Religion and Ethics Forum
Religion and Ethics Discussion => Christian Topic => Topic started by: newnature on April 21, 2016, 06:06:55 AM
-
A figure of speech relates to the form in which the words are used. It consists in the fact that a word or words are used out of their ordinary sense, or place, or manner, for the purpose of attracting our attention to what is said. In Genesis chapter three, we have neither allegory, myth, legend, nor fable, but literal historical facts set forth, and emphasized by the use of certain figures of speech. When Satan is spoken of as a ‘serpent’, it is the figure Hypocatastasis or Implication. An implied resemblance or representation.
Other figures of speech are used in Genesis 3:14-15, but only for the same purpose of emphasizing the truth and the reality of what is said. “Thou shalt bruise his heel”, it cannot mean his literal heel of flesh and blood, but suffering, more temporary in character.
“He shall crush thy head”, it means something more than a skull of bone, and brain, and hair. It means that all Satan’s plans and plots, policy and purposes, will one day be finally crushed and ended, never more to mar or to hinder the purposes of God.
This will be effected when Satan shall be bruised under our feet (Romans 16:20). This, again, will not be our literal feet, but something much more real. The bruising of Christ’s heel is the most eloquent and impressive way of foretelling the most solemn events; and to point out that the effort made by Satan to evade his doom, then threatened, would become the very means of insuring its accomplishment; for it was through the death of Christ that he who had the power of death would be destroyed; and all Satan’ power and policy brought to an end, and all his works destroyed.
The history of Genesis chapter three is intended to teach us the fact that Satan’s sphere of activities is in the religious sphere, and not the spheres of crime or immorality; that his battlefield is not the sins arising from human depravity, but the unbelief of the human heart. We are not to look for Satan’s activities today in the newspaper press, or the police courts; but in the pulpit, and in professors’ chairs. Whenever the Word of God is called in question, there we see the trail of that old serpent?
Genesis 3:14-15 - What literal words could portray these literal facts so wonderfully as these expressive figures of speech? It is the same with the other figures used in versus 14, “On thy belly shalt thou go”. This figure means infinitely more than the literal belly of flesh and blood. It paints for the eyes of our mind the picture of Satan’s ultimate humiliation; for prostration was ever the most eloquent sign of subjection. Ps. 44:25 denotes such a prolonged prostration and such a depth of submission as could never be conveyed or expressed in literal words.
-
A figure of speech relates to the form in which the words are used. It consists in the fact that a word or words are used out of their ordinary sense, or place, or manner, for the purpose of attracting our attention to what is said. In Genesis chapter three, we have neither allegory, myth, legend, nor fable, but literal historical facts set forth, and emphasized by the use of certain figures of speech. When Satan is spoken of as a ‘serpent’, it is the figure Hypocatastasis or Implication. An implied resemblance or representation.
Other figures of speech are used in Genesis 3:14-15, but only for the same purpose of emphasizing the truth and the reality of what is said. “Thou shalt bruise his heel”, it cannot mean his literal heel of flesh and blood, but suffering, more temporary in character.
“He shall crush thy head”, it means something more than a skull of bone, and brain, and hair. It means that all Satan’s plans and plots, policy and purposes, will one day be finally crushed and ended, never more to mar or to hinder the purposes of God.
This will be effected when Satan shall be bruised under our feet (Romans 16:20). This, again, will not be our literal feet, but something much more real. The bruising of Christ’s heel is the most eloquent and impressive way of foretelling the most solemn events; and to point out that the effort made by Satan to evade his doom, then threatened, would become the very means of insuring its accomplishment; for it was through the death of Christ that he who had the power of death would be destroyed; and all Satan’ power and policy brought to an end, and all his works destroyed.
The history of Genesis chapter three is intended to teach us the fact that Satan’s sphere of activities is in the religious sphere, and not the spheres of crime or immorality; that his battlefield is not the sins arising from human depravity, but the unbelief of the human heart. We are not to look for Satan’s activities today in the newspaper press, or the police courts; but in the pulpit, and in professors’ chairs. Whenever the Word of God is called in question, there we see the trail of that old serpent?
Genesis 3:14-15 - What literal words could portray these literal facts so wonderfully as these expressive figures of speech? It is the same with the other figures used in versus 14, “On thy belly shalt thou go”. This figure means infinitely more than the literal belly of flesh and blood. It paints for the eyes of our mind the picture of Satan’s ultimate humiliation; for prostration was ever the most eloquent sign of subjection. Ps. 44:25 denotes such a prolonged prostration and such a depth of submission as could never be conveyed or expressed in literal words.
Thank you { R} look forward to lots more from you.
and welcome
~TW~
-
But for the figurative language of verses 14 and 15 no one would have thought of referring the third chapter of Genesis to a snake; no more than he does when reading the third chapter from the end of Revelation (ch. 20:2). Indeed, the explanation added there, that the “old serpent” is the Devil and Satan, would immediately lead one to connect the word “old” with the earlier and former mention of the serpent in Genesis chapter 3; and the fact that it was Satan himself who tempted “the second man”, “the last Adam”, would force the conclusion that no other than the personal Satan could have been the tempter of “the first man, Adam”.
-
Much of the Bible is not historical especially the creation myth! ::)
-
NN, it should be noted that the language, phraseology and even terminology used in the first 11 chapters of Genesis differ dramatically from that used in chapters 12 and following. This suggests that we need to take Genesis as more than just a single entity, and Biblical scholars are increasingly suggesting that, as the language better reflects Jewish usage of the 5th and 6th centuries BCE, we need to consider whether Genesis 1-11 is less a historical record and more of a theological treatise written shortly after the Jewish return from exile in Babylon explaining how and why the Jewish God differs and is more powerful than the Babylonian gods that they would have had contact with for the previous years (and possibly come to regard as worth worshipping).
-
Much of the Bible is not historical especially the creation myth! ::)
It isn't a myth, Floo; its a theological treatise.
-
It isn't a myth, Floo; its a theological treatise.
A lot of it is very silly nonsense. Making out poor old Satan to be the bad guy is very unfair when god is so very evil, if the deeds attributed to it were factual.
-
NN, it should be noted that the language, phraseology and even terminology used in the first 11 chapters of Genesis differ dramatically from that used in chapters 12 and following. This suggests that we need to take Genesis as more than just a single entity, and Biblical scholars are increasingly suggesting that, as the language better reflects Jewish usage of the 5th and 6th centuries BCE, we need to consider whether Genesis 1-11 is less a historical record and more of a theological treatise written shortly after the Jewish return from exile in Babylon explaining how and why the Jewish God differs and is more powerful than the Babylonian gods that they would have had contact with for the previous years (and possibly come to regard as worth worshipping).
Let’s look at the beginning of Genesis, “And” is the figure of speech Polysyndeton or Many Ands. The repetition of the word “and” at the beginning of successive clauses, each independent, important, and emphatic, with no climax at the end. 34 verses of this introduction, each one of 102 separate acts is emphasized; and the important word “God” in versus 1 is carried like a lamp through the whole of this Introduction.
“The earth” is the figure of speech Anadiplosis or Like sentence endings and beginnings. The word or words concluding one sentence are repeated at the beginning of another.
“Without form” the Hebrew word is ‘tohu va bohu’ and is the figure of speech Paronomasia or Rhyming words. The repetition of words similar in sound, but not necessarily in sense. Without form, one of the Hebrew words is ‘tohu’ and is used as a subsequent event. Not created ‘tohu’ (Isa. 45:18), but became ‘tohu’ (2 Pet. 3:5-6). The other word is ‘bohu’ and is rendered “void”, means desolate. The two words together occur in Gen. 1:2a; Isa. 34:11; Jer. 4:23.
“Face” in Genesis 1:2a is the figure Pleonasm or Redundancy. Where what is said is, immediately after, put in another or opposite way to make it impossible for the sense to be missed.
In Genesis 1:2a, the two verbs ‘was’ should be the verb ‘to become’. The Revisers ill-advisedly decided that “all such words, now printed in italics, as are plainly implied in the Hebrew, and necessary in English, be printed in common type. One of the consequences of this decision is that the verb “to be” is not distinguished from the verb “to become”, so that the lessons conveyed are lost.
-
It isn't a myth, Floo; its a theological treatise.
The creation story at least is myth. No just, loving power would punish future generations for a sin which Adam and Eve committed.
-
Much of the Bible is not historical especially the creation myth! ::)
Genesis shouldn't have happened.
-
It isn't a myth, Floo; its a theological treatise.
The Nachash, or serpent, who beguiled Eve (2 Cor. 11:3) is spoken of as “an angel of light” in v.14. Have we not, in this, a clear intimation that it was not a snake, but a being of glorious aspect, apparently an angel, to whom Eve paid such great deference, acknowledging him as one who seemed to possess superior knowledge, and who was evidently a being of a superior (not of an inferior) order?
-
A lot of it is very silly nonsense. Making out poor old Satan to be the bad guy is very unfair when god is so very evil, if the deeds attributed to it were factual.
The word “beast” does not say that either a serpent or Satan was a “beast”, but only that he was “more wise” than any other living being. We cannot conceive Eve as holding converse with a snake, but we can understand her being fascinated by one, apparently “an angel of light” possessing superior and supernatural knowledge. When Satan is spoken of as a “serpent”, it is the figure Hypocatastasie or Implication; it no more means a snake than it does when when Herod is called a “fox” or when Judah is called “a lion’s whelp”. It is the same figure when “doctrine” is called “leaven” (Matt. 16:6). It shows that something much more real and truer to truth is intended. If a figure of speech is thus employed, it is for the purpose of expressing the truth more impressively; and is intended to be a figure of something much more real than the letter of the word.
-
I'm still waiting for the punchline...
Lots of words, newnature, but what is your point?
-
The creation story at least is myth. No just, loving power would punish future generations for a sin which Adam and Eve committed.
Adam and Eve had childlike innocents, but after eating of that tree. Evil is a product of human behavior, not a principal inherent in the cosmos. It is the power of moral choice alone, that is Yahweh like and having that good and bad knowledge is no guarantee that one will choose or incline towards the good. The very action that brought Adam and Eve a Yahweh like awareness of their mortal autonomy, was an action that was taken in opposition to Yahweh.
Yahweh knows that, that human beings will become like Yahweh, knowing good and bad; it’s one of the things about Yahweh, he knows good and bad, and has chosen the good. Human beings, and only human beings are the potential source of evil, responsibility for evil will lie in the hands of human beings. Evil is represented not as a physical reality, it’s not built into the structure of Eden, evil is a condition of human existence, and to assert that evil stems from human behavior.
-
I'm still waiting for the punchline...
Lots of words, newnature, but what is your point?
We know that God did indeed create some kind of structure around him, because he went to the north side of that structure and laid the north side of it over the empty place that is outside of that structure. It is in the north of the north of that new addition to that structure, that God established a different throne to sit on, because his throne (the Ark) is in the tent that God pitched in the north of the north also. Job 26:7 also shows that God hanged the earth not on anything in the middle of this new structure.
Did God create gold (Ezekiel 28:13)? As God and his fellow travelers rested from their journey, a day is like 10,000 years to God. When God created the earth, what was created? Earth’s core and the plates floating on the core. Did God create mountains? The earth makes it’s own mountains. A day is like 10,000 years to God, and they indeed took a long rest. The earth made the gold, but in order for God to mine gold, he would have to have legs and arms in order to swing a pick. The figure of speech called Anthropopatheia or Condescension means ascribing of Human Attributes, etc., to God. God, by using this figure, condescends to the infirmity of man.
-
We know that God did indeed create some kind of structure around him...
No, we don't.
..., because he went to the north side of that structure...
[blah, blah, blah]
Still waiting. ::)
-
No, we don't.
Still waiting. ::)
Now at one point in time in God’s life, he chose to create some kind of structure that separated him from the empty place outside of that structure. But God was not alone, because God rode around on a kind of throne chariot. God’s enthroned above four magnificent creatures. Each of these has a human body and then four faces: the face of a human, the face of a lion, the face of an ox, and the face of an eagle. These 4 magnificent creatures have the same kind of eternal life that God has within himself, but what these magnificent creatures bodies are made of, is unclear. Not only were these 4 magnificent creatures with God, but there were 24 other individuals with God.
These 24 individuals are named Elders and they also have the same kind of eternal life that God has within himself, but these Elders have that eternal life in some kind of flesh and bone body. Now God’s body is different then these 24 Elders and these 4 magnificent creatures. God is a spirit being, meaning his body is composed of a substance called spirit. God also has a unique kind of life within that body composed of that substance called spirit, but the eternal life God has within himself produces some kind of light (His glory).
-
new,
We know that God did indeed create some kind of structure around him...
Who's "we"? Perhaps if you stepped back a little and demonstrated this "God" in the first place you'd have a platform from which to discuss his thoughts and doings, and who knows - maybe the Templeton prize too!
-
new,
Now at one point in time in God’s life, he chose to create some kind of structure that separated him from the empty place outside of that structure. But God was not alone, because God rode around on a kind of throne chariot. God’s enthroned above four magnificent creatures. Each of these has a human body and then four faces: the face of a human, the face of a lion, the face of an ox, and the face of an eagle. These 4 magnificent creatures have the same kind of eternal life that God has within himself, but what these magnificent creatures bodies are made of, is unclear. Not only were these 4 magnificent creatures with God, but there were 24 other individuals with God.
These 24 individuals are named Elders and they also have the same kind of eternal life that God has within himself, but these Elders have that eternal life in some kind of flesh and bone body. Now God’s body is different then these 24 Elders and these 4 magnificent creatures. God is a spirit being, meaning his body is composed of a substance called spirit. God also has a unique kind of life within that body composed of that substance called spirit, but the eternal life God has within himself produces some kind of light (His glory).
Are you a person or some kind of random word generator? If the former, I hear that Ryman's have a sale on green ink this week - better hurry!
-
Now at one point in time in God’s life, he chose to create some kind of structure that separated him from the empty place outside of that structure. But God was not alone, because God rode around on a kind of throne chariot. God’s enthroned above four magnificent creatures. Each of these has a human body and then four faces: the face of a human, the face of a lion, the face of an ox, and the face of an eagle. These 4 magnificent creatures have the same kind of eternal life that God has within himself, but what these magnificent creatures bodies are made of, is unclear. Not only were these 4 magnificent creatures with God, but there were 24 other individuals with God.
These 24 individuals are named Elders and they also have the same kind of eternal life that God has within himself, but these Elders have that eternal life in some kind of flesh and bone body. Now God’s body is different then these 24 Elders and these 4 magnificent creatures. God is a spirit being, meaning his body is composed of a substance called spirit. God also has a unique kind of life within that body composed of that substance called spirit, but the eternal life God has within himself produces some kind of light (His glory).
Clearly you love your mythology (and typing a lot of words) but I still haven't detected the hint of any point to all this storytelling.
-
new,
Who's "we"? Perhaps if you stepped back a little and demonstrated this "God" in the first place you'd have a platform from which to discuss his thoughts and doings, and who knows - maybe the Templeton prize too!
We who study Genesis. Genesis shouldn't have happened. Why is the earth flooded out in Genesis 1:1?
-
We who study Genesis. Genesis shouldn't have happened. Why is the earth flooded out in Genesis 1:1?
A lot of Genesis clearly didn't happen; the flood being a case in point.
-
new,
Are you a person or some kind of random word generator? If the former, I hear that Ryman's have a sale on green ink this week - better hurry!
We who do word studies knows about the north.
Isaiah 14:13 - The north, this helps us to localize the dwelling place of God.
Psalms 75:6 - It comes not from the east, nor from the west, nor from the south, therefore promotion comes from the north. The immediate place of God’s throne, to which Lucifer aspires.
Job 26:7 - In order to stretch out the north over the empty place, there has to be a structure in place separating whatever is inside it from the empty place outside of it.
-
Clearly you love your mythology (and typing a lot of words) but I still haven't detected the hint of any point to all this storytelling.
If a serpent was afterward called a nachash, it was because it exercised fascination over other creatures, and if it became known as “wise”, it was not because of its own innate positive knowledge, but of its wisdom in hiding away from all observation; and because of its association with one of the names of Satan (that old serpent) who “beguiled Eve” (2 Corh. 11:3-11).
-
A lot of Genesis clearly didn't happen; the flood being a case in point.
