That's half right, but it is more closely associated with something else in Jewish tradition. 1/2 point. It has a more specific of a memorial meaning. Also, need the specific meaning-scripture does indicate it, though you need to see it in context. I think it's mentioned three times in scripture, but only once is it specified. 1/2 point.
Jesus was, indeed, anointed King of Israel, King of the Jews, He just wasn't anointed by the people OF Israel, but by their God and Creator. THAT's the real anointing! David's anointing wasn't seen by, or recognized by Israel when he was anointed, but he was king just as sure as anything, because it was God that sent Nathaniel to anoint him. David WAS king, but he was a humble man and chose not to take his kingdom by force from Saul, who was also the Lord's anointed-that was for God to do, not himself, or the people. So God anointed Jesus His Son to be King of Kings and Lord of Lords-that the people reject has nothing to do with the fact-that He hasn't taken yet His earthly kingdom doen't matter a hill of proverbial beans-He IS King and Lord.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/04/01/discrimination-against-atheists-is-now-officially-illegal-in-madison-wisconsin/ Anyone hear about this? I was not aware that atheists were being discriminated against. Weird. Now that it has hit in one place, it will soon be all over, with atheists giving teary-eyed speeches of how the evil Christians have discrimintated against them. Soon, Christian bakeries will be sued for not making 'Atheist Pride" cakes, and churches will be sued for not hiring atheists Sunday School teachers. Atheists Pride parades will shortly be the new norm. Seriously, has ANYONE heard of Atheists as being discriminated against in ANY way? In fact, really they are the new majority, the ones with power, the evolutionary scientists and teachers and college professors. How exactly have they been discriminated against?
Guess its my turn. Hmmm.... I am going to ask two questions. One, because its a Bible-based trivia question, though the answer is not IN the Bible, so it doesn't really count, and the other is in the Bible, so it does. 1 (answer in the Bible): What is an 'Ebenezer'? 2 (not in the Bible): When John the Baptist came a-baptizin', many of Israel came to him to be baptized. If baptism is a 'Christian' ordinance, and this was before the church had begun, why is it that that no one seemed confused by the 'new thing' and came to be baptized? Even the Pharisees and Saducees who came only questioned John's authority and identity, but not what he was doing. Why?
I keep trying to edit the above, but it won't let me, so I will add it here. I wanted to first say that I'm not trying to set some kind of doctrine with that, just some speculation. Also, that an event like the entire ring of fire going off, which is a possibility as they are connected, hence the name, is that, as most know, when a big natural even like a large earthquake or a volcanic eruption occurs, it will often trigger a response somewhere else on the earth. So something like the offered senario could conceivably set off an earthquake the like of which has never been seen before, maybe even one like the earthquake the Bible describes as occuring in Israel during the tribulation. So, just a little speculation which even has some scientific backing to it. But speculation only, nonetheless. because its fun to speculate, as long as we don't get too dogmatic about it.
Actually, an event akin to the entire 'ring of fire' erupting would have that sort of effect too, I suspect. It would also cause the earth to lose a lot of its light, and could explain the burning mountain falling into the sea, AND the black sun and blood moon. Interestingly, when its considered where the ring of fire is, around the Pacific ocean area, while it would effect the entire world, the effects on the middle east would be less than say, on America. Since we know that during the tribulation, the armies of the Middle East and apparently Russia will make a massive attack on Israel and Jerusalem, it would help them a lot to do so if America was unable to assist Israel-and with us dealing with the effects of an event like that, it would put us and many others who might help Israel effectively out of the running.
Let me assure you, as a moderator AND one who holds a different belief on a couple issues from pretty much everyone here, though nothing fundamental, disagreement is allowed, so long as it is done with a kind spirit. Of course, we're all human here, and as such, are liable to get pricked by things that might set one off, but as long as we try to do any contentions in a godly, kind manner, we can still get along. But be aware, most are not Calvinist/Reformed here, so expect disagreement.
We also need to remember that giving 'sacrificially' means not expecting anything back, and I think that's one of the fallacies of much preaching on the subject: we are often told that as we give, we can expect God to give back. Scripture even tells us that. However, sacrificial giving, by its very meaning, is promised nothing back, and should expect nothing back-it is a sacrifice. A sacrifice is given completely and totally, and we aren't to expect anything back. When the widow woman gave of her food to Elijah, she was promised to be taken care of, and she received that which was promised to her. But the wodow who gave her mite, we see nothing of anything being given, nor of it mentioned, though she gave all she could-she expected nothing in return. THAT was sacrificial giving. Granted, in a more general sense, God promises to provide our daily bread, but thats a general promise to those who are His, and has nothing to do with sacrificial giving. Much like making ourselves a living sacrifice-we give ourselves completely to God expecting nothing in return, because we already owe Him all. If He gives back, that's great, a blessing! but we do it as a sacrifice.
Actually, doctors have repaired a severed spinal cord, using stem cell therapy. Not fetal stem cell, but stem cells taken from the patient. A lot has been done, but because it's part of alternative therapy, its poo-poo'd and ignored by medical science as a whole. They won't recognize it until the have killed enough babies and used their cells.
I just set it on the first Sunday after Pesach-it won't always match the perfect amount of days, I realize, but since we want to celebrate it on the first day, because it was on the first day that He was resurrected, and it was the first day, and after Passover, that works for us. getting all three in line, Sunday, after Passover, three days and nights, is very difficult. Though really, isn't EVERY Sunday, or first day, ultimately recognition of His resurrection? That's why the church meets on Sundays.
MAybe the point of the rods was so Laban might have some fear of Jacob, thinking he had done it? Or it might have been a case of how Abraham tried to help God produce Isaac, a little bit of him trying to help God produce the cattle, according to some myths he had picked up somewhere? We need to remember that these people really knew very little about God, didn't have a Bible to work off of, and lived among a lot of strange traditions and myths, and had to pick some up.
You all DO know that when the Bible speaks of the disciples being 'In one accord", that it was not, in fact, implying they were all crammed into the same little Honda vehicle? This is another common error in the changing usage of a word, meaning something different today than it meant 400 years ago. Man, imagine my embarassment when someone cleared THAT up for me!
Actually, I have used toe idea of the car to make the pount of what being in one accord means: if they were all piled into Peter's Honda, and started off driving, they would all be heading the same direction, all moving toward the same place-that's kind of like what being in one accord means-all of one mind, one set of goals, and heading the same direction.