End Times and Current Events
April 22, 2018, 04:46:10 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me." John 5:39 (KJB)
 
  Home Help Search Gallery Staff List Login Register  

Internet Only - No More Cable TV?

Shoutbox
January 29, 2018, 01:21:57 am Christian40 says: It will be interesting to see what happens this year Israel being 70 years as a modern nation may 14 2018
October 17, 2017, 01:25:20 am Christian40 says: It is good to type Mark is here again!  Smiley
October 16, 2017, 03:28:18 am Christian40 says: anyone else thinking that time is accelerating now? it seems im doing days in shorter time now is time being affected in some way?
September 24, 2017, 10:45:16 pm Psalm 51:17 says: The specific rule pertaining to the national anthem is found on pages A62-63 of the league rulebook. It states: “The National Anthem must be played prior to every NFL game, and all players must be on the sideline for the National Anthem. “During the National Anthem, players on the field and bench area should stand at attention, face the flag, hold helmets in their left hand, and refrain from talking. The home team should ensure that the American flag is in good condition. It should be pointed out to players and coaches that we continue to be judged by the public in this area of respect for the flag and our country. Failure to be on the field by the start of the National Anthem may result in discipline, such as fines, suspensions, and/or the forfeiture of draft choice(s) for violations of the above, including first offenses.”
September 20, 2017, 04:32:32 am Christian40 says: "The most popular Hepatitis B vaccine is nothing short of a witch’s brew including aluminum, formaldehyde, yeast, amino acids, and soy. Aluminum is a known neurotoxin that destroys cellular metabolism and function. Hundreds of studies link to the ravaging effects of aluminum. The other proteins and formaldehyde serve to activate the immune system and open up the blood-brain barrier. This is NOT a good thing."
http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-08-11-new-fda-approved-hepatitis-b-vaccine-found-to-increase-heart-attack-risk-by-700.html
September 19, 2017, 03:59:21 am Christian40 says: bbc international did a video about there street preaching they are good witnesses
September 14, 2017, 08:06:04 am Psalm 51:17 says: bro Mark Hunter on YT has some good, edifying stuff too.
September 14, 2017, 04:31:26 am Christian40 says: i have thought that i'm reaping from past sins then my life has been impacted in ways from having non believers in my ancestry.
September 11, 2017, 06:59:33 am Psalm 51:17 says: The law of reaping and sowing. It's amazing how God's mercy and longsuffering has hovered over America so long. (ie, the infrastructure is very bad here b/c for many years, they were grossly underspent on. 1st Tim 6:10, the god of materialism has its roots firmly in the West) And remember once upon a time ago when shacking up b/w straight couples drew shock awe?

Exodus 20:5  Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
September 11, 2017, 03:40:40 am Christian40 says: those in america should better repent or things will only get worse
View Shout History
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Internet Only - No More Cable TV?  (Read 770 times)
Kilika
Guest
« on: April 08, 2013, 04:22:01 pm »

I've notice a few articles of late that are talking about the number of people dropping cable and satellite, and just watching shows online via an internet connection. I've been seriously considering dropping our satellite service myself and going with internet only.

Then I had a thought; is the media industry actually pushing people to make the change to internet service only?

It's the same media companies products, just on a different service. The real claimed sticking point is in advertising that people are sick of and want to avoid with devices like Dish's "Hopper". But is the arguing over ads and broadcast rights just a means to an end? It's starting to look like it, and it's claimed it will be one of the topics at the broadcaster's conference this week in Vegas.

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2013/04/08/broadcasters-worry-about-zero-tv-homes/?intcmp=features

Quote
Growing number skipping TV for smartphones, tablets

Published April 08, 2013
Associated Press

LOS ANGELES –  Some people have had it with TV. They've had enough of the 100-plus channel universe. They don't like timing their lives around network show schedules. They're tired of $100-plus monthly bills.

A growing number of them have stopped paying for cable and satellite TV service, and don't even use an antenna to get free signals over the air. These people are watching shows and movies on the Internet, sometimes via cellphone connections. Last month, the Nielsen Co. started labeling people in this group "Zero TV" households, because they fall outside the traditional definition of a TV home. There are 5 million of these residences in the U.S., up from 2 million in 2007.

Winning back the Zero TV crowd will be one of the many issues broadcasters discuss at their national meeting, called the NAB Show, taking place this week in Las Vegas. (cont.)

