text:
As you know, if you were with us last week, we are examining together the theme, "The precious blood." Just to set our thoughts, I'd like you to turn again to 1 Peter chapter 1, a chapter in which we have been studying for many months now. And I would like to remind you of what Peter says in verses 18 and 19.
First Peter chapter 1 verse 18, "Knowing that You were not redeemed with perishable things like silver or gold from your futile way of life inherited from Your forefathers but with precious blood, as of a lamb unblemished and spotless, the blood of Christ. We are digressing from a careful exegetical study of this section here for a moment just to talk about the precious blood itself.
Peter speaks of the blood Christ as precious and rightly so. It is precious because it was shed for our salvation. But it is important for us to remember that when Peter speaks of the blood of Christ being precious he has more in mind than just the fluid itself that flowed in and out of the body of Christ. When Peter speaks of precious blood he means to include Christ's death as a sacrifice for sin and he means to include all that is involved in the atonement. And we are endeavoring to cause you to understand that all Scripture references to the blood of Christ that look back at His death include the fullness of his substitutionary atoning work on the cross.
Through the years theologian and preachers and teachers, including myself have held the view that the blood of Christ, when referred to in the epistles, makes reference to the atoning work of Christ, more so than just the blood itself. However, in recent months there has been a confusing new teaching, new in the sense that it's new to this particular generation but not new in the history of the church. It has come up in the past. And that new teaching wants to identify the blood isolated from the death of Christ, isolated from His atoning work as having some very special significance in and of itself.
I pointed out last time that basically what these people are teaching goes like this. First of all they are saying that the blood of Christ was not human blood. It was supernatural blood, the blood of God. Secondly, they are saving since it was supernatural blood and not the blood of man, but the blood of God it is, therefore, eternal and incorruptible. Thirdly, they are saying in its eternal and incorruptible condition and state it was taken to heaven at the time of the ascension of Christ, some of them say, it was taken to heaven where it remains forever in heaven contained in some vessel. Fourthly, they say it is perpetually and continually being poured out on some heavenly mercy seat for the forgiveness of sins. And then the fifth and most significant part of this, as far as understanding the New Testament is concerned, they say references to the blood of Christ then in the New Testament are not symbols for His atoning work, they are not symbols for His sacrificial death, they refer specifically to His blood.
Now what makes this particular teaching so threatening is that it is held by people who claim to be and are fundamentalists, orthodox. It is held by people who are so adamant about it that they are saying, "Anyone who doesn't believe this view is a heretic." To personalize it a little bit they have called me heretic on many many occasions, both on tape, in public, to my face, and in print. The dictionary says a heretic is a professed believer who, in truth, denies the truth. A professed believer who denies the truth. So they are saying that if you do not believe that the blood of Christ is the blood of God, not the blood of a man, not even the God/man, if you do not believe that it is eternal, incorruptible, preserved forever in heaven, if you do not believe that it is being perpetually poured out on a heavenly mercy seat washing away sins even now, if you do not believe that the references to the blood; in the epistles particularly, are not direct references to the blood but are symbols of His death and atoning work, then you're a heretic. You are a professed believer who in reality is denying the truth. Now the actual truth is that none of those viewpoints are biblical. To call someone a heretic for not believing in a manufactured viewpoint is indeed far from reality.
Now last week I began to take a look at these views and examine them in the light of Scripture. I haven't tried to be academic or pedantic or difficult to understand but just really to examine very simply and very obviously, I hope, what the word of God says so that you will understand. And I want to go back to that Bible study that we started last week tonight. Now remember that last week we took the first of their view, "It was not human blood but the blood of God." And they base it on Acts 20:28, where it says, "The church of God which He has purchased with His own blood." And they say, "Therefore, since it says the church of God, which He has purchased with His own blood it must be then the blood of God whose church it is." And we answered that particular argument by saying there is never a reference to the blood of God in the entire Bible. The New Testament always refers to the blood of Christ. And even though the church can be called the church of God it was purchased by the death of Christ, therefore, it is the blood of the one who purchased the church that is referred to in Acts 20:28. "Whoever purchased the church...and that is clearly Christ...as 1 Peter 1 says that, "We have been redeemed with precious blood." Whose blood? The blood of Christ. Very clearly not the blood of God.
And then we also noted that blood is produced in the bone marrow. From the time a human being is a fetus on all the blood is produced in the bone marrow. And in the case of Jesus He grew as a man in wisdom and stature, as a man was fully human, therefore, there was produced in His bone marrow the blood that flowed in His veins. It was human blood. In Hebrews we reminded you of chapter 2 verse 14, where it says that, "Christ partook of flesh and blood." He shared with the human race, and it says it, flesh and blood, Hebrews 2:14. So it is not some divine blood, some supernatural blood, some blood of God that came down but rather that which was produced in His body as He was in human form.
We took the second point they make that the blood of Christ was eternal and incorruptible. They base it on 1 Peter 1:18, "That we were not redeemed with perishable silver and gold but with precious blood." And they say, "Peter is contrasting perishable silver and gold with imperishable blood, therefore, the blood must be imperishable." But that is to read into the passage something it doesn't say. "Peter is contrasting perishable silver and gold with precious blood," that's what he says. He is very careful not to say imperishable blood. He is comparing the perishable with the precious. And, of course, it is implied in something that perishes that it can't be ultimately precious.
We pointed out also that it is the work of Christ that is eternal, not the fluid that flowed in His veins, anymore than any part of His sinless body was eternal in some sense. There's nothing in the Bible to indicate that any part of His body, His hair, His fingernails, whatever it might be, was eternal. Now He is eternal and He is eternally glorified in a glorified body that is different than the body that died on the cross, and, yet, in some ways the same. It has the nails and so forth; the nail marks. We don't know about that glorified body specifically except to say in 1 Corinthians 15, "It is different than the human body. It knows no sin, it knows no curse, it knows no fallenness, it never ages, it never grows old, it is some way unique, it has no capacity to die, therefore, whatever it is it is forever." But that which was part of His human body is never said to be eternal.
We also looked at the third point that they make that it...we, at least, introduced it and I want to go back to it tonight and pick it up there. They say that the blood of Christ is perpetually in heaven being poured out on the heavenly mercy seat. That blood being eternal and incorruptible was taken to heaven where it is perpetually being poured out on the mercy seat. I want to just take you to Hebrews chapter 12 at this particular point. Hebrews chapter 12, and this is the verse that they use to support this idea that it is perpetually being poured out. Now, before we look at this point on perpetual pouring the third issue that they bring up is that it is preserved forever in heaven. And if they're going to have it preserved forever in heaven I guess they feel that something needs to be done with it so it's not just sitting there.
If you'll back into chapter 9 before you look at chapter 12 I'll kind of set this up a little bit. In Hebrews chapter 9 and verse 11 it says, "But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation; and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption." Now that is a very key passage. That is describing Christ having completed His work on earth of redemption, ascending to heaven, appearing as the high priest of good things to come. Verse 11, "He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation." In other words He went in His glorified body into the presence of God in a greater and more perfect tabernacle. He had a greater and a more perfect body than even He had here. Not human, not made with hands, not the product of a woman's womb, not of this creation.
"And he entered in...verse 12...not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place." In other words God gave Him access back to heaven into His holy presence because through His blood He had obtained eternal redemption. Now would you please notice that these people say that this is teaching us that He entered with His blood, and they take the very clear preposition through and substitute for it the word "with." But it is not so in the Greek. It is not "with" it is through. That is by virtue of his death, not "with" His blood in hand. He entered into the true and immediate presence of God when He offered Himself on the cross and He accomplished, once and for all, the perfect redemption. And, therefore, through His resurrection was granted a new and more perfect tabernacle in which He entered the presence of God and was accepted into the holy place through or by virtue of His perfect work on the cross. Because of the merits of His death, by His ascension, He entered the presence of God having satisfied God's requirement for salvation. The reference to blood is not to His carrying in His blood. It isn't with His blood, it is through His blood. That must be carefully understood.
So, therefore, there is no reason to assume, based on those two verses, which they are using, that His blood is in heaven at all. There is no reason to assume that it was some kind of supernatural blood that would have to exist forever. There is no reason to assume it was taken into heaven, certainly not on the basis of this particular text. And, yet, they insist that it was the blood of God, that it was eternal and corruptible, that it is presently in heaven, taken there by Christ. And in order to come to that view I think they have to do an injustice to the text. Now that it is in heaven...we come to the fourth thought in their little scheme. Hebrews chapter 12 verse 22 is a place to start. And here the writer of Hebrews is referring to heaven and he's referring to those who enter into the presence of God through faith and Christ. He is contrasting salvation by grace with the law of God and the trembling and fear that went along with the law. He says, "You're not coming to Mount Sinai. You true believers aren't coming to God through law. You are coming to Mount Zion and to the city of the living of God, to the heavenly Jerusalem, to myriads of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the judge of all, and to the spirits of righteous men made perfect, and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood, which speaks better than the blood of Abel."
Now the writer of Hebrews is saying when you come to God by faith and faith has been the subject for two chapters now. It started in chapter 11 verse 1 when he introduced faith as the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. And then chronicled in chapter 11 all the heroes of faith and then in chapter 12 said, "Let us run the race of faith with endurance." And now he is saying, "When you come to God by faith you don't come to Synia, you don't come to a mountain of law, a mountain of judgment, you come to Zion and you come to the living God and you come to the heavenly Jerusalem, and there you find myriads of angels and the general assembly and church of the firstborn, and you come to God, who is the judge of all, and you come to the spirits of righteous men who have been made perfect in His presence, and you will come to Jesus and to the sprinkled blood. And so they conclude that when you get to heaven the sprinkled blood must be there. The blood must be there being sprinkled, being sprinkled.
Some say...and I got a letter this week from a man who called me a heretic for two pages, the pastor of a church. And he said, "Don't you understand that all those things are literal, therefore, the sprinkled blood must be literal as well?" But they're not all literal. He says, "You have come to Mount Zion." That's not literal that's an earthly place. These are not all literal. And when he says to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant and to sprinkled blood he is simply referring to the work of Christ. You come to Jesus when you come to heaven. Jesus the mediator, Jesus the one who shed His blood, which blood symbolically atoned for sin. And he's drawing an analogy; a high priest in the past, go into the temple, into the holy of holies, sprinkle the blood once a year on the mercy seat to atone for the sins of the people. And he says, "When you come to heaven you come to the place where the atonement has been accomplished and symbolically where the blood has been sprinkled." There's no reason to assume that literally Jesus carried His blood there and sprinkled it around heaven.
And they would teach that there is a repeated atonement with this eternal blood going on perpetually, so it's always being sprinkled. The Anglo Catholics and the Roman Catholics, through the years, believed that in heaven a perpetual offering by Christ of His blood is taking place. But I want you to understand something. I want you to understand that this text is not telling us that there is a literal sprinkling of blood going on all the time in heaven. The picture here is coming into a new place. "You have come to a new place." It's almost as if he is saying you have come to a new tent. "You've come to Mount Zion to a new temple, to the city of the living God, to the church, to those enrolled in heaven, to God, to the spirits of the men made perfect and to Jesus, and to the place where atonement has been made." There's no compelling reason to take the sprinkled blood that is literal anymore than to take Mount Zion as literal.
Now theologically, and I want you to understand this, the sacrifice of Christ is not repeated and it is not repeatable. Go back to chapter 9 for a moment. In Hebrews chapter 9 verse 24, "Christ...I want you to note this...when Christ ascended He did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself." Now, personally, I don't believe in heaven there is a reproduction of the tabernacle or a reproduction of the temple. He didn't enter into a copy of the true one, he entered heaven, now to appear in the presence of God for us." He's there to intercede for us. It never says He is there perpetually pouring out blood for us. Now follow..."nor was it that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood not His own." Did you hear that? It is not that Jesus went into some heavenly tabernacle and like the high priest of old is often offering up His blood as the high priest offered the blood of someone other than his own, literally an animal. "Otherwise...look at this, verse 26...he would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world."
Listen, if the sacrifice of Christ has to be repeated, if the blood has to be poured out and...poured out and...poured out and...poured out and...poured out, it must be repeated to be efficacious. He would have had to do that since the foundation of the world. "But...look at it, verse 26...now once at the consummation of the ages...that's the time when Messiah came and died...He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself." Verse 28, "So Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many." Once...once. It does a terrible injustice to the intent of the once for all sacrifice of Christ to have Him in heaven perpetually pouring out His blood in some copy of the earthly tabernacle on some mercy seat.
