| Americans Take to the Streets in " Women Betrayed! " Rallies Against Planned Parenthood July 29, 2015 Sen. rand Paul speaks at " Women Betrayed " rally in Washington, D.C. The movement against Planned Parenthood has gained considerable momentum in the wake of three videos released by the Center for Medical Progress showing Planned Parenthood officials discussing their profiteering on the illegal sale of the dismembered body parts of babies killed by abortion. A rally at the U.S. Capitol featured several prominent speakers, including GOP presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson, Sens. Rand Paul, Tom Cruz and James Lankford, Reps. Marsha Blackburn, Andy Harris, Tim Huelskamp and Chris Smith, as well as representatives of the Susan B. Anthony List, Concerned Women for America, Americans United for Life, and the Family Research Council. Referring to the videos he deemed “nothing short of horrifying,” Sen. Cruz called upon the Dept. of Justice, state and local law enforcement, and the U.S. Congress to investigate the legality of Planned Parenthood’s recently-exposed practices. He encouraged every American to watch the videos, saying “Even if you are a supporter of abortion, I would encourage you to watch these videos and just ask a simple question: Are these my values?” “When we see the truth, after a time for truth comes a time for action. Today is a time for action,” Cruz said. GOP presidential candidate Ben Carson speaks at Women Betrayed rally on July 28, 2015 Retired neurosurgeon Dr. Ben Carson also addressed the crowd, recalling his many long nights in the operating room saving the lives of countless children who could later go on to have their own children. He pointed to the contradiction between deeming children in the womb as a mere clump of cells and the harvesting of their organs, asking, “How could you have such organs from a meaningless clump of cells?” While the situation sometimes seems bleak, Carson offered a positive note: “I think that we have just gradually slid in terms of our morals to a point where we don " t really care about the killing of human beings. That is the bad news. The good news is, I think we are changing. And I think things like this are starting to change us a lot. There are actually more people in America now who identify themselves as pro-life than there are who are pro-death. You know, we are capable of changing.” |
| D. A. Carson, Douglas J. Moo, Leon Morris An Introduction to the New Testament focuses on " special introduction» that is historical questions dealing with authorship, date, sources, purpose, destination, and so forth. This approach stands in contrast to recent texts that concentrate more on literary form, rhetorical criticism, and historical parallels—topics the authors don’t minimize, but instead think are better given extended treatment in exegesis courses. By refocusing on the essentials, An Introduction to the New Testament ensures that the New Testament books will be accurately understood within historical settings. For each New Testament document, the authors also provide a substantial summary of that book’s content, discuss the book’s theological contribution to the overall canon, and give an account of current studies on that book, including recent literary and social-science approaches to interpretation. This second edition reflects significant revision and expansion from the original, making this highly acclaimed text even more valuable. • A new chapter provides a historical survey examining Bible study method through the ages. • The chapter on Paul has been expanded to include an analysis of debates on the “new perspective.” • The discussion of New Testament epistles has been expanded to form a new chapter. This new edition will help a new generation of students better grasp the message of the New Testament. Данный труд пока не переведён в текстовый формат. В виде сканированного документа вы можете ознакомиться с ним по ссылке ниже. Читать в формате pdf Предлагаем помочь распознать текст этой книги и открыть его для тысяч читателей. Это можно сделать самостоятельно или привлечь профессионала. Предварительно просим уточнять, не взята ли эта книга на распознавание, написав по адресу otechnik@azbyka.ru Читать далее Источник: D. A. Carson, Douglas J. Moo, Leon Morris, An Introduction to the New Testament, 1992 Поделиться ссылкой на выделенное |
| About Pages Проекты «Правмира» Raising Orthodox Children to Orthodox Adulthood The Daily Website on How to be an Orthodox Christian Today Twitter Telegram Parler RSS Donate Navigation Gratitude is More Than Attitude Source: Ramblings of a Redneck Priest Archpriest John Moses (+2019) 29 November 2016 Carson Ellis I had a chance to hear Fr. Valery Lukianov speaking to his family and friends about the Thanksgiving season. Fr. Valery has always been a very engaging speaker and this was another example. Among other things, he spoke of how we should be glad that the entire nation, Christian or not, took a moment to be thankful, to say thanks to God or to a friend or family member. This caused me to reflect that Thanksgiving is a moment, for those of us who are Orthodox, to understand what it must have been like to live in an Orthodox country where feast days and traditions were largely shared by the entire culture. I do hope that you had a wonderful Thanksgiving season with those that you love. It would be a sad life to live it without gratitude and thankfulness. Yet, it is interesting that while we often feel gratitude for those who love and serve us, we are slow to thank them. Though they may be grateful, I have known men who rarely thank their wives, and I have known wives who rarely thank their husbands. I know of children who rarely thanked their parents, and parents who rarely thanked their children. The list could go on and on. Family and friends serve us because they love us, and they don’t do it to be thanked. Yet, if gratitude is rarely shown, that service becomes ever more difficult to give. So, please: thank your priest, thank your parishioners, thank your parents, thank your children, thank your wife, thank your husband, thank the police, thank the military, and so on. Above all, thank God from whom all blessings flow. We need to go a little deeper. For those who follow Christ, gratitude is more than an attitude. As important as it is to express our thanks to those who have served us, giving thanks is more than words, more than an internal attitude. Allow me a personal memory. My brother and sisters and I thought to make Mother’s Day a bit more special than usual. So we planned breakfast in bed for mom and made some things to show how we were thankful for all that she did. Mom was happy and thanked us for the effort. Later, as we were talking, she reminded us that while she appreciated the effort, the best way to show our gratitude was to clean our rooms, pick up our socks, bring our dishes to the sink, etc., and on a daily basis. That lesson stuck with me, but I can’t say that I always followed it. |
| It is likely that both uses of the verb πιστεω in 14should be taken in the same mood; probably either both are indicative or both are imperative; in either case, taking both the same way links Jesus with the Father as the supreme object of faith. In the context of their anxiety, the imperative is more likely: «Believe in God; believe also in me.» 8360 («Believe in» could be idiomatic for «Trust,» e.g., Gen 15MT.) Such words of encouragement were common to those in distress, 8361 such as the «Have courage» of 16:33; 8362 Scripture was also replete with «Do not fear» oracles. 8363 Glasson claims that this was a recurrent theme of Deuteronomy, and may be right that the fuller «Do not be troubled or afraid» of 14reflects the double exhortation of Deut 31 (cf. Deut 1:21, 29; 7:18 ; Josh 1:9). 8364 These words do not allude to Jesus» deity per se, though in the light of the whole context of John " s Christology these associations are certainly present as wel1. (Carson is right that first-century Jews did not exhort others to believe in them as they believed in God.) 8365 The words themselves allude to the role of Moses, an object of faith (as God " s agent) alongside God: when Israel «saw» how God destroyed the Egyptians, they feared the Lord and believed in both the Lord and his servant Moses (Exod 14MT). 8366 (The language, by extension, then applied to the prophets in genera1.) 8367 As Israel at least temporarily believed Moses» sign (Exod 14:8), Jesus would invite trust on the basis of his works if necessary ( John 14:11 ). 8368 In context they do not constitute so much a summons to proceed beyond signs-faith to enduring faith (as in 20:31) 8369 as an encouragement to continue persevering in the face of opposition. The difference between these alternatives is less one of substance than one of delivery style: both are deliberative, but the exhortation to deeper faith may constitute firmer rhetoric potentially evoking the epideictic rhetoric of blame, whereas this passage is closer to pure encouragement or consolation. 8370 2. Dwelling in the Father " s House (14:2–3) |
