jgnat:
Canada has fighter jets. I wonder what we keep them for.
Isn't Cananda part of NATO? (I was thinking they were) I think Canada also partners with NORAD for air defense from threats over the Arctic circle (aka Russian strategic threats).
the wall street journal reports that india has again made a decision to buy 42 russian sukhoi su-30 mk1 fighter jets that will be assembled in india.
additionally india will buy 71 m--17 v-5 helicopters.
another deal was signed for russia to manufacture the ka and mi brand of helicopters in india .
jgnat:
Canada has fighter jets. I wonder what we keep them for.
Isn't Cananda part of NATO? (I was thinking they were) I think Canada also partners with NORAD for air defense from threats over the Arctic circle (aka Russian strategic threats).
the wall street journal reports that india has again made a decision to buy 42 russian sukhoi su-30 mk1 fighter jets that will be assembled in india.
additionally india will buy 71 m--17 v-5 helicopters.
another deal was signed for russia to manufacture the ka and mi brand of helicopters in india .
Here is another story about India's intention to acquire the SU T-50. The story dates from Aug, 2012.
Ding:
If the "Gentile times" ended in the 20th century, why don't the "Gentiles" know it yet?
That's exactly right. Nor is it likely that the phrase is referring to a specific pre-announced time period, for the entire phrase ("Gentile times") is anarthrous. The Baker Exegetical Commentary on the NT comments, "More likely, the "times of the Gentiles" is a general way to describe the current period in God's plan, when the Gentiles are prominent but that will culminate in judgment on those nations."
C. O. Jonsson (GTR, p.279) says, "In Greek, the use of the definite article would point to a definite and well-known period. Since, however, the definite article is not found in the Greek text, the phrase "times of Gentiles" can refer to an imprecise period rather than one specific period already known to the readers (or listeners).
If there is a relationship to the book of Daniel, it probably corresponds to the image in Daniel 2 and ends when the image is destroyed and ground to powder. If so, then the Society is, in general terms, close with regard to when they started (the Babylonians), but somewhat off as to when they end.
COJ pointed out the anarthrous nature of the phrase in his book GTR.
if jehovah can read hearts then why did he test abraham by ordering him to kill his son ?.
The question about God reading Abraham's heart is centered around this verse:i
(Genesis 22:12) . . .And he went on to say: "Do not put out your hand against the boy and do not do anything at all to him, for now I do know that you are God-fearing in that you have not withheld your son, your only one, from me.. . .
Please consider this possibility:
Why does God only now, after seeing Abraham's attempted obedience, know that Abraham is God-fearing. Either:
1. God did already know, but for some reason only let on that 'now he knew.'
2. God did not know until Abraham went thru with his instructions, just as he said.
Quantum physics actually provides a hint of an answer:
When a particle is tested, it is changed. The test of Abraham changed Abraham. It would have changed him regardless of how he reacted to the test. His following thru as he did changed him in a way that God could afterwards truthfully say, "Now I do know you are God-fearing."
So when seen this way, it is not a question of whether God could read Abraham's "heart." He could. His statement that, 'Now He does know . . ." shows that God immediately noticed this change in Abraham's "heart."
Something similar happened in Jesus' case. Although he was already without defect and had a perfect record of obedience, Heb 5:8, 9 says:
". . .Although he was a Son, he learned obedience from the things he suffered; and after he had been made perfect he became responsible for everlasting salvation to all those obeying him. . ."
just curious to know which scripture that let an average person know that they were of the annointed and what did it mean to you?.
20YearFader:
You did not come across in any bad way to me. And I was trying not to imply anything bad about you either.
I appreciated your question and was trying to cover it from the standpoint of what I have been learning just very recently.
Probably not even a year ago I would have asked the very same question.
Take Care
just curious to know which scripture that let an average person know that they were of the annointed and what did it mean to you?.
I'm adding this as a seperate post because it would make an already long previous post even longer.
Sometimes the WT presents prophecies with an explanation that seems to allow for non-anointed Christians, or what the WT would call "companions of anointed Christians."
Two of these prophecies are:
Zech 8:23 where it mentions 10 gentiles grabbing the skirt of a Jew.
Isa 45:14 which speaks of the unpaid laborers of Egypt serving as slaves to the Jews.
The WT always mentions these in connection with the "great crowd" of Revelation 7. But what they never mention is that Paul alluded to a fulfillment of these prophecies in the 1st century. In the NWT at 1 Cor 14:25, at the very end of the verse, where it says, "God is really among YOU," the reference column cites Zech 8:23 and Isa 45:14. The NWT is not being original in citing Isa 45 and Zech 8 in connection with 1 Cor 14:23-25.
In the context of 1 Cor. 14, the "10 gentiles" and the "unpaid laborers" are the unbelievers who show an interest in Christianity. Once they become Christian they become part of the Jew(s)/Israel to which the unbelievers seek to associate with.
If these non-Jews in the prophecies were "non-anointed Christians," then, there shouldn't be any 1st century application. Which explains why the WT never mentions any such application.