Look at chapter 10 verse 12, "But He, having offered...how many sacrifices?...one for sins for all time, did what?...sat down at the right hand of God." He is not going in to some holy of holies, into some mercy seat and perpetually pouring out His blood. Verse 14, "For by one offering of His life and blood he has perfected for all time those who are sanctified." Listen, Beloved, Christ poured out His blood one time. There is nothing to indicate that it was perpetual, that there is some ongoing incessant, unending, continual pouring out of blood in heaven. Christ lives to suffer and die no more. He lives to bleed no more. He lives to atone for sin no more. It is the efficacy of the offering at Calvary that is perpetual, the efficacy of the one offering that is perpetual, not the perpetual sprinkling of the blood. And the sprinkled blood...the metaphor that appears in Hebrews 12 simply refers back to the atonement that God was satisfied with the sacrificial work of Christ. There is nothing in Scripture to describe Christ using His blood in heaven, nothing. He is there doing one thing for us, and that is what? What's the word? Interceding...interceding.
Now, let me get you to the final and most important point, number five. They say that blood is not a symbol for atonement; it's not a symbol for death. When I said some years ago now that the blood, when it's referred to in the epistles, primarily when the blood of Christ is made reference to, but also in the gospels on occasion, it has reference to death, to violent death, to sacrificial death. In other words, it is a term that is used as a symbol for death, for violent death, for sacrificial death, in Christ's case for his atonement. And that's what began all this controversy because these people want to say that the blood is not symbolic. In fact, there was a meeting together of a group of Baptists who came out with a statement in which they said, "That no mention of the blood of Christ in the New Testament is ever symbolic. It always means the literal blood." Well that view is not new. It was elaborated on and systematized by a man named F.C.N. Hicks, in his book called, The Fullness of Sacrifice, written in 1930. He is an Anglo-Catholic theologian. He separated the blood from the death of Christ and wanted to make something special out of the blood isolated from His death. But no such separation can be made because blood is used frequently in the New Testament to refer to death. It is not the blood all alone as a fluid that saves us; it is the death of Christ.
In fact, you have statements in the New Testament like this, "The preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness. Is there anything in the cross as wood that saves us?" Or Peter says, "By His stripes we are healed." Is there something in His physical stripes and scars and wounds that saves us? No. When he says, "By His stripes we are healed," he is simply looking at the death of Christ from the viewpoint of His scars and stripes. When he says, "It's the cross that saves," he's looking at the atoning work of Christ from the viewpoint of the cross. When he talks about blood that's just another symbol of the whole atoning work of Christ. Whether he says, "By His stripes," or by the preaching of the cross or we're saved through the blood of Christ, he has in mind the whole atoning work, not the fluid isolated from the death of Christ.
Go back to Hebrews 9 verse 13. And get ready cause we're gonna look at a lot of Scriptures quickly here. And this is what they use. "They say...verse 13...If the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those that have been defiled sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh...here's the key...how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works?" They said, "There it is, right there, the blood of Christ will cleanse your conscience from dead works." Somehow that eternal fluid, up in heaven, being poured out on a mercy seat in a copy of the earthly temple, by Jesus Christ, who is still making a sacrifice of Himself, somehow that fluid cleanses your conscience from dead works. And they say, "That's where it is; right there." In order to come to that conclusion you have to take the phrase, "The blood of Christ," as meaning the fluid, the chemical fluid blood. Is that fair? No.
When the writer of Hebrews says, "The blood of Christ will cleanse your conscience he means the death of Christ, the atoning work of Christ, the sacrificial work of Christ," he isn't referring just to the blood. Listen, if the blood alone could save you Christ would never have had to die. All He would have had to do was bleed.
Now, let's follow along with __________. Peter uses the term blood of Christ. And Peter uses the term blood of Christ to refer to His death. "And it became known to all who were living in Jerusalem...Acts 1:19...the field that Judas fell down and died. . .it became known to all in Jerusalem; so that in their language the field was called Hakeldama, that is, Field of Blood." Why was it called the Field of Blood? Because somebody bled there? No, it was called the Field of Blood because there a man died. There a man died. It was the field of death, simply another way to express that. In Acts 5:28; Here is the council, the high priests confronting the preachers of the gospel. And he says to them, "We give you strict orders not to continue teaching in this name...stop preaching Christ...and behold, you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and you intend to bring this man's blood on us." What did they mean by that? Did they mean that you intend to douse us with the fluid? No, that's ridiculous. What they meant is, you intend to make us responsible for this man's...what?...death. Obviously, obviously, it can't mean anything else.
In John chapter 6 in verse 53, "Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. He who eats My flesh, drinks My blood has eternal life; I'll raise him up on the last day. My flesh is true food, My blood is true drink. He who eats My flesh, drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him." What in the world does He mean by that? Is He talking about literal fluid? Is He saying, you've got to take a chunk out of Me like a cannibal and then you've got to drink my literal blood? No. What He is saying is, "You are going to have to accept My life and death. You're going to have to acknowledge My sacrifice, my atoning work. Take in the sacrifice offered on the cross." That's what He has in mind.
John 10 verse 17, "For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it again." You see that's the point. In one place He said, "You have to drink My blood." In another place He says, "You're gonna have to accept the fact that I lay down My life." In both cases He has the same thing in mind, he's talking about His death. There's nothing in the fluid that can cure sin. I mean if there was the people who beat Him and got blood splattered on them would have their sins washed away. The soldiers that drove the nails through His hands and got His blood on their hands would have their sins washed away. That is bizarre.
One writer, Stibb, says...who has written an outstanding article on the use of haima, which is the Greek word for blood, he says, "To the Jewish mind blood was not merely nor ever chiefly the life currently flowing in the veins of the living. It was especially the life poured out in death." That's exactly right. To the Jewish mind, referring to blood was referring to life being poured out in death. It was a symbol of sacrificial death. Johannes Bain, writing in Kittle's set of studies of Greek words, says, "Haima stands for death. Blood stands for death." And that, by the way, is probably the consummate source for understanding Greek words. "Writers," the article says, who speak of the blood of Christ are interested, not in the material substance but in the death of Christ." That has been the traditional view. Why, then, did they say blood instead of death? Because blood is more vivid in its expression and because it signifies the sacrificial nature in which blood was poured out.
In the Old Testament, dawm, the Hebrew word for blood, is used 360 times. Okay? Now we're not gonna go through all 360 of those but I do want to just, maybe, give you a little bit of an idea. Genesis 37, let's go back to the very beginning. Don't turn to these, just listen, write em down. Genesis 37:26, okay? "And Judah said to his brothers, "What profit is it for us to kill our brother and cover up his blood?" Now what did he mean? To kill our brother and put dirt on top of the fluid? No. To kill our brother and cover up the fact that we. . .what? We killed him. Blood there means a violent death. We have to hide the fact that we took his life. That's standard usage of the Hebrew word in the Old Testament.
In 1 Kings 2:5, it says, "Now you also know what Joab the son of Zeruiah did to me, what he did to the two commanders of the armies of Israel, to Abner the son of Ner, to Amasa the son of Jether, whom he killed; he also shed the blood of war in peace. And he put the blood of war on his belt." Now that does not mean that he smeared blood all over himself. It simply means he killed people in battle. He killed people in battle. That is a very typical reference to blood. There are many many more that I won't take the time to go over.
But let me give you some statistics. Three hundred and sixty times the word blood appears. Two hundred and three times in the Old Testament it refers to violent death, 203 times. One hundred and three times it refers to sacrificial death. So 306 times out of 360 times it refers either to violent death or sacrificial death. In the Hebrew mind, in the Jewish mind, all...all linguistic scholars that I have read on the Old Testament will say that the use of blood refers to violent death or sacrificial death most frequently unless it is talking about the actual fluid.
In the New Testament...we'll go to the New Testament...the word haima is used 98 times. And I want to give you some insight into it. All right? Now you might want to follow me in the New Testament if you can, Acts 22. You're gonna enjoy this because this is really gonna open all the windows for you. Acts 22:20, Paul here giving his testimony, "And I said...verse 19...Lord, they themselves understand that in one synagogue after another I used to imprison and beat those who believed in Thee...Paul talking here. . .and when the blood of Thy witness Stephen was being shed, I also was standing by approving, and watching out for the cloaks of those who were slaying him." Let me ask you a question. How did Stephen die? Stoned to death. When someone was stoned to death large boulders were dropped on their upper body. Their head was crushed. Their chest was crushed. There is no reason to assume that the actual fluid of Stephen's body was actually shed. He didn't die by bleeding to death. He was crushed to death. But when it says, "When the blood of Thy witness Stephen was being shed," all that means was when Stephen was being what? Killed. That's just another expression for a violent death, another expression for a violent death. No blood was shed there of significance, or, at least, we wouldn't assume so in a stoning. And, certainly, he didn't bleed to death. He was crushed. No doubt his skull was crushed.
Look at Revelation...we're gonna jump around...chapter 6, revelation chapter 6. "Here you have in the fifth seal. . .verse 9. . .under the altar those who have been slain because of the word of God." These are the martyrs that have died in the tribulation. "And these dear saints of God are crying out to God and their crying out...in verse 10...Lord, holy and true, how long will You refrain from judging and avenging our blood?" Now what do they mean? Somebody bleed us and we want vengeance. No, somebody what? Killed them. They're crying out to God that justice be brought against those who killed them. And the reference there to avenging our blood is simply a reference to their death. It makes no sense to insist on a literal blood shedding, as if everybody who died bleeds. It simply says in verse 9, "They were slain because of the word of God and the testimony, which they maintained," irrespective of how they died. And the reference to avenging their blood is a reference to avenging the violent death they died as martyrs.
Go back to Luke chapter 11:47, "Jesus says, "Woe to you! You build the tombs of the prophets, and it was your fathers who killed them. Consequently you witnessed and approved the deeds of your fathers; because it was they who killed them, and you build their tombs." In other words, you hypocrites, your fathers killed the prophets and you build monuments to them. "For this reason...verse 49...the wisdom of God said, "I will send to them prophets and apostles, some of them they will kill, some they will persecute, in order that the blood of all the prophets shed since the foundation of the world may be charged against this generation, from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who perished between the altar and the house of God; yes, I tell you, it shall be charged against this generation." Whoa, what statement. What a statement. When he says the blood of all the prophets are we to assume that all the prophets bled to death? No. All it means is the death of the prophets. "From the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah," means from the death of Abel to the death of Zechariah, which sweeps over the range of history of the Old Testament. From the first persecuted martyr to the last persecuted priest, you're gonna be responsible for all of their deaths. Clearly those references to blood in this passage, both in verse 50 and 51, are simply references to death. They all died in different ways. In fact, of Abel it says his brother slew him and it says his blood cried out from the ground. Does that mean his literal blood cried out? Of course not, it means the responsibility for his death cried for vengeance.
Look at Acts chapter 18. Acts chapter 18 and verse 6, Paul comes to preach, down from Macedonia he comes to Corinth, he begins to preach, and in verse 6 says, "When they resisted and blasphemed, he shook his garment, said to them, "Your blood be on your own heads." Now you tell me, is that literal? Is that literal? Is he saying, "I hope you get a leak in your head?" I mean that kind of thing would be absolutely ridiculous. What he is saying to them is, "When you die you're gonna be responsible for your own death. When you die you're gonna be responsible for it. When you perish you're responsible. I'm not responsible. I'm not responsible." Why? "Because I have preached to you the truth. I have discharged my responsibility. Your death, your violent death, your being judged by God is your own fault." By the way, blood there is used to refer to spiritual and eternal death, certainly not bleeding. Not bleeding.
Now what I've just shown you are some references to blood that are general, not related to the blood of Christ. Those passages I just gave you: Acts 22:20, Revelations 6:10, Luke 11:51 and Acts 18:6 refer to blood in a way that is obviously referring to a violent death. But now let's look at the blood of Christ, specifically as a phrase, all right? Get ready.
Let's go back to Romans chapter 5, Romans chapter 5 verse 9, "Much more then...Paul says...having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him. For if while we were sinners we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we'll be saved by His life." Now notice he says two things. Verse 9, he says, "We have been justified by His blood." Verse 10, he says, "We have been reconciled by His death." They both refer to what? Same thing. Two different ways of referring to His atoning work. If you say that, "We are justified by His blood," and it means the fluid then you have to have two parts to salvation. The fluid justifies you and the death reconciles you. And now you have really convoluted salvation. You've got the death doing something and the actual fluid doing something. That's not consistent with what the Scripture teaches. To say that, "We have been justified by His blood," is the same as saying we have been reconciled by His death because, folks, to be justified and to be reconciled means basically the same thing. To be justified means to be made right with God. To be reconciled means to be made right with God. Blood, therefore, and death must be synonyms because what they produce is the same thing. Okay?
How bout Ephesians chapter 2 verse 13? Ephesians chapter 2 verse 13, "Now in Christ Jesus you who formerly were far off have been brought near...near to God, near to the covenant but God is the real object...you have been brought near to God by the blood of Christ." Now what does that mean? What's that mean? It can't mean anything but His atoning sacrifice, His whole work. Let me show you why? Okay. If we had been brought near by the blood that is brought near to God, verse 12 says that, "The unbelievers are without God." Verse 13 says, "In Christ Jesus we have been brought near to God...implied...by the blood." Look at verse 16. "And it says that he reconciles us in one body to God through the...what?...cross.
