In the Fullness of Time

Galatian 4:4 "But, when the fullness of time was come God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
5 To redeem them that were under the law,"

It is the time of year when we remember the Birth of the Lord Jesus Christ. As I shared in the devotional at our children's Sunday School program last week, this event occurred at the exact moment in history ordained by God the Father.

First, the fullness of time. In the Greek,

that which is (has been) filled

a) a ship inasmuch as it is filled (i.e. manned) with sailors, rowers, and soldiers

b) in the NT, the body of believers, as that which is filled with the presence, power, agency, riches of God and of Christ

2) that which fills or with which a thing is filled

a) of those things which a ship is filled, freight and merchandise, sailors, oarsmen, soldiers

b) completeness or fulness of time

3) fulness, abundance

4) a fulfilling, keeping


God put together all the pieces "as a ship fitted for passage" then he sent forth His Son.

What were those pieces?

We know that in Daniel 9, God promises that the Messiah would come 483 weeks/years after the command to restore and rebuild Jerusalem. That was 49 years or 7 weeks until the exiled Jews would return to Jerusalem plus the 434 week/years till the Messiah would come.

We also know that there were numerous other prophecies which had to be fulfilled in the birth of the Messiah. That he would be a descendant of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David. That He would be born in Bethlehem.

That he would be born of a woman, see Genesis 3:15, Luke 1:34, and Galatians 4:4.

All these things God caused to occur just as He fortold, so that at the one moment in time when all of the necessary prophecies were completed or prepared, as ship fit for passage, God sent His method of Redemption.

As you and your family celebrate the birth of the Savior of the World, remember that Christ came at precisely the time God intended for Him to come.

And a question, if the God of the Universe is capable of telling when and how His Son would come, what prophecies are yet to be fulfilled? What does the future hold?

Titus 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;

I want to wish all of you a Merry Christmas. And may your future be filled with the hope of a Coming Savior.

A little test for my readers.

After you take the test let us know how you did.

I got 9 out of 12. I'll explain later.



Update:

Ok, I apologize for not telling all of you that the answers page was no possible to access without taking the second part of the survey.

I would never encourage anyone to lie, but I happen to know that if you answer the questions, put John Smith in the name line, JohnSmith@hotmail.com on the email line and ajdieioajf on the friend section it will pass you through to the answers.

The answers page has pop-ups with dates court cases and other info worth reading.

An update on Rudy Ghoulini and Stare Decisis

Thanks to my friend, and legal advisor, BriantheGreat for this update.

In the post I wrote on November the 7th, I tried to make the case that Rudy is talking about appointing strict constructionist judges because he believes that judges who are strict constructionists will not overturn Roe vs. Wade based on a legal principle called stare decisis.
Read the previous article for a much fuller explanation.

BriantheGreat told me about an interview by Cal Thomas of Rudy Giuliani in todays Des Moines Register.


And this is the money quote, I would say I told you so, but that's not polite. Just read it and see for yourself.

Of greatest interest to social conservatives is Giuliani’s pledge to nominate only “strict constructionists” to the federal courts. Why would a supporter of “choice” on abortion nominate judges likely to overturn Roe v. Wade? “My view of a strict constructionist or originalist judge who sticks with the plain meaning of the Constitution comes from my judicial philosophy. It’s not that I want one particular decision changed.” He added that originalists might have “different views on this” and that precedent might trump even a wrongly decided case like Roe. Or, he said, the justices could overturn it. He cited the Second Amendment case the Supreme Court agreed to consider as a fine example of strict constructionism and noted that Judge Laurence Silberman read “The Federalist Papers” and other writings and speeches at the time the Bill of Rights was written to see what the authors intended.


Let me highlight the relevant point, that precedent might trump even a wrongly decided case like Roe.

He's not hiding it, he's not trying to fool you, he's right in your face with it. I'm going to appoint judges who will not overturn Roe vs. Wade, even though it's bad law, because of stare decisis or using his word, precedent.

There it is plain as the nose on your face. What more can I say?

For JACIII

This is a picture of the combine I had when I was farming for myself.






I've always been one of those guys who does things a little different than most people.
I bought an adapter to run JD heads on a IH combine.

Lastest Iowa Poll Results

My analysis of the Des Moines Register articles of Sunday Dec. 2nd.

First, I'm not surprised that Huckabee is now leading in the polls. The anybody but Rudy crowd has hitched their wagon to Mike's horse and they will ignore his big government tendencies, his support until recently of Jorge the Younger's open door policy toward illegal aliens. After all, Mike is a born-again Christian, he's an excellent public speaker, and he's not bad looking either, now that he lost a hundred lbs.

Romney is in free fall. I would not be surprised if he continues to loose support. And his friends aren't helping his cause. The Republican Majority for Choice ran a full page add in todays paper showing Romney's pirouettes on the abortion issue. One day he's pro-baby killer the next pro-life, the next limited baby-killer, the next limited pro-life, only kill part of them, ya know. I quote from the add, Take a stand Mr. Romney. On behalf of the Republican Majority for Choice, ask Mr . Romney to flip-flop just one more time, back to being pro-choice... and stay there. Ouch.

Fred is dead. He will be lucky to finish 5th. He just comes across as, well, old and tired, I don't personally know of anyone still supporting him.

Ron Paul and McCain were tied at 7 percent. Now that is a bit deceiving as McCain is also toast. I only know of one person supporting him and she signed on over a year and a half ago. She is also a party person to the core, so it's his turn in her mind.

Deep in another article is a fascinating piece. In a paragraph entitled

Republicans: Can Paul finish third?

Ron Paul has tied John McCain, an amazing development for both men. But Paul attracts a lot of young people and first-time caucusgoers. Yet based on his rate of gain in a month, Paul could challenge Rudy Giuliani for a third-place finish — if he spends more time in Iowa and some of that wad of money he's raised on the Internet. He needs to show his zealous supporters just how to attend a GOP caucus

This column is written by David Yepsen, a lib, but a relatively fair one. If he thinks Ron Paul has a chance of finishing third, my guess is he knows the numbers are there. He's been a good prognosticator of Iowa elections. In other words Ron Paul is still gaining ground.

Now the other side of the picture. The liberal left (including the entire staff at the Register) hate true Constitutionalists. In this same edition of the paper, where one of their senior news reporters considers the possibility that Ron Paul might finish third on the Republican side ran an editorial article with the title "Recommit to Founding Principles" the issue Civil Liberties

In this article they trash Jorge the Younger for abandoning the Fourth Amendment with the Patriot Act and other attacks on civil liberties. Below this article on the same page is a chart with the candidates positions of the issue. They give all the democrats + scores while giving only John McCain a + score on the republican side(yes the same John McCain of McCain/Feingold). Amazing thing though, Ron Paul is not included on the list. I nearly blew a gasket. One man in the entire campaign, spends time talking about the erosion of our civil liberties and he's completely ignored.

It seems like the Iowa voters are likely to get exactly what they have gotten every time since Reagan. They will choose a good guy who talks the conservative line, and they will get a slow and steady loose of their remaining rights. Instead of voting for a candidate who wants to make a radical move back to the Constitution, they will instead chose the conservation of the here and now, ignoring the fact the we now live under 7 of the ten points of the Communist Manifesto.

Ron Paul Vote for a return to the Constitution