Leaderboard

See: https://www.khmertimeskh.com/50564946/couples-explain-why-interfaith-marriage-works/ This article comments on the marriage between a SDA and a Buddhist. It should be noted that when the marriage began, both were members of the Buddhist faith. At a later time, the woman became a SDA.

The paragraph that follows is a summary of the changes made in this week’s main lesson (by Ranko Stefanovic). What follows is the original text that Stefanovic turned in, before the editing process, for those who would like to know that he originally intended. Please ignore the daily dates, they were put in just to […] The post Ranko Stefanovic on the Editorial Changes in the Main Lesson for this Week (Rev 1:1-8) appeared first on Jon Paulien's Blog. View the full article

It is not often that I will post material from Fulcrum 7, a website that is often quite critical of the SDA Church, and in my opinion often unfairly so. However, as I have posted the article by the NAD, which was critical of Fulcrum 7, I believe that in fairness to Fulcrum 7, I should post their response to the NAD criticism. You may access their response below: http://www.fulcrum7.com/blog/2019/1/2/fulcrum7-responds-to-the-nads-attack My posting of the above, should not be construed as either agreement or of disagreement with it. However, the following quote from the Fulcrum 7 article is exactly as I predicted would happen.

Greetings again The Wanderer, I believe that the details are mainly fulfilled in the RCC. I also believe that many of the Churches will support the RCC in the opposition to Christ when he returns. My resources are fairly extensive as I have been a hoarder / collector of books, notes and magazines over many years. These are not usually in the public domain, but some are electronic. One set of notes from 1973 suggests a number of other dates on the rise of the RCC and corresponding decline 1260 years later. As well as AD533 and AD608-610 he adds AD 549-554, 590 and 600 on page 61 of his Daniel notes (printed in USA). I could copy this detail if you want. I have checked two other sets of notes printed in Australia, and these have similar details. I have a book with similar detail. I have not checked my numerous magazines specifically on the above dates. But I have been reading a series of magazines from 1864, and the 1868 magazines were anticipating that significant events would occur soon regarding the demise of the Papacy. Out of all my resources, I cannot remember any that did not clearly identify the fourth beast as the Roman Empire and the little horn as the Papacy. Kind regards Trevor

5 Things You Didn't Know About The State of Georgia On January 2, 1788, Georgia ratified the Constitution and joined the United States. Named after King George II, Georgia was first settled by Europeans in 1733, when a group of British debtors led by English philanthropist James E. Oglethorpe established Georgia’s first permanent settlement–the town of Savannah. Here are five more things you didn't know about the state of Georgia... Georgia Was Already Technically a State Georgia was the fourth state to ratify the U.S. Constitution, with Delaware, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey ratifying in December 1787, and Georgia in January 1788, and thus Georgia "entered the union." However, Georgia was already technically a state—this ratification and entry marked Georgia's new identity as a state in the United States under the new constitution that centralized power a little more and that corrected a lot of the problems created by the Articles of Confederation. Georgia, along with every other former British colony in the United States, technically became their own states after breaking away from Britain and winning the Revolutionary War. All the ratification did was show Georgia's support for the paperwork that replaced the Articles. Georgians Initially Didn't Feel as Enthusiastic About Breaking Away From Britain Georgia wasn't as badly affected by all the factors that led other states to initially rebel against the British. The state was prosperous, so revolution wasn't on everyone's minds (economic comfort tends to be a big factor in revolutions and uprisings). However, as the war continued, much of Georgia became a base for British troops—in effect, an occupation. This made a lot of Georgians turn against the British. Georgia Is the 24th Biggest State, but It's Got the Second Highest Number of Counties Georgia's 159 tiny counties have their origins in the desire for rural residents to feel more connected, and for rural counties to have major influence in the state's government. When Georgia was formed, much of the state was rural, and people benefited from having a county government that was close by, rather than located miles and miles away. There's an urban legend (rural legend?) that the size of the counties was based on whether a farmer driving a mule-drawn wagon could get to the courthouse and back in one day, but that has never been proven true. Anyway, having small counties—and thus close-by government structures—allowed residents to remain better involved in the state's business. The State Has Live, Wild Shrimp Living at the Top of a Mountain "Wild" is the keyword. It's not unusual to find shrimp farms in various places, but in Georgia, at the top of Stone Mountain northeast of Atlanta, sit several pools fed by rainwater. These pools are home to fairy shrimp and clam shrimp. The Name of the State of Georgia Has a Different Origin Than the Name of the Country of Georgia Both the state and the country are named after British Georges, but that's where the similarities end. The state of Georgia was named in honor of King George II, who granted the land to its British settlers. The country of Georgia was given its English name after St. George, as in St. George and the Dragon. This actually isn't close at all to what Georgians call their country (that's Sakartvelo), but funnily enough, St. George and the Georgian people have apparently been associated with one another for centuries.

Word of Life

Words of truth ?

I have been working to contact Mark Finley directly on this matter. As a retired General Conference Vice President, I believe that the major issue here is an ethical one, rather than legal. Today (January 2, 2018) I spoke with a person in the General Conference who is closely associated with Elder Finley. I have been assured that my concerns will be presented to Elder Finley and that I will be contacted. My effort here has been to be fair to both HCH and to Elder Finley.

I posted it because it was news. I agree that the NAD action gives vaulable publicity to F7.