text:
The layout process of your thesis:
from text to a designed book
from text to a designed book
Our process is best summarized in 5 short steps, you and your personal designer will work together to create a personally designed thesis. The process can be divided into 3 phases:
- Crafting your custom-designed thesis by creating a layout proof.
- Applying the previous designed layout on your entire thesis.
- Adjusting the end result and sending it off for printing.
Your designer will provide guidance during the entire process. If you have questions about our process please contact the head of our design team.
Convinced we are the right choice to design your thesis for just € 599?Request your layout
Or call +31 (0) 30 207 27 07
Our layout process in 5 steps
Step 1 – Submitting your files
Enjoy the fruits of your preparation.
To hit the ground running, you can make preparations even before the layout of your thesis starts. To aid the designer in creating the best possible layout of your dissertation, you will need to submit your dissertation documents correctly. Additionally we advise to check out our thesis layout examples well in advance.
> Read more about how you can prepare yourself for the layout of your thesis in our knowledge base.
Step 2 – The introductory phonecall
Day 1 and 2 – Your personal designer will contact you.
Once your application has reached us, your personal designer will get in touch with you. We will always contact you by phone before starting the design of your thesis. This way you can get to know your designer and you can clearly state your wishes regarding the design. Your designer will inform you about the details of the process and may make suggestions to optimize the design.
> Interested in more information about the the introductory phonecall. Read more on our knowledge base.
Step 3 – The layout proof
Week 1 – A quick glance of the final result.
After your introductory phonecall with your designer the layout of your thesis will start. The first step is to create a layout proof. This proof summerizes all layout aspects in a few pages. In this way you'll get a good idea of what the final layout will look like. You can refine the layout proof together with your designer during a set of adjustment rounds until you are satisfied with the end result.
> Read more about the layout proof and how it determines the layout of your thesis in our knowledge base.
Step 4 – A fully designed thesis
Weeks 2 and 3 – Your designer designs your entire thesis in accordance to the layout proof.
Your designer will now begin working on the layout of all chapters. In addition we will start the layout of your cover. Just as before, the designed cover and inside of your thesis will be sent to you in the form of a PDF in order to make adjustments to the design. We recommend you to inspect and read the submitted PDF. We offer a number of adjustment rounds to further perfect the design.
> Curious for more information about the design of your thesis?
Just visit our knowledge base.
Step 5 – A print proof of your thesis
Week 4 – A digital and print proof of your thesis are made by a printer of your choice.
When you have approved the design of your entire thesis and its cover, we will hand over the files to your printing partner who will create a digital proof. You will have to approve this digital proof before a print proof is made. This print proof will include a full color print version of your cover and full inside. We ask you to check the print proof carefully as a printed version of your thesis will have a different feel compared to the digital version. Adjustments can be made in this stage, you will only have to relay them to your designer.
> Why would you make a print proof?
Read more about it on our knowledge base.
Receive your printed thesis
Week 6 or 7 – Your theses will be sent.
After the print proof and the final adjustments your thesis is ready to be printed. Often it takes up to two weeks before all dissertations are printed and delivered at a location you have designated. This is, of course, an exciting moment. When you were well prepared and had a good cooperation with your designer, the result will certainly be as beautiful as expected. After this it is up to you, the defense is the final sprint to the finish. As soon as you have the books in hand, we are satisfied. We ask you to evaluate the process, in that way we can improve the quality of our service.
Convinced our process will guarantee a great result?Request your layout
Or call +31 (0) 30 207 27 07


text:
Happy new year!
Happy new year!
We celebrated by going to bed early, waking up even earlier (awoken at 4:50 am by our early bird toddler), and having brunch with our neighbors and a bunch of babies. 365 days ago the same girls were lying on a blanket unable to roll over. Today they were jumping on an ottoman and playing "kitchen".
I made these banana muffins which are delicious (I subbed butter) and easy enough to make while sleep deprived:

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Despite their name, air fryers actually function pretty much the same as an oven. They work by using dry heat and a thin coating of oil to produce crispy fries and crumbed meats without the mess and health concerns associated with deep frying foods.
We've put multiple air fryers through their paces and can tell you which models work best.
On this page:
Our expert testers
There's no doubt our home economist/test co-ordinator Fiona Mair and kitchen test officer Chantelle Scodeller know their way around a kitchen. With 30 years of combined experience they've seen lots of new technology enter the kitchen space, including the increasingly popular air fryer. Fiona and Chantelle know how to put appliances through their paces in the test kitchen and air fryers are no exception.
How we choose what we test
With a range of products on the market, what makes us choose one air fryer over another to test? As with most of our product testing, our aim is to test the most popular models on the market and what you're most likely to see in the retailers.
We survey manufacturers to find out about their range of models, check market sales information and also check for any member requests to test specific models. From this information we put together a final list that goes to our buyers. They then head out to the retailers and purchase each product, just as a normal consumer would. We do this so we can be sure they are the same as any consumer would find them and not 'tweaked' in any way. The air fryer market in Australia is fairly small, so we've tested the majority of air fryers that are currently available for purchase.
How we test
Our kitchen lab puts air fryers through their paces by conducting three main cooking tests to assess their performance:
Crumbed chicken – 400g of frozen crumbed chicken breast nuggets.
Frozen chips – 500g of frozen thick-cut chips with half a tablespoon of rice bran oil.
Fresh cut fries – We use a mandolin to cut 500g of potatoes into 7.5mm widths, then cook them with half a tablespoon of rice bran oil. We recently added this test to make our results more relevant for those who use air fryers to make their own fries from scratch. As it's a new test which hasn't been performed on all the models, this isn't integrated in the overall score, but it is displayed in the comparison table for newly tested models.
For each test, we follow the manufacturer's instructions on how to cook that particular food. If there are no specific instructions or recommended settings we use common sense to determine the settings and cooking time and monitor the cooking progress visually.
We then assess the overall look and taste of the food, noting how evenly the pieces are browned and how well they are cooked inside, with deductions for sogginess, burnt areas and dried out or undercooked insides.
And like with other kitchen appliances such as ovens and cooktops, when we're done testing, we get to eat the results. One of the perks of working at CHOICE!
Ease of use
We check how:
- Easy the air fryers are to assemble, store, operate and clean.
- Helpful the instructions are.
Test criteria explained
Overall score
The overall score is made up of:
- Cooking performance (60%)
- Ease of use (40%)
Our test lab
We maintain a kitchen lab that is up to date with the latest reference machines and calibrated measurement tools for our testers to bring you the right results.