| Personal story The Very Rev. Moses Berry, pastor of Theotokos “Unexpected Joy” Orthodox Church in Ash Grove, Ark. and the founder and president of the Brotherhood of St. Moses the Black, will explain how the ancient faith can free individuals from modern spiritual and mental prisons. He " ll also offer a session on the African roots of Orthodoxy and the African-American experience. “What Father Moses did that was pivotal for me was bringing in family artifacts,” said Gomulka, who is familiar with his presentations. “He is the gate keeper of his great-great grandfathers " slave shackles. He has his great-grandmother " s auction tag. He brings in quilts and talks about the oldest Negro cemetery in the Ozarks. It became this glue that I could attach myself to ... and understand that this is my story, too.” Gomulka said organizers hope to reach three distinct audiences with the conference — the Orthodox faithful, those who don " t know the Gospel message, and African-American Christians. “Many of us start our spiritual journey from the plantation ... tracing back to the point we got off the boat or just before we got on.” But African-Americans can find their Christian roots in the early church, with the desert fathers. “It started much earlier.” “We invite clergy to come and grow with us on this spiritual journey of understanding African spirituality and roots.” The invitation is designed to strengthen relationships and not to proselytize. The Brotherhood of St. Moses the Black " s mission doesn " t include evangelizing. It aims to create awareness of the Christian Church " s African roots and heritage. “That " s another thing I like about the Orthodox Church. It doesn " t proselytize. It " s not out to get you to leave your church. Christians are Christians. We don " t need to shuffle them around.” Observer & Eccentric 23 августа 2011 г. ... Комментарии carson lauffer 24 августа 2011, 15:00 The article is certainly glorious. I agree with all that is written except the last assertion. All living breathing Christians seek to bring others to Christ. It is a glorious thing. Why deny it? |
| Morgan: But do you preach tolerance? Driscoll: I’ve preached that we should love our neighbor, that we should accept— Morgan: But tolerance. Tolerance in particular. Driscoll: You keep hammering it. What do you mean by tolerance? Morgan: Tolerating people who may have a lifestyle or a belief that you don’t agree with. Driscoll: Yes, we have to. When Jesus says, “Love your neighbor,” He knows you’re not going to agree with all your neighbors, but He wants you to love them, to seek good for them, to care for them. Our conflict was around the old definition of tolerance (which I hold) and the new definition of tolerance (which he holds). Theologian D.A. Carson explains how the definition of tolerance has changed from accepting that lots of people have different views, some of which are wrong, to agreeing that all views are equally true. The Old Tolerance vs. the New Tolerance The old view of tolerance assumed that (1) there is objective truth that can be known; (2) various people, groups and perspectives each think they know what that objective truth is and (3) as people/groups disagree, dialogue and debate their conflicting views of the truth, everyone involved will have an opportunity to learn, grow, change and possibly arrive together at the truth. The new tolerance is different from the old tolerance. The new view of tolerance assumes that (1) there is no objective truth that can be known; (2) various people, groups and perspectives do not have the truth but only what they believe to be the truth and (3) various people, groups and perspectives should not argue and debate their disagreements because there is no truth to be discovered, and to assume otherwise only leads to needless conflicts and prejudices. Absolutely No Absolutes A few things are perhaps most curious about the new tolerance. One, it denies moral absolutes while holding to the moral absolute that there is no moral absolute. I know that’s confusing. It’s like saying, “There is no such thing as absolute truth”—to which the question should be asked, “So does that mean you’re lying when you want us to believe your absolute statement that truth does not exist?” You cannot say absolutely that there are no absolutes. I hope you see that the statement itself saws off the very limb it’s sitting on. |
