www.veritaspress.com/
These freak's do LATTIN. And they call themselves Christian's! Lattin is a SATANIC language. Catholic's use Lattin in thier "Churches" because Catholic's worship satan. The Lattin's have a conspiracy! They are trying to infultrate our LANGUAGE AND CHURCHE'S with this SATANIC TALK and CULTURE. But i'll talk no more of these "Lattin" crimes for now. Communist's are the next subject! I do not like Communist's! I think that Richard Dawkin's is a communist.
4 comments:
What's Lattin?
If it's the same as Latin, then this doesn't make sense. Our English language and scientific classification has a lot of Latin roots...
In following your logic, should say the English language is a bad language because you speak it... oh wait you don't know how to speak it properly, so I don't need to worry about that anymore.
France is against our freedom. That whole country had a meeting and said so... right. Generalizing is very dangerous especially when you're trying to debate topics like this.
Also... how can there be any Christianity without the Catholic Church? If you read your Bible, Jesus founded one Church and one church only... as time went on, that Church became known as the Catholic Church. If you disagree, I suggest you stop believing in your interpretation of the Bible and go with His interpretation.
I can go on... but I must end here. Think about what you've written...logically please.
Hi Amy... well I see your all sold out for Jesus, thats grear! as us christians know we must sacrifice our lives to serve him in spirit and truth. I urge you to keep up the fire of love you have for Jesus and let no one shut it off.
Though i think some of the topics you write about have a good intension I see you need more knowlegde on some of what you talk about. its very important to know we are acurate in what we share with others.... anyway i want to leave you a little insite on christmas...read it look up more information on it and ask God to guide you in this one...
Biblical Evidence Shows Jesus Christ Wasn't Born on Dec. 25
History convincingly shows that Dec. 25 was popularized as the date for Christmas, not because Christ was born on that day but because it was already popular in pagan religious celebrations as the birthday of the sun.
But is it possible that Dec. 25 could be the day of Christ's birth?
"Lacking any scriptural pointers to Jesus's birthday, early Christian teachers suggested dates all over the calendar. Clement. . . picked November 18. Hippolytus . . . figured Christ must have been born on a Wednesday . . . An anonymous document[,] believed to have been written in North Africa around A.D. 243, placed Jesus's birth on March 28" (Jeffery Sheler, U.S. News & World Report, "In Search of Christmas," Dec. 23, 1996, p. 58).
A careful analysis of Scripture, however, clearly indicates that Dec. 25 is an unlikely date for Christ's birth. Here are two primary reasons:
First, we know that shepherds were in the fields watching their flocks at the time of Jesus' birth (Luke 2:7-8). Shepherds were not in the fields during December. According to Celebrations: The Complete Book of American Holidays, Luke's account "suggests that Jesus may have been born in summer or early fall. Since December is cold and rainy in Judea, it is likely the shepherds would have sought shelter for their flocks at night" (p. 309).
Similarly, The Interpreter's One-Volume Commentary says this passage argues "against the birth [of Christ] occurring on Dec. 25 since the weather would not have permitted" shepherds watching over their flocks in the fields at night.
Second, Jesus' parents came to Bethlehem to register in a Roman census (Luke 2:1-4). Such censuses were not taken in winter, when temperatures often dropped below freezing and roads were in poor condition. Taking a census under such conditions would have been self-defeating.
Given the difficulties and the desire to bring pagans into Christianity, "the important fact then . . . to get clearly into your head is that the fixing of the date as December 25th was a compromise with paganism" (William Walsh, The Story of Santa Klaus, 1970, p. 62).
If Jesus Christ wasn't born on Dec. 25, does the Bible indicate when He was born? The biblical accounts point to the fall of the year as the most likely time of Jesus' birth, based on the conception and birth of John the Baptist.
Since Elizabeth (John's mother) was in her sixth month of pregnancy when Jesus was conceived (Luke 1:24-36), we can determine the approximate time of year Jesus was born if we know when John was born. John's father, Zacharias, was a priest serving in the Jerusalem temple during the course of Abijah (Luke 1:5). Historical calculations indicate this course of service corresponded to June 13-19 in that year (The Companion Bible, 1974, Appendix 179, p. 200).
It was during this time of temple service that Zacharias learned that he and his wife Elizabeth would have a child (Luke 1:8-13). After he completed his service and traveled home, Elizabeth conceived (verses 23-24). Assuming John's conception took place near the end of June, adding nine months brings us to the end of March as the most likely time for John's birth. Adding another six months (the difference in ages between John and Jesus) brings us to the end of September as the likely time of Jesus' birth. GN
You couldn't have said it more clearly. I have a similar blog about the consipracy of Christmas trees and Santa Claus. I would be honored if you would take a gander.
You people are soooooo dumb. I can't believe you don't realize this is a joke.
Post a Comment