text:
A Dialectic Response to Mr. Cooper Abrams' (2006) Alleged Refutation of the Necessity of "Baptism for the Forgiveness of Sin"
Mr. Abrams (2006) begins his treatise, alleging that water baptism is not "for"—in order to receive—forgiveness of sin, by assigning particular terminology and a generalized definition to the concept of water baptism, saying: "This position is commonly called 'baptismal regeneration' because it holds that one is 'regenerated' or saved only when a person is baptized" (para. 1). While we acknowledge that there are many people in this world who have been led to think of baptism in those terms, this paper purports to establish the fact that every authentic New Covenant child of God—believing that, indeed, baptism is "for the forgiveness of sin,"—knows better. They understand that the efficacy of baptism has nothing to do with the water, or the act of being immersed in water, in and of itself. The New Covenant children of God do not believe in "baptismal regeneration" or "water regeneration," even though they do hold to the premise that baptism is when and where a living faith connects with God's saving grace. They understand that baptism has nothing to do with the efficacy of the water, or the act of baptism itself, to merit, earn, warrant, or deserve salvation in any way.
For Mr. Abrams to begin his article by using such a term, and applying his particular definition to it throughout his article in such a broad and general way, is simply a rhetorical device—the appeal to the "straw man"—defined as:
…a common type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on the misrepresentation of the original topic of argument. To be successful, a straw man argument requires that the audience be ignorant or uninformed of the original argument. The so-called typical "attacking a straw man" implies an adversarial, polemic, or combative debate, and creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition by covertly replacing it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and then to refute or defeat that false argument, ("knock down a straw man,") instead of the original proposition. This technique has been used throughout history in polemical debate, particularly in arguments about highly charged emotional issues where a fiery, entertaining "battle" and the defeat of an "enemy" may be more valued than critical thinking or understanding both sides of the issue. (Straw Man, 2014).
After setting up his "straw man," Mr. Abrams (2006) gives himself permission to call everyone who believes that water baptism is, indeed, for the forgiveness of sin, "baptismal regenerationists" (para. 2). Thus he has effectively labeled his "straw man." The rhetorical practice of using names, labels, and general stereotyping—whether they accurately apply or not—is certainly easier than having to deal with actual truth and the real heart issues that are involved.
Mr. Abrams (2006) then goes on to offer a brief summary of what he thinks these alleged "baptismal regenerationists" believe and teach; using what he refers to as "supposed 'proof text[s]'" (para 2). We might note that his blatant use of uncontextualized truth is precisely how the serpent approached and deceived Eve in the garden. It is also how Satan tempted Jesus in the wilderness. False spirits are not opposed to using the Holy Scripture as a weapon of deception. They know that the closer to the truth, the better the lie. And the best lie is always the truth when it can be used that way.
By offering a barrage of scripture up front, Mr. Abrams (2006) give the impression of acknowledging and understanding his "straw man" enemy. He also seeks to give some impression of scholarship. However, it should be noted that a true scholar would not simply present his own, paraphrased, brief summary of what he thinks other people believe. Rather, he would offer actual documentation, in the words of his alleged opponents, to substantiate what they truly believe. However, that approach would require a tremendous amount of effort on the part of Mr. Abrams because of the way in which he collectively groups several different Christian denominational faiths together under his "straw man" campaign, saying, "Groups that teach this include the Catholics, Seventh Day Adventists, many Pentecostal groups including the United Pentecostal Church, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, and the Church of Christ (Russelites)" (para. 2). Mr. Abrams then presents his argument as though what each of these respective groups teach on this particular issue is essentially the same thing—convenient for Mr. Abrams, but nothing could be further from the truth.
Furthermore, Mr. Abrams (2006) displays what is, at least, a serious editorial mistake, if not profound ignorance, when he denotes "the Church of Christ" as "Russelites." Mr. Abrams errs in two ways in making this statement. First, he speaks of "the Church of Christ" as though it were one big denominational organization; when, in fact, such an organization does not actually exist. The people Abrams is referencing should be more accurately described as "the churches of Christ" (Romans 16:16); each being an independent and autonomous, nondenominational, community Christian fellowship linked only by love. While one of these local fellowships in a given location might be called "a church of Christ," there is currently no such common denomination as "the Church of Christ" in the United States.
Second, Mr. Abrams (2006) errs in that, so far as history recounts, members of the churches of Christ have never been commonly referred to as "Russelites." However, that term has been sometimes used of the Jehovah Witnesses denomination. What Mr. Abrams may have been referring to, with regard to what he mistakenly calls "the Church of Christ" is the term "Campbellite," which is "a mildly pejorative term referring to adherents of certain religious groups that have historic roots in the Restoration Movement, among whose most prominent 19th century leaders were Thomas and Alexander Campbell. Members of these groups generally consider the term "Campbellite" inappropriate, saying that they are followers of Jesus, not Campbell" (Campbellite, 2014). But whether this is the term Mr. Abrams' was fishing for or not, his spirit of pejorative name calling, just as with his general groupings of different faiths in seeking support for his "straw man," is less than academic.
Mr. Abrams (2006) then launches a campaign of refutation in which he purports to knock down all the alleged tenets of his "straw man" and put the Holy Scriptures in their proper light. In so doing, he uses various terms and phrases that the Bible does not use to describe his perceptions of truth. For example, he calls baptism "an important first act of obedience" (para. 3)—nowhere in scripture is baptism referred to in this way—and seeks to redefine Biblical "faith" by equating it with mere "belief" by saying things like, "Overwhelmingly the Bible stresses that a person is saved by grace through faith and that salvation is a gift of God, freely given, when one believes in Jesus Christ for their salvation. (Eph. 2:8-9)" (para. 3). Of course, that is "not" what this passage of scripture actually says. It says, "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God…"When Mr. Abrams adds the phrase, "when one believes in Jesus Christ," he is only adding his own theological perspective, but couching it as though it were scripture. This is misleading at best and, perhaps, another deliberate deception.
Reading his own theological perspectives into scripture, as he has done here in Ephesians 2:8-9, characterizes a lot of the rest of Mr. Abrams' (2006) campaign to negate the importance of water baptism—or any other physical expression of faith—in salvation; as, verse-by-verse, he seeks to offer, as the only reliable interpretation of scripture, his own theological constructs. Whether Mr. Abrams' theology is rooted and grounded in the five basic tenets of Calvinism is a little hard to tell simply by this one manuscript. But it is clear that he has a Calvinistic approach to salvation insofar as he believes that faith, "faith alone," and, in particular, his definition of faith—which equates to belief only—is all that God requires for salvation. This is seen in statements made by Abrams, such as:
- "The clear teaching of the New Testament is that it is faith and faith alone that saves" (para. 4).
- "God did not change the requirement for salvation after the cross. It was by faith only both before and after the cross" (para. 8).
- "For example look again at the issue here. Sixty passages, including the classic passage of Ephesians 2:8-9, say that salvation is received by faith and faith alone" (para. 9). We need to note here that, contrary to what Mr. Abrams (2006) so boldly asserts, there is not one single passage of scripture, NOT ONE, anywhere in the Bible that says that anyone is saved by "faith alone." There is only one place in all of scripture where the term "faith alone" is even used, and that is in James 2:24, "You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone."
Abrams (2006) also makes it a point to note that, "At least sixty times the New Testament states that salvation is received by faith with no mention of baptism" (para. 4). Abrams makes it sound as though, somehow, the sheer volume of scripture references one can cite has everything to do with establishing truth. But is it not true that if even one passage of scripture reveals a portion of God's truth, that one passage must be accredited the same weight and significance as every other passage of scripture? Does the Bible not say, "The sum of Your word is truth, And every one of Your righteous ordinances is everlasting" (Psalm 119:160)? So why would Abrams even attempt such a futile rhetorical tactic; except to try to win his point!
I think we can attribute much of Abrams' (2006) efforts at explaining away the meaning of scripture to his fundamental misunderstanding of just what "faith" really is. As noted in the references above, and throughout his article, Abrams apparently equates "faith" with "belief." There is little doubt that, for him, individual salvation takes place when people belief in Christ; although it is likely that even he might say that they must also "receive Jesus into their hearts as Lord and Savior"—another theological construct that can be found nowhere in scripture. But what Mr. Abrams is missing, what he needs to discover and come to terms with, is that Biblical "faith" is, and always has been, much more than mere "belief."
Remember the Biblical teaching from the book of James—a book that I note Abrams (2006) keeps well away from—when he says:
What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him? [do not doubt we're talking about "saving" faith here] If a brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food, and one of you says to them, "Go in peace, be warmed and be filled," and yet you do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that? Even so faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself. But someone may well say, "You have faith and I have works; show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works." You believe that God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder. But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless? Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar? You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was perfected [brought to completion]; and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness," and he was called the friend of God. You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone. In the same way, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way? For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead. (James 2:14-26)
At this point we may want to stop and ask ourselves, "Who do we really want to believe here, Mr. Abrams (2006)—who says we are saved by faith alone—or James, the elder of the church in Jerusalem, physical brother of Jesus, and inspired author of one of the books of the New Testament who says we are "justified by works and not by faith alone"? Both cannot be right, Either Abrams is right and we agree with him. Or, James is right and we agree with him.
There is one other option, but Abrams (2006) doesn't like it very much. That option is that Paul in Ephesians 2:8-9 and James in James 2:14-26 are talking about two entirely different kinds of works. While Paul, in context, is talking about legalistic, meritorious works of law by which people seek to justify themselves, James, in context, is talking about works that are the expression of a living faith; but without which faith is useless, faith is dead and, therefore, are essential to our justification.
But Abrams (2006) will not accept the possibility of that explanation, for he says:
Often the baptismal regenerationist trying to reconcile his belief with Ephesians 2:8-9 will state that baptism is not a "work." However, the word translated "work" is the Greek noun ergon ergon er'-gon and means a "an act, deed, thing done" (2). Baptism is indeed a physical act, to which a person submits and is physically immersed under water. It is the deliberate result of new believer exercising his will and agreeing to be baptized. This is the same word used in passages such as 1 Timothy 5:10, 25; 6:18, 2 Timothy 3:17, which refer to "good works" (kalos ergon). To silence any doubt note that the word is used in 2 Timothy 4:14, "Alexander the coppersmith did me much evil: the Lord reward him according to his works(ergon)." There can be no mistake that the word means some action a person takes. Alexander the coppersmith's evil deeds were acts or works he committed. (para. 10)
What should be noted is that the same Greek word, "ergon," is also used by James when he says, "You see that a man is justified by works [ergon] and not by faith alone" (James 2:24). Mr. Abrams (2006) seriously misrepresents those who believe that baptism is essential to salvation when he lumps them all together under his "straw man" and says that they "state that baptism is not a 'work'" (para. 10). No authentic New Covenant child of God that I know will ever say that baptism is not a "work." Baptism is a work, just as confession is a work, and repentance is a work, and pursuing "the sanctification without which no one will see the Lord" (Hebrews 12:14) is a work. But what Mr. Abrams fails to see, or what he will not agree to see, is that confession, repentance, baptism, and the pursuit of sanctification are not the kinds of works that the Apostle Paul was speaking of in Ephesians 2—meritorious works of law by which one seeks to justify himself. Rather, they are the kind of works that James was speaking of in James 2—expressions of living faith; the kind of faith upon which our access to God's grace depends.
But just as no authentic New Covenant child of God that I know will ever say that baptism is not a work, so also, they will never tell you that their faith is in their works. We do not put our faith in the waters of baptism. We do not put our faith in the fact that we surrendered ourselves to God in baptism, or that we have repented of our sins, or that we confess with our mouth Jesus as Lord, or that we are in constant pursuit of sanctification. We know that none of these things can save us. We work, because a living faith will not allow us to do otherwise. And we know that, as James teaches, our works bring our faith to completion. But our faith is not in our works. Our faith is not even in our faith. Sadly people can misdirect their faith by putting their faith in the fact that they have faith. But we are not saved by our faith, any more than we are saved by our works. We are saved only "by" God's grace, which He has poured out for us through the sacrificial gift of His Son. And that grace is made abundantly available to those who, by faith, surrender their hearts and lives to God in obedience to His will as expressed through His holy and inspired word—the Bible.
We can point to the entire chapter of Hebrews 11 for example after example of what faith is; each example involving not only a conviction in one's heart, but a living demonstration of that conviction—bringing their faith to completion. For example, the book of Hebrews says, "By faith Noah, being warned by God about things not yet seen, in reverence prepared an ark for the salvation of his household" (verse 7). Noah and family were saved by faith, but it wasn't a dead faith that merely believed. Rather, it was a living faith that PREPARED AN ARK! Had they only believed, but taken no action, they would have perished. Why? Because, as James 2 says, "…faith without works is useless" (verse 20). In the same way, Hebrews 11 says, "By faith the walls of Jericho fell down after they had been encircled for seven days" (verse 30). Now we know that all the marching in the world could not have made those walls fall down. It wasn't the marching that did it and the Hebrews children did not put their faith in their marching; they put their faith in Jehovah God. It was He who made the walls fall down and they knew that very well. But those wall didn't fall until the marching occurred. Why? Because as James 2 says, "faith without works is dead" (verse 26).
Is it, then, too much for Mr. Abrams (2006) to imagine that faith is more than the mere mental acquiescence to the validity of something; that it is more than just belief, more than just accepting? In light of James' teaching and what the Bible says faith really is, is it really too much for Mr. Abrams and company to imagine that God, as a prerequisite to gaining access to the blood of Christ, would call upon people to actually express the convictions of their heart by meeting Him at the watery grave of baptism, and there demonstrating their faith in what Jesus has done for them—His death, burial, and resurrection—through their own symbolic death, burial, and resurrection to "walk in newness of life" (Romans 6:4)? Perhaps that is, indeed, just a little too much for a heart steeped in the doctrines of John Calvin to ever comprehend?
I love the Apostle Paul's explanation of baptism, in addressing the church at Colossae, when he says: "and in Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ; having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead" (Colossians 2:11-12). In this passage, Paul not only defines baptism as the moment we receive our spiritual circumcision, but he points out exactly where the efficacy of authentic Bible baptism lies when he says that "you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God…" Every authentic New Covenant child of God that I know knows exactly where their faith was at when they were baptized; and it was not in themselves, not in their obedience, not in their performances, and certainly not in the "water" itself. Their faith was, and is, in "the working of God!" That is about as far away from the kind of meritorious works of law, which Paul addressed in Ephesians 2, as one can get!
Faith cannot be separated from works; any more than love can be separated from obedience. Jesus said, "If you love Me you will keep my commandments" (John 14:15) and "He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me" (John 14:21). While the Calvinists, and others like them, try to separate it all out and make "faith" one thing and "works another, or "love" one thing and "obedience" another, the truth is they are all one big ball of wax. As James points out, a living faith necessitates works and works of faith bring one's faith to completion.
But not only do Abrams (2006) and company fail to differentiate between two entirely different kinds of works, thus throwing the writings of Paul and James into conflict with one another, but they also seem to neglect the very teachings of Jesus Himself concerning the importance of works to our salvation. Abrams says we are saved by faith alone, completely separate and apart from any works whatsoever, even works that are simply expressions of our faith. But Jesus said:
Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?' And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.' (Matthew 7:21-23)
So now the question becomes, "Who are we to believe, Abrams (2006) or Jesus?" I think we all know the answer to THAT one. And, while I am sure that Abrams and company have found some way to explain away those statements made by Jesus—I mean, how could they not try to come up with something that will seemingly justify their position—it behooves us, as disciples of Christ and students of the Word, to not let these guys off the hook. There is simply no way that the Calvinists, or anyone remotely related to their doctrinal positions, can look at the teachings of Christ in this particular passage, and throughout the Gospels, and continue to hold to their doctrine of "faith only" without trying to do an awful lot of explaining away.
I am sometimes virtually dumbfounded at how far people will sometimes go to reinterpret a passage of scripture, or an event in Bible history, in order to maintain their doctrine. For example, concerning Luke's account of the thief on the cross, Abrams (2006) says:
One passage the baptismal regeneration people have never really correctly understood is Luke 23:42-43 and the fact the thief on the cross was saved as Jesus declared, and was never baptized. They try to skirt the matter by saying this was before the Church Age when baptism was initiated. They state that Romans 10:9-10 requires that to be saved a person must believe that Jesus was raised from the dead. The thief could not have believed that because Christ had not yet arisen. The problem with that idea is that it does not take into account how were people in the Old Testament saved? Old Testament saints were saved by faith, through the grace of God as Hebrews 11 explains. This chapter is the Bible's Hall of Faith and states repeatedly how from Abel on men believed the revelation they were given by God and were saved. Abraham never heard the name of Jesus Christ or of His death, burial and resurrection, but he was certainly saved…. (para. 5)
The Bible teaches that no one in the Old or New Testament who was saved, merited or earned it in any way. The thief died in the Old Testament dispensation during the time the Mosaic Law was in force. He expressed saving faith while hanging on a cross and had no time to keep any law therefore the keeping of any part of the law was certainly not a part of his salvation. Jesus declared that the repentant thief (malefactor) would be with Him that day in Paradise because the thief believed in Jesus Christ and nothing more… (para. 7)
As seen in this text, Mr. Abrams (2006) is very good a telling us what the Bible teaches—in light of his own theological positions. However, even a casual reading of Hebrews 11 reveals that the theme of the whole chapter is "faith in action"; demonstrating for us in example after example how that authentic "faith" is much more than mere "belief"; and how that it consists not only of a conviction within our hearts but the physical expression of that conviction, as well. In the section above, Abrams (2006) speaks of Abel, of whom the book of Hebrews says he "offered to God a better sacrifice than Cain, through which he obtained the testimony that he was righteous, God testifying about his gifts, and through faith, though he is dead, he still speaks" (verse 4). Does that sound like "faith" is only "believing" to you? Abrams also mentions Abraham, of whom the book of Hebrews says he "obeyed by going out to a place which he was to receive for an inheritance; and he went out, not knowing where he was going" (verse 8). I'm thinking Abrams' Old Testament appeals to faith being nothing more than a mental acquiescence to, or belief in, something is not doing him any favors.
But, back to the thief on the cross. I am amazed, startled even, at how quickly those of Calvinists heritage run to this particular illustration to try to prove their point concerning baptism not being a part of God's plan for receiving the forgiveness of sin. They inevitably say, "Well, what about the thief on the cross, he wasn't baptized and Jesus saved him?" To this point we must point out that:
First, if it's just "baptism" we're talking about, how does Mr. Abrams (2006) know that the thief on the cross had not been baptized with the baptism of John? He very well may have been. According to the Bible, "When all the people and the tax collectors heard this, they acknowledged God's justice, having been baptized with the baptism of John. But the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected God's purpose for themselves, not having been baptized by John" (Luke 7:29-30). Perhaps, at one time or another, the thief on the cross had, indeed, been among those people who were baptized by John, or one of his disciples. Just because he had sinned, and was now hanging on a cross beside Jesus, does not mean that he was totally disobedient to the will of God. It was the religious leaders—lawyers and Pharisees—who, like Abrams and company, "rejected God's purpose for themselves, not having been baptized by John" (verse 30). Why is it always the religious leaders who, seemingly, cannot see what the common people so easily see? But whether or not the thief on the cross had ever been baptized with the baptism of John is a moot point because, it's Jesus' baptism, commanded after His death, burial, and resurrection, that we have in view here, not John's baptism.
Second—and, really, of greater importance—despite Abrams (2006) claims to the contrary, it remains important to the discussion to remember that the thief on the cross lived and died prior to Jesus' commands concerning baptism. When Jesus said, "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 28:19) and, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned" (Mark 16:15-16), He made these statements after His death, burial, and resurrection. Baptism, as taught in the New Testament, is an expression of saving faith symbolizing the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ—as we die to self and to sin (Romans 6:6), are "buried with Him through baptism into death" and raised up to "walk in newness of life" (Romans 6:4). How could the thief on the cross have be expected to have done any of that when Jesus had not yet died, nor had He issued His commandment regarding baptism? The whole appeal to the thief on the cross—with regard to Christian baptism, or any other New Covenant expression of saving faith—is a moot point!
