . the problem then being how they were relating personally with one another. They were being anti-love, then, not relating in love the way Jesus has loved us. And so, they were not having their supper/communion in true remembrance of Jesus because they were not loving the way Jesus has loved us.
His way of loving as His family is much of what is the remembrance of Jesus, is it not? So, instead, by focusing on only our own sins and focusing away from one another and loving, this can be a major problem of communion in case it has become an outward idol ceremony with copy-catting and with no real relating.
In 1 Corinthians 11:22 > "What! Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and shame those who have nothing?" So, yes they were abusing those who had "nothing". Yes, Jesus had a lamb dinner with His disciples at the "Last Supper". It was communion, indeed, but with the Passover dinner which includes lamb, to my knowledge. So, there is nothing wrong with communion being a full dinner, but it needs to be full of the remembrance of Jesus, by being full of His love with His family way of caring and sharing with one another . . . not with each of us trying to make our minds concentrate on some imagination of Jesus on the cross while we even ignore each other!!
So, then, yes > when ones have a pot luck . . . and all are welcome, whether they have time or money to prepare food . . . this could be more like the Last Supper, with everyone loving and delighting in sharing as family with one another.
However, ones were despising and shaming the poor Christians. And what we do to the least of Jesus Christ's brethren, we do to Jesus Himself.
"Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me." (in Matthew 25:40)
So, those people indeed were in a lot of trouble . . . much worse than just dying and getting sick and being weak.
1 Corinthians 11:23-25 > so, yes, Jesus says to share the bread and cup "in remembrance of" Jesus.
"For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death till He comes." (1 Corinthians 11:26)
And what shows Jesus Christ's death? How He was loving while on the cross > this is much of all that is involved in Jesus dying for us, on the cross. And we are commanded >
"And walk in love, as Christ also has loved us and given Himself for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling aroma." (Ephesians 5:2)
So, His death which we are to show has much to do with how Jesus was so loving, right while so suffering and dying for us, and how He was "a sweet-smelling aroma" to God . . . so sweetly pleasing our Father. And this is how we are to be: sweet and pleasant to our Father during whatever is going on.
So, their way of doing the so-called communion was anti-Christ, I would say. They were not personally relating and sharing as family, like Jesus did during the Last Supper.
1 Corinthians 11:27-28 > Paul says not to eat and drink "in an unworthy manner". I see, from the context of earlier scriptures, how the main issue was the divisions and how horribly they could be relating with ones less well-to-do. Therefore, my opinion is the unworthy manner was not only failure to confess some list of sins or some failure to devote oneself to the bread and drink. But they needed to be attentive to one another . . . not isolating themselves in trying to get grace only for their own selves, or brownie points for paying attention to the "symbolic meaning" of perhaps some cracker and grape juice.
1 Corinthians 11:29 > Paul says they were not "discerning the Lord's body". Now, ones take this to mean the bread is the body of Jesus. But, then, why does Paul not say not discerning the body "and blood" of Jesus . . . if the drink is really Christ's blood?? What I see, from what Paul says earlier, is he means they were not discerning how those poor Christians are the body of Christ. Jesus is so more concerned with if and how we honor and regard the children of God who are the body of Jesus >
"For we are members of His body, of His flesh and of His bones." (Ephesians 5:30)
1 Corinthians 11:30 > here we have the verse that you are talking about . . . how many were sick and weak and dying. They had been relating badly with needy Christians. And "Therefore" many of them were sick and weak and dying. And so, Paul then concludes with what they need to do >
1 Corinthians 11:31-32 > judge themselves, be chastened by the Lord. Hebrews 12:4-14 talks about how we need to actively seek our Heavenly Father for His real correction which changes our ***character*** so we are sharing with Him in His own holiness in His love's "peaceable fruit of righteousness".
1 Corinthians 11:33 > and Paul says "Therefore" > "wait for one another" < this means how they are relating with each other.
But because they were relating in such an impersonal and even anti-love way, ones were dying and weak and sick. When we live in what is not love, this can affect us emotionally and even physically . . . even if God does not somehow punish us. And if we do relate in God's love with one another during the Lord's Supper, this love is full of God's own grace to grow and mature us to be and to love like Jesus. So, yes there is grace in the true Lord's Supper, grace being the effect of God's own love being ministered by "each" of us to one another >
"As each one has received the gift, minister it to one another, as good stewards of the manifold grace of God." (1 Peter 4:10)
But it seems to me, how ones can isolate themselves in how they do the Lord's Supper. Ones do not function as ongoing and life-giving and love-ministering children of God. And so they hide with a little bit of bread and drink. But instead we can always stay prayerful, submissive to God so we are constantly spreading His own grace.
'My child was killed in the last attack!'That's true, but it's still progress.
Sure, that's what the Treasury Department says, but what about...
"We cannot build bananas in America"
At a House Appropriations hearing on Thursday, Rep. Madeleine Dean (D-PA) questioned Sec. Howard Lutnick about President Trump's tariffs.