Now, if we're gonna make the blood literal what do we have to do here? Make the cross literal. It's talking about the same thing. In verse 13 we were brought near by the blood. In verse 16 we had been reconciled to God through the cross. What is different about being brought near and being reconciled? Nothing. Being brought near to God is the same as being reconciled to God is the same as being right with God. So whether you say it's through the blood, through the death, through the cross, you're saying the same thing. You have to be saying the same thing. They're used interchangeably.
Colossians chapter 1 verse 20, "And through Him," he says, that is through Christ the Father reconciles all things to Himself." How did God reconcile us to Himself? How did He make us right with Him? How did he draw us near? He made peace through the blood of His cross. Now, Beloved, a cross has no blood. It simply stands for His painful sacrificial death in which he atoned for sin. You see what happens if you try to make the blood literal everywhere, you really get into some problems?
First John chapter 5 verse 6. Now listen to this. "This is the one...namely Jesus the Son of God mentioned in verse 5 then verse 6 says, "This is the one who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ; not with the water only, but with the water and with the blood." Coming by water, what does that refer to? Christ's what? His baptism. Coming by blood, what does that refer to? His death, his sacrificial death, his death on the cross. It can't mean anything else. "He came by water...this is My Beloved Son, hear him...He came at the cross and accomplished our salvation."
Revelation chapter 1 verse 5, "And Jesus Christ," it says, the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, the ruler of the kings of the earth To Him who loves us and released us from our sins by His...what?...blood." He released us from our sins by His blood. Listen, blood must mean death because there is no forgiveness of sin without death. The wages of sin is death. When the writer of Hebrews says, "Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sin." Does he mean without somebody bleeding? No, he means without somebody what? Dying. It's obvious. Chapter 7 of Revelations verse 14, "And I said to him, "My Lord, you know." He said to me, "These are the ones who came out of the great tribulation, they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the lamb." Now you tell me if blood on a robe makes it white? Can't be literal. Makes no sense. It simply means that they have been cleansed through the sacrificial atoning work of Christ. Chapter 12 verse 11, "Salvation...verse 10 says..."Salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of His Christ have come...this is a loud voice out of heaven...the accuser of our brethren has been thrown down...namely Satan...who accuses them before our God day and night. And the saints literally overcame him because of the blood of the Lamb." What does that mean, literal blood? No, because of His sacrificial death, because of His sacrificial death.
And then Revelation 19:13, Jesus in His second coming judgment, He comes, His eyes are a flame of fire, His head has many diadems or crowns. He has a name written on Him, which no one knows except Himself. He is clothed with a robe dipped in blood." What does that mean? He's coming back to do what? Judge. It's the blood of those He slays, the blood of those He slays. Some commentators feel that it's the blood that He shed on the cross, symbolic. Either way it embraces His whole atoning work. He comes either as the one who is blood stained; symbolic of His great atoning work, or He comes as the one who is blood stained; symbolic of His great judgment work in which He will slaughter the nations of the earth in unbelief. Obviously the blood of Christ embraces His whole atoning work.
Now, as we bring this together again let me take you back through...go back to 1 Corinthians chapter 10. There're some other Scriptures that will enrich your thinking. And I'm gonna go really quick. First Corinthians 10:16, communion service, "Is not the cup of blessing which we bless a sharing in the blood of Christ?" Does that mean we share in the literal blood? No, it means we share in His atoning work, in all that He accomplished through the sacrifice of Himself. Chapter 11 verse 27, "When you come to the Lord's Table and you eat and drink unworthily you are guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord." In other words if you mock the cross you take your stand with those who took His life, with those who took His life.
In Hebrews...I want to give you a few key Scriptures, some of them we've already looked at but I need to draw them back to your attention just to pull the final thoughts together. In Hebrews chapter 9 verse 14, it says...we read it earlier..."How much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God cleanse your conscience?" "And he then...verse 15...becomes a mediator of a new covenant, in order that, since a death has taken place for the redemption of the transgressions...you see the point? Blood in verse 14, a death has taken place in verse 15. They mean one and the same; blood must equal death. Now look at verse 16. And here's how he explains it, "For where a covenant is, there must of necessity be the death of the one who made it." Literally here were a will or a testament. Someone give a will, it's no good until the person who gave it dies. A covenant or a will or a testament...verse 17...is valid only when men are dead." Now follow, verse 18, "Therefore, even the first covenant was not inaugurated without...what?...blood." What does that mean then? Has to mean death. He just said that. Can't mean anything else. Not blood, death, he just said it. A covenant is no good except for death and so a covenant is validated only when inaugurated by blood, which must mean, cannot mean anything else other than death. That is one of the key passages in this whole discussion.
Hebrews 13 verse 11...I didn't know how much time I had so I'm going back picking up a few Scriptures for you. Hebrews 13:11, "For the bodies of those animals whose. . .looking back at the sacrificial system in the Old Testament. . .whose blood is brought into the holy place by the high priest as an offering for sin, are burned outside the camp. Therefore Jesus also, that He might sanctify the people through His own blood, suffered outside the gate." Again, it has to mean His death; it has to mean His death. The animals were killed, their blood was sprinkled, Jesus, through His own blood, means through His own death, suffered outside the gate. Outside the city of Jerusalem. Hebrews 12:4...one more in Hebrews. Got a few more. Got a few minutes. Hebrews 12:4, "You have not yet resisted to the point of shedding blood." What does that mean? "_______ in your striving against sin." Well you say, "What's the point?" Well look back what it says. "Christ...verse 2...endured the cross." He endured the cross. You have not yet resisted to the point of shedding blood. In other words, He died; you haven't had to do that. That's what that means. Shedding blood there simply means He died a violent death. You can be faithful. You haven't had to strive against sin to the point where you had to die a violent death have you? It's not as bad as you think is what he's saying. "Consider him...verse 3...who endured such hostility so that you don't grow weary and lose heart." You haven't suffered unto a violent death. You see shedding blood has to do with a violent death.
I can't resist taking you to Matthew chapter 23. And I want to wrap this up in a solid way so that it really will be helpful. Matthew 23:29 "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Jesus says, "You build the tombs of the prophets adorning the monuments of the righteous and say, "We'd been living in the days of our Fathers, we would not have been partners with them in shedding the blood of the prophets." What does that mean? What does that mean? Killing them. Killing them. The next verse says it, "Consequently you bear witness against yourself that you are the sons of those who murdered the prophets." Shedding the blood means murder. That's what it means. And verse 34, "I'm sending you prophets and wise men...just like we read in Luke 11...some of them you will kill and crucify, some you will scourge in your synagogues, persecute from city to city. Upon you may fall the guilt of all the righteous blood shed on earth, and the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar." Again, the idea of blood means murder, violent death, sacrificial death, those kinds of things.
Then Matthew 27, Judas threw the silver back...you remember he went back to the temple threw the silver back? So guilty. The chief priest took the pieces of silver and said, "It is not lawful to put them into the temple treasury, since it is the price of...what?...what does he mean?...it's the price of murder." It's the price of betrayal that ends in murder, that's exactly what he meant. Nothing else would make sense. And that's why verse 8 says, "The field was called The Field of Blood." They used the money to buy the potter's field that became the Field of Blood or the Field of Murder, the Field of Violent Death, for the one that was betrayed with the money was violent in his ultimate end, in that Christ was violently killed. He too was violently killed as he committed suicide, as well. No wonder it was called the Field of Blood, the Field of Violent Death, for the money that bought it was for that purpose and the man who died there died violently. In verse 24, "When Pilate saw that he was accomplishing nothing, but rather that a riot was starting, he didn't want to be responsible for what happened to Jesus, he said, "I'm innocent of this Man's blood." What did he mean? I'm innocent of his death. "And all the people said, "His blood be on us." What did they mean? Did they mean pour his blood on us? They meant, "We'll take responsibility for His death." That was the Hebrew term, they understood it, they knew it meant violent death. "Kill him and we'll take responsibility.
Now some people say, "Well but you see the Old Testament typology has the priest going in and sprinkling the blood. So Christ, like the priest, He has to go in and sprinkle the blood too." You can't press that. You can't press that analogy too far. And there's nothing to indicate that Christ actually sprinkled His blood and you certainly don't want to press the Old Testament ritual.
Let me go back to Leviticus 16 and tell you what the priest did. Okay? Verse 15 of Leviticus 16, "He'll slaughter the goat of the sin offering which is for the people, bring its blood inside the veil and do with its blood as he did with the blood of the bull, to sprinkle it on the mercy seat in front of the mercy seat." Verse 24...I'm just picking up some highlights..."He shall bathe his body with water in a holy place, put on his clothes, come forth, offer his burnt offering, the burnt offering of the people, make atonement for himself and for his people. And he shall offer up smoke the fat of the sin offering on the altar." Verse 27, "The bull of the sin offering, the goat of the sin offering, whose blood is brought in to make atonement in the holy place, shall be taken outside the camp, they shall burn their hides, their flesh, their refuse in the fire. Then the one who burns them shall wash his clothes, bathe his body with water, and afterward come into the camp." Now you tell me whether Christ has to do all that when He gets in there too? You can't push that. The high priest made an atonement and brought the atoning blood before God and it satisfied God. That's all that has to be translated into the New Testament work of Christ. You can't have Him doing everything in reduplication of what the Old Testament high priests did on the Day of Atonement.
Now, to conclude, seriously. Romans 3:25, Listen to this, this is so rich, Romans 3:25, "Speaking of Christ Jesus...verse 24...Christ Jesus...this is a salvation section..."The redemption that is in Christ Jesus...verse 24 says...whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith." Now watch this, verse 25, "Whom God displayed publicly...that is one possible translation of pro ef a ta. It can be translated that way. God set forth openly, made a public spectacle. By the way, that's in contrast to the Levitical sprinkling on the mercy seat, which was hidden from the sight of everybody. It wasn't a spectacle, nobody saw it. So there's no parallel there. But in contrast to the hidden sprinkling by the high priests on the Day of Atonement it could mean Jesus was openly displayed, openly displayed as propitiation. Pro ef a ta could also mean and it could be just as well translated, purposed or for ordained. And it would read this way, "Whom god for ordained as a propitiation." Say, "What's the point?" The word propitiation can mean mercy seat. Now let me give you a perspective.
I believe there's only one mercy seat in heaven and that mercy seat is Christ. And if you translate it, "Whom God openly displayed as a mercy seat," or if you translate it, "Whom God for ordained to be the mercy seat in His blood," then you will understand it. That would indicate that it is not that Christ offered some blood on some mercy seat, as if there is some reproduced tabernacle there. But that He Himself in His blood is the mercy seat Himself. I believe that is the way to interpret that, that God publicly showed Him forth or for ordained and purposed Him to be the mercy seat in His blood. He didn't take it to heaven. He doesn't dump it on a mercy seat. He is the mercy seat. That corresponds perfectly to 1 John 2. It says it. First John 2, "For He Himself is the propitiation, the hilasterion...same word...the mercy seat for our sins." He is the mercy seat. He is the mercy seat. The only one in heaven is Christ Himself who in His blood satisfied God.
Well, I hope that helps. I hope you understand what the Scripture teaches about the blood of Christ. In 1 John 1:7, do you remember that verse? "If we walk in the Light as He Himself is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son keeps on cleansing us from all sin." I don't believe that's teaching, that it's perpetually being poured out...perpetually being poured...perpetually being poured out. No. It was poured out one time and it's efficacy keeps on cleansing us perpetually.
What's the greatest chapter in the Old Testament on the atoning work of Christ? What is it? Isaiah...what?...53. Read it, you will find no occasion of the word blood in that chapter. It focuses on His death. What is the clearest, most concise presentation in the New Testament of the gospel? What is it? First Corinthians 15. I read it to you. "Now I make known to you brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain...here it is...for I delivered to you as of first important what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that He was buried, that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures." That's the gospel. Doesn't mention the blood. Doesn't have to. It mentions His death. It mentions His death.
Yes the blood is precious because His death is precious. Yes we don't want to minimize anything precious, certainly not the blood of Christ. But it is very sad when people go off emotionally over what they misperceive because someone is misrepresenting it. To say that Christ was less than fully human is wrong. To say that there was some eternal character to impersonal blood that has left it uncorrupted throughout all of eternity is not taught in Scripture. To say that that fluid is now in heaven and that it is being poured out somehow on some mercy seat cannot be supported Scripturally. And to say that the New Testament writers, referring to the blood of Christ 30 times, always meant only the fluid is just not true. They had in mind his death very clearly, very clearly. And all of that kind of fuzzy and incorrect thinking takes the focus off the truth, that Jesus, the perfect God/man died and went to heaven, having once for all accomplished our redemption and is now resting at the right hand of God interceding for us, not carrying on some perpetual priestly function. There's no heresy in believing what we believe it's just what Scripture teaches.
Let's pray. Father, we've covered so much tonight and I just thank You for these dear people who have come to listen so faithfully. I pray that these things will be clear in their hearts and minds and that in the volume of Scripture we haven't lost the flow. It's so simple Lord. The blood of Jesus was the blood of Jesus, as human as He was human, as perfect as He was perfect. There's no need for the blood of Christ to exist now; it did its work. No need for it to be poured out on some imaginary mercy seat. He is the mercy seat. He is the sacrifice. He is the high priest. He is all and all. No need to repeat what is unrepeatable.
Lord, we thank you for the precious blood; precious because His death is precious. The sacrifice of Himself as an atonement for our sins is precious. And we do not treat likely the sacred, sacred reality of the sacrifice of our dear Savior, in whose name we pray. Amen.
This article is also available and sold as a booklet.
This sermon series includes the following messages:
Please contact the publisher to obtain copies of this resource.Publisher Information


text:
They could literally do a whole wave of different Padme costumes.
Quote from: Qui-Gon Jim on March 22, 2012, 07:29 AMThey could literally do a whole wave of different Padme costumes.And they'd sit on store pegs for years.
I've never quite understood the passion for Jocasta Nu, but is she actually a Jedi? I have a Jedi collection display, so I'd add her to the list, only because she fits into that display.Pardon the stupid question.
I found it funny at the time that Jocasta Nu didn't just say it was possible when clearly it was.
Page created in 0.077 seconds with 17 queries.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
By Keith RobinsonJuly 24, 2013Purdue Extension will provide exhibits and events at the Indiana State Fair that will offer fun learning, celebrate the work of women in agriculture and give a first look at how the Indiana corn and soybean crops are developing.
Visitors to the Indiana State Fairgrounds in Indianapolis Aug. 2-18 will find educational exhibits and games for children and adults, learn about preparing healthy meals and participate in other activities geared toward the entire family.
"Purdue Extension activities are focused on things that matter to fair-goers in their daily lives. We provide relevant, expert information to help them make good decisions for their families' health and welfare," said Danica Kirkpatrick, engagement program manager for Purdue Agriculture. "And we do this in a fun way, incorporating education in the family-friendly surroundings of the state fair. It's a perfect match."
Four exhibits will be on display every day:
* The A-maize-ing Popcorn Adventure, a new exhibit where visitors can go through a maze and learn interesting information about popcorn, such as why popcorn pops, from Max; his dog, Munch; and Professor Popcorn. The exhibit, funded by the state fair and tied to the fair's 2013 theme of Year of Popcorn, will be at a site immediately east of the Hoosier Lottery Grandstand.
* To My Plate and Beyond , an interactive exhibit that explains the U.S Department of Agriculture's guide for healthy eating, returns to the DuPont Food Pavilion. In this exhibit, Max and his best pal, Munch, visit a grocery store, a home kitchen, pantry, dining room and two restaurants on a flying saucer. They learn about healthy eating and answer questions about MyPlate. The exhibit is sponsored by the American Dairy Association and Indiana's Dairy Farm Families.
* Spay/neuter surgery exhibit , providing 29 surgeries over 13 days for visitors to observe. The surgeries are needed to prepare Humane Society pets for adoption. The exhibit, in the same area as the popcorn exhibit, is a partnership between the Purdue University College of Veterinary Medicine and the Indiana Veterinary Medical Association. In addition to the surgeries, veterinarians and veterinary technicians will provide educational demonstrations to visitors about what is new in veterinary medicine and to show them how to care for their dog, cat or other animals. Also, veterinary students from the college will meet with the public daily on veterinary-related issues.
* What's Bugging Belva?, an exhibit from past years, will be in the Exposition Hall. Presented like a children's book, visitors will follow Belva and Grandpa Belvedere as Belva learns why it's good to be a bug. The exhibit was funded by the Purdue Department of Entomology.
Visitors will learn even more about bugs with activities on specific days of the fair. On Aug. 9, entomologist Tom Turpin will show how to cook with bugs in a program titled "There's a Bug in My Soup!" in the DuPont Food Pavilion. Purdue entomology staff and students will share information about insects, showing them live and pinned, on "Bug Day" Aug. 17 in the Department of Natural Resources Building. On Aug. 12, the Purdue University Science Theatre Outreach Program will present "Let's Make a Meal," during which puppets will talk about entomology in three performances on the Main Street Stage near the Dairy Barn.
There will be other food, nutrition and cooking demonstrations at various times. In the DuPont Food Pavilion, "A Taste of Wild Game," about preparing fish and venison, will be held Aug. 8, 9, 15 and 16, and "Cooking for a Healthy Heart," "Eat Right for Less" and "Making the Most of Your Garden" will be presented Aug. 9. Purdue Extension staff also will give food and nutrition demonstrations throughout the fair in 4-H Centennial Hall.
Other Purdue Extension events during the fair include:
* Crop production report panel discussion at 1:30 p.m. Aug. 12 in the banquet hall of the Indiana Farm Bureau Building. Agricultural experts will analyze the U.S. Department of Agriculture's crop production report, the first yield and production forecasts for the 2013 U.S. and Indiana corn and soybean crops.
* Women in Agriculture awards Aug. 14 at 10:30 a.m. in the Normandy Barn. Two awards, to be presented to women who demonstrate leadership and innovation and make positive contributions to Indiana agriculture, will be given as part of the lieutenant governor's Celebration of Agriculture ceremony.
A highlight at the fair will be Purdue Day on Aug. 9. The colleges of agriculture, health and human sciences, and veterinary medicine are among those that will have booths and exhibits along State Fair Boulevard. Activities will include cricket-spitting, bean bag toss, discovering caffeine content in energy drinks, and a texting-and-driving simulator. Purdue staff will be on hand to answer questions about the colleges.
Latest Purdue Agriculture Top Story
Top Story Archive
Department of Agricultural Communication, 615 West State Street, West Lafayette, IN 47907-2053 USA, (765) 494-8403
© | An equal access/equal opportunity university | Integrity Statement | Copyright Complaints | Maintained by Agricultural Communication
Trouble with this page? Disability-related accessibility issue? Please contact us at firstname.lastname@example.com so we can help.


