I was on the swim team at A&M, and one night after we had concluded a meet in Austin, which is the home of our arch rival, the University of Texas, whose nom de guerre is "Longhorns", but whom we call "T-sips", we all went out for refreshments.
I ended up at the bar between two T-sips. I had a full glass of beer, and I told the T-sip on my left to place the index finger of his right hand on the bar, which he did. I rubbed the bottom of my full glass of beer over his finger and asked him if felt a very special sensaton. He replied no.
I went, "Hmmm." Then I told him to place the index finger of his left hand on the bar, and he again complied. I once again rubbed the bottom of my full glass of beer over his finger and asked him if he felt a very special sensation this time. Once again he told me he had not.
Once again I went, "Hmmmm."
So now I told him to put both index fingers on the bar right next to each other. In other words, the index finger of his left hand was on the bar right next to the index finger of his right hand.
I set my full glass of beer on his two index fingers and walked away. -:)
deleted for clarity
Originally Posted by newnature
Well, I am not a first time poster but I WAS going to ask a theological question a couple of days ago. (I asked where the "Other" forum was.) I hesitated because I didn't want to start a debate. Perhaps my decision not to was a wise one?:)
Well, you are partly correct, however, it is not a question of morality, it is a test of obedience. The test was conducted by God just as He used the talking Donkey as an adversary to test Balaam: Numbers 22:27 (KJV)
Originally Posted by newnature
27 And when the ass saw the angel of the LORD, she fell down under Balaam: and
Balaam's anger was kindled, and he smote the ass with a staff.
To imply any more than that is to go beyond what the scripture says.
1 Chronicles 21:15 (KJV)
And God sent an angel unto Jerusalem to destroy it: and as he was destroying, the LORD beheld, and he repented him of the evil, and said to the angel that destroyed, It is enough, stay now thine hand. And the angel of the LORD stood by the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite.
Matthew explains what is meant by an enemy: It correctly states
that the word ζιζάνιον is cheat a troublesome weed in the grαinfields, resembling wheat, in our lit. only ρl. and then BAG inserts the word (tares). (mistakenly) cockle, tares which are a (synonym)
Matthew 13:26-29 (Darby)
But when the blade shot up and produced fruit, then appeared the darnel also. 27 And the bondmen of the householder came up and said to him, Sir, hast thou not sown good seed in thy field? whence then has it darnel?
And he said to them, A man [that is] an enemy has done this. And the bondmen said to him, Wilt thou then that we should go and gather it [up]? 29 But he said, No; lest [in] gathering the darnel ye should root up the wheat with it.
After a brief statement of some facts relating to the use of the neuter in the LXX, he continues: 'The masculine ο πονηρος is used, as is also its Hebrew equivalent, to designate a wicked man, when an individual is pointed out; but it is never used in the Septuagint to designate the ' Evil One.' It certainly would not occur to any one familiar with the language of the Septuagint, to interpret the word as equivalent to Satan'
Lightfoot P. 273-283 Revision of the English Version of the New Testament