Download PDF The Sceptres Return (Sceptre of Mercy Book 3)

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online The Sceptres Return (Sceptre of Mercy Book 3) file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with The Sceptres Return (Sceptre of Mercy Book 3) book. Happy reading The Sceptres Return (Sceptre of Mercy Book 3) Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF The Sceptres Return (Sceptre of Mercy Book 3) at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF The Sceptres Return (Sceptre of Mercy Book 3) Pocket Guide.
The Sceptre's Return (Sceptre of Mercy Book 3) - Kindle edition by Harry Turtledove. Download it once and read it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets.
Table of contents


  • Ultra XXX: Soldier VS Whore.
  • Monsieur Pamplemousse Aloft (Monsieur Pamplemousse Series).
  • Falling For My Best Friends Cousin (The Falling Series)?
  • The Scepter's Return?
  • Download The Sceptre's Return ebook {PDF} {EPUB}.
  • THE BOOK OF WISDOM!
  • How Faith Comes: 28 Ways That FAITH Comes.

Afflictions are an article of the covenant, and are not only consistent with, but flow from, God's fatherly love. The revolt of the ten tribes from the house of David was their correction for iniquity, but the constant adherence of the other two to that family, which was a competent support of the royal dignity, perpetuated the mercy of God to the seed of David, according to this promise; though that family was cut short, yet it was not cut off, as the house of Saul was. Never any other family swayed the sceptre of Judah than that of David. This is that covenant of royalty celebrated Ps.

Shop with confidence

Others of them relate to Christ, who is often called David and the Son of David, that Son of David to whom these promises pointed and in whom they had their full accomplishment. When one observes the use of the rod on fools, this would be adults who are "fools" because they are grown and still have no self-control. It would be comparable to a criminal being beaten. This is not speaking of a young child. There are examples of criminals being beaten in Scripture.

There are NO examples of children being beaten with any rod. In most other instances the word "rod" is used to symbolize God's authority or the authority of a nation. Thus, the word "rod" is referring to a parent's authority in all five of the Proverbs references, including the following verses: Pr Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die.

In the preceding verses, one can see that the child shall not die with this rod. A person cannot kill another with their authority. They can be striking beating the other person with their authority by using their authority to discipline teach, disciple, educate, instruct and guide them. IF this Scripture were referring to a literal beating, taken in context, it would have to be speaking about a grown child. The verses before and after Proverbs was written by a father who was instructing his adolescent son.

Crowns and Sceptres

However, one still has the problem of the contradiction as far as whether or not a "shebet" can cause someone to die. Another observation worth mention is the Hebrew word translated "child" in the "rod" Scriptures of Proverbs. This word is "na'ar". Meaning of "na'ar": a boy, lad, servant, youth, retainer a.

The KJV translates it as follows: young man 76, servant 54, child 44, lad 33, young 15, children 7, youth 6, babe 1, boys 1 This word "na'ar" is referring to boys most of the time since a lad would be a male and usually young men. Most Christian discipline "experts" do not mention this. Yet, if one is to interpret this verse literally, this would have to be the explanation.

A Study of "The Rod" Scriptures

Law-based Christian parenting authors say a parent should be able to STOP spanking by the time their children reach 12 or 13, yet according to this Scripture, this parent would not even START using physical punishment until then. These verses, if taken literally, would be referring to this form of punishment as an absolute last resort to save the child which was possibly a boy only from hell.

Parents are told to use this as a primary form of punishment what these experts refer to as discipline. Some use the word "punishment" and the term "discipline" interchangeably when they mean two entirely different things. These people are basing their theology on nothing more than the traditions of men!

Shop by category

Further, we are told in Deuteronomy 18 If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: 19 Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; 20 And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.

The parents are told first to talk to their child he has not heard their voice. Then, they are told to chasten him. Chasten simply means correct with words or blows. It seems they were supposed to instruct, then correct him if he did not heed their verbal correction. Then, if this does not work, he is to be stoned. If we are no longer to stone, then why do we assume we should use physical beatings to bring about repentance?

Shouldn't we make examples of a few children and stone them too?


  • Stories of the Magicians!
  • Memories of a Caregiver?
  • Symbols of Monarchy: the orb and sceptre?
  • The Mortimer Seal.

Why were they to go ahead and stone them to death if they would not repent and be obedient? This was because the Holy Spirit was not actively convicting hearts and they did not yet have direct access to God. Jesus said in the case of the adulterous woman to let him who was without sin to cast the first stone. Parents don't stone their kids because the parents themselves are just as much a sinner as their rebellious child.

Jesus was gentle with children. He is a shepherd to the sheep. The shepherd uses HIS rod to guide the sheep, not to beat them! Psalm 23 uses "shebet" to describe the shepherd's "rod". People have mentioned to this author that the shepherd would use his "rod" to break the legs of a wandering sheep to keep it from going away and getting hurt, so this is proof of how we should physically punish our children. However, this only proves that we should try to keep our children's hearts and keep them on the right path by praying for God to convict and protect them.

If He chooses to allow some kind of circumstance or situation to break their legs in their life, to keep them in the fold, then so be it! He is much stronger than human parents. Our children's "legs can be broken" by natural, spiritual and logical consequences which God allows in their lives even more effectively than by man made pain. Enter supporting content here. A Study of "The Rod" Scriptures.