text:
"Junk Car Removal - We pay cash for junk cars!"
We pay you cash to tow away your unwanted vehicle.
Qualified, Skilled and Accredited services.
Professional lockout service, and locksmith service.
We are San Jose's premier towing company with over 20 years experience. We are available to help you in more ways than you thought possible. We don't only offer towing services but we offer, but also junk car removal, transporting, auto lock out help, heavy duty towing, off road recovery and much more. We can tow your car to your own mechanic or we can refer you to some of the best and affordable auto repair shops in the county. You can depend in our fast, friendly service whenever you are stuck on the road. We'll come to the rescue.
© 2013 H & R Towing. All rights reserved.


text:
BOSTON, Mass.--#13/14 UMass Boston men's hockey (14-4-3, 7-4-3 ECAC East) scored three goals in the first eight minutes and cruised to a 5-1 victory over Castleton State College (10-10-2, 6-7-2 ECAC East) Saturday afternoon at the Clark Athletic Center Ice Arena.
Stephen Buco (North Providence, R.I.), Kit Sitterley (Mooresville, N.C.) and Frankie DeAugustine (Pittsburgh, Pa.) each recorded a goal and an assist to help the Beacons snap a four-game winless streak and earn two pivotal points in the ECAC East standings.
With the two teams separated by a point coming into the game in the battle for home-ice in the ECAC East Tournament, UMass Boston raced out to a 3-0 lead over the first 7:49 behind goals from Mike Kuhn (Holbrook, Mass.), Buco and Sitterley. That would be more than enough to help UMass Boston earn their first season-series win against the Spartans since the 2004-05 season.
Giovanni Marinelli (Randolph, N.J.) added his first collegiate goal and DeAugustine potted a nifty tally in the third to help UMass Boston snap a four-game streak in which they'd been held to two goals or fewer.
Sophomore netminder Zach Andrews (Coral Springs, Fla.) was nearly perfect, stopping 29 of the 30 shots he faced to move to 11-2-2.
Ross Herzog scored the lone tally of the afternoon for the Spartans, while Thomas Shelley (20 saves) and and Mark Hochman (10 saves) combined for 30 saves on 35 total shots.
Kuhn got the Beacons off to a hot start just 90 seconds in when he received a pass from Buco out in front and roofed a shot over Shelley's glove while slipping to the ice.
The Beacons pushed the lead to 2-0 just under five minutes later, when Buco took a pass from Bishop and sent a shot through traffic for his first goal as a Beacon. The UMass Lowell transfer now has a goal and three assists in four games with UMass Boston.
UMass Boston forced Castleton State to call a timeout just 7:49 into the contest, when DeAugustine slipped a pass from behind the net to Sitterley who banged it home for a 3-0 advantage. Captain Travis Daniel (North Brunswick, N.J.) picked up an assist on the play, to move into sole possession of eight place all-time in Beacons' history with 117 points.
Castleton State cut the deficit to 3-1, six seconds into their first power-play effort of the day, off of a rocket from Herzog. The senior captain sent a shot through traffic that Andrews never saw to make it 3-1 at the 11:07 mark.
The play would slow down from there, with both teams picking up the physicality the rest of the way.
Shelley managed to keep the game close behind two spectacular saves, one each in the first and second.
On the first save, Nathan Milam (Westland, Mich.) skated in all by himself and made a bevy of moves to beat Shelley, only to have the goaltender throw out his glove as a last-ditch effort and barely keep the puck from going over the line. In the second period, Shelley once again found himself out of position, only to make a terrific stick save on a shot from Connor McStravick (Philadelphia, Pa.) that looked destined for the back of the cage.
Marinelli managed to beat Shelley at 13:11 of the second period, off of a face-off win. Derek Colucci (North Scituate, R.I.) won the defensive zone face-off to Marinelli who sent a shot onto Shelley from the blue line. While Shelley made the initial save, he stood up to control the puck and Marinelli rushed in to beat him to it, before burying a shot for his first collegiate point in his fourth career game.
UMass Boston capped off the scoring 38 seconds into the third on DeAugustine's ninth tally of the year. Sitterley fed the puck to DeAugustine in the slot who roofed it by Hochman for a 5-1 advantage.
The Beacons finished with a 35-30 advantage in shots and held Castleton State College to a 1-for-6 effort on the power-play, while finishing 1-for-1 on the man-advantage themselves.
UMass Boston will be back in action Friday night at 7 p.m. when they host the University of Southern Maine.