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2013/04/08/broadcasters-worry-about-zero-tv-homes/?intcmp=features#ixzz2PuQqg9M1

Report Spam   Logged

Social Buttons

Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: April 08, 2013, 04:51:49 pm »

On a side note, yes, speaking of the internet/smartphones, it seems like society today is very obsessed with these items. Back in the 80's and 90's, the "couch potatoes" seemed to be the "obsessions". But today it seems like everywhere you go, the average person, especially the youth, are so into their smartphones/internet, that it's hard to get their attentions when you want to ask them for anything.

For example, at my church in Dec when a Sunday School luncheon was being thrown, there was a young girl who had her eyes completely on her smartphone the entire time. At one point I asked her why she was sliding on the floor, and she gave me that initial reaction look, "What did you just say? Why did you just interrupt with what I was doing?". Anyhow, if that was me and my friends back in the 80's doing this, our parents would have wacked us pretty good. Her mother, from what I could tell, just looked a bit hopeless the entire time, and just chose to ignore it.

I do understand what you are saying, Kilika, but just thought I would add this, as from what I'm observing, it seems like each time we make a transition into something "different" like this, it seems like the "obsessions" and society behaviors that are regressing reflect that. No, I'm not against smartphones and the internet at all, but at the same time, if they aren't used constructively, they lead to a lot of anti-social behaviors, for example.

Ultimately, nothing is a coincidence everytime a transition is being made.

2Peter 3:1  This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance:
2Pe 3:2  That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:
2Pe 3:3  Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
2Pe 3:4  And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
2Pe 3:5  For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
2Pe 3:6  Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
2Pe 3:7  But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2013, 04:59:49 pm by BornAgain2 » Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: April 08, 2013, 11:27:32 pm »

One more thing - don't forget the big role social media(Twitter, FB, etc) are playing. It seems like a growing number of the masses are using this as their primary source.

James 3:4  Behold also the ships, which though they be so great, and are driven of fierce winds, yet are they turned about with a very small helm, whithersoever the governor listeth.
Jas 3:5  Even so the tongue is a little member, and boasteth great things. Behold, how great a matter a little fire kindleth!
Jas 3:6  And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell.

Report Spam   Logged
Christian40
Moderators
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3836


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: April 09, 2013, 12:49:42 am »

Well here now the sales for new TV's include "Internet TV's" , "Smart TV's" and "3D TV's" with full HD 1080p. i wouldn't mind if i got a new Internet TV but i'm not a covetous about it i think what i have is enough, i know when your in the electronics business it is all about coming up with some new technology.
Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #4 on: April 09, 2013, 04:02:09 am »

Don't waste your money on an "Internet TV" (and 3d tv is simply stupid and not very good anyway). Much cheaper to simply get a 1080p HDTV and a cheap pc to hook up to it so I am using the tv as a 55" monitor/tv, though the pc I'm using is an older dual core gaming rig I built that uses Windows XP.

An internet tv is the same as a tablet or smart phone; you can't do any hardware changes at all like you can with a pc, or even what software it runs. They don't want "geeks" messing with the hardware or software, claiming it's for protection against copyright stuff. Whatever! Roll Eyes
Report Spam   Logged
McChristian
Guest
« Reply #5 on: August 21, 2013, 04:06:09 pm »

With all these shows going internet, with no internet no show. When the internet goes down, so does the media. Just my opinion

Google has been holding talks with the National Football League, raising speculation that the Internet monolith is seeking new inroads into television.

Other tech companies like Apple are reportedly in talks with cable providers to boost access to blockbuster television shows through their devices.

With Google sitting on a cash pile of $48 billion, the league's Sunday Ticket package is easily within its reach.

The contract is currently held by DirecTV, which pays about $1 billion annually for the rights. That contract, however, expires at the end of the 2014 season.

Earlier this year, Google Chief Financial Officer Patrick Pichette said "it serves the shareholder best to actually have that strategic ability to pounce," when there is the opportunity to make a major acquisition.

The NFL confirmed its meetings with Google Wednesday, but declined to discuss the nature of those talks, as did Google.

"Members of our office meet often with innovative leaders in Silicon Valley and around the world," the NFL said in a statement. "We are constantly looking for ways to make our game better on the field, in the stadium and for fans."

The Sunday Ticket Package provides fans with access to most out-of-market NFL games not televised nationally on ESPN or on NBC.

Citi analyst Jason Bazinet believes that DirecTV is losing money on the deal, generating only about $725 million a year in revenue. He thinks a new contract would run about $1.5 billion if DirecTV were to make another go for it.