Parenting Overview. Level 1 - Foundational Discipline. Level 2 - Proactive Discipline. This was made to the order of Edward I, to accommodate the "holy stone" beneath the seat; the stone was an offering from the King at the shrine of Edward the Confessor; the chair is of wood and cost, with the lions and step, about eight pounds; on the occasion of coronations it is covered with brocade or damask; the present lions are modern. The famous Stone of Scone, the "stone of destiny," the focus of so many legends is of red sandstone, probably from a Dundee quarry.

All the sovereigns of Great Britain since Edward I have been consecrated on this chair, save Mary I, who had, according to tradition, a chair especially blessed sent from Rome. This used to be a very popular feature of the coronation festivities; it proceeded from the Tower, the royal residence, to the Abbey, then back again. The earlier processions, notably that of Richard II, were costly and elaborate pageants; the streets being sumptuously decorated and crowded with spectators.

From early times it has been customary to erect stands along the royal route and to charge for seats thereon; the prices varied from about one farthing for Edward I to thirty shillings for Queen Victoria. This usually took place in Westminster Hall and was a very magnificent affair; the sheriffs of the different counties used to contribute meat and fowls to the feast. The entry of the Champion was the great feature of the banquet, the fare was costly and varied, served on gold plate.

For the banquet of Henry VI, the ingenious cook prepared a red soup with white lions in it, a gold leopard in a custard, chickens "powdered with gilt lozenges," "fritters like the sun," and a haunch of venison inscribed Te Deum Laudamus. When the Court had retired, the people were allowed in to "scramble" for the remnants of the food; after the banquet of George IV, the crowd broke in too soon, and "scrambled away" the gold plate that the lackeys had not had time to remove; some of this was not recovered in the unseemly fight that followed.

This was the last of the public banquets. The coronation of Richard II is the first occasion on which there is a detailed record of the Court of Claims that sits to decide the merits of the claims to perform some service at the coronation, in return for honours or rewards. This office is hereditary in the family of the Duke of Norfolk; part of the duties of the College of Arms is the direction of royal ceremonials and pageants, so that the arrangements for the coronation come directly under the jurisdiction of the Earl Marshal.

The gorgeous attire of the Kings-of-Arms is a notable feature of the coronation; they have crowns of gold oak-leaves set upright over caps of crimson satin, a tabard of the royal arms embroidered on velvet and collars of S. Garter Principal King-of-Arms, who is the Chief, has a crimson satin mantle and a white rod of office; he serves especially the Most Noble Order of the Garter. The formal solemnity of a coronation is the occasion above all others when the impressive and symbolic pomp of ancient heraldry is seen to greatest advantage; and immense labour occupying months of careful work devolves on the Earl Marshal and the College of Arms in the preparation of this gorgeous pageant, which must be perfect in every detail and worthy of the gathering together of a commonwealth of nations.

The robes are of crimson velvet; the mantle has a cape, lined minever and "powdered" with ermine; four rows for a Duke, three and a half rows for a Marquess, three rows for an Earl, two and a half rows for a Viscount, two rows for a Baron. The Oath is an integral part of the coronation ceremony; the Anglo-Saxons regarded it as a compact between King and people, and it still retains that meaning.

The present coronation oath dates from the accession of William and Mary, , and has been but little altered since; it is too long to be quoted here; the sum of it is the sovereign's undertaking to maintain the laws and "the Protestant Reformed Religion. The coronation robes are arranged for convenience during the anointing.

When this is done the Chrism—oil mixed with balm—is consecrated by a bishop. It is then poured from the ampulla into the spoon, then placed on the sovereign's head, breast and arms. Since the oil was supposed to be of divine origin this was considered the most important part of the ceremony; "the Lord's anointed" was the most sacred title that could be given the King. The Chrism gave the gift of healing and touched the kingship with divinity.

The English anointing ceremonial follows those of ancient times; all sovereigns were anointed; the pouring of "a vial of oil" on the King's head is mentioned in the Bible, and the Hebrews are thought to have derived the custom from Egypt. MANY of the British coronations are associated with extraordinary or romantic incidents quite apart from the intrinsic splendour of the pageantry and the momentous solemnity of the ceremonial; the following are a few of the most dramatic and interesting.

When St. Dunstan crowned Ethelred II, he said: "If you have obtained the Kingdom through the death of your brother the sword shall not depart from your House till it has cut it off, and the Crown shall pass to one of another race and language. Ethelred had obtained the crown by the murder of his brother Edward, and the prophecy was, like most old prophecies, fulfilled—in the establishment first of the Danish and then of the Norman Kings.

Edward the Confessor was crowned at Winchester, Harold, crowned in St. Paul's, it is supposed, was slain October 14th of the same year. The Archbishops were preparing for the coronation of Edgar the Atheling when they heard that William the Norman was advancing on London, and believing the cause of the English to be hopeless they made their submission to the Conqueror, whom, with deputies from London, they hastened to meet.

The Conqueror chose Christmas Day for his crowning; there were sounds of popular discontent from without the newly built church of St. Peter or Abbey of Westminster; the Norman soldiery seized the opportunity to lay wait to plunder the neighbouring houses, and the King himself rushed out with his drawn sword in his hand. The most hurried of coronations was that of Henry I, who rode post haste to London after finding his brother William Rufus murdered in the New Forest in order to outdo Robert, the rightful heir, then in Normandy.

The Sovereign’s Orb:

This bold move was successful; the elder brother was never able to make headway against the anointed King. A splendid coronation that took place in dramatic circumstances was that of Matilda, the daughter of Henry I, in Winchester Cathedral in , after her rival, Stephen, had been made prisoner, and in the midst of civil war. Matilda was de jure, at least, an Empress as well as Queen of England.