text:
After Liu spikes Bloomberg's taxi contract, de Blasio reminds us he objected first
Shortly after comptroller John Liu said this afternoon that he would reject the city's Taxi of Tomorrow contract as it's now written, Public Advocate Bill de Blasio sent out a reminder that he didn't like the Taxi of Tomorrow first.
Both men, apparently, are planning to run for mayor in 2013.
Story Continued Below
"The Taxi of Tomorrow competition was an exercise in missed opportunities," de Blasio said, in an emailed statement. "This is a raw deal for New York City, and it's high time we demand more from the companies we subsidize. Taxpayers have been asked to foot the billion-dollar bill for an inaccessible vehicle with no promise of new local jobs—all for a company that does business in Iran. I commend Comptroller Liu for pledging to block Nissan's contract if these vehicles are not made accessible to all New Yorkers, and urge the Bloomberg Administration to use this opportunity to secure a better Taxi of Tomorrow for New York City."
While Liu opposes the Nissan contract on handicapped-accessibility grounds, de Blasio objects on the grounds of Nissan's business dealings in Iran.


text:
In the Beginning...
This account by Mrs. Luther Hess appeared in the July, 1925 issue of Farthest North Collegian.
NOTE: No one is better fitted to tell the intimate history of the college from its embryonic beginnings than Mrs. Luther C. Hess, whose keen interest and enthusiastic efforts weighed heavily in favor of the institution when it was yet a dream viewed with practical skepticism by legislators and even by others who have later become its whole-hearted friends and supporters. Not only does Mrs. Hess hold the distinction of being the only woman member of the Board of Trustees, but she is the one member of that Board who has served since its first appointment. For present and past services and constant helpful interest, there is no one to whom Alaska's college owes a greater debt of gratitude.
In the Beginning, by Mrs. Luther C. Hess


text:
Thank you for visiting. JennFit is a full service, fitness training
organzation dedicated to help you live life to its fullness.
You are unique. You have your own personal needs and goals.
Whether it is weight loss, trimming and toning, sports training or
getting together with your friends for a fun workout, Jenn will help
you reach your goals.
In your own home or in her studio, Jenn will develop a customized
workout specific to your needs.
At JennFit, it's all about you.
Expand your life, become stronger, move purposefully
towards your goals...and have fun along the way!


text:
So I have a need to setup a access point / Repeater, if that's the correct term. What I really need is to have a switch that is in another location to receive its connection to the network via wireless and still allow the use of the 10/100 ports.
Here is a diagram of what I want to do; the device i need is in red.
I'm not sure what type of hardware can do this type of task. Are there any broad suggestions on what sort of equipment I need?


text:
Learn About Local Health Providers at Free Des Moines Health Fair Saturday
Learn about local health and wellness provides at the Des Moines Health Fair this Saturday, Feb. 9 from Noon – 3 p.m. at Naturopathic Medicine, located at 2014 7th Ave South, Suite 102.
"Local, licensed health and wellness alternative care providers will all be located in one place!" reads an announcement. "Many booths to explore, ask questions, learn and connect!
There will be 15-minute presentations throughout the fair on various health and wellness topics.
Light refreshment, coffee and tea will be served.
All are welcome to this FREE event.
For more information, contact Dr. Lynn Mikel at [email protected].
[Would you like to have a Blogvertorial story, Ad and/or Event Listing like this on a popular, fast-growing website seen by over 80,000 interested Local Readers every month? Email us for more info, or check out our Advertise page!]


text:
When your romantic partner experiences success, do you celebrate it or do you feel diminished by it?
According to a new study published online in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, your answer may depend on whether you're a man or a woman.
After conducting a series of surveys and computer tests on heterosexual couples in the U.S. and the Netherlands, researchers concluded that men's self-esteem was lower when a partner succeeded than when a partner failed, whereas women's implicit self-esteem was not.
"There is an idea that women are allowed to bask in the reflected glory of her male partner and to be the 'woman behind the successful man,' but the reverse is not true for men," wrote lead author Kate Ratliff, an assistant professor of psychology at the University of Florida.
In fact, researchers concluded that men automatically interpreted a partner's success as their own failure, even when they were not in direct competition.
The study relied on five experiments involving roughly 900 men and women on college campuses and websites. In some experiments, couples were asked to write about episodes in which their romantic partner succeeded or failed. Afterward, they completed a computerized word association test that was intended to gauge their level of self-esteem.
Dutch students were included in experiments to counterbalance potential American cultural and gender biases.
But Ratliff and coauthor Shigehiro Oishi, a psychology professor at the University of Virginia, acknowledged that their findings were limited by the relatively young age of the study participants. Most were college undergraduates.
The study authors offer a number of possible reasons for the loss of male self-esteem.
"From a very young age, boys' playtime interaction tends to be marked by dominance-striving," authors wrote. "Young girls also pursue individual goals within social groups, but tend to do so while simultaneously striving to maintain group harmony."
The authors cited prior research that suggested men generally portrayed themselves as being more competent than they actually were. Being reminded of a time that their partner was successful might pose a threat to their own view of themselves.
Authors also suggested that men may feel a threat to the relationship itself if they feel they have been outperformed.
"Having a partner who experiences a success might hurt men's implicit self-esteem because ambition and success are qualities that are generally important to women when selecting a mate," the authors wrote. "So thinking of themselves as unsuccessful might trigger men's fear that their partner will ultimately leave them."


text: Born from Florentine saddlemaker Guccio Gucci's small luggage company in 1921, the legendary house of Gucci is renowned for its innovative take on classic silhouettes. Now headed by Alessandro Michele, the brand's signature style has been updated with a contemporary and edgy twist. The brand's refined range of women's necklaces boasts fine metals and innovative designs. Each Gucci necklace is carefully constructed with creative designs, rich textures, high-quality materials and a dose of contemporary attitude.


text:
No fancy tech stuff here, just a plain chicken egg and paint. Granted, it's much cooler than the pink and purple pastel eggs we used to get when we younger, so if we could get those matching Wii and PS3 eggs to boot, we might just spare the Easter Bunny. This year.
The Xbox 360 Easter Egg [Kotaku]


text: "My family loves it! They always use the app when we go on car rides or when they're bored at home. It's good to keep their imaginations going with reading. I totally recommend." - Parent @Gonzachr006 "The vibrant games, beautiful illustrations, and cute animation all make for an interactive experience, but kids get hooked on reading books" – PC Mag "We've never before seen as diverse a library offered up" – Common Sense Media "I love this app and I highly recommend it for children" - Wired Magazine's GEEKMOM "The benefit to children's literacy development cannot be overlooked" – Smart Apps for Kids Spark a lifelong love of learning in your young reader by joining us on a journey through an ever-expanding world of interactive digital books and Video Field Trips hosted by everyone's favorite storyteller, LeVar Burton. With Skybrary®, your child can truly go anywhere and be anything. Download it today and give your child a whole month of free access! FEATURES: • Enjoy unlimited access to hundreds of quality children's books. • Discover exclusive educational Video Field Trips. • Unlock interactive animations that bring the stories to life and support reading comprehension. • Find tailored book recommendations based on your child's age and interests. • Create customized profiles for up to 3 children at no additional cost. • Choose "Read to Me" or "Read by Myself" for each book. • Track your reader's progress with a Parent Dashboard. • Ad-free environment. For children, Skybrary is an immersive world of reading discovery, where they can pilot their own personal hot air balloons through 7 magical islands, each home to hundreds of quality books and videos that celebrate diversity, family and the world around us. Young readers are free to explore the topics they love most as well as discover new areas of interest. WHAT MAKES SKYBRARY SO SPECIAL? • Supports increased reading frequency and literacy development. • Designed to enhance reading comprehension through purposeful interactivity. • Enhances a child's relationship to reading by making it fun, interesting, and relevant. • Designed to engage young minds within the context of a modern family's busy lifestyle. • Provides healthy, interactive, educational screen time. HOW THE SKYBRARY SUBSCRIPTION WORKS: • Register and get a 1 Month Free Trial to everything we have to offer! • Subscribe and unlock an unlimited reading experience for your child: 1 Month for $4.99 USD or 1 Year for $39.99 USD (all subscriptions are recurring). • Your subscription is connected to your iTunes Account and can be used on additional iPads, iPhones, and across the web on any browser. • Payment will be charged to your iTunes Account at confirmation of purchase or at the start of the first subscription period after an eligible free trial has completed. • Your subscription will auto-renew unless auto-renewal is canceled at least 24 hours before the end of the current subscription period. • You may turn off auto-renewal at any time from your iTunes account settings. • Cancellations will be reflected during your next billing cycle. Privacy Policy: https://www.levarburtonkids.com/privacy-policy Terms of Use: https://www.levarburtonkids.com/terms-of-use © 2017 LeVar Burton Kids. All rights reserved. Skybrary® property of RRKidz, Inc. DBA LeVar Burton Kids


text:
Coronary Artery Disease
For diagnosis and treatment of coronary artery disease, you demand crystal-clear images of the moving heart and of challenging cardiac anatomies in any angulation. To spice up the challenge, dose has to be kept to a minimum even during complex procedures.
Our Artis systems deliver images in excellent quality and at low dose, displayed the way you like them best with CLEARchoice. A wide variety of software tools supports the toughest percutaneous coronary interventions.
Find out how smart solutions from Siemens can support you in your routine and advanced procedures for coronary artery diseases.
Clinical Applications
Our dedicated clinical solutions such as CLEARstent and CLEARstent Live or IVUSmap help you tackle the toughest challenges in coronary artery disease.
Speed up diagnostic coronary examinations and save contrast agent
Artis Family of Imaging Systems
The Artis family includes four product lines of interventional imaging systems: Artis one, Artis zee, Artis Q, and Artis Q.zen.
While the floor stand of the Artis one offers ceiling-like movement on a small foot print, the other product lines include a floor-, ceiling-mounted, or biplane system and even a highly flexible multi-axis system with robotic technology: Artis zeego. The versatile portfolio from Siemens offers the right solution for virtually any need in interventional cardiology.


