Leaderboard

Windows vs. Ford. For all of us who feel only the deepest love and affection for the way computers have enhanced our lives, read on. At a recent computer expo (COMDEX) : Bill Gates reportedly compared the computer industry with the auto industry and stated, "If Ford had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25 cars that got 1,000 miles to the gallon." In response to Bill's comments, Ford issued a press release stating: If Ford had developed technology like Microsoft, we would all be driving cars with the following characteristics (and I just love this part): 1. For no reason whatsoever, your car would crash.........twice a day. 2.. Every time they repainted the lines in the road, you would have to buy a new car. 3.. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason. You would have to pull to the side of the road, close all of the windows, shut off the car, restart it, and reopen the windows before you could continue. For some reason you would simply accept this. 4.... Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn would cause your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would have to reinstall the engine. 5.... Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was reliable, five times as fast and twice as easy to drive - but would run on only five percent of the roads. 6...... The oil, water temperature, and alternator warning lights would all be replaced by a single "This Car Has Performed An Illegal Operation" warning light. 7...... The airbag system would ask,"Are you sure?"before deploying. 8........ Occasionally, for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door handle, turned the key and grabbed hold of the radio antenna. 9........ Every time a new car was introduced car buyers would have to learn how to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in the same manner as the old car. 10.......... You'd have to press the "Start" button to turn the engine off. PS - I'd like to add that when all else fails, you could call "customer service" in some foreign country and be instructed in some foreign language how to fix your car yourself!

I have a 12 YO grand daughter. Yesterday, she and a number of other friends and family were over at our home to celebrate the birthday of her paternal grandmother. At one point, she challenged me to see if I could beat her in the number of push-ups. Well, while I am physically active, I have not done push-ups in years. So, I responded that I would accept the challenge if both of us would do the male form of push-up and she would not do the female form. She agreed and her Father would count the valid number for each of us. By the way, she also informed me that the male form of push-up was the only one she ever did. We both did 13 valid push-ups, so we tied. As she left she informed me that she was going to engage in regular practice and the next time she saw me, she would challenge me again. She also informed me that her immediate goal was to successfully do 15, so I should count on at least that depending on when I saw her next.

And did you accept the challenge from your awesome granddaughter?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_England's_Dark_Day From the Wayback Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20110227191738/http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/eh/12.1/campanella.html http://www.islandnet.com/~see/weather/almanac/arc2004/alm04may.htm https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEcat5/SE1701-1800.html There was a solar eclipse on May 4 and October 27 of the year 1780. So, when the great dark day of 1780 occirred, there were no solar eclipses. Again, people are trying to find reasons for what may have been a supernatural event. The darkening of the sun in 1780 lasted from about 10am for the rest of the day! Much longer than 3 hours.

Does it really matter on what day or what year Christ died on or was resurrected? I personally don't find this to be a salvational issue. The gist of the story is that Jesus died to pay the penalty for our sins; and the Father resurrected Him, showing that Jesus' sacrifice was acceptable. I'll be sure of the day of the week and the year once Jesus explains it to me in the Kingdom. In the mean time, I will be happy knowing that I have a Lord and Savior who gave His life for me, and who lives again in heaven to intercede for all of us until He returns in glory and power.