DirecTV has a market capitalization of about $32 billion and would be unlikely to remain for long in a bidding war with Google, which has a market capitalization nine times that.

Bazinet believes DirecTV investors would welcome the prospect of letting the NFL go.

Read More: http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory/google-nfl-meet-sunday-ticket-grabs-20025966
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: March 13, 2017, 03:40:45 pm »

Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: March 31, 2017, 09:50:45 am »

Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: April 14, 2017, 11:21:14 am »

Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: April 17, 2017, 02:16:56 pm »

Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: April 19, 2017, 06:08:58 pm »

Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: May 12, 2017, 09:46:24 am »

Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: May 18, 2017, 11:11:05 am »

A frank conversational piece recorded last night about the plague of hyper-gracer's and hyper-dispensationalists on YouTube. Scripture, once again, clearly helps us identify them by WHAT they "do NOT consent to". Verse 3 is the key verse (amazing, no?) and should help you all understand the core problem with channels that act in that unscriptural manner. FROM SUCH WITHDRAW THYSELF.

Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: May 24, 2017, 12:11:56 pm »

Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: May 24, 2017, 03:50:45 pm »

Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: June 26, 2017, 05:34:18 pm »

http://redstatewatcher.com/article.asp?id=83566
6/26/17
Breaking: Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter and Youtube Have Just Made A Joint Announcement and It's Global!!

https://twitter.com/breaking911/status/879386472629112834
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: September 27, 2017, 08:38:19 pm »

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-nfl-cant-keep-tv-afloat-anymore-2017-9?utm_content=buffer38424&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer-ti
The NFL can’t keep TV afloat anymore
Sep. 22, 2017, 7:00 PM

The NFL has long been the cornerstone of the U.S. pay television market. Viewers’ loyalty to their favorite teams and the tradition of watching games on Sunday afternoons (and Monday nights) provided stability and certainty for stakeholders across the TV ecosystem.

Mass-market advertisers could plan fall marketing campaigns knowing that NFL games would reach just about everyone. Broadcasters and cable channels (such as ESPN) could enter into long-term deals for broadcast rights knowing that people would “always” want to watch football, creating an anchor tenant for the rest of their programming lineup. Last but not least, pay TV providers have long used their exclusive distribution rights to NFL games as both a carrot (to attract new subscribers as DirecTV did with its wildly successful Sunday Ticket package in the 1990s) and a stick (to keep existing households from canceling service regardless of the cost or frustration many folks have with their pay TV provider).

The question today, however, is what if this entire edifice is just a house of cards? NFL ratings have fallen significantly across all providers over the past seasons and so far 2017 is not looking any better. The only positive element to that decline may be that fewer people have to watch the sad sight of the Los Angeles Rams playing in front of a mostly empty stadium at the Coliseum. There are endless theories about the decline, from the rising popularity of video games to player safety to (ridiculously) the Colin Kaepernick situation.

My own view is that declining NFL ratings are the logical outgrowth of the decline in legacy linear television overall. This larger decline has been going on for over a decade now; is rooted in a fundamental shift to anytime, anywhere viewing on broadband devices; and affects all legacy TV programming to one degree or another. In short, contrary to the hopes (or delusions) of some in the TV industry, the NFL is not immune to these larger societal and viewing dynamics.

The more important question is: What happens to the pay TV edifice when the NFL cornerstone isn’t there anymore? The answers are multiple, but two are particularly important.

First, the link between household growth and pay TV growth has been irreparably broken. The creation of a new household—most commonly by a young adult leaving home—used to almost automatically result in an additional pay TV household. That is simply no longer the case. Millions of American households are living happily without pay TV and one of the reasons is that Monday Night Football and other NFL games are simply no longer must-see TV. Put another way, U.S. legacy pay TV households have peaked and will only decline going forward.

The second effect of declining NFL ratings is the slow collapse of the supersize pay TV bundle itself. If the NFL isn’t must-have content, then nothing is must-have content. The result is a mushrooming of skinny bundles from providers as varied as Sling TV, DirecTV Now, PlayStation Vue, YouTube TV, and Hulu’s Live TV.