Genesis happen. Genesis shouldn't have happen, but it did happen.
-
Genesis happen. Genesis shouldn't have happen, but it did happen.
How do you know?
Because it says so in a book?
-
Genesis happen. Genesis shouldn't have happen, but it did happen.
Evidence...?
-
How do you know?
Because it says so in a book?
I showed were the earth was formed. It was formed before any living thing was made, formed or created.
-
new,
We who study Genesis.
Fine - all you need to do now then is to build a logical path from studying Genesis to "knowing" what a supposed god did. Good luck with it.
Genesis shouldn't have happened. Why is the earth flooded out in Genesis 1:1?
Presumably because the authors had gleaned enough inherited stories of ancient but localised floods to be able to gussy them up into a fiction about a global phenomenon.
What though does that have to do with your personal faith that there is (or was) something you call "God", and why claim "we" when you actually meant "I"?
-
Evidence...?
Figures of speech is enough evidence for you.
-
I showed were the earth was formed. It was formed before any living thing was made, formed or created.
Not sure how you know this?
You are just making it up.
What evidence do you have to backup your assertions?
Because it says so in a book?
-
Figures of speech is enough evidence for you.
what?
-
new,
We who do word studies knows about the north.
Isaiah 14:13 - The north, this helps us to localize the dwelling place of God.
Psalms 75:6 - It comes not from the east, nor from the west, nor from the south, therefore promotion comes from the north. The immediate place of God’s throne, to which Lucifer aspires.
Job 26:7 - In order to stretch out the north over the empty place, there has to be a structure in place separating whatever is inside it from the empty place outside of it.
Riiiiight....okaaaay then (steps gingerly away while asking nurse to consider upping your dosage as the rambling incoherence is getting worse than ever)
-
Figures of speech is enough evidence for you.
No, they aren't.
-
new,
Genesis happen. Genesis shouldn't have happen, but it did happen.
No it didn't - it's just a narrative that was persuasive to some folks at the time because it appeared to have explanatory power, just as stories about Thor explained thunder to the norse people.
-
new,
Figures of speech is enough evidence for you.
Oh dear. Would that be any figures of speech, or just the ones in a particular book you happen to find persuasive?
-
new,
Fine - all you need to do now then is to build a logical path from studying Genesis to "knowing" what a supposed god did. Good luck with it.
Presumably because the authors had gleaned enough inherited stories of ancient but localised floods to be able to gussy them up into a fiction about a global phenomenon.
What though does that have to do with your personal faith that there is (or was) something you call "God", and why claim "we" when you actually meant "I"?
Lucifer attacked God, he took control of the earth and then flooded it out. Genesis is about how God took control back, but to be fair to Lucifer, God put that tree of knowledge of good and bad in the garden.
-
Not sure how you know this?
You are just making it up.
What evidence do you have to backup your assertions?
Because it says so in a book?
Did God create gold?
-
Did God create gold?
No.
Stars did
-
Lucifer attacked God, he took control of the earth and then flooded it out. Genesis is about how God took control back, but to be fair to Lucifer, God put that tree of knowledge of good and bad in the garden.
You actually think this is true, do you?
If so, why?
-
new,
Lucifer attacked God, he took control of the earth and then flooded it out. Genesis is about how God took control back, but to be fair to Lucifer, God put that tree of knowledge of good and bad in the garden.
Blimey, you really do have it bad don't you. Lucifer eh? A tree of knowledge too it seems? And you seriously think these things to be real and not fictional?
Seriously?
-
what?
Just a book! This book uses all known figures of speech there are. No way around figures of speech.
-
Just a book! This book uses all known figures of speech there are. No way around figures of speech.
Why not.
Shakespeare created loads more, so what.
Figures of speach mean nothing.
-
new,
Riiiiight....okaaaay then (steps gingerly away while asking nurse to consider upping your dosage as the rambling incoherence is getting worse than ever)
Revelations shows the north, where the 24 Elders are sitting.
-
No, they aren't.
You will never get around them.
-
And I thought TW and Sassy were off the scale - this is some industrial grade fruit-loopism, and frankly it's a bit uncomfortable. Unless matey is a total wind up merchant he doesn't appear to be the full ticket so perhaps it'll be a kindness just to leave him alone?
-
new,
No it didn't - it's just a narrative that was persuasive to some folks at the time because it appeared to have explanatory power, just as stories about Thor explained thunder to the norse people.
The fact that Genesis shouldn't have happen, is prove enough for you that it did happen.
-
Revelations shows the north, where the 24 Elders are sitting.
This is just bonkers!
-
new,
Oh dear. Would that be any figures of speech, or just the ones in a particular book you happen to find persuasive?
To bad you didn't read or study what I wrote.
-
BR,
This is just bonkers!
And then some...
-
To bad you didn't read or study what I wrote.
I don't think this is real.
I think you are posting as a joke.
-
The fact that Genesis shouldn't have happen, is prove enough for you that it did happen.
Insane.
-
Just a book! This book uses all known figures of speech there are. No way around figures of speech.
Figures of speech as evidence. Well, what it lacks in sanity, it makes up for in originality, I guess...
-
No.
Stars did
Not so, no stars were around when God hung the earth in the middle of the large structure.
-
Not so, no stars were around when God hung the earth in the middle of the large structure.
Wibble
-
You will never get around them.
I already did.
-
You actually think this is true, do you?
If so, why?
God was the light source of the earth. How can God visit the earth and have a relationship with the beings living on that earth and still maintain the light source of the earth?
-
What a load of pretentious crap!
-
new,
Blimey, you really do have it bad don't you. Lucifer eh? A tree of knowledge too it seems? And you seriously think these things to be real and not fictional?
Seriously?
“Face” in Genesis 1:2a is the figure Pleonasm or Redundancy. Where what is said is, immediately after, put in another or opposite way to make it impossible for the sense to be missed. Blimey, you really overlooked this impossible event?
-
Why not.
Shakespeare created loads more, so what.
Figures of speach mean nothing.
“Without form” the Hebrew word is ‘tohu va bohu’ and is the figure of speech Paronomasia or Rhyming words. The repetition of words similar in sound, but not necessarily in sense. Without form, one of the Hebrew words is ‘tohu’ and is used as a subsequent event. Not created ‘tohu’ (Isa. 45:18), but became ‘tohu’ (2 Pet. 3:5-6). The other word is ‘bohu’ and is rendered “void”, means desolate. The two words together occur in Gen. 1:2a; Isa. 34:11; Jer. 4:23. If they mean nothing to you, why are you here talking about the bible?
-
Dear newnature,
Welcome to the forum, your blog thingy, it could just be my tired old eyes but the format is kind of sore on the eyes.
Gonnagle.
-
And I thought TW and Sassy were off the scale - this is some industrial grade fruit-loopism, and frankly it's a bit uncomfortable. Unless matey is a total wind up merchant he doesn't appear to be the full ticket so perhaps it'll be a kindness just to leave him alone?
Should it be a problem for you that God had something going on before Genesis?
-
This is just bonkers!
Not bonkers at all. That north part of that structure is there.
-
BR,
And then some...
Job 26:7 - In order to stretch out the north over the empty place, there has to be a structure in place separating whatever is inside it from the empty place outside of it.
-
I don't think this is real.
I think you are posting as a joke.
Seems nothing is real to you. Isaiah 14:13 - The north, this helps us to localize the dwelling place of God.
-
Insane.
Genesis 1:1 shouldn’t have happened. The bible assumes that Lucifer exits and never questions that assumption. The earth flooded out proves Lucifer is not an unfounded assumption. The beginning of the universe is in Genesis 1:1. Darkness was upon the earth, because it appears the earth is now in some kind of black structure now. Lucifer and those who helped him out are swimming around on the earth. Now the earth, the opposite of the created order is ‘nothing,’ (water). But to the ancients, the opposite of the created order was something much worse than ‘nothing’ (chaos).
-
Figures of speech as evidence. Well, what it lacks in sanity, it makes up for in originality, I guess...
What literal words could portray these literal facts so wonderfully as these expressive figures of speech?
-
Wibble
No stars before Genesis. No need to keep track of time or light the earth. God was the light source, but how can God visit the earth and have a relationship with the beings living on that earth and still maintain the light source of the earth?
-
What a load of pretentious crap!
God is a spirit being, meaning his body is composed of a substance called spirit. God also has a unique kind of life within that body composed of that substance called spirit, but the eternal life God has within himself produces some kind of light (His glory).
John 4:24 God is a spirit, not flesh or material substance.
John 5:26 God has eternal life in himself.
-
I already did.
In Genesis chapter three, we have neither allegory, myth, legend, nor fable, but literal historical facts set forth, and emphasized by the use of certain figures of speech. When Satan is spoken of as a ‘serpent’, it is the figure Hypocatastasis or Implication. An implied resemblance or representation. I didn't see you come close.
-
Dear newnature,
Welcome to the forum, your blog thingy, it could just be my tired old eyes but the format is kind of sore on the eyes.
Gonnagle.
My fingers were sore typing that blog thingy. My brain is still sore reasoning out that blog thingy. I can see how one's eyes would be sore.
-
new,
Seems nothing is real to you. Isaiah 14:13 - The north, this helps us to localize the dwelling place of God.
Possibly you're confusing "God" with Father Christmas?
-
new,
Possibly you're confusing "God" with Father Christmas?
Father Christmas was after the Tower of Babel.
-
new,
Possibly you're confusing "God" with Father Christmas?
Or Superman?
Did he also have a sanctuary at the pole?
-
God is a spirit being, meaning his body is composed of a substance called spirit. God also has a unique kind of life within that body composed of that substance called spirit, but the eternal life God has within himself produces some kind of light (His glory).
John 4:24 God is a spirit, not flesh or material substance.
John 5:26 God has eternal life in himself.
So you respond with more pretentious crap. Do you not realise that all that stuff is the invention of human brains? The Bible is just a collection of stories dreamed up by people who couldn't face the fact that death is the end of us, and were prepared to believe anything to avoid it.
-
As new seems to be unable to construct a coherent thought I'm thinking now that he must some kind of poorly designed algorithm rather than a real person. The random selection of words, barmy assertions, inability to engage with anything that's said in response all point that way at least, and frankly the alternative is too sad to contemplate.
-
As new seems to be unable to construct a coherent thought I'm thinking now that he must some kind of poorly designed algorithm rather than a real person. The random selection of words, barmy assertions, inability to engage with anything that's said in response all point that way at least, and frankly the alternative is too sad to contemplate.
I think it's a bad wind up.
Surely, no one can be this crazy?
-
I think it's a bad wind up.
Surely, no one can be this crazy?
Similar style to Sass, TW and BA.
-
Similar style to Sass, TW and BA.
LJ kindly excuse me from Sass and BA and you, and your mates just for a tiny exercise might explain how nothing can go bang.Which you cant.Now if you wish to consider the newbie as barmy fair enough but I place your beliefs in the same box.
~TW~
-
Dear Leonard,
More kind of NicholasMarks but not as wonderful, yet ;)
But like our Nicholas, I was sent on a little journey.
Analogy: You are acting like a dog.
Metaphor: You are a dog.
Hypocatastasis: Dog!
Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?”
Still a snake or serpent, I don't get this hypocatastasis stuff.
Anyway newnature is different, I like different.
Gonnagle.
-
Is anyone else awaiting the hexagons of lightning to possibly make an appearance? :-\
-
So you respond with more pretentious crap. Do you not realise that all that stuff is the invention of human brains? The Bible is just a collection of stories dreamed up by people who couldn't face the fact that death is the end of us, and were prepared to believe anything to avoid it.
Here is made up stuff. All you have to do is proof that the second Adam's blood didn't drip on the Ark Moses had built.
Matt. 27:51, the earthquake that fractured the rock opened a fissure that ran down through 20 foot of solid rock into a cave and cracked the stone lid on top of a black stone volt where the Ark of the Covenant lie hidden inside, pushing the lid aside. John 19:34, the blood that poured from the side of Jesus, ran down through that crevice and dripped onto the Mercy Seat of the Ark of the Covenant that was hidden by God and the prophet Jeremiah, right under where they crucified Jesus, 620 years earlier when the Babylonians destroyed Salomon’s temple.
The Greek word used for “the cross” on which Jesus was put to death is “stauros,” which denotes an upright pale or stake. It never means two pieces of timber placed across one another at any angle, but always of one piece alone. There is nothing in the Greek of the New Testament even to imply two pieces of timber. The blood of Jesus would do no good for the Israelites dripping on “stauros,” because the second Adam’s blood was the basis by which Yahweh would now have just cause to remit or to clear the accounts of those with faith in time past, those who had trusted Yahweh’s word to them and who obeyed what Yahweh told them to do.
According to Israel’s New Covenant, when would Yahweh finish what forgiveness alone would not accomplish where Israel’s sins were concerned? When would the forgiveness come? At what time would Yahweh completely clear the slate for Israel nationally-those believers who had been baptized according to John the Baptizer’s program? The blood of the second Adam would make it possible,
-
As new seems to be unable to construct a coherent thought I'm thinking now that he must some kind of poorly designed algorithm rather than a real person. The random selection of words, barmy assertions, inability to engage with anything that's said in response all point that way at least, and frankly the alternative is too sad to contemplate.
Let's start with before Heaven (the structure)? Interesting how God is in this empty place.
-
and your mates just for a tiny exercise might explain how nothing can go bang.
~TW~
Only after you acknowledge that nobody here (that is, those with the slightest bit of knowledge not gleaned from the plethora of lunatic literalist websites) has claimed that anything or even 'nothing' - 'went bang'.
And given that the above has been pointed out to you on numerous occasions yet you choose to ignore it, I can only assume that you read this forum with a blindfold on , one finger in one ear, a wet haddock in the other ear and a spare index stuck firmly up your arse, in order to be close to your source of reasoning. ::)
And as that confession is unlikely to happen - I for one will keep you firmly in the same crazy box as the other two.
-
Let's start with before Heaven (the structure)? Interesting how God is in this empty place.
OK let's start with how you know this to be true?
-
Adam and Eve had childlike innocents, but after eating of that tree. Evil is a product of human behavior, not a principal inherent in the cosmos. It is the power of moral choice alone, that is Yahweh like and having that good and bad knowledge is no guarantee that one will choose or incline towards the good. The very action that brought Adam and Eve a Yahweh like awareness of their mortal autonomy, was an action that was taken in opposition to Yahweh.
Yahweh knows that, that human beings will become like Yahweh, knowing good and bad; it’s one of the things about Yahweh, he knows good and bad, and has chosen the good. Human beings, and only human beings are the potential source of evil, responsibility for evil will lie in the hands of human beings. Evil is represented not as a physical reality, it’s not built into the structure of Eden, evil is a condition of human existence, and to assert that evil stems from human behavior.
There is nothing good about god, not even the worst of humans is as bad as it, if the deeds attributed to it were true.
-
Genesis shouldn't have happened.
Well, that's OK then, because it didn't.
It's a post-hoc rationalisation myth to explain why humans appear different to other animals in their degree of self-awareness.
ht
-
new algorithm,
Let's start with before Heaven (the structure). Interesting how God is in this empty place.
Let's not. Let's start instead with what you mean by "Heaven" and why you think it exists.
Then let's have you tell us what you mean by "God", and perhaps tell us why you think he or it exists too.
Then if you're still going perhaps you can share with us why you think an ancient book of myth and fable has anything to say to the objective accuracy or otherwise of your faith beliefs.
And only once you've done all that can we talk about whether or not your question is in fact "interesting".
-
I think it's a bad wind up.
Surely, no one can be this crazy?
But just think about this. Who are these dudes and creatures? Crazy! This is more crazy, Jesus has the same kind of life and same kind of flesh and bone body these 24 Elders have. Interesting, this empty place they are in before God created that structure separating them from that empty place. It is the north side of that structure that God stretch out over the empty place. Job 26:7 - In order to stretch out the north over the empty place, there has to be a structure in place separating whatever is inside it from the empty place outside of it.
These 4 magnificent creatures have the same kind of eternal life that God has within himself, but what these magnificent creatures bodies are made of, is unclear. Not only were these 4 magnificent creatures with God, but there were 24 other individuals with God. These 24 individuals are named Elders and they also have the same kind of eternal life that God has within himself, but these Elders have that eternal life in some kind of flesh and bone body. Now God’s body is different then these 24 Elders and these 4 magnificent creatures.
-
But just think about this. Who are these dudes and creatures? Crazy! This is more crazy, Jesus has the same kind of life and same kind of flesh and bone body these 24 Elders have. Interesting, this empty place they are in before God created that structure separating them from that empty place. It is the north side of that structure that God stretch out over the empty place. Job 26:7 - In order to stretch out the north over the empty place, there has to be a structure in place separating whatever is inside it from the empty place outside of it.
These 4 magnificent creatures have the same kind of eternal life that God has within himself, but what these magnificent creatures bodies are made of, is unclear. Not only were these 4 magnificent creatures with God, but there were 24 other individuals with God. These 24 individuals are named Elders and they also have the same kind of eternal life that God has within himself, but these Elders have that eternal life in some kind of flesh and bone body. Now God’s body is different then these 24 Elders and these 4 magnificent creatures.
You have an overactive imagination. ;D
-
Here is made up stuff. All you have to do is proof that the second Adam's blood didn't drip on the Ark Moses had built.
Matt. 27:51, the earthquake that fractured the rock opened a fissure that ran down through 20 foot of solid rock into a cave and cracked the stone lid on top of a black stone volt where the Ark of the Covenant lie hidden inside, pushing the lid aside. John 19:34, the blood that poured from the side of Jesus, ran down through that crevice and dripped onto the Mercy Seat of the Ark of the Covenant that was hidden by God and the prophet Jeremiah, right under where they crucified Jesus, 620 years earlier when the Babylonians destroyed Salomon’s temple.
The Greek word used for “the cross” on which Jesus was put to death is “stauros,” which denotes an upright pale or stake. It never means two pieces of timber placed across one another at any angle, but always of one piece alone. There is nothing in the Greek of the New Testament even to imply two pieces of timber. The blood of Jesus would do no good for the Israelites dripping on “stauros,” because the second Adam’s blood was the basis by which Yahweh would now have just cause to remit or to clear the accounts of those with faith in time past, those who had trusted Yahweh’s word to them and who obeyed what Yahweh told them to do.
According to Israel’s New Covenant, when would Yahweh finish what forgiveness alone would not accomplish where Israel’s sins were concerned? When would the forgiveness come? At what time would Yahweh completely clear the slate for Israel nationally-those believers who had been baptized according to John the Baptizer’s program? The blood of the second Adam would make it possible,
I give up, mate! You are completely ensnared in rubbish stories, and are too dim to see how silly they are.
Furthermore I'm too old to waste my time pointing the truth out to you. I'll leave it to the younger, more capable people here.
-
But just think about this. Who are these dudes and creatures? Crazy! This is more crazy, Jesus has the same kind of life and same kind of flesh and bone body these 24 Elders have. Interesting, this empty place they are in before God created that structure separating them from that empty place. It is the north side of that structure that God stretch out over the empty place. Job 26:7 - In order to stretch out the north over the empty place, there has to be a structure in place separating whatever is inside it from the empty place outside of it.
These 4 magnificent creatures have the same kind of eternal life that God has within himself, but what these magnificent creatures bodies are made of, is unclear. Not only were these 4 magnificent creatures with God, but there were 24 other individuals with God. These 24 individuals are named Elders and they also have the same kind of eternal life that God has within himself, but these Elders have that eternal life in some kind of flesh and bone body. Now God’s body is different then these 24 Elders and these 4 magnificent creatures.
I think, nn, you're going to have to take a step back and demonstrate why we shouldn't consider these as being just one set (there are others) of ancient myths dating from more credulous times.
-
Similar style to Sass, TW and BA.
As God and his fellow travelers rested from wherever they came from, a day is like 10,000 years to God, and they indeed took a long rest. Here is the beginning of earth science without life on it. But when God created the earth, what was created? The earths core and the plates that float on the core.
I am sure that Sass and TW and BA know more about the science behind making an earth. Does God make mountains or does the earth?
-
Dear newnature,
What's your take on "The Science of Righteousness" or "Dynamic Energy"
Gonnagle.
-
Figures of speech as evidence. Well, what it lacks in sanity, it makes up for in originality, I guess...
What literal words could portray these literal facts so wonderfully as these expressive figures of speech?
You have provided nothing whatsoever to suggest it is anything more than an old myth.
-
Only after you acknowledge that nobody here (that is, those with the slightest bit of knowledge not gleaned from the plethora of lunatic literalist websites) has claimed that anything or even 'nothing' - 'went bang'.
And given that the above has been pointed out to you on numerous occasions yet you choose to ignore it, I can only assume that you read this forum with a blindfold on , one finger in one ear, a wet haddock in the other ear and a spare index stuck firmly up your arse, in order to be close to your source of reasoning. ::)
And as that confession is unlikely to happen - I for one will keep you firmly in the same crazy box as the other two.
Toe Thanks, fill the space you are a waste of thank you,nothing in your head also could never go bang.
~TW~
-
I rather like the new chap and at least now for a short while this dead forum has been bought to life, the message is Toe,Gordon,Gonna,and all bring out your dead. That includes floo :'(
~TW~
-
LJ kindly excuse me from Sass and BA and you, and your mates just for a tiny exercise might explain how nothing can go bang.Which you cant.
So what?
Lack of a complete explanation does not make silly fairytales any more believable...
-
LJ kindly excuse me from Sass and BA and you, and your mates just for a tiny exercise might explain how nothing can go bang.Which you cant.Now if you wish to consider the newbie as barmy fair enough but I place your beliefs in the same box.
~TW~
Revelation chapter four is the first vision “in Heaven” the Throne and its surroundings. 24 elders sitting, round about the throne, arrayed in white garments and on their heads crowns of gold. David arranged his twenty-four courses of the Priesthood after the heavenly order. It was the same in the case of the Tabernacle which served “unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as when Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the Tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern showed thee in the mount.” Hence, they are called “patterns of things in the heaven. It was the same with David and the Temple, so that when David copied on earth was a pattern of real things “in the heaven.” The Temple worship on earth was therefore modeled on that worship which is carried on in heaven: and which, if we were caught up now, we should see being carried on there by these heavenly leaders of heaven’s worship.
-
As God and his fellow travelers rested from wherever they came from, a day is like 10,000 years to God, and they indeed took a long rest. Here is the beginning of earth science without life on it. But when God created the earth, what was created? The earths core and the plates that float on the core.
I am sure that Sass and TW and BA know more about the science behind making an earth. Does God make mountains or does the earth?
Are you 'Stone(d)', if you get my drift? ::) ::) ::)
-
Toe Thanks, fill the space you are a waste of thank you,nothing in your head also could never go bang.
~TW~
~TW~ thanks, you have proved my point.
Now why don't you go on another of your holidays and leave the grown ups to talk.
-
Dear Leonard,
More kind of NicholasMarks but not as wonderful, yet ;)
But like our Nicholas, I was sent on a little journey.
Analogy: You are acting like a dog.
Metaphor: You are a dog.
Hypocatastasis: Dog!
Still a snake or serpent, I don't get this hypocatastasis stuff.
Anyway newnature is different, I like different.
Gonnagle.
Ursa Minor - the lesser sheep-fold. By placing in its very tip the most important, wondrous, and mysterious Polar Star, the central star of the heaven, round which all others revolve. The brightest star, at the point of the tail, is the most important in the whole heaven. it is named Al Ruccaba, which means the turned or ridden on, and is today the Polar or central star, which does not revolve in a circle as does every other star, but remains, apparently, fixed in its position.
But though the star does not revolve like the others, the central point in the heaven is very slowly but steadily moving. When these constellations were formed, the Dragon possessed this important point, and the star in Draco, marked this central point. But, by its gradual recession, that point is sufficiently near this star Al Reccaba, in the Lesser Sheepfold, for it to be what is called the Polar Star. The Polar Star has been removed from the Dragon, and is now in the Lesser Fold.
-
Ursa Minor - the lesser sheep-fold. By placing in its very tip the most important, wondrous, and mysterious Polar Star, the central star of the heaven, round which all others revolve.
This is getting more insane with every post.
You do realise that the stars don't really revolve, don't you...?
-
Dear Leonard,
More kind of NicholasMarks but not as wonderful, yet ;)
True!
But like our Nicholas, I was sent on a little journey.
Analogy: You are acting like a dog.
Metaphor: You are a dog.
Hypocatastasis: Dog!
Still a snake or serpent, I don't get this hypocatastasis stuff.
Anyway newnature is different, I like different.
There's no accounting for tastes. (another of my old mum's wise saws)
-
nn
It seems to me that you are, in effect, proselytising your particular take on theology, and experience suggests you'll just keep repeating your mantra ad nauseum so I think I'll just leave you to it.
-
I am beginning to think NN is a WUM who is having a 'larf' as his posts are quite crazy.
-
Is anyone else awaiting the hexagons of lightning to possibly make an appearance? :-\
Maybe it was lightning on the earth when it was forming itself before Genesis.
-
~TW~ thanks, you have proved my point.
Now why don't you go on another of your holidays and leave the grown ups to talk.
Toe you have no points. I must say I like the new man,so please lots more of newnature lots and lots what a fine feast {spiritual} it is.
~TW~
-
Toe you have no points. I must say I like the new man,so please lots more of newnature lots and lots what a fine feast {spiritual} it is.
~TW~
You appear to be a WUM as well, so no wonder you are in love with nn. ;D
-
new algorithm,
Ursa Minor - the lesser sheep-fold. By placing in its very tip the most important, wondrous, and mysterious Polar Star, the central star of the heaven, round which all others revolve etc...
All the other stars revolve around the Pole Star now do they? Well blimey O'Reilly - maybe someone should inform the observatories that their findings have been wrong all this time. It's gonna be a problem for NASA though because they use fixed star positions for clocks and for navigation purposes. Perhaps you should call them to pass on your insights before they put the next crew of astronauts into space? Dammit man, this is urgent!
-
You appear to be a WUM as well, so no wonder you are in love with nn. ;D
Wum is me :) Oh wum is me.
~TW~
-
Wum is me :) Oh wum is me.
~TW~
Yep, you said it! ;D
-
TW,
Wum is me :) Oh wum is me.
The first and possibly the last thing you'll ever post with which I agree - WUM is you indeed.
-
OK let's start with how you know this to be true?
Job 26:7 - In order to stretch out the north over the empty place, there has to be a structure in place separating whatever is inside it from the empty place outside of it. Whatever land they were travailing in couldn't support life other then the eternal life they each have within themselves.
The north tells us that God did indeed create some kind of structure around him, because he went to the north side of that structure and laid the north side of it over the empty place that is outside of that structure. It is in the north of the north of that new addition to that structure, that God established a different throne to sit on, because his throne (the Ark) is in the tent that God pitched in the north of the north also.
-
TW,
The first and possibly the last thing you'll ever post with which I agree - WUM is you indeed.
Bluehillside explain to me how nothing went bang go on wum me. ;D
~TW~
-
There is nothing good about god, not even the worst of humans is as bad as it, if the deeds attributed to it were true.
Yahweh knows that, that human beings will become like Yahweh, knowing good and bad; it’s one of the things about Yahweh, he knows good and bad, and has chosen the good.
-
Job 26:7 - In order to stretch out the north over the empty place, there has to be a structure in place separating whatever is inside it from the empty place outside of it. Whatever land they were travailing in couldn't support life other then the eternal life they each have within themselves.
The north tells us that God did indeed create some kind of structure around him, because he went to the north side of that structure and laid the north side of it over the empty place that is outside of that structure. It is in the north of the north of that new addition to that structure, that God established a different throne to sit on, because his throne (the Ark) is in the tent that God pitched in the north of the north also.
Precisely
~TW~
-
new algorithm,
Job 26:7 - In order to stretch out the north over the empty place, there has to be a structure in place separating whatever is inside it from the empty place outside of it. Whatever land they were travailing in couldn't support life other then the eternal life they each have within themselves.
The north tells us that God did indeed create some kind of structure around him, because he went to the north side of that structure and laid the north side of it over the empty place that is outside of that structure. It is in the north of the north of that new addition to that structure, that God established a different throne to sit on, because his throne (the Ark) is in the tent that God pitched in the north of the north also.
God was into camping? Well well well - presumably Jesus wore his sandals over his socks too then?
The question you were asked though was about how you knew something to be true, not about what a book happens to say. If however you seriously think that this book is in some way a reliable guide to factual truths, by all means have an attempt at explaining why you think that.
-
Well, that's OK then, because it didn't.
It's a post-hoc rationalisation myth to explain why humans appear different to other animals in their degree of self-awareness.
ht
Genesis 1:1-2 “The earth” is the figure of speech Anadiplosis or Like sentence endings and beginnings. The word or words concluding one sentence are repeated at the beginning of another.
“Without form” the Hebrew word is ‘tohu va bohu’ and is the figure of speech Paronomasia or Rhyming words. The repetition of words similar in sound, but not necessarily in sense. Without form, one of the Hebrew words is ‘tohu’ and is used as a subsequent event. Not created ‘tohu’ (Isa. 45:18), but became ‘tohu’ (2 Pet. 3:5-6). The other word is ‘bohu’ and is rendered “void”, means desolate. The two words together occur in Gen. 1:2a; Isa. 34:11; Jer. 4:23.
“Face” in Genesis 1:2a is the figure Pleonasm or Redundancy. Where what is said is, immediately after, put in another or opposite way to make it impossible for the sense to be missed.
-
TW,
Bluehillside explain to me how nothing went bang go on wum me. ;D
First, no-one does say that - it's just another straw man of your own making.
Second, even if someone did say that and the answer to your "how?" was "don't know", that would provide not one jot of one iota of one smidgen of evidence for whatever unevidenced explanation you wanted to insert into the gap, "God" included.
-
Newnature could we consider the 5 atheist miracles at this point.
http://creation.com/five-atheist-miracles
~TW~ :)
-
Bluehillside explain to me how nothing went bang go on wum me. ;D
~TW~
Having a daft fairytale that purports to "explain" (in a just-so story sort of way) something is, in no way, made any more believable by pointing out that those who refuse to accept it don't know everything.
Pretending that it does, is one of the stupidest "arguments" of theists.
-
new algorithm,
Let's not. Let's start instead with what you mean by "Heaven" and why you think it exists.
Then let's have you tell us what you mean by "God", and perhaps tell us why you think he or it exists too.
Then if you're still going perhaps you can share with us why you think an ancient book of myth and fable has anything to say to the objective accuracy or otherwise of your faith beliefs.
And only once you've done all that can we talk about whether or not your question is in fact "interesting".
I present my case. It is interesting though.
-
Having a daft fairytale that purports to "explain" (in a just-so story sort of way) something is, in no way, made any more believable by pointing out that those who refuse to accept it don't know everything.
Pretending that it does, is one of the stupidest "arguments" of theists.
Right on cue
Newnature could we consider the 5 atheist miracles at this point.
http://creation.com/five-atheist-miracles
Some idiot has written a whole website based on it....
-
I'll say this for ol' new algorithm - though barmier than a box of frogs he clearly is, he must have put in an awful lot of hours just making up his bumper lexicon of personal facts.
-
Newnature
It looks like the girls are getting their knickers in a twist. ;)
~TW~
-
new algorithm,
I present my case. It is interesting though.
No you haven't and so no it isn't. I asked you some perfectly clear questions - why just ignore them?
-
new algorithm,
No you haven't and so no it isn't. I asked you some perfectly clear questions - why just ignore them?
Go back and reread the post of newnature they are very easy to understand.All the answers are there.
~TW~
-
You have an overactive imagination. ;D
Ezekiel, a prophet who was a priest, he was deported in the first deportation. There was deportation of exiles in 597. Ezekiel was in exile in Babylon during the final destruction and the fall of Jerusalem in 587. After 587, Ezekiel had a remarkable vision, among many. There’s a stormy wind and a huge cloud, and a flashing fire, Yahweh is riding on a kind of throne chariot.
Yahweh’s enthroned above four magnificent creatures. Each of these has a human body and then four faces: the face of a human, the face of a lion, the face of an ox, and the face of an eagle. There are four huge wheels under this throned-chariot, and they are said to gleam like beryl beneath a vast and awe-inspiring expanse or dome, which gleams like crystal. Above that is the semblance of a throne that is like sapphire, and on the throne was the semblance of a human form that’s gleaming like amber, and its fire encased in a frame, which is radiant all about.
This fire that’s encased, is in a cloud that contains or hides the fire that is Yahweh’s presence. So this kavod, describing the presence of Yahweh among his people, Yahweh is concealed and revealed only in his kavod.
-
Ezekiel, a prophet who was a priest, he was deported in the first deportation. There was deportation of exiles in 597. Ezekiel was in exile in Babylon during the final destruction and the fall of Jerusalem in 587. After 587, Ezekiel had a remarkable vision, among many. There’s a stormy wind and a huge cloud, and a flashing fire, Yahweh is riding on a kind of throne chariot.
Yahweh’s enthroned above four magnificent creatures. Each of these has a human body and then four faces: the face of a human, the face of a lion, the face of an ox, and the face of an eagle. There are four huge wheels under this throned-chariot, and they are said to gleam like beryl beneath a vast and awe-inspiring expanse or dome, which gleams like crystal. Above that is the semblance of a throne that is like sapphire, and on the throne was the semblance of a human form that’s gleaming like amber, and its fire encased in a frame, which is radiant all about.
This fire that’s encased, is in a cloud that contains or hides the fire that is Yahweh’s presence. So this kavod, describing the presence of Yahweh among his people, Yahweh is concealed and revealed only in his kavod.
More please.
~TW~
-
new algorithm,
Just out of interest, are you capable only of regurgitating the bits of a text that appeal to you or do you intend ever to set out why you think this text is a reliable guide to anything?
Oh, and while you're at it do you want to stick with the nonsense of "all the stars revolving" around the Pole Star or can you at least acknowledge that - while you're entitled to make up your own opinions - you don't also get to make up your own facts?
-
TW,
More please.
Seriously - this unhinged gibberish is actually appealing to you?
Seriously seriously?
-
I give up, mate! You are completely ensnared in rubbish stories, and are too dim to see how silly they are.
Furthermore I'm too old to waste my time pointing the truth out to you. I'll leave it to the younger, more capable people here.
Don't give up. That Ark Moses is the only place the second Adam's blood would do any good. What good would his blood do dripping on a piece of wood? Follow the history of that Ark.
-
I think, nn, you're going to have to take a step back and demonstrate why we shouldn't consider these as being just one set (there are others) of ancient myths dating from more credulous times.
Revelation chapter four is the first vision “in Heaven” the Throne and its surroundings. 24 elders sitting, round about the throne, arrayed in white garments and on their heads crowns of gold. David arranged his twenty-four courses of the Priesthood after the heavenly order. It was the same in the case of the Tabernacle which served “unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as when Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the Tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern showed thee in the mount.” Hence, they are called “patterns of things in the heaven. It was the same with David and the Temple, so that when David copied on earth was a pattern of real things “in the heaven.” The Temple worship on earth was therefore modeled on that worship which is carried on in heaven: and which, if we were caught up now, we should see being carried on there by these heavenly leaders of heaven’s worship.
-
new algorithm,
Revelation chapter four is the first vision “in Heaven” the Throne and its surroundings. 24 elders sitting, round about the throne, arrayed in white garments and on their heads crowns of gold. David arranged his twenty-four courses of the Priesthood after the heavenly order. It was the same in the case of the Tabernacle which served “unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as when Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the Tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern showed thee in the mount.” Hence, they are called “patterns of things in the heaven. It was the same with David and the Temple, so that when David copied on earth was a pattern of real things “in the heaven.” The Temple worship on earth was therefore modeled on that worship which is carried on in heaven: and which, if we were caught up now, we should see being carried on there by these heavenly leaders of heaven’s worship.
Try reading what you're actually being asked - it was a "why" question. Just regurgitating more gibberish doesn't answer that. You really seem to believe this stuff to be a reliable guide to what's true - the question is though, why should anyone else?
-
Dear newnature,
What's your take on "The Science of Righteousness" or "Dynamic Energy"
Gonnagle.
No one has a self-defense plea that will successfully excuse them from being counted worthy of God’s wrath. No one therefore, will be able to escape the judgment of God by anything that they do.
-
What literal words could portray these literal facts so wonderfully as these expressive figures of speech?
You have provided nothing whatsoever to suggest it is anything more than an old myth.
What is the riddle of the Sphinx?
-
Gonners,
What's your take on "The Science of Righteousness" or "Dynamic Energy"
1. It's not science.
2. All energy is "dynamic".
You're welcome ;)
-
No one has a self-defense plea that will successfully excuse them from being counted worthy of God’s wrath. No one therefore, will be able to escape the judgment of God by anything that they do.
You have NO evidence to support that statement, the Bible is not evidence.
-
Just to note that making up your own facts does seem to be a trait of the fundie - Hope told us that cancer was a recent phenomenon (though I think he backtracked on that later on), Sassy tells us that not all planets have gravity, and now new tells us that all stars revolve around the Pole Star.
Must be quite liberating just to make up your own facts so as to fit whatever religious narrative most appeals, though I suspect it's less than helpful if you want to practice medicine or engineering or astronomy.
-
Moderator:
I see a couple of posts that veer too far towards comments about members being mentally ill, so I'm going to remove these.
Please try and avoid making comments that go beyond lighthearted banter.
-
What is the riddle of the Sphinx?
Oh! Me! Me! I know this one. It goes;
"My sphynx has got no nose."
"How does it smell?"
"Terrible..."
-
new,
Are you a person or some kind of random word generator? If the former, I hear that Ryman's have a sale on green ink this week - better hurry!
:D :D Thank you for the laugh. It has taken me only a couple of New's posts to realise that I shall be scrolling past them in order to read the responses.
-
One of best days on here for a long time :) Just a quick question with all you chaps changing names is Alien still around and 2Corrie I know where Spud is and how about the Scotsman who was into Egypt have they all left?
~TW~
-
TW, I think they've all been Raptured. Are you late for it?
-
Oh! Me! Me! I know this one. It goes;
"My sphynx has got no nose."
"How does it smell?"
"Terrible..."
I like your new user name!!
Well, I've read through all six pages now and New's posts - some of them were fairly short, so I did read quite a few - come into the top ten for meaningless gobbledegook, and by the time I reached the end, I am of the opinion that they are not even remotely amusing.
-
TW, I think they've all been Raptured. Are you late for it?
So they have gone this forum has lost a lot of good people it most certainly has died in a lot of ways shame all we have are those in the hell bound club and I enjoyed newnature leading these jokers today really entertaining more needed.
~TW~
-
What is the riddle of the Sphinx?
One sixth of an ephah from each homer of wheat, and one sixth of an ephah from each homer of barley,
-
TW,
So they have gone this forum has lost a lot of good people it most certainly has died in a lot of ways shame all we have are those in the hell bound club and I enjoyed newnature leading these jokers today really entertaining more needed.
Green-inked ravings and made up "facts" do not constitute "leading" anyone - they're just a bit sad to witness really.
-
TW,
Green-inked ravings and made up "facts" do not constitute "leading" anyone - they're just a bit sad to witness really.
With your imagination made up facts pertaining to your imagination are easy come.But you are in the shadow of newnature this chap is a breath of fresh air.
~TW~
-
TW,
With your imagination made up facts pertaining to your imagination are easy come.But you are in the shadow of newnature this chap is a breath of fresh air.
And for those of us working in English?
-
With your imagination made up facts pertaining to your imagination are easy come.But you are in the shadow of newnature this chap is a breath of fresh air.
~TW~
It is you who makes it up as you go along! ::)
-
I love newnature because he had you all on his hook for most of the day,will he come back? he might is he right ? no but for entertainment this chap is good.I prefer him to the other ,half JW half rocket man along with his dynamic ????.For me it just goes to show that you floos and JP's get what you deserve a bit of fun,so come back newnature soon.
~TW~
-
new,
Are you a person or some kind of random word generator? If the former, I hear that Ryman's have a sale on green ink this week - better hurry!
I actually like a bit of scholarship rather than people who have garnered an internet presence on my coattails.
-
I love newnature because he had you all on his hook for most of the day,will he come back? he might is he right ? no but for entertainment this chap is good.I prefer him to the other ,half JW half rocket man along with his dynamic ????.For me it just goes to show that you floos and JP's get what you deserve a bit of fun,so come back newnature soon.
~TW~
but I think he's gonna be a long long time, ooo rocketman...
:)
-
but I think he's gonna be a long long time, ooo rocketman...
:)
His battery ran out.
-
Are you 'Stone(d)', if you get my drift? ::) ::) ::)
Ezekiel 28:13; and gold beautifully wrought for you, mined for you, prepared the day you were created. A day is like 10,000 years to God, that earth had a lot time to form itself. What about water?
-
This is getting more insane with every post.
You do realise that the stars don't really revolve, don't you...?
The brightest star, at the point of the tail, is the most important in the whole heaven. it is named Al Ruccaba, which means the turned or ridden on, and is today the Polar or central star, which does not revolve in a circle as does every other stars, but remains, apparently, fixed in its position. But though the star does not revolve like the others, the central point in the heaven is very slowly but steadily moving.
-
The brightest star, at the point of the tail, is the most important in the whole heaven. it is named Al Ruccaba, which means the turned or ridden on, and is today the Polar or central star, which does not revolve in a circle as does every other stars, but remains, apparently, fixed in its position. But though the star does not revolve like the others, the central point in the heaven is very slowly but steadily moving.
You can't be for real... absolutely nobody with access to a computer can be that ignorant.
-
nn
It seems to me that you are, in effect, proselytising your particular take on theology, and experience suggests you'll just keep repeating your mantra ad nauseum so I think I'll just leave you to it.
Trying to show the imagery of these figures of speech. The ground thirst.
-
I am beginning to think NN is a WUM who is having a 'larf' as his posts are quite crazy.
The progeny of the fallen angels before the flood. The Nephilim, these abnormal WUM who were having a 'larf', their destruction was necessary for the preservation of the human race, and for the faithfulness of Yahweh’s Word (Gen. 3:15).
-
new algorithm,
All the other stars revolve around the Pole Star now do they? Well blimey O'Reilly - maybe someone should inform the observatories that their findings have been wrong all this time. It's gonna be a problem for NASA though because they use fixed star positions for clocks and for navigation purposes. Perhaps you should call them to pass on your insights before they put the next crew of astronauts into space? Dammit man, this is urgent!
How did you know I heard that on O'Reilly. I don't know how it works, but something is going on up there.
-
Whit... You been on the pish again?
-
In the Hebrew, Satan is never referred to as a serpent/snake..
Ahh fuck - I see where you're going with this..
Sorry, yet another moron joins the cacophony of fellow morons, as you were. Ignore this twat.
-
new algorithm,
God was into camping? Well well well - presumably Jesus wore his sandals over his socks too then?
The question you were asked though was about how you knew something to be true, not about what a book happens to say. If however you seriously think that this book is in some way a reliable guide to factual truths, by all means have an attempt at explaining why you think that.
It was the same in the case of the Tabernacle which served “unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as when Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the Tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern showed thee in the mount.” That Tabernacle is in the north of this structure. I'm sure they did a lot of camping in the empty place. Now that they are in this structure, I'm sure they kicked it for awhile as the earth formed.
-
TW,
First, no-one does say that - it's just another straw man of your own making.
Second, even if someone did say that and the answer to your "how?" was "don't know", that would provide not one jot of one iota of one smidgen of evidence for whatever unevidenced explanation you wanted to insert into the gap, "God" included.
Gen. 1:14-19 is the first mention of the heavenly bodies that can be seen from earth. The groupings of the stars, there is no articulate speech or voice, and no words are heard, but their sayings have gone out into all the world (Ps. 19:1-6). No gaps, this took time.
-
Newnature could we consider the 5 atheist miracles at this point.
http://creation.com/five-atheist-miracles
~TW~ :)
Atheist don't understand why Genesis happened. No miracles in Genesis, because of that tree of knowledge of good and bad. God made a point to Lucifer. The beginning of Genesis, “And” is the figure of speech Polysyndeton or Many Ands. The repetition of the word “and” at the beginning of successive clauses, each independent, important, and emphatic, with no climax at the end. 34 verses of this introduction, each one of 102 separate acts is emphasized; and the important word “God” in versus 1 is carried like a lamp through the whole of this Introduction.
-
Having a daft fairytale that purports to "explain" (in a just-so story sort of way) something is, in no way, made any more believable by pointing out that those who refuse to accept it don't know everything.
Pretending that it does, is one of the stupidest "arguments" of theists.
The monotheism of Israel does not and cannot evolve from polytheism, because the two are based on radically divergent world-views, radically divergent intuitions about reality. The monotheism of Israel was not, it could not be the natural outgrowth of the polytheism of an earlier age, it was a radical break with it.
Monotheism was a revolution, not an evolution.
-
I'll say this for ol' new algorithm - though barmier than a box of frogs he clearly is, he must have put in an awful lot of hours just making up his bumper lexicon of personal facts.
There was a second irruption of some different fallen angels, smaller in number and more limited in area, for they were for the most part confined to Canaan “the nations of Canaan.” The Nephilim, these abnormal beings is what Yahweh was getting rid of. But this second irruption took place on Yahweh’s land, the land he promised to Abraham.
These abnormal beings were to be cut off, and driven out, and utterly destroyed (Deut. 20:17; Josh. 3:10) but Israel failed. We do not know how many got away to other countries to escape the general destruction. If this were recognized, it would go far to solve many problems connected with Anthropology?
-
Newnature
It looks like the girls are getting their knickers in a twist. ;)
~TW~
These 'a days' took time. So we come to the fifth 'a day' and we see whatever kind of life being killed off over and over again. It seems that God is making another point to Lucifer.
Then we come to the cave people during the fifth ‘a day’ in Genesis, that fifth ‘a day’ took around four and half billion years. Look at the cave people, God did not create them in his image. Being created in the image of God means that we must view ourselves as intrinsically valuable and richly invested with meaning, potentially and responsibilities. We are to be and to do on a finite scale, what God is and does on an infinite scale.
By virtue of being created in the image of God, human beings are capable of reflecting his character in their own life; animals possess none of these qualities. What distinguishes people from animals is the fact that human nature inherently has godlike possibilities.
Omniscience, omnipotence, or omnipresence, none of these other divine attributes have been ascribed to the human race as part of the image of God. We have been created to reflect God in our thinking and actions, but the physical sustained by God and dependent upon him for our existence in this world and in the world to come. Developing a godly character in this present life, this will be our personal identity in the world to come. It is the character or personality that we have developed in this life, that God preserves in his memory.
So these cave people, they would have to have everything we have, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mtLXpgjHL0&feature=related
These cave people would not have had a God conscious, like God has given to the human race a God consciousness, the conscious perception that we could say that there is a God somewhere and that ultimately the human race is accountable to that God. These cave people would have been smart, knowing how to make a living.
-
new algorithm,
No you haven't and so no it isn't. I asked you some perfectly clear questions - why just ignore them?
The Nephilim, these mighty men, the men of renown. The explanation of the origin of the Greek mythology, that mythology was no mere invention of the human brain. But it grew out of the traditions, and memories, and legends of the doings of that mighty race of beings, and was gradually evolved out of the ‘heroes’ of Gen. 6:4. There are huge building under water off the coast of Japan.
Alexander the Great used what is called ‘religious syncretism,’ Alexander took this tendency of syncretism, of mixing together different religious traditions from different places, and he used it as a self-conscious propaganda technique. Alexander even started claiming divine status for himself. Alexander went around passing out rumors that his mother had actually been impregnated by the god Apollo, when he appeared as a snake in her bed. So, Alexander is putting himself forward as divine. Why? This is not a Greek tradition, but it’s very much a tradition in the East for kings to be considered by their people to be gods.
Alexander says, “Well, if they can be gods, I can be a god.” So Alexander starts spreading rumors that he is divine himself. Alexander probably even believed it; and so he had a god father, he had a human mother, and so then he would identify himself with whoever was a god in the different places. So Alexander would identify himself as a Greek god with a Persian god. Alexander would identify the goddess Isis with some Greek goddess; and so all the time these different gods from different places were basically all said to be simply different cultural representations, different names, for what were generally the same gods all over the place.
Also, though, what they would do is sometimes they wouldn’t try to simply say these gods are the same. What they would just do is add on more gods. They’d get to Syria, “Look at all these god that the Syrians worship. Well, we’ll just add those into our pantheon of gods too.” And this is part of what ancient religion was like, is that people were not exclusive.
You didn’t have to worry. Just because you worshiped one god, doesn’t mean you couldn’t worship another god or several gods or five gods or a hundred gods. Gods knew who everybody was-they weren’t particularly jealous, in that sense. So this is the way people did it. But what Alexander and his successors did, was they made sort of a conscious, propagandistic decision to use religious syncretism to bind together their kingdoms.
Alexander the Great, and the beginning of Hellenization; that is, the Grecization of the eastern part of the Ancient Mediterranean. That’s all Hellenization means, making it Greek. Alexander the Great’s father was Philip II, King of Macedonia, King of Macedon, and he conquered different Greek city-states by defeating Athens and its allies at Chaeronea. Alexander himself was born in 356 BC, he was educated by Aristotle, Alexander was made king after the assassination of his father. Alexander defeated the Persian Army, which at that time controlled all of Asia Minor, Modern Turkey, and had even threatened to control Greece. Alexander defeated the Persian Army in Asia Minor at Granicus, that put Alexander and his Macedonian Army in charge of both Greece and Asia Minor. When Darius II died, who was the king of the Persians, Alexander himself took on Darius’s title, which was Great King.
After defeating the Persians again, Alexander pushed his army all the way to the Indus River in India, Alexander wanted to go all the way to the Ganges River, but his army forced him to turn back. Alexander died in 323 BC, when he was not yet 33-years-old, and Alexander died in Babylon of a fever. After Alexander’s death, his empire was divided up among four generals of Alexander, although they were Macedonians and spoke Macedonian and not themselves Greek, but they had, just like Alexander, they had adopted Greek language, Greek culture. They educated their children in Greek ways. Alexander, of course, had been educated by Aristotle, when he was young, and so he had adopted Greek language and Greek literature and a lot of other Greek ways. What Alexander had wanted to do was to take all these different peoples, who spoke different languages and had different customs, and use a Greek layer to sort of unite his empire overall.
Now Alexander didn’t really care about the lower class people so much. So they could just still live in their villages and out in the country and do their farming and speak their own local language. But if one were going to be elite-they wanted to establish cities throughout Alexander’s empire that would be actually Greek cities, and he wanted to have the elite people all be able, at least, to speak Greek. We have therefore one world, and in fact this whole dream of Alexander-and it was a very self-conscious, propaganda campaign and a cultural campaign on Alexander’s part. He wanted to make one world. We really have, therefore, for in some way the first time in history, a dream of making all of his empire basically universal, a dream of a universal vision, for one world, under one kind of culture, one kind of language.
This really hadn’t been attempted. Other empires, like the Assyrian Empire, or these kinds of-the Egyptian Empire, when people conquered other peoples, often all they wanted was tribute. They just wanted taxes, and food, and money, and that sort of thing. They didn’t really care about turning those people into Egyptians or into Assyrians. And Alexander didn’t really care that much about the lower classes doing that, but he still wanted the elites. And so Alexander would plant Greek cities and settle his veterans in different parts of his empire in Egypt, in Syria, all the way over, and sometimes in the western part of India, and Alexander would take his veterans of his army, and he would drum them out of the army, when they retire, and Alexander would give them land and they’d build a city there, and that city would be just like a Greek city back home. And they all would speak what developed to be a common form of Greek, slightly different from Classical Greek, what is called Koine Greek.
-
More please.
~TW~
The first time the Zoa are mentioned in the Bible they are named, though they are not described. In Genesis 3:24 they are called “the Cherubim.” We first see them in connection with the Fall; and we note the fact that they are representative of animate creation, hence their name Zoa. Their number, four, connects them also with the earth.
Romans 8:19-21 these words receive a new significance if we regard the Cherubim as being the concrete representation of this groaning creation; and as being the pledge that its groaning shall one day cease, and its hope be fulfilled. That hope was given when they were first placed, as in an Tabernacle, at the gate of Eden. There, at that time, was Yahweh’s presence manifested. Hither Cain and Abel brought their offerings; and from this “presence of Yahweh” Cain went out (Genesis 4:14-16). It may be that the Tabernacle of Yahweh continued up to the time of the Flood. For Shem is spoken of as the custodian of this “dwelling place.”
-
new algorithm,
Just out of interest, are you capable only of regurgitating the bits of a text that appeal to you or do you intend ever to set out why you think this text is a reliable guide to anything?
Oh, and while you're at it do you want to stick with the nonsense of "all the stars revolving" around the Pole Star or can you at least acknowledge that - while you're entitled to make up your own opinions - you don't also get to make up your own facts?
For notwithstanding that we speak of “fixed stars,” there is a constant, though slow, change taking place amongst them. There is also another change taking place owing to the slow recession of the pole of heaven (about 50” in the year); so that while Alpha in the constellation of Draco was the Polar star when the Zodiac was first formed, the Polar Star in now Alpha in what is called Ursa Minor. This change alone carries us back at least 5,000 years.
-
Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
Got something intelligent to add No Nature.. Unnatural.. frukwanker..
whjatever!!
-
For notwithstanding that we speak of “fixed stars,” there is a constant, though slow, change taking place amongst them. There is also another change taking place owing to the slow recession of the pole of heaven (about 50” in the year); so that while Alpha in the constellation of Draco was the Polar star when the Zodiac was first formed, the Polar Star in now Alpha in what is called Ursa Minor. This change alone carries us back at least 5,000 years.
Very good I am certain all the lads are looking for more of this tomorrow what a treat and learning it has been for these victims of this forum who are self trapped here every day. You have been a breath of fresh air to them.
Well done newnature keep it coming for me it is goodnight
~TW~
-
What Fall?
Was there ever a "fall"
Didn't we pick ourselves up from this inconvenience and jollied the wee man along?
-
*wee man being the illiterates who followed what churchie people told them to...
-
..fuckwits, morons, idiots, retards, cretins, imbeciles, twats all come to mind.. as additions to the illiterates already mentioned.
-
new algorithm,
Try reading what you're actually being asked - it was a "why" question. Just regurgitating more gibberish doesn't answer that. You really seem to believe this stuff to be a reliable guide to what's true - the question is though, why should anyone else?
Should anyone else, why not. It's better then what you have to say.
-
You have NO evidence to support that statement, the Bible is not evidence.
Paul knew that the defense mechanism resident within the pride nature of the human heart would be instant in it’s response to protest the accusation of wrath worthiness.
-
Just to note that making up your own facts does seem to be a trait of the fundie - Hope told us that cancer was a recent phenomenon (though I think he backtracked on that later on), Sassy tells us that not all planets have gravity, and now new tells us that all stars revolve around the Pole Star.
Must be quite liberating just to make up your own facts so as to fit whatever religious narrative most appeals, though I suspect it's less than helpful if you want to practice medicine or engineering or astronomy.
The same movement which has changed the relative position of these two stars has also caused the constellation of the Southern cross to become invisible in northern latitudes. When the constellations were formed the Southern Cross was visible in N. latitude 40, and was included in their number. But, though known by tradition, it had not been seen in that latitude for some twenty centuries, until voyages to the Cape of Good Hope were made.
-
Oh! Me! Me! I know this one. It goes;
"My sphynx has got no nose."
"How does it smell?"
"Terrible..."
The “Sphinx” was invented as a memorial. It had the head of a woman and the body and tail of a lion, to tell us that this Book, written in the Heaven, began with the Sign “Virgo”, and will end with the Sign “Leo”. The word “sphinx” is from the Greek sphinx, to join; because it binds together the two ends of this circle of the heaven.
-
I like your new user name!!
Well, I've read through all six pages now and New's posts - some of them were fairly short, so I did read quite a few - come into the top ten for meaningless gobbledegook, and by the time I reached the end, I am of the opinion that they are not even remotely amusing.
The word ‘till’ marking the uncertainty, which was conditional on the repentance of the nation. Note the word ‘till’ in Matt. 10:23; 16:28; 23:39 what is certain with what is uncertain?
-
You can't be for real... absolutely nobody with access to a computer can be that ignorant.
Genesis 1:14-19 reveals the fact that the stars were created, not only “to divide the day from the night, and to give light upon the earth”; but, they were set “for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years”. “And” is the figure of speech Polysyndeton or Many Ands. The repetition of the word “and” at the beginning of successive clauses, each independent, important, and emphatic, with no climax at the end. The figure emphasizes these four purposes, and bids us to single them out and consider them separately and independently.
They are for Signs. The Hebrew word oth, from athah, means to come. Signs, therefore, of something or some One to come. Those who understand them are enlightened by them. Those who do not may well be “dismayed” Jer. 10:2. For more than 2,500 years, the revelation of the hope which God gave in Genesis 3:15 was preserved in the naming of the stars and their grouping in Signs and Constellations.
-
Whit... You been on the pish again?
Pish-a-dew.
-
Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
Got something intelligent to add No Nature.. Unnatural.. frukwanker..
whjatever!!
I took out something that makes no since, some kind of superiority teaching that seems to be added to Hebrews?
Hebrews 1:1-3:15;
From of old, Yahweh spoke to the Israelites fathers by the prophets in every manner, and in all ways; but in these later days, Yahweh has conversed with us, by his son; whom Yahweh has constituted heir of all things, and when Yeshua made a purgation of sins, then Yeshua sat down on the right hand of Yahweh. Wherefore, my brethren, who are called with a calling that is from heaven, consider this high priest of our profession, Yeshua the Messiah; because Yahweh has said, “O, if you would but heed my charge this day; do not be stubborn as at Meribah, in the wilderness, when your fathers put me to the test, tried me, though they had seen my deeds.
Forty years I was provoked by that generation; I thought, they are a senseless people; they would not know my ways. Concerning them, I swore in anger, they shall never come to my resting-place!” Beware, therefore, my brethren, lest there be in any of us an evil heart that believes not, and we depart from the living Yahweh; but we need to examine ourselves all the days, during the day which is called today; and let none of us be hardened, through the deceitfulness of sin; for we have part with the Messiah, if we persevere in this firm confidence, from the beginning to the end; as it was said, “O, if you would but heed my charge this day.” Do not harden your hearts to anger Yahweh.
Hebrews 1:4-2:18; 3:2-6 is what was left out?
-
What Fall?
Was there ever a "fall"
Didn't we pick ourselves up from this inconvenience and jollied the wee man along?
For Adam and Eve to have true freedom of will, Adam and Eve have to have the freedom to rebel. This is why this tree is in the garden, next to the tree of life; instead, evil will come about as a result of the clash of the will of Yahweh, and the will of humans, who happen to have the freedom to rebel. Human beings, and only human beings are the potential source of evil, responsibility for evil will lie in the hands of human beings. Yet, evil is represented not as a physical reality, it’s not built into the structure of Eden, evil is a condition of human existence, and to assert that evil stems from human behavior. The drama of Adam and Eve’s life should revolve not around the search for eternal l
-
*wee man being the illiterates who followed what churchie people told them to...
I don't eat at the Cafeteria of Christianity. Each group placing on their plate the portion, or portions of Scripture that appeal most to them. “We want this, but we will ignore that.” “We will take one of these, but we will leave the others off our plate.” But we can not pick and choose whatever doctrine suits our appetites, as though it is left up to us to serve ourselves.
-
..fuckwits, morons, idiots, retards, cretins, imbeciles, twats all come to mind.. as additions to the illiterates already mentioned.
Judgment and Chastisement, there are two traditional answers in the hallways of religion to why Christians should not think they should continue in sin; spankings from God and judgments from God. Paul gives two entirely different reasons, instead of chastisement and judgment, Paul holds up two entirely different issues, identity and slavery.
-
The “Sphinx” was invented as a memorial. It had the head of a woman and the body and tail of a lion, to tell us that this Book, written in the Heaven, began with the Sign “Virgo”, and will end with the Sign “Leo”. The word “sphinx” is from the Greek sphinx, to join; because it binds together the two ends of this circle of the heaven.
Oh. In that case is it,
"My sphinx has gone to the West Indies."
"Jamaica?"
"No. She went of her own accord."
?
-
Oh. In that case is it,
"My sphinx has gone to the West Indies."
"Jamaica?"
"No. She went of her own accord."
?
Through the “procession of the Equinoxes” the sun gradually shifts its position a little each year, till in about every 2,000 years it begins the year in a different Sign. This was foreseen; and it was also foreseen where the sun began its courses, and where the teaching of this Heavenly Book commenced, and where we were to open its first page.
-
Through the “procession of the Equinoxes” the sun gradually shifts its position a little each year, till in about every 2,000 years it begins the year in a different Sign. This was foreseen; and it was also foreseen where the sun began its courses, and where the teaching of this Heavenly Book commenced, and where we were to open its first page.
In that case, is it,
"Why do sphinxes have C&A written in their knickers?"
"So they know which way round to wear them."
?
-
In that case, is it,
"Why do sphinxes have C&A written in their knickers?"
"So they know which way round to wear them."
?
To remind the Egyptians which way round to wear their knickers. So the riddle of the sphinx, where to start reading the stars and which way round to wear our knickers.
-
The monotheism of Israel does not and cannot evolve from polytheism, because the two are based on radically divergent world-views, radically divergent intuitions about reality. The monotheism of Israel was not, it could not be the natural outgrowth of the polytheism of an earlier age, it was a radical break with it.
Monotheism was a revolution, not an evolution.
Drivel.
The real revolution came much later, when people started to realize that we don't need to make up magic beings in order to explain stuff.
Genesis 1:14-19 reveals the fact that the stars were created, not only “to divide the day from the night, and to give light upon the earth”; but, they were set “for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years”....
[blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah]
So, to return to the point I was making - you really think all the stars literally rotate around the pole star? And, what, the Earth stays still? Do you think the Earth is flat too?
-
Drivel.
The real revolution came much later, when people started to realize that we don't need to make up magic beings in order to explain stuff.
So, to return to the point I was making - you really think all the stars literally rotate around the pole star? And, what, the Earth stays still? Do you think the Earth is flat too?
Don't waste your time, Stranger, he's just a WUM.
-
Don't waste your time, Stranger, he's just a WUM.
He is Robert Stone.
If you know his history on forums like this then you will realise, as others before, that interaction, conversation and the like, are a complete and utter waste of your time and effort.
-
Blimey, nn is obviously trying to rival Sass with the number of nutty posts one after another. ;D
-
He is Robert Stone.
If you know his history on forums like this then you will realise, as others before, that interaction, conversation and the like, are a complete and utter waste of your time and effort.
I'm old Seb, but not daft ... I recognised him as a WUM after his first couple of posts.
-
A random word generator - definitely a random word generator. The spelling is pretty good though the grammar is a bit off in places, but it's remarkable how much these algorithms have improved in recent years. One of the clues though is that they just churn out gibberish regardless of the content of the comments and questions that are put to them.
Do we have a policy on this mb about algorithms posting?
-
A random word generator - definitely a random word generator. The spelling is pretty good though the grammar is a bit off in places, but it's remarkable how much these algorithms have improved in recent years. One of the clues though is that they just churn out gibberish regardless of the content of the comments and questions that are put to them.
Do we have a policy on this mb about algorithms posting?
This is him here I believe, pretty much all of the quotes you see have been derived from this 'collection'.
http://godsreconciliation.blogspot.co.uk/
He travels around settling on some unsuspecting forum then gets pretty much the same responses as he has here;
http://evangelicaluniversalist.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=6835
http://www.nairaland.com/newnature/posts
http://pilotsforchrist.proboards.com/user/54/recent
https://plus.google.com/110888684855191501688
Enjoy!
-
Through the “procession of the Equinoxes”
Precession
the sun gradually shifts its position a little each year, till in about every 2,000 years it begins the year in a different Sign. This was foreseen;
By whom?
and it was also foreseen where the sun began its courses, and where the teaching of this Heavenly Book commenced, and where we were to open its first page.
You do understand that it is the Earth that precesses and not the Sun, don't you?
Also, the Sun came into existence about 4.6 billion years ago. There was nobody around to force it then.
-
Seb,
This is him here I believe, pretty much all of the quotes you see have been derived from this 'collection'...
Well spotted. It's quite spectacularly bonkers stuff, though whether he/it really means it or is just stringing together random terms as a wind up is anyone's guess. Clearly though he isn't aware that in fact the three-legged virgin priests of Pnim relocated the Northern Campsite to the Southern Caravan Park of Verisimilitude using the Earth's orbit around the Moon to slingshot the Dormobile of Destiny from one to the other. What can the great void of new nature's mind imply? I don't know, but it's an interesting question...
...or perhaps not.
-
To remind the Egyptians which way round to wear their knickers. So the riddle of the sphinx, where to start reading the stars and which way round to wear our knickers.
Oh. In that case, is it,
"What's brown and sphinxy?"
"I don't know, what is brown and sphinxy?"
"A sphinx."
?
-
The monotheism of Israel does not and cannot evolve from polytheism, because the two are based on radically divergent world-views, radically divergent intuitions about reality. The monotheism of Israel was not, it could not be the natural outgrowth of the polytheism of an earlier age, it was a radical break with it.
Monotheism was a revolution, not an evolution.
Polytheism > henotheism or monolatry > monotheism.
It's pretty simple, really, especially as there is still some evidence of the process that wasn't completely redacted out of the bible.
ht
-
Polytheism > henotheism or monolatry > monotheism.
It's pretty simple, really, especially as there is still some evidence of the process that wasn't completely redacted out of the bible.
Oh dear God, horsethorn's actually feeding him! Will no-one think of the children? The horror! The horror!
-
Oh dear God, horsethorn's actually feeding him! Will no-one think of the children? The horror! The horror!
Well, Vlad doesn't want to play, and TW is dull and boring. Gotta find a new playmate! :)
Besides, it'll be fun to deconstruct his argument by using his own book...
ht
-
Polytheism > henotheism or monolatry > monotheism.
It's pretty simple, really, especially as there is still some evidence of the process that wasn't completely redacted out of the bible.
ht
I would say Polytheism was added to the Bible. History will show a major Polytheism concept that was added.
Exodus 3:13-14 - Moses said to God, “When I come to the Israelites and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ what shall I say to them?” And God said to Moses, “Ehyeh-Asher-Ehyeh.” He continued, “Thus shall you say to the Israelites, ‘Ehyeh sent me to you.’ ”
Not having been raised among his own people, Moses is ignorant of their God’s name and fears he will lack credibility with the Israelites. God’s proper name, disclosed in the verse 15, is YHVH (spelled “yod-heh-vav-heh” in Hebrew; in ancient times the “vav” was pronounced “w”). But here God first tells Moses its meaning: “I Will Be What I Will Be,” meaning “My nature will become evident from my actions.”
Then God answers Moses’ question about what to say to the people: “Tell them: ‘Ehyeh’ (“I Will Be,” a shorter form of the explanation) sent me.” This explanation derives God’s name from the verb “h-v-h,” a variant form of “h-y-h,” “to be.” Because God is the speaker, he uses the first person form of the verb.
-
Well, Vlad doesn't want to play, and TW is dull and boring. Gotta find a new playmate! :)
Besides, it'll be fun to deconstruct his argument by using his own book...
ht
Horsethorn newnature was a breath of fresh air after months and months of crap topics you and your mates have served up here the forum sprung to life yesterday,granted it was crap but different from what we get from you and the rest of the duffers. For example No god because I cant see him or no God cause he does not talk to me
I will look in when it improves come back newnature.
~TW~
-
Horsethorn newnature was a breath of fresh air after months and months of crap topics you and your mates have served up here the forum sprung to life yesterday,granted it was crap
The forum sprung [sic] to life but granted it was crap.
Right.
-
Well, Vlad doesn't want to play, and TW is dull and boring. Gotta find a new playmate! :)
Besides, it'll be fun to deconstruct his argument by using his own book...
ht
It will be hard for you to deconstruct my arguments using the bible. I know what Satan and his ministers of righteousness did to the bible.
-
Drivel.
The real revolution came much later, when people started to realize that we don't need to make up magic beings in order to explain stuff.
So, to return to the point I was making - you really think all the stars literally rotate around the pole star? And, what, the Earth stays still? Do you think the Earth is flat too?
The real revolution came with the Apostle Paul. People glorify themselves by filtering everything they say and everything they do through that screen of self-protection, self-elevation, and self-gratification. No matter what we wish others to believe, we seek to satisfy self first and foremost.
For notwithstanding that we speak of “fixed stars,” there is a constant, though slow, change taking place amongst them. There is also another change taking place owing to the slow recession of the pole of heaven (about 50” in the year); so that while Alpha in the constellation of Draco was the Polar star when the Zodiac was first formed, the Polar Star in now Alpha in what is called Ursa Minor. This change alone carries us back at least 5,000 years.
-
He is Robert Stone.
If you know his history on forums like this then you will realise, as others before, that interaction, conversation and the like, are a complete and utter waste of your time and effort.
I got to learn a lot of good stuff doing that. There are more smart people on forums than there are in churches.
-
Blimey, nn is obviously trying to rival Sass with the number of nutty posts one after another. ;D
No one has disproved any of those nutty posts so far.
-
A random word generator - definitely a random word generator. The spelling is pretty good though the grammar is a bit off in places, but it's remarkable how much these algorithms have improved in recent years. One of the clues though is that they just churn out gibberish regardless of the content of the comments and questions that are put to them.
Do we have a policy on this mb about algorithms posting?
You are a God hater, good for you. It is churned out gibberish, because you are a God hater. The defense mechanism resident within the pride nature of the human heart would be instant in it’s response to protest the accusation of wrath worthiness.
-
new algorithm,
No one has disproved any of those nutty posts so far.
That's because they're not even wrong. If you really think there's a "God" then start by demonstrating that without the circularity of, "it's true because a book says so/the book is correct because God made it so". Just quoting more of the book in reply will keep you anchored in not even wrong territory, so it's your call as to whether or not you actually want to post something worth considering.
-
new algorithm,
That's because they're not even wrong. If you really think there's a "God" then start by demonstrating that without the circularity of, "it's true because a book says so/the book is correct because God made it so". Just quoting more of the book in reply will keep you anchored in not even wrong territory, so it's your call as to whether or not you actually want to post something worth considering.
MMM......I see your approach and methodology here Hillside
but it does beg the question 'Why don't you change the record?'
-
MMM......I see your approach and methodology here Hillside
but it does beg the question 'Why don't you change the record?'
Probably because nobody's playing a newer tune than nobody's favourite mouldy oldie, "I've provided the evidence ... before ... somewhere else ... but the site is down ... and the mods pulled it anyway ... before the dog was sick on it."
-
new algorithm,
That's because they're not even wrong. If you really think there's a "God" then start by demonstrating that without the circularity of, "it's true because a book says so/the book is correct because God made it so". Just quoting more of the book in reply will keep you anchored in not even wrong territory, so it's your call as to whether or not you actually want to post something worth considering.
You hate the bible because of the accusation of wrath worthiness. That book knew the human heart would not only be quick, but that it would be ingenious in the pleas that it would offer as to why they are not wrath-worthy.
-
new algorithm,
You are a God hater, good for you. It is churned out gibberish, because you are a God hater. The defense mechanism resident within the pride nature of the human heart would be instant in it’s response to protest the accusation of wrath worthiness.
You can't hate something you've been given no reason to think exists in the first place.
Try again.
-
new algorithm,
You can't hate something you've been given no reason to think exists in the first place.
Try again.
Come on Hillside you are almost as obsessed with God as you are with Leprechauns.
-
new algorithm,
Me:
That's because they're not even wrong. If you really think there's a "God" then start by demonstrating that without the circularity of, "it's true because a book says so/the book is correct because God made it so". Just quoting more of the book in reply will keep you anchored in not even wrong territory, so it's your call as to whether or not you actually want to post something worth considering.
You:
You hate the bible because of the accusation of wrath worthiness. That book knew the human heart would not only be quick, but that it would be ingenious in the pleas that it would offer as to why they are not wrath-worthy.
So that'll be a "no" then. I have no reason to "hate" the bible (though it's fair to say that I hate some behaviours of those who look to it to justify their awfulness, but that's a different matter). The question you just ran away from though was whether or not you could demonstrate this "God" of yours without recourse to circular reasoning. Just spitting the dummy in response is avoidance, and it does you no credit.
Try again.
-
new algorithm,
You can't hate something you've been given no reason to think exists in the first place.
Try again.
Your in a bad spot, because you still have your identity in Adam, Adam in rebellion. This is the age of grace, bad move on your part. The human heart would not only be quick, but that it would be ingenious in the pleas that it would offer as to why they are not wrath-worthy.
-
Your in a bad spot
I've been to Corby too.
-
new nature,
Your in a bad spot, because you still have your identity in Adam, Adam in rebellion. This is the age of grace, bad move on your part. The human heart would not only be quick, but that it would be ingenious in the pleas that it would offer as to why they are not wrath-worthy.
Further avoidance noted. So you don't have an argument for this "God" that isn't circular - I assumed as much, but thought it only fair to allow you hang yourself.
It must be awful for you - you've invested all this time in a mad iron-age ontology, only to find that you have no way to demonstrate the central pillar that's supposed to hold it up.
You have my sympathy - if ever though you do feel like attempting an actual argument for this "God" that isn't logically hopeless, I'll read it with interest. Probably best not to hold my breath though...
-
new algorithm,
Me:
You:
So that'll be a "no" then. I have no reason to "hate" the bible (though it's fair to say that I hate some behaviours of those who look to it to justify their awfulness, but that's a different matter). The question you just ran away from though was whether or not you could demonstrate this "God" of yours without recourse to circular reasoning. Just spitting the dummy in response is avoidance, and it does you no credit.
Try again.
God is doing something different today, this is the age of grace. There will be no demonstrating God in this age of Grace. God made it quite clear what he is doing today.
-
new algorithm,
God is doing something different today, this is the age of grace. There will be no demonstrating God in this age of Grace. God made it quite clear what he is doing today.
Un-argued and un-evidenced assertion noted - that's some evasion kick you've got going there my friend.
So now we know that the existence of this supposed "God" is just your personal opinion on the matter, can I share with you my personal opinion about the doings of Colin, the High Nabob of the Leprechauns? After all, being not even wrong my claims have the same epistemic value as yours.
-
new nature,
Further avoidance noted. So you don't have an argument for this "God" that isn't circular - I assumed as much, but thought it only fair to allow you hang yourself.
It must be awful for you - you've invested all this time in a mad iron-age ontology, only to find that you have no way to demonstrate the central pillar that's supposed to hold it up.
You have my sympathy - if ever though you do feel like attempting an actual argument for this "God" that isn't logically hopeless, I'll read it with interest. Probably best not to hold my breath though...
The message about what is going on during this age of grace anticipated that you would jump to defend yourself. You have your identity in Adam, Adam in rebellion, bad move. The only issue between this so called God and you is why you still have that identity. God is doing something different today in this age of grace.
-
For notwithstanding that we speak of “fixed stars,” there is a constant, though slow, change taking place amongst them. There is also another change taking place owing to the slow recession of the pole of heaven (about 50” in the year); so that while Alpha in the constellation of Draco was the Polar star when the Zodiac was first formed, the Polar Star in now Alpha in what is called Ursa Minor. This change alone carries us back at least 5,000 years.
Yeeeeesss. Except that the change of which you speak is not happening to the stars at all, it's happening to the Earth's axis.
-
new nature,
The message about what is going on during this age of grace anticipated that you would jump to defend yourself. You have your identity in Adam, Adam in rebellion, bad move. The only issue between this so called God and you is why you still have that identity. God is doing something different today in this age of grace.
The other thing I should have mentioned by the way is that being repeatedly not even wrong is that it's, well, a bit dull. Clearly you have no argument worthy of the name for this "God" of yours so I'll leave you to your personal grief on that I think.
Happy to leave the door open to you though if ever you finally feel like making an argument that isn't logically disastrous...
...your call.
-
new algorithm,
Un-argued and un-evidenced assertion noted - that's some evasion kick you've got going there my friend.
So now we know that the existence of this supposed "God" is just your personal opinion on the matter, can I share with you my personal opinion about the doings of Colin, the High Nabob of the Leprechauns? After all, being not even wrong my claims have the same epistemic value as yours.
The defense mechanism resident within the pride nature of the human heart would be instant in it’s response to protest the accusation of wrath worthiness. The law of Moses will never be held against you. Your sin debt will never be held against. Why you still have your identity in Adam, Adam in rebellion?
-
new nature,
Further avoidance noted. So you don't have an argument for this "God" that isn't circular - I assumed as much, but thought it only fair to allow you hang yourself.
It must be awful for you - you've invested all this time in a mad iron-age ontology, only to find that you have no way to demonstrate the central pillar that's supposed to hold it up.
=====
You have my sympathy - if ever though you do feel like attempting an actual argument for this "God" that isn't logically hopeless, I'll read it with interest. Probably best not to hold my breath though...
The message about what is going on during this age of grace anticipated that you would jump to defend yourself. You have your identity in Adam, Adam in rebellion, bad move. The only issue between this so called God and you is why you still have that identity. God is doing something different today in this age of grace.
=====
I've underlined the bit I don't understand New, what exactly do you mean?
You've used some kind of terminology that I'm not familiar with?
ippy
-
new algorithm,
The defense mechanism resident within the pride nature of the human heart would be instant in it’s response to protest the accusation of wrath worthiness. The law of Moses will never be held against you. Your sin debt will never be held against. Why you still have your identity in Adam, Adam in rebellion?
That's an interesting move - you're called out on your logical incoherence, so you just switch to plain old linguistic incoherence. Presumably this stuff meant something in your head when you typed it, but there's no guessing what.
Look, if you're unable or unwilling to make an argument for this god of yours that isn't entirely circular (come to think of it, do you even know what "circular argument" means?) do you not think that you at least owe it to yourself to try to answer that question to your own satisfaction?
I know I would. Good luck with it though - this could get messy!
-
new nature,
The other thing I should have mentioned by the way is that being repeatedly not even wrong is that it's, well, a bit dull. Clearly you have no argument worthy of the name for this "God" of yours so I'll leave you to your personal grief on that I think.
Happy to leave the door open to you though if ever you finally feel like making an argument that isn't logically disastrous...
...your call.
There is no argument about why you still have your identity in Adam, Adam in rebellion. The only issue between God and you is your identity. So you choose not to do something about your identity, when you had the chance too, that is the issue you face before God. Nothing you say about God or anything you do will be the issue between you and God, the only issue is your identity.
-
new nature,
There is no argument about why you still have your identity in Adam, Adam in rebellion. The only issue between God and you is your identity. So you choose not to do something about your identity, when you had the chance too, that is the issue you face before God. Nothing you say about God or anything you do will be the issue between you and God, the only issue is your identity.
Nope, still no argument for this "god" of yours then. You remind me of Wylie E. Coyote running off the cliff and only after several seconds looking down and realising with horror that there's nothing supporting him. Only you haven't got to the horror bit yet.
Look, if it's any comfort you're not alone - no-one else has been able to make a logically sound case for "God" either, though to be fair you could at least be arsed to make some kind of effort to do so. Presumably you're happy to be not even wrong, though why you would be is beyond me.
Oh well.
-
new algorithm,
That's an interesting move - you're called out on your logical incoherence, so you just switch to plain old linguistic incoherence. Presumably this stuff meant something in your head when you typed it, but there's no guessing what.
Look, if you're unable or unwilling to make an argument for this god of yours that isn't entirely circular (come to think of it, do you even know what "circular argument" means?) do you not think that you at least owe it to yourself to try to answer that question to your own satisfaction?
I know I would. Good luck with it though - this could get messy!
You still having your identity in Adam, Adam in rebellion will get messy for you. Your identity, what argument can you come up with, that is what is going to be the issue between God and you. No religion on the face of this earth will be able to get you out of the messy spot you are in.
-
new algorithm,
You still having your identity in Adam, Adam in rebellion will get messy for you. Your identity, what argument can you come up with, that is what is going to be the issue between God and you. No religion on the face of this earth will be able to get you out of the messy spot you are in.
Oh-oh - looks like the random word generator has got stuck in an endless loop. Could someone try switching it off and on again perhaps - maybe it could be jolted finally into making an argument that'll get it out of it's not even wrong quandary.
-
new algorithm,
Oh-oh - looks like the random word generator has got stuck in an endless loop. Could someone try switching it off and on again perhaps - maybe it could be jolted finally into making an argument that'll get it out of it's not even wrong quandary.
Here is a scary group of people you are going to face, these people are for real. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKnF1HEUwuo These people going to have fun with you. Wrong identity, bad move on your part.
-
Yeeeeesss. Except that the change of which you speak is not happening to the stars at all, it's happening to the Earth's axis.
I thought that myself, but a slow sift of the earth's axis would have been recorded.
-
new nature,
Further avoidance noted. So you don't have an argument for this "God" that isn't circular - I assumed as much, but thought it only fair to allow you hang yourself.
It must be awful for you - you've invested all this time in a mad iron-age ontology, only to find that you have no way to demonstrate the central pillar that's supposed to hold it up.
=====
You have my sympathy - if ever though you do feel like attempting an actual argument for this "God" that isn't logically hopeless, I'll read it with interest. Probably best not to hold my breath though...
The message about what is going on during this age of grace anticipated that you would jump to defend yourself. You have your identity in Adam, Adam in rebellion, bad move. The only issue between this so called God and you is why you still have that identity. God is doing something different today in this age of grace.
=====
I've underlined the bit I don't understand New, what exactly do you mean?
You've used some kind of terminology that I'm not familiar with?
ippy
I'm using Paul's reasonings.
-
I'm using Paul's reasonings.
Hint: he wasn't very good at it.
-
new algorithm,
Here is a scary group of people you are going to face, these people are for real. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKnF1HEUwuo These people going to have fun with you. Wrong identity, bad move on your part.
So when asked for an honest-to-goodness argument for the central pillar of your belief you respond instead with empty threats.
What does that say about you do you think?
-
new algorithm,
I'm using Paul's reasonings.
Did he rely on empty assertion instead of coherent argument too then?
You wrongly privilege your efforts with the term "reasonings" by the way. To be reasoned something has to be logically consistent - you on the other hand dispense with the reason bit entirely and go straight for the assertion, much as I would for my claims about Colin the Leprechaun.
How does, "it's true because I say it's true" help you do you think?
-
new algorithm,
So when asked for an honest-to-goodness argument for the central pillar of your belief you respond instead with empty threats.
What does that say about you do you think?
No threats, you get a front row seat when the 1st seal get pulled. Just the facts, Wrong Identity.
-
new algorithm,
Did he rely on empty assertion instead of coherent argument too then?
You wrongly privilege your efforts with the term "reasonings" by the way. To be reasoned something has to be logically consistent - you on the other hand dispense with the reason bit entirely and go straight for the assertion, much as I would for my claims about Colin the Leprechaun.
How does, "it's true because I say it's true" help you do you think?
No way around Paul. Wrong Identity, you are in a bad spot, you don't have the words to get yourself out of the mess you are in.
-
Hint: he wasn't very good at it.
Bottom line with Paul, identity. Which Adam does one have their identity in.
-
new algorithm,
No threats, you get a front row seat when the 1st seal get pulled. Just the facts, Wrong Identity.
And if you diss Colin he'll spit in your eye and make your camel lame - or possibly the other way around.
Any suggestion as to why I should take your daft threat any more seriously than you should take mine?
-
new nature,
No way around Paul. Wrong Identity, you are in a bad spot, you don't have the words to get yourself out of the mess you are in.
So you assert, albeit logically incoherently. Do you not think that you should trouble to get out of the mess you're in of being not even wrong before just pretending that your interlocutor has the problem?
Really?
Look, you clearly have nothing of interest or even clarity to say so I'll leave you to your utter barminess. By all means though if ever you do feel the need to try to argue your way out of your grief I'll be happy to lend you a hand. I warn you though - unravelling the towering edifice of piffle on which your beliefs rest could be painful for you.
-
new algorithm,
And if you diss Colin he'll spit in your eye and make your camel lame - or possibly the other way around.
Any suggestion as to why I should take your daft threat any more seriously than you should take mine?
Wrong Identity, just showing the facts about that group of people you are about to face.
-
new nature,
So you assert, albeit logically incoherently. Do you not think that you should trouble to get out of the mess you're in of being not even wrong before just pretending that your interlocutor has the problem?
Really?
Look, you clearly have nothing of interest or even clarity to say so I'll leave you to your utter barminess. By all means though if ever you do feel the need to try to argue your way out of your grief I'll be happy to lend you a hand. I warn you though - unravelling the towering edifice of piffle on which your beliefs rest could be painful for you.
You are a product of after the fall. Just the facts.
-
Mods - ban the twat.
You've dished out bannings for less!!
-
Naenuts..
Sadly you make the Sass seem intelligent.. in fact, I'd say she IS more intelligent than you. Sad days, sad days indeed!!
-
newby,
Look, you clearly have nothing of interest or even clarity to say so I'll leave you to your utter barminess.
Good. That means we can get back to the serious point and work out this sphinx riddle thing.
Is it,
"What's brown and sphinxy?"
"I don't know, what is brown and sphinxy?"
"A sphinx."
?
-
newby,Good. That means we can get back to the serious point and work out this sphinx riddle thing.
Is it,
"What's brown and sphinxy?"
"I don't know, what is brown and sphinxy?"
"A sphinx."
?
What's Brown and steamy and comes out of Cows backwards?
The Isle of White Ferry.
-
What's Brown and steamy and comes out of Cows backwards?
The Isle of White Ferry.
But the Isle of Wight ferry is white.
And it doesn't come out of Cows it comes out of Cowes or Ryde or Fishbourne or Yarmouth.
And it's got nothing to do with sphinxes.
If I didn't know better, I'd think you were making a cheap joke instead of treating this thread with the seriousness it deserves.
-
But the Isle of Wight ferry is white.
And it doesn't come out of Cows it comes out of Cowes or Ryde or Fishbourne or Yarmouth.
And it's got nothing to do with sphinxes.
If I didn't know better, I'd think you were making a cheap joke instead of treating this thread with the seriousness it deserves.
yes, well, er, um, i mean, ahhh, Fuck off.
-
newby,Good. That means we can get back to the serious point and work out this sphinx riddle thing.
Is it,
"What's brown and sphinxy?"
"I don't know, what is brown and sphinxy?"
"A sphinx."
?
In the constellation Coma (desired or the longed for), the Star of Bethlehem appeared. There was a traditional prophecy, well-known in the East, carefully preserved and handed down, that a new star would appear in this sign when he whom it foretold should be born. New stars have appeared again and again, but in 125 BC that a star, so bright as to be seen in the day-time, suddenly appeared.
What does a chicken and sphinx have in common. I can't come up with a punchline.
-
vlad may be briefly interested to hear that with NN's posts being as totally daft as they are, I have resorted to reading one or two of his, Vlad's!! Only one or two I hasten to add. :)
-
In the constellation Coma (desired or the longed for), the Star of Bethlehem appeared. There was a traditional prophecy, well-known in the East, carefully preserved and handed down, that a new star would appear in this sign when he whom it foretold should be born. New stars have appeared again and again, but in 125 BC that a star, so bright as to be seen in the day-time, suddenly appeared.
What does a chicken and sphinx have in common. I can't come up with a punchline.
Oh. In that case, is it,
"What's the difference between a sphinx and a bison?"
"I don't know, what is the difference between a sphinx and a bison?"
"You can't wash your hands in a sphinx."
?
-
vlad may be briefly interested to hear that with NN's posts being as totally daft as they are, I have resorted to reading one or two of his, Vlad's!! Only one or two I hasten to add. :)
Thanks for taking the time to read a post or two, how cool.
-
What does a chicken and sphinx have in common. I can't come up with a punchline.
What's the difference between a sphinx and a chickpea?
I've never had a sphinx on my face. :-[ ;)
-
I'm using Paul's reasonings.
Thanks very much but no I still don't get it, any chance of you breaking it down a bit?
ippy
-
ipster,
Thanks very much but no I still don't get it, any chance of you breaking it down a bit?
There's nothing to break down - it's just the green-inked froth of a badly disordered mind.
-
Thanks very much but no I still don't get it, any chance of you breaking it down a bit?
ippy
God is doing something different today, because he took the sin issue off his table of justice. God reconciled the human race to himself. Sin is no longer an issue today, because the human race has been freed from the law of Moses. It's a son issue during the age of grace.
-
God is doing something different today, because he took the sin issue off his table of justice. God reconciled the human race to himself. Sin is no longer an issue today, because the human race has been freed from the law of Moses. It's a son issue during the age of grace.
There ya go Ipster - now all we have to do is to wait for Google Translate to add a Gibbersh to English module and you'll be good to go.
-
There ya go Ipster - now all we have to do is to wait for Google Translate to add a Gibbersh to English module and you'll be good to go.
Wrong Identity, why are you still in that identity during this age of grace, bad move.
-
new algorithm,
Wrong Identity, why are you still in that identity during this age of grace, bad move.
Is there an App for converting spilt alphabet soup into online posts?
-
new algorithm,
Is there an App for converting spilt alphabet soup into online posts?
Wrong Identity, why you thumb your nose at God's reconciliation. Does reconciliation mean that the whole world is saved? No. The free Gift of God can get you the right identity, but you will just thumb your nose at that free gift. You are in a bad spot.
-
vlad may be briefly interested to hear that with NN's posts being as totally daft as they are, I have resorted to reading one or two of his, Vlad's!! Only one or two I hasten to add. :)
Careful now.
-
new algorithm,
Wrong Identity, why you thumb your nose at God's reconciliation. Does reconciliation mean that the whole world is saved? No. The free Gift of God can get you the right identity, but you will just thumb your nose at that free gift. You are in a bad spot.
Only in your badly disordered mind my friend, only in your disordered mind.
Incidentally, any news on when you plan to demonstrate this supposed "God" of yours without recourse to the basic logical fallacy of circular reasoning: "God is true because a book says so/God made the book correct/God is true because a book says so" etc etc?
Surely you must have something in the locker mustn't you?
Anything at all?
-
Careful now.
Maybe this person read the one about the Nephilim. These angels were mixing human DNA into animal DNA before the flood. After the flood, some different angels were mixing animal DNA into human DNA.
-
new algorithm,
Maybe this person read the one about the Nephilim. These angels were mixing human DNA into animal DNA before the flood. After the flood, some different angels were mixing animal DNA into human DNA.
Of course the were, of course they were. Fish tonight - nurse says you like a bit of fish on a Saturday, and it's extra cocoa night tonight too so that'll be nice for you.
Mind how you go, and do watch out for sharp objects won't you. Good lad.
-
new algorithm,
Of course the were, of course they were. Fish tonight - nurse says you like a bit of fish on a Saturday, and it's extra cocoa night tonight too so that'll be nice for you.
Mind how you go, and do watch out for sharp objects won't you. Good lad.
Do you ever consider the fact that God saved you once. No, think about this; Satan tried to breed the human race off the earth before the flood.
-
new algorithm,
Do you ever consider the fact that God saved you once. No, think about this; Satan tried to breed the human race off the earth before the flood.
No.
Do you ever consider that fact that Colin the leprechaun put our shin bones at the front so we'd bang them on coffee tables as a reminder of his leprechaunal presence?
See, it's easy to call something a "fact" isn't it even when the claim we're making is an entirely unsupported personal assertion. Of course you could at least try to prove me wrong by finally attempting an argument that isn't circular for the existence of this "God" of yours, but as you seem determined to avoid the problem I guess we'll never know why you think that.
Two digestives with your extra cocoa tonight by the way - enjoy!
-
new algorithm,
No.
Do you ever consider that fact that Colin the leprechaun put our shin bones at the front so we'd bang them on coffee tables as a reminder of his leprechaunal presence?
See, it's easy to call something a "fact" isn't it even when the claim we're making is an entirely unsupported personal assertion. Of course you could at least try to prove me wrong by finally attempting an argument that isn't circular for the existence of this "God" of yours, but as you seem determined to avoid the problem I guess we'll never know why you think that.
Two digestives with your extra cocoa tonight by the way - enjoy!
The fact that there are huge building off the coast of Japan. The fact that people have found the Nephilim's bones. These facts are before the flood.
-
new algorithm,
The fact that there are huge building off the coast of Japan. The fact that people have found the Nephilim's bones. These facts are before the flood.
Your problem here being that none of these things, flood included, are in fact, well, facts. If you seriously think otherwise, just link us to the evidence. Which museum are these bones in exactly for example?
-
new algorithm,
Your problem here being that none of these things, flood included, are in fact, well, facts. If you seriously think otherwise, just link us to the evidence. Which museum are these bones in exactly for example?
I'm amazed that you haven't done this research on your own all ready. After the flood, the Nephilim were breeded again. Could 666 be a blood type? Maybe the Anti-Christ will be one of these Nephilim's. Wrong Identity, you might get to see a real Nephilim.
-
new algorithm,
I'm amazed that you haven't done this research on your own all ready. After the flood, the Nephilim were breeded again. Could 666 be a blood type? Maybe the Anti-Christ will be one of these Nephilim's. Wrong Identity, you might get to see a real Nephilim.
And you might get to see a real leprechaun.
Amazed as you may be, you just ducked the question: where is your evidence that any of these fantastical claims are in fact, well, facts?
-
new algorithm,
And you might get to see a real leprechaun.
Amazed as you may be, you just ducked the question: where is your evidence that any of these fantastical claims are in fact, well, facts?
https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=the+nephilim+giants+youtube&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
Watch all of them, I did. Come on over to the sunny side of the hill, Wrong Identity.
-
new algorithm,
https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=the+nephilim+giants+youtube&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
Watch all of them, I did. Come on over to the sunny side of the hill, Wrong Identity.
You misunderstood me - I asked for evidence, not for nut job conspiracy videos posted on Youtube. You know, the kind of stuff that people who don't wear tinfoil hats research and write about and have peer reviewed and published, and that gets taught in reputable institutions.
Surely you have something don't you?
Anything at all?
-
Maybe this person read the one about the Nephilim. These angels were mixing human DNA into animal DNA before the flood. After the flood, some different angels were mixing animal DNA into human DNA.
Well, you're right in a way! On the GH message board there are quite a few who are convinced of saidnephilim but enough of us to give a strongly opposing view. :)
-
new algorithm,
You misunderstood me - I asked for evidence, not for nut job conspiracy videos posted on Youtube. You know, the kind of stuff that people who don't wear tinfoil hats research and write about and have peer reviewed and published, and that gets taught in reputable institutions.
Surely you have something don't you?
Anything at all?
Looks like there are some in the Berlin museum.
https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=pictures+of+nephilim+skeletons&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
-
new algorithm,
And you might get to see a real leprechaun.
Amazed as you may be, you just ducked the question: where is your evidence that any of these fantastical claims are in fact, well, facts?
Good old Hillside....he's such a big personality he can afford to be anti consequentialist in a whole universe of cause and effect.
-
Well, you're right in a way! On the GH message board there are quite a few who are convinced of saidnephilim but enough of us to give a strongly opposing view. :)
The Nephilim, these abnormal beings were to be cut off, and driven out, and utterly destroyed (Deut. 20:17; Josh. 3:10) but Israel failed. We do not know how many got away to other countries to escape the general destruction. If this were recognized, it would go far to solve many problems connected with Anthropology? After the flood Nephilim's were breeded different from the one's before the flood.
-
Good old Hillside....he's such a big personality he can afford to be anti consequentialist in a whole universe of cause and effect.
As long as a person doesn't have a Leprechaun's gold, all they have to do is throw their shoes at it and get away. No getting away from a Nephilim.
-
1 for the bible. Hands down, no one can dispute the bones of the Nephilim before the flood or after the flood.
-
new algorithm,
1 for the bible. Hands down, no one can dispute the bones of the Nephilim before the flood or after the flood.
Yay, right on brother - let's hear it for the bib...oh, hang on - turns out there's not one scrap of evidence for these nephilim of yours after all, just a few myths. Odd that. If they really had popped up all over the shop do you not think someone would have thought to keep one of the skeletons and maybe put it on display somewhere?
To be fair though, there's bunch of rather jolly hoax pictures on t'internet if that's your thing.
Reality 1: Bible 0
PS - There wasn't a global flood either. Sorry.
-
new algorithm,
Yay, right on brother - let's hear it for the bib...oh, hang on - turns out there's not one scrap of evidence for these nephilim of yours after all, just a few myths. Odd that. If they really had popped up all over the shop do you not think someone would have thought to keep one of the skeletons and maybe put it on display somewhere?
To be fair though, there's bunch of rather jolly hoax pictures on t'internet if that's your thing.
Reality 1: Bible 0
PS - There wasn't a global flood either. Sorry.
http://www.timetobelieve.com/2013/09/more-nephilim-giant-discoveries/ The Nephilim, let's hear it for the bible. Hang on, there are bones in a museum. Bible 2 : Reality 0
-
new algorithm,
http://www.timetobelieve.com/2013/09/more-nephilim-giant-discoveries/ The Nephilim, let's hear it for the bible. Hang on, there are bones in a museum. Bible 2 : Reality 0
Oh dear. Try to focus now: there are no skeletal remains, no DNA evidence, no anything to support the bonkers notion of "nephilim". What there are though are some tinfoil hat merchants with Youtube videos and a bunch of photoshopped pictures.
Do you seriously not think that if a genuine giant was ever found it would be global news, the find of the century, a major event with people queuing up to see it, learned articles in reputable scientific journals etc?
Really?
Reality 27: Bible 0, whistle blown, game over.
-
new algorithm,
Oh dear. Try to focus now: there are no skeletal remains, no DNA evidence, no anything to support the bonkers notion of "nephilim". What there are though are some tinfoil hat merchants with Youtube videos and a bunch of photoshopped pictures.
Do you seriously not think that if a genuine giant was ever found it would be global news, the find of the century, a major event with people queuing up to see it, learned articles in reputable scientific journals etc?
Really?
Reality 27: Bible 0, whistle blown, game over.
http://beforeitsnews.com/prophecy/2014/02/shocking-evidence-lost-city-of-nephilim-giants-found-archaeologists-are-scratching-their-heads-for-answers-stunning-photos-and-videos-2458738.html This is one big hammer.
-
new algorithm,
http://beforeitsnews.com/prophecy/2014/02/shocking-evidence-lost-city-of-nephilim-giants-found-archaeologists-are-scratching-their-heads-for-answers-stunning-photos-and-videos-2458738.html This is one big hammer.
Actually its one big hoax, but you got the first letter right at least.
-
new algorithm,
Actually its one big hoax, but you got the first letter right at least.
It's perfectly natural for the credulous to be taken in by such rubbish. The sad thing is that they don't seem to learn to be a tad more perceptive. :(
-
new algorithm,
Actually its one big hoax, but you got the first letter right at least.
What about the Somatids you have inside you. Although Somatids are still a mystery. They cannot be destroyed even at 1000 degree C. Millions of rads of radiation hardly phases then. Microscopic diamond knives have broken when trying to cut them in half, suggesting a crystalline structure. They have no DNA or RNA although they can change into bacteria.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Py-hutc5ZNM
-
new algorithm,
What about the Somatids you have inside you. Although Somatids are still a mystery. They cannot be destroyed even at 1000 degree C. Millions of rads of radiation hardly phases then. Microscopic diamond knives have broken when trying to cut them in half, suggesting a crystalline structure. They have no DNA or RNA although they can change into bacteria.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Py-hutc5ZNM
For which there's also no evidence whatsoever.
Here's a link to the chap who claims these things and the fraudulent nature of the supposed cancer cure he claims on the back of them:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/714-X
You really are a sucker for a hoax aren't you. Jolly good - can I interest you in this bridge I have for sale?
Just out of interest by the way, why do you think no reputable journals in archaeology, medicine etc will touch these various stories given that - if there was a word of truth in any of them - they be globally important scientific discoveries? Presumably you have to cook up some kind of multi-disciplinary, global cover up conspiracy story or some such to explain that away?
Don't tell me - let me guess: it's all down to the Illuminati and Elvis plays at their Christmas parties?
-
new algorithm,
For which there's also no evidence whatsoever.
Here's a link to the chap who claims these things and the fraudulent nature of the supposed cancer cure he claims on the back of them:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/714-X
You really are a sucker for a hoax aren't you. Jolly good - can I interest you in this bridge I have for sale?
Just out of interest by the way, why do you think no reputable journals in archaeology, medicine etc will touch these various stories given that - if there was a word of truth in any of them - they be globally important scientific discoveries? Presumably you have to cook up some kind of multi-disciplinary, global cover up conspiracy story or some such to explain that away?
Don't tell me - let me guess: it's all down to the Illuminati and Elvis plays at their Christmas party?
Blood, the blood that courses through one’s veins, represents the life force; the Noahide covenant, you may not spill human blood. And you may not eat animal flesh that has the lifeblood in it, because the blood is the life and that belongs to Yahweh, that’s holy.
So the life force is holy, and the life force is in the blood; Leviticus 17:11, repeats the blood prohibition, and then it offers a rationale. “For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have assigned it to you for making expiation for your lives upon the altar.”
Somatids are no longer a mystery. Somatids belong to God. Are your Somatids really yours, or does God something that belongs to him in you.
-
They cannot be destroyed even at 1000 degree C. Millions of rads of radiation hardly phases then. Microscopic diamond knives have broken when trying to cut them in half, suggesting a crystalline structure. They have no DNA or RNA although they can change into bacteria.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Py-hutc5ZNM
Could I order a jar of them from somewhere then?
Can you point me in the direction of someone who has isolated.
-
Stephen,
Could I order a jar of them from somewhere then?
Can you point me in the direction of someone who has isolated.
That might be fun. Sadly as there's no reason to think they exist in for the first place they're unlikely to arrive any sooner than the bucket of Scotch mist I have on order from Amazon.
-
Could I order a jar of them from somewhere then?
Can you point me in the direction of someone who has isolated.
Somatids in dormant form, they are a very tiny, extremely hard Apatite crystal that it is very difficult to cut with a diamond knife. They are resistant to all acids, and withstand extremely high carbonizing temperatures and extreme levels of radiation.
-
Stephen,
That might be fun. Sadly as there's no reason to think they exist in for the first place they're unlikely to arrive any sooner than the bucket of Scotch mist I have on order from Amazon.
But they have tested their heat and radiation tolerance.
Someone must have small jar left, surely.
If you are after the Scotch mist may I recommend the 12 year old. A bit dearer but worth it.
-
Somatids in dormant form, they are a very tiny, extremely hard Apatite crystal that it is very difficult to cut with a diamond knife. They are resistant to all acids, and withstand extremely high carbonizing temperatures and extreme levels of radiation.
Could you point to relevant paper in which this is reported along with the methods used, so that we can see what experiments have been conducted?
Ta
PS: very tiny is quite a vague phrase in science, could you give us a typical geometry and the relevant average dimensions in nm please?
-
Stephen,
That might be fun. Sadly as there's no reason to think they exist in for the first place they're unlikely to arrive any sooner than the bucket of Scotch mist I have on order from Amazon.
Somatids are tiny bodies that exist in the blood and fluids of all living things, plant and animal. They are part of an up to now, completely unidentified biological system in all living things. They can only be viewed in live blood, not dead or stained blood, which is the normal route for studying blood. They are always vibrating, and have an electronegative repulsion. Without Somatids cell division does not occur. You cannot live without them. There is something that belongs to God in you, better change that identity.
-
Could you point to relevant paper in which this is reported along with the methods used, so that we can see what experiments have been conducted?
Ta
PS: very tiny is quite a vague phrase in science, could you give us a typical geometry and the relevant average dimensions in nm please?
They are not cells and do not contain DNA or any kind of genetic material. But they seem to carry information. After death, all somatids present in the blood at that time will process to their macrocycle bringing the body into its basic elements (dust). The greenish mycelium on the surface of the dead body is the somatids in action. The decaying process of the body is caused by the polymorphism of somatids.
-
They can only be viewed in live blood, not dead or stained blood, which is the normal route for studying blood.
How do you know that they can survive up to 1000C then? Blood boils at ~100 C (slightly higher than water because of the presence of salts) but it would certainly not be "live" blood at temperatures above this.
So how can you know they can survive 1000C?
-
They are not cells and do not contain DNA or any kind of genetic material. But they seem to carry information. After death, all somatids present in the blood at that time will process to their macrocycle bringing the body into its basic elements (dust). The greenish mycelium on the surface of the dead body is the somatids in action. The decaying process of the body is caused by the polymorphism of somatids.
All very well, but can you answer the question I actually asked?
Ta
-
They are not cells and do not contain DNA or any kind of genetic material. But they seem to carry information. After death, all somatids present in the blood at that time will process to their macrocycle bringing the body into its basic elements (dust). The greenish mycelium on the surface of the dead body is the somatids in action. The decaying process of the body is caused by the polymorphism of somatids.
Sounds like you've been reading too much H.P. Lovecraft.
-
Sounds like you've been reading too much H.P. Lovecraft.
"That which is not dead but my eternal lie,
and yet with strange aeons even death may die..""
It's that long ago I'd even forgot I used to listen to Iron Maiden.
All I need now is a can of Special Brew.
-
How do you know that they can survive up to 1000C then? Blood boils at ~100 C (slightly higher than water because of the presence of salts) but it would certainly not be "live" blood at temperatures above this.
So how can you know they can survive 1000C?
The Somatoscope does not attempt to illuminate the specimen by passion light through two small objects. Instead, the illumination source is actually stimulation the specimen to the point it generates its own light. The light itself expands as it moves outward and because the specimen itself is generating the light, the physical restrictions encountered by regular optical microscopes do not apply.
Somatids in dormant form are extremely hard Apatite crystal. These is where it can be done.
-
The Somatoscope does not attempt to illuminate the specimen by passion light through two small objects. Instead, the illumination source is actually stimulation the specimen to the point it generates its own light. The light itself expands as it moves outward and because the specimen itself is generating the light, the physical restrictions encountered by regular optical microscopes do not apply.
Somatids in dormant form are extremely hard Apatite crystal. These is where it can be done.
I beg your pardon? Ignoring the lack of comprehensibility of this, what has microscopy got to do with this?
You have said two contradictory thing?
1) That they can only be observed in live blood.
2) They can survive temperatures of 1000C.
As blood cannot survive/exist at 1000C how can you know they exist at this temperature?
-
Sounds like you've been reading too much H.P. Lovecraft.
Haven't ran across this dude yet.
-
Haven't ran across this dude yet.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_After_Death#Cover_art
Would recommend Aces high, Phantom of the opera(Lucozade advert for the 80s) and Die with your boots on.
Now, what about the explanation for the contradictory claims that you have made?
It's not a question of you wanting some weird shit to be true then found a website with some weird shit on it, and decided that therefore, this weird shit is true. It couldn't be that could it?
It's not as if the simplest of questions have shown you to hold contradictory views is it.
-
I beg your pardon? Ignoring the lack of comprehensibility of this, what has microscopy got to do with this?
You have said two contradictory thing?
1) That they can only be observed in live blood.
2) They can survive temperatures of 1000C.
As blood cannot survive/exist at 1000C how can you know they exist at this temperature?
Gaston Naessen, he found that the Somatids are indestructible.
-
Gaston Naessen, he found that the Somatids are indestructible.
What about explaining the contradictory statements that you have made?
How could he know that something that can only live/ be observed in living blood be observed at 1000C. Blood does not exists in any meaningful form at 1000c.
Could it be that either you have misquoted him or that he didn't know his arse from his elbow.
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_After_Death#Cover_art
Would recommend Aces high, Phantom of the opera(Lucozade advert for the 80s) and Die with your boots on.
Now, what about the explanation for the contradictory claims that you have made?
It's not a question of you wanting some weird shit to be true then found a website with some weird shit on it, and decided that therefore, this weird shit is true. It couldn't be that could it?
It's not as if the simplest of questions have shown you to hold contradictory views is it.
Don't want to read anything about live after death.
-
Don't want to read anything about live after death.
what about your contradictory claims?
-
What about explaining the contradictory statements that you have made?
Somatids in "dormant form," they are a very tiny, extremely hard Apatite crystal that it is very difficult to cut with a diamond knife. They are resistant to all acids, and withstand extremely high carbonizing temperatures and extreme levels of radiation.
-
what about your contradictory claims?
Death as we know it, would indeed be the end of our existence were it not for the fact of the resurrection. It is the resurrection that turns death into a temporary sleep, so to speak. The second death differs from the first death, not in nature, but in results.
The first death is a temporary sleep, because it is followed the the resurrection. The second death is permeant and irreversible extinction, because there is no awakening. The second death is the death resulting from the final judgment which prevents evildoers from living in the new earth to come, a punishment that ultimately results in eternal, irreversible death.
The stern punishment awaiting the enemies of righteousness, whose temporary resurrection results only in a return to death and its punishment, their full and final defeat. The wicked will be resurrected mortal in order to receive their punishment which will result in their ultimate annihilation.
In the Old Testament, the word “sheol” is the underground depository of the dead. There are no immaterial, immortal souls in sheol, simply because the soul does not survive the death of the body. Nowhere in the Old Testament is the abode of the dead regarded as a place of punishment or torment.
-
what about your contradictory claims?
Skeptics are always seeking “proof.” But if a disease like cancer is indeed caused by Somatids bacteria, it would indicate physicians have been unable to see what was quite plain for some nineteenth and twentieth century scientists to observe using simple light microscopy.
-
"That which is not dead but my eternal lie,
and yet with strange aeons even death may die..""
It's that long ago I'd even forgot I used to listen to Iron Maiden.
All I need now is a can of Special Brew.
Run for the hills, the germs are a coming! A violent controversy took place in France between the illustrious Louis Pasteur and Antoine Bechamp, a noted professor of physics, toxicology, medical chemistry, and biochemistry. Bechamp’s work led him to discover ‘microzymas’ (tiny ferments) which were characterized by a host of small bodies in his fermenting solutions. Bechamp came to the conclusion that these microzymas were more basic to life than cells. This caused Bechamp to champion the idea that the cause for disease lay within the body. Pasteur’s germ theory held that the cause came from without. Pasteur’s outspokenness helped the germ theory win out and dominate medical philosophy for the past century.
-
There ya go Ipster - now all we have to do is to wait for Google Translate to add a Gibbersh to English module and you'll be good to go.
Thanks for that Blue? just for a moment there, I thought I was missing something important and it was only another one leading off about this god idea they, I don't know why they, just can't seem to get away from it.
Might be related to Mr Dynamism?
Distant cousin of Hope's?
ippy
-
Thanks for that Blue? just for a moment there, I thought I was missing something important and it was only another one leading off about this god idea they, I don't know why they, just can't seem to get away from it.
Might be related to Mr Dynamism?
Distant cousin of Hope's?
ippy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SGoDIkscXg The machine that is inside of you. Someone had to make this machine in the first place. Then man and woman made the human race. The machine keeps making on.
-
Everyone knows the creator was Pangu. He emerged from the Cosmic Egg wherein the principles of Yin and Yang became balanced.
Pangu created the earth and sky such that they were joined together. However, Pangu then spent the next 18,000 years pushing earth and sky apart at a rate of ten feet per day.
The evidence for this is what we are told in the Sanwu Liji
Actually, it could have been Ymir who was born from poison and frost. Ymir who suckled the great cow Audumla.
From Audumla was born Buri, who fathered Borr, who fathered Odin, Vili and Ve.
Borr's sons slew Ymir and created the earth from his body.
Ask and Embla were the first man and woman and they were created from an Ash tree and elm tree respectively.
The evidence for this is in the Eddas
Silly me.
In the beginning it was just darkness, Vishnu and a giant cobra in whose coils Vishnu slept.
When Vishnu awoke he created Brahma from a lotus and Brahma went on to create everything else.
Yes, that's it.
The evidence is in the Vedas
Hang on
In the beginning, creation was a giant cloud. The lighter parts became heaven and the heavier parts became ocean.
From the ocean a sprout grew and became a gigantic flower and when it opened, the first god appeared.
The first god created Izanagi and his wife Izanami. Together they thrust a jewel encrusted spear into the ocean and when they pulled it up, out popped the islands of Japan.
Izanagi and Izanami descended to Japan and used it for a base to create the rest of the world.
That must be true and there is evidence of this in the Kojiki
Wait a minute - here's another.
This time God created the world in six days.
He started with the day and night, then the sky, sea and earth, then the sun, moon and stars.
Then the animals and then Adam the first man. