In your daily work life, do you ever deal with people who are unreasonable, who don’t think logically, who never try to understand the context of a given situation, and who cannot seem to draw accurate conclusions from the facts?

A good deal of our workplace stress, anxiety, and frustration is due to unreasonable managers, employees, customers, suppliers, and others with whom we interact. “I want what I want, when I want it, how I want it, for the price I want it.” I sometimes wonder what type of culture we have become.

I think the apostle Paul was exasperated by unreasonable people, too. I think it upset his soul, and weighed heavy on his mind.

The question for today is: “are you a reasonable person or do others see you as ‘wicked and evil’?”

If you are a Christian, the Holy Spirit lives within you. He is a spirit of power, love, and sound mind. The more the Holy Spirit lives in you, the more reasonable and loving you become.

If the Holy Spirit is telling you that you’re an unreasonable person, consider how this affects your workplace ministry. Being a reasonable person will build your credibility, strengthen your relationships, and ultimately bear a lot more Godly fruit!

Listen to the Holy Spirit this Wednesday. Examine yourself. “Pray, too, that you will not become an unreasonable, wicked, or evil person.”

Enjoy your day, “Working for Christ”!

Related Articles:

• WOTD: Evidence Of The Holy Spirit- Joyce Meyer (litroads.wordpress.com)
• Free (achristianmeditation.wordpress.com)
• Ask for the Holy Spirit…Are we serious? (dailythoughts4us.blogspot.com)
• Holy Spirit = your “Higher Consciousness” (davidwinter.wordpress.com)
• Filled With The Spirit (devog.wordpress.com)
• WOTD: Receiving The Holy Spirit-Joyce Meyer (litroads.wordpress.com)
• Day 427 – He knows your heart (mysketchbookjournal.wordpress.com)
• Receiving the Holy Spirit (savedbygraceblogdotcom.wordpress.com)

THE FOLLOWING IS FROM A DEVOUT EVOLUTIONIST AND A HATER OF GOD AND THE BIBLE:

“But I am also a deeply rational person. And so as I began to read studies…volumes and volumes of studies…I realized that the scientists who published these findings were not on an anti-God rampage, they were simply publishing their observations. I then realized it would be irrational to reject their findings. Why? Because if they were, indeed, falsified…an anti-God conspiracy of unheard of, global, proportions would be going on. I don’t consider it rational to hold such an opinion.

And there is no dogma in science. The best thing for a scientist to hear is that they’re wrong. Why? It means new curiosity, new answers, new searching. Just look at last summer. Scientists had predicted, for decades, the existence of the Higgs Boson particle…the field that gives the universe mass. Scientists were almost disappointed that their prediction was right! It would have been much more exciting to have to go back to the physics drawing board. Instead, the Standard Model was confirmed. Again.

So I was convinced by testable data. Not dogma. Again, that is falsifiable evidence.

So, no, I am not going to spend an hour listening to a nutjob like Hovind. I spend the first 20 years of my life “studying” that kind of drivel. I’ve got better, more exciting, and real things to learn now.”
“To be honest, I don’t have an hour to spend watching psuedoscience.” -Andrew Marburger [a deluded frequent commenter]

• When and Where

We are into the home stretch of our journey, with what should be a comparatively light week of reading (and a great opportunity for folks to catch up).  We began 5 weeks ago with 1 Thessalonians, almost certainly the earliest NT document, but this 2^nd letter is almost as certainly the work of an author writing in Paul’s name some 3 to 4 decades after Paul’s death.

A primary reason scholars think this is because of what is at stake in the letter – concerns over a delay in the 2^nd coming of Jesus and the issue of “freeloaders” – people who became part of the Christ community not because they were passionate about Jesus, but in order to receive free food – a problem that arises in any established “share community” model.

• Key Insights

It is not clear to us what the author means by “rebellion,”  and  “lawless one” but the original audience likely had very specific situations in mind. The letter is “slight” but does give us another window into the Pauline communities as they continued to grow decades after their founding.