If the Biblical account of the thief on the cross has anything whatsoever so say about our own salvation, it is not with specific regard to baptism or any other expression of the faith to which we are called in accordance with the terms of the New Covenant. Rather, much to the chagrin of the "legalists" on both sides of all such issues, it speaks to the beautiful, compassionate, ever gracious character of a wild and passionate God who will not be tamed or constrained by any man's theology. I have had both conservative legalists and liberal legalist (and, yes, there are legalists—people who base their salvation, and that of others, on how well they adhere to particular tenets and practices of some religious doctrine or another—on both sides of every issue) tell me that, if God makes a single exception for any individual with regard to what He requires for salvation, then He must make that same exception for every person. Such legalistic thinking, however, does not take into account that God looks deeply into our heart—individually, person-by-person—and deals with us accordingly.
The thief on the cross is a first class example of God's personal attention to, and intimate dealings with, the individual human heart. As the thief hung there beside Jesus, suspended between heaven and earth, and between two covenants—the Old Covenant with its Law of Moses, which was obsolete and passing away (Hebrews 8:13), and the New Covenant, which was about to be inaugurated with Christ's own blood (Hebrews 9:15-16)—he was, to be sure, in a unique position. Whatever faith and obedience he had demonstrated in accordance with the Law of Moses, or even with regard to the prophetic authority of John the Baptizer, was now all behind him and there was nothing more he could ever do to show his penitence. He could do nothing to make restitution in accordance with the old law. He could offer no animal sacrifice for himself down at the temple. If he had not submitted to John's prophetic authority, it was too late now. No one was going to take him down from that cross and over to the Pool of Siloam for baptism. Everything pertaining to the Old Covenant dispensation was behind him and irretrievable.
Likewise, whatever expressions of faith and love required by our Lord in accordance with the terms of the New Covenant in Christ were beyond him and out of his reach. He had no knowledge or comprehension of some future baptism that Christ had not yet even commanded, or of what such an act of surrender might mean with regard to becoming a New Covenant child of God.
All he had to offer God in that moment was a living faith in Jesus as the Christ; a saving faith that prompted him to, well, do something—so he opened his mouth and rebuked the other criminal, then confessed his own sin and guilt, and then, finally, confessed Jesus as His Lord and King as he entreated Him to remember him. It was not exactly in keeping with the Law of Moses under which, technically, he lived and died. It was not exactly what John the baptizer had been preaching earlier. It was also not even entirely in keeping with what Jesus Himself, and the apostles and prophets of the New Testament, would later command, following the death, burial and resurrection of Christ. But it was all that he had to offer in that moment; and, by faith, he offered what he had.
I think it incredulous for the Calvinists among us, or anybody else, to run to the thief on the cross and so tritely use him as some kind of rhetorical devise to justify their own theological positions; and especially to use him to negate something that Jesus Himself would later command following His own death, burial, and resurrection. I think it must break the thief's heart—and I hate continually referring to him as "the thief," must he continue to wear that label for eternity? Furthermore, I know it breaks our Lord's heart for such a beautiful example of intimacy and compassion to be used in such a legalistic way. I also can't help but think that, given the kind of heart that that man who was redeemed by Christ's love on the cross reveals to us as he hung there beside Jesus, had he somehow miraculously survived that whole ordeal, and upon hearing his risen Savior say, "he who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved" (Mark 16:16), that man would have been among the first in line to surrender his heart and life to Christ in baptism.
What I learn from the account of the redeemed man on the cross—thief no longer—is that God will forgive whoever He chooses, whether such forgiveness conforms to human expectations or not. And no amount of doctrine or dogma—Christian, Calvinist, or otherwise—can get in the way of that! As the Apostle Paul records it, "So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires" (Romans 9:18). But God does not harden good and honest hearts. I know this because Jesus said, "Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened" (Matthew 7:7-8) and, "The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance" (2 Peter 3:9). If a person is actively seeking God, like that merchant who was constantly in pursuit of the "pearl of great price" (Matthew 13:45-46), or even if a person simply has an open heart and, like the man who accidently found the hidden treasure buried in a field (Matthew 13:44), is willing to do anything to be a part of God's eternal kingdom once they have discovered it, then God will surely give that person every opportunity to know the truth, to respond in living faith, and to be saved by the blood of Christ. But there is a huge difference between that kind of person—one like the man who was redeemed by Christ's love on the cross—and someone who, being more devoted to their religion than they are the Lord, continues to walk contrary to the teachings of God's word.
I was asked one time, by a liberal legalist, if I thought that someone killed in a tragic accident on their way to be baptized would still go to heaven. I answered, "In view of the thief on the cross, I believe that, yes, of course they would." "But," I continued, "I don't think someone who is running in the opposite direction, away from the waters of baptism, will be saved." When he asked me to explain that further, I simply said, "Well, as we learn from the account of the thief on the cross, it's all about what is going on in our hearts. A surrendered heart seeking the Lord's will is one thing, but a rebellious heart seeking its own will, or willing to put some theological concept ahead of the expressed will of God, is quite another."
Not long after Jesus had issued His commandments regarding baptism, the Apostle Peter preached the first recorded gospel sermon on the Day of Pentecost—recorded in Acts, Chapter 2. Near the end of his sermon, when the people were convicted and cried out, "Brethren, what shall we do?" (verse 37), Peter told them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit" (verse 38). Simple enough, right! But along comes men like Mr. Abrams (2006) who says:
The true interpretation of Acts 2:38 is not clouded in a great mystery that cannot be understood. Anyone with the most basic skills in Bible study can research and find the correct meaning of the verse. Acts 2:38 says, "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." The preposition "for" is the Greek work "eis" and simply means "with a view towards," "in connection with," "because of," or "in light of." In other words, Peter said that because they had believed and repented these people should now be baptized. (para. 11)
It appears that Abrams (2006) wants to distort simple Bible teaching by taking us to the original Greek language and arguing over the meaning of "for" [eis]. So let's go there. It is important to note that:
…the standard Greek lexicons do not define "eis" as "because of" with reference to Acts 2:38. J.H. Thayer, for instance, translated the term as follows, citing Acts 2:38 — "eis aphesin hamartion, to obtain the forgiveness of sins" (Greek-English Lexicon, Edinburgh: T.&T. Clark, 1958, 94). Wm. Arndt and F.W. Gingrich, in a section where "eis" is defined as expressing "purpose," with the sense of "in order to," rendered the same phrase: "for forgiveness of sins, so that sins might be forgiven . . . Acts 2:38:" (Greek-English Lexicon, Chicago: University of Chicago, 1967, 228). Elliger states that "eis," in Acts 2:38, is designed "to indicate purpose" (Horst Balz & Gerhard Schneider, Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990, Vol. 1, 399). In his discussion of Acts 2:38, Ceslas Spicq noted: "Water baptism is a means of realizing this conversion, and its goal—something altogether new—is a washing, 'the remission of sins'" (Theological Lexicon of the New Testament, Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994, Vol. 1, 242). (Jackson, 2014)
The "for" [eis] in Acts 2:38, when Peter says, ""Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for [eis] the forgiveness of your sins" means the very same thing that it means in Luke 24:47 when Jesus said, "Thus it is written, that the Christ would suffer and rise again from the dead the third day, and that repentance for [eis] forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in His name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem." Jesus made both repentance and baptism prerequisites to salvation. And Peter faithfully proclaimed the same on the Day of Pentecost.
Concerning Abrams (2006) treatment of the events recorded in Acts, Chapter 10 concerning the salvation of the household of Cornelius, he says:
Cornelius and those present with him, when Peter preached the Gospel to them, believed and received the Baptism of the Holy Spirit; following this they were baptized in water. If water baptism was necessary for salvation why did the Holy Spirit indwell them as believers BEFORE they were baptized in water? The baptism of the Holy Spirit refers to the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in a believer's life and receiving the new nature from God. Peter asks the question, "Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?" (Acts 10:47) Peter is effectively saying that Cornelius was saved and had received the Holy Spirit as Peter had and those who believed with him, at Pentecost in Acts 2. Peter further said that Cornelius, who was now saved along with those there with him, should now be baptized in water. If salvation is received at baptism, as some believe, this passage would then be essentially and incorrectly interpreted as saying that the Holy Spirit will indwell the unsaved. (para. 18)
While Mr. Abrams (2006) seeks to line us out on what Peter is "effectively" saying—which is only Abrams personal interpretation of the scene—what he fails to grasp is that what the household of Cornelius received that day was not the "Baptism of the Holy Spirit." The Bible does not say that they had received the baptism of the Holy Spirit (doesn't anybody read their Bible anymore) only that "the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message" (verse 44). In fact, the phrase or term, "Baptism of the Holy Spirit" does not actually occur anywhere in scripture. It is a manmade phrase used in many different ways according to various denominational doctrines.
However, the concept of a baptizing "with the Holy Spirit," or similar wording, does occur several times in scripture:
- Matt. 3:11, "As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire."
- Mark 1:8, "I baptized you with water; but He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit."
- Luke 3:16, "John answered and said to them all, 'As for me, I baptize you with water; but One is coming who is mightier than I, and I am not fit to untie the thong of His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire."
- John 1:33, "And I did not recognize Him, but He who sent me to baptize in water said to me, "He upon whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining upon Him, this is the one who baptizes in the Holy Spirit."
- Acts 1:5, "for John baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now."
- Acts 11:16, "And I remembered the word of the Lord, how He used to say, 'John baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit."
The actual fulfillment of these passages of scripture, concerning a baptism of the Holy Spirit, occurred on the Day of Pentecost—Acts, Chapter 2. It was a onetime, historical event that took place when Jesus, in fulfillment of the prophecy made by Joel, poured forth His Spirit "on all mankind" (Acts 2:17). Thus the Holy Spirit, for the first time ever, was made available, freely accessible to all people everywhere. After that occurred, the Holy Spirit immediately began to empower the apostles, enabling them to speak languages they had never studied or spoken before.
Until the conversion of the household of Cornelius, all Christians were Jews or Jewish proselytes, and there were strong cultural mores indicating to their 1st Century minds that one must become a Jew—an adherent of the Law of Moses—before becoming a Christian. In other words, Christianity was for Jews only (that sounds rather strange to our modern ears). But the Apostle Peter and company, along with all Christians everywhere, needed to be convicted of the fact that Jesus died for all men everywhere, that salvation was not just for the Jews, and that one need not become a Jew in order to become a Christian. Hence the events of Acts 10. And what better way for God to demonstrate to Peter that on the day of Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit had been poured forth, He had been made available to all men everywhere, and not just to Jews, than to empower the household of Cornelius with a divine sign—in precisely the same way that He had empowered the apostles on the Day of Pentecost—by allowing them to also speak in foreign languages they had never studied or learned.
But this wonderful gift of empowerment was not some kind of second baptism of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit had been poured forth only once upon "all flesh"—"baptizing" or immersing the whole earth in His presence; Jews and Gentiles. Acts 10 even says that what was so amazing to Peter was the fact that "the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out [past tense—on day of Pentecost] on the Gentiles also" (verse 45). Then came the empowering of the apostles, and later the household of Cornelius, as evidence of that. However, the giving of the "gift of the Holy Spirit"—or the "indwelling" of the Holy Spirit—occurs only at the point of baptism (Acts 2:38), when one is saved by the blood of Christ and access to God is thereby granted. This is why Peter immediately "ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ" (Acts 10:48).
Mr. Abrams (2006) makes at least two significant errors when he jumps to conclusions and makes assumption that are not necessitated by scripture. First he says, "If water baptism was necessary for salvation why did the Holy Spirit indwell them as believers BEFORE they were baptized in water?" (para. 18). However, there is no indication that the Holy Spirit had "indwelled" them, but only "empowered" them. The Holy Spirit can empower whomever He wishes, whenever He wishes, ask Balaam's ass (Numbers 22). If the Lord can open the mouth of a donkey and cause it to speak in a human language, He could certainly open the mouths of the household of Cornelius and cause them to speak in foreign languages. But that does not mean the Holy Spirit had indwelled them, or the donkey for that matter.
Second, Mr. Abrams says, "The baptism of the Holy Spirit refers to the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in a believer's life and receiving the new nature from God" (para. 18). However, both the use of the phrase "baptism of the Holy Spirit," and the definition he here assigns to it are nothing but the mental constructs of his own theology; and not supported by scripture. As we have already seen, scripture references that point to what could be termed a baptism of the Holy Spirit do not refer to the "indwelling" of the Spirit, but rather to the "pouring forth" of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost.
I do not think it too bold, at this point, to make the assertion that Mr. Abrams (2006) is either incredibly deceived, reminiscent of Jesus' statement, "if a blind man guides a blind man, both will fall into a pit" (Matthew 15:14), or that he is under the influence of a terribly bold false spirit. For what he says next, in connection with Galatians 3:27, is simply a direct violation of New Testament teaching:
Galatians 3:27 is also misused as a supposedly "proof" text by those that teach baptismal regeneration. However, once again the context and even the simplest hermeneutic principles show this verse is not teaching this false doctrine. The context of the passage is teaching salvation by faith and verse 26 says, "For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus." Verse 27 is used out of context by the Baptismal Regeneration people and it says, "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." The baptism here is the baptism of the Holy Spirit that comes when one by faith believes and is saved. This is the baptism of the Holy Spirit in which the believer is indwelled by the Holy Spirit and given the new nature of God as explained in 2 Cor. 5:17. Gal. 3:24 says "Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith."; this verse does not say here, or anywhere else in the Scriptures, that one is justified by faith plus works (baptism). If baptism regenerates and saves why not say so here and in the sixty some passages in the New Testament which address being saved but do not mention baptism as a requirement for salvation? (para. 33)
This passage and many others show the important truth that after a person is saved by believing in Jesus Christ as his Savior, baptism and an obedient life are important in showing the evidence of true conversion. (para. 34)
Here, Mr. Abrams (2006) is clearly teaching that there are at least two baptisms: water baptism and Holy Spirit baptism. He equates Holy Spirit baptism with belief and calls that salvation. Then, he emphasizes the need for a second baptism, water baptism; which, he says, is "important in showing evidence of true conversion." However, the Bible says, "There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all" (Ephesians 4:4-6). Again we must ask the question, "Who do we choose to believe: Mr. Abrams who says there is more than one baptism, or the Apostle Paul, who teaches that there is but one baptism?
The baptism presented in scripture is, indeed, water baptism: "As they went along the road they came to some water; and the eunuch said, 'Look! Water! What prevents me from being baptized?' And Philip said, 'If you believe with all your heart, you may.' And he answered and said, 'I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.' And he ordered the chariot to stop; and they both went down into the water, Philip as well as the eunuch, and he baptized him" (Acts 8:36-28). But, we know that this water baptism is also an act of the Spirit and represents the moment at which we receive the indwelling of the Spirit: "For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit" (I Corinthians 12:13). Water baptism "for the forgiveness of your sins" is baptism by the one Spirit into the one body, and it is at that moment that we receive "the gift of the Holy Spirit" (Acts 2:38). This is the "one baptism" of Ephesians 4; and anyone who advocates for more than one baptism, or two separate baptisms—water baptism and Spirit baptism—is operating under a false and deceitful spirit.
As Mr. Abrams (2006) closes his treatise on baptism, he not only reveals his own inconsistences, but circumvents his own line of reasoning with regard to "faith only," for he states:
Some will argue that even if one believes in faith plus baptism they still have believed and are saved. However the fallacy of this thinking can be seen in the teaching that without the act of baptism added to belief there is no salvation. Let me say that again . . . the baptismal regenerationist believes that if he is not baptized he cannot be saved. Clearly, their belief is that baptism is as important as faith according to this teaching because if they are not baptized they are not saved. This teaching degrades faith whereas the Scriptures overwhelmingly speak of the necessity of faith for salvation (sixty times as mentioned earlier) without a hint of or reference to baptism. Surely, all this evidence should alert those seeking God's truth that it is faith that saves . . . not the work of baptism. (para. 36) … Paul plainly and emphatically proclaimed that any Gospel other than what he taught, which God had given him by revelation, was a false gospel and those that preached a false gospel should be "accursed"; Galatians 1:8-10. (para. 37)
So let's try to get Mr. Abrams' (2006) teaching in perspective. First, he asserts that people are saved when they believe in Christ and, I assume, receive or accept Jesus into their heart as their personal Savior. He asserts that this "belief," which he equates with "faith," is all that is required and that our works have nothing to do with our salvation. But then he says that those who do believe and who have accepted Jesus as their Lord and Savior, but who happen to disagree with him and his doctrine of "faith only" are not saved, but accursed. Is that not an incredibly inconsistent theology? All that is required to be saved is belief, but even if you do believe, yet disagree with Abrams, you are accursed? Really? Has he not just shot down his own theology in which he asserts that all that is required is to believe? Is this not, ironically, the epitome of legalism?
As pointed out previously, in the section about the thief on the cross, even many of us who do believe that baptism is "for the forgiveness of sin" (because it is in baptism—the figurative reenactment of the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ—that God has chosen to unite faith with grace) are not so legalistic as to presume to judge who is and who is not saved based on how well someone conforms to our own understanding of scripture. While we must always speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4:15), we know that only God can stand in judgment of people's hearts.
Of course, we do agree with the Apostle Paul's teaching concerning those who he says deliberately want to "distort the gospel of Christ" (Galatians 1:7); we believe that they are, indeed, "accursed" (verse 9). But our theology remains consistent in that regard because we do not believe that "belief" is all that is required, or that Biblical "faith" equates to mere "belief." If it did, then it really wouldn't matter what one practiced, taught, or how they lived their life, so long as they believed. But, as James said, "the demons also believe, and shudder. But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless?" (James 2:19-20).
Mr. Abrams (2006) is correct about a few things—no one is totally wrong about absolutely everything. But one thing, in particular, that he is absolutely correct about, and with which we heartily agree, is when he says, "A person is saved solely on the basis of the shed blood of Jesus Christ which atones for sin. This is the one 'work' that saves and was the sole work of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, God incarnate in the flesh (John 1:1)" (para. 36). Nothing could be truer and every authentic New Covenant child of God knows it very well. But Mr. Abrams, in his apparent ignorance, in his rush to defend the tenets of John Calvin, and in his feeble "straw man" generalizations of what he presumes to think people believe, has missed the point entirely. Authentic New Covenant children of God—who do believe that baptism is "for the forgiveness of sin"—understand that baptism is not a legalistic work of law. It does not cause us to earn, merit, or deserve anything; any more than endorsing the back of a check causes one to earn or deserve the gift that has been presented to them thereby. Baptism is a surrender of our heart and life to Christ, a demonstration of the conviction that is in our hearts, and the expression of our faith in all that Jesus has done for us.
We know with all our hearts that it is the blood of Christ that justifies us (Romans 5:9), the blood of Christ that redeems us (Ephesians 1:7), the blood of Christ by which we draw near to God (Ephesians 2:13), the blood of Christ that cleanses our conscience from dead works to serve the living God (Hebrews 9:14), the blood of Christ that continually cleanses us of all our sins (I John 1:7), the blood of Christ that releases us from our sins (Revelation 1:5), the blood of Christ by which we have been purchased for God (Acts 20:28, Revelation 5:9).
Baptism adds nothing to the finished and complete work of Christ. As practiced by the authentic New Covenant children of God, there is nothing meritorious about it, nothing that causes anybody to earn, win, or deserve salvation. While we do believe what the Apostle Peter said, "baptism now saves you," we understand that it has nothing to do with the washing of water or the "removal of dirt from the flesh" [legalistic works of law] but everything to do with "an appeal unto God for a good conscience" [an expression of living faith] (I Peter 3:21). And, as stated earlier, our faith is not in the water, nor in the act of baptism, nor in our own surrender, or our own obedience, or our own works. We have nothing of our own with which to come before God seeking justification. "For all of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous deeds are like a filthy garment" (Isaiah 64:6). Rather, our faith, as expressed through baptism, is in one thing and one thing only: the sacrifice of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
Baptism is of God. He designed this beautiful and elegant expression of faith to be simple and feasible for people the world over. Faith meets grace at the waters of baptism for it is there that Christ has chosen for us to be "united with Him in the likeness of His death" (Romans 6:5). As the Apostle Paul states, "Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life" (Romans 6:3-4)
Respectfully Submitted,
~ Salty ~
Abrams, C. (2006). Does the Bible say baptism is necessary for salvation? A Biblical explanation of the question and the verses used that supposedly teach that baptism is necessary for salvation. Retrieved from http://bible-truth.org/BaptismNotNecessary.html
Campbellite. (2014). Wikipedia: The free encyclopedia. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campbellite
Jackson, W. (2014). Dallas professor rebuffs common quibble on "eis." Christian Currier. Retrieved from https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/395-dallas-professor-rebuffs-common-quibble-on-eis
Scripture taken from the NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE®, Copyright © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation. Used by permission."
Straw Man. (2014). Wikipedia: The free encyclopedia. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man


text:
Peloton 200 Zip-T
lifetime warranty on all our gear
Product Overview
Amazing warm-for-its-weight performance
Peloton 200 introduces another revolutionary Toray innovation – Karuishi fleece, which has a special brushed fabrication that traps warm air inside the fabric. The hydrophobic nature of the fabric wicks moisture away from your skin so it can quickly evaporate, keeping you dry. The Zip-T design enables you to keep warm in cold conditions, and release heat with the half zip collar as conditions change. Toray's medical division Makspec odor control treatment, applied to all 200 styles, helps block odor-causing bacteria from penetrating the fabric, allowing for extended wear.
• Athletic fit
• YKK zipper
• Flat lock seams
• Side panels and Raglan sleeves for added comfort and reduced chaffing
• Spandex-free all direction stretch
• Moisture wicking and quick drying
• Thermo-regulating
• Highly breathable
• High abrasion resistance
• Easy care
• Great for everyday wear
Toray's Karuishi thermal solution
Toray's Karuishi thermal solution
Lightweight, Soft and Warm
Toray's Karuishi thermal solution features fine polyester to make fabrics softer, and a brushed fabrication to trap warm air and reduce weight. Anti-pilling and high abrasion resistance.
Featured in all our Peloton 97 and 200 styles and the Peloton 240 Beanie


text:
This report was prepared for the Shenzhen-UNESCO International Conference on "Digital Books and Future Technology" (November 29-30, 2014 in Shenzhen, China) by A.D. Hitchens.
From the Introduction:
The digital revolution continues to modernize, disrupt, and fundamentally change the way in which we engage with our surroundings. The resulting increase in interconnectedness is continuing to catalyze the human thirst for immediate access to information and content.
Amidst all of the changes, there are many questions that should be asked and explored: Are we able to draw any conclusions about how eBooks will fare by looking at other digital content industries? How will the economic interests of publishers and rights owners influence the spread and use of eBooks? Will the globalized media corporate landscape impose a "developed-country" first approach or is there room for developing and emerging countries to adapt their own strategy? Can traditional print continue to coexist with the explosive growth of its digital form? How can governments aid in the development of this industry?
Hitchens argues that exactly because eBook technology is the last piece of the content industries' assimilation into a globally interconnected world, its development and promulgation will trigger major changes in the publishing industry and in our ways of consuming books.
The report provides an excellent summary describing the state of eBooks in the global landscape before exploring the state of digital books region by region:
The US and Europe — Not surprisingly, the majority of growth in the eBook industry has been focused in countries such as the US, UK, Germany, and to a lesser extent France and Spain. Much of this growth can be attributed to the location of the major media companies that control the vast majority (by revenue) of the book trade.
India — India has become one of the top markets for digital publishing outside of the US and Europe. While the 2013 show eBooks make up 2% of the market, this segment is contributing 84% of the profits. Netscribes predicts that India's eBook market will see a 20-25% growth in the next two to three years.
China — With one of the highest literacy rates in the developing and emerging economies, and very well developed digital infrastructure, China has a number of factors that enable it to emerge as one of the next decade's digital publishing powerhouses of the world. The year 2013 saw China overtake the United States as the largest eCommerce market in the world. Combined with the world's largest mobile phone penetration of approximately 1.1 billion people, China continues to provide a significant market opportunity for the growth of eBooks and digital content.
Hitchen's then goes on to explore issues surrounding copyright law and Digital Rights Management (DRM) and makes some projections on eBook growth and adoption rates before turning to look at the issues facing libraries.
There are at least five main challenges facing libraries in the new era of eBooks:
- Libraries have always been traditionally focused on serving a local community and population. eBooks have disaggregated this concept and made the Internet the world's virtual library.
- It takes more effort to go to a library, research a book and check it out than simply getting it online. This includes the time to go to the library, effort to locate the text, a willingness to wait for a copy to become available if it has been checked out by other patrons, amongst others. eBooks remove those hurdles entirely and while there is a cost, increasingly consumers are paying small fees for conveniences that could pose a challenge to the very existence of the library as a resource.
- Physical books can degrade and wear down over time whereas eBooks never will. Libraries are forced to reorder titles on an ongoing basis and publishers would lose revenue if libraries had a access to a perpetual use digital version of that book.
- Shelf space will become obsolete since advanced research tools, primarily facilitated by computers, minimizes the browsing that a library patron must do.
- The operational model for physical books is well known and has been refined over time. With eBooks, this process is, as yet, still undefined. As a result, very few publishers remain unwilling to actively invest in pilot tests to work with libraries to adapt to the digital age.
The pricing that publishers charge has become arbitrary and often onerous for libraries seeking to expand their eBook collection. To varying degrees, eBooks have almost become prohibitive because of restrictions such as maximum number of checkouts by library patrons or extremely high pricing for digital copies. This is all an effort by publishers to ensure that they do not lose money on the new perpetual digital medium.
Hitchens concludes:
The future of reading, in whatever form it takes, will be a slow and deliberate process that will take time to understand and shape. Powerful interest groups will compete with innovators and entrepreneurs who will continue to use technology to democratize access to industries that were once reserved for a few powerful companies through the innovative and growing medium of self-publishing.