These services vary pretty dramatically, seemingly agreeing only on three things: people want cheaper pay TV offerings; what people want varies (including access to the NFL); and half a loaf (in terms of monthly subscription fees) is a whole lot better than none.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: September 29, 2017, 09:04:12 pm »

http://www.baptistpillar.com/article_256.html

The Local Church
vs.
The Universal Church

H. Meyers

There has been a confusion amongst Bible believers that has lasted for hundreds of years. Many have been deceived for so long, they will not even hear what the Word of God really says. There are others who are not even aware of what their "so-called" churches are standing on. I am speaking about the "universal, invisible church" theory.

The word "church" occurs 77 times in the singular form, and 37 times in the plural form in the Bible. All these verses are found in the New Testament. Therefore it is one of the ten New Testament mysteries. "A mystery is defined as truth withheld from the Old Testament but revealed in the New Testament." (Landmarks of Bible Prophecy, page 54). "This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church." (Ephesians 5:32).

Although it is a mystery, it doesn't mean that it needs to be mystical. And what would be more mystical than a "universal, invisible" church? The church was a mystery for the Old Testament saints because it had not been revealed to them yet. But it was revealed to the New Testament saints. Jesus said that He would build His church, and that He would preserve it. Nothing would prevail against it, not even the gates of hell!

The meaning of the word "church" (Ekklesia) is "a lawful, organized assembly". Strong's Concordance defines it as "a calling out, a popular meeting, assembly." The very definition of the word "church" proves that it is a local church, and not an "invisible, universal" church. An assembly must be local, visible, organized, and constituted. None of these attributes could describe the "universal, invisible" church.

The first occurrence of the word "church" is found in Matthew. "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." (Matthew 16:18). As we have learned in Bible Institute, one of the general rules of Bible interpretation is the "Law of First Mention". The first place a subject is mentioned in the Bible usually gives us the key to its meaning.

If this is going to be our key verse, let's look at its context. Starting at verse 15: "He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." Who is speaking? Jesus Christ, the Son of the living God. Who is He speaking to?

First he speaks to his disciples, then he turns to Simon Peter. When is this conversation taking place? He says in verse 18 that He will build his church. When did He actually build his church? For the ones who are confused and think that the church started at Pentecost: two chapters later, the church is already in existence. "And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican." (Matthew 18:17). Jesus was building His church at that very moment (Matthew 16:18). He had already called His disciples back in chapter 10 of Matthew, and He was giving his instructions on how to conduct the church.

Some seem to confuse who the rock is. "Peter" (Petros) is a piece of rock, while "rock" (Petra) is a mass of rock (Strong's Concordance). Some assume that Peter is the rock on which Jesus built is church, but 1 Corinthians 3:11 takes care of that. "For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ." From other Scriptures it is obvious that the "rock" is Jesus Christ. "And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ." (1 Corinthians 10:4). Here is a list of verses that will show who the rock is without a doubt. Deuteuronomy 32:4, 15, 18; 1 Samuel 2:2; 2 Samuel 22:2, 3, 32, 47, 23:3; Psalm 18:2, 31, 28:1, 31:3, 42:9; 62:2, 6, 7, 71:3, 78:35, 89:26, 92:15, 94:22, and Romans 9:33.

"Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican. Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them." (Matthew 18:15-20).

This portion of Scriptures deals with problems in the church, and the proper way of dealing with them. The last resort is church discipline. And again, we see the authority of the church given by Jesus Christ. This portion of Scriptures could not possibly be speaking about an "invisible, universal" church. How could you practice church discipline if it is invisible? Nonsense!


"Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call. And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers. And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles. And all that believed were together, and had all things common. And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need. And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved." (Acts 2:38-47).

Here, Peter is preaching to the church. They had received the power of the Holy Ghost Jesus had promised in Acts 1:4 and 5. This was the greatest revival ever. Notice that they were all of one accord. Thousands of souls were getting saved, baptized, and added to the church. Once more, how can you add to something that is not yet existent?

Let's look at the four characteristics of the local church or "assembly". An assembly must be local. Here is Webster's definition for "assemble": "To collect a number of individuals or particulars into one place, or body; to bring or call together; to convene; to congregate." A church must come together into one place. Hebrews 10:25 says "Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching." We are instructed in the Word of God to come together in one place.

If the church is universal, how are we supposed to do that? In almost all the verses where the word "church" or "churches" appear, it speaks of a specific place or locality. For example the church at Jerusalem was a local church. "... And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the apostles." (Acts 8:1) So was the church at Cenchrea and at Corinth. "I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea:" (Romans 16:1). "Unto the church of God which is at Corinth,..." (1 Corinthians 1:2). You can also look up these following verses: 1 Corinthians 14:23, 16:19, 2 Corinthians 1:1, Colossians 4:15, 16, 1 Thessalonians 1:1, 2 Thessalonians 1:1, Philemon 1:2, 1 Peter 5:13, Rev. 2:1, 8, 12, 18, 3:1, 7 and 14.