• Big Picture

One of the things this letter causes me to reflect on his how I experience and share grace. How easy it is to consider what I’m getting as deserved and others as undeserved. That said, there are also real problems when not everyone pulls their own weight. How do we resolve these tensions? – a problem in the 1^st and 2^nd centuries and a problem today. Might we focus on Christ’s presence as a key? 

Blessings on your reading!

For the lady that claims the office of “Prophet” and “Elder”, which, biblically, she should not hold.

Titus 1:6 If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.

1 Timothy 2:11-14 “Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.”

In this section, Peter discusses the relationship of believers to God and to the world. A theme found in this passage is that trust in the Lord “will never be put to shame” (1 Peter 2:6). The same theme appears arises later in the discussion of the exemplary life of Christ – particularly the manner in which he responded to suffering (those who attempted to put him to shame). Christ refused to defend himself at that time, because “he continued entrusting himself to him who judges justly” (1 Peter 2:23).

This theme can be found in 2 Thessalonians 1 (another letter connected with Silvanus), where Paul encourages the suffering church to remain faithful knowing that God will bring judgment against those who are afflicting the believers, “since indeed God considers it just to repay with affliction those who afflict you, 2 Thessalonians 1:6 (ESV).

Ramsay argues as follows:

λαὸς εἰς περιποίησιν, “a people destined for vindication.” This phrase, together with the whole clause that follows, recalls Isa 43:21 LXX (not, as in Titus 2:14, the λαὸς περιούσιος of Exod 19:5). Peter has changed Isaiah’s λαόν μου ὃν περιεποιησάμην to the more future-oriented λαὸς εἰς περιποίησιν. In view of Peter’s characteristic use of εἰς in various eschatological expressions in 1:3–5, and especially the εἰς σωτηρίαν of 1:5 and 2:2, περιποίησις could be plausibly understood as a synonym for σωτηρία (cf. BGD, 650.1) in the sense of future or final salvation (cf. S. Halas, Bib 65.2 [1984] 254–58, who translates accordingly, “peuple destiné au salut” [258]).

This interpretation is supported by the fact that three of the other four NT occurrences of περιποίησις use the word similarly as the object of εἰς and with a future reference (cf. 1 Thess 5:9; 2 Thess 2:14; Heb 10:39; Eph 1:14 is slightly different). In each instance περιποίησις in itself means simply “attainment” or “acquisition”: to complete the thought of “salvation” an additional noun in the genitive is needed (i.e., σωτηρίας in 1 Thess 5:9; δόξης in 2 Thess 2:14; ψυχῆς in Heb 10:39). In the present passage, the absence of such a qualifying noun, as well as the choice of περιποίησιν in place of σωτηρίαν, was probably dictated by Peter’s desire to echo as much as possible the language of Isa 43:21 even while making his own independent statement (cf. the use of εἰς περιποίησιν by itself in Hag 2:9b and Mal 3:17 LXX). If not the precise equivalent of σωτηρία, περιποίησις is at least a closely parallel term for future divine vindication (like the τιμή of v 7).

Of the four titles comprising v 9a, λαὸς εἰς περιποίησιν is the only one pointed distinctly toward the future. Once this is recognized, such traditional renderings as “God’s own people” (RSV) or “a people belonging to God” (NIV) are shown to be inadequate. To Peter, it is already the case that the Christian community belongs to God as a unique possession (cf. νῦν δὲ λαὸς θεοῦ, v 10); what still awaits is its final vindication against the unbelieving and disobedient.

J. Ramsey Michaels, vol. 49, 1 Peter, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1998), 109-10.

            Ramsay’s argument thus entails two elements: (1) the conjunction of the preposition eis + the noun in the accusative has a future reference; and (2) Peter has made use of an ellipsis, a deliberate omission of a word which must be supplied by the reader.

            Taking the second element first, let us consider whether the structure of the sentence indicates an ellipsis:

9 ὑμεῖς δὲ γένος ἐκλεκτόν,

βασίλειον ἱεράτευμα,

ἔθνος ἅγιον,

λαὸς εἰς περιποίησιν,

 ὅπως τὰς ἀρετὰς ἐξαγγείλητε τοῦ ἐκ σκότους ὑμᾶς καλέσαντος εἰς τὸ θαυμαστὸν αὐτοῦ φῶς·1 Peter 2:9 (NA27)

The relevant phrase reads (literally) a people for [eis] possession. The phrase does stand out from the preceding three phrases:  Each of the preceding phrases make sense as a stand-alone noun phrase (each is in the accusative): an elect generation/people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation.  Yet our phrase leaves something missing: a people for possession.  The phrase is ambiguous.

The preposition eis + the accusative can refer to movement, time, purpose, result, reference/respect or advantage (Wallace, 741).  Thus, the usage is unclear.

Moreover, the phrase is incomplete:  each of the translations treat it as an ellipsis by supplying the possessor: God or He (God’s or His).

Ramsay gives three examples where the construction eis  + possession is connected to a genitive object possessed (two of the three being found in Thessalonians – epistles both connected with Silvanus).

9 ὅτι οὐκ ἔθετο ἡμᾶς ὁ θεὸς εἰς ὀργὴν

ἀλλὰ εἰς περιποίησιν σωτηρίας

διὰ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ1 Thessalonians 5:9 (NA27)

9 For God has not destined us for wrath,

but to obtain salvation

through our Lord Jesus Christ, 1 Thessalonians 5:9 (ESV)

The parallels are interesting. First, the sentences are structurally similar in that each is a dependence clause to describe the people of God. Second, the dependent clause contains the same structure eis + possession.  Without the genitive following possession, the phrase would be ambiguous and one would have to make an addition to resolve the trouble. For example, if the sentence had lacked the genitive “salvation” after possession [as it does in 1 Peter 2:9], the sentence would have read, 9 For God has not destined us for wrath,  rather we are His possession  through our Lord Jesus Christ,….

14 εἰς ὃ [καὶ] ἐκάλεσεν ὑμᾶς διὰ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου ἡμῶν

εἰς περιποίησιν δόξης

τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. 2 Thessalonians 2:14 (NA27)

14 To this he called you through our gospel,

so that you may obtain the glory

of our Lord Jesus Christ. 2 Thessalonians 2:14 (ESV)

Again, the parallels obtain. The potential ambiguity of eis + possession is resolved by the addition of a genitive following the noun “possession”.

Finally, there is the example of Hebrews 10:39:

39 ἡμεῖς δὲ οὐκ ἐσμὲν ὑποστολῆς εἰς ἀπώλειαν

ἀλλὰ πίστεως

 εἰς περιποίησιν ψυχῆς. Hebrews 10:39 (NA27)

39 But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed,

 but of those who have faith

and preserve their souls. Hebrews 10:39 (ESV)

Thus, on its face, Ramsay’s argument has plausibility: 1) An ellipsis does exist. 2) The parallel structures do exist. In addition, in two of the three parallel passages, Silvanus was  listed as an author – and he is tied to 1 Peter (1 Peter 5:12. See Jobes, 335).  In addition, the remedy of Ramsay matches well with the overall structure of the letter.

However, this leaves some additional questions: (1) Do we find any parallel constructions in the LXX (or perhaps in contemporary writing)? (2) Does any other commentator come to a similar conclusion? (3) If an ellipsis exists and it is to be remedied by a genitive object of possession, has Ramsay correctly identified that object?  At this stage, all I can say is that Ramsay’s construction is possible – but not certain. 

TOM HORNS RESPONSE TO THE NEW POPE–HE FULFILLS THE PROPHECY

Was the prophecy of the old Catholic correct? Maybe. 1 in 1,000. Was he of God? NO. Can familiar spirits foretell the future? If they’re 4D and can percieve time (the fourth dimention) like we (3D) can percieve depth. I would always allow for caution.

See Ezekiel 22:30 and II Thess. 2:8.

Am now viewing; let me know what you think!

Used to use the KJV; never believed it was inerrant after education. Now uses the New King Jimmy Version. See PMO 3/12/13. He don’t gotta be a mason, though. When you forsake the true Bible things start going on. (See “The Babel Conspiricy” by Mike Hoggerd.)

