text:
Really excited to be going to Edinburgh for a few days next week; just wondering if anyone knows of any places I can buy bento or bento supplies there, or any good restaurants? These are the kind of priorities I have when travelling to another city or country! I trust forumers judgement when it comes to good places to eat, too. :)
Obento Baby used to live in Scotland, she's now moved to Oz, but I'm sure if you asked her on the blog she might be able to offer advice?
I can only tell you who I have found so far that will ship to the UK (I'm in Northern Ireland)
Info on my Blog here:
Near the end of the post!
Hopefully you might get another scottish bento-ist to help you out!
Good Luck in your search and let us know if you do find anything!
Sushi in Edinburgh! Noooo - actually I have no idea. There's a great whisky place up on the Royal Mile that does good haggis though. Mind you, there are probably heaps of them and I can't remember the name of the one we went to.
My blog is Food and Shoes
I used to go to Edinburgh fairly regularly, but that was rather a long time ago....
You might be interested in a newly formed company based in Glasgow. They won a competition last year run by Runfrewshire council and the publicity for this contest says that the company were a group of three Japanese entrepreneurs (I found more info in the BBC which says that they'd been made redundant by JVC and wanted to stay in Scotland - I hope they do well).
The website http://www.bentoboxglasgow.com/ is under construction at the moment but you can see a screenshot of previously published web pages here:
I'd strongly suggest giving them a call first though if you're tempted to make the short trip over to Glasgow.
If not, this article
says you can get some food from "Bento Box" in a Delicatessen chain called Peckhams
They have three branches in Edinburgh - addresses here: http://www.peckhams.co.uk/branches.html
Thanks guys! I knew Obento Baby used to live in Scotland, but I'd never been on her lovely blog before, so thanks for bringing it to my attention!
I hope to savour some whisky and haggis, but not proper haggis, just veggie (which I really love!). I like how cosmopolitan the food is in Edinburgh, and a lot of the more tourist/student/middle class places are really veggie friendly.
I think that Bento Box Glasgow is a really great project, and I hope they do well. I will find a Peckhams while I'm in Edinburgh, definitely - looks like really top quality deli fare.
|Last Post
|Sesame salad dressing
|5 years 41 weeks ago
|Authentic paella?
|5 years 42 weeks ago
|IMPORTANT: If you have a blog on JustBento...
|5 years 45 weeks ago
|Shiso - uses for this herb
|5 years 47 weeks ago
|Fuki (Japanese Butterbur) Tsukemono Recipes
|5 years 47 weeks ago
@justbento - strictly site updates
@makiwi - Maki tweets at random


text:
There are three factors to watch in the corn market over the next five months, said grain analyst Richard Brock — planted acreage, corn yield potential and feed and residual use.
Brock, addressing producers at the Mid-South Farm and Gin Show in February, believes that the latter should be decreasing in the next few months because USDA is projecting more corn being crushed for ethanol, therefore allowing for more substitution of DDGs, which would reduce the feed and residual number. Feed and residual use for 2010-11 is currently estimated at 5.2 billion bushels, but Brock said it could be as low as 4.9 billion bushels. "That would be a reduction of 300 million bushels added to the carryover."
Brock estimates that corn ending stocks will increase from 675 million bushels in 2010-11 to 979 million bushels in 2011-12. "That's still reasonably tight, but if you add 300 million bushels from feed and residual, that takes you to 1.279 billion bushels."
Brock believes corn acreage will fall between 91 million and 92 million acres this season. He pegs corn yield at 166 bushels, a number which might be too low, especially if favorable growing conditions allow corn genetics to reach their full potential.
Brock believes that rapidly improving genetics have kept corn yields respectable through several years of unfavorable weather. But if there's ever a year when everything goes right, yields could respond in a big way.
The Midwest is setting up nicely for such a year, he says. "I have never seen better soil moisture and conditions in prior to spring planting. In 2009, we had the worst fall we ever had. It was wet and it was long. Farmers were still harvesting corn in January. There were cartoons going around of a combine running through the field with the corn planter right behind it."
That was followed in 2010 by the earliest harvest in history. That led to timely ground preparation for this season's crop. "We had the heaviest fall fertilizer application we've ever seen. Now the big question is how big is the opening for planting going to be this spring."
If it all comes together, yield pushing 172 bushels per acre "is not out of the realm of possibility," Brock said. "Obviously, you can't count on that until you get the crop planted, but if you get this crop planted and get to the middle of June without any major crop problems or heat issues, we could really ramp these yields up.
"If U.S. growers plant 92 million acres of corn and produce a yield of 172 bushels per acre, carryover jumps to 1.6 billion, and you're looking at a corn crop that's $2 a bushel overpriced.
"The bulls will argue that we have a tight stocks-to-use ratio and if we have any delays getting planted or weather problems in May and June, we could blow the top off the market. But I think that's a tough bet. I can build a fundamental argument for bearish scenarios in corn, cotton and soybeans. All it takes is one good crop. But we have to get them planted."
Time to make decisions
It's decision-making time for marketers, Brock says. "The time is right now. Markets are anticipatory. They're based on what's about to happen, not what already has. Once the crop gets in the ground, opportunities are going to be gone."
To lock in corn prices, Brock says to look at a combination of crop insurance, hedge-to-arrive contracts and call and put options.
"Crop revenue insurance should fly off the shelves," according to Brock. "Your price for corn is determined by the average of December futures during February. Because of the bull spread market, we're probably going to average $5.93. If you buy a 70 percent policy, it's going to be expensive. But you'll have a floor under your crop at that price. Then I'm going to either a hedge-to-arrive contract or hedge it myself on the other 30 percent. You can put a floor under 100 percent of your crop and you still have the upside left."
Brock says buying out-of-the-money calls only "is probably not going to work. If you want to protect yourself on the upside, you have to buy calls and sell some out-of-the money puts to help you finance it. The premiums are just too high to buy calls or puts. Eighty percent of the time, you're going to lose whatever you pay for them anyway."
Grain storage may not be a good option this year, Brock adds. "The market is telling producers that it doesn't pay to store corn this year. In order for grain storage to work, you have to have a carrying charge market. Storage is not going to pay. Just because you have a bin doesn't mean you have to use it."
Brocks advised producers to "get everything sold for late August and early September delivery, take advantage of this premium, then rent the bins to your neighbor who didn't figure it out.
"Southern farmers have a huge advantage over Midwest farmers. You have a premium market because your crop comes off early. Don't look this gift horse in the mouth and not take advantage of it. It's an incredible opportunity."

subset: commoncrawl


text:
The equitation option is provided for students who have an interest in working in general agriculture and first and foremost the horse industry. The equine industry is growing and ever changing. The A.A.S. degree is intended to provide basic, practical, and theoretical grounds from which they can choose a field in the industry. Students work with young horses to acquire knowledge and skills in horsemanship, training, safe horse handling, and husbandry. Furthermore, a background in general agriculture is added to make for a very well rounded individual in knowledge that is important in livestock, feeds, range condition, business and marketing. The program is also designed for students who plan to pursue an advanced university degree in the field.
Upon completion of the program the student will be able to:
- Students will build a strong knowledge base in the field of Agriculture/Equine Science and practical skilled-based exposure in its related industries (Animal Sciences, Equine Sciences, Range and Soil Sciences, Business and Marketing).
- The course of study in Animal Science: Equitation Option will give the student the opportunity to demonstrate knowledge, skills, attitudes, and practical experiences for entry-level employment or self-employment in the equine and agricultural industry segments.
- Serve those students seeking a career in Equine Studies and Agriculture and/or planning to pursue an education beyond the associate's level.
- Expose students to courses in computation, communications, and human relations, and will assist students in developing an understanding and appreciation for diversity, social responsibility and the participation in public affairs.
- Provide students with opportunities for practical experience in the Agriculture/Equine Industry via internships, fieldwork, and skills-based course offerings.
- Assist students in the development of critical thinking and problem-solving skills, and the ability to conceptualize ideas.
- Serve those students seeking a career as an Equine Professional by providing in-depth and practical skills-based exposure to the equine training and sciences component of Agriculture.