The Universalists like to use Ephesians 5:23 to prove that the church is not local. "For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body." They say that it can only mean one "universal" church because there can only be one head. But what about the rest of the verse? Is there also a "universal" husband and wife? 1 Corinthians 11:3 tells us that Christ is head over many men. "But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God."

In the Bible, there are three metaphors concerning the church. A metaphor is a short similitude; a similitude reduced to a single word; or a word expressing similitude without the signs of comparison. (Webster's dictionary). The first metaphor is the body. "And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence."(Colossians 1:18).

The second metaphor is the building. "And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit." (Ephesians 2:20-22). The third metaphor is the bride found in 2 Corinthians 11:2, "For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ."

As we look at each of these, we see that they must all be local. If a body is scattered or dismembered it is no longer a body. A building must be built on a foundation and in one place. A bride must be in one place.

An assembly must be visible. A church can not operate unless it is visible. Who has ever heard of invisible believers, invisible tithes, or invisible church discipline? "Night and day praying exceedingly that we might see your face, and might perfect that which is lacking in your faith?" (1 Thessalonians 3:10). And again, the three metaphors (body, building and bride) must also all be visible.

An assembly must be organized. Remember the definition of "ekklesia"? "A lawful, organized assembly." 1 Corinthians 14:40 says, "Let all things be done decently and in order." This is speaking of the church for it says in verse 33, "For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints." "For though I be absent in the flesh, yet am I with you in the spirit, joying and beholding your order, and the stedfastness of your faith in Christ."(Colossians 2:5). "For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee:"(Titus 1:5). "But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth." (1 Timothy 3:15). Here again, the three metaphors must also be organized.

An assembly must be constituted. Constituted means, "Set; fixed; established; made; elected; appointed." Members of an assembly must meet some qualifications. Can just anyone be a member of a New Testament church? No, first they must be born again, and then baptized. It must be established. The same goes for the metaphors. The body, the building, and the bride must be made with just the right materials.

I'm sure by now, you are convinced that the word "church" in the Scriptures is not even close to a "universal or invisible" church.

Let's look for a moment at how the theory of the universal church got started. This theory is not by any means based on the Bible. The early Christians knew nothing of this theory. So, where did this theory get its origin?

The Roman Catholic church came up with the "Universal Visible" church by confusing "Church" (ekklesia) and "Kingdom" (basileia). This is Webster's definition of "catholic": "Universal or general; as the Catholic church." This is what the Roman Catholic church is based on. They confused the "kingdom of God", or the "family of God" with the "church of God". As we will see later, God's family and God's church are two different things.
So, how did we pass from a "universal, visible" church to a "universal, invisible" church? During the Reformation, when people started to see some of the heresies of the Catholic church, began to leave and start their own "churches", they had to come up with something to take the place of the "universal, visible" church. They were still confusing the "church" with the "kingdom". The "universal, invisible" church was their answer.

Here is what Dr. R. K. Maiden, former editor of the Word and Way of Missouri has to say about this theory:

"As nearly as can be determined, the first formal, official identification of church and kingdom was projected when the Roman Empire became nominally Christianized, about the time of the consummation of the great ecclesiastical apostasy. It was the Ecumenical Council of Nice, called by the Emperor Constantine, that affirmed and projected as its creed the idea of a 'Catholic' World Church. From then down to the Lutheran Reformation of the sixteenth century, the universal visible theory of the church held the field, except for the scattered, comparatively obscure, hunted and persecuted little churches known by various names at different times –churches of the New Testament type in doctrine and policy. Following the Reformation period and born of the Reformation movement, there emerged a new theory of the church – the universal, invisible spiritual theory." (The Myth of the Universal Invisible Church Theory Exploded, page 11.)


What it really comes down to is the Universalists confuse the "Church of God" with the "Kingdom of God". And yes, the Kingdom of God is universal and invisible.

The word "kingdom" means "the power or authority of a king; a realm or a domain over which it extends." (Landmarks of Bible Prophecy, page 17) The "Kingdom of God" is also called the "Kingdom of Christ"–"For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God." (Ephesians 5:5), and the "kingdom of Heaven" throughout the book of Matthew.

