Nationwide disability employment search firm. Focused on linking innovative companies and agencies to qualified job seekers with disabilities. Search tools, job seekers, employment programs, success stories, and testimonials.

A non-profit, tax-exempt organization which supports the needs of medically and/or physically challenged children, providing financial assistance for recipients who are unable to afford equipment and/or services.

Milwaukee, Wisconsin-based provider of educational, clinical and residential programs, facilities, and services in Wisconsin, New Jersey, Illinois, Indiana, and South Carolina.

Issues, legislation, current bills, and a media guide.

A non-profit, tax-exempt organization which supports the needs of medically and/or physically challenged children, providing financial assistance for recipients who are unable to afford equipment and/or services.

Offers nationwide resources for helping gifted and special needs children. Includes links for specific special needs, online support groups, special education law and advocacy, plus book recommendations.

Here is an example where "anabaino" in John 3:13 does not necessarily
mean "go up under one's own power"

Mt 17:27 - "Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the
sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first COMETH
(anabaino) up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a
piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me and thee."

Here "anabaino" refers to something that was "taken" up or pulled up
NOT under it's own power as the fish "ascended" via a fish hook.

((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post. )))

Matthew Johnson wrote:

> In article , Bob Felts says...
> >
> >Matthew Johnson wrote:
> >
> >> In article , Robert Sutherland
> >> says...
> >>
> >>>
> >> >We can infer that from the self-evident truth "ought implies
> >> >can".
> >>
> >> Well, _some_ of us can infer this. But A rather disturbingly high
> >> proportion of regular participants in this NG rejedt the truth you label
> >> 'self-evident'.
> >
> >And why not? Christianity itself is hardly "self-evident". In fact,
> >Jesus and Paul are so radical that many Christians have trouble
> >understanding them.
> >
> >>
> >> >Job has consistently done that which is right.
> >>
> >> And what I find even _more_ disturbing is how many participants deny _this_
> >> truth.
> >
> >Why, Job was so righteous that he had to admit that "I despise myself
> >and repent in dust and ashes." [J 42:6]
>
> Aha! So you ARE relying on a tendentious translation! No, that is NOT what God
> said to Job.
>
> On the contrary: the HEbrew of that passage is maddengly vague. It is quote
> plausible to translate it as something quite different. Use google to see.

In the finall analysis, it doesn't matter, since I have another avenue
which is more deadly to your position. It has to do with the question
which you didn't answer: did Job die?

((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post. )))

Stephen M. Adams wrote:
> lsenders@hotmail.com writes:
>
> >> Who can correct you if you think that you have the last word?
> >
> >Again as Luther demanded, show me in Scripture and by the Scriptures
> >where I am wrong. Sola scriptura.
>
> Ah, but this is NOT the concept of Sola Scriptura that is held by
> conservative evangelical