Everlasting Arms (Modified Talk)

[This was given some time ago-EF]

There is no time better than the present to seek Jehovah’s everlasting arms: we remain in a pandemic, we’re living in critical times, and Satan keeps challenging our faith. There is no better place than the loving arms of our heavenly Father. Please notice what Moses recorded in Deuteronomy 33:26 (Read).

Did you notice what Jehovah wants to do for his people? He wants to help us. Jehovah wills for us to be morally upright and he willingly imparts the strength that helps us to endure.

The Bible emphasizes this point in the next verse, Deuteronomy 33:27 (Read):

What a comforting thought to consider Jehovah as our refuge; he is like a place where we can hide when trouble arises. He is our strong tower. We also have Jehovah’s everlasting arms beneath us in order to support us and make sure that we never fall or totter. He sustains and empowers us to do his will: God lovingly uses his power in our behalf.

But what if we experience a spiritual slip? Maybe it’s temporary and requires discipline from Jehovah. Nevertheless, we can be confident that if we rely on God in times of distress or when we err, Jehovah will put his caring and everlasting arms beneath us. He will gently raise us up until we regain our spiritual balance and once again, stand firm.

In view of the spiritual resources that Jehovah has provided, we have reason to affirm the words of Deuteronomy 33:29 (read)

Who is there like Jehovah’s people today? We are spiritually fed, we enjoy God’s support and his salvation. Yes, we have good reason to trust in divine salvation just as Moses did.

[Picture and concluding words]

In the picture, the brother has likely lost his wife and he’s gotten older in Jehovah’s service, but he continues to study the Bible and meditate on it. The result is that our brother feels empowered to attend meetings and to give Jehovah his best, even during hard times. The picture also may depict the flood of Noah’s day.

Ezekiel 43:2-"I saw the glory of the God of Israel"

HCSB: "and I saw the glory of the God of Israel coming from the east. His voice sounded like the roar of mighty waters, and the earth shone with His glory."

Lisa Ward ("A Pentecostal Hearing of Ezekiel: Ezekiel’s Visions by the hwhy-dy and the xwr." Ph.D. Diss. Page 194):

"Ezekiel describes how YHWH’s glory caused the land to shine with radiance (43.2). The overpowering nature of the vision of YHWH’s glory affected Ezekiel’s physical and emotional
senses. Ezekiel’s eyes saw in color, his ears heard majestic sounds, and his emotions were
overwhelmed to the point of falling prostrate before the glory in worship. There is a sense that
YHWH’s previous commands to Ezekiel to see and hear prepared him to know and understand
the awesomeness of what he was now shown. The use of anthropomorphic and anthropopathic
terms with the language of analogy assisted and invited the hearers to participate through their
imaginations. Ezekiel repeatedly described the glory of YHWH as likened to sights and sounds
that his hearers would recognize in their environment. For example, the glory was likened to fire,
bright colors of gemstones, and a figure that looked like a human being. He also likened the
voice of the Almighty like the sound of rushing waters."

For more on the kebod elohe yisrael, see Ezekiel 8:4; 9:3; 10:19; 11:22. Cf. Petter, Donna Lee (2011). The Book of Ezekiel and Mesopotamian City Laments. Fribourg / Göttingen: Academic Press / Vandenhoeck Ruprecht.

Did God the Father Cause God the Son?

1) God is the uncaused cause of all things.
2) (According to numerous Trinitarians) God the Father is causally prior to God the Son.
3) However, nothing has caused or causes God.
4) Therefore, the Son is not God.

Judas Left His Place (Screenshot)-L. Scott Kellum

 

Recommended Book about the LXX by Natalio Marcos

 

Credo Ut Intelligam Versus Crede Ut Intelligas

 Feel free to fact check me here--this was written back in 2013:

I teach a course on human nature and once used a work by Leslie Stevenson and David Haberman entitled Ten Theories of Human Nature. It's now up to twelve theories, but here is one thing I've noted about the book (among others) which I hope the editors/authors change one day.

I have found a small technical error in Stevenson and Haberman's book. On page 130, Augustine of Hippo is quoted as saying, "I believe in order to understand" (The Latin is credo ut intelligam); yet that evidently is not what the bishop wrote. The expression credo ut intelligam was uttered or written by Anselm of Canterbury (the so-called father of Medieval theology). Augustine actually said or wrote the words "Crede, ut intelligas" (Believe, in order to understand). One form is indicative whereas the other is imperatival.
See Augustine's Sermon 43.7, 9 and the Dictionary of Latin and Greek Theological Terms: Drawn Principally from Protestant Scholastic Theology, pages 85-86.
Maybe one day this change will be made in Stevenson/Haberman.

It may sound like I'm picking nits, but Augustine died in 430 CE; conversely, Anselm is a 11-12th century figure. While he certainly derived his saying from Augustine, technically, one speech act is indicative while the other is a command. Nevertheless, I would concede that the point remains the same.

Is It Possible to be Happy Now?

Is it possible to be happy prior to death? The ancient Greeks debated this question intensely. Some concluded that happiness in this life is not possible: that's why there's the famous saw, "Call no man [person] happy until he [she] dies," which we find discussed in some ancient writers. So is it possible to be happy in this life or should we postpone calling someone happy until death?

Consider two scriptures:

"O the happiness of the people that is thus, O the happiness of the people whose God is Jehovah!" (Psalm 144:15 Young's Literal Translation)

"After this, Job lived a hundred and forty years; he saw his children and their children to the fourth generation. And so Job died, an old man and full of years" (Job 42:16-17 NIV).

The ISV states that Job lived a "full life."  The point is that he was satisfied or fulfilled because he faithfully worshiped God even through adversity. One only has to read the book of Ecclesiates (Qoheleth) to realize that life apart from our Creator is vain. We can be happy--even now--if we keep integrity (Hebrew, tam) to God. We might suffer times of depression, loneliness, hardship or feelings of worthlessness, but those serving God can have a sense of deep fulfillment like the Savior did when he suffered and gave his life in order that we might live into perpetuity (Hebrews 12:1-3).

Can A Thing Be the Efficient Cause of Itself?

Efficient Cause Definition: "the immediate agent in the production of an effect"

An efficient cause brings something into being or sets it in motion (e.g., a sculptor is the efficient cause of a bronze statue). With this in mind, one might ask whether it's possible for the universe to be its own efficient cause. Thomas Aquinas' answer is below:

"There is no case known (neither is it, indeed, possible) in which a thing is found to be the efficient cause of itself; for then it would be prior to itself, which is impossible" (Aquinas).

Hence, it seems highly unlikely, to say the least, that the cosmos could be its own efficient cause. Just as a house needs a builder, so the universe needs an efficient cause outside itself. See Hebrews 3:4.

In this regard, Origen of Alexandria uses autotheos which means something like "Godself" or God Himself, a term that distinguishes the Father from other "gods" (theoi) and that includes the Logos. I guess Origen wants to say that while the Logos and other ontic deities are gods by participation in the Father's divinity, the Father is God by his very nature (John 17:3) and he is the source or fount of divinity. The Father also does not need an efficient cause.

Words of the Month (November 2024)-Terms from Logic

I could have put "soundness" instead or used "valid" and sound, but the point remains the same. Also, the argument in the example is neither valid nor sound since it commits the logical fallacy of affirming the consequent rather than affirming the antecedent.