Let's compare the "kingdom of God" in the same way we did the "church". The "Kingdom of God" is universal. Unlike the "church" it is not local. It is made up of all the saints of all ages. "Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named," (Ephesians 3:15). "Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham. And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham. For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus." (Galatians 3:6-9, 26). Therefore, it is impossible for the "kingdom of God" to assemble together in this present age.

The "kingdom of God" is invisible. It is a spiritual kingdom. Luke 17:20-21 says, "And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you." Romans 14:17 says "For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost."

There is only one "kingdom of God", but there are many local New Testament churches. The local church practices church discipline, but it is not so for the "kingdom of God". The church practices democracy while the "kingdom of God" is totally theocratic. The church has pastors and ordinances, but the "kingdom of God" doesn't. "To whom also he showed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God: And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence. When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power." (Acts 1:3-7).

What about 1 Corinthians 12:13 "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit." and Ephesians 4:3&4 "Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;" The Universalists use these two portions of Scriptures to prove their theory by wrong interpretation. They believe the word "body" is speaking of the "universal" church, but the word itself means it is local. Remember the metaphor we spoke of earlier? What did it represent? The local church.

The Universalists have come to their erroneous conclusion by starting out with an idea, and then going to the Scriptures to prove it. The Catholics said the "body of Christ" was the "universal, visible" church, and the Protestants said the "body of Christ" was the "universal, invisible" church. We must interpret Scriptures with Scriptures; not Scriptures with man's ideas. All this verse is saying is that by the same Spirit (the Holy Spirit) that lead us to salvation, we are lead to be baptized and become part of the body of Christ, the local church.

What has the "universal, invisible" church theory accomplished? It has made Jesus Christ out to be a liar. Jesus said He would build His church, but the "universal, invisible" church theory says the Holy Spirit did. They also say that the church wasn't started until Pentecost, but I proved them wrong earlier. "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it."(John 8:44).

How the devil must be laughing! He has succeeded in spreading his seeds of confusion and he is now reaping. Believers will neglect the church of God–the local New Testament church–because it is not important to them. They believe the great commission was given to individuals and not to the local church. The ordinances are not important, neither is baptism. And that might as well include their personal testimonies, too.

The Universalists refuse to believe God's Word. They would rather believe man made fables. They want to hang on to their religion. They need to repent, turn to God, and stop relying on traditions. "God forbid: ye, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged." (Romans 3:4). "For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints. (1 Corinthians 14:33).
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: September 29, 2017, 09:05:05 pm »

http://reformation21.org/articles/the-advantage-of-virtual-church.php

Excerpt:

Iain Murray's latest book on Martyn Lloyd Jones makes a point about his view of preaching.

'he believed that the gospel preached in a worshipping church, and in a local setting, has an advantage over other situations. Here the preacher is not just one man addressing a crowd; he is part of a community of believers who are not onlookers; they are involved; they too are witnesses in whom the Holy Spirit is present.' (p15)

'sermons should be heard in the context of worship not listened to casually as one might listen to anything else' (p19)

We live in an unbelievably individualistic world, and this has not just crept into the church; it has run full steam in and is in danger of wiping us out.  Church is full of difficult people, people we don't naturally get on with each other, but that is the church for which Christ has died.  We neglect these people at our peril. It is the community of God's people that God meets with. Murray continues

'When this is a reality, the incomer is confronted by something that has no counterpart in the world - thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on his face, he will worship God and report that God is in you of a truth (1 Cor 14:25 av). Something of eternity may be felt on such an occasion: 'Our coming together in public worship should be a foretaste of heaven'.(p15)

You just don't get that listening on your iplayer in the car or listening to sermons because you can't sleep.  We have adopted a celebrity culture in evangelicalism when conferences - or more accurately conference organisers - often feel they are the true barometer of Christianity in our culture.  If numbers are up at a conferences - 'Jubilation God is on the move' but if on the other hand numbers go down - 'people have lost their hunger for the gospel, a sad reflection on the church at this time'.  If 98% of conferences were got rid of would it make any difference?  Admittedly certain speakers would have a lot more time on their hands, but would the church suffer?

All the time the local church is bleeding because people have lost their commitment to the nitty gritty of church life.  Some are frustrated that their ministers aren't half as good as the ones they hear online. Of course the internet can be greatly used for the kingdom. Of course God has used the web ministries, but there is danger for us here.