Also see: http://anothervoicerev184.blogspot.com/2009/11/david-jeremiah-and-his-all-seeing-eye.html

Basic Outline of 1 Thessalonians:

Ch. 1-3 – Introduction and personal commendations

Ch. 4-5 – Practical Instructions in Light of the Day of The Lord

Chapter-by-Chapter Outline of 1 Thessalonians:

Ch. 1 – The Faith & Example of the Thessalonians

Ch. 2 – Paul’s Ministry & Longing to See Them

Ch. 3 – Timothy’s Encouraging Report Of Their Faith During Suffering

Ch. 4 – Your Walk Should Be Pleasing to God In View of Christ’s Return

Ch. 5 – Living As Children of the Light In View of Christ’s Return, Benediction

Basic Outline of 2 Thessalonians:

Ch. 1 – Greeting and Commendation

Ch. 2 – More teaching on the Day of The Lord

Ch. 3 – Exhortations for Specific Problems in the Church

We know the following things about how Paul planted a church in Thessalonica by looking at Acts 17:

1. Paul first preached in Thessalonica during his 2nd missionary journey according to Acts 17:1-9.

2. Paul stayed in Thessalonica for at least 3 weeks (Acts 17:2) but probably he stayed there longer (maybe around 6 months?).

3. After Paul left Thessalonica he went to Berea. The Thessalonian Jews tracked him down and incited the Bereans to expel him from the city (Acts 17:10-15).

4. Paul continued his travels and was apparently reached with news of the Thessalonians by Timothy while he was in Corinth.

5. Paul writes 1 Thessalonians to answer questions and accusations brought by Timothy.

- The missionaries were preaching to fatten their wallets.
- Inclination to moral laxity and laziness (in light of the Eschaton).
- They had no respect for church elders.
- While answering these questions Paul defends his apostleship encourages faithfulness and holiness (in the face of persecution) and comforts with and teaches the church about the Lord’s return.

We know the following things about Paul’s church planting in Corinth:

1. Paul visits Corinth on the 2nd missionary journey and is there for more than one year (Acts 18:11).

2. Paul moves on to Ephesus and beyond. he hears of troubles in the church and writes them a letter (“the previous letter” 1 Cor. 5:9) which they misunderstood (1 Cor. 5:10-11).

3. Paul also receives questions / problems from Corinth. He writes 1 Corinthians to answer those concerns around AD 55.

4. Paul learns that 1 Corinthians didn’t do its job. He pays the Corinthians a visit (“the painful visit”). He doesn’t stay long.

5. After leaving Paul writes a letter “out of great distress and anguish of heart” (the sorrowful letter). Probably carried to them by Titus.

6. Paul leaves Ephesus and moves on to Troas. He is waiting for Titus to get news of how helpful the painful visit and the sorrowful letter had been.

7. Paul writes 2 Corinthians because some problems remain but generally he is relieved to hear that things have improved.

8. Some time later Paul visits Corinth for a 3rd time (Acts. 20:2).

Gab and grab “faith-speekers” are wrong according to the Bible.

See also:

2 Timothy 3:5-7

King James Version (KJV)
5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,
7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

Great and short. Andrew, no excuses about knowing all arguments for creation and against evolution, please.
Statements must be answered if there is no faith in a final authority, facts can only be answered have facts added to the disgussion. Right? Preponderence of evidence alone justifies the debator.

From Dr. Hovind’s CSE 101-3. Also see the flat discrimination against any scientist that believes or is converted to, not Bible Believing Bapitst, but simply creationist in “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed!” in The ARMORY on the “Evolutionism” page near the bottom.

Part 4 of a growing and exaustive study of the King James Code. Absolutely fantastic!
I’ll be making more posts this week, if the Lord will, but if you just watch this seriese, you will do very well!

Methodist “pastors” are starting to get a reputation in my mind from my and Kent Hovind’s experiences. If you know different, please indicate it in the comment section. (see a ton of such Boards at RYFTKOHIAH’s Pictures)

Starting at 1:00 pm CST watch PMO for next 2 hrs. (at most)! Limited time only .