text:
AOL bought Huffington Post for $315 million earlier this year.
So far, according to an anonymous reader who sent us the following note, the integration is going badly.
We haven't checked any of this (including the reader's identity), and some of it sounds preposterous. (The "enemies list", for example). We look forward to hearing what AOL and Huffpo employees have to say about it.
As we noted when the deal was announced, successfully integrating these two companies while also turning around AOL is going to be extremely challenging. It will involve the purging of those who disagree with or resist strategic choices, and it will no doubt create dissent and frustration in the ranks. This note presumably captures the "dissent" perspective.
Twelve reasons why the AOL - Huffington Post merger is going down in flames.
The tragedy here is that not only will the deal ruin AOL, but it will also ruin the Huffington Post.It is the Peter Principle on a grand scale. None of AOL's senior editors (Huffington, Roy Sekoff, and Nico Pitney) have ever managed more than a few people. Now they have hundreds and lack the experience to manage a team this big. Behind the scenes, long time Huffposters say that Jai Singh's departure has eliminated the key adult in the room. Now they need to grow HuffPost and save AOL - not possible.Dissension in edit. The editorial team is miserable and views Arianna as unpredictable and her leadership unsteady. Several editors are racing to close book deals to be write the "Devil Wear's Prada" of the digital age. Others are aggressively pitching unflattering profiles to New York Magazine, Vanity Fair, and the LA Times. The lack of maturity and loyalty among editors is stunning - even those close to her are extremely negative behind her back - which is surprising because she has done a great job taking care of her people.Hasty launches. New site launches, like AOL Healthy Living, are little more than Huffington Post channels and very poor quality The real URL is www.huffingtonpost.com/aolhealthyliving - it is a joke. Dissension in tech. CTO Paul Berry is miserable in his new role and refuses to create an org chart. Most of the tech team is miserable that they have to do things that large, complicated, advertising based sites require. They would prefer to focus on huffingtonpost.com.No product function. Huffington Post effectively eliminated AOL's product function - design and development of the sites is handled by editors via email list serves, creating enormous amounts of churn.Unclear lines of authority. Editors are turning down sponsorships - refusing to allow McDonald's or K-Mart sponsor AOL's fashion week coverage.Traffic is down. The integration is likely destroying the huffington post. The sales demands and content over-reach are destroying huffpost's focus while the org is trapped trying to save AOL when the huffpost team should be focused on building huffpost. Traffic on huffpost is up - but only due to the redirects from aol sites…. Net net, aol plus huff post traffic is in decline and the situation is not improving. Imperial over-reach. AOL will eliminate Popeater and Parentdish this month and roll them into the Huffington Post. Arianna's people are plotting to eliminate all non huffingtonpost.com websites and redirect all traffic to the huffingtonpost.com. No one thinks consolidating to huffingtonpost.com is a good idea from a consumer or an advertiser perspective, but no one will stop Arianna.Fear and paranoia. Large parts of the org recognize the strategy is bad for the business but everyone is afraid to speak out. Arianna is rumored to have created an enemies list across the company and has directed her loyalists to collect dossiers on other managers across the company and report back on conversations. Her list includes several key business, sales, technology, and marketing executives she wants to eliminate and replace with her people. Anyone who disagrees, even if backed by data and clear rationale's - goes on the enemies list. Facts don't matter. Nepotism. Huffington is also quietly positioning several of her senior folks, in particular, Chris Davis, to take over the business, marketing, and distribution functions of the Huffington Post Media Group, do away with the business edit split, and eliminate COO John Brod. Davis, like the rest of the team, has never managed a business of this size or complexity.
Lack of exec buy in. Several senior execs are actively positioning themselves and their businesses for the eventual private equity takeover - few have confidence this will work.Waiting for Tim. CEO Tim Armstrong remains enamored with the Huffpost team and has created a double standard - huffposters can launch poor sites, create low quality articles, and and launch low quality video programming it and get away with it. He believes they can do no wrong and that the integration is going fantastic.
What do AOL and HuffPo employees think of this take? Let us know below or at email@example.com or 646.376.6014. We're discreet.


text:
How to Use the Context
Inquiry Question
The issue of school desegregation was neither peculiar to the South nor to the 20th century. As early as 1849, in the school desegregation case of Roberts v. the City of Boston, attorney Charles Sumner, arguing on behalf of the African-American plaintiffs, stated:
Who can say that this does not injure the blacks? Theirs, in its estate, is an unhappy lot. Shut out by a still lingering prejudice from many social advantages, a despised class, they feel this proscription for the Public Schools as a peculiar brand. Beyond this, it deprives them of those healthful animating influences which would come from a participation in the studies of their white brethren. It adds to their discouragements. It widens their separation from the rest of the community, and postpones the great day of reconciliation which is sure to come.¹
Sumner's argument did not sway the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts in 1849. Massachusetts, however, did outlaw school segregation in 1855 after black and white abolitionists organized a propaganda campaign to persuade the Massachusetts legislature to enact a law prohibiting school segregation.²
The Massachusetts model did not become the basis of race relations in this country. Instead, after the Civil War and Reconstruction, a Louisiana case set the standard. In 1892, Homer Plessy refused to sit in the railroad car designated for blacks. By refusing to move, Plessy violated an 1890 Louisiana law, which provided for equal but separate accommodations for the white and "colored" races on state railroads. Plessy, tried and convicted at the local level, took his case to the U.S. Supreme Court. In 1896, the Court determined in Plessy v. Ferguson that laws separating the races did not imply that one race was inferior to another. The Court concluded that if blacks felt inferior it was "...solely because the colored race chooses to put that construction upon it."³
Fifty-eight years passed before Plessy was overturned in arguably the most well-known school desegregation case of all, Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas. In 1954, almost one hundred years after the legal desegregation of the Massachusetts schools, the Supreme Court struck down Plessy by declaring that separate schools were inherently unequal. Attorney Thurgood Marshall, like Sumner, argued that it was the intangible benefits that made the difference between segregated and desegregated schools. Marshall concluded that the mere fact of segregation sanctioned by law implied the inferiority of African Americans and prohibited children from the opportunity to "...learn to live, work and cooperate with children representative of approximately 90% of the population of the society in which they live; to develop citizenship skills; and to adjust themselves personally and socially in a setting comprising a cross-section of the dominant population."4
Unlike Sumner, Marshall succeeded in convincing the Court. A year later in Brown II, the second part of the decision relating to Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas, the court attempted to define the process by which desegregation would take place by directing federal district courts to enforce the desegregation of schools "with all deliberate speed." This left the door open for those in opposition to school desegregation to delay the process almost indefinitely.
Ten years later most southern schools, including the New Kent School and the George W. Watkins School, remained segregated. While African-American schools, such as the George W. Watkins School, could boast of a faculty that genuinely cared about its students, they still suffered from inadequate resources. It was at this time that Dr. Calvin C. Green, president of the New Kent County branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and father of three, decided it was time to take on the local school board in hopes of forcing the county to provide better educational opportunities for all students.¹ Jeffrey C. Stewart, 1001 Things Everyone Should Know About African American History (New York: Doubleday, 1996), 91.
² Susan Cianci Salvatore, Waldo Martin, Vicki Ruiz, Patricia Sullivan, and Harvard Sitkoff, Racial Desegregation in Public Education in the United States Theme Study (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 2000), 8.
³ Eric Foner and John A. Garraty, The Readers Companion to American History (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1991), 844.
4 Mark V. Tushnet, ed., Thurgood Marshall: His Speeches, Writings, Arguments, Opinions, and Reminiscences (Chicago: Lawrence Hill Books, 2001), 22.


text:
We are all active participants in the dynamics of our Universe.
Art and poetry blog with oil paintings, drawing and short childlike rhymes.Also an artist theory on the physics of 'time' as a physical process!
We are all active participants in the dynamics of our Universe.
Would this explain why we never 'seem' to learn from history?
If we say the time continuum is formed by a universal process of energy exchange formed by light interacting with the atoms of the periodic table. In such a process 'the moment of now' is formed when light is absorbed and emitted this is relative to the object or life form. For you and me 'the moment of now' is continuously unfolding in the form of electrical activity (light) relative to the structure of the brain (atoms). Therefore we are always in the centre of our own reference frame seeing the process unfold being able to look back in time in all directions at the beauty of the stars. It is this personalization of the brain being in 'the moment of now' in the centre of its own frame of reference that gives us the concept of 'mind' with each one of us having our own unique personal view of the Universe.


text:
Chevalier College, Bowral
Through these photographs I was looking to convey the commonalities and differences in the extent to which people consciously project an image of themselves emotionally and physically, and to juxtapose this with a more severe, though unguarded look at each subject. I arrived at this idea through the refining, stylising and intellectualising of previous, more aesthetic ideas on the relationships between people and through the representation of place, their own selves. The medium employed was chosen as I have had prior interests in photography and chose subjects to whom I am close in order to accurately and effectively portray my intentions.