I recognise there is a danger that we swing to the other extreme of not recognising gifted men and giants in the church. The speakers at many of these conferences are godly men doing a great work, but the danger remains. Local church can seem so dreary compared to the glamorous conferences. For us as ministers we can long to be on the bigger stage and get frustrated with the work that God has called us to do in the local church.

The church of Christ is the apple of Gods eye, the centre of what he is doing.  He cares passionately about our local church life. What goes on in your local church is infinitely more important that what goes on in any conference or any web ministry.  Don't be dazzled by the internet preachers or Christian celebrities.  Be amazed that you have been called to play your part in Gods new community - The church.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: September 29, 2017, 09:06:02 pm »



http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=928172348381
Virtual Church: Can Social Media Replace The Local Church?
Series:  OPBC ONLINE Radio Show  · 9 of 9
9/28/2017 (THU)
Audio: http://mp3.sa-media.com/download/928172348381/928172348381.mp3
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: October 06, 2017, 06:27:43 pm »

http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/man-created-facebook-like-button-now-warns-mind-can-hijacked-social-media/
Man Who Created The Facebook ‘Like’ Button Now Warns Your Mind Can Be ‘Hijacked’ Through Social Media
In 2007, Rosenstein was one of a small group of Facebook employees who decided to create a path of least resistance – a single click – to “send little bits of positivity” across the platform. Facebook’s “like” feature was, Rosenstein says, “wildly” successful: engagement soared as people enjoyed the short-term boost they got from giving or receiving social affirmation, while Facebook harvested valuable data about the preferences of users that could be sold to advertisers. The idea was soon copied by Twitter, with its heart-shaped “likes” (previously star-shaped “favourites”), Instagram, and countless other apps and websites.

10/6/17

Justin Rosenstein had tweaked his laptop’s operating system to block Reddit, banned himself from Snapchat, which he compares to heroin, and imposed limits on his use of Facebook. But even that wasn’t enough.

“And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.” Revelation 13:15 (KJV)

EDITOR’S NOTE: It’s very interesting to understand that the very people who created the highly-addictive ‘like’ system have now installed extensions on their devices to block those same features from being active. What does that tell you about how enslaving social media can be? Just imagine how it will be in a few years when AI is fully rolled out, and the devices are doing our thinking for us. The “brave new world’ is a very scary place to be, and I honestly don’t think any of us really know what we’re playing with.

In August, the 34-year-old tech executive took a more radical step to restrict his use of social media and other addictive technologies. Rosenstein purchased a new iPhone and instructed his assistant to set up a parental-control feature to prevent him from downloading any apps.

He was particularly aware of the allure of Facebook “likes”, which he describes as “bright dings of pseudo-pleasure” that can be as hollow as they are seductive. And Rosenstein should know: he was the Facebook engineer who created the “like” button in the first place.

A decade after he stayed up all night coding a prototype of what was then called an “awesome” button, Rosenstein belongs to a small but growing band of Silicon Valley heretics who complain about the rise of the so-called “attention economy”: an internet shaped around the demands of an advertising economy.

These refuseniks are rarely founders or chief executives, who have little incentive to deviate from the mantra that their companies are making the world a better place. Instead, they tend to have worked a rung or two down the corporate ladder: designers, engineers and product managers who, like Rosenstein, several years ago put in place the building blocks of a digital world from which they are now trying to disentangle themselves. “It is very common,” Rosenstein says, “for humans to develop things with the best of intentions and for them to have unintended, negative consequences.”

Rosenstein, who also helped create Gchat during a stint at Google, and now leads a San Francisco-based company that improves office productivity, appears most concerned about the psychological effects on people who, research shows, touch, swipe or tap their phone 2,617 times a day.

There is growing concern that as well as addicting users, technology is contributing toward so-called “continuous partial attention”, severely limiting people’s ability to focus, and possibly lowering IQ. One recent study showed that the mere presence of smartphones damages cognitive capacity – even when the device is turned off. “Everyone is distracted,” Rosenstein says. “All of the time.”
But those concerns are trivial compared with the devastating impact upon the political system that some of Rosenstein’s peers believe can be attributed to the rise of social media and the attention-based market that drives it.

Drawing a straight line between addiction to social media and political earthquakes like Brexit and the rise of Donald Trump, they contend that digital forces have completely upended the political system and, left unchecked, could even render democracy as we know it obsolete.