| It was still imitated in the early Christian period, 9240 probably including the most explicit examples we have of the Johannine community " s prophetism, the letters of Rev 2–3, 9241 in which the term λγχω appears in Rev 3:19; the term also describes other early Christian prophecies ( 1Cor 14:24 ; cf. Luke 3:19). 3. The Charges If λγχω means here «to prosecute,» then the three parallel περ clauses represent the charges leveled against the opponents of the community. As Holwerda notes, «In a judicial process it would seem proper that when conviction occurs the grounds for conviction would also be presented.» 9242 The cm clauses probably explain the shorter, single-word charges; Carson " s objection to the on explicative is predicated on his improbable view that v. 10 refers to the world " s (pseudo-)righteousness. 9243 The conclusion of my exegetical analysis is virtually the same as that of W.H.P. Hatch: First, that it has sinned because it has not believed in Christ; second, that believers are justified or acquitted because Christ has gone to the Father to act as their advocate (παρκλητος); and third, that evil has been condemned because the ruler of this world (the devil) has been condemned. The whole context is forensic. 9244 The Paraclete would convict the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment: 9245 the sin is 9246 the world " s unbelief in the Son, the one provision for salvation (v. 8; cf. 1:29, 8:24); 9247 the righteousness is that of God and his people, established by the vindicated, exalted Jesus as heavenly advocate against all the accusations of the world (v. 9; cf. 8:46); 9248 the judgment (condemnation) is that the ruler of the world, the accuser of God " s true people, has been judged in Jesus» glorification and shown to be wrong (v. 11; cf. comment on 12:31–32,14:30–31). The Paraclete continues Jesus» ministry of exposing the world " s sin (3:20; 7:7; 15:22). Christ " s own δικαιοσνη–justification, or vindication–is established by the Father " s witness in enthroning him; 9249 the disciples» δικαιοσνη is established because they are bound together with him in the Spirit and his exaltation is their vindication as well (cf. 1 John 2:1 ). 9250 But just as the believers are justified with Christ, so also is the world condemned 9251 in its ruler (16:11). 9252 |
| John is not alone in drawing a contrast between servants and friends of God–Philo does the same: indeed, it is folly to imagine that the servants [τος δολους] of God take precedence of His friends [τν φλων το θεο] in receiving their portion in the land of virtue. 9092 Abraham, like Wisdom, is God " s friend and not his servant, and those who are his friends are also his only son (μνος υις). 9093 By saying that he no longer calls his disciples slaves, Jesus could be alluding back to 13and suggesting that they need no longer assume the role of subordinates but rather of equals. Against this proposal is the fact that Jesus cites the same saying in 15:20, after he has promised to call them servants no longer, 9094 and the fact that their friendship is predicated on obedience to Jesus» command to love (15:14). As Carson has pointed out, The distinction Jesus draws between a servant and a friend is not the distinction between obeying and not obeying, but the distinction between not understanding and understanding. 9095 When Jesus declares that he «no longer» (οκτι) calls them slaves (15:15), he signals a new era in salvation history, 9096 the transition point being Jesus» departure to, and return from, the Father in chs. 18–20 (16:16; cf. 14:19, 30; 16:10,16,21,25; 17:11). In communicating to them what he has heard from the Father (15:15), Jesus acts the role of a faithful disciple who passes on the teachings of the Father, 9097 thus providing a model for the Spirit and the disciples (15:26–27). Even more to the point, just as Wisdom possesses all the special, secret knowledge of God (Wis 8:4) 9098 and is thus the truest source of insight about God, Jesus is the truest revealer of the Father. The eschatological king would be «taught by God» (διδακτς υπ θεο, Pss. So1. 17:32; cf. John 6:45 ). 2F. Concluding Observations on Friendship Although an allusion to patronal friendship is possible in this passage, the Greco-Roman ideals of loyalty, intimacy, and sharing are more likely in view. The subordination of the disciples in obedience is probably more an expression of covenant loyalty, qualified by their continuing role as servant-disciples, than the subordination of a client to a patron. The disciples are clearly dependent on Jesus in 15:1–7, and that dependence might have been read by clients patronally; but it need not have been so understood (cf., e.g., Hos 14 :8d). |
|
|