Concerning 1 Cor 14:25, the Commentary on the NT Use of the OT (G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson), p.742, says, in part:
Part of the solution may be found in the relationship between Paul's quotation of Isa 28:11-12 in 14:21 and his allusion to Isa 45:14 and Zech 8:23 in 14:25. While 14:22 mentions both believers and unbelievers, the illustrations in 14:23-25 focus exclusively on unbeleivers and the way they respond to an encounter with a community that is speaking in tongues or one that is prophesying. . . His [Paul's] allusion to Isa 45:14, on the other hand, relates to a later phase in God's relationship with his people, one when even Gentiles would come to recognize the presence of God in the midst of his people and would worship him for who he really is. . .
. . . In Paul's scenario "it is the church - itself a predominately Gentile community - through which God will accomplish the eschatalogical conversion of outsiders," and the Corinthian believers have "stepped into the role originally assigned to Israel in Isaiah's eschatalogical drama." Hence the church is the fulfillment of Isaiah's [chap.45] prophecy about Israel.
just curious to know which scripture that let an average person know that they were of the annointed and what did it mean to you?.
20YearFader:
The question itself, that you pose, has WT indoctrination written all over it. It seems to accept, as a premise, the idea that there are Christians, and then there are "anointed Christians."
Of course, it might only seem that way. You might have a particular angle from which you are asking the question. So first, my apologies if I misunderstand what you are asking about.
But here is what I am finding out:
The Bible only presents Christians as being anointed. The only verses that directly speak of "anointing" in connection with Christians are: 2Cor 1:21; 1 Jn 2:20, 27 (x2). These are the only four verses that mention "anointing" in connection with disciples of Jesus. In all four, the context assumes that all Christians have this anointing. All four speak of this anointing in relation to learning or having knowledge. None of them speak of ruling in heaven or having authority over other believers. Ruling with Jesus in heaven and exercising some authority over other believers is mentioned in the NT. But never in connection with, or as a consequence of, anointing.
There are other terms that relate to "anointing" such as:
Born again, Born from above, Born of water and spirit, Born of God, Born of the Spirit, [there may be others].
"Holy ones" (Greek hagios) is related in the sense that it carries the idea of ones seperated for God. And "anointing" (of people and objects) was done to seperate it (or them) for God's service. Thus, "holy ones" is a proper description of anointed Christians.
There are other NT terms that are related, but a little more indirectly:
New creation, new(ness [of] life, adoption as sons, children of God, [others - I'm still researching].
My point in all this is this:
With all these terms, throughout the entire NT, they are used with the assumption that these describe all Christians. These terms are part of what it means to be Christian.
For many years prior to my recent research, I simply accepted the WT teachings that there were non-anointed Christians and anointed ones. But so far, and I'm not through researching the subject, but so far, I can't find any actual evidence in the NT that the WT is correct. So, if there is such a thing as a non-anointed Christian, the burden of proof falls on the WT to prove it.
But what I see the WT doing is, they are assuming, in their writings, that everyone is a non-anointed Christian, unless he has been specially selected. And it is this that leads to questions which wonder how or why someone has gotten the idea that they are "anointed." I also notice in WT writings that they almost always relate being anointed to following, or being obedient to, their directions.
So, to get back to your question, the real question should be:
What would make a Christian think they are NOT anointed? Because everything in the NT indicates otherwise.
That is a question that the WT does not want JWs to start asking.
Again, if I misunderstand your question, or its purpose, I apologize. And, of course, others may provide answers that are more in line with what you may have been asking about. But I was hoping to spell out this angle too.
Take Care
the wall street journal reports that india has again made a decision to buy 42 russian sukhoi su-30 mk1 fighter jets that will be assembled in india.
additionally india will buy 71 m--17 v-5 helicopters.
another deal was signed for russia to manufacture the ka and mi brand of helicopters in india .
Here is what purports to be a DoD video on the perceived Air to Air/ Surface to Air threat to US interests. Part of that threat is what is posed by Sukhoi/MiG designs and other well designed Russian equipment. (This is from the western perspective - with due respect to our eastern friends).
FTS - as someone said, interesting thread, and a nice break from religious interests.
the wall street journal reports that india has again made a decision to buy 42 russian sukhoi su-30 mk1 fighter jets that will be assembled in india.
additionally india will buy 71 m--17 v-5 helicopters.
another deal was signed for russia to manufacture the ka and mi brand of helicopters in india .
the wall street journal reports that india has again made a decision to buy 42 russian sukhoi su-30 mk1 fighter jets that will be assembled in india.
additionally india will buy 71 m--17 v-5 helicopters.
another deal was signed for russia to manufacture the ka and mi brand of helicopters in india .
Why doesnt India invest in its OWN industry to design AND build the damn planes
Actually they do. HAL (Hindustan Aero Limited). There are several lesser ones also. And they might be license building these aircraft or parts of them from Sukhoi. I think they also have an indigenous (or several) fighter aircraft. But nothing that matches the SU-30. They probably see the SU-30 as a counter to Pakistani F-16s and Chinese SU-27s and JF-17s. India and China are not the best of friends. (Unless something has changed recently.)