In Acts 10 it states:
1 At Caesarea there was a man named Cornelius, a centurion in what was known as the Italian Regiment. 2 He and all his family were devout and God-fearing; he gave generously to those in need and prayed to God regularly. (NIV)
My understanding is that Roman soldiers of this period (Augustus through to Septimus Severus [193-211 CE]) were prohibited from marrying [“The men serving in the army, since they could not legally have wives, were granted the privileges of married men.” Cassius Dio 60.24.3]
This raises the question who are the οἴκῳ of verse 2? Are these an illicit family, thus raising questions of “devout and God-fearing;” or are they merely servants and retainers? If the former does indicate that since such non-married living and family arrangements were unofficially sanctioned by Rome, that Cornelius’ situation was an application of Acts 17:30 being in play, that his ignorance was overlooked until his repentance?
Guest;
old story – same issues 3 years later remain unresolved for the church But instead of talking and praying about them let’s just have a chilly dinner instead, right? Alan Smith William DeArteaga Terry Wiles I do see Res16 as the main reason for most good and most bad in our denomination for the past decade. It represent a culture withing – not just a decision. It is now an identity
Guest;
Political involvement is a whole different subject. The world will not change by getting “your” candidate in office.
It will change when the Government of Governments rules in your heart and His will is done in your life while you live here on earth.
Guest;
is renting out churches for elections involvement?
Guest;