Thank you Jackson for the breakdown, I have looked at this while conducting my research and taken it into consideration. This is compelling support, I think with the complexity of the Greek to English could be cause for some confusion. Because the Author didn't refer to the Most Holy place in the same verbiage does that negate that he references it? Hagia Hagion is holy holy's now if I say Most Holy or Holy of Holy's are those different if I don't use the consistent Most Holy verbiage? I will break down my understanding. Lets look at the contexts of the verses, and what the author of Hebrews is referencing. Hebrews chapter 9 begins with a description of the earthly sanctuary service. As part of this description of the earthly sanctuary the author points out the limited access of the earthly high priest who could only go into God's presence once per year, on the day of atonement: Heb 9:6 (ESV)These preparations having thus been made, the priests go regularly into the first section, performing their ritual duties, 7but into the second only the high priest goes, and he but once a year, and not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the unintentional sins of the people. This shows the limited nature of access to God in the old covenant sanctuary. Even the high priest had very limited access to God's presence. He alone could enter once per year into God's direct presence, and not without blood. He did not stay but withdrew again until the next year. This description of the earthly sanctuary, including the day of atonement, sets the stage for the argument in the rest of the chapter. The author demonstrates that Jesus' sanctuary ministry surpasses the old covenant sanctuary service. The author's description of the day of atonement at the beginning of the chapter clues us in to where he is going. He is leading up to the argument that Jesus fulfilled this entry of the high priest once per year. Heb 9:11(ESV)But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come,e then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) 12he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. Jesus' entry here is described with a number of specifics. 1. Jesus entered as high priest into the sanctuary. 2. He entered by means of blood. Blood was not necessary to enter the first compartment of the sanctuary. Blood was required, however, to enter the second compartment. So this entry of Jesus included ministration in the heavenly equivalent of the second compartment. 3. Jesus blood is said to be superior to that of goats and calves. While there are various sacrifices spelled out in the Old Testament, few involved entry into the sanctuary with blood. The reference to goats and calves reduces further the possibilities for the old testament service being referenced. Specifically, goats blood was only brought into the sanctuary on two occasions, both involving the Most Holy Place. The first service involving goat blood and entry into the sanctuary is the service to inaugurate the sanctuary (described in Leviticus chapters 7 and 8). The second is the Day of Atonement. 4. The entry of Jesus with blood secured eternal redemption. This shows the finality of the blood work Jesus is performing here. If there was more blood atonement to be provided, how could this be said in the first century? The last passage that spells out the Day of Atonement fulfillment of the cleansing of the sanctuary is the most clear yet. Heb 9:23 Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. Heb 9:24 For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. Heb 9:25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own In this passage we see the following: 1. It was necessary for the earthly sanctuary to be purified. It is necessary for the heavenly realities, of which the earthly were a copy, to be purified with better sacrifices. 2. The fulfillment of this cleansing is then spelled out. Christ has entered into heaven itself, to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. Where in the sanctuary does the Bible teach that the "presence of God" exists? Lev 16:2and the Lord said to Moses, “Tell Aaron your brother not to come at any time into the Holy Place inside the veil, before the mercy seat that is on the ark, so that he may not die. For I will appear in the cloud over the mercy seat. The place of the Lord's presence in the Old Testament tabernacle was upon the mercy seat in the Most Holy Place. In order for Christ to have entered into the "presence of God" He must have entered into the Most Holy Place. This is further validated by the fact that the authors of the NT repeatedly referred to Jesus as sitting or standing on the right hand of God 3. This presentation of Christ before God, where He presents or offers Himself the completed sacrifice for sin, is contrasted with the entry of the high priest on the day of atonement. The high priest had to enter in once every year, again and again, year after year. However, Jesus entered once and presented Himself before God, and only had to do so once. Just as the earthly high priest would minister blood in God's immediate presence while cleansing the earthly sanctuary, so Jesus ascended to God and ministered the sacrifice of Himself that had been made on the cross. I will have to disagree with your conclusion. So we see from Hebrews that Jesus' death and ministration of His blood - made purification for sin - secured eternal redemption - cleansed the heavenly things with better sacrifices As this was all done before the time of the writing of Hebrews.

my ex-boss would *love* your words... Until you've been in the shoes of someone to whom spiritual abuse has happened, you've no idea of what might have occurred. There is no attempt made to discredit the church as a whole. The abuser can be such a smooth-talking, trust-provoking manipulator that the "victim," though wondering about the legitimacy of the suggestions/orders/judgment, accepts the words of the abuser as God-given and the *right* thing to do, and follows through with the "suggestions".... It is only *afterwards* that it sinks in what actually happened. And the "victim" ends up feeling like cr*p for having been so stupid, so gullible, so trusting, to have done exactly what the abuser had wanted him/her to do. And the abuser goes merrily on his way, having gotten exactly what was wanted and keeping his little religious skirts clean while turning the "victim" into the "culprit"... yeah... browbeat that into the heart of the "victims" .... Let them know that, of course, any TRUE Christian worth his salt wouldn't have done such a bad thing. Make the "victims" feel even worse about themselves and the situation. Don't bother to find out what *really* happened. By all means, blame the "victims" — because, you know, it's the Christian thing to do.