text:
Why Does Nature Form Exoplanets Easily?
By Kevin Heng
The ubiquity of worlds beyond our Solar System confounds us.
The ubiquity of worlds beyond our Solar System confounds us.
An area of research that has attracted a lot of attention in the field of astronomy and astrophysics is planet formation: the study of how planets (in our Solar System) and exoplanets (orbiting other stars) form. Astronomers harness the power of telescopes with meter-sized or larger mirrors to search the night sky for exoplanets—and they find loads of them. In the past two years, NASA's Kepler Space Telescope has located nearly 3,000 exoplanet candidates ranging from sub-Earth-sized minions to gas giants that dwarf our own Jupiter. Their densities range from that of styrofoam to iron. Astronomers find them close to their parent or host stars with scorching temperatures of a few thousand degrees; they also find them distant from their stars, more than 10 times farther away than Jupiter is from our Sun. Perhaps most significant, the Kepler results demonstrate that rocky exoplanets are common in our local cosmic neighborhood—and by extension, our universe at large. Nature seems to have a penchant for forming exoplanets.
As astrophysicists, our goal is to construct hypotheses to explain what we see in nature. We create model universes and exoplanetary systems on paper and in our computers. When our hypotheses stand the tests of data and time, they eventually become accepted as theories. Hypotheses of planet formation are usually forged within two accepted paradigms: core accretion and gravitational instability. Core accretion is the "bottom-up" approach: Large objects form from smaller ones, eventually building up to exoplanets. Gravitational instability is the "top-down" method: Exoplanets form directly from larger structures in the primordial disks of gas and dust orbiting young stars. But when astrophysicists zoom in on the physical details, we find ourselves (and our hypotheses) flummoxed and, quite simply, outclassed by nature. Dust grains do not seem to readily stick. Even if rocks form, they then drift into the star much too quickly, fast enough to preclude their coalescence into larger objects. These larger, kilometer-sized objects, known as planetesimals, are in principle the building blocks of planets. For our Solar System, theorists struggle in modeling to form the rocky cores of the gas giants, Jupiter and Saturn, before the primordial gas of the natal disk dissipates. Even forming Neptune within the paradigm of core accretion takes too long due to its relative remoteness from the Sun. The devil is in the details and, unfortunately, they do matter when trying to construct synthetic exoplanets.
The hardest thing to observe with a telescope is a rock. Astronomers can see disks of gas and dust swirling around nascent stars, as well as fully formed exoplanets orbiting mature stars. But it is terribly difficult—if not impossible—to detect the presence of planetesimals, at least outside of our Solar System. An entire cottage industry of astronomers is engaged in the study of protostellar or protoplanetary disks, the purported birthplaces of exoplanets. They find a rich cacophony of features in these disks: asymmetries, gaps, warps, dust made from exotic substances. Sometimes, they even find exoplanets embedded in the disks (which often cause the features themselves). A decisive test of planet formation hypotheses is to study the properties of planetesimals within these disks, but these objects are practically invisible. Planetesimals are neither numerous (compared to dust grains) nor large enough (compared to exoplanets) to re-emit significant radiation that can be detected by telescopes. Any link to them is indirect and uncertain at best, made through assumptions of their relationship to the observed dust grains. Even estimating the masses of these disks remains a crude exercise at best and requires Solar System–centric assumptions on the opacity of the dust grains and the relative amounts of dust and gas present in the disk. We find ourselves bombarded with information, but knowledge eludes us.
The prevalence of rocky exoplanets in nature lends credence to the paradigm of core accretion. Astrophysicists hoping to model formation by this mechanism appear to have their work cut out for them: They must start with micrometer-sized dust grains and congregate them to produce larger particles, either on paper, in computer simulations or in the laboratory. The task is daunting, because there is conceivably a factor of a billion in size between dust grains and planetesimals. The protoplanetary disk conspires to exacerbate matters—gas orbiting a star tends to move at slower speeds than the dust grains do. The gas molecules, mostly hydrogen, in the disk are so numerous that they act like a fluid, which has an internal pressure. This self-exerted pressure support results in the gas orbiting the star at a speed slower than would be predicted. Dust grains or rocks, present in much fewer numbers, do not exhibit this property, and thus in their reference frame the gas appears to be coming towards them, much like what one encounters when one runs in the rain. This relative motion between the dust grain and the gas is azimuthal (around the star) instead of radial (toward or away from the star), which then leads to a loss of angular momentum and the radial motion of the dust grains towards the star. The time scale on which this "gas drag" phenomenon occurs is, uncomfortably, shorter than any conceivable time scale for grain growth. This conundrum is commonly called the "meter-size problem," because it afflicts meter-sized objects the most when they are located at the same distance from the Sun as the Earth.
Proposed solutions to the meter-size problem are plentiful. Some astrophysicists devote their careers to re-creating in their computers the conditions for encounters between dust grains. These simulations capture the intricate details of collisions, both constructive and destructive: coagulating, chipping, bouncing, deflecting, shattering. Dust grains of all sizes and shapes are studied. Again, we are awash in information, but knowledge is slower to come. Nature is hinting to us that planet formation is a robust phenomenon—surely, the mechanism involved cannot be privy to all of the micro-details of the dust grains and must be related somehow to the global properties of the protoplanetary disk. Although it cannot serve as a proof, we are guided by principles such as Occam's razor—when faced with many explanations, we pick the simplest one.
Theorists studying core accretion use two approaches. The first is to isolate a piece of the puzzle—such as the meter- size problem—and study the microphysics involved. Such approaches shed light on important pieces of the puzzle of planet formation but lose the big picture. A complementary approach is to use
population synthesis,
which is an attempt to incorporate all of the physics and chemistry involved in core accretion, starting from dust grains and ending up with exoplanets. Gaps in our knowledge of the details currently prevent the population synthesis framework from being a complete theory, but its redeeming quality is that it provides some falsifiable predictions.
Another solution is to bypass the intermediate steps of growth between dust grains and planetesimals. Protoplanetary disks are usually massive enough that gravity may triumph over pressure support. The fragments that result from gravitational instability may be the size of planetesimals or even exoplanets. The issue then is not that one cannot form structures, but rather that the gravitational instability paradigm lacks predictive power. Again, the devil is in the details. A successful theory of gravitational instability should start from the initial properties of the protoplanetary disk and the conditions imposed upon it by the star—the strength of irradiation, the metallicity of the natal gas (the abundance of elements that are heavier than hydrogen and helium), the mass of the disk—and predict the number of exoplanets that ensue, including their masses and interior structures. In other words, theorists need to build a population synthesis framework for gravitational instability. A theory with such completeness currently eludes us.
The true answer may lie in between the two paradigms. Giant structures may form in the disk, which then collect dust grains within them to form larger particles. An intriguing possibility is the existence of vortices, essentially giant cyclones or hurricanes forming out of the gas in the disk. Vortices have the ability to trap particles within them, much like dust devils on Earth—an old concept with its roots spanning back to the German philosopher Immanuel Kant. An attractive feature of this idea is that vortices would arise naturally from the turbulent gas if it behaves like a two-dimensional fluid. A parcel of fluid "lives" in a two-dimensional world if it is sufficiently buoyant in the third dimension—as it is displaced from its plane of existence, it returns to its original position quickly. The gas swirling around a protoplanetary disk may be regarded as a fluid; the disk also has a finite thickness. Dust tends to collect mostly at the midplane of the disk. It turns out that the midplanes of protoplanetary disks behave like three-dimensional fluids, whereas locations farther away from the midplane, where the solid material needed to grow structure is found in less abundance, behave like two-dimensional fluids. A successful theory of planet formation involving vortices has to identify a mechanism for producing them, predict their lifetimes and elucidate the means by which they will be destroyed.
Perhaps an easier way to provide constraints on hypotheses of planet formation is simply to stare at the planets themselves. Gas giants appear to be more common around stars with higher metallicities, consistent with the notion that one needs more solid material to construct larger cores and trigger runaway accretion of the natal gas. No trend in stellar metallicity is found for the occurrence of rocky exoplanets. When they are found, they tend to be social creatures, located in systems with other rocky brethren. These exoplanetary systems also tend to be "flat," just like our Solar System— the orbits of the rocky exoplanets lie roughly within the same plane. We now know that "hot Jupiters"—gas giants found implausibly close to their host stars, such that their temperatures are a few thousand degrees—are oddballs (comprising less than one percent of the entire exoplanet population) and loners (without nearby exoplanets as companions), despite being the most common type of exoplanets initially found due to their brightness and large sizes. Furthermore, hot Jupiters are often found in orbital planes that are misaligned with the spin axes of their host stars—in stark contrast to the systems hosting multiple, rocky exoplanets—perhaps providing a clue that they were delivered to their present locations via some kind of scattering mechanism.
Some of the Kepler telescope discoveries present invaluable puzzles and challenges to our current ideas of planet formation. The Kepler-11 system plays host to six exoplanets with radii ranging from twice to five times that of Earth. Three of these exoplanets have densities less than that of water. All six appear to lie roughly in the same orbital plane. The Kepler-16 system consists of a pair of stars orbited by a Saturnlike exoplanet, a harsh environment for any exoplanet to survive in because of the enhanced gravitational tugs of the stars. A diminutive red dwarf sits at the center of the Kepler-32 system, yet it is orbited by five exoplanets within a distance a third the size of Mercury's orbit. Perhaps the most puzzling case study comes from the Kepler-36 system. Two planets are found at roughly the same distance from the star: one with a density less than that of water, whereas the other is as dense as iron. Theorists are just coming to grips with these discoveries. The venerable theory of migration—the notion that exoplanets and their progenitors drift through the gaseous disk during assembly—is coming under scrutiny. It may turn out that migration, although an attractive idea for constructing our Solar System, is not really needed to form exoplanetary systems populated by close-in super Earths—Earthlike exoplanets somewhat larger than our Earth, which seem to be an omnipresent breed. Our Solar System appears not to be the dominant outcome of planet formation and it may be exerting a provincial influence on our theoretical ideas. In seeking to map out the universe, we find ourselves to be the exception rather than the norm.
An intriguing idea, suggested during a recent conference on Kepler exoplanets by Renu Malhotra of the University of Arizona, is to search for the transits of planetesimals around the corpses of stars known as white dwarfs. During a transit, a body passes in front of its host star, causing a dip in electromagnetic emissions from the star. By coincidence, the relative size of a planetesimal orbiting a white dwarf is equivalent to that of an Earth orbiting a Sunlike star. Because the Kepler Space Telescope is detecting Earthlike exoplanets around Sunlike stars, the reasoning is that it will be able to do the same for planetesimals transiting white dwarfs. If this idea meets with success, it will be the first time information on planetesimals outside of the Solar System will be obtained. Another fascinating idea concerns the hunt for moons around exoplanets—"exomoons." The idea is that these exomoons are formed during the final stages of assembly, during a phase of planet formation known as "clean-up," and may provide some clues on the properties of planetesimals.
If nothing else, one upshot from the numerous recent results is that planet formation is hardly a straightforward process, perhaps going some distance to explaining why nature forms planets and exoplanets more easily than theorists are capable of doing. But ultimately, we still seek a theory of planet formation because we wish to determine how common exoplanets, and life, are in the universe. The Kepler Space Telescope is showing us that about one in 10 stars may have an exoplanet that resembles Earth. For the aficionados, this frequency factor of 0.1 is termed "eta Earth"; it is one of the several factors in Drake's equation, which seeks to quantify how common exoplanets are around stars, how many of these exoplanets are capable of harboring life, and how many of them actually do host life. From extrapolating the Kepler results, Earthlike exoplanets likely number in the billions for our galaxy alone; unless life is an exceedingly rare event, it must exist elsewhere in the universe. We may never answer all of these questions, but understanding planet formation is a step in the right direction.
The author acknowledges financial and logistical support from the University of Bern, the University of
and the Swiss-based MERAC Foundation. He is grateful to Eric Agol, Dan Fabrycky and Jack Lissauer for enlightening conversations during the Kepler multi-planet conference, held at the Aspen Center for Physics in February 2013, Scott Tremaine and Lucio Mayer for constructive comments on an earlier version of the article, and George Lake for encouragement.
Click "American Scientist" to access home page