In 2007, Rosenstein was one of a small group of Facebook employees who decided to create a path of least resistance – a single click – to “send little bits of positivity” across the platform. Facebook’s “like” feature was, Rosenstein says, “wildly” successful: engagement soared as people enjoyed the short-term boost they got from giving or receiving social affirmation, while Facebook harvested valuable data about the preferences of users that could be sold to advertisers. The idea was soon copied by Twitter, with its heart-shaped “likes” (previously star-shaped “favourites”), Instagram, and countless other apps and websites.

It was Rosenstein’s colleague, Leah Pearlman, then a product manager at Facebook and on the team that created the Facebook “like”, who announced the feature in a 2009 blogpost. Now 35 and an illustrator, Pearlman confirmed via email that she, too, has grown disaffected with Facebook “likes” and other addictive feedback loops. She has installed a web browser plug-in to eradicate her Facebook news feed, and hired a social media manager to monitor her Facebook page so that she doesn’t have to.

“One reason I think it is particularly important for us to talk about this now is that we may be the last generation that can remember life before,” Rosenstein says. It may or may not be relevant that Rosenstein, Pearlman and most of the tech insiders questioning today’s attention economy are in their 30s, members of the last generation that can remember a world in which telephones were plugged into walls.

It is revealing that many of these younger technologists are weaning themselves off their own products, sending their children to elite Silicon Valley schools where iPhones, iPads and even laptops are banned. They appear to be abiding by a Biggie Smalls lyric from their own youth about the perils of dealing crack ****: never get high on your own supply.

One morning in April this year, designers, programmers and tech entrepreneurs from across the world gathered at a conference centre on the shore of the San Francisco Bay. They had each paid up to $1,700 to learn how to manipulate people into habitual use of their products, on a course curated by conference organiser Nir Eyal.

Eyal, 39, the author of Hooked: How to Build Habit-Forming Products, has spent several years consulting for the tech industry, teaching techniques he developed by closely studying how the Silicon Valley giants operate.

“The technologies we use have turned into compulsions, if not full-fledged addictions,” Eyal writes. “It’s the impulse to check a message notification. It’s the pull to visit YouTube, Facebook, or Twitter for just a few minutes, only to find yourself still tapping and scrolling an hour later.” None of this is an accident, he writes. It is all “just as their designers intended”.

He explains the subtle psychological tricks that can be used to make people develop habits, such as varying the rewards people receive to create “a craving”, or exploiting negative emotions that can act as “triggers”. “Feelings of boredom, loneliness, frustration, confusion and indecisiveness often instigate a slight pain or irritation and prompt an almost instantaneous and often mindless action to quell the negative sensation,” Eyal writes.
facebook-like-button-creator-says-highly-addictive-warns-social-media-banned

Less than 5 minutes after posting this story on social media, Facebook banned me for 6 days in retaliation for daring to expose them.

Attendees of the 2017 Habit Summit might have been surprised when Eyal walked on stage to announce that this year’s keynote speech was about “something a little different”. He wanted to address the growing concern that technological manipulation was somehow harmful or immoral. He told his audience that they should be careful not to abuse persuasive design, and wary of crossing a line into coercion.

But he was defensive of the techniques he teaches, and dismissive of those who compare tech addiction to drugs. “We’re not freebasing Facebook and injecting Instagram here,” he said. He flashed up a slide of a shelf filled with sugary baked goods. “Just as we shouldn’t blame the baker for making such delicious treats, we can’t blame tech makers for making their products so good we want to use them,” he said. “Of course that’s what tech companies will do. And frankly: do we want it any other way?”

Without irony, Eyal finished his talk with some personal tips for resisting the lure of technology. He told his audience he uses a Chrome extension, called DF YouTube, “which scrubs out a lot of those external triggers” he writes about in his book, and recommended an app called Pocket Points that “rewards you for staying off your phone when you need to focus”.

Finally, Eyal confided the lengths he goes to protect his own family. He has installed in his house an outlet timer connected to a router that cuts off access to the internet at a set time every day. “The idea is to remember that we are not powerless,” he said. “We are in control.”

But are we? If the people who built these technologies are taking such radical steps to wean themselves free, can the rest of us reasonably be expected to exercise our free will?

Not according to Tristan Harris, a 33-year-old former Google employee turned vocal critic of the tech industry. “All of us are jacked into this system,” he says. “All of our minds can be hijacked. Our choices are not as free as we think they are.” source
Report Spam   Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
Free SMF Hosting - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines