If false, why is it OK to come to my home and bother me with something I don't believe in?True or False: Atheists sit in your churches and disrupt service with DNA samples and evolution theory books?
Try answering the door wearing red contacts, a thong and carrying a satanic bible. I bet they never knock on your door again.True or False: Atheists sit in your churches and disrupt service with DNA samples and evolution theory books?
I have seen it with my own eyes in my brain
it is true
I have even seen them replace some of the pages with those of science books
true .. true I tell ya
Not church goer.
If you don't pet the kitty for 10 minutes she'll bother you for six hours.
Atheists don't go to churches because they don't believe in anything but their own existence.
They do however shove their beliefs down the throats of children who are forced to learn their myths of evolution in every public school.
They also force Catholics and other religious instructors to teach their children evolution.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;鈥?/a>
So who is the real culprit and who is the victim?
Its not ok to bother you. Live and let live. God made us to be able to chose for ourselves. A simple ';no thank you'; and quietly closing the door will suffice. Christ did not argue or fight. God's word is a fact whether they chose to believe it or not.
I usually just tell my doberman to keep them in check!
Can you say ';not intrested'; boys and girls, sure you can try it, ';N..o...t........IN...tre...s....ted'; see that's not so hard is it. Now on the other hand, what give atheists the right to shove their religion into my child's classroom, teaching it as fact, failing them if they disagree and refuse to write an answer that they believe is a lie. Why is it OK, to take their sacred holidays Like Christmas and Thanksgiving and turn them into hollow shells of what they were, so watered down with political correctness and multi-culturalism that they no longer have any meaning at all. Why is it OK to tell the christian child, get the ';Jesus Saves'; tee shirt off, but allow the Muslim children to wear the veil in school. I could go on all day, the hypocrisy is ridiculous. The only ones that hate crimes DON'T apply to are when they are committed against Christians. Read the papers. Look it up on the net.
Eww, Church!
False.
-good point-
put something slippery on your front porch the moment you see them coming and if they try to sue or threaten let them know they were trespassing. That's what I would do lol or put a picture of a naked woman on your window and hope they would be offended
Excellent!
Don't answer the door.
Christians and Athiests do it, its the same.
Although most non-Christians I know don't talk about the whole evolution thing, I've gotten plenty of knocks on my door from missionaries, and have been condemned to hell by a number of nuns.
So I ignore them!
False.
Do not open your door. The lock is inside.
Answer the door naked.
You know, that would make a great story on a Michael Moore documentary: Atheists knocking on doors and trying to convert people to Atheism.
False, you have every right to believe in what you want. Its your choice to choose the right way or the wrong. Nobody should be bothering you about something you dont believe in, they should tell you once and thats it, if you don't accept the truth then so be it.
Loveeeeeeeeeeeee it.
Put a sign on your door,hell bound,they won,t bother you.
oOoOo
i smell something burning... did the religious folks just get burned there...? =]
Ok, so when did I ever come to your home???
Or, are you thinking about JWs and Mormons? They have to knock on doors. They think that the more doors you knock on, the better you are in heaven or something.
Why NOT come to our church with your so-called ';evidence';?
But come early, and wait till the service is over. You never know what you might just learn from the sermon.
Friday, February 12, 2010
There are no math books that say ';2+2=5';, so why are there Bibles published with equally false assertions?
The same reason it's ok to publish other mythological books - it's fiction.There are no math books that say ';2+2=5';, so why are there Bibles published with equally false assertions?
Because it is a STORY, and as such can take liberty with The Way Things Are.There are no math books that say ';2+2=5';, so why are there Bibles published with equally false assertions?
hey if you dont believe then find something else to read.
That's too easy. Math books deal with facts and proveable truths. The bible is a book of fiction and unproveable (and impossible) myths.
Hey, I am all for atheism, if that is what you believe. But why come and post here with offensive comments such as yours? I respect your beliefs, why can't you respect mine?
LOL JC is the Man says there are no contradictions!!!!!! Someone get me some oxygen, i'm laughing too much today.......
Give it time. I'm sure there will be ';faith-based'; math in Kansas before you know it.
Well I read one book that claimed that there was this kid named Harry Potter...and that he was a wizard...now that isn't true so why did they publish that?!
Okay that's a big exaggeration but you get my point. Whether or not you believe in the Bible and what it says, it is still valuable historically in some aspects, as well as a good read(Well I can't vouch for that part, I havent read it all!).
And if you don't like it, don't read it. But at the same time, don't get upset at everyone else who does.
because its pure fiction. i read it. i like stephen king and john grisham better.
That is why they have disclaimers in the beginning.
The Bible does not have equally false assertions. Can anything in the Bible be reduced to simple math? The Bible never contradicts itself theologically and the Bible is rationally coherent.
Maybe the editors weren't very good.
Because, my dear sir, it is the greatest story ever SOLD.
How many dumb questions are you going to ask today?
Because it is a STORY, and as such can take liberty with The Way Things Are.There are no math books that say ';2+2=5';, so why are there Bibles published with equally false assertions?
hey if you dont believe then find something else to read.
That's too easy. Math books deal with facts and proveable truths. The bible is a book of fiction and unproveable (and impossible) myths.
Hey, I am all for atheism, if that is what you believe. But why come and post here with offensive comments such as yours? I respect your beliefs, why can't you respect mine?
LOL JC is the Man says there are no contradictions!!!!!! Someone get me some oxygen, i'm laughing too much today.......
Give it time. I'm sure there will be ';faith-based'; math in Kansas before you know it.
Well I read one book that claimed that there was this kid named Harry Potter...and that he was a wizard...now that isn't true so why did they publish that?!
Okay that's a big exaggeration but you get my point. Whether or not you believe in the Bible and what it says, it is still valuable historically in some aspects, as well as a good read(Well I can't vouch for that part, I havent read it all!).
And if you don't like it, don't read it. But at the same time, don't get upset at everyone else who does.
because its pure fiction. i read it. i like stephen king and john grisham better.
That is why they have disclaimers in the beginning.
The Bible does not have equally false assertions. Can anything in the Bible be reduced to simple math? The Bible never contradicts itself theologically and the Bible is rationally coherent.
Maybe the editors weren't very good.
Because, my dear sir, it is the greatest story ever SOLD.
How many dumb questions are you going to ask today?
So if Paul is the antichrist/false prophet, how did he get more books attributed to him than anyone else?
As in, in all the bible, Paul has more book attributed to him than anyone in either the old or new testament.
And once again, I was on youtube, and someone said that Jesus spoke of Paul when He said:
Matthew 24:24-25 (New King James Version)
24 For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. 25 See, I have told you beforehand.
and they say that He talks about Paul because Paul said:
2 Corinthians 12:11-13 (New King James Version)
Signs of an Apostle
11 I have become a fool in boasting; you have compelled me. For I ought to have been commended by you; for in nothing was I behind the most eminent apostles, though I am nothing. 12 Truly the signs of an apostle were accomplished among you with all perseverance, in signs and wonders and mighty deeds. 13 For what is it in which you were inferior to other churches, except that I myself was not burdensome to you? Forgive me this wrong!
But anyway, how could Paul be the antichrist if he has the most book throughout anyone in the bible?So if Paul is the antichrist/false prophet, how did he get more books attributed to him than anyone else?
one only has to read the letters of Paul to see the humble way in which speaks about Jesus .. secondly, the man dedicated his whole life to Jesus with humility, no one who wanted to oppose Jesus would do that.
Paul is awesome, a great role model for anyone who wants to follow Christ.
rock on.So if Paul is the antichrist/false prophet, how did he get more books attributed to him than anyone else?
Paul is not an antichrist. Jesus Himself said to Ananias about Paul as follows:
Acts 9:15 But the Lord said to him, “Go, for he is a chosen vessel of Mine to bear My name before Gentiles, kings, and the children of Israel.”
Paul was a chosen servant of the Lord Jesus Christ tasked by Him to write a substantial part of the New Testament and about the gospel of grace.
God bless you.
All anti-pope have declared that All popes of the catholic church since day one, are anti-christ. Smearing campaign of the holy men of God is on going. We know for sure that Jesus empowered Paul to be the 'apostle of the gentiles'. So, Paul is the apostle of the gentiles. Is that antichrist to you?
The no. of the books he wrote is not the criteria why he is an apostle.. It is the order of Jesus.
The bigger question: If Paul was not a Christian, why did he spread the gospel in the face of torture and death? If he wasn't the real deal, he wouldn't have done anything that would place himself in danger. We Christians could learn a thing or two from Paul.
Gotta wonder what's going to happen to you.
Your efforts are commendable, but your comprehension is bizarre to say the least. Sortof a twisted, schizophrenic form of calculations.
Many antichrists were around as the Bible attests. The beast was Nero.
Are you honestly suggesting that the ultimate test of whether someone is good or evil, is how many books they get published???? Not too familiar with the book publishing business, are you....
Him having so many books proves he is the author of christianity not Christ
He perverted the monotheism of Jesus and made divine a messenger of GOd
Please see 2 Peter 3:15 and 16..
Peter himself also recognized the divine inspiration of Paul's writings.
The SAME spirit was in both men...
To claim Paul had hijacked, or twisted Christianity is an accusation which cannot be proven, but can be proven to be incorrect.
We cannot add to the scriptures, but we are also warned not to take away, either.
Anyone that truly knows the Bible, knows God, can tell Paul was used for the writings by God. Inspiration is all over it.
How is it anyone can read paul and think it makes sense?
In the old testment, God is the messiah, God himself and there is no God beside him or before him, no one to intercede, no other God at all.
paul proclaims a vision of mythology as if it is truth, and imagine how naive people were in the ancient world.
even today, we have see the heaven's gate cult spring from the insanity of one man, among many cults of our time. How much more of a following could a con artist have in the ancient world.
Paul was a Roman citizen, the Romans controlled the cannonization process.
It really is that simple.
Paul wasn't the AntiChrist, because there is none.
I think if you read closely you will see Roman fingerprints all over the bible. Specifically in the view of Romans presented in the Gospels.
Keep in mind that the Romans were an occupying force in Jerusalem at the time, and the Jews HATED them. You would expect books written by Jews to have many examples of horrific Roman treatment of the chosen people. They exist in most other jewish writings of the times, because the Romans tended to be a violent lot.
However, in the Gospels the Romans are painted as a few good centurians that beg Jesus for help in healing and one regional leader, who washes his hands of Jesus Death after struggling with it emotionally.
Thats Roman influence my friend, and so is the Paul writings. Paul was emphasized because of his gentile inclusion stance. Its also why Ebionite writings were not cannonized.
if Paul is the antichrist/false prophet then why does his theology agree with the Old Testament as well as the teachings of the other Apostles and why didn't the other Apostles denounce him?
As for the claim a small number of very liberal and atheistic scholars make about Paul inventing Christianity, this seems to ignore the fact that the other Apostles confirmed that what Paul was teaching was correct and we see no contradiction between Paul's Jesus and the Jesus of the four Gospels.
If Paul really ';invented'; Christianity, then one would expect that his teachings would be different from Jesus, the other apostles, and disciples.
The basis of the gospel is the belief that Jesus died for the sins of mankind. Jesus clearly indicated that His purpose was to come to die on a cross for the sins of the world.
This concept was not a new one, since Isaiah first prophesied that the Messiah would die for our sins.
Paul taught this doctrine, as did John, Luke, and Peter.
Other crucial doctrines taught by Paul were also taught by Jesus and the disciples:
Belief in Jesus for eternal life, Righteousness by faith, Justification by faith, Forgiveness of sin through faith, Repentance.
Besides the core doctrines of Christianity, Paul taught on many other theological topics, also taught by Jesus and recorded in the Gospels.
Paul's Letter to the Romans is radically different from just about any other book of the Bible, the teachings found in the Book of Romans is also found in the Old Testament, the teachings of Jesus, and the teachings of the disciples. So, Paul didn't just make up doctrines to create a new religion. However, he did write the greatest theological treatise of all time in the Book of Romans.
Not only are the core doctrines of Christianity found outside Paul's writings, but Paul himself taught many other theological issues that reflect the teachings of Jesus during His years of ministry. In conclusion, Paul of Tarsus did not invent Christianity, but clarified the teachings of the Bible as no other Bible author ever has. In addition to his great theological writings, Paul was Christianity's greatest evangelist.
And once again, I was on youtube, and someone said that Jesus spoke of Paul when He said:
Matthew 24:24-25 (New King James Version)
24 For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. 25 See, I have told you beforehand.
and they say that He talks about Paul because Paul said:
2 Corinthians 12:11-13 (New King James Version)
Signs of an Apostle
11 I have become a fool in boasting; you have compelled me. For I ought to have been commended by you; for in nothing was I behind the most eminent apostles, though I am nothing. 12 Truly the signs of an apostle were accomplished among you with all perseverance, in signs and wonders and mighty deeds. 13 For what is it in which you were inferior to other churches, except that I myself was not burdensome to you? Forgive me this wrong!
But anyway, how could Paul be the antichrist if he has the most book throughout anyone in the bible?So if Paul is the antichrist/false prophet, how did he get more books attributed to him than anyone else?
one only has to read the letters of Paul to see the humble way in which speaks about Jesus .. secondly, the man dedicated his whole life to Jesus with humility, no one who wanted to oppose Jesus would do that.
Paul is awesome, a great role model for anyone who wants to follow Christ.
rock on.So if Paul is the antichrist/false prophet, how did he get more books attributed to him than anyone else?
Paul is not an antichrist. Jesus Himself said to Ananias about Paul as follows:
Acts 9:15 But the Lord said to him, “Go, for he is a chosen vessel of Mine to bear My name before Gentiles, kings, and the children of Israel.”
Paul was a chosen servant of the Lord Jesus Christ tasked by Him to write a substantial part of the New Testament and about the gospel of grace.
God bless you.
All anti-pope have declared that All popes of the catholic church since day one, are anti-christ. Smearing campaign of the holy men of God is on going. We know for sure that Jesus empowered Paul to be the 'apostle of the gentiles'. So, Paul is the apostle of the gentiles. Is that antichrist to you?
The no. of the books he wrote is not the criteria why he is an apostle.. It is the order of Jesus.
The bigger question: If Paul was not a Christian, why did he spread the gospel in the face of torture and death? If he wasn't the real deal, he wouldn't have done anything that would place himself in danger. We Christians could learn a thing or two from Paul.
Gotta wonder what's going to happen to you.
Your efforts are commendable, but your comprehension is bizarre to say the least. Sortof a twisted, schizophrenic form of calculations.
Many antichrists were around as the Bible attests. The beast was Nero.
Are you honestly suggesting that the ultimate test of whether someone is good or evil, is how many books they get published???? Not too familiar with the book publishing business, are you....
Him having so many books proves he is the author of christianity not Christ
He perverted the monotheism of Jesus and made divine a messenger of GOd
Please see 2 Peter 3:15 and 16..
Peter himself also recognized the divine inspiration of Paul's writings.
The SAME spirit was in both men...
To claim Paul had hijacked, or twisted Christianity is an accusation which cannot be proven, but can be proven to be incorrect.
We cannot add to the scriptures, but we are also warned not to take away, either.
Anyone that truly knows the Bible, knows God, can tell Paul was used for the writings by God. Inspiration is all over it.
How is it anyone can read paul and think it makes sense?
In the old testment, God is the messiah, God himself and there is no God beside him or before him, no one to intercede, no other God at all.
paul proclaims a vision of mythology as if it is truth, and imagine how naive people were in the ancient world.
even today, we have see the heaven's gate cult spring from the insanity of one man, among many cults of our time. How much more of a following could a con artist have in the ancient world.
Paul was a Roman citizen, the Romans controlled the cannonization process.
It really is that simple.
Paul wasn't the AntiChrist, because there is none.
I think if you read closely you will see Roman fingerprints all over the bible. Specifically in the view of Romans presented in the Gospels.
Keep in mind that the Romans were an occupying force in Jerusalem at the time, and the Jews HATED them. You would expect books written by Jews to have many examples of horrific Roman treatment of the chosen people. They exist in most other jewish writings of the times, because the Romans tended to be a violent lot.
However, in the Gospels the Romans are painted as a few good centurians that beg Jesus for help in healing and one regional leader, who washes his hands of Jesus Death after struggling with it emotionally.
Thats Roman influence my friend, and so is the Paul writings. Paul was emphasized because of his gentile inclusion stance. Its also why Ebionite writings were not cannonized.
if Paul is the antichrist/false prophet then why does his theology agree with the Old Testament as well as the teachings of the other Apostles and why didn't the other Apostles denounce him?
As for the claim a small number of very liberal and atheistic scholars make about Paul inventing Christianity, this seems to ignore the fact that the other Apostles confirmed that what Paul was teaching was correct and we see no contradiction between Paul's Jesus and the Jesus of the four Gospels.
If Paul really ';invented'; Christianity, then one would expect that his teachings would be different from Jesus, the other apostles, and disciples.
The basis of the gospel is the belief that Jesus died for the sins of mankind. Jesus clearly indicated that His purpose was to come to die on a cross for the sins of the world.
This concept was not a new one, since Isaiah first prophesied that the Messiah would die for our sins.
Paul taught this doctrine, as did John, Luke, and Peter.
Other crucial doctrines taught by Paul were also taught by Jesus and the disciples:
Belief in Jesus for eternal life, Righteousness by faith, Justification by faith, Forgiveness of sin through faith, Repentance.
Besides the core doctrines of Christianity, Paul taught on many other theological topics, also taught by Jesus and recorded in the Gospels.
Paul's Letter to the Romans is radically different from just about any other book of the Bible, the teachings found in the Book of Romans is also found in the Old Testament, the teachings of Jesus, and the teachings of the disciples. So, Paul didn't just make up doctrines to create a new religion. However, he did write the greatest theological treatise of all time in the Book of Romans.
Not only are the core doctrines of Christianity found outside Paul's writings, but Paul himself taught many other theological issues that reflect the teachings of Jesus during His years of ministry. In conclusion, Paul of Tarsus did not invent Christianity, but clarified the teachings of the Bible as no other Bible author ever has. In addition to his great theological writings, Paul was Christianity's greatest evangelist.
Books will disappear soon since we have other growing audio-visual sources ?? false or true?
';there will be no need to use papers anymore in the near future..books will loose their values';..somebody says.Books will disappear soon since we have other growing audio-visual sources ?? false or true?
I don't think so bcos even the technology has been developing such fast, we still need books. Since not every one afford to buy the equipments needed in order to use the technology.
Me, for instance. I can't afford buying audio books or e-books. So i prefer books to the any other meansBooks will disappear soon since we have other growing audio-visual sources ?? false or true?
No, books will always be there. It is a very practical method of not losing data. People will always read books.
Yeah, right. Ever try and drive a laptop into the bathroom for something to read when you have to go?
Don't think so....
Plus the constantly changing format on computers and word programs will ensure books don't go anytime soon. All the knowledge of older systems is lost as they become incompatible with current machines.
i strongly doubt that
false, false, false.............hard copy is a favorite of many. check Barnes and Noble...that business isn't going anywhere....
i have to disagree.
False. A hard copy is safer than data held on a disk somewhere.
this won't happen ever because books have valuable influences rather than other objects of education
I don't think so bcos even the technology has been developing such fast, we still need books. Since not every one afford to buy the equipments needed in order to use the technology.
Me, for instance. I can't afford buying audio books or e-books. So i prefer books to the any other meansBooks will disappear soon since we have other growing audio-visual sources ?? false or true?
No, books will always be there. It is a very practical method of not losing data. People will always read books.
Yeah, right. Ever try and drive a laptop into the bathroom for something to read when you have to go?
Don't think so....
Plus the constantly changing format on computers and word programs will ensure books don't go anytime soon. All the knowledge of older systems is lost as they become incompatible with current machines.
i strongly doubt that
false, false, false.............hard copy is a favorite of many. check Barnes and Noble...that business isn't going anywhere....
i have to disagree.
False. A hard copy is safer than data held on a disk somewhere.
this won't happen ever because books have valuable influences rather than other objects of education
Has ANYof the books or stories in the bible been proven false?or otherwise from Genesis-Revelations?
Nope...doubted, picked apart and quoted way out of the context of the spirit it was meant to be read but never proven false. In fact most are confirmed with archeology.
DavidHas ANYof the books or stories in the bible been proven false?or otherwise from Genesis-Revelations?
Oh look... the supposed ';catch-all'; of ';out of context';. How convenient that they can simply parade this phrase about without actually having to prove it.
Has ANYof the books or stories in the bible been proven false?or otherwise from Genesis-Revelations?
A literal interpretation of Genesis and a literal interpretation of bigoted scriptures (Leviticus, 1 Corinthians, etc)
There are definate contradictions throughout, most everything in Genisis can be easily seen to be false, most of the supposed factual accounts of events are bogus. The real question is have any been PROVEN true.
Um... yes. For more information, please visit this site:
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra鈥?/a>
Not any that have been allowed into the offical Christian Bible.
NO!! Absolutely not!
Sigh... No, they haven't, to my knowledge. I'm not a proponent of the ';truth by lack of evidence'; policy/fallacy, but when you look at it from a reasonably wide perspective-- taking into account things like metaphors (hey, God's hard to describe!)-- the Bible is amazingly difficult to disprove. There is a certain lack of evidence in the Bible's favor, which is why so many are reluctant to follow God's word. But by the same token, there is a certain lack of evidence against the Bible. Who can blame those that are confused? It's not a simple matter of the scientific method or fossil records-- there is not much hard data.
I believe that when it comes down to it, it's a matter of faith, not material evidence, and that though I'd like to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that every bit of His Word rings with truth backed by hard evidence... God has other ideas.
Addendum: People aren't joining because they don't believe in what they can't detect with their senses. Besides, I'll admit that some Christians really, REALLY grate on my nerves. The Bible's more of a weapon than a cause in this 10,000-year-old war.
Are you ready for this? There is a $250,000.00 Reward if you can prove Genesis is flawed and Creation did not happen. Go to:
http://www.raycomfort.com and link onto Dr. Hovind...if you can prove it, no questions asked and you get the money! It's that simple. So far none have been proved false. Job is a scientific summary, Genesis 1 the classification of species, Leviticus the law, medical hygiene, Daniel a futuristic look into history also current history of the time..Nebuchadnezzar was a real person, Revelation goes back and forth in time to actual events that have occurred or are occurring in the world today. The puzzle is to figure out what the ancient names of those countries were and who they are now!
No, not even one.
Proven false, maybe. Proven contradictions, most certainly.
The Bible is the Word of God therefore it is error free!
The bible stands!!!
No, not really.car loan
DavidHas ANYof the books or stories in the bible been proven false?or otherwise from Genesis-Revelations?
Oh look... the supposed ';catch-all'; of ';out of context';. How convenient that they can simply parade this phrase about without actually having to prove it.
Report Abuse
Has ANYof the books or stories in the bible been proven false?or otherwise from Genesis-Revelations?
A literal interpretation of Genesis and a literal interpretation of bigoted scriptures (Leviticus, 1 Corinthians, etc)
There are definate contradictions throughout, most everything in Genisis can be easily seen to be false, most of the supposed factual accounts of events are bogus. The real question is have any been PROVEN true.
Um... yes. For more information, please visit this site:
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra鈥?/a>
Not any that have been allowed into the offical Christian Bible.
NO!! Absolutely not!
Sigh... No, they haven't, to my knowledge. I'm not a proponent of the ';truth by lack of evidence'; policy/fallacy, but when you look at it from a reasonably wide perspective-- taking into account things like metaphors (hey, God's hard to describe!)-- the Bible is amazingly difficult to disprove. There is a certain lack of evidence in the Bible's favor, which is why so many are reluctant to follow God's word. But by the same token, there is a certain lack of evidence against the Bible. Who can blame those that are confused? It's not a simple matter of the scientific method or fossil records-- there is not much hard data.
I believe that when it comes down to it, it's a matter of faith, not material evidence, and that though I'd like to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that every bit of His Word rings with truth backed by hard evidence... God has other ideas.
Addendum: People aren't joining because they don't believe in what they can't detect with their senses. Besides, I'll admit that some Christians really, REALLY grate on my nerves. The Bible's more of a weapon than a cause in this 10,000-year-old war.
Are you ready for this? There is a $250,000.00 Reward if you can prove Genesis is flawed and Creation did not happen. Go to:
http://www.raycomfort.com and link onto Dr. Hovind...if you can prove it, no questions asked and you get the money! It's that simple. So far none have been proved false. Job is a scientific summary, Genesis 1 the classification of species, Leviticus the law, medical hygiene, Daniel a futuristic look into history also current history of the time..Nebuchadnezzar was a real person, Revelation goes back and forth in time to actual events that have occurred or are occurring in the world today. The puzzle is to figure out what the ancient names of those countries were and who they are now!
No, not even one.
Proven false, maybe. Proven contradictions, most certainly.
The Bible is the Word of God therefore it is error free!
The bible stands!!!
No, not really.
The Iliad and Odyssey were chiief books for teaching in ancient Greece. ture or false? Please Help!!?
True. They were the book with what teachers used to teach. And for a long time. Even nowadays, it is considered as the staple of education.The Iliad and Odyssey were chiief books for teaching in ancient Greece. ture or false? Please Help!!?
true
true
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
FOUND ';The Epic of Creation'; carved on 7 stone tablets predates all religious books inc.Bible /TRUE or FALSE?
The discovery of these tablets as well as many other history and Bible history verifying artifacts( proving many events in the Bible were true) were found back in the late 1800's and early 1900's.
The impact of these discoveries inspired the Indiana Jones Movies.
Some of the artifacts took 40 years of scholarly study referencing and cross referencing to translate. The discovery has such an other worldly and incredible impact on so many different religions (until maybe 2012 concsiousness shift)
No one wants to be the first to burst anyones bubble and tell them they may have to re-think their religion.
Enuma Elish translated means the Epic of Creation and found carved into seven stone tables. There are parts of the Bible, Koran, Torrah, and other religious books that seem to ';borrow'; huge sections and passages from these 7 tablets.
If this IS true -It changes almost everything
If you want to read the Enuma Elish....
http://www.sacred-texts.com/ane/enuma.ht鈥?/a>FOUND ';The Epic of Creation'; carved on 7 stone tablets predates all religious books inc.Bible /TRUE or FALSE?
True.
It's a Sumerian text.
It is thought to be the basis for Genesis.FOUND ';The Epic of Creation'; carved on 7 stone tablets predates all religious books inc.Bible /TRUE or FALSE?
The link does not work. Yes, there is evidence that the bible was taken from other written manuscripts, but that does not prove that anything happened the way the bible says it happened.
Like the whole earth being flooded. That is ludicrous and has been proven scientifically impossible.
By they way, the Gnostic Gospels were also found but some Christians deny their credibility.
And much of it contributed to the stories in the Bible.
The in depth study of the Enuma Elish in college is what led, in part, to me becoming an atheist.
If this makes it to the discovery Chanel, I'll watch it. Other then that, so?
The impact of these discoveries inspired the Indiana Jones Movies.
Some of the artifacts took 40 years of scholarly study referencing and cross referencing to translate. The discovery has such an other worldly and incredible impact on so many different religions (until maybe 2012 concsiousness shift)
No one wants to be the first to burst anyones bubble and tell them they may have to re-think their religion.
Enuma Elish translated means the Epic of Creation and found carved into seven stone tables. There are parts of the Bible, Koran, Torrah, and other religious books that seem to ';borrow'; huge sections and passages from these 7 tablets.
If this IS true -It changes almost everything
If you want to read the Enuma Elish....
http://www.sacred-texts.com/ane/enuma.ht鈥?/a>FOUND ';The Epic of Creation'; carved on 7 stone tablets predates all religious books inc.Bible /TRUE or FALSE?
True.
It's a Sumerian text.
It is thought to be the basis for Genesis.FOUND ';The Epic of Creation'; carved on 7 stone tablets predates all religious books inc.Bible /TRUE or FALSE?
The link does not work. Yes, there is evidence that the bible was taken from other written manuscripts, but that does not prove that anything happened the way the bible says it happened.
Like the whole earth being flooded. That is ludicrous and has been proven scientifically impossible.
By they way, the Gnostic Gospels were also found but some Christians deny their credibility.
And much of it contributed to the stories in the Bible.
The in depth study of the Enuma Elish in college is what led, in part, to me becoming an atheist.
If this makes it to the discovery Chanel, I'll watch it. Other then that, so?
True or False..........are these real ';on the books'; California laws......?
1. No vehicle without a driver may exceed 60 miles per hour.
2. It is a misdemeanor to shoot at any kind of game from a moving vehicle unless the target is a whale.
3. Toads may not be licked
4. It is a crime for dogs to mate within 500 yards of a church. (Los Angeles)
5. It is illegal to walk a camel down Palm Canyon Drive between the hours of 4 and 6 pm. (Palm Springs)
6. It is illegal to drive two thousand sheep down Hollywood blvd. (Hollywood)
7. Women may not wear high heels within city limits. (Carmel)
8. Ice cream may not be eaten while standing on the sidewalk. (Carmel, repealed when Clint Eastwood was mayor)
9. Persons classified as ';ugly'; may not walk down any street. (San Francisco)
10.It is illegal for a man to beat his wife with a strap wider than 2 inches without her consent. (Los Angeles)
Give it your best shot friends...who ever gets the most right answers gets 10 points.....True or False..........are these real ';on the books'; California laws......?
They are all true, although most of them are no longer law. Most of them have some validity, believe it or not.
I won't discuss all of them but here are a few:
Toads are poisonous. Licking a toad can kill you. Since it's in the book, if you lick a toad, you can be arrested for attempted suicide if you don't die.
The church law is actually from Pasadena, although L.A. probably had it, too. Pasadena is known as a prudish church-going town.
The camels: There was a time when the US Army tried to use camels in the cavalry. They trained near Indio, just east of Palm Springs. Actually, it was at the site of what is now the George S. Patton Museum at the airport at Chiriaco Summit. Sometimes the soldiers would bring the camels into town. The city fathers just didn't want them around during rush hour.
Hollywood is part of the city of Los Angeles. HOWEVER, between 1903 and 1909, Hollywood was an incorporated city on its own... A FARM TOWN. There were lots of sheep farms.
The Carmel laws were VERY true. I think they still have the law about no neon signs within the downtown section. The high heels was because of cobblestone sidewalks. The ice cream was because they didn't want any food to be seen in public, except in a restaurant.
San Francisco... yeah it's true.
And #10 is still on the books. Of course, if a man beats his wife the California Penal Code supercedes the City Charter.True or False..........are these real ';on the books'; California laws......?
i don't know about all that, but did you know that some ppl actually think it's against the law to say 'mommy 'or 'daddy' in san fran?
my friend TOLD ME, argued it -even, That the law was , they have to say 'Parental Unit';.
Well having lived in California all my life and knowing how incredibly stupid law makers have been here over the years, I'm betting they're all real.
I would say all of them are real except number 9 and fizz dude STOP that crap (no pun intended!) this is the second question i have come across you did that on!
you know I really hope that these are not true but thinking it is California I am going to say TRUE
I don't know, but I like #1 the best.
2. It is a misdemeanor to shoot at any kind of game from a moving vehicle unless the target is a whale.
3. Toads may not be licked
4. It is a crime for dogs to mate within 500 yards of a church. (Los Angeles)
5. It is illegal to walk a camel down Palm Canyon Drive between the hours of 4 and 6 pm. (Palm Springs)
6. It is illegal to drive two thousand sheep down Hollywood blvd. (Hollywood)
7. Women may not wear high heels within city limits. (Carmel)
8. Ice cream may not be eaten while standing on the sidewalk. (Carmel, repealed when Clint Eastwood was mayor)
9. Persons classified as ';ugly'; may not walk down any street. (San Francisco)
10.It is illegal for a man to beat his wife with a strap wider than 2 inches without her consent. (Los Angeles)
Give it your best shot friends...who ever gets the most right answers gets 10 points.....True or False..........are these real ';on the books'; California laws......?
They are all true, although most of them are no longer law. Most of them have some validity, believe it or not.
I won't discuss all of them but here are a few:
Toads are poisonous. Licking a toad can kill you. Since it's in the book, if you lick a toad, you can be arrested for attempted suicide if you don't die.
The church law is actually from Pasadena, although L.A. probably had it, too. Pasadena is known as a prudish church-going town.
The camels: There was a time when the US Army tried to use camels in the cavalry. They trained near Indio, just east of Palm Springs. Actually, it was at the site of what is now the George S. Patton Museum at the airport at Chiriaco Summit. Sometimes the soldiers would bring the camels into town. The city fathers just didn't want them around during rush hour.
Hollywood is part of the city of Los Angeles. HOWEVER, between 1903 and 1909, Hollywood was an incorporated city on its own... A FARM TOWN. There were lots of sheep farms.
The Carmel laws were VERY true. I think they still have the law about no neon signs within the downtown section. The high heels was because of cobblestone sidewalks. The ice cream was because they didn't want any food to be seen in public, except in a restaurant.
San Francisco... yeah it's true.
And #10 is still on the books. Of course, if a man beats his wife the California Penal Code supercedes the City Charter.True or False..........are these real ';on the books'; California laws......?
i don't know about all that, but did you know that some ppl actually think it's against the law to say 'mommy 'or 'daddy' in san fran?
my friend TOLD ME, argued it -even, That the law was , they have to say 'Parental Unit';.
Well having lived in California all my life and knowing how incredibly stupid law makers have been here over the years, I'm betting they're all real.
I would say all of them are real except number 9 and fizz dude STOP that crap (no pun intended!) this is the second question i have come across you did that on!
you know I really hope that these are not true but thinking it is California I am going to say TRUE
I don't know, but I like #1 the best.
Does quoting from holy books in archaic language give people a (false!) feeling of authority over others?
Cursed be he that smiteth his neighbour secretly. And all the people shall say, Amen.Does quoting from holy books in archaic language give people a (false!) feeling of authority over others?
thay seem to think so to me its just loads of jiberish so when are thay gowing to print it in proper english instead of all that ye oldie englishDoes quoting from holy books in archaic language give people a (false!) feeling of authority over others?
If you ask a question on sport, would it not make more sense if i told you the rules using the rule book rather than me just ranting and raving about anything?
That way peoples Holy Books are simply rule books on how to lead a thier lives.
Claiming arcane knowledge is an ancient - and pathetic - way of claiming power and/or prestige. Such pseuds are best ignored.
Yes. They like to tell you which paragraph and line it's on. I can do the same with the Playboy, Penthouse and Thomas the Tank at the same time. .
It certainly can for some, but I think the feeling of comfort is probably more common.
Moving away from Latin for services in the Catholic church was controversial, even if it made the rites more comprehensible.
I used regularly to pass a London church which had a large sign saying ';1662 used in all services';. I never quite dared ask them whether this was because they considered the theology of Cranmer to be unsurpassed, or because it was more religious to address God in Jacobean English.
This involves the whole area of ritual, and the sense of cohesion and well-being that it can engender, independently of the language being fully understood.
No one seeking to communicate with modern folk should be using the King James Bible. The English language has moved on since then. (Unless, and only unless, there is something about the sense of the words that really cannot be put any other way. This I doubt.)
I don't know. Let me try:
1. There came one day to Lord Omar, Bull Goose of Limbo, a Messenger of Our Lady who told him of a Sacred Mound wherein was buried an Honest Book.
2. And the Angel of Eris bade of the Lord: Go ye hence and dig the Truth, that ye may come to know it and, knowing it, spread it and, spreading it, wallow in it and, wallowing in it, lie in it and, lying in the Truth, become a Poet of the Word and a Sayer of Sayings -- an Inspiration to all men and a Scribe to the Gods.
3. So Omar went forth to the Sacred Mound, which was to the East of Mullah, and thereupon he worked digging in the sand for five days and five nights, but found no book.
4. At the end of five days and five nights of digging, it came to pass that Omar was exhausted. So he put his shovel to one side and bedded himself down on the sand, using as a pillow a Golden Chest he had uncovered on the first day of his labors.
5. Omar slept.
6. On the fifth day of his sleeping, Lord Omar fell into a Trance, and there came to him in the Trance a Dream, and there came to him in the Dream a Messenger of Our Lady who told him of a Sacred Grove wherein was hidden a Golden Chest.
7. And the Angel of Eris bade of the Lord: Go ye hence and lift the Stash, that ye may come to own it and, owning it, share it and, sharing it, love in it and, loving in it, dwell in it and, dwelling in the Stash, become a Poet of the Word and a Sayer of Sayings -- an Inspiration to all men and a Scribe to the Gods.
8. But Omar lamented, saying unto the Angel: What is this ****, man? What care I for the Word and Sayings? What care I for the Inspiration of all men? Wherein does it profit a man to be a Scribe to the Gods when the Scribes of the Governments do nothing, yet are paid better wages?
9. And, lo, the Angel waxed in anger and Omar was stricken to the Ground by an Invisible Hand and did not arise for five days and five nights.
10. And it came to pass that on the fifth night he dreamt, and in his Dream he had a Vision, and in this Vision there came unto him a Messenger of Our Lady who entrusted to him a Rigoletto cigar box containing many filing cards, some of them in packs with rubber bands around, and upon these cards were sometimes written verses, while upon others nothing was written.
11. Thereupon the Angel Commanded to Lord: Take ye this Honest Book of Truth to thine bosom and cherish it. Carry it forth into The Land and Lay it before Kings of Nations and Collectors of Garbage. Preach from it unto the Righteous, that they may renounce their ways and repent. (HBT, Book of Explanations, Ch.1)
Hmm, not really. But it's easier than writing out an answer...perhaps I have struck upon something...
quoting from holy books in general seems to give ppl this sense of authority and superiority over others. in my opinion ppl should do their own thinking, and quote their own crap, then, only then they have all the right to have this false sense of ';authority'; over others, and maybe gain a little respect from ppl.
Vanitas, vanitatum, omnes es vanitas...
some times the translations do not give the meaning and in the ofitiol translations some times the persone who translate could hide somthings , i wander how moslems will translait this ( i coped that from quran sorat al tahreem التحريم 12 aya12 ) : وَمَرْيم ابْنَتَ عِمْرانَ الّتي أحصَنَت فَرْجَها فَنَفَخْنا فِيهِ
مِنْ رُوحِنا وَصَدَّقت بِكَلِماتِ رَبّها وَكُتُبهِ وَكانَتْ مِنَ الْقانِتين
it sayes that alla has blowed in marrys vgaina to berth jesuss
the polite translation for the world (فرج) (farj ) is vgaina , we cant say hear in the country i am in the world farj coz thats not polite
sorry for my bad english
I have heard plenty of people do the same with literature that they have memorized and don't try and understand. Whether they are in an archaic language or not (like Homer being in Greek) really has little to do with it. I think there are just a lot of people that memorize things and spout them out thinking it backs up what they are saying. At the same time there it is an effective tool to use other thoughts, be them biblical or literary to make ones point. Personally I am just as likely to quote modern culture as I am use, well the Bible in my case as a Christian. Well using quotations they don't understand may give some people a false sense of authority it also seems that going on Yahoo Answers and trying to demean people's beliefs gives others an equally false sense of authority.
No it just gives the feeling that your mentally challenged....
I don't know
Yes and another way is to stand on a cake tin, to get the extra 5 inches of authority.
Hello,
In my opinion its not so much that quoting such texts gives them a feeling of authority, more a sense of superiority perhaps?. Why! because they are hoping that by quoting from their holli texts or sacred book/s you the unbeliever will heard or see their trueth.
**I have been exploring my own spirituality for the last 27years %26amp; I have yet to meet any fundamentalist, or religious, or holli person that could convince me that their views would change my life for the better or enrich my being. Thus I have come full circle %26amp; back to being an Atheist.
**Such fundamentalists or people of faith feel a strong need to convince themselves %26amp; others of their views. This tends to suggest that they dont feel secure at a deep level in their so called beliefs.
In other words they quote texts to convince others %26amp; themselves of what they are trying to believe in, even if they know its not based on anything real or anything that would stand up to logical analysis or scientific methods of research. i.e. show me the actual evdience for what you believe in then? Dont just tell me its true because its written in a book.
IR
We praise Allah for the succour He has given us in carrying out His obedience and in preventing us from disobedience, and we ask Him to complete His favours (to us) and to make us hold on to His rope. We stand witness that Muhammad is His slave and His Messenger. He entered every hardship in search of Allah's pleasure and
endured for its sake every grief. His near relations changed themselves for him and those who were remote from him (in relationship) united against him. The Arabs let loose the reins (of their horses to quicken their march) against him, and struck the bellies of their carriers to (rouse them) in fighting against him, so much so that enemies came to
his threshold from the remotest places and most distant areas.
I advise you, O' creatures of Allah, to fear Allah and I warn you of the hypocrites, because they are themselves misguided and misguide others, and they have slipped and make others slip too. They change into many colours, and adopt various ways. They support you with all sorts of supports, and lay in waiting for you at every lookout. Their hearts are diseased while their faces are clean. They walk stealthily and tread like the approach of sickness (over the body). Their words speak of cure, but their acts are like incurable diseases. They are jealous of ease, intensify distress, and destroy hopes. Their victims are found lying down on every path, while they have means to approach every heart and they have (false) tears for every grief.
They eulogise each other and expect reward from each other. When they ask something they insist on it, if they reprove (any one) they disgrace (him), and if they pass verdict they commit excess. They have adopted for every truth a wrong way, for every erect thing a bender, for every living being a killer, for every (closed) door a key and for every night a lamp. They covet, but with despair, in order to maintain with it their markets, and to popularise their handsome merchandise. When they speak they create doubts. When they describe they exaggerate. First they offer easy paths but (afterwards) they make them narrow. In short, they are the party of Satan and the stings of fire.
Satan hath gained hold on them, so he maketh them forget the remembrance of Allah; they are Satan's Party; Beware! verily, the party of Satan are the losers. (Qur'an, 58:19)
thay seem to think so to me its just loads of jiberish so when are thay gowing to print it in proper english instead of all that ye oldie englishDoes quoting from holy books in archaic language give people a (false!) feeling of authority over others?
If you ask a question on sport, would it not make more sense if i told you the rules using the rule book rather than me just ranting and raving about anything?
That way peoples Holy Books are simply rule books on how to lead a thier lives.
Claiming arcane knowledge is an ancient - and pathetic - way of claiming power and/or prestige. Such pseuds are best ignored.
Yes. They like to tell you which paragraph and line it's on. I can do the same with the Playboy, Penthouse and Thomas the Tank at the same time. .
It certainly can for some, but I think the feeling of comfort is probably more common.
Moving away from Latin for services in the Catholic church was controversial, even if it made the rites more comprehensible.
I used regularly to pass a London church which had a large sign saying ';1662 used in all services';. I never quite dared ask them whether this was because they considered the theology of Cranmer to be unsurpassed, or because it was more religious to address God in Jacobean English.
This involves the whole area of ritual, and the sense of cohesion and well-being that it can engender, independently of the language being fully understood.
No one seeking to communicate with modern folk should be using the King James Bible. The English language has moved on since then. (Unless, and only unless, there is something about the sense of the words that really cannot be put any other way. This I doubt.)
I don't know. Let me try:
1. There came one day to Lord Omar, Bull Goose of Limbo, a Messenger of Our Lady who told him of a Sacred Mound wherein was buried an Honest Book.
2. And the Angel of Eris bade of the Lord: Go ye hence and dig the Truth, that ye may come to know it and, knowing it, spread it and, spreading it, wallow in it and, wallowing in it, lie in it and, lying in the Truth, become a Poet of the Word and a Sayer of Sayings -- an Inspiration to all men and a Scribe to the Gods.
3. So Omar went forth to the Sacred Mound, which was to the East of Mullah, and thereupon he worked digging in the sand for five days and five nights, but found no book.
4. At the end of five days and five nights of digging, it came to pass that Omar was exhausted. So he put his shovel to one side and bedded himself down on the sand, using as a pillow a Golden Chest he had uncovered on the first day of his labors.
5. Omar slept.
6. On the fifth day of his sleeping, Lord Omar fell into a Trance, and there came to him in the Trance a Dream, and there came to him in the Dream a Messenger of Our Lady who told him of a Sacred Grove wherein was hidden a Golden Chest.
7. And the Angel of Eris bade of the Lord: Go ye hence and lift the Stash, that ye may come to own it and, owning it, share it and, sharing it, love in it and, loving in it, dwell in it and, dwelling in the Stash, become a Poet of the Word and a Sayer of Sayings -- an Inspiration to all men and a Scribe to the Gods.
8. But Omar lamented, saying unto the Angel: What is this ****, man? What care I for the Word and Sayings? What care I for the Inspiration of all men? Wherein does it profit a man to be a Scribe to the Gods when the Scribes of the Governments do nothing, yet are paid better wages?
9. And, lo, the Angel waxed in anger and Omar was stricken to the Ground by an Invisible Hand and did not arise for five days and five nights.
10. And it came to pass that on the fifth night he dreamt, and in his Dream he had a Vision, and in this Vision there came unto him a Messenger of Our Lady who entrusted to him a Rigoletto cigar box containing many filing cards, some of them in packs with rubber bands around, and upon these cards were sometimes written verses, while upon others nothing was written.
11. Thereupon the Angel Commanded to Lord: Take ye this Honest Book of Truth to thine bosom and cherish it. Carry it forth into The Land and Lay it before Kings of Nations and Collectors of Garbage. Preach from it unto the Righteous, that they may renounce their ways and repent. (HBT, Book of Explanations, Ch.1)
Hmm, not really. But it's easier than writing out an answer...perhaps I have struck upon something...
quoting from holy books in general seems to give ppl this sense of authority and superiority over others. in my opinion ppl should do their own thinking, and quote their own crap, then, only then they have all the right to have this false sense of ';authority'; over others, and maybe gain a little respect from ppl.
Vanitas, vanitatum, omnes es vanitas...
some times the translations do not give the meaning and in the ofitiol translations some times the persone who translate could hide somthings , i wander how moslems will translait this ( i coped that from quran sorat al tahreem التحريم 12 aya12 ) : وَمَرْيم ابْنَتَ عِمْرانَ الّتي أحصَنَت فَرْجَها فَنَفَخْنا فِيهِ
مِنْ رُوحِنا وَصَدَّقت بِكَلِماتِ رَبّها وَكُتُبهِ وَكانَتْ مِنَ الْقانِتين
it sayes that alla has blowed in marrys vgaina to berth jesuss
the polite translation for the world (فرج) (farj ) is vgaina , we cant say hear in the country i am in the world farj coz thats not polite
sorry for my bad english
I have heard plenty of people do the same with literature that they have memorized and don't try and understand. Whether they are in an archaic language or not (like Homer being in Greek) really has little to do with it. I think there are just a lot of people that memorize things and spout them out thinking it backs up what they are saying. At the same time there it is an effective tool to use other thoughts, be them biblical or literary to make ones point. Personally I am just as likely to quote modern culture as I am use, well the Bible in my case as a Christian. Well using quotations they don't understand may give some people a false sense of authority it also seems that going on Yahoo Answers and trying to demean people's beliefs gives others an equally false sense of authority.
No it just gives the feeling that your mentally challenged....
I don't know
Yes and another way is to stand on a cake tin, to get the extra 5 inches of authority.
Hello,
In my opinion its not so much that quoting such texts gives them a feeling of authority, more a sense of superiority perhaps?. Why! because they are hoping that by quoting from their holli texts or sacred book/s you the unbeliever will heard or see their trueth.
**I have been exploring my own spirituality for the last 27years %26amp; I have yet to meet any fundamentalist, or religious, or holli person that could convince me that their views would change my life for the better or enrich my being. Thus I have come full circle %26amp; back to being an Atheist.
**Such fundamentalists or people of faith feel a strong need to convince themselves %26amp; others of their views. This tends to suggest that they dont feel secure at a deep level in their so called beliefs.
In other words they quote texts to convince others %26amp; themselves of what they are trying to believe in, even if they know its not based on anything real or anything that would stand up to logical analysis or scientific methods of research. i.e. show me the actual evdience for what you believe in then? Dont just tell me its true because its written in a book.
IR
We praise Allah for the succour He has given us in carrying out His obedience and in preventing us from disobedience, and we ask Him to complete His favours (to us) and to make us hold on to His rope. We stand witness that Muhammad is His slave and His Messenger. He entered every hardship in search of Allah's pleasure and
endured for its sake every grief. His near relations changed themselves for him and those who were remote from him (in relationship) united against him. The Arabs let loose the reins (of their horses to quicken their march) against him, and struck the bellies of their carriers to (rouse them) in fighting against him, so much so that enemies came to
his threshold from the remotest places and most distant areas.
I advise you, O' creatures of Allah, to fear Allah and I warn you of the hypocrites, because they are themselves misguided and misguide others, and they have slipped and make others slip too. They change into many colours, and adopt various ways. They support you with all sorts of supports, and lay in waiting for you at every lookout. Their hearts are diseased while their faces are clean. They walk stealthily and tread like the approach of sickness (over the body). Their words speak of cure, but their acts are like incurable diseases. They are jealous of ease, intensify distress, and destroy hopes. Their victims are found lying down on every path, while they have means to approach every heart and they have (false) tears for every grief.
They eulogise each other and expect reward from each other. When they ask something they insist on it, if they reprove (any one) they disgrace (him), and if they pass verdict they commit excess. They have adopted for every truth a wrong way, for every erect thing a bender, for every living being a killer, for every (closed) door a key and for every night a lamp. They covet, but with despair, in order to maintain with it their markets, and to popularise their handsome merchandise. When they speak they create doubts. When they describe they exaggerate. First they offer easy paths but (afterwards) they make them narrow. In short, they are the party of Satan and the stings of fire.
Satan hath gained hold on them, so he maketh them forget the remembrance of Allah; they are Satan's Party; Beware! verily, the party of Satan are the losers. (Qur'an, 58:19)
Why do Jews, Christians, & Muslims, follow a calendar that uses false gods even though their Books forbid it?
In Mark 12:29, Jesus affirms the First Commandment revealed to Moses: “The first of all commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our GOD is one Lord.”
In the 2nd Book of Moses (Ex. 23:13), GOD commands: “Do not even mention the names of other gods”.
The Qur’an informs the Children of Israel it confirms the Truth existing in the Torah [Q2v41].
Muslims are commanded to reject “taghut” (false worship) in all its forms [Q4v60], and they say: ';We believe in the scripture sent to Muhammad [saws], and we believe in the scriptures sent to previous prophets.';Why do Jews, Christians, %26amp; Muslims, follow a calendar that uses false gods even though their Books forbid it?
Are you serious? Are Atheist running out of insults? C'mon man, dig deeper.Why do Jews, Christians, %26amp; Muslims, follow a calendar that uses false gods even though their Books forbid it?
as a matter of fact, judaism and islam both have their own calendars that they use. today may be october 8 2006 for you, but for jews it is Tishrei 18, 5767. i'm not sure what the muslim date is.
I know of no one that worships the calendar, nor any part of it. Do you?
Now this takes the cake. It's not harrassing us for going to church on Sunday; not even about eating bacon. It's about a calendar.
Well....at least it's original.
I don't worship my calender.
And I'm smart enough to know the difference between the name of a month and an ancient Diety. It's really not that difficult.
I for one do not follow any false gods.
Which gods are in the calander? Just Tammuz, and since no one worships it anymore, it's OK.
I think you need to make yourself a bit more clear, to have this question make any sense.
Actually, I think the Jews follow their own calendar since they are in the 5400s, and I think the Muslims are in the 600s or 700s. As far as the other goes, I rather doubt very many people know who the months are named for. I know the days are named for a combination of Norse gods and goddesses and Roman gods and goddesses, but seeing how I don't PRAY to any of them, I don't see the problem.
The Muslim Calendar.
Muslims follow the lunar calendar. This means they have twelve months of 29 days, 12 hours, 44 minutes each. The Muslim year is eleven days shorter than the solar year. As a result, Muslim months and holidays are not seasonal and rotate throughout the solar calendar year. The Muslim calendar is dated from the time of Muhammad's moving from Mecca to Medina - the ';Hegira'; -- and is designated by the letters A.H. (After the Hegira). Muslims living in Western countries that follow the solar Gregorian calendar usually keep both set of dates.
Why do Muslims follow the lunar calendar instead of the solar calendar?
Answer:
1. As per the Solar calendar, every year the months fall in the same respective seasons of that location. For example, the months of March, April and May in India will always have summer, while July, August, September will always have monsoons i.e. rains in western India. November, December and January will always have winter.
2. In the lunar calendar in different years the months fall in a different season.
The lunar calendar has about 11 days less than the solar calendar. Thus, every year, the month of the lunar calendar occurs 11 days prior to what it had occurred in the previous solar year. Thus, in a span of about 33 lunar years a human being will experience all the different seasons for one particular month of the lunar calendar. This is very important because the yearly activities of a Muslim are based on the lunar calendar. Certain months like Ramadhan and Hajj are very important to the Muslims. During Ramadhan a Muslim has to fast which includes abstaining from food and drink from sunrise to sunset. If the Islamic months were based on the solar calendar where the seasons were fixed, then people living in certain parts of the world would have Ramadhan in summer while in other parts of the world it would be winter. Some Muslims would have to fast for a longer period of time where the days are long while other Muslims would have to fast for shorter period of time where the days are short. If the seasons did not change, then Muslims living in some parts of the world may feel that they are at a disadvantage throughout their lives.
By following the lunar calendar, every Muslim has a taste of fasting in different seasons and for a different time period, in a span of his life.
as for me -- for this world i follow the solar calender and for my Afterlife i follow Lunar calender. this is 1427th year of Lunar Calender.
This is a good question.
Rabbis have discussed it before and the conclusion was reached that if the name is divorced from any actual notion of the entity as a god then it's fine. (think about it, most people probably don't even know that january is from Janus etc.. etc..)
(But its also true that for that reason many jews try to only use the hebrew calandar as much as possible.)
cheerio
Agreed. Most people are ignorant that the days and months are named after pagan gods and goddess.
In the 2nd Book of Moses (Ex. 23:13), GOD commands: “Do not even mention the names of other gods”.
The Qur’an informs the Children of Israel it confirms the Truth existing in the Torah [Q2v41].
Muslims are commanded to reject “taghut” (false worship) in all its forms [Q4v60], and they say: ';We believe in the scripture sent to Muhammad [saws], and we believe in the scriptures sent to previous prophets.';Why do Jews, Christians, %26amp; Muslims, follow a calendar that uses false gods even though their Books forbid it?
Are you serious? Are Atheist running out of insults? C'mon man, dig deeper.Why do Jews, Christians, %26amp; Muslims, follow a calendar that uses false gods even though their Books forbid it?
as a matter of fact, judaism and islam both have their own calendars that they use. today may be october 8 2006 for you, but for jews it is Tishrei 18, 5767. i'm not sure what the muslim date is.
I know of no one that worships the calendar, nor any part of it. Do you?
Now this takes the cake. It's not harrassing us for going to church on Sunday; not even about eating bacon. It's about a calendar.
Well....at least it's original.
I don't worship my calender.
And I'm smart enough to know the difference between the name of a month and an ancient Diety. It's really not that difficult.
I for one do not follow any false gods.
Which gods are in the calander? Just Tammuz, and since no one worships it anymore, it's OK.
I think you need to make yourself a bit more clear, to have this question make any sense.
Actually, I think the Jews follow their own calendar since they are in the 5400s, and I think the Muslims are in the 600s or 700s. As far as the other goes, I rather doubt very many people know who the months are named for. I know the days are named for a combination of Norse gods and goddesses and Roman gods and goddesses, but seeing how I don't PRAY to any of them, I don't see the problem.
The Muslim Calendar.
Muslims follow the lunar calendar. This means they have twelve months of 29 days, 12 hours, 44 minutes each. The Muslim year is eleven days shorter than the solar year. As a result, Muslim months and holidays are not seasonal and rotate throughout the solar calendar year. The Muslim calendar is dated from the time of Muhammad's moving from Mecca to Medina - the ';Hegira'; -- and is designated by the letters A.H. (After the Hegira). Muslims living in Western countries that follow the solar Gregorian calendar usually keep both set of dates.
Why do Muslims follow the lunar calendar instead of the solar calendar?
Answer:
1. As per the Solar calendar, every year the months fall in the same respective seasons of that location. For example, the months of March, April and May in India will always have summer, while July, August, September will always have monsoons i.e. rains in western India. November, December and January will always have winter.
2. In the lunar calendar in different years the months fall in a different season.
The lunar calendar has about 11 days less than the solar calendar. Thus, every year, the month of the lunar calendar occurs 11 days prior to what it had occurred in the previous solar year. Thus, in a span of about 33 lunar years a human being will experience all the different seasons for one particular month of the lunar calendar. This is very important because the yearly activities of a Muslim are based on the lunar calendar. Certain months like Ramadhan and Hajj are very important to the Muslims. During Ramadhan a Muslim has to fast which includes abstaining from food and drink from sunrise to sunset. If the Islamic months were based on the solar calendar where the seasons were fixed, then people living in certain parts of the world would have Ramadhan in summer while in other parts of the world it would be winter. Some Muslims would have to fast for a longer period of time where the days are long while other Muslims would have to fast for shorter period of time where the days are short. If the seasons did not change, then Muslims living in some parts of the world may feel that they are at a disadvantage throughout their lives.
By following the lunar calendar, every Muslim has a taste of fasting in different seasons and for a different time period, in a span of his life.
as for me -- for this world i follow the solar calender and for my Afterlife i follow Lunar calender. this is 1427th year of Lunar Calender.
This is a good question.
Rabbis have discussed it before and the conclusion was reached that if the name is divorced from any actual notion of the entity as a god then it's fine. (think about it, most people probably don't even know that january is from Janus etc.. etc..)
(But its also true that for that reason many jews try to only use the hebrew calandar as much as possible.)
cheerio
Agreed. Most people are ignorant that the days and months are named after pagan gods and goddess.
Is this true or false regarding the writer of harry potter books?
Is this true or false regarding the writer of harry potter books?
that the author j.k. rowling wrote one of the books on napkins?Is this true or false regarding the writer of harry potter books?
I don't think any book that is hundreds of pages long was written on a napkin.Is this true or false regarding the writer of harry potter books?
What does this have to do with dating?
Yes, it is true, as a matter of fact, I believe she was a homeless person when she created these Harry Potter characters.
Yes, her first book--she was writing on napkins and stuff as the ideas came to her, as she was working as a waitress, etc.
no wonder there's a napkin shortage in our city.
If she did, good for her because she's loaded now. Like or close to Oprah.
false. I read it in one of her interviews. She had paper, she said
thanks for the 2 points.. %26amp; by the way ur question is in the wrong section...
True she was a poor homeless women going around to reasaurants and writing on napkins however i don't think it was a whole book. Now she is the 2nd to richest woman in the world(Oprah is the richest) and she is 3 times richer than the Queen of England
She probably did, good thing I wasn't there, I probably would have blown my nose in it and the rest, as they say, would be history!
Why the hell did you include your question in ';Singles and Dating';?
a part of it.
i think it might be true i do know that after she wrote the 1st book and it sold she wrote the 7th book
She didn't write a WHOLE book on a napkin. She jotted down initial ideas for the series on a napkin.
why the hell does it matter? its still going to come out as a book
check out the official j. k. rowling website for all your j.k. questions or to find out harry potter stuff. p.s. some really cool games there once you figure out how to access them..
I have found an interview with J.K Rowling.
In this interview she is asked about a book on napkins. She laughed and denied it.
http://www.scholastic.com/harrypotter/au鈥?/a>
True. I heard she wrote on napkins on a train ride.car loan
that the author j.k. rowling wrote one of the books on napkins?Is this true or false regarding the writer of harry potter books?
I don't think any book that is hundreds of pages long was written on a napkin.Is this true or false regarding the writer of harry potter books?
What does this have to do with dating?
Yes, it is true, as a matter of fact, I believe she was a homeless person when she created these Harry Potter characters.
Yes, her first book--she was writing on napkins and stuff as the ideas came to her, as she was working as a waitress, etc.
no wonder there's a napkin shortage in our city.
If she did, good for her because she's loaded now. Like or close to Oprah.
false. I read it in one of her interviews. She had paper, she said
thanks for the 2 points.. %26amp; by the way ur question is in the wrong section...
True she was a poor homeless women going around to reasaurants and writing on napkins however i don't think it was a whole book. Now she is the 2nd to richest woman in the world(Oprah is the richest) and she is 3 times richer than the Queen of England
She probably did, good thing I wasn't there, I probably would have blown my nose in it and the rest, as they say, would be history!
Why the hell did you include your question in ';Singles and Dating';?
a part of it.
i think it might be true i do know that after she wrote the 1st book and it sold she wrote the 7th book
She didn't write a WHOLE book on a napkin. She jotted down initial ideas for the series on a napkin.
why the hell does it matter? its still going to come out as a book
check out the official j. k. rowling website for all your j.k. questions or to find out harry potter stuff. p.s. some really cool games there once you figure out how to access them..
I have found an interview with J.K Rowling.
In this interview she is asked about a book on napkins. She laughed and denied it.
http://www.scholastic.com/harrypotter/au鈥?/a>
True. I heard she wrote on napkins on a train ride.
Books are writen on why religion is false?
What do these people have to offer? Appart from hot air!
Do you have something better to offer?Books are writen on why religion is false?
Well, some of these people offer a rational consideration of various religions and explain why they think they are wrong. They are offering their opinion which you can accept or reject.
Many of them do this because they think that people who believe in religion are being deceived, albeit by sincere people who are genuinely mistaken, or sometimes even lied to.
They are trying to help you to have a better understanding of life, the universe and everything. Please note though: not all claim to have all the answers.
Anna.
';I've heard it said that if you scratch the surface of an atheist, you often find anger and resentment over some past experience, more than cogent reasons for their non belief. Some of the books of this type I've read are exercises in catharsis or ';payback';--they are busy shocking the vicar, their parents, or someone else in their head.';
This may be true of some writers, I don't know. But I think that many people called atheist do not actively hold reasons not to believe, but rather they lack a reason to believe.
You wouldn't expect me to have a cogent reason NOT to believe in pixies, goblins, trolls or the man in the moon, would you?Books are writen on why religion is false?
Something better than religion? How about 'not religion'? It's like 'not poison' is better than poison.
Reason.
They have nothing.
they think they are being cool and controversial.
A man needs to earn a shilling. If people buy it write it.
Erm...why do you think religion is true?
oh yes thats right! Because it is written in a book!
Can you see the hypocrisy within your statement? Probably not because religion tries to ignore blatant hypocrisy
They have to offer the truth unlike the hot air that religionists seem to spout all the time.
Really I think they'd have better things to do with their time than to try and push their god agenda wherever they went.
Looks like your full of hot air too.
I've heard it said that if you scratch the surface of an atheist, you often find anger and resentment over some past experience, more than cogent reasons for their nonbelief. Some of the books of this type I've read are exercises in catharsis or ';payback';--they are busy shocking the vicar, their parents, or someone else in their head.
I definitely have something better to offer: Peace, Joy, Compassion, Love, Forgiveness (of self and others), Healing (of traumas, fears etc as well as some physical illness in my own experience), Kindness, Faithfulness, Self-control, Freedom from one's past, fears, and phobias....I could go on and on.
Of course *I* can't give you these things myself, and I don't claim to, but they are available free for the asking from Jesus Christ.
they were written by religions scholars.they have to keep
faith of followers and religions.
All religion is false only faith in our Lord Jesus who died on the cross for all mankind, is the true and only way. To have Jesus as a personal saviour and friend is a wonderful thing. Unless you have this then it is diificult to understand what it is like. I can only say ask Jesus into your life personally.
yes, facts rather than fantasy.
Only two contradictions of the New Testament have been mentioned, but others will be referenced when the Trinity, Divinity of Jesus Christ, Divine Sonship of Jesus, Original Sin and Atonement are reviewed.
How could the ';inspired words'; of God get the genealogy of Jesus incorrect (See Matthew 1:6-16 where it states 26 forefathers up to Prophet David, and Luke 3:23-31 says 41 in number). Or for that matter, give a genealogy to Jesus who had NO father? See II Kings 19:1-37, now read Isaiah 37:1-38. Why is it that the words of these verse are identical? Yet they have been attributed to two different authors, one unknown and the other is Isaiah, who are centuries apart; and yet, the Christians have claimed these books to be inspired by God.
I looked up the word Easter in the Nelson Bible dictionary and learned that the word ';Easter'; (as mentioned in Acts 12:4) is a mistranslation of ';pascha,'; the ordinary Greek word for ';Passover.'; As, you know Passover is a Jewish celebration not a Christian holiday. I think human hands, all to human, had played havoc with the Bible.
From the brief points mentioned above, and the fact that Biblical scholars themselves have recognized the human nature and human composition of the Bible (Curt Kuhl, The Old Testament: Its Origin and Composition, PP 47, 51, 52), there should exist in the Christian鈥檚 mind some acceptance to the fact that maybe every word of the Bible is not God鈥檚 word.
As a side note to this subject, let me mention that some Christians believe that the Bible was dictated to Prophet Muhammad (SAW) by a Christian monk, and that is why some of the biblical accounts are in the Quran. After some research, I found that this could not have happened because there were no Arabic Bible in existence in the 6th century of the Christian era when Muhammad (SAW) lived and preached. Therefore, no Arab, not even Prophet Muhammad (SAW) who was absolutely unlettered and unlearned, would have had the opportunity to examine the written text of the Bible in his own language.
What is According to:
Christians, as I once did, boast about the Gospels according to Matthew, according to Mark, according to Luke and according to John. However, if we think about it, there is not a single Gospel according to Jesus himself. According to the preface of the KJV (King James Version) new open Bible study edition, the word ';Gospel'; was added (see below) to the original titles, ';According to John, according to Matthew, according to Luke and according to Mark.';
If you read Luke 1:2-3, you will learn, as I did, that Luke (who was not one of the 12 disciples and never met Jesus) said that he himself was not an eyewitness, and the knowledge he gathered was from eyewitnesses, and not as words inspired by God. Incidentally, why does every ';Gospel'; begin with the introduction According to. Why ';according to?'; the reason for this is because not a single one of the gospels carries its original author鈥檚 autograph! Even the internal evidence of Matthew 9:9 proves that Matthew was not the author of the first Gospel which bears his name:
';And as Jesus passed forth thence, He (Jesus) saw a man, named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and He (Jesus) saith unto Him (Matthew), follow me (Jesus). And he (Matthew) arose, and followed Him (Jesus).';
Without any stretch of the imagination, one can see that the He鈥檚 and the Him鈥檚 of the above narration do not refer to Jesus or Matthew as its author, but a third person writing what he saw or heard - a hearsay account and not words inspired by God.
Who wrote the gospels?
It is worth noting, and well known throughout the religious world, that the choice of the present four ';gospels'; of the New Testament (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) were imposed in the Council of Nicea 325 CE for political purposes under the auspices of the pagan Emperor Constantine, and not by Jesus. Constantine鈥檚 mind had not been enlightened either by study or by inspiration. He was a pagan, a tyrant and criminal who murdered his son, his wife and thousands of innocent individuals because of his lust for political power. Constantine ratified other decisions in the Nicene Creed such as the decision to call Christ ';the Son of God, only begotten of the father.';
Literally, hundreds of gospels and religious writings were hidden from the people. Some of those writings were written by Jesus鈥?disciples, and many of them were eyewitness accounts of Jesus鈥?actions. The Nicea Council decided to destroy all gospels written in Hebrew, which resulted in the burning of nearly three hundred accounts. If these writings were not more authentic than the four present gospels, they were of equal authenticity. Some of them are still available such as the Gospel of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas which agree with the Quran. The Gospel of Barnabas, until now, is the only eyewitness account of the life and mission of Jesus. Even today, the whole of the Protestant word, Jehovah鈥檚 Witnesses, Seventh Day Adventists and other sects and denominations condemn the Roman Catholic version of the Bible because it contains seven ';extra'; books. The Protestant have bravely expunged seven whole books from their word of God. A few of the outcasts are the Books of Judith, Tobnias, Baruch and Esther.
The permission to call ';According to'; writings the Gospel was not given by Jesus nor by any other divine guidance. These writings; Matthew, Luke, Mark and John, were never originally to be the Gospel. Therefore, Mark 1:1 can not be a true statement that his writing is the gospel of Jesus.
Which Gospel is Gospel of Jesus?
Concerning Jesus鈥?teachings of the Gospel (Injeel), the Gospel writers frequently mentioned Jesus preaching the Gospel: Matthew 9:35, Mark 8:35, and Luke 20:1. The word ';gospel'; is recurrently used in the Bible. However, in the New Testament Greek edition the word Evangeline is used in place of the word gospel, which is translated to mean good news. My question was: what Gospel did Jesus preach? Of the 27 books of the New Testament, only a small fraction can be accepted as the words of Jesus, and only of the 27 books are known to be attributed as the Gospel of Jesus. The remaining 23 were supposedly written by Paul. Muslims do believe that Jesus was given God鈥檚 ';Good News.'; However, they do not recognized the present four Gospels as the utterances of Jesus.
Mark and Luke are not found in the biblical list of 12 disciples.
The earliest Gospel is that of Mark鈥檚 which was written about 60-75 AD. Mark was the son of Barnabas鈥檚 sister. Matthew was a tax collector, a minor official who did not travel around with Jesus. Luke鈥檚 Gospel was written much later, and in fact, drawn from the same sources as Mark鈥檚 and Matthew鈥檚. Luke was Paul鈥檚 physician, and like Paul, never met Jesus. By the way, did you know that the names Marks and Luke were not included in the 12 appointed disciples of Jesus as mentioned in Matthew 10:2-4?
Now the names of the twelve apostles are these; the first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother; Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus; Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.
What are Original scriptures
It should be mentioned that Muslims must believe in all Divine scriptures in their original form, their Prophets and making no distinction between them: The Suhuf (Abraham); Torah (Moses); Psalms (David); Gospel - or the Injeel (Jesus); and the Quran (Muhammad). It is clearly stated in the Quran 3:3 that Allah sent down the Torah and the Gospel. However, none of these scriptures remains in its original form now, except the Quran, which was sent for all mankind everywhere and for all times.
Do you have something better to offer?Books are writen on why religion is false?
Well, some of these people offer a rational consideration of various religions and explain why they think they are wrong. They are offering their opinion which you can accept or reject.
Many of them do this because they think that people who believe in religion are being deceived, albeit by sincere people who are genuinely mistaken, or sometimes even lied to.
They are trying to help you to have a better understanding of life, the universe and everything. Please note though: not all claim to have all the answers.
Anna.
';I've heard it said that if you scratch the surface of an atheist, you often find anger and resentment over some past experience, more than cogent reasons for their non belief. Some of the books of this type I've read are exercises in catharsis or ';payback';--they are busy shocking the vicar, their parents, or someone else in their head.';
This may be true of some writers, I don't know. But I think that many people called atheist do not actively hold reasons not to believe, but rather they lack a reason to believe.
You wouldn't expect me to have a cogent reason NOT to believe in pixies, goblins, trolls or the man in the moon, would you?Books are writen on why religion is false?
Something better than religion? How about 'not religion'? It's like 'not poison' is better than poison.
Reason.
They have nothing.
they think they are being cool and controversial.
A man needs to earn a shilling. If people buy it write it.
Erm...why do you think religion is true?
oh yes thats right! Because it is written in a book!
Can you see the hypocrisy within your statement? Probably not because religion tries to ignore blatant hypocrisy
They have to offer the truth unlike the hot air that religionists seem to spout all the time.
Really I think they'd have better things to do with their time than to try and push their god agenda wherever they went.
Looks like your full of hot air too.
I've heard it said that if you scratch the surface of an atheist, you often find anger and resentment over some past experience, more than cogent reasons for their nonbelief. Some of the books of this type I've read are exercises in catharsis or ';payback';--they are busy shocking the vicar, their parents, or someone else in their head.
I definitely have something better to offer: Peace, Joy, Compassion, Love, Forgiveness (of self and others), Healing (of traumas, fears etc as well as some physical illness in my own experience), Kindness, Faithfulness, Self-control, Freedom from one's past, fears, and phobias....I could go on and on.
Of course *I* can't give you these things myself, and I don't claim to, but they are available free for the asking from Jesus Christ.
they were written by religions scholars.they have to keep
faith of followers and religions.
All religion is false only faith in our Lord Jesus who died on the cross for all mankind, is the true and only way. To have Jesus as a personal saviour and friend is a wonderful thing. Unless you have this then it is diificult to understand what it is like. I can only say ask Jesus into your life personally.
yes, facts rather than fantasy.
Only two contradictions of the New Testament have been mentioned, but others will be referenced when the Trinity, Divinity of Jesus Christ, Divine Sonship of Jesus, Original Sin and Atonement are reviewed.
How could the ';inspired words'; of God get the genealogy of Jesus incorrect (See Matthew 1:6-16 where it states 26 forefathers up to Prophet David, and Luke 3:23-31 says 41 in number). Or for that matter, give a genealogy to Jesus who had NO father? See II Kings 19:1-37, now read Isaiah 37:1-38. Why is it that the words of these verse are identical? Yet they have been attributed to two different authors, one unknown and the other is Isaiah, who are centuries apart; and yet, the Christians have claimed these books to be inspired by God.
I looked up the word Easter in the Nelson Bible dictionary and learned that the word ';Easter'; (as mentioned in Acts 12:4) is a mistranslation of ';pascha,'; the ordinary Greek word for ';Passover.'; As, you know Passover is a Jewish celebration not a Christian holiday. I think human hands, all to human, had played havoc with the Bible.
From the brief points mentioned above, and the fact that Biblical scholars themselves have recognized the human nature and human composition of the Bible (Curt Kuhl, The Old Testament: Its Origin and Composition, PP 47, 51, 52), there should exist in the Christian鈥檚 mind some acceptance to the fact that maybe every word of the Bible is not God鈥檚 word.
As a side note to this subject, let me mention that some Christians believe that the Bible was dictated to Prophet Muhammad (SAW) by a Christian monk, and that is why some of the biblical accounts are in the Quran. After some research, I found that this could not have happened because there were no Arabic Bible in existence in the 6th century of the Christian era when Muhammad (SAW) lived and preached. Therefore, no Arab, not even Prophet Muhammad (SAW) who was absolutely unlettered and unlearned, would have had the opportunity to examine the written text of the Bible in his own language.
What is According to:
Christians, as I once did, boast about the Gospels according to Matthew, according to Mark, according to Luke and according to John. However, if we think about it, there is not a single Gospel according to Jesus himself. According to the preface of the KJV (King James Version) new open Bible study edition, the word ';Gospel'; was added (see below) to the original titles, ';According to John, according to Matthew, according to Luke and according to Mark.';
If you read Luke 1:2-3, you will learn, as I did, that Luke (who was not one of the 12 disciples and never met Jesus) said that he himself was not an eyewitness, and the knowledge he gathered was from eyewitnesses, and not as words inspired by God. Incidentally, why does every ';Gospel'; begin with the introduction According to. Why ';according to?'; the reason for this is because not a single one of the gospels carries its original author鈥檚 autograph! Even the internal evidence of Matthew 9:9 proves that Matthew was not the author of the first Gospel which bears his name:
';And as Jesus passed forth thence, He (Jesus) saw a man, named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and He (Jesus) saith unto Him (Matthew), follow me (Jesus). And he (Matthew) arose, and followed Him (Jesus).';
Without any stretch of the imagination, one can see that the He鈥檚 and the Him鈥檚 of the above narration do not refer to Jesus or Matthew as its author, but a third person writing what he saw or heard - a hearsay account and not words inspired by God.
Who wrote the gospels?
It is worth noting, and well known throughout the religious world, that the choice of the present four ';gospels'; of the New Testament (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) were imposed in the Council of Nicea 325 CE for political purposes under the auspices of the pagan Emperor Constantine, and not by Jesus. Constantine鈥檚 mind had not been enlightened either by study or by inspiration. He was a pagan, a tyrant and criminal who murdered his son, his wife and thousands of innocent individuals because of his lust for political power. Constantine ratified other decisions in the Nicene Creed such as the decision to call Christ ';the Son of God, only begotten of the father.';
Literally, hundreds of gospels and religious writings were hidden from the people. Some of those writings were written by Jesus鈥?disciples, and many of them were eyewitness accounts of Jesus鈥?actions. The Nicea Council decided to destroy all gospels written in Hebrew, which resulted in the burning of nearly three hundred accounts. If these writings were not more authentic than the four present gospels, they were of equal authenticity. Some of them are still available such as the Gospel of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas which agree with the Quran. The Gospel of Barnabas, until now, is the only eyewitness account of the life and mission of Jesus. Even today, the whole of the Protestant word, Jehovah鈥檚 Witnesses, Seventh Day Adventists and other sects and denominations condemn the Roman Catholic version of the Bible because it contains seven ';extra'; books. The Protestant have bravely expunged seven whole books from their word of God. A few of the outcasts are the Books of Judith, Tobnias, Baruch and Esther.
The permission to call ';According to'; writings the Gospel was not given by Jesus nor by any other divine guidance. These writings; Matthew, Luke, Mark and John, were never originally to be the Gospel. Therefore, Mark 1:1 can not be a true statement that his writing is the gospel of Jesus.
Which Gospel is Gospel of Jesus?
Concerning Jesus鈥?teachings of the Gospel (Injeel), the Gospel writers frequently mentioned Jesus preaching the Gospel: Matthew 9:35, Mark 8:35, and Luke 20:1. The word ';gospel'; is recurrently used in the Bible. However, in the New Testament Greek edition the word Evangeline is used in place of the word gospel, which is translated to mean good news. My question was: what Gospel did Jesus preach? Of the 27 books of the New Testament, only a small fraction can be accepted as the words of Jesus, and only of the 27 books are known to be attributed as the Gospel of Jesus. The remaining 23 were supposedly written by Paul. Muslims do believe that Jesus was given God鈥檚 ';Good News.'; However, they do not recognized the present four Gospels as the utterances of Jesus.
Mark and Luke are not found in the biblical list of 12 disciples.
The earliest Gospel is that of Mark鈥檚 which was written about 60-75 AD. Mark was the son of Barnabas鈥檚 sister. Matthew was a tax collector, a minor official who did not travel around with Jesus. Luke鈥檚 Gospel was written much later, and in fact, drawn from the same sources as Mark鈥檚 and Matthew鈥檚. Luke was Paul鈥檚 physician, and like Paul, never met Jesus. By the way, did you know that the names Marks and Luke were not included in the 12 appointed disciples of Jesus as mentioned in Matthew 10:2-4?
Now the names of the twelve apostles are these; the first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother; Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus; Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.
What are Original scriptures
It should be mentioned that Muslims must believe in all Divine scriptures in their original form, their Prophets and making no distinction between them: The Suhuf (Abraham); Torah (Moses); Psalms (David); Gospel - or the Injeel (Jesus); and the Quran (Muhammad). It is clearly stated in the Quran 3:3 that Allah sent down the Torah and the Gospel. However, none of these scriptures remains in its original form now, except the Quran, which was sent for all mankind everywhere and for all times.
True or false? in the beginng comic books were mostly humorous, made to be funny?
I would say the comic book as it is today was meant as a COMICAL medium. They did use the books as a forum to republish comic strips. Then came Superman and everything afterward changed. Comics became the premiere adventure experience for mostly prepubescent boys. They have continued to where they are now, mainly by providing interesting stories and art created by those that have grow up admiring the stories and art that gave them so much pleasure. Comics have become an exceptional source of fiction, with a large number of movies having being ADAPTED from comic origins. 'Nuff said!True or false? in the beginng comic books were mostly humorous, made to be funny?
true ofourse no wonder they were called comic books hahhahaTrue or false? in the beginng comic books were mostly humorous, made to be funny?
true.........hence the 'comic' part
F
Comic books developed from earlier comic strips that had begun appearing in newspapers in the late 19th century. In the 1920s and 1930s, early comic books began to appear in the form of pulp magazines collecting previously-published comic strips. Since comic strips at this time were primarily humorous in nature, the term ';comic book'; was adapted from ';comic strip';. This has caused some confusion over time, since ';comic book'; grew to refer to the medium, not to the type of content being published.
SO THE ANSWER IS TRUE
Well, yeah. The first comic books were reprints of the newspaper comics.
I think the only funny ones out there these days are Archie and Walt Disney comics.
false, it'a half a chance to get 10 pts.
ya sure why not
yes it is true
I think the first comic books were action books so no
true
true ofourse no wonder they were called comic books hahhahaTrue or false? in the beginng comic books were mostly humorous, made to be funny?
true.........hence the 'comic' part
F
Comic books developed from earlier comic strips that had begun appearing in newspapers in the late 19th century. In the 1920s and 1930s, early comic books began to appear in the form of pulp magazines collecting previously-published comic strips. Since comic strips at this time were primarily humorous in nature, the term ';comic book'; was adapted from ';comic strip';. This has caused some confusion over time, since ';comic book'; grew to refer to the medium, not to the type of content being published.
SO THE ANSWER IS TRUE
Well, yeah. The first comic books were reprints of the newspaper comics.
I think the only funny ones out there these days are Archie and Walt Disney comics.
false, it'a half a chance to get 10 pts.
ya sure why not
yes it is true
I think the first comic books were action books so no
true
When the Books are upon and your not found in it what will you do pray to Jesus? Followers of false vision?
Jesus said. by the way he hates the many who come in his name can you name them by denominationsWhen the Books are upon and your not found in it what will you do pray to Jesus? Followers of false vision?
When the books are upon my nuts maybe.When the Books are upon and your not found in it what will you do pray to Jesus? Followers of false vision?
Upon what?
Upon a table?
Upon a desk?
Upon a podium?
wha??????
When the books are upon my nuts maybe.When the Books are upon and your not found in it what will you do pray to Jesus? Followers of false vision?
Upon what?
Upon a table?
Upon a desk?
Upon a podium?
wha??????
Believers if all the books were demonstrated to be false, would this mean there was no god
is it not possible that only the books are false doctrine; made up by intelligent but profoundly ignorent, puzzled men, who were trying to understand their enviorenment and how it came to beBelievers if all the books were demonstrated to be false, would this mean there was no god
It's possible :-), but I don't see why someone would put so much time and effort into such works if they didn't feel confident about the veracity of what they were writing about.
If all the books were demonstrated to be false, then no, it wouldn't mean there was no God, it would just mean that men wrote the wrong stuff down, like for example, Mohammed.Believers if all the books were demonstrated to be false, would this mean there was no god
Not possible. Forgetting for a minute that the level of consistency in the message across multiple authors written over the course of a couple of thousand years suggests these men were, at the very least, not ignorant, it simply isn't possible to demonstrate that they are all false. Any evidence you could use to support the conclusion would be, by definition, just as likely to be false.
If you can give me an example to illustrate how you would demonstrate those writings to be false (not specific historical inaccuracies but ';all the books';), then I might be able to provide a better answer.
Yes its possible that theres a God and that none of the religions have it right.
I beleive that there is a God, and that the Christian religion has it right though.
(there are alot of differences in its self, with all the denominations, i cant tell you who exactly has it right of them)
In your dreams it may happen.
The possibility is always on who is interpreting the Bible for you and there are two possible thing that may come as a lie,
1.Your own interpretations
2. Religious interpretations biased to their own thinking and
interests..
No; not at all. - It would simply mean that whomever judged such books to be false, (though so proven and so full of the TRUTH they are), would have made a grave mistake, and would be subject unto the discipline of God!
Personally, I would be most apprehensive in even going near such an undertaking myself.
Why??? - Because it would only be foolishness to 'jack around' with the very WORD OF GOD; the very MIND OF GOD,Himself.
Give it a shot!...and see what happens! Just let me 'get out of the way' before you do!!!!!!!!!!!
God bless.
No, it is not possible because I know from my own personal experience that God is very real. The Bible or what it says is not what convinced me. It is first hand experience that has shown me that at least most of what the Bible says is true of my God. He is awesome.
This clever question should prove fruitful. It assumes their religion is false and asks if their religion would be false. Circular questions are clever by atheist standards. We don't know logic so good.
That wouldn't necessarily prove that God does not exist. It would only prove ';the books'; are wrong. Most of the Old Testament was written by those trying to understand their environment.
The books could be false, but there would still be the possibility of the existence of deities.
there is also secular historical documents that can prove the existence of Jesus. also geological evidence.
I think that has pretty much been demonstrated already.
Never happen Chuckie
God Is. and His word is true.
If rainbows were to fly out of my backside that must mean I should support homosexuality? Perhaps.....but it ain't gonna happen
I dont have any books that I follow or believe in
but I do believe in a God
so the answer is no ... disproving a book does not disprove a God
nor does it prove a God for that matter though
No
If there were a God he
would have existed before writing
No, if the creation didn't exist, then maybe we could say that there is no creator.
I guess anything is possible. So it's down to what you believe.
it would just reiterate the flaws and imperfection of man.
No. They all have lies in them by man. It just means religion is stupid, not God.
not in my opinion
';IF'; pigs would fly, we'd all be shooting for ham.
fj nk;jn j;n nf;njf;n
It's possible :-), but I don't see why someone would put so much time and effort into such works if they didn't feel confident about the veracity of what they were writing about.
If all the books were demonstrated to be false, then no, it wouldn't mean there was no God, it would just mean that men wrote the wrong stuff down, like for example, Mohammed.Believers if all the books were demonstrated to be false, would this mean there was no god
Not possible. Forgetting for a minute that the level of consistency in the message across multiple authors written over the course of a couple of thousand years suggests these men were, at the very least, not ignorant, it simply isn't possible to demonstrate that they are all false. Any evidence you could use to support the conclusion would be, by definition, just as likely to be false.
If you can give me an example to illustrate how you would demonstrate those writings to be false (not specific historical inaccuracies but ';all the books';), then I might be able to provide a better answer.
Yes its possible that theres a God and that none of the religions have it right.
I beleive that there is a God, and that the Christian religion has it right though.
(there are alot of differences in its self, with all the denominations, i cant tell you who exactly has it right of them)
In your dreams it may happen.
The possibility is always on who is interpreting the Bible for you and there are two possible thing that may come as a lie,
1.Your own interpretations
2. Religious interpretations biased to their own thinking and
interests..
No; not at all. - It would simply mean that whomever judged such books to be false, (though so proven and so full of the TRUTH they are), would have made a grave mistake, and would be subject unto the discipline of God!
Personally, I would be most apprehensive in even going near such an undertaking myself.
Why??? - Because it would only be foolishness to 'jack around' with the very WORD OF GOD; the very MIND OF GOD,Himself.
Give it a shot!...and see what happens! Just let me 'get out of the way' before you do!!!!!!!!!!!
God bless.
No, it is not possible because I know from my own personal experience that God is very real. The Bible or what it says is not what convinced me. It is first hand experience that has shown me that at least most of what the Bible says is true of my God. He is awesome.
This clever question should prove fruitful. It assumes their religion is false and asks if their religion would be false. Circular questions are clever by atheist standards. We don't know logic so good.
That wouldn't necessarily prove that God does not exist. It would only prove ';the books'; are wrong. Most of the Old Testament was written by those trying to understand their environment.
The books could be false, but there would still be the possibility of the existence of deities.
there is also secular historical documents that can prove the existence of Jesus. also geological evidence.
I think that has pretty much been demonstrated already.
Never happen Chuckie
God Is. and His word is true.
If rainbows were to fly out of my backside that must mean I should support homosexuality? Perhaps.....but it ain't gonna happen
I dont have any books that I follow or believe in
but I do believe in a God
so the answer is no ... disproving a book does not disprove a God
nor does it prove a God for that matter though
No
If there were a God he
would have existed before writing
No, if the creation didn't exist, then maybe we could say that there is no creator.
I guess anything is possible. So it's down to what you believe.
it would just reiterate the flaws and imperfection of man.
No. They all have lies in them by man. It just means religion is stupid, not God.
not in my opinion
';IF'; pigs would fly, we'd all be shooting for ham.
fj nk;jn j;n nf;njf;n
The square of a numberis always positive. True or false. If false correct & please give reference books if any
No, because zero is a number, and 0虏 = 0, which isn't positive. Also the squares of imaginary numbers can give you negative numbers (though if you haven't learned about imaginary numbers yet, skip that notion for now and just go with the first example I gave.)The square of a numberis always positive. True or false. If false correct %26amp; please give reference books if any
True because a negative multiplied by a negative is positiveThe square of a numberis always positive. True or false. If false correct %26amp; please give reference books if any
Yes and no. The square of a real number will be positive (excpt for the case of zero because zero is neither positive of negative).
The square of an imaginary number could be negative for example in the most simple case i^2 = -1 where i=sqrt(-1).
Complex numbers dont usually appear until you start with some more heavy maths so depending on your level of understanding i wouldnt worry too much about them. For further information just ggoogle 'Complex Numbers' and I'm sure you will find alot of info
Yes the square of any number is always positive. This is valid for all real numbers. But there is a set of complex numbers, in which the square of a number may be negative.
This is because, in real nos, square root of negative nos is not defined and there you will find all squares positive.
The square of ANY number is only positive.... i'll prove it.
if the number is positive.....(be it x)...
then its square is (+x) * (+x)....= (plus * plus)(x * x)
+ multiplied by + is +......therefore the square is +x^2
if the number is negative..... (be it -y)
then its square is (-y)(-y) = (minus * minus)(y *y)
minus * minus = plus.
therefore, ans:- +y^2
so the square is always +ve...
suppose the square is negative... it is an imaginary no.(complex no.)
Somtimes square of number is negative in case of imaginary numbers, where you have Square root of (-1) denoted as i.
i is an imaginary number whose square is negative.
i x i = -1
This you will get in any book on complex number. There are good problems based on this concept.
So answer to your question depends on your syllabus. If you are not stuyding advance mathematics you can simply say ';True';.
Else you have to give the above justification with a ';False'; answer.
False. The square of 0 is 0, which, by definition, is not a positive number (a number is positive if and only if it is greater than 0; 0 cannot be greater than itself).
its true..coz negative into negative makes positive.
True because a negative multiplied by a negative is positiveThe square of a numberis always positive. True or false. If false correct %26amp; please give reference books if any
Yes and no. The square of a real number will be positive (excpt for the case of zero because zero is neither positive of negative).
The square of an imaginary number could be negative for example in the most simple case i^2 = -1 where i=sqrt(-1).
Complex numbers dont usually appear until you start with some more heavy maths so depending on your level of understanding i wouldnt worry too much about them. For further information just ggoogle 'Complex Numbers' and I'm sure you will find alot of info
Yes the square of any number is always positive. This is valid for all real numbers. But there is a set of complex numbers, in which the square of a number may be negative.
This is because, in real nos, square root of negative nos is not defined and there you will find all squares positive.
The square of ANY number is only positive.... i'll prove it.
if the number is positive.....(be it x)...
then its square is (+x) * (+x)....= (plus * plus)(x * x)
+ multiplied by + is +......therefore the square is +x^2
if the number is negative..... (be it -y)
then its square is (-y)(-y) = (minus * minus)(y *y)
minus * minus = plus.
therefore, ans:- +y^2
so the square is always +ve...
suppose the square is negative... it is an imaginary no.(complex no.)
Somtimes square of number is negative in case of imaginary numbers, where you have Square root of (-1) denoted as i.
i is an imaginary number whose square is negative.
i x i = -1
This you will get in any book on complex number. There are good problems based on this concept.
So answer to your question depends on your syllabus. If you are not stuyding advance mathematics you can simply say ';True';.
Else you have to give the above justification with a ';False'; answer.
False. The square of 0 is 0, which, by definition, is not a positive number (a number is positive if and only if it is greater than 0; 0 cannot be greater than itself).
its true..coz negative into negative makes positive.
Letter to Christian physicists ';we must burn all the books giving the false theories of the recent era'; ...!?
http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/chris鈥?/a>
the above page is the weirdest thing! ... and its from someone at STANFORD??!!! thankfully, he's a professor of ';computer science';, NOT PHYSICS
(creationists probably wont appreciate the nuttiness of the letter)Letter to Christian physicists ';we must burn all the books giving the false theories of the recent era'; ...!?
What's that guy been smoking? I want some .....Letter to Christian physicists ';we must burn all the books giving the false theories of the recent era'; ...!?
Stanford appears to have gone downhill a bit.
Edit:
';God does not need science. He is infinite and has no need of simple laws to co-ordinate facts.';
';The hypothesis on which I have based all my work in Natural Philosophy is that every natural law is God's Law, and therefore must express his Glory and Divine Purpose.'; - Newton, preface to Principia.';
I smell a contradiction.
';All sorts of ridiculous answers are given by self-styled Christians who cannot remember their faith long enough to realize that science is a gift to man from God and that God would never have granted the boon of science to pagans.';
Wow. This guy should be ashamed of himself. Apparently he forgot that most highly educated scientists don't believe in God.
The hypothesis on which I have based all my work in Natural Philosophy is that every natural law is God's Law, and therefore must express his Glory and Divine Purpose.'; - Newton, preface to Principia.
That was the only portion I needed to read to decide its validity.
Heh, you should read this a bit more carefully. Follow the link the author has: he states that this was not to be taken seriously.
Good grief...
I'm guessing that the lad didn't get awarded tenure?
Einstein a 'sly jew' and the holocaust was God's punishment for the esteemed professor being right? Terrific! Amazing what utter rubbish the Internet can be populated with, isn't it?
Don't assume. It's not good form.
I essentially believe creation is a key piece of the puzzle. However, I'm TOTALLY opposed to book banning and burning. That is nutty, especially from the mouths of supposedly educated people.
What on Earth is Christian physics supposed to be? Does gravity work differently in their world?
He says it wasn't meant to be taken seriously- pretty dumb to write it at all then, eh?
I call Poe's Law.
For it is written:
';God will destroy the wisdom of the wise;the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate'; (1Cor 1:19).
Kind of scary. But there are people out there who think this way.
';Evolution vs.Creation'; is the new ';earth is round vs. earth is flat'; argument.
I wonder who will win?
Scary! It is a very short step from burning books to burning people.
Did he write that letter in crayon?car loan
the above page is the weirdest thing! ... and its from someone at STANFORD??!!! thankfully, he's a professor of ';computer science';, NOT PHYSICS
(creationists probably wont appreciate the nuttiness of the letter)Letter to Christian physicists ';we must burn all the books giving the false theories of the recent era'; ...!?
What's that guy been smoking? I want some .....Letter to Christian physicists ';we must burn all the books giving the false theories of the recent era'; ...!?
Stanford appears to have gone downhill a bit.
Edit:
';God does not need science. He is infinite and has no need of simple laws to co-ordinate facts.';
';The hypothesis on which I have based all my work in Natural Philosophy is that every natural law is God's Law, and therefore must express his Glory and Divine Purpose.'; - Newton, preface to Principia.';
I smell a contradiction.
';All sorts of ridiculous answers are given by self-styled Christians who cannot remember their faith long enough to realize that science is a gift to man from God and that God would never have granted the boon of science to pagans.';
Wow. This guy should be ashamed of himself. Apparently he forgot that most highly educated scientists don't believe in God.
The hypothesis on which I have based all my work in Natural Philosophy is that every natural law is God's Law, and therefore must express his Glory and Divine Purpose.'; - Newton, preface to Principia.
That was the only portion I needed to read to decide its validity.
Heh, you should read this a bit more carefully. Follow the link the author has: he states that this was not to be taken seriously.
Good grief...
I'm guessing that the lad didn't get awarded tenure?
Einstein a 'sly jew' and the holocaust was God's punishment for the esteemed professor being right? Terrific! Amazing what utter rubbish the Internet can be populated with, isn't it?
Don't assume. It's not good form.
I essentially believe creation is a key piece of the puzzle. However, I'm TOTALLY opposed to book banning and burning. That is nutty, especially from the mouths of supposedly educated people.
What on Earth is Christian physics supposed to be? Does gravity work differently in their world?
He says it wasn't meant to be taken seriously- pretty dumb to write it at all then, eh?
I call Poe's Law.
For it is written:
';God will destroy the wisdom of the wise;the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate'; (1Cor 1:19).
Kind of scary. But there are people out there who think this way.
';Evolution vs.Creation'; is the new ';earth is round vs. earth is flat'; argument.
I wonder who will win?
Scary! It is a very short step from burning books to burning people.
Did he write that letter in crayon?
Is this false that the other Daughters of Muhammad (saww) do not have any merits recorded in Sunni/ Shia books?
They discredit anything that is inconvenient to them.
So, I wouldn't be surprised if that was true!Is this false that the other Daughters of Muhammad (saww) do not have any merits recorded in Sunni/ Shia books?
really ?
The daughters of Prophet ( peace and blessing of Allaah be upon him) are his companions as well and the part of his household.
Do you know the merits and virtues of Sahaabah and Ahlul bayt ?
___________Is this false that the other Daughters of Muhammad (saww) do not have any merits recorded in Sunni/ Shia books?
Obviously Fatima RA did not narrate many hadith because she died a few months after the Prophet SWS. The companions with the most narrated hadith were obviously the ones that Lived the longest (Abu Huraira, Ibn Umar, Ibn Masud, Aisha, ibn Abbas RA)
Prophets other two daughters who were married to Uthman (RA) was died in prophets life time.
thats why Uthman(RA) was titled ,ZULNORAIN
So, I wouldn't be surprised if that was true!Is this false that the other Daughters of Muhammad (saww) do not have any merits recorded in Sunni/ Shia books?
really ?
The daughters of Prophet ( peace and blessing of Allaah be upon him) are his companions as well and the part of his household.
Do you know the merits and virtues of Sahaabah and Ahlul bayt ?
___________Is this false that the other Daughters of Muhammad (saww) do not have any merits recorded in Sunni/ Shia books?
Obviously Fatima RA did not narrate many hadith because she died a few months after the Prophet SWS. The companions with the most narrated hadith were obviously the ones that Lived the longest (Abu Huraira, Ibn Umar, Ibn Masud, Aisha, ibn Abbas RA)
Prophets other two daughters who were married to Uthman (RA) was died in prophets life time.
thats why Uthman(RA) was titled ,ZULNORAIN
Lord of the rings books: True or false?
I love the LOTR movies and im going to start reading the books after x mas. I have heard different things about things that were in the book but left out of the movies. Every website i look on itcontradictss the last. So can any one tell me the truth?
1: After the ring is destroyed and the hobbits return to the shire, have all the greenFieldss been torn up and changed into more of an industrial area? If so why and who did the changes?
2: in the books is saruman killed by the hobbits? (one site said he gets his head kicked in by them lol)
3: Does it explain who 'sent' gandelf back after his week long fight with the balrog?
4:Does Sam end up having children?
5: Does frodo and sam have 'feelings' for each other?... now this is more based on the vibes i get from watching the film... they don't seem just friends in some scene's lol.
Thanks for any help you can give - Adam :D
P.s also WHY is saruman can make a Bomb to strap onto an oriki's back to destroy Helms deep wall... cant he make them to bombared the whole castle/fort with them using catapults... Saruman fail :PLord of the rings books: True or false?
1) yes, it is the work of Saruman who now goes by the name of Sharkey.
2) Saruman is killed by Wormtongue as they are being expelled from the shire%26gt; Wormtongue is then killed by the hobbits.
3) I don't recall if that answer is given
4) yes, many, and among them Frodo-lad
5) if you mean homosexual feelings, that was not the author's intent. Tolkien was a fervent Catholic and undoubtedly would have frowned upon such a relationship
P.S. sometimes logic must be suspended for the story to be told. You might ask why the eagles couldn't have flown Frodo to Mount Doom and saved him the journey on foot. Then the book would have been 30 pages instead of 1,030.Lord of the rings books: True or false?
The eagle thing was actually addressed in the beginning of Fellowship (the book, not the movie). Sauron was ACTIVELY searching for the ring. Don't you think he would have noticed a bunch of giant eagle flying into his land to the one place that the ring could be destroyed?? It's not a plot hole.
1. True: Sauruman decided that since Merry and Pippin destroyed his home, he would destroy theirs.
2. False: Though he was killed in the shire, he was stabbed in the back by wormtongue (who was subsequently killed by hobbit archers)
3. The books don't explain that, but the Silmarillion does
4. Yes. Five, I think
5. NO THEY DON'T!! I freaking hate that about the movie!
The word is Uruk-hai.
the end of the movie is not even close to the book, but you must read it for yourself
to find out who sent Gandalf in the first place, read the Silmarillion
Sam has children
no Frodo and Sam were not gay, that is fan fiction sickness
he only had one bomb
If you love fiction, these are the books for you. It's just someones exaggerated imagination and has nothing to do with reality. However, if it entertains you, read up for yourself and don't depend on others. That way you will have reliable facts to go by.
erm, why do want to know all this if you're going to read the books? Will take the fun out of it, no?
1: After the ring is destroyed and the hobbits return to the shire, have all the greenFieldss been torn up and changed into more of an industrial area? If so why and who did the changes?
2: in the books is saruman killed by the hobbits? (one site said he gets his head kicked in by them lol)
3: Does it explain who 'sent' gandelf back after his week long fight with the balrog?
4:Does Sam end up having children?
5: Does frodo and sam have 'feelings' for each other?... now this is more based on the vibes i get from watching the film... they don't seem just friends in some scene's lol.
Thanks for any help you can give - Adam :D
P.s also WHY is saruman can make a Bomb to strap onto an oriki's back to destroy Helms deep wall... cant he make them to bombared the whole castle/fort with them using catapults... Saruman fail :PLord of the rings books: True or false?
1) yes, it is the work of Saruman who now goes by the name of Sharkey.
2) Saruman is killed by Wormtongue as they are being expelled from the shire%26gt; Wormtongue is then killed by the hobbits.
3) I don't recall if that answer is given
4) yes, many, and among them Frodo-lad
5) if you mean homosexual feelings, that was not the author's intent. Tolkien was a fervent Catholic and undoubtedly would have frowned upon such a relationship
P.S. sometimes logic must be suspended for the story to be told. You might ask why the eagles couldn't have flown Frodo to Mount Doom and saved him the journey on foot. Then the book would have been 30 pages instead of 1,030.Lord of the rings books: True or false?
The eagle thing was actually addressed in the beginning of Fellowship (the book, not the movie). Sauron was ACTIVELY searching for the ring. Don't you think he would have noticed a bunch of giant eagle flying into his land to the one place that the ring could be destroyed?? It's not a plot hole.
Report Abuse
1. True: Sauruman decided that since Merry and Pippin destroyed his home, he would destroy theirs.
2. False: Though he was killed in the shire, he was stabbed in the back by wormtongue (who was subsequently killed by hobbit archers)
3. The books don't explain that, but the Silmarillion does
4. Yes. Five, I think
5. NO THEY DON'T!! I freaking hate that about the movie!
The word is Uruk-hai.
the end of the movie is not even close to the book, but you must read it for yourself
to find out who sent Gandalf in the first place, read the Silmarillion
Sam has children
no Frodo and Sam were not gay, that is fan fiction sickness
he only had one bomb
If you love fiction, these are the books for you. It's just someones exaggerated imagination and has nothing to do with reality. However, if it entertains you, read up for yourself and don't depend on others. That way you will have reliable facts to go by.
erm, why do want to know all this if you're going to read the books? Will take the fun out of it, no?
Men don't like to read books, written by women. True or False?
I've noticed a pattern..
Am I wrong? How and why?Men don't like to read books, written by women. True or False?
Great question you have gotten a lot of great responses. Some defensive and maybe not 100% honest perhaps though. I read mostly books by men but not because they are by men.
Some of the classics like Mary Shelley's ';Frankenstein'; kicked a lot of male writer's butts. I think typically men think that a woman puts too much romance in her books but that is not true of all female writers of course. But the fear steers some men away just the same. For me, a good book is a good book. As far as female written books, ';A Wrinkle in Time';, ';Frankenstein';, and ';The Key to Zion'; were excellent. I'd read other books by theses authors in a heart beat but from my personal perception I'd probably stay away from any Danielle Steele or Nora Roberts books in fear that they are sappy or romance novels.
I think actually women rule the preteen and young teen market as I remember Judy Bloom and Beverly Cleary type books being read by both genders but currently men have a greater hold on reaching the male older market. I don't think its necessarily a conscious effort to avoid female writers though and I wouldn't be surprised if this changed in the next several years.Men don't like to read books, written by women. True or False?
:o) Thanks a lot for the pick and I'll have you know I've posed a question to help broaden my horizons and have gotten great feedback so far. http://answers.yahoo.com/quest鈥?/a>
False I read Margaret Weis and Anne Rice both of which are my favorite authors.
TRUE TRUE TRUE. I read sci fi / fantasy, but only male authors. I've wondered why too. I think it's because I immerse myself into the characters of the story, especially the main character, preferably a male. It's a form of escapism. And who better to write about a male, than a male? My favorites are Robert Jordan, Terry Goodkind, John Marco, George R. R. Martin, and David Eddings.
I thought David Eddings' work was good until his wife joined him in writing. (David and Leigh Eddings.)
This is why I think women authors choose pseudonyms that sound like male names, especially when writing sci fi/fant because many of the readers of that genre are men who only read male authors. Or, female authors use abbreviations of their name, like the author of Harry Potter.
false
Not true. Ayn Rand was a woman and more men than women read her books
false. men and women authors dont show much difference
Agatha Christie was much celebrated ,right?
False. I don't think that anybody cares if the writer is a man or a woman.
False..cause a woman can rite an adenture book very cool...like J.K.Rowling...you can't say mens don't read Harry Potter..or others book
Definately false The harry potter books are phenominal sellers written by a woman.Millions of men have read them.
I'm a man, and as long as the book is good, I'll read it. I don't really care who it's written by. Oh, and the same thing goes for my dad, step-dad, and step-brother. So, I'm going to say people read what they think is good, and most of the time don't pay attention to the author. :)
dont know
Like must true/false statements about human nature, this one can be both true and false. There are men, and then there are men.
I once had a student in a college English class--a recent veteran of Vietnam, a rock musician on the side, and a noted (and proud) womanizer. His favorite book as an adolescent boy had been The Outsiders by S. E. Hinton. He told me it was the best boy's book he ever read, and it had turned him into a reader. He had even become an English major in college. When I told him that S. E. Hinton was Susan Hinton, he simply could not believe me. No seventeen-year-old girl could have written that good a book about boys' experiences, he insisted.
If it had shown up on a booklist in his school with the author's name, Susie Hinton, he certainly would not have read it. Publishers knew that, so they sometimes had women publish under pseudonyms or using only their initials. It wasn't the nature of the book; it was an adolescent macho predilection.
That said, it is certainly true that there are some books that most men like better than most women and vice versa. But like most generalizations about human beings, both of these are products of stereotypical thinking: ';men don't like to read'; and ';when they do read, they like to read only books written by men.';
Not true for me. If you can pry me away from playing tennis, basketball, riding the cycle, etc. I will read pretty much anything. Like, once a year...doesn't matter what sex the author is.
False
false
True
sorry i dont know
If a writer is outstanding, gender doesn't seem to matter.
hi chacakaka its hard to generalise but i think men (the few who actually do) read books by women probably to get the ';chicks perspective '; thats what id do if i was a man
by the way i noticed your nickname are you perhaps from south africa ???
false. if the book is nice then it doesnot matter whwther its writtwn by a male or a female.
Not true. Although the kind of slushy,girly books that I avoid like the plague tend to be written by women.
False. My BF reads everything under the sun and doesn't even pay attention to what gender/age/race/etc. the authors are.
not neccesarily. i like works of emily bronte, charlotte bronte, dickinson, louisa may alcott and many more better books by female authors. mary shelly is pretty ok(just for ur knowledge she is pb shelleys wife)... and there are loads more female writers who are pretty good
Not in all instances, but if the book is something too romantic or girly, i doubt, for one, i dont read it myself....we have authors mushrooming that way....
IT DEPENDS ON THE GUY! SOME GUYS LIKE BOOK THAT ARE BY WOMAN.SOME BOYS DON'T LIKE TO READ AND SOME GUY LOVE TO READ! IT ALL DEPENDS.
False. Men dont like to read books by lousy writers. Nor do women for that matter....
it's true. and it's the same with female comedians. it's cos women writers seem to think it's interesting to talk about female things, plus guys find women complicated enough without trying to read something they have worked on for months!
P.S. JK Rowling proved your theory by not making it obvious from her name that she is female. most ppl who don't know would think it's a guy.
Not necessarily..... Men don't like reading love novels
False.
It depends on a number of factors:
The percentage of male authors to female
The types of book that females write
The types of book that males write
The types of books that females like to read
The types of books that males like to read
Put all of those together in a Venn diagram and ... hmmm. You have something that looks vaguely like raindrops on a lake. Very pretty, but does it mean anything?
All I can say is that one of my very favorite authors is Judith Lennox
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/sear鈥?/a>
(and I'm a male, by the way)
False. The majority of my favorite authors are female and I am a guy.
Am I wrong? How and why?Men don't like to read books, written by women. True or False?
Great question you have gotten a lot of great responses. Some defensive and maybe not 100% honest perhaps though. I read mostly books by men but not because they are by men.
Some of the classics like Mary Shelley's ';Frankenstein'; kicked a lot of male writer's butts. I think typically men think that a woman puts too much romance in her books but that is not true of all female writers of course. But the fear steers some men away just the same. For me, a good book is a good book. As far as female written books, ';A Wrinkle in Time';, ';Frankenstein';, and ';The Key to Zion'; were excellent. I'd read other books by theses authors in a heart beat but from my personal perception I'd probably stay away from any Danielle Steele or Nora Roberts books in fear that they are sappy or romance novels.
I think actually women rule the preteen and young teen market as I remember Judy Bloom and Beverly Cleary type books being read by both genders but currently men have a greater hold on reaching the male older market. I don't think its necessarily a conscious effort to avoid female writers though and I wouldn't be surprised if this changed in the next several years.Men don't like to read books, written by women. True or False?
:o) Thanks a lot for the pick and I'll have you know I've posed a question to help broaden my horizons and have gotten great feedback so far. http://answers.yahoo.com/quest鈥?/a>
Report Abuse
False I read Margaret Weis and Anne Rice both of which are my favorite authors.
TRUE TRUE TRUE. I read sci fi / fantasy, but only male authors. I've wondered why too. I think it's because I immerse myself into the characters of the story, especially the main character, preferably a male. It's a form of escapism. And who better to write about a male, than a male? My favorites are Robert Jordan, Terry Goodkind, John Marco, George R. R. Martin, and David Eddings.
I thought David Eddings' work was good until his wife joined him in writing. (David and Leigh Eddings.)
This is why I think women authors choose pseudonyms that sound like male names, especially when writing sci fi/fant because many of the readers of that genre are men who only read male authors. Or, female authors use abbreviations of their name, like the author of Harry Potter.
false
Not true. Ayn Rand was a woman and more men than women read her books
false. men and women authors dont show much difference
Agatha Christie was much celebrated ,right?
False. I don't think that anybody cares if the writer is a man or a woman.
False..cause a woman can rite an adenture book very cool...like J.K.Rowling...you can't say mens don't read Harry Potter..or others book
Definately false The harry potter books are phenominal sellers written by a woman.Millions of men have read them.
I'm a man, and as long as the book is good, I'll read it. I don't really care who it's written by. Oh, and the same thing goes for my dad, step-dad, and step-brother. So, I'm going to say people read what they think is good, and most of the time don't pay attention to the author. :)
dont know
Like must true/false statements about human nature, this one can be both true and false. There are men, and then there are men.
I once had a student in a college English class--a recent veteran of Vietnam, a rock musician on the side, and a noted (and proud) womanizer. His favorite book as an adolescent boy had been The Outsiders by S. E. Hinton. He told me it was the best boy's book he ever read, and it had turned him into a reader. He had even become an English major in college. When I told him that S. E. Hinton was Susan Hinton, he simply could not believe me. No seventeen-year-old girl could have written that good a book about boys' experiences, he insisted.
If it had shown up on a booklist in his school with the author's name, Susie Hinton, he certainly would not have read it. Publishers knew that, so they sometimes had women publish under pseudonyms or using only their initials. It wasn't the nature of the book; it was an adolescent macho predilection.
That said, it is certainly true that there are some books that most men like better than most women and vice versa. But like most generalizations about human beings, both of these are products of stereotypical thinking: ';men don't like to read'; and ';when they do read, they like to read only books written by men.';
Not true for me. If you can pry me away from playing tennis, basketball, riding the cycle, etc. I will read pretty much anything. Like, once a year...doesn't matter what sex the author is.
False
false
True
sorry i dont know
If a writer is outstanding, gender doesn't seem to matter.
hi chacakaka its hard to generalise but i think men (the few who actually do) read books by women probably to get the ';chicks perspective '; thats what id do if i was a man
by the way i noticed your nickname are you perhaps from south africa ???
false. if the book is nice then it doesnot matter whwther its writtwn by a male or a female.
Not true. Although the kind of slushy,girly books that I avoid like the plague tend to be written by women.
False. My BF reads everything under the sun and doesn't even pay attention to what gender/age/race/etc. the authors are.
not neccesarily. i like works of emily bronte, charlotte bronte, dickinson, louisa may alcott and many more better books by female authors. mary shelly is pretty ok(just for ur knowledge she is pb shelleys wife)... and there are loads more female writers who are pretty good
Not in all instances, but if the book is something too romantic or girly, i doubt, for one, i dont read it myself....we have authors mushrooming that way....
IT DEPENDS ON THE GUY! SOME GUYS LIKE BOOK THAT ARE BY WOMAN.SOME BOYS DON'T LIKE TO READ AND SOME GUY LOVE TO READ! IT ALL DEPENDS.
False. Men dont like to read books by lousy writers. Nor do women for that matter....
it's true. and it's the same with female comedians. it's cos women writers seem to think it's interesting to talk about female things, plus guys find women complicated enough without trying to read something they have worked on for months!
P.S. JK Rowling proved your theory by not making it obvious from her name that she is female. most ppl who don't know would think it's a guy.
Not necessarily..... Men don't like reading love novels
False.
It depends on a number of factors:
The percentage of male authors to female
The types of book that females write
The types of book that males write
The types of books that females like to read
The types of books that males like to read
Put all of those together in a Venn diagram and ... hmmm. You have something that looks vaguely like raindrops on a lake. Very pretty, but does it mean anything?
All I can say is that one of my very favorite authors is Judith Lennox
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/sear鈥?/a>
(and I'm a male, by the way)
False. The majority of my favorite authors are female and I am a guy.
Is Paul a false teacher and prophet? He said what will be and it never will happen the Books are open.?
no blink of the eye no meting in the air it is all in youIs Paul a false teacher and prophet? He said what will be and it never will happen the Books are open.?
The best part is that Jesus warned about people like Paul.
Yet Paul, who never knew J-Dog, came trotting into town and re-wrote religion. Quite ironic, actually.Is Paul a false teacher and prophet? He said what will be and it never will happen the Books are open.?
Yes, paul is a false teacher. He contradicts himself frequently, does NOT quote Jewish scripture (old testament) correctly, teaches mithraism (secret initiations, babbling in ecstacy, blood baptism), and he expected jesus to come back in his lifetime - each of these makes him a false prophet and in NO way related to Judaism, which he insisted.
Sprinkling some Jewish scripture around doesn't make it true.
Yes Paul is a false teacher. Paul tells us not to hang around certain believers as well as non-believers where Jesus ministered and dealt with all people. Jesus didn't try to stop women from teaching, Paul forbid it in his letter to Thomas.
Paul was nothing but a Pharisee who just took the old scripture and added Jesus name to the title.
NO
2 points
The best part is that Jesus warned about people like Paul.
Yet Paul, who never knew J-Dog, came trotting into town and re-wrote religion. Quite ironic, actually.Is Paul a false teacher and prophet? He said what will be and it never will happen the Books are open.?
Yes, paul is a false teacher. He contradicts himself frequently, does NOT quote Jewish scripture (old testament) correctly, teaches mithraism (secret initiations, babbling in ecstacy, blood baptism), and he expected jesus to come back in his lifetime - each of these makes him a false prophet and in NO way related to Judaism, which he insisted.
Sprinkling some Jewish scripture around doesn't make it true.
Yes Paul is a false teacher. Paul tells us not to hang around certain believers as well as non-believers where Jesus ministered and dealt with all people. Jesus didn't try to stop women from teaching, Paul forbid it in his letter to Thomas.
Paul was nothing but a Pharisee who just took the old scripture and added Jesus name to the title.
NO
2 points
How many believe that allah would tell his followers to believe in false or corrupted books.?
sura 4:136''o'' ye who believe.' believe in allah and his apostle, and the scripture which he hath sent to his apostle, and the scriptures which he sent to those before him. any who denieth allah, his angels, his books, his apostles, and the day of judgement hath gone far astray. these other scriptures had been worshiped for thousands of years before mohammad revealed this sura. AND THE SCRIPTURES HE SENT TO THOSE BEFORE HIM. ANY WHO DENIETH ALLAH, HIS BOOKS before him has gone far astray. so this states that you are to follow the other books allah sent before mohammad. not one word about them being corrupted .How many believe that allah would tell his followers to believe in false or corrupted books.?
Muslims are not allowed to follow their Allah it would dissolve their religion, Muslims must follow the teachings of Islam that twist the ayats to say what they don't say.
Muhammad believed he was in agreement with the previous scriptures he called guidance and light.
Logically he would have to believe he was in agreement with God to be a prophet of God.
Muhammad was much wiser than today's Muslims obviously.
The Quran challenges Muhammad if he has doubts about the revelation he was receiving to check with those who read the previous scriptures.
Muhammad realized he had to be in agreement with them to be a prophet of God or anyone with a book could be a prophet of God,
If we assume Allah or God is wiser than a man then Allah would surely know that a man who is only a prophet because his own book calls hima prophet means anyone who claims to be a prophet should be followed...obviously if this were true Muhammad was proved false by Joseph Smith..apparently he is a prophet in the same manner as Muhammad. Which means the Quran must have corrupted because Muhammad was to be the last prophet...its a mindless game..to believe Muhammad and his book you have to believe God did not know that prophet must be proved by God and anyone could be a prophet because we have no way of knowing for sure other than our own judgment, which makes God much less than a man because most common men could easily see the obvious problem.
2:41. And believe in what I reveal, confirming the revelation which is WITH YOU, and be not the first to reject Faith therein, nor sell My Signs for a small price; and fear Me, and Me alone
Sura 5.68 - Say: O followers of the Book! you follow no good till you keep up the Taurat and the Injeel and that which is revealed to you from your Lord;
Sura 6.155: And this (Torah) is a Book We have revealed, blessed; therefore follow it and guard (against evil) that mercy may be shown to you.
- Sura 29:46 ';And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, but say, ';We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; Our Allah and your Allah is one;
Sura 10:94. If thou wert in doubt as to what We have revealed unto thee, then ask those who have been reading the Book from before thee: the Truth hath indeed come to thee from thy Lord: so be in no wise of those in doubt
Sura 6:115. The word of thy Lord doth find its fulfilment in truth and in justice: None can change His words: for He is the one who heareth and knoweth all.How many believe that allah would tell his followers to believe in false or corrupted books.?
For a thorough handling of Islam, go to the prophet of doom website.
Al hamdoullah
They can't even say Thank God! What more proof do you want! They are of the lost and astray, leave them for Allah SWT, he will deal with them. We have enough work around us to deal with.
Khair inshAllah
If I have to come back I will, The Golden Arrow Program Autopilot has....
Not worthy of your time or answer, are listed below
HERE IS YOUR DECK OF CARDS
Links to their avatars, location, age, and proof of their filth to come
------------------------------
Ace of Spades - Manifest Error – Ũniνέгsäl Рдnтsthέisт™
Ace of Clubs - Manifest Error – Ace of Clubs , Jim
Ace of Hearts- Manifest Error – lovebug87 , Lovebug(name change to- Poison Ivy)
Ace of Diamonds - Manifest Error – Acorns H
King of Spades - Manifest Error – Tom , Tom
King of Hearts - Manifest Error – 33 Lashes King of Hearts
King of Diamonds – Manifest Error – Richbro
King of Clubs - Manifest Error – djmantx
Queen of Spades - Manifest Error – δίκοπο μαχαίρι aka Natassia (THE BLACK HOLE)
Queen of Clubs - Mintee
Queen of Diamonds - Manifest Error – Lexi - Queen of Diamonds
Queen of Hearts - Manifest Error – Burka ******
Jack of Spades - Manifest Error – Al ****** Jadeed (name change to- _!_'s)
Jack of Clubs - Manifest Error – Pharoah(Abanobe.s)
Jack of Diamonds - Manifest Error – PirateSmackK
Jack of Hearts - Manifest Error – iSlam Blows DustBins
10 of Spades - Manifest Error – † Crusader †
10 of Clubs - Manifest Error – I LOVE JESUS CHRIST (funny that’s not Jesus’s name!)
10 of Diamonds - Please Mark My Grave…
10 of Hearts - Manifest Error – whyusukk
9 of Spades - Manifest Error – Canchito
9 of Hearts - Manifest Error – MJY †SFECU† pray4rev…
9 of Spades - Manifest Error – Follows Jesus
9 of Diamonds - Manifest Error – HeisTheTruth (SOC)
8 of Hearts - Manifest Error – Spider
8 of Spades - Tom M.
8 of Diamonds - Travis M , Travis
8 of Clubs - Azzman0bama (6 of Spades)
7 of Spades - Manifest Error – trolls overrun the globe
7 of Diamonds - Manifest Error – Lionheart ®
7 of Clubs - Manifest Error – Covnert Ruth - JPA , Ruth Asher
7 of Hearts - Manifest Error – A. Byrd of Spades (2acts susp.already!!)
6 of Spades - Manifest Error –muslims R swein (6 of Spades)
6 of Clubs - Manifest Error – Poison Ivy
6 of Diamonds- Manifest Error – Satan, you ARE the f…
6 of Hearts- Manifest Error – Olga
5 of Clubs- Manifest Error – Draak (Error of the people of Lut A.s.)
5 of Spades - Joker - Belfast Girl
5 of Diamonds - Manifest Error – Nekhtet
5 of Hearts - Manifest Error – Debbi (SOC) 5 of hearts (name change)
4 of Hearts - Manifest Error – Sonny (New account 07/12) { bighaidaboy@yahoo.ca}
4 of Diamonds - Manifest Error – Mr Burns
4 of Clubs - Manifest Error – Toms new dad
4 of Spades - Manifest Error – Cephas
3 of hearts- Manifest Error – Aisha (imposter)
3 of Clubs - Manifest Error – Mel to the P. (changed name)
3 of Spades - Manifest Error – Musicmaster
3 of Diamonds - Manifest Error – iSlam Blows DustBins
2 of Clubs - Manifest Error – Fokyah
2 of Spades - Manifest Error – cactus
2 of Hearts - Islam is a LIE!
2 of Diamonds - Manifest Error – JERRY (changed name)
WILD CARDS - High rollers!
--------------------------------------…
MANIFEST ERROR - Nina, BaC ..Bring back Schneb!!
Muslims are not allowed to follow their Allah it would dissolve their religion, Muslims must follow the teachings of Islam that twist the ayats to say what they don't say.
Muhammad believed he was in agreement with the previous scriptures he called guidance and light.
Logically he would have to believe he was in agreement with God to be a prophet of God.
Muhammad was much wiser than today's Muslims obviously.
The Quran challenges Muhammad if he has doubts about the revelation he was receiving to check with those who read the previous scriptures.
Muhammad realized he had to be in agreement with them to be a prophet of God or anyone with a book could be a prophet of God,
If we assume Allah or God is wiser than a man then Allah would surely know that a man who is only a prophet because his own book calls hima prophet means anyone who claims to be a prophet should be followed...obviously if this were true Muhammad was proved false by Joseph Smith..apparently he is a prophet in the same manner as Muhammad. Which means the Quran must have corrupted because Muhammad was to be the last prophet...its a mindless game..to believe Muhammad and his book you have to believe God did not know that prophet must be proved by God and anyone could be a prophet because we have no way of knowing for sure other than our own judgment, which makes God much less than a man because most common men could easily see the obvious problem.
2:41. And believe in what I reveal, confirming the revelation which is WITH YOU, and be not the first to reject Faith therein, nor sell My Signs for a small price; and fear Me, and Me alone
Sura 5.68 - Say: O followers of the Book! you follow no good till you keep up the Taurat and the Injeel and that which is revealed to you from your Lord;
Sura 6.155: And this (Torah) is a Book We have revealed, blessed; therefore follow it and guard (against evil) that mercy may be shown to you.
- Sura 29:46 ';And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, but say, ';We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; Our Allah and your Allah is one;
Sura 10:94. If thou wert in doubt as to what We have revealed unto thee, then ask those who have been reading the Book from before thee: the Truth hath indeed come to thee from thy Lord: so be in no wise of those in doubt
Sura 6:115. The word of thy Lord doth find its fulfilment in truth and in justice: None can change His words: for He is the one who heareth and knoweth all.How many believe that allah would tell his followers to believe in false or corrupted books.?
For a thorough handling of Islam, go to the prophet of doom website.
Al hamdoullah
They can't even say Thank God! What more proof do you want! They are of the lost and astray, leave them for Allah SWT, he will deal with them. We have enough work around us to deal with.
Khair inshAllah
If I have to come back I will, The Golden Arrow Program Autopilot has....
Not worthy of your time or answer, are listed below
HERE IS YOUR DECK OF CARDS
Links to their avatars, location, age, and proof of their filth to come
------------------------------
Ace of Spades - Manifest Error – Ũniνέгsäl Рдnтsthέisт™
Ace of Clubs - Manifest Error – Ace of Clubs , Jim
Ace of Hearts- Manifest Error – lovebug87 , Lovebug(name change to- Poison Ivy)
Ace of Diamonds - Manifest Error – Acorns H
King of Spades - Manifest Error – Tom , Tom
King of Hearts - Manifest Error – 33 Lashes King of Hearts
King of Diamonds – Manifest Error – Richbro
King of Clubs - Manifest Error – djmantx
Queen of Spades - Manifest Error – δίκοπο μαχαίρι aka Natassia (THE BLACK HOLE)
Queen of Clubs - Mintee
Queen of Diamonds - Manifest Error – Lexi - Queen of Diamonds
Queen of Hearts - Manifest Error – Burka ******
Jack of Spades - Manifest Error – Al ****** Jadeed (name change to- _!_'s)
Jack of Clubs - Manifest Error – Pharoah(Abanobe.s)
Jack of Diamonds - Manifest Error – PirateSmackK
Jack of Hearts - Manifest Error – iSlam Blows DustBins
10 of Spades - Manifest Error – † Crusader †
10 of Clubs - Manifest Error – I LOVE JESUS CHRIST (funny that’s not Jesus’s name!)
10 of Diamonds - Please Mark My Grave…
10 of Hearts - Manifest Error – whyusukk
9 of Spades - Manifest Error – Canchito
9 of Hearts - Manifest Error – MJY †SFECU† pray4rev…
9 of Spades - Manifest Error – Follows Jesus
9 of Diamonds - Manifest Error – HeisTheTruth (SOC)
8 of Hearts - Manifest Error – Spider
8 of Spades - Tom M.
8 of Diamonds - Travis M , Travis
8 of Clubs - Azzman0bama (6 of Spades)
7 of Spades - Manifest Error – trolls overrun the globe
7 of Diamonds - Manifest Error – Lionheart ®
7 of Clubs - Manifest Error – Covnert Ruth - JPA , Ruth Asher
7 of Hearts - Manifest Error – A. Byrd of Spades (2acts susp.already!!)
6 of Spades - Manifest Error –muslims R swein (6 of Spades)
6 of Clubs - Manifest Error – Poison Ivy
6 of Diamonds- Manifest Error – Satan, you ARE the f…
6 of Hearts- Manifest Error – Olga
5 of Clubs- Manifest Error – Draak (Error of the people of Lut A.s.)
5 of Spades - Joker - Belfast Girl
5 of Diamonds - Manifest Error – Nekhtet
5 of Hearts - Manifest Error – Debbi (SOC) 5 of hearts (name change)
4 of Hearts - Manifest Error – Sonny (New account 07/12) { bighaidaboy@yahoo.ca}
4 of Diamonds - Manifest Error – Mr Burns
4 of Clubs - Manifest Error – Toms new dad
4 of Spades - Manifest Error – Cephas
3 of hearts- Manifest Error – Aisha (imposter)
3 of Clubs - Manifest Error – Mel to the P. (changed name)
3 of Spades - Manifest Error – Musicmaster
3 of Diamonds - Manifest Error – iSlam Blows DustBins
2 of Clubs - Manifest Error – Fokyah
2 of Spades - Manifest Error – cactus
2 of Hearts - Islam is a LIE!
2 of Diamonds - Manifest Error – JERRY (changed name)
WILD CARDS - High rollers!
--------------------------------------…
MANIFEST ERROR - Nina, BaC ..Bring back Schneb!!
Why cant a law or punishment given to wife n her parents, if a false dowry case is booked on husband?
They are let out without any frills, if their case of dowry fails. But severe punishment meted out to husband and his parents if convicted. WHY? WHY? WHYYYYYYYYYYY?Why cant a law or punishment given to wife n her parents, if a false dowry case is booked on husband?
It doesn't look like many people know what you are talking about. Even if you click on YA India, your questions go out to everyone who reads and writes English. I am in the USA. for instance. We do not have dowry cases here because we do not have dowries any more. They had them in Europe 400 years ago. India is the largest country I can think of that has them today. Other countries may have them.
You might ask a lawyer in your country. You might post again in ';Law'; with a title ';Indian people only - why . . .?'; (Adjust the country if you are not in India, obviously.)
I hope this helps.car loan
It doesn't look like many people know what you are talking about. Even if you click on YA India, your questions go out to everyone who reads and writes English. I am in the USA. for instance. We do not have dowry cases here because we do not have dowries any more. They had them in Europe 400 years ago. India is the largest country I can think of that has them today. Other countries may have them.
You might ask a lawyer in your country. You might post again in ';Law'; with a title ';Indian people only - why . . .?'; (Adjust the country if you are not in India, obviously.)
I hope this helps.
Why do you not follow Zeus instead of chasing after false gods in old books?
Especially after his begotten son Hercules sacrificed so much to save you!Why do you not follow Zeus instead of chasing after false gods in old books?
Yeah I'm with you. I don't know how they can all be so blind. And Hercules, what a hero! I am forever indebted to Him. Praise Zeus.Why do you not follow Zeus instead of chasing after false gods in old books?
Uhhhhh - maybe because he is a false god in an old book
Cause Greece is a lot farther away than Scandinavia.
Those Christians should be ashamed for perverting exquisite Greek mythology by adding the inferior Roman. Romans always copied the Greeks in everything but never managed to achieve their level of excellence.
I view all gods as inferior to my living God.
because i prefer Dagda, and the Tuath de dannon.
besides i look much better in a robe than i do in a toga.
I have never met Zeus, but I have met Jesus Christ. Like so many have. If you ever do then you will understand. Amazing grace...once I was blind but now I see. Maybe one day you will see too.
Hahahaha! What about Demeter? She sacrificed a lot too! I would think she would be a better comparison. Why not worship the Goddess? Far more believable we came from conception then some sand and a man's bone ;)
They don't understand Odin's sacrifice of hanging for nine days to bring them the runes either. Go figure. Ingrates.
i met zeus .. i even see people using him in dota ..
zeus is real , evidence of zeus = lightning . its so real , why don't you guys just believe him
Same principle, different religion...uh myth...
lol. Same reason I think Christianity is crap. But I have to admit I always felt partial to Athena.
Edit: Ezekial, I'm actually embarassed for you that you'd say such a stupid thing. You realize the Grecian gods were never written down in any old books right?
Yeah I'm with you. I don't know how they can all be so blind. And Hercules, what a hero! I am forever indebted to Him. Praise Zeus.Why do you not follow Zeus instead of chasing after false gods in old books?
Uhhhhh - maybe because he is a false god in an old book
Cause Greece is a lot farther away than Scandinavia.
Those Christians should be ashamed for perverting exquisite Greek mythology by adding the inferior Roman. Romans always copied the Greeks in everything but never managed to achieve their level of excellence.
I view all gods as inferior to my living God.
because i prefer Dagda, and the Tuath de dannon.
besides i look much better in a robe than i do in a toga.
I have never met Zeus, but I have met Jesus Christ. Like so many have. If you ever do then you will understand. Amazing grace...once I was blind but now I see. Maybe one day you will see too.
Hahahaha! What about Demeter? She sacrificed a lot too! I would think she would be a better comparison. Why not worship the Goddess? Far more believable we came from conception then some sand and a man's bone ;)
They don't understand Odin's sacrifice of hanging for nine days to bring them the runes either. Go figure. Ingrates.
i met zeus .. i even see people using him in dota ..
zeus is real , evidence of zeus = lightning . its so real , why don't you guys just believe him
Same principle, different religion...uh myth...
lol. Same reason I think Christianity is crap. But I have to admit I always felt partial to Athena.
Edit: Ezekial, I'm actually embarassed for you that you'd say such a stupid thing. You realize the Grecian gods were never written down in any old books right?
Do you know that much of Indian History Text Books contains False & Fabricated information ?
Re-writing of Indian Historical Text Books
http://blogs.epicindia.com/blokesblogin/2005/08/rewriting_indian_history_in_te.html
Do you know the Meaning of Bharatvarsha - which mean entire Bharata ( india ) are decendents of an ancient Hindu King called Bharata ( Grandson of Maharishi Vishwamitra ).
The Original %26amp; Ancient Name of India JAMBUDWIPA.
Read :Konraad Elst's Negationism in India: Concealing the Record of Islam, Francois Gautier's Rewriting Indian History contributes to the growing literature of dissent against the ';standard'; textbooks of India's history.
A conspiracy to feed Hindus with absolute DIS-INFORMATION , FABRICATION %26amp; FALSIFICATION OF INDIAN HISTORY in Indian School Text Books . Congress Government is using Hindu Money to kill Hindus %26amp; Hinduism. Dividing us on basis of RACE ...since Hinduism Unites us all.
';The massacres perpetuated by Muslims in India are unparalleled in history, bigger than the Holocaust of the Jews by the Nazis; or the massacre of the Armenians by the Turks; more extensive even than the slaughter of the South American native populations by the invading Spanish and Portuguese.';
Much of Modern Day North Indian Population are propably Decendents of Islamic Invadors ...all of us Hindus in northern india have muslim blood ..since our ancestors were raped %26amp; mutilated by islamic Invadors.Do you know that much of Indian History Text Books contains False %26amp; Fabricated information ?
He who controls the past, controls the future; and he who controls the present, controls the past.
-The Ministry of InformationDo you know that much of Indian History Text Books contains False %26amp; Fabricated information ?
It is said- History is a fable agreed upon. What is correct history- is a matter for historians to discuss and revise history based on historic evidences.
For peace, progress and prosperity to build vibrant India, we need good will among all communities. Religion is a matter of individuals. We must devote our intention to issues like education to all, equality of opportunities, social justice, economic progress and prosperity. It is no use in distorting history for maligning minorities.
It is true that our Indian History is fabricated and does not produce the real information but some authors have tried to bring the facts like Bharatvarsh ka Vrihat Itihas by Pdt.Bhagvadutt Published by Itihas Prakashan Mandal,South Patel Market,New Delhi-12,part I and II ;And Bhartiya Itihas Punerlekhan kyon ? evam Puranon mein Itihas vivek by Dr.Kunwar Lal Vyassishya.
okizzzzzzz
None can tell the truth about past.
Not that surprising. Many governments tend to control public opinion and direction through propaganda and disinformation. The American government likes to claim Abraham Lincoln as a kind and benevolent leader who wanted to emancipate slaves. Nothing could be further from the truth. Lincoln was in fact a cruel and ruthless dictator who invaded free and sovereign states, allowed his army to rape and pillage the citizens and then forced the states back into the northern controlled union at gunpoint. It only cost about a million lives and hundreds of thousands more their liberties and freedoms when they spoke out against his policies and he had them imprisoned without due process, or even being charged with anything.
It worries me a little that incoming U.S. president O' Bama likes to claim Lincoln as his hero. What are we in for now?
http://blogs.epicindia.com/blokesblogin/2005/08/rewriting_indian_history_in_te.html
Do you know the Meaning of Bharatvarsha - which mean entire Bharata ( india ) are decendents of an ancient Hindu King called Bharata ( Grandson of Maharishi Vishwamitra ).
The Original %26amp; Ancient Name of India JAMBUDWIPA.
Read :Konraad Elst's Negationism in India: Concealing the Record of Islam, Francois Gautier's Rewriting Indian History contributes to the growing literature of dissent against the ';standard'; textbooks of India's history.
A conspiracy to feed Hindus with absolute DIS-INFORMATION , FABRICATION %26amp; FALSIFICATION OF INDIAN HISTORY in Indian School Text Books . Congress Government is using Hindu Money to kill Hindus %26amp; Hinduism. Dividing us on basis of RACE ...since Hinduism Unites us all.
';The massacres perpetuated by Muslims in India are unparalleled in history, bigger than the Holocaust of the Jews by the Nazis; or the massacre of the Armenians by the Turks; more extensive even than the slaughter of the South American native populations by the invading Spanish and Portuguese.';
Much of Modern Day North Indian Population are propably Decendents of Islamic Invadors ...all of us Hindus in northern india have muslim blood ..since our ancestors were raped %26amp; mutilated by islamic Invadors.Do you know that much of Indian History Text Books contains False %26amp; Fabricated information ?
He who controls the past, controls the future; and he who controls the present, controls the past.
-The Ministry of InformationDo you know that much of Indian History Text Books contains False %26amp; Fabricated information ?
It is said- History is a fable agreed upon. What is correct history- is a matter for historians to discuss and revise history based on historic evidences.
For peace, progress and prosperity to build vibrant India, we need good will among all communities. Religion is a matter of individuals. We must devote our intention to issues like education to all, equality of opportunities, social justice, economic progress and prosperity. It is no use in distorting history for maligning minorities.
It is true that our Indian History is fabricated and does not produce the real information but some authors have tried to bring the facts like Bharatvarsh ka Vrihat Itihas by Pdt.Bhagvadutt Published by Itihas Prakashan Mandal,South Patel Market,New Delhi-12,part I and II ;And Bhartiya Itihas Punerlekhan kyon ? evam Puranon mein Itihas vivek by Dr.Kunwar Lal Vyassishya.
okizzzzzzz
None can tell the truth about past.
Not that surprising. Many governments tend to control public opinion and direction through propaganda and disinformation. The American government likes to claim Abraham Lincoln as a kind and benevolent leader who wanted to emancipate slaves. Nothing could be further from the truth. Lincoln was in fact a cruel and ruthless dictator who invaded free and sovereign states, allowed his army to rape and pillage the citizens and then forced the states back into the northern controlled union at gunpoint. It only cost about a million lives and hundreds of thousands more their liberties and freedoms when they spoke out against his policies and he had them imprisoned without due process, or even being charged with anything.
It worries me a little that incoming U.S. president O' Bama likes to claim Lincoln as his hero. What are we in for now?
Why do the American history books teach false information?
I read the Americans history just to find out more about some of the wars they had. The war in 1812 all it said was there was a war between Britain and the U.S. and it spilt into Canada.
In everyone else's history books, it states that after the Americans won the war of Independence they wanted to take over Canada because it was such a huge area of land. The British, French, and some of the natives fought against them; we won mainly because Laura Secord warned the British that the Americans were planning a surprise attack in the night. Naturally there attack failed and the Americans lost tons of soldiers as well as the war. The people who fought for Canada (British and French soldiers) remained in Canada, and are our ancestors. The first Canadians pulverized the Americans and the Americans to this day won't admit to it, how childish.
If the Americans won the war, then Canada wouldn't exist. I can't trust anything they say in their history books, I can't believe how much time I wasted on them.Why do the American history books teach false information?
nobody spends much time on the wars they lost because it becomes a list of failures.
When you read a history book about your country, (Not specifically Canada, but any country) what you are basically reading is propaganda.
That's why it's important to read the history of other countries and your own thru the eyes of more than your own country. Russia, Japan and the US were all involved in WW II. All three versions of that war are vastly different. About all they agree on are that certain battles were fought on certain dates. The whys and hows are as different as day and night.
And you didn't waste your time. You may not have found what you were looking for, but you learned something else, didn't you? All reading pays off in some way at some time.Why do the American history books teach false information?
Interesting. You are right in that American history doesn't tell us we invaded Canada. It does mention that the UK was seizing American sailors off our ships and making them serve in the British navy. I understood that was one of the underlying causes of the war.
Oh, and the Battle of New Orleans was fought after the treaty was signed. Communication was slow.
It's true. However you forgot about the Canadian partisans. It wasn't British or French soliders that marched to Washington after the Americans lit York (Toronto) a blaze. It was Canadian militia who marched to Washington and lit the White House on fire in retailiation.
Guess what. You're right. Every time we've tried to invade Canada, we've gotten our butts handed to us, leaving you free to come up with that amazing Canadian addition to world cuisine: french fries with curds.
Grats on that.
';What is true depends on one's point of view'; - Obi-wan Kenobi.
To put it another way, NEVER rely on just one point of view when reading history.
good for you sassy
About time someone did this
well done
You oversimplify the war.
There were certainly many in the U.S. who wanted to take over some Canadian territory, and the war began when the U.S. invaded Canada. However, the British wanted a neutral Indian state in the area that is now Michigan, Ohio, and Indiana, and they failed at that. Also, the war war fought in the south, such as Barbados and New Orleans, which had nothing to do with Canada.
The U.S. was also concerned about pressing its citizens into labor on British ships, a practice that ended because of the war.
Both Canada and the United States felt like they had gained a victory in the war.
In everyone else's history books, it states that after the Americans won the war of Independence they wanted to take over Canada because it was such a huge area of land. The British, French, and some of the natives fought against them; we won mainly because Laura Secord warned the British that the Americans were planning a surprise attack in the night. Naturally there attack failed and the Americans lost tons of soldiers as well as the war. The people who fought for Canada (British and French soldiers) remained in Canada, and are our ancestors. The first Canadians pulverized the Americans and the Americans to this day won't admit to it, how childish.
If the Americans won the war, then Canada wouldn't exist. I can't trust anything they say in their history books, I can't believe how much time I wasted on them.Why do the American history books teach false information?
nobody spends much time on the wars they lost because it becomes a list of failures.
When you read a history book about your country, (Not specifically Canada, but any country) what you are basically reading is propaganda.
That's why it's important to read the history of other countries and your own thru the eyes of more than your own country. Russia, Japan and the US were all involved in WW II. All three versions of that war are vastly different. About all they agree on are that certain battles were fought on certain dates. The whys and hows are as different as day and night.
And you didn't waste your time. You may not have found what you were looking for, but you learned something else, didn't you? All reading pays off in some way at some time.Why do the American history books teach false information?
Interesting. You are right in that American history doesn't tell us we invaded Canada. It does mention that the UK was seizing American sailors off our ships and making them serve in the British navy. I understood that was one of the underlying causes of the war.
Oh, and the Battle of New Orleans was fought after the treaty was signed. Communication was slow.
It's true. However you forgot about the Canadian partisans. It wasn't British or French soliders that marched to Washington after the Americans lit York (Toronto) a blaze. It was Canadian militia who marched to Washington and lit the White House on fire in retailiation.
Guess what. You're right. Every time we've tried to invade Canada, we've gotten our butts handed to us, leaving you free to come up with that amazing Canadian addition to world cuisine: french fries with curds.
Grats on that.
';What is true depends on one's point of view'; - Obi-wan Kenobi.
To put it another way, NEVER rely on just one point of view when reading history.
good for you sassy
About time someone did this
well done
You oversimplify the war.
There were certainly many in the U.S. who wanted to take over some Canadian territory, and the war began when the U.S. invaded Canada. However, the British wanted a neutral Indian state in the area that is now Michigan, Ohio, and Indiana, and they failed at that. Also, the war war fought in the south, such as Barbados and New Orleans, which had nothing to do with Canada.
The U.S. was also concerned about pressing its citizens into labor on British ships, a practice that ended because of the war.
Both Canada and the United States felt like they had gained a victory in the war.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)