text:
Find Your Perfect Home.
Eastlake Real Estate
Eastlake is located in Michigan. Eastlake, Michigan has a population of 505. Eastlake is less family-centric than the surrounding county with 15.44% of the households containing married families with children. The county average for households married with children is 22.42%.
The median household income in Eastlake, Michigan is $36,944. The median household income for the surrounding county is $40,408 compared to the national median of $53,482. The median age of people living in Eastlake is 55.7 years.
Eastlake Weather
The average high temperature in July is 80 degrees, with an average low temperature in January of 18.3 degrees. The average rainfall is approximately 35.2 inches per year, with inches of snow per year.
View Homes for Sale in Eastlake
Eastlake Map
Real Estate Near Eastlake
Nearby Cities
Nearby Cities Homes for Sale
Eastlake Zip Codes


text:
Hello darling!
I am so thrilled that you chose to take time away from your day, and also take time away from your meds, to write such a sincere and uplifting email.
It was such a pleasure to read! Or was it? Who can tell what I mean? I do exude timeless sarcasm, after all.
I could sit here and wonder what prize you are referring to. I could pace the room fretting over what mind bogglingly amazing craft it was that you submitted that I overlooked.
But, I won't. I think you're freaking out enough for both of us.
I will say though, for future reference, that a linky party is not a contest. It awards no prizes. You cannot win a linky party.
There are no entries, or enteries, as you call them. It is just a place where like minded people can share projects that they have worked on be them crafts, recipes or anything else. In submitting such a link, you may catch the host's eye and have your project featured. Or, you may not.
What to the ever! It's all in fun and no one seems to take it very seriously. Please chill out.
Signed, The Nicest Person Ever
What Viv Says:
Oh my! I have never received a prize for entering a linky party either! This is madness! Madness, I tell you!
If she has "entered" Lesley's linky party "again and again" why hasn't she picked up on how this all works? Lesley, tell me... do her projects tend to use an inordinate amount of glue? As perhaps she has been sniffing it.
This sounds like the type of person who thinks that there shouldn't ever be winners or losers... no one should ever have their feelings hurt, so everyone should get a trophy. Congratulations! You all get an Honorable Mediocrity Mention!
Lame. (I will say that I totally agree with our Over-Entitled Email-er in that yes, Lesley does have "wit and timeless sarcasm" ...part of why I double puffy heart love her.)
What Do You Say?