text:
|My wish list
|Clear ALL
21 June 2019
|Reflecting style into your home, the chic design of the chic vintage floor standing mirror, with black frame, will provide a fantastic feature in the bedroom.
The elegant frame is made from durable fir wood, while the slim line design is accentuated by a black finish. The large rectangular mirror will give the illusion of space, helping to open up your room. The adjustable full length mirror allows you to see the full outfit. The stand at the back ensures the mirror will be sturdy and stable. Complementing most decors, the chic vintage floor standing mirror is as functional as it is fashionable.
|Overall Size :
|160 x 40 cm
|Mirror Size :
|149 x 29 cm
|Mirror Type :
|Plain Mirror
|Shape :
|Approximate Weight :
|5.94 kg
At Mirrorworld we endeavour to deliver your mirror as quickly and safely as possible.
However, this can vary dependant on a number of factors.
The vast majority of our mirrors are delivered from stock including our superfast 24hr option but a few other circumstances can influence our deliveries.
We care greatly that your mirror arrives in pristine condition, so large or especially fragile items are upgraded, FREE of charge to our 'White Glove' delivery service. In essence, this means we hand deliver your mirror right to your door ourselves, potentially bypassing a heavy handed national courier. The small consequence to this excellent service could mean waiting an extra few days for a delivery. We cover 95% of addresses within the UK between 10-14 days. If you need to know when we are delivering in your area, our knowledgeable sales staff will be pleased to assist with our schedule details.
Where the items are labelled 'Due In', this means items may be delayed a few days whilst mirrors undergo final assembly processes and quality checks before being dispatched.
Where items are labelled 'To Order' or 'Made to Measure', these items are ONLY manufactured once an order has been received. We can normally do this within 5-7 days but some items such as our Art Deco range and Bevelled Tiles can take up 14-21 days manufacturing time.
If you do require a quicker service, this is often possible but please do check BEFORE you order to avoid disappointment.
Mirrorworld want you to be completely satisfied with your purchase.
In the unlikely event you wish to return your item for any reason, we operate a 14 day no quibble returns policy in which you may return your goods for up to 14 days from receipt, for a full refund. Please see Mirrorworld terms and conditions to view our complete returns procedure.
Please note:- Goods that are bespoke, made to order or made-to-measure to your specific requirements are unfortunately not covered by this returns policy and are non-refundable. When ordering these type of items please check carefully your sizes and specifications BEFORE placing your order.
Items found to be faulty will be replaced or rectified free of charge.
For full details of our returns policy and terms and conditions following this link click here...
|View complete collection in the Cheval range
|Read our testimonials
Stock Label Information
Denotes IN Stock ready for despatch. Final quality check and packaging. Normal 2-4 days from order to delivery.
Denotes materials in stock, but require assembly. Normally 7 - 10 days from order to delivery.
Denotes goods due into our warehouse imminently, normally within 10 - 14 days and after a final quality check your order will be packed and despatched immediately.
Denotes designs made soley to order by our craftsmen, delivery normally 14 - 21 days.
Larger items: These may have to be delivered via our own vehicle, delivery will be arranged on an individual basis. Location normally dictates delivery times.
Note: "Days" referes to Working Days Mon-Fri Incl
|Close Window


text:
You are here - Personal Psychiatric Services >
Gary has helped me be a better person. I would recommend this practice to anybody, very professional, friendly, and seem to actually care about what's going on with a person. Gary is also working with me on how to better understand me, how to get past some barriers I have built up for whatever reason over the years from childhood until present day and I am feeling better about myself. I actually look forward to coming to my therapy secessions. Don't hesitate to come see these folks, they can help.
Virginia Beach
I have received nothing but excellent service at this office, from my therapist, Erin, to the front office. Laura and Rita are very professional, friendly, and courteous.
Bob Glass
Dr Gary provides a wonderful caring atmosphere and I know that our sessions are helping me to better manage my home and family life. I find myself moving forward and making decisions that put more emphasis on my well being.
Susan P
Excellent office staff , Rita and Laura are very helpful. I have had a very nice experience with all the staff in this office. They all are very knowledgeable and professional staff.
Bill R
I brought my 6 year old daughter in to see Danielle Bell. At first I thought "boy is she young, does she really know what she is doing " but after meeting with her a few times I felt very confident that she could help my child. The office staff is on the ball and when I needed FMLA paperwork filled out Rita at the front desk was very sweet and went out of her way for me, and always returned my phone calls promptly. I highly recommend Fairfield and Danielle!
I would highly recommend this practice. Gary is down to earth, insightful, and very compassionate. My husband and I have seen Gary to help us deal with issues in our marriage before they became insurmountable. I also have seen Gary on and individual basis, and he has helped to learn to deal with issues in my life that I have no control over and how to learn to live with it. The staff is very helpful also.
Sandy Q
Would recommend this practice to anyone. The Therapist, Gary Rotfus is very compassionate and uplifting and as for the Physician, He is the most caring, & personable Physician I know!!
Virginia Beach


text:
Staff writer
Toes tapped, chins bobbed, and smiles lit up the faces of more than 100 Lifelong Learning participants Friday as they listened to the music of the Cottonwood River Band at Wolgemuth Music Education Center in Hillsboro. The listeners came from all over Marion County, and some from adjoining counties, to hear the locally connected band.
The Durham-Hillsboro-Tampa based band members Delayne Herbel, Vince and Julie Jantz, Richard Dirks, and Tim Deiner played and sang county-style gospel and bluegrass songs ranging from "Amazing Grace" to "Put Another Log on the Fire," much to the delight of those in attendance.
Herbel (guitar and vocalist) and Deiner (guitar and melodica player) work at Countryside Feeds in Hillsboro. Vince (bass guitar and backup vocalist) and Julie (lead vocalist) Jantz own Jantz Construction of Tampa, and Dirks (harmonica player) is retired, living in Hillsboro.
"This group was just great. They were so much fun," said Lifelong Learning Director Connie Isaac. "The words they sang were so fitting and the crowd really seemed to enjoy it."
Isaac, who has kept track of membership attendance through her 20-years of involvement with the Lifelong organization, knew ahead of time that this group would be a hit with her usual crowd.
"I have this amazing Access database that my husband helped me set up years ago that I can use to record how many people attend what type of programs," she said. "I also use it to keep track of program ideas and have over 16,000 names of people to contact with interesting talents. They really come out for the fun acts."
John Dick of Hillsboro said he joined the Lifelong Learning group as a member just this past year and was really enjoying the variety of programming.
"Connie just does a great job of bringing in worthwhile entertainment," he said. "I think it is the wide variety of programs that she coordinates that keep people coming back."
Lifelong Learning has members from Florence, Marion, Ramona, Newton, Goessel, and Buhler, as well as several other towns, including Hillsboro where sessions are held almost each week through the spring months.
"After 20 years of doing this, I think we will be cutting back from 16 to 12 sessions next year," Isaac said. "It takes a lot of my time, probably because I love to talk with everyone so much, but I am getting to the age where I would like some time off."
Isaac is the backbone of the Lifelong programming, producing brochures, organizing events, and sending out invitations on her own. She gets a small stipend from Tabor College for her work, but said volunteering was an important part of her life.
"I believe very strongly that even in retirement you should still do what you can to make a difference," she said. "I have always enjoyed bringing people together and keep my eyes open for good entertainment and programs."
Isaac said she had several members of the Cottonwood River Band in her database because they were Tabor College alumni. Although the group had only been together for several years, someone who had heard them recommended them highly.
Dick said he knew many of the members, he just had no idea they were so musically inclined.
"I've known Vince Jantz was a builder in the area, but never knew he played the bass guitar," Dick said. "And Tim Deiner — it was fun seeing familiar people doing something like this. I had no idea."
LaVerne Richert, who came from Buhler with her husband Herb for Friday's program, said she would not have missed the group for anything.
"We have been regular members for many years," Richert said. "Isaac just goes out of her way to bring in the best entertainment. This was so much fun. They made everyone laugh. These programs are certainly worth the drive."
Lifelong Learning sessions are over for the season, but Isaac said she was already confirming acts for the coming year.
"I've got more ideas than I'll ever be able to use," she said. "I really try to focus on bringing in a variety of entertainment for the area. It is a good way for all of us to broaden our horizons."


text:
Results > Posts Filed Under > Stauer
Nov 27
Posted by Gina.
Isaac McROBIE (Andrew, John William, William) was born in 1847 in Maryland. He died on 1 Dec 1929 in Warren County, Iowa. He is supposedly buried in the Indianola I.O.O.F. Cemetery in Warren County, Iowa. He was a farmer.
Isaac married Almeda May HAMMON on 22 Jun 1869 in Warren County, Iowa. Almeda was the daughter of Levi Willard HAMMON and Elizabeth STAUER. She was born on 11 May 1852 in Knox County, Ohio. …


text:
2019 Media Kit
Quick Stat
Disaster Recovery Journal's Website and online newsletters are by far the most read BC/DR product available. Average monthly unique visitors to DRJ.com: 64,000 – total registered users: 138,000.
Package Offers
Contact our office if you would like to evaluate a marketing package that includes items covering the various avenues available through DRJ. Significant discounts can apply.
Guaranteed Satisfaction
If you are not satisfied with the results of any advertising campaign, DRJ will work with you until you are completely satisfied or all associated fees will be waived.


text:
Find Your Perfect Home.
Free Soil Real Estate
Free Soil is located in Michigan. Free Soil, Michigan has a population of 144. Free Soil is less family-centric than the surrounding county with 21.88% of the households containing married families with children. The county average for households married with children is 22.38%.
The median household income in Free Soil, Michigan is $25,000. The median household income for the surrounding county is $42,156 compared to the national median of $53,482. The median age of people living in Free Soil is 52 years.
Free Soil Weather
The average high temperature in July is 80 degrees, with an average low temperature in January of 17.4 degrees. The average rainfall is approximately 35.3 inches per year, with inches of snow per year.
View Homes for Sale in Free Soil
Free Soil Map
Real Estate Near Free Soil
Nearby Cities
Nearby Cities Homes for Sale
Free Soil Zip Codes