text:
New York producer Ray West has announced a July release called Luv NY. The project features sessions and collaborations with veteran five borough emcees such as Kool Keith, Roc Marciano, Kurious, D.I.T.C.'s O.C. and A.G., and others. The Ascetic Music release follows 2010's Everything's Berri Fat Beats release with A.G. Previously, Dave Dar and Kurious worked together as The Bamboo Bros.
The emcees involved have had a busy year. O.C. just released Trophies with Apollo Brown last month, as Kool Keith's Love & Danger dropped earlier this month. Roc Marciano and Showbiz & A.G. are all prepping releases for later this year.
The tracklist to Ray West's Luv NY is as follows:
01 Intro
02 Legacy feat. O.C.
03 Egyptology feat. A.G. & Roc Marciano
04 Snake Charmer feat. A.G., Kurious & Dave Dar
05 Extreme Status feat. A.G. & Kool Keith
06 The Ritual feat. Sean G
07 Shorties Watching feat. Kurious
08 These Rappers Under The Hex feat. A.G.
09 Last Night Finesse feat. Dave Dar
10 I Been Luvin U feat. Kool Keith
11 Pressure Up feat. Kool Keith & Roc Marciano
12 The Blues Got Ya feat. A.G.
13 Acid feat. O.C.
14 Random feat. A.G.
RELATED: Showbiz & A.G. Discuss Runaway Slave 20 Years Later, D.I.T.C. Music-Making Bond


text:
Former First Lady, Barbara Bush met up with Bob and I in Houston, Texas for a private visit before I was honored at a charity event.
We chatted with Mrs. Bush, who had come to the event early to see us. She arrived with her son Neil and his wife, Maria. We have been friends with Mrs. Bush since she was the First Lady in Washington.
I told the audience that Barbara Bush is an icon, and the woman I most admire in the world.
Our very special thanks to our dear friend, Paul-David Van-Atta for all his amazing efforts to put this event together over the past couple of months. He did a truly remarkable job.


text:
A Mississauga parent is keeping her two children home until Wednesday because of high temperatures in their classrooms.
Mariola Fik-Izydor said when she picked up her daughter from St. Basil Catholic Elementary School last Thursday, she noticed the child had developed a heat rash on her chest and back. She then attended the school's barbecue that night and experienced the warm conditions for herself.
"It was already really hot and not comfortable at all. I couldn't even imagine how bad it was during the day," she said.
Related: Ontario to target math, report cards in curriculum revamp
Read more: Debate over police officers in classrooms spreads to GTA
In Brampton on Monday, a second-floor classroom in a elementary school reached a temperature of 30.2 C before 11 a.m. Matthew Jackson, president of the Peel Elementary Teachers' Local, said the heat in the room was stifling.
A heat warning was issued on Monday by Environment Canada for Southern Ontario, as temperatures were expected to be in the low 30s with humidex reaching 40.
"It's hard to keep the kids engaged. They wilt as much as we do, if not more," Mr. Jackson said.
"You're trying to teach them a curriculum at the same time as you're trying to make sure that no one is dehydrated and at risk of any health concerns," he said.
The Elementary Teachers' Federation of Ontario (ETFO) issued a news release on Monday asking the provincial government to address "unbearable conditions" in classrooms without air conditioning.
"Schools found themselves in the same situation one year ago. Our changing climate is sending a strong message that the Ministry of Education needs to take action. Too much student learning will be lost the longer the Ministry delays," ETFO president Sam Hammond said in the statement.
The release asked the province to act on the motions the ETFO made at its annual meeting in August: ensuring all schools have plans to cope with heat, setting an indoor temperature limit and supplying all elementary schools with a form of air conditioning.
"We understand the concerns that have been raised by students, parents and teachers with regard to the impact that this warm weather is having in the classroom. We fully recognize that when the classroom is too hot, it can make it uncomfortable for staff and students," said Richard Francella, spokesman for Education Minister Mitzie Hunter.
"That's why, starting this year, we're providing schools across Ontario with an additional $1.4-billion so they can make investments in building upgrades such as air conditioning," he said. This investment was first announced in June.
"We want local school boards to have the autonomy and flexibility to be able to use this money on local needs as they see fit."
The Ontario Occupational Health and Safety Act doesn't currently include a maximum temperature acceptable in the workplace.
In the Peel District School Board, there are seven elementary schools without any air conditioning; 167 Peel elementary schools have air conditioning in some areas of the building and 34 are cooled completely.
Twenty-seven Peel secondary-school buildings have full air conditioning; 11 have air conditioning in some areas of the school.
A weather plan outlines how to cope with a heatwave, and has been reissued to Peel schools, Mr. Jackson said.
In Toronto, similar guidelines exist for staff, said Ryan Bird, spokesman for the Toronto District School Board, where out of 584 schools in the board, only 125 are fully air conditioned.
Protocols for schools in both boards with partial or no air conditioning include closing blinds, using fans and turning off lights. Where possible, students will relocate or cycle through to cooler areas in schools. Strenuous gym activities may be reduced and schools may decide to reduce time outside in cases of extreme heat.
"We do our very best to keep people as cool as possible. We do know it's going to be hot, but we try to minimize it wherever we can given the circumstances," Mr. Bird said.
Over the next five to seven years, the TDSB has plans to cool large areas, such as a gym or library, in schools that do not have full air conditioning, so students can access them on hot days.
Mr. Bird said the cost to install complete air conditioning in all schools currently without it would cost hundreds of millions of dollars, not including maintenance and operation costs.
Andy Lomnicki, president of the Elementary Teachers of Toronto union, said that if the government heeds its own education from the community and union, they'll see the need to invest further into school facilities including air conditioning.
"In a few weeks or months we'll have the same conversation about heating. People aren't looking at a five-year solution being helpful or realistic. I think we have to start getting our heads around making that more immediate," Mr. Lomnicki said.
"There's no magic answer for that. It's got to be through funding."


text:
Prior to any findings being made on an internal investigation the complaint is thoroughly investigated. I thank the public for their patience in this process. While we would like to have released this information earlier there is a balance that must take into account the on-going criminal investigation as well as preserving the rights of complainants and all parties involved in the investigative process.Also last week, the CSPD responded to our latest request for the Walker file. Walker, as you might recall, slammed Alexis Acker, who was handcuffed behind her back, to the floor in Memorial Hospital's emergency room, which was caught on video.
Traffic stops offer many different perspectives from that of police officers to the drivers and passengers and bystanders or witnesses standpoint. This investigation included interviews with independent witnesses. This dichotomy of views can sometimes cause conflicts in expectations and outcomes.
I ask the public to read the investigation in its entirety in order to make an informed decision. The process of releasing an internal investigation is not something that I take lightly. There were honest comments, statements and opinions made from all parties. Stylistic difference in delivery of police services occur with each individual officer and every situation they encounter. These differences are not necessarily policy violations.
On September 3, 2015, the Colorado Springs Police Department ("CSPD") denied your request for the Internal Affairs records relating to an incident involving Officer Tyler Walker ("IA records") that occurred in 2013. The records you have requested are defined criminal justice records under the Colorado Criminal Justice Records Act ("CCJRA") in C.R.S. § 24-72-302(4). Please note that since your request is for records other than records of "official action" as defined in C.R.S. § 24-72-302(7), the release of the requested records is within the discretion of the official custodian per C.R.S. § 24-72-304(1) subject to the statutory requirements contained within the CCJRA as well as the balancing requirements prescribed by the Colorado Supreme Court in Harris v. Denver Post 123 P.3d 1166, 1175 (Colo.2005) and other Colorado case law.We also sought the internal affairs file for Officer Nathan Jorstad, who shot a drunken man in the back without warning and later told investigators he shot him in the chest.
The CSPD record's custodian reviewed your request for IA records and carefully considered and weighed the public's interests in allowing inspection of the IA records against the following factors:
1. the ongoing civil litigation between Alexis Acker and the City of Colorado Springs in the United States Federal District Court and the effect upon the civil case if the requested IA records are released to the public who would constitute the potential jury pool;
2. CSPD's and Officer Walker's ability to seek a protective order from the U.S. District Court regarding the IA records which may be released in discovery during the civil case;
3. CSPD's ability to conduct future IA investigations in which release of IA files would subject parties to the investigation and potential witnesses to harassment, intimidation and fear of public ridicule if their names and the content of their statements were revealed to the public;
4. the effect that public disclosure of IA investigative case files could compromise CSPD's organizational mission to conduct thorough IA investigations and, if necessary, appropriately discipline its officers;
5. the effect on CSPD employee morale and performance would be negatively affected by such public disclosures of materials contained in the IA investigative case file;
6. the privacy interests of Officer Walker regarding the employee discipline imposed as a result of the IA investigation; and
7. CSPD's interest in keeping historical confidential files, which include IA investigative files, confidential.
During the balancing test, the custodian recognized and acknowledged the high level public interest in the CSPD IA investigation regarding Officer Walker. The custodian also took into account the current nationwide public focus on the conduct of law enforcement officers.
After balancing the factors supporting and opposing disclosure of the documents the custodian determined that release of the records was contrary to the public interest. In the custodian's analysis factors 1 and 2 weighed most heavily against the release of the IA investigative file during the pendency of civil litigation involving Ms. Acker, CSPD, and Officer Walker, and in conjunction with factors 3 through 7 outweigh the interest the public has in viewing the records. It is important to note that at the conclusion of the civil case factors 1 and 2 will no longer applicable to the custodian's analysis and at such time CSPD will reconsider release the of the IA records if a subsequent request is made. Additionally the custodian considered whether redactions could be made to the IA records so that portions of the records might be releasable; however the custodian concluded that the necessary redactions would so limit the releasable information to cause such information to be of very limited value to the public.
Showing 1-18 of 18


text:
Bedroom doors are what enclose you at night safe and secure inside and what takes you out in to light and the world around you in the morning. Master bedroom is one of the leading features of the house. As a place to start your new day, relax for the weekend, recharge your body and soul, and reflect your daily routines before going to rest, looking for master bedroom ideas should be prioritized on your interior wish list.
Whether you are a person who consider your bedroom just a place to rest and sleep or for whom bedroom is a place that holds unlimited possibilities of dreams and day dreams, what you need in common is a strong door to keep you safe and private. While installing bedroom doors there are a few factors that you need to keep in mind. Bedroom doors come in all different patterns and colours. You could get the door in the colour of bedroom walls to match or go for the wooden one which would go with all colours. Or, if you are careful about money you could go for plastic doors and paint it with wood colours of different shades like cider pear, cherry, light oak or maple.
While deciding on the look of the door also you need to check whether you need the modern or contemporary look. Accordingly, you need to select the door handles and latches. Traditional handles and latches might be a little more ornamental than the modern ones. You could check out the bedroom doors of some of your friends also before purchasing one. Checking out some magazines on interiors and home decors and browsing websites on the same topic also would help you take an informed decision.


text:
Men's Dress Watches
You can tell a lot about a man by the dress watch he wears.
You can tell a lot about a man by how he dresses for the occasion. Introducing Timex's line of Men's Dress Watches—complete with a variety of luxury features, gadgets, sizes, and styles, these dress watches for men will subtly draw attention without sacrificing an ounce of comfort.


text:
This page will be of help to you if you need to research or buy shop front signs for retail premises, for restaurants or for any enterprise with a facia or frontage bordering a pedestrianised walkway, road or shopping centre thoroughfare including hotels. The Voodoo DesignWorks has a proven expertise in designing and installing signs for shopfronts. We'd love to take a look at your project.
Call Voodoo Now if you'd like to discuss your project or Email us and we'll get in touch at a time that suits you.
Q: What are shop front signs?
A: Shop front signs, sometimes known as fascia signs, are a form of retail signage that is used to brand retail premises and in particular shops, restaurants and similar enterprises.
Typical business signs for shops are mounted above the shop's main doors and windows and usually span the entire frontage of the building housing the shop in question. Shop signs usually have to both reflect the brands of the shops' operators and announce their premises' location.
A sign for a shopfront can be either illuminated, or non illuminated. It can be made of modern materials or, in the case of a vintage sign for a diner or shop, it can be made from reclaimed material or modern materials treated with specialist finishes so that those material have a look of age or a patina.
A typical non-illuminated fascia sign may be constructed from modern plastics and framed in a metal containment system. Such a sign will be colourful and attractive but obviously only as good as the prevailing available light at night. Where better stand-out is desired, illuminated signage may be the better option. Voodoo can advise.
Illumination for a shop's signage can take many forms. With the rise of brand values taking their influence from the traditional, sources of illumination that light the shop sign from the front and are in themselves an attractive and decorative vintage feature and becoming more popular. Voodoo can propose such lighting and design retail signage around it too.
Backlit shop signs and lit facias are typically constructed using LEDs for ease and energy efficiencies. Such signs can be notably thinner and have a lower component count making them less expensive and easier to work with.
When choosing a sign for a shop frontage, it is work remembering that the installation is a long-term fixture. Signs in situ can be maintained and worked on, but wholesale changes because of the bespoke sign design for shops with a brand to promote, are not trivial.
Signs reflect much of the character of the businesses they identify so it's important that they are designed with brand values in mind. Voodoo understands this and delivers shop signing solutions that perfectly reflect brand and business. The first step on the journey to a great looking sign is easy. Call Voodoo and we'll get the ideas flowing.
Shop fronts were made for signs. Let Voodoo make signs for you.
Q: How are shop front signs made?
A: Shop front signs are minor feats of engineering. They also embody electrical components, welded metal and formed plastics. Once installed though, none of this is apparent – or rather it shouldn't be. A sign should be appreciated for the impact made by the sum of its parts. Signs made by Voodoo achieve just that.
We make signs for shop and restaurants by working with components made on an entirely bespoke basis. The construction we elect to use is a function of the sign's size, it's location and its aesthetic qualities.
Large signs may be built around a fabricated armature for structural reasons. Such signs for retail premises will often feature fabricated elements supported by an armature.
Individual built up letters in stainless steel and other durable materials are commonly specified for high-end shop fronts. Polished metals and contrasting plastics lend such signs a prestigious feel. They are brazed or soldered and fitted with accurately inlaid plastics and are often lit with LEDS or neon.
Tensioned sign faces for retail parks are a very popular form of illuminated signage fronting retail businesses. Voodoo makes them. And makes them work. Such signs can be made seam-free in large sizes and really broadcast their message around the clock. Some of the biggest brands out there rely on them. We have a modern approach to their manufacture so the flex-face signs we deliver are energy efficient and attractive.
There's a wrong way to makes shopfront signage, there's a right way and there's the Voodoo way. We think it's better. It helps of signs achieve more. It helps them cost less. It helps our customers' businesses thrive. Call us, to discuss.
Refer to the examples, constructions and materials below:-


text:
Watch Full Richard the Lionheart: Rebellion in HD QualityNow you can enjoy Richard the Lionheart: Rebellion in best look with duration 96 Min and was published in 2015-06-11 with MPAA rating is 0.
- Original Title : Richard the Lionheart: Rebellion
- Movie title in your country : Richard the Lionheart: Rebellion
- Year of movie : 2015
- Genres of movie : History, Action, Adventure, Drama,
- Status of movie : Released
- Release date of movie : 2015-06-11
- Companies of movie : WonderPhil Productions, Claang Entertainment, DOMA Entertainment,
- Countries of movie : United States of America, Italy,
- Language of movie : English,
- Durationof movie : 96 Min
- Average vote of movie : 0
- Youtube ID of movie :
- Translation of movie : EN,PT,
- Cast of movie :Valeri Alessandro (Rebel), Elisa Allara (Maid), Lucia Allara (Maid), Derek Allen (King Henry II), Brian Ayres (King Louis), Christian Burruano (Messenger), David Callahan (Chester), Andrea Lorenzo Canetto (Monk), Mishael Lopes Cardozo (Wilhelm), Davide Chiolero (Wilhem's Herald), Neil Cole (Captain), Maurizio Corigliano (English Archer), Emil Corradin (Blacksmith), Irene Corradin (Kid), Jon Firman (Castle Lord)
Movie plot of Richard the Lionheart: Rebellion :
Free Streaming Richard the Lionheart: Rebellion in Best Look with movie plot "The year is 1173. England and France are at war. The destiny of the two great powers has never been so intertwined. As King Henry's wife, Queen Eleanor, is captured and imprisoned by the king himself, Richard and his brothers lead the fight against their father in a heartless war. Allegiances shift with each victory or defeat as the destinies of England and France keep swaying in a delicate balance." in best look. Full Length of Richard the Lionheart: Rebellion in Best Quality by visiting the download link.
Now you can watch full Richard the Lionheart: Rebellion in top video format. Download full Richard the Lionheart: Rebellion movie with single submit the variety by simply clicking on the image with the sign in place button. Enjoy each of the albums completely new movie along with all most liked movie streaming! just play this movie Richard the Lionheart: Rebellion today for full access this online movie. This is truly spectacular and may even a type of rare amazing. The high quality was great all over. Management, photos and visual effects had been all extremely innovative as well as brilliant. The pleasure with the script, often humorous and possesses a lot of heart for all those his characters are typical very well toned.
... Download Full Richard the Lionheart: Rebellion in High Quality 720p ...
Of course, now you can watch movie connected with Richard the Lionheart: Rebellion entirely length and find the connection to this flick Richard the Lionheart: Rebellion in best quality.
Tags: period piece, historical,


text:
Autumn 2016 - Peterborough Young Singers visit The Royal Albert Hall
In November 2016 the youth choir joined thousands of other young people for a recital of the Youth Messiah. Working with our musical director the Committee has helped to organsise a number of trips like this over the years. It's such a great day out and singing with the massed choir is an experience that the PYS members never forget.


text:
Jan 26, 2012Tego's recently introduced TegoChip 2000, offering 2 kilobits of available memory, is an ideal RFID "Low Memory Tag" chip for applications in aviation (see Tego Offers New 2-Kilobit Chip). Outlined in the Air Transport Association (ATA) Spec 2000 standard, the Low Memory Tag format is intended to allow the widespread use of lower-cost tags that store an abbreviated version of a tag's birth record and a shorter form of its table of contents, as compared with the original aviation High Memory Tag format.
There has been some confusion, however, regarding the amount of memory actually required to support Low Memory Tag usage. There may be some instances in which 1-kilobit tags will suffice, but the reality is that slightly more memory is necessary, and aviation users will likely be disappointed by 1-kilobit tags as Low Memory Tag applications unfold. Here's why:
1. EPC Requirements
Although not mentioned in the released version of Spec 2000, aerospace companies are required to follow EPCglobal's Tag Data Standard when creating their Electronic Product Code (EPC) numbers (each tag's unique item identifier). Ratified in September 2011, version 1.6 of this standard specifies EPC numbers as large as 422 bits. Most companies are surprised to learn how large their EPC number is, and some find that it complicates the use of 1-kilobit tags.
2. Mandatory Birth-Record Fields
Because Spec 2000's abbreviated birth-record description can be difficult to follow, most companies look at the table of birth-record entries outlined there and assume they only need to include the three fields listed as "Mandatory": CAGE code, serial number and original part number. But the remaining fields are not optional—they are labeled as "Conditional," and Conditional fields are usually mandatory. For example, the "Date of Manufacture" field is mandatory for all new parts. These Conditional fields can use significant amounts of memory.
3. Shared Memory
The expectation is that the 1-kilobit RFID chips currently on the market have 1 kilobit of user memory available. However, that memory needs to be divided among the EPC Memory bank, the User Memory bank and other chip overhead, such as passwords and control. Because these divisions have definitive increments, a high percentage of this storage space becomes unusable; in fact, it is not uncommon to have less than 400 bits left over for user memory.
Users who have already encountered just one of these issues recognize an unwelcome surprise when it hits them. The repercussions of all three, taken together, are worse—here is a potent triad of snags that can render 1-kilobit low-memory tags too erratic for aviation use. Tags may work when used with items on a production line today, but next week could bring additional parts to be tagged with updated requirements, and the 1-kilobit memory is suddenly unable to support a Low Memory Tag application.
Tego has worked closely with the aerospace industry for many years in developing standards and improving the practical implementation of radio frequency identification on aviation parts. Users should be aware that there are underlying reasons why the TegoChip 2000 model was developed as a 2-kilobit solution for ATA Spec 2000 Low Memory Tag applications—it needed to cover all possible cases for Low Memory Tag requirements, and the smaller 1-kilobit memory option is simply unable to accomplish that goal.
Bob Hamlin is the chief technology officer at Tego, a provider of high-memory RFID chips and tags able to operate within harsh environments.


text: Alonso's contract with Ferrari ends next month [AP]Fernando Alonso says he has not signed with McLaren for next season and remains undecided about his future in Formula One. The two-time world champion is still "considering what's the best decision'' for his career and "nothing has been decided'' so far even though he already has "an idea'' of what he wants to do. Alonso's contract with Ferrari ends at the end of year. He has been with the Italian team since 2010. The 33-year-old Spaniard is sixth in the drivers' standings this season, 167 points behind leader Lewis Hamilton. Meanwhile, Hamilton can set more British Formula One records in Brazil this weekend but it is the world championship he wants and that will have to wait. Hamilton's success No Briton has ever won six grands prix in a row, or celebrated 11 victories in a single season. The Mercedes driver, who has already overtaken 1992 champion Nigel Mansell as his country's most successful in terms of race wins after chalking up his 32nd in Texas last weekend, can do both at Interlagos. "I guess I have a buffer for the next race, if something goes wrong you still have an opportunity to be in the fight but that doesn't really change my mentality or approach," he told reporters in Austin. "I've never won in Brazil. I nearly won in 2012 but was taken out. "It is what it is," he said of the double points. "There's no point in getting upset about it. It's just about being positive. I've driven the best I've ever driven this year." SOURCE: Agencies Sport Formula One Brazil