text:
As I said earlier, I had the opportunity to be in Florida to be part of a conference on the subject of The War on the Word and to address the issue of biblical truth and its attack by the enemy, Satan. And, of course, this is a great opportunity because this is such a critical issue to deal with. And understanding the critical aspect of that I really have been pressed to bring it before you this morning. It's a little bit more of a Bible study and a lecture than it is a sermon and we'll have to set Luke aside for a little while but I think this is really important.
What makes it important is the instruction of Jude verse 3, which say, "Earnestly contend for the faith, once for all, delivered to the Saints." And the faith, once for all, delivered to the Saints is talking about the Scripture and the content of sound doctrine, the revelation of God committed to us. We are to earnestly fight for the faith, to contend for that faith. If we're going to contend for the faith we need to understand where the battle is coming from. A couple of weeks ago Tom Pennington gave me a quote from Martin Luther that I found very interesting. This is what Martin Luther said, "If I profess with the loudest and clearest exposition, every portion of the truth of God, except that little point, which the world and the devil are, at that moment, attacking. I am not confessing Christ. However, boldly, I may be professing him. Where the battle rages, said Luther, there the loyalty of the soldier is proved. And to be steady on all the battlefield, besides is mere flight and disgrace if he flinches at that point," end quote. Luther was saying if you're gonna call yourself a Christian then you have to fight the battle where the battle rages. And where it rages today, and I think all through history, is at the very point of the truth of Scripture.
The Bible is under incessant assault from the enemy. It's pretty easy to understand, from the biblical prospective, God is the source of, author of, truth. Satan is the source of, author of, lies. And, therein, is the battle, God's truth, Satan's lies. And Satan attacks God's truth relentlessly with his lies.
In fact, in John 8:44, Jesus, himself, said that Satan is the father of lies. Jesus said, "He is a liar from the beginning and he's the father of lies." Oh, we can find out how he fathered lies by turning in our Bibles back to the 3rd chapter of Genesis. Let's go back and find out how this assault on the word of God really began. Genesis chapter, this is a familiar chapter and an absolutely critical chapter in the Bible because it is a chapter that chronicles for us the fall of humanity. It is in this chapter that mankind is catapulted into depravity and sin and death and judgment and hell. And it all began in a conflict over who's telling the truth. Is it God or is it Satan? Eve decided it was Satan. Eve decided that God was lying and Satan was telling her the truth. I suppose most people that the human race failed because Eve ate something. It didn't. The human race failed because Eve thought something. The eating was only the byproduct of the thought. And what Eve thought was, God doesn't tell the truth, Satan does. And that same dichotomy has existed through all of human history. There are people who believe God and there are people who don't. There are people who believe the Bible and people who don't. And it's that clear.
Well let's go back to the story and find out how this all unfolded in Genesis chapter 3. And remember just one thing about Satan, at least for this time, and that is that only in lying is Satan consistent. If you study Satan, if you study demons throughout the Scripture you're gonna find all kinds of inconsistencies. I've often asked, "The devil seems very inconsistent, demons seem inconsistent. Is that true?" And it is true. They're only consistent in one thing, they hate the truth, they tell lies, they attempt to deceive. And here we find where the father of lies gave birth to his first lie and his first liar, which resulted in the whole human race being born with a propensity to lie; to love deception and hate truth.
Verse 1, "The serpent, identified, of course as Satan, " says to the woman, "Indeed, has God said you shall not eat from any tree of the garden?" He finds Eve when she's unprotected. Adam is not there, Adam her protector, Adam her head, Adam her covering and she is alone. And there is greater vulnerability at that point and Satan chooses his moment very carefully. He's got a pretty simple two-step strategy that will unfold so rapidly it makes your head swim. It's a progressive deception. It begin with an apparently innocuous question, by what somebody might assume is sort of a neutral observer. "Indeed, has God said you shall not eat from any tree of the garden?" The idea of the question is did God really say that? It could be translated in the Hebrew as, "So, God has said, has he, that you shall not eat from some tree of the garden? Has God said that?" What is he trying to do? He's trying to introduce the thought into her mind that there's something wrong with that prohibition. It's sort of like, "Did God really tell you that?"
Now this is the first question in the Bible. This might be the first question in all of human history. This is the first dilemma. There's never been a dilemma, there's only been answers. Everything has been clear. And the question is designed to start Eve on the path to doubting God's word, which is the essence of sin. And for the first time the most deadly spiritual force in the world has covertly been smuggled into human life. It is the assumption that what God has said is subject to human judgment. Eve was very clear at what God had said, absolutely unmistakable what God had said. God had said, "You can eat anything except, verses 16 and 17 of chapter 2, "From the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat: for in the day that you eat from it you shall surely die," very clear, unambiguous and obvious statement. But now all of a sudden Satan is very subtlely asking Eve to make a judgment on what God said. "Did God really tell you not to eat from any tree of the garden? Did God really say that?" And the implication here. . . follow this, is, "Why would God put that restriction on you? Why would God do that? Why would He be narrow? Why would He limit you? Doesn't God want you to be free? Isn't God for free will? Isn't God pro-choice? Isn't God for freedom? Doesn't God want you to do whatever you wanna do, whatever looks good, feels good, whatever brings you pleasure, whatever brings you joy, whatever brings you satisfaction, whatever brings you freedom? Why is God limiting you?" And you notice that in the question Satan asked, "He said from any tree of the garden," as if the prohibition was very big and extensive. Even though it was only one tree. But the subtle suggestion is this: God tampers with our freedoms, God restricts us, God is very narrow; God takes away our rights. God may be even unkind so restricting us, taking away the things that might bring us pleasure and satisfaction. He may even be cruel, is the possibility. And you might not be able to trust him. Why would he ever say that? This is a perfect world. Why would he ever do that? Why is he unnecessarily limiting?" And Satan plants the thought in her mind that God is narrow, God is limiting, God is restraining, God is, maybe, unkind, less than fully good. But he (she doesn't even know who he is yet) but he is devoted to her freedom and her choice and her happiness, more so than God. The snake is sort of like saying with a little bit of incredulity, "I can't believe that God told you you couldn't eat of any tree of the garden. Why would he ever do that?" So Satan plants in her mind that there is this one possibility that God has a flaw in his character. That God's goodness is suspicious. Eve weakly defends God is verse 2, "Well," the woman said to the serpent, "from the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat." And she narrows it down, "He's saying from any tree." She narrows it down verse 3, "But from the fruit of the tree, which is in the middle of the garden." And so she narrows it down to that one tree. "No, it's not that we can't eat from any tree. God is not that restrictive. God is not so restrictive that he puts all those kinds of limits. It really is just this one tree that we can't eat. And you know what? God has said, "You shall not eat from it or touch it." Did God say that? No. "Lest you die." God didn't say you couldn't touch it. He didn't say that at all. She's already falling victim to Satan's progressive temptation. "Yeah, you know, it is only one tree but he said you shouldn't eat from it and you shouldn't even touch it." And she's assigned to God something God did not say. She's putting words in God's mouth that she's decided emphasize his narrowness. "You can't even touch it, let alone eat it." God never said that. So now you get the picture. Satan is trying to get her to the point where she understands that Satan is for freedom and liberty and rights and freewill and choice, and God is for limits and narrowness and constraint, taking away your freedom and your choices and your rights and your joys and your satisfaction and your fulfillment. "Yeah," she says, "it is only one tree but you're right, he said we couldn't eat of it and we couldn't even touch it." That little phrase indicates that she's buying in to the narrowness of God. She should have defended God. She knew God. She knew God's perfect goodness. She had a clear command from God. It wasn't hard to understand. And, frankly, she should have been suspicious of the talking snake. At this point she should have made some kind of emphatic defense of God's goodness. But her reply is a partial kind of reputation, "Well he only did say one tree, but you know what? We can't eat it and we can't even touch it." That indicates that she's buying in to suspicion about God's narrowness.
Let me tell you something. As soon as someone doe not completely and wholeheartedly and unreservedly trust in the Word of God as true and the source of our highest joy and fulfillment then mistrust has gained a foothold and sin has entered the heart. This is where the fall came. It didn't come when she ate, it came when she thought, "God is narrow, God is withholding something good." She accepts the unnecessary restriction as a fact. And she agrees it's unnecessary and she even makes it worse by adding, "Or touch it." God's word then has been judged unacceptable to her. It is limiting and it is a needless limitation and that's when the fall happened. Right there. And what follows is just the evidence of the fall. She was done in at that point.
Step two is very straightforward and very clear. Step one was, "You have a right to sit in judgment on God's word." That was step one. She said, "You know, you're right, you're right. It is narrow, it is unnecessarily restriction, it is limiting." And that points up some kind of flaw in God's character. Step two follow immediately in verse 4, the serpent said to the woman, "You surely shall not die." What's that? He says, "God lied. When God said the day you eat of the fruit of the tree you'll die, he lied. God is a liar and I tell you truth. Don't believe the Word of God, believe me." That's the same old stuff. "Don't believe the Bible believe this person or that person or this holy book or that prophet or whatever," and on and on it goes. And Satan is disguised as an angel of light in a thousand costumes. But his message is always the same, "Don't believe God. God doesn't tell you the truth. He's a liar. You won't die. There is no judgment. There are no consequences if you eat. You won't die. You can't trust God to tell you the truth. You can't believe God's word. It's needlessly narrow. It's needlessly confining and restraining and you should be free to do whatever you want to do. God is flawed. God limits joy. God takes away freedom. And then God says we're gonna die if we do what he tells us not to do. Boy, how harsh is that?" Satan says, "You just can't trust God. He doesn't tell you the truth and he's needlessly legalistic. And then he scares you by telling you you're gonna die. You're not gonna die, God's lying to you. Be free from those restraining constraining narrow words of God. It's your life, you live it anyway you want. You can do what you want. You're free; make your own choices. No limits, no boundaries." That's the metaphor for the Ford Motor Company lately. "No rules," Outback Steakhouse. "No judgment, no consequences." Hey that's old stuff isn't it? But it's very contemporary. "You can live any way you wanna live. Don't believe the Bible. Don't believe God. Don't take him at his word. And, by the way, any God who would put those kind of restraints on you, any God who would limit your freedom, take away your rights, your choices, any God who would tell you you're gonna die if you did something like that is not a God of love. He's a God of law; he's law." Satan says, "But I'm love. I love you. I want you to do whatever you want and be satisfied with whatever it is you wanna do. I love you. God doesn't love you." The question comes into Eve's mind, "Why would he do that? Why would God be like that? Why would God tell me I was gonna die if I wasn't gonna die? Why would it be so important that I not eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil? Why would God tell me not to do that? If it's not because I'm gonna die, if he lied about that then what's gonna happen that he wants not to happen? He's got to have a reason for telling me not to eat and if he's lying to me about the fact I'm gonna die, what's the reason? Why is the prohibition there?" And Satan's got a strategy for that.
Verse 5, "He doesn't want you eat, not because you'll die, not because he loves you and doesn't want you to die, not because he loves you and doesn't want you to go into sin and death and hell, no, God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be open and you'll be like God." Boy, Satan could say - and I'll tell you from personal experience - he hates competition. I've been there. Remember Satan when he was in heaven the anointed cherub Lucifer decided that he wanted to be like God, remember, equal to God? Satan knew that didn't sit too well with God and God through him out of heaven and he became Satan. And so Satan lies and says, "God isn't restraining you from eating that because you'll die and he loves you too much to let you die and perish and fall into sin. He's restraining you from eating that and threatening death to scare you because he knows if you do eat you'll become like him and he hates anybody to be like him. He's that jealous."
Some people think, you know, that the fall of man happened because Eve ate an apple. No. The fall happened because Eve stripped God of his glory, because Eve made a twisted assault on the holy perfections of God. She didn't trust what he said and she didn't trust his character. She blasphemed God. The eating was just the evidence. Because when she ate she was saying, "God lied, I'm not gonna die. And Satan told me the truth. I'm gonna be like God. And even if he doesn't like it I'm gonna do it anyway." So it was disobedience to what God said. It was the conviction that God was a liar, that God was motivated by selfishness, and it was open rebellion. So the father of lies brought down the whole human race on the premise that you can't trust what God said. He doesn't tell the truth.
Now folks I can put it simply. Either the Bible is true or it's not. There's no in-between. It's not part of it's true and part of it's not. It's not whatever is true to you is true and what ever is not true to you is not true. It's either true or it's not.
Thirty eight hundred and eight times the Old Testament claims to be the Word of God. The New Testament writers repeatedly claim that it is the Word of God. Jesus claimed that Scripture could not be broken, that it was the Word of God. Not one jot or tiller would ever in any wise fail until it had all come to past, even though heaven and earth would pass away. You can say it's a lie or you can say it's true, and there's really nothing in the middle. And so at that moment the whole human race was catapulted into sin. A stone was removed at the base of the mountain and an avalanche drowned all of humanity. Without taking time to go through the Scripture this then becomes the pattern for the whole Scripture, the conflict between the truth of God and lies of Satan. You find it reaches a pinnacle in the New Testament when Satan comes to Jesus. He was very successful with Eve and he thought maybe he could be successful with Jesus. So you remember he caught Jesus at a weak point also? After 40 days of fasting in the wilderness he came to him and he gave him three temptations and every temptation that he presented to Jesus, Jesus answered with this statement, "It is - what? Written." And he affirmed that the truth of God stood. He would not violate the Word of God. And he conquered Satan and vanquished him. But this is the strategy that Satan has had ever since, never changed. All through biblical history there's this endless array of false prophets, false teachers, liars, false apostles, deceivers, all the way from Genesis to Revelation. And always there's been this battle for the truth of God to defend the truth. And it seems as though no matter how well it's been fought in the past, how noble have been the victories, how triumphant have been the men of God in defending the Bible against the tax, they just never stop. Because, essentially, as long as Satan is outside the lake of fire, as long as he's moving around like a roaring lion seeking whom it may devour, his way of devouring is through creating mistrust in God's word.
Well I was asked at the conference if I would address how the Bible is being attached today? And I could tell you, folks, this is today and another five years from now it'll be being attached - probably from some of these same areas but in different ways. It just continues to go on and on and on. But if we're gonna earnestly contend for the faith we need to know how it's being attacked. So let me talk about that a little bit.
First of all I want to talk about friendly fire, you know, the most deadly fire in a war is the friendly fire. You know what that is; it's when you get shot by your own troops. And that's really hard because you can't see it coming, you don't expect it. And that's what's happening in Evangelicalism today. The friendly fire is coming against the Word of God. I could give you lots of illustrations, but here are some that I found pretty compelling. I picked up a very Evangelical theologically sound periodical and I saw in it an article entitled, "The Insufficiency of Scripture." That got my attention. "The Insufficiency of Scripture." I began to read the article written by a minister and I was amazed to see in the article that it actually was designed for the reader to understand that Scripture was not sufficient for everything. This is what the article said, "Whereas Scripture teaches us that marriage is a lifelong commitment, Scripture is manifestly not sufficient to teach people how to attain that end." Scripture is not sufficient to teach you how to have a good marriage? "Oh, yes," he writes. "Scripture contains some broad principles, such as those encountered in Ephesians 5 or Proverbs 29. But for all the Evangelical talk about roles of men and women such talk has obviously not produced happy or successful marriages," end quote. So he's saying it's obvious that the Bible doesn't help you have a good marriage because there are so many bad marriages among Christians.
He went on to say ten years ago he affirmed the sufficiency of Scripture in harmony with the standard reformed position on that matter. Now he suggests that those who drafted the first chapter of the Great Westminster Confession of Faith might have stated the case better if they had changed the language. This is what that Westminster Confession says and it's a reflection of what Scripture teaches, "The whole council of God (that is Scripture) concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man, salvation, faith, and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture," end quote. That's what the Westminster Confession says - accurate statement. This writer said, "The entire matter would have been better expressed had the writers articulated a more manifestly covenantal statement, indicating that the Scriptures are a sufficient guide to the various covenants God has made with various covenant people," end quote. In fact, he particularly suggests that the expressions faith and life could only be interpreted in the most narrow religious sense, point being, Scriptures not sufficient for life, marriage being an illustration. And in the article . . . I'm reading with great interest now. . . in the article he said he backed away from an unqualified affirmation that the Bible contains all things necessary for God's glory, man's salvation, faith and life, and why? Listen to this; he changed his mind about biblical sufficiency when he saw a survey. A survey? A survey. What does a survey have to do with the Word of God? Absolutely nothing. A survey? What did the survey say? Survey says. The survey said the divorce rate among Evangelicals is worst than the divorce rate among unbelievers. I knew about that survey because when it came out I was called by a newspaper and they asked what I thought I said, "I don't believe it." They said, "Well it's in the survey. The statistics are there." I said, "I don't believe it. I do not believe that more true Christians get divorced than non Christians, I don't believe that." And they printed that. Well then I had to go support that so I did a little research and which I'll share with you in a minute as to where that statistic came from. First of all you need to know this, the statistic originally was 27% of born-again people get divorced, 24% of non born-again people get divorced. I found out that there was no distinction between, whether the 27% of born-again people had had a divorce before or after they were born-again. And since that's not included it makes the statistic pointless. But, be that as it may, even if we grant that the latest statistic from the same organization now is up to 33% of born-again people get divorced. Or anyway, that was the survey. And he writes in response to that survey, "The large practical matter that has influenced my thinking about the sufficiency of Scriptures has been the publication of findings that the Evangelical divorce rate is the same as that of the general population. How is the world can a survey change your view of the sufficiency of Scripture? In fact, he went on to say, "Believing in the sufficiency of Scripture might work against your marriage. I would suggest that part of the reason our unbelieving friends succeed as often in marriage as we do is that they are never hoodwinked by any misunderstanding of the sufficiency of Scripture," end quote.
I wanted to know more about the survey so I got to the source of the survey, the original statistics, the original information because I started seeing more people changing their view of Scripture from this one survey. I just made a miniseries on video and I'm just now watching it to make sure it represents what I wanna say. It's a 4-hour video miniseries on, "Does the Truth Matter Anymore?" And at the end of video number 1 they have included (unbeknownst to me) this survey. It showed up in theological journals, pastors everywhere have just bought it as a true statistic. So I decided to find out if it, in fact, is true. So I wanted to know how you determine whether somebody's born-again first, right? Since the survey said 41% of Americans are born-again, 41%. I needed to know what born-again meant. So they had two questions to determine if someone fit in the born-again category.
Question one; have you ever made a personal commitment to Jesus Christ that is still important in your life today? Well that's so bland that it wouldn't indicate anything, other than that you made some commitment to Jesus Christ. If you answered yes to that then there were seven answers and a multiple-choice question. And if check this answer, "When I die I will go to heaven because I've confessed my sins and accepted Jesus Christ as my Savior." If you said yes to that one you were then considered born-again. Even though accepting Jesus Christ, as we all know, in our culture, has become a clich and it could be said by anybody in any form of Christianity from Catholicism through Greek Orthodoxy to the cults.
I said this when I was doing that thing on. . . that interview of that newspaper, I said, "Look, they don't know who's born-again. They don't know who's born-again. You can't say that because they don't have any way to know who's really born-again." Well this stirred some small furor. So I went further to the same survey. Listen to other things that came out of the same survey of the born-again people.
Forty-five percent of these born-again people who get divorced more than non born-again people, 45% of them say Satan is not a living being; he's only a symbol of evil. So we know they don't believe the Bible cause that's pretty clear in the Bible that Satan is not a symbol of anything, he's a living being. Thirty-four percent believe that if a person's good enough they can earn their place in heaven. Can you believe that and be born again? Twenty-eight percent say that while Jesus lived on earth he committed sins just like everybody else. Fifteen percent of these people said that after he was crucified and died he did not return to life physically. Twenty-six percent believe it doesn't matter what faith you follow they all teach the same thing. Are these people born again? No. So the statistic is useless. So why in the world would you change your view of Scripture from that? Why do you believe what you believe about the Scripture because of what the Bible says or because of a survey?
That's what I call friendly-fire, in the sense that these are people, probably well intentioned, people who wouldn't wanna attack the Word of God but fall victim to these kind of subtle things.
I've talked to you in the past about things that are said by well-known evangelists and TV preachers about the wider mercy that people, who've never heard the gospel, never heard the name of Jesus are going to heaven and things like that. Those are all assaults on the Scripture from friendly fire, from people within the Evangelical world, whatever now that may mean. There's a new effort afoot now among Evangelicals to be able to embrace Roman Catholicism and the Roman Catholic doctrine of justification. In order to do that you have to reinvent Paul, so they have a new paradigm called, "The New Prospective on Paul." They have to reinvent the whole legal paradigm to get the doctrine of justification out of the paradigm it's in in the New Testament to make sure it's big enough to embrace Roman Catholicism. People that once stood shoulder to shoulder in the defense of the Scripture moved on to that side. And then one of the big things that happened down in Ligonier Conference was R.C. Sproul spoke on the issue of the new NIV; called Today's NIV. You've been seeing it. It's the New International versions newest update. Today's NIV is the gender sensitive edition, which tampers with the text of Scripture, plainly. R.C. Sproul gave a very passionate presentation of the fact that two years ago when they started to release this thing, Evangelical leaders had a big meeting together with the people from the International Bible Society, who own the rights to the translation and Zondervan is the publisher. They had a meeting together. They got the publishers to agree they would never produce that Bible because they saw it as tampering with the truth of Scripture to meet a contemporary agenda. And, you know, if you look at who supports it you can see it's all the sort of politically correct feminist side that supports this.
And so, anyway, these people agreed that they wouldn't produce it. They bowed to the pressure of the Evangelical leadership and they said, "We won't produce that Bible." Well, two weeks ago they released it. And the day before they released it they sent a letter to the people who signed the original document, saying, "Integrity demands that we take our name off that document." How's that for a spin on integrity? "Integrity demands we don't keep our word." And, of course, everybody knew that they had to have been working on it to release it since long ago so the signing of it meant nothing. Well, R.C. Sproul was deeply exercised over that lack of integrity, over that breach of a pledge and a commitment, and over the tampering of the Word of God, as are other Evangelicals. There were six of us. Speakers were sitting there, some of who have preached out of the NIV for years. One of them said, and they all affirmed and agreed, that he would never preach out of any form of the NIV again if they don't have any more concern for the Word of God. And if they would tamper with it for the sake of money then we're not gonna use it at all. It was really very interesting. I wouldn't be surprised to see a lot of NIV's showing up at Zondervan mailed back. Not a bad idea.
But, how can that happen? Well Rupert Murdoch owns Zondervan, Fox Television. I don't think that the Bible should be in the hands of the same person who runs the Simpsons. So how did that ever happen? You know, Doug Wilson, in an article said, "Whoever sold the rights to the Bible to Rupert Murdoch outta be taken out and flogged." How does that happen? So, you know, this, "Oh, no, it's not bad. It's not bad." Luther said, "At that little point where they begin to tamper with the truth if you don't wage war there then you may profess Christ but you're not truly confessing him." Scripture cannot be broken. Every Word of God is pure.
Well that's the friendly fire, then there's the unfriendly-fire. That was the introduction. I was part of the introduction. I have some things I wanna say to you know about where the war is coming. . . where the attacks are coming from. I'll give you two and I'm gonna finish tonight, maybe.
Number one. . . you gotta know this isn't notes this is heart so you never know. But the first attack comes from the critics. The first attack comes from the critics. Not long after the great reformation, the reclaiming of the Word of God, the precious truth of God, the Scripture coming out of the Dark Ages, brought back into the light by Luther and Calvin, Melanthan, and others. The Word of God began to shine brightly and it wasn't long after that that you had the, you know, the renaissance and awakening of humanism and the French Revolution and all of that. And the birth of criticism came out of that, higher criticism, which was German scholasticism that went back and in the passionate love of mankind and his mind, the advent of humanism. They went back to the Bible and said, "We've gotta take everything out of the Bible that doesn't fit our minds. The mind of man is ultimate." Thomas Paine, "The Age of Reason," was at that same time. "The mind is ultimate. If it's not rational, if it's not reasonably, then it's not true." So the German critics went back to the Bible and they massacred the text of Scripture. They said Moses didn't write the Pentateuch and Paul didn't write his epistles and Jesus didn't do what he said he did and didn't say what is said that he said. And you can't believe the Bible. And we've got to take out the miracles and we've got to take all the supernatural out and it's a human book written by religious people. And that was the legacy of the graph well has in school of higher criticism, a very sophisticated way that fools design (fools in terms of 1 Corinthians 1) fools designed to emasculate the Bible of its truth. And Liberalism just destroyed the Bible, eliminating all the supernatural elements. It's still around. It literally took over and ate up every seminary in every major denomination around the world . . . of the historic denominations.
In an effort to sort of rescue that a guy named Carl Bart came along and Carl Bart said, "You know, we can't have religion. If we don't have the supernatural all we've got is philosophy. We don't have any religion. We've got to have a supernatural." So Carl Bart tried to put all the miracles back. Do you believe in a miracle? Sure. Do you believe in the resurrection? Yes. But is it real history? Did it really happen in actual time, in actual history with real people? No, it happened in hilika shikda lick. It happened in super duper history. And he invented some. . . I don't know what? . . . some fantasy land where these things did happen in a spiritual reality that, again, you couldn't accept the straightforward facts of Scripture.
This legacy of criticism toward the Bible infected the major denominations, destroyed their seminaries, their colleges, and created Liberalism all over the world. It's still around. It's still around. You saw evidence of this kind of stuff when you looked at Peter Jennings' Search for the Real Jesus about a year ago. They're trying to find the real Jesus by asking people who don't know him, have no idea who he is or where he is, that parade themselves as scholars. The people they were asking belonged to a group called The Jesus Seminar. They're the self-appointed scholars on Jesus. There are 200 of them. Once in a while in silly religious sections of newspapers you'll read about the Jesus Seminar. Religious sections of newspapers are pretty bad for the most part; usually list all the places you wanna avoid and all the things you don't wanna believe. Certainly the LA Times is that way. But they decided to vote on whether Jesus said what he said. They're gonna vote on whether the Word of God is true. And the way they vote is with a bunch of little beads. Red bead means probably true, pink bead means possibly true, gray bead means added/altered by somebody else; some early Christian or some disciple. Black bead . . . nope, didn't reflect the truth at all. And the results are astonishing. There are more than 700 sayings attributed to Jesus in the Gospels. They said 31 of them are true. And of the 31, 16 have duplicates in parallel passages, so you have 15 that they accepted as true. All total they rejected 80% of the words that Scripture attributes to Jesus. They rejected the entire Gospel of John. One verse got one pink bead. The whole Gospel of John. Why? Because it's all about the deity of Jesus Christ and his miracles. The one verse that got a pink one is John 4:44, "A prophet has no honor in his own country." They thought that was a cute little axiom I guess. How ironic.
"The Jesus Seminar is the decaying flotsam from the shipwreck of Liberal theology that continues to wash ashore." I'm quoting myself there. It's bad to do that. It's like Jerry Vine said, "A guy preached such a great sermon he signed his own Bible." So, you know, you're asking, "What is the criteria? On the basis of what criteria did they make those judgments?" One criteria alone; political correctness. If, in their minds, it didn't seem to square with what they think should be _________. So, they are God and they will determine truth. If it doesn't fit Egalitarianism for women, homosexuality as an alternate lifestyle, environmental activism, animal rights, racial quotas, hard line anti-war doctrine, on and on and on and on, then it's not true. By the way, they did the words of Jesus now their working on the works of Jesus. Don't get the idea that I think the conclusions of the Jesus Seminar should be discarded lightly. On the contrary I think they should be thrown away with as much force as possible. Liberals say that other religions are lesser lights. That's what Carl Bart said. "They're lights but their just lesser lights." Paul Tillich, the theologian, I studied in seminary, said that, "They are Christians incognito." A theologian named Rayner said, "They are anonymous Christians." And we know what the Bible says about who's a Christian. Dr. Joseph Huff. . . recently in the Wall Street Journal I read this president of Union Theological Seminary in New York - a seminary that's been decimated by this liberalism. He was asked, "Are you saying that all religions are equal?" "No, all religions are not equal for me. For my faith Jesus Christ is decisive. I'm a Christian who strongly believes that God has always been and now is working everywhere in every culture to redeem the world. I believe that there is ample evidence in the best of the world's religions, including our own, that God's work is effective. Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, and others have been and are being transformed by a powerful vision of God that redeems them with hope and infuses their religious practice with compassion, justice and peace. Wherever there is peace and movement toward peace, wherever there is justice and movement toward justice God is present and working." Just double-talking, it denies what the Bible says. And he thinks he's the authority. There is an effort to develop in Evangelicalism what's called, "The New Model Evangelicalism. The New Model Evangelicalism." But somehow we've all been victimized by Agustin and Tertullian, and Calvin, and Luther who created this legal motif of God as a judge and man as a guilty sinner brought into the courtroom of God and indicted by God and sentenced to die. An advocate steps in and provides a propitiation or a satisfaction to the judge and, therefore, on the basis of that satisfaction God declares the sinner righteous and that is the great reformation doctrine of justification. The New Evangelical model says, "That's too narrow, that's too exclusive. That's not gonna include people who don't believe that." So we've got to get rid of that. We can't be victimized by Augustin and Tertullian and Calvin and Luther who gave us that. We've gotta get rid of these what they call law court models. We've gotta redefine things. For example, hell, we have to understand is not a judicial sentence of God to punishment. Faith is not a decision. It's a continual progressive looking onto God that produces a progressive justification. And we've got to get the idea of judge out of the picture and see God, not as our judge, but as our defender. And wrath, not as angry punishment, not a law court term but just bad consequences. And when God speaks in what appears to us to be wrath it's really loving encouragement. And sin, we have to redefine that. Not as a legal violation of God's law demanding a just punishment but bad behavior needing correction from a loving parent whose purpose never is to exclude the child from the family. And forgiveness, oh, that's not dependent on the sacrifice of Jesus Christ because the cross was not a judicial payment to an offended judge and a broken law. This is new model Evangelicalism? More familiar is the new openness of God theology, which is running rampant through church. Openness of God theology says, "God doesn't determine the future." They say, "Well, you know, we don't wanna make God responsible for everything that's going on in the world. It's all bad stuff. It's bad press for God. So if we wanna save God from getting a bad reputation because everything's such a mess what we ought to do is just let people know, he didn't do it because he's not in charge. Not only does God not determine what's gonna happen," says Openness theology, "He doesn't even know what's gonna happen. He doesn't know any more about the future than you do." That's the Openness theology. And if that's their God that's not the God of the Bible. Isaiah 46:9 and 10, "I am God, there is no other. I am God; there is none like me. Declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things that are not yet done." Saying, "My castle shall stand and I will do all my pleasure." God knows the end from the beginning. From the very beginning he knew the end and everything in between. This is a denial of divine sovereignty. This attacks the Word of God. It makes God just a reactor who's saying, Wow, I didn't expect that to happen. That's bad, that's good. I can work with that. I don't know how I'm gonna work with that. Open theism is a revival of an ancient heresy, 16th century heresy, known as socinism. Socinists virtually got every error there was and packaged it all in one package, one great abomination. And these open theist's, not only deny that God is sovereign over the future, that God knows the future, purposes the future, works his plan in the present and the future, they deny the substitutionary atonement as well. I wrote an article for a book on that; a chapter in a book, an anthology on Openness theology and the denial of the substitutionary atonement of Christ. They deny that the salvation of sinners is entirely God's work on the sinner behalf. And they redefine God so that if God is not sovereign then he can't sovereignly save. He can't not only predict the future and plan the future and purpose it and work his work, he can't save on his own if he's not sovereign. And Open theists say, "Well, we're not really socinian, we're . . . you have to twist the Bible to work all this in, as you know? But they say, "We're not socinian because we don't deny the deity of Jesus like socinists did. We don't deny the deity of Jesus." And my response to that is, "You do worst than that you deny the deity of God." If God is not the God he says he is in the Bible then Jesus is not the God of the Bible either. To attack any doctrine in the Bible is to attack the Bible. To attack the heart and soul of the Bible, the character of God, the deity of God, Christ, the Holy Spirit, the Gospel, is to hit the truth at its heart. Every assault on biblical truth is an attack on the Word of God. So, the critics. . . we could say more about that. Let me just give you a second one briefly, the attack from the cults, the cults. That's another thing we have to battle. You know, for years ever since higher criticism came out there have been great scholars who have battled against the critics. And I'll tell you folks I fought that battle. . . a lot of us have fought that battle through the years. I was ten years on the Inerrancy Council, lead by Jim Boice, with 100 scholars and battling against the attacks of criticism against the Scripture, fighting for inerrancy, inspiration, authority of Scripture. From 1980 to 1990 that battle was waged and tremendous amount of work was done to answer those questions and to try to protect the church from the critical onslaught. But it's still going on today. The Openness theology is a huge issue attacking the Bible and its presentation of the character of God and Christ. Our seminary faculty are in the forefront of that fight. They have produced in our journal a whole series of articles answering Openness theology. We have a great core of men who teach in the seminary who are first-rate scholars who are dealing with these issues on that level. It's wonderful to be a part of that, to have a team like that battling for the Word of God on a critical side in answering those compelling questions.
But, secondly, it's the cults. Some of you grew up in the days when almost every preacher preached against the cults because we were trying to wage war against the Jehovah's Witnesses and Christian Science and the Mormons and Theosophy and Unitarianism, and whatever other cult, answering all their bizarre twistings of Scripture. Cults pervert the Bible and inevitably they all deny the deity of Jesus Christ and they all deny the Gospel of Grace alone. They have extra revelation, whether it's the writings of Mary Baker-Eddy-Glover-Fry, she had a problem with men, obviously. Whether it's Annie Besant, Judge Rutherford, Madam Blavatsky, Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, whoever it is that writes these extra biblical documents, by which the Bible is singularly interpreted and it spawns these bizarre cults that twist the Scripture.
Drove down to the store yesterday and then back home, went by the Mormon church that's near us, saw a couple hundred people out on the lawn, mostly young couples and little children, and my heart just sunk as I realized being drilled into their heads is the fact that Jesus is not God and that salvation is a combination of God being good enough to let you work your way to salvation and you doing enough good things to earn it. What damnable doctrines. We have to protect people, we have to defend the truth, we have to know the truth to help the people in the cults. To say nothing of the death cults: People's Temple, followers of Jim Jones. Over 900 people drank cyanide-laced Kool-Aid, thinking their gonna go to heaven in a mass suicide. And then that bizarre David Koresh, 75 who died in self-emulation, really, in a battle with the United States Government, in the Branch Davidian Cult. And then there was that screwball, Marshall Applewhite, in Heaven's Gate cult, who all poisoned themselves thinking they're gonna be taken to heaven in a Hale Bop Comet. How do people get this kind influence? It's not just human. Do you understand that? It's not just human. Twisting Scriptures, pseudo Christian imagery exists in all these bizarre things and they just relentlessly, mercilessly hack at the Scripture.
I sat down with the primary theological leaders of the Mormon Church on several occasions here at the church. They've come here several times to talk about theology, Bible. We spent hours and hours and hours together. And I said to them, I said, "You know, I only do this for one reason and that one reason is in the hope that you will see the horrible error of your ways and come to the knowledge of the truth." And I have to tell you that's the only reason I do this. Listen; let me tell you something very simple, truth gains nothing from dialogue with error. That is pointless. And in the Evangelical world today the climate is, "Let's dialogue. Let's sit down with Muslims and let's sit down with the Roman Catholics, and let's sit down with Orthodox Jewish people, and let's sit down with these other people and we'll grown in the dialogue." You know what happens in dialogue? Nothing good. You wanna be patient with people; you wanna be loving and gracious. I don't need the Islamic view of anything to interpret the Bible. Do you understand that? I don't need the Mormon view of anything to interpret the Bible. That's not a necessary element. Error provides no insight to truth. Error is not a hermeneutic. I don't interpret the Bible better because now I'm a buddy with a Muslim. I wanna be a friend to a Muslim. I wanna be a loving friend to one because I wanna lead him to the truth - that nothing in his religion makes any contribution to my understanding of Scripture. The only thing that happens in those dialogues is compromise. And the end result always seems to be the same - the diminishing of conviction about truth. Well, the cults are a real real problem. With the cults you can throw in the world religions, that's why I used that illustration.
Now, so we talked a little about the critics, we talked a little about the cults. Tonight I'm gonna talk about some more. I'm gonna start with the charismatics. And we're gonna go into the Word of God and see how inside that movement there is so much that assaults the Scripture.
Let's pray. We are at your mercy, O God, in every area. We only know what you have told us in your precious Word. We only live the life you've given us. We have no way on our own to discern divine truth, we have no way to gain salvation, it is all of you. Thank you for your Word. Thank you for giving us, by your Holy Spirit, the conviction to believe your Word, which is not natural because naturally we understand, not the things of God. Naturally we are sinners at enmity with you. Naturally we are bound up in our own foolishness. Naturally we are following our Father who is the devil and believing his lies. We thank you God that you have rescued us from the deception and the lies of that natural condition and you have awakened us to the truth. And we do see your Word as a light and a lamp. And the law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul. And the testimony that you've given us in Scriptures is sure making wise to simple and it's right, rejoicing the heart.
We thank you that you have given us the love of the truth and Lord we need to defend it in a day when it is just being relentlessly assaulted. May we know in our own lives that it is our confidence in the Word of God that gives us the strength to stand against Satan's temptations. If we don't trust the Word of God then we can't stand on it when he questions it and we will fall like Eve fell, to doubting You and questioning You and thinking that Your laws and Your standards, and Your holy and righteous truth somehow impinges on our freedom and somehow limits our satisfaction. Help us to believe that when Satan says, "God has told you not to something but if you do it it's gonna be fun and fulfilling and thrilling." Help us not to believe the lie but to believe Your Word. And that You're not trying to hold us back from joy, You're trying to hold us back from what is deadly and destructive. Help us to believe You. Help us, not only to trust Your Word for our own lives, but stand and defend Your Word against all attacks of those who would undermine its truth, whether they come at it critically or cultically. Whether they just deny it or whether they misinterpret, misrepresent it, twist it, and pervert if. Help us to be, like Luther said, "Waging our war at that littlest point." Maybe it's just the point where they take the word Son or Father or Man in the text of Scripture, and because of some pressure from what is politically correct, they change it. It's just a little point but it's there that the battle has to be fought. "Help us to be faithful to the truth, which has redeemed us, for it is that we are begotten again by the truth," as Peter put it. "by living an incorruptible truth." And may it be that we are faithful to hold the truth up in our own temptations, live the truth, proclaim the truth, protect the truth. To your Glory 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:
This evening I came home from work to find Aaron completely engrossed with something on the computer. This hardly ever happens. Aside from looking at bicycle websites, Aaron spends no time on the computer. So, if that wasn't weird enough, I couldn't be more surprised with what he was actually doing.
I'm not sure what brought this all on, but Aaron decided to unleash his inner Spielberg yesterday afternoon and create a short film documenting Giuseppe's day. Turns out, Aaron isn't completely untalented when it comes to casting, scripting, shooting, directing, and editing videos.
So, here it is folks: the premiere of Giuseppe: The Life of a Puppy, Part 1. Filmed on location at my mom's house, the streets of Albuquerque, and my backyard (don't judge the dirt…it doesn't rain here). Soundtrack courtesy of Kid Cudi and David Guetta (Memories). Edited using Microsoft Movie Maker. Directed by Aaron. Starring Giuseppe.


text:
A genuine, profound, and lasting change for the better . . . can no longer result from the victory (were such a victory possible) of any particular traditional political conception, which can ultimately be only external, that is, a structural or systemic conception. More than ever before, such a change will have to derive from human existence, from the fundamental reconstitution of the position of people in the world, their relationships to themselves and to each other, and to the universe. If a better economic and political model is to be created, then perhaps more than ever before it must derive from profound existential and moral changes in society. This is not something that can be designed and introduced like a new car. If it is to be more than just a new variation of an old degeneration, it must above all be an expression of life in the process of transforming itself. A better system will not automatically ensure a better life. In fact, the opposite is true: only by creating a better life can a better system be developed.
I would argue that this is true, not only of Havel's post-totalitarian, but our pseudo-democratic, wannabe socialist (perhaps pre-totalitarian?) society as well. If one wishes to step outside of the mainstream, outside of the major two parties, and go beyond the supposed consensus, doing so by usual political action borders on the pointless. Third parties have no chance in the present system, nor do views outside the mainstream of a party tend to last long within the party. Real change must be gradual and fundamental. The American system has come where it is, straying so far from the liberty insured by the limited government that its founders intended, by a slow and steady process of corruption. We had no socialist revolution, yet every day we inch closer to European-style democratic socialism. Alexis de Tocqueville pointed to the lack of democratic revolution as one of the great strengths of early American government. Our nation was born a democracy, and was born free. The move away from the liberty for which the American system was designed, however, has not been a revolution either. It has been a slow process of forgetting the clear ideals on which our nation was founded, and which are embodied in our Constitution, and replacing them with vague and problematic ideas that require interpretations of our Constitutions whose confusion borders on the ridiculous.
I worry that the lack of revolution that lent the formation of our liberal democracy strength will also lend strength to the not-so-liberal democracy into which it is developing. I also worry that those advocates of freedom operating today have the wrong idea about how to achieve change. Real change, as I am fond of saying, is heart change. And heart change must precede institutional change. Voting and, what seems to me to be a favorite means of political action of many libertarian-minded folks today, protesting, are perhaps the least important means of change open to those who desire it. Real change takes hard work. It takes letters to the editor. It takes blogs. It takes conversations in coffee shops. It takes hours on the phone. It takes friendship. It takes business relationships. It takes families, churches, and schools. Real, lasting change doesn't happen according to a blueprint. Real change is bottom up. It starts in the hearts of people transformed by the power of truth. It begins in the realm of the truly political, in the daily lives of individual people interacting with others. Only later can it move from people to the people. Only after change invades the heart of society will the transformation of government be possible, meaningful, or lasting.


text:
New in version 2.2 is the option to control the number of continuum bins. Continuum bins are logarithmically spaced between 0.1 eV and 40 keV, and are calculated according to:
ncn2 must be in the range between 999 and 999999. The higher value is appropriate for use in modeling X-ray grating spectra. The lower value is appropriate for models where only integrated line luminosities or ionization fractions are desired. Execution time scales approximately proportionately to ncn2.


text:
Science Friday® is produced by the Science Friday Initiative, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization.
Science Friday® and SciFri® are registered service marks of Science Friday, Inc. Site design by Pentagram; engineering by Mediapolis.
|Progress, extinction, climate change, and the nature of obsolescence meet in the film 'Obselidia.' Ira will talk with Diane Bell, the writer and director of the film. It's a love story involving a man who is trying to compile an encyclopedia of obsolete things. When the characters are confronted with the possibility of a planetwide catastrophe due to climate change, they must come to terms with ideas of progress, obsolescence, and extinction. The film won the Alfred P. Sloan Award at this year's Sundance film festival. (Full disclosure: Science Friday, and this site, receive Sloan Foundation funding.) See a trailer from the film at Science Friday's Sci/Arts site.


text:
Get it fast
2955 results
- 4.7 out of 5 stars with 48 reviews$79.00
- 4.8 out of 5 stars with 38 reviews$79.00
- 4.8 out of 5 stars with 36 reviews$79.00
Going on a summer vacation or business trip? Target has loads of luggage choices with suitcases big and small in colors and styles for everyone. Why not get a matching set for your next trip? Completely functional and cool, you'll find one to match your taste, whatever it is. If you're traveling with the kiddos, we have bright colors and cute styles designed just for them. If you're traveling for work, you can look sharp with a convenient and stylish briefcase or laptop bag. Plus, our carry-on bags for frequent fliers make packing a breeze with their many pockets. Stay organized and keep track of your bags with travel accessories, travel chargers, luggage tags and more. Looking for a backpack for school, a duffle bag for the gym or a messenger bag for running errands? Lucky for you, our selection doesn't stop at travel bags. We have a variety of backpacks, shoulder bags and more to suit your needs and your style.


text: In 1920, filmgoers were treated to no fewer than two different film versions of Robert Louis Stevenson's Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. In this one, John Barrymore plays the humanitarian Dr. Henry Jekyll, who becomes obsessed with the notion of separating the good and evil impulses within every man. To this end, he develops a potion which unleashes his own darker side: the demonic Mr. Hyde. This was the adaptation which established the clich? of having both a "good" and "bad" leading lady, to parallel the doppelganger aspects of the Jekyll/Hyde personality. Martha Mansfield is the good girl, while Nita Naldi, wearing costumes that were daring indeed in 1920, is the bad one. The adaptors also borrowed the character of Lord Henry from Oscar Wilde's The Picture of Dorian Gray in order to provide Jekyll with an evil mentor/blackmailer. Sadly, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde proved to be one of the last starring films for leading lady Martha Mansfield: she died horribly during filming of The Warrens of Virginia (1924) when her costume touched a discarded match and burst into flame. Hal Erickson, Rovi


text:
- Home
- News
- Sports
- Opinion
- Obituaries
- Features
- Special Sections
- Classifieds
- Public Notices
The Oldham County Public Library will be offering to assist customers who need a little help getting to know their new Christmas digital items.
Visit the reference desk at the Main Branch of the Oldham County Library and a friendly and knowledgeable "i-brarian" can show you how to use various models of e-readers, MP3 players, notebooks and tablets — and how to locate the free e-book collection available from the library.
While you are there, take a look at the new schedule of formal computer classes that will be starting. Several new classes will be available including classes on digital devices and basic computing knowledge. Calendars and topics of the classes will be available at each library branch.
All classes are free and accessible and at the Main Library, 308 Yager Avenue, LaGrange. Call 222-9713 for more information.
Add new comment
Read and share your thoughts on this story


text:
Customer Assistant - 20 - 40 Hours - Newport
- Recruiter
- Lidl
- Location
- Newport (Casnewydd)
- Salary
- £8.45 per hour
- Posted
- 03 Sep 2017
- Closes
- 12 Oct 2017
- Sector
- Hair & Beauty
- Contract Type
- Full Time
For our Customer Assistants, quality is not just a passion, it's a way of life! Putting the same care and attention into the little tasks as they do with big ones, our Store team know how important their hard work is to the success and growth of our business.
Working as part of a diverse and dedicated team, you will love the buzz and energy of a fast-paced retail environment. You thrive on a challenge so you will love the fact that there is never a dull moment in store and always tasks to be done.
Above all else, our Customer Assistants are the face of our business, providing great service to our loyal customers. If you have a natural flair for providing outstanding customer service and are looking to become part of strong team with varied shifts, this could be the perfect opportunity for you!
Please note that as part of your application you will be asked to complete an exercise, designed to provide us with a more in-depth understanding of you and your potential as a member of Team Lidl. Should you be successful at this stage you will then be invited for a face to face interview.
We look forward to receiving your application!
What will you do?
- Assist the Assistant Store Manager and Store Manager with all areas of store operation
- Operate the checkout and handle cash
- Make sure our shelves are well-stocked at all times
- Carry out regular freshness checks to ensure we offer the freshest produce
- Unpack daily stock deliveries
- Rotate stock
- Ensure the store is clean, both on the shop floor and behind the scenes
- Keep the store clear and ensure any potential hazards are dealt with quickly and efficiently
- Help with merchandising stock and preparing for promotions and special offers
- Assist with baking in our in-store bakery
What will you need?
- A can-do attitude and excellent customer service skills
- The willingness to go the extra mile for our customers
- To be responsible and reliable
- The ability to be flexible
- To enjoy working in a fast-paced, varied environment, hitting targets and meeting deadlines
- To work well in teams and take pride in a job well done
- Preferably, previous experience in a customer facing role but this is not essential provided you have the right attitude
What do we offer?
- £8.45 to £9.79 per hour (subject to experience)
- 30 days holiday per annum (pro rata, including Bank Holidays)
- A contributory pension scheme
- 10% discount on all Lidl products, in all stores throughout the UK
- Access to corporate discounts on a range of products and services (including holidays, home and garden products, leisure activities and more)
- Initial training and on-going development from an experienced team member
- Brilliant opportunities to take on more responsibility and long term career prospects
Click "Apply Now" to navigate to our online application form. Please ensure you attach your CV and covering letter.Apply Now
Related jobs


text:
U.S. Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission
Queens Nursing Home Refused to Accommodate Request for Time Off And Fired Nurse's Assistant With Back Injury, Federal Agency Charged
NEW YORK - The Silvercrest Center for Nursing and Rehabilitation, a Queens, N.Y., nursing home, violated federal law by firing a nurse's assistant because she failed to submit a request for medical leave on Silvercrest's preferred form, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit it filed today.
According to the EEOC's suit (Case No. DN CV-12-4808) in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York in Brooklyn, in January 2011 Carolyn Belcon wrote a letter requesting leave after reinjuring her back, which she had previously injured in a car accident. Silvercrest did not acknowledge her request, instead insisting that she fill out the form. Silvercrest then ignored a subsequent request by Belcon to have SEIU-1199, her union, assist when filling out the form. Silvercrest fired Ms. Belcon later the same month, at no time acknowledging her requests.
Such alleged conduct violates the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The EEOC seeks a ruling that Silvercrest violated the ADA, plus lost back pay and compensatory and punitive damages.
"Silvercrest ignored Ms. Belcon's perfectly legitimate request for leave because it was not in its preferred format," said Michael J. O'Brien, a senior trial attorney in the EEOC's New York District Office. "The company's ignoring an injured employee's leave request for such a ridiculous reason cannot be countenanced."
Kevin Berry, EEOC's District Director in New York, added, "Employers need to remember that the ADA's interactive process is informal and is started when an employee requests an accommodation via whatever means. The law is clear that employers cannot stand on form over substance."
The EEOC enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. Further information about the EEOC is available on its web site at www.eeoc.gov.


text:
Ischemic Strokes (Clots)
Ischemic stroke accounts for about 87 percent of all cases.
Ischemic strokes occur as a result of an obstruction within a blood vessel supplying blood to the brain. The underlying condition for this type of obstruction is the development of fatty deposits lining the vessel walls. This condition is called atherosclerosis. These fatty deposits can cause two types of obstruction:
- Cerebral thrombosis refers to a thrombus (blood clot) that develops at the clogged part of the vessel.
- Cerebral embolism refers generally to a blood clot that forms at another location in the circulatory system, usually the heart and large arteries of the upper chest and neck. A portion of the blood clot breaks loose, enters the bloodstream and travels through the brain's blood vessels until it reaches vessels too small to let it pass. A second important cause of embolism is an irregular heartbeat, known as atrial fibrillation. It creates conditions where clots can form in the heart, dislodge and travel to the brain.
Ischemic strokes can be treated with tPA and clot retrieval.


text:
Find Your Perfect Home.
Monon Real Estate
Monon is located in Indiana. Monon, Indiana has a population of 1,746. Monon is more family-centric than the surrounding county with 31.82% of the households containing married families with children. The county average for households married with children is 29.64%.
The median household income in Monon, Indiana is $34,125. The median household income for the surrounding county is $51,250 compared to the national median of $53,482. The median age of people living in Monon is 27.9 years.
Monon Weather
The average high temperature in July is 83.9 degrees, with an average low temperature in January of 15.8 degrees. The average rainfall is approximately 39.1 inches per year, with inches of snow per year.
Monon Map
Real Estate Near Monon
Nearby Cities
Nearby Cities Homes for Sale
Monon Zip Codes


text:
Thanks to 170° of even light dispersion that goes where you do. Whether your
work takes you under a cabinet or crawlspace, or to an attic or the outdoors, the
SysLite's robust build and shock-resistant body is easy to carry and designed to
perform when you need it most. Six high-efficiency, LED bulbs will provide even,
consistent light for up to four hours on a single charge, longer when paired with
a Festool battery, and without interruption when plugged directly to a power source.
Built to handle the toughest you can throw at it, the SysLite features a rugged
case and nearly indestructible LED lights, so you won't ever have to worry about
breaking or replacing bulbs.
The SysLite delivers an even, balanced light source, casting a brilliant and consistent
white light, so you can examine the smallest details in close quarters, or take
a few steps back to look at the big picture.
The SysLite features a long-lasting internal battery as its main power source, but
can be easily charged or run with the included wall and car chargers, or used with
a compatible Festool battery as an auxiliary power source to the internal battery.
Unlike halogen work lights, the SysLite stays cool by using high intensity LEDs.
This means you don't sweat getting under cabinets or in confined spaces. Even after
hours of use, the LEDs remain completely cool which means you do, too.
The SysLite LED Worklamp is compact enough to be handheld, lay it on its side, mount
it on a tripod or hang it from the integrated hook. Each of three sides offer a
different angle at 10°, 15° or 30°, putting light right where you need
Festool stands behind its products and the SysLite LED is backed by our exceptional
three year warranty should you ever have problems with it. You can also try the
SysLite risk free since we offer a 30-day no-hassle money back guarantee.
Below, you will find a comprehensive list of specifications for each of the worklamp
models in the Festool line.
We're here to help. Feel free to give us a call toll-free at 888-337-8600 or use
our contact form and one of our tool
application specialists will help answer your questions.
Visit the Festool Owners
Group forum, consisting of over 15,000 international members. The forum
is a great place to collaborate with other Festool power tool owners. There's no
better online resource of Festool information than the Festool Owners Group.
© Copyright
Festool USA, Tooltechnic Systems, LLC. All rights reserved. Festool reserves the
right to correct any erroneous information on this site.


text:
Deaths Death Notices
LUTH, Ulrich J.
LUTH - Ulrich J.
Of Jamestown, RI, June 19, 2010, at the Newport Hospital. He was born in Hamburg, Germany, on July 16, 1935 and lived there until he completed his engineering studies. In 1957, Ulrich moved to Lima, Peru, where he later met his wife, Diana. After completing studies at the Harvard Business School, he held senior management positions in New York City and Pittsburgh with Joy Manufacturing Company and in Buffalo, NY, with Cooper Industries, Inc., and Cameron International. In retirement, he volunteered at St. Matthew's Church in Jamestown and was active in the Circle of Scholars at Salve Regina University in Newport. He is survived by wife Diana Sherman Luth, his sons Thornton and Christopher, daughters-in-law Laurie and Heather, and four granddaughters Audrey, Charlotte, Justine and Sadie. He is also survived by his brother Kuno and his sister Ute and their families in Germany. A Memorial Service will be held on Thursday, June 24 at 11 AM at St. Matthew's Church, 87 Narragansett Ave., Jamestown, RI. In lieu of flowers, contributions may be sent to Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Care, 165 Cambridge St., Boston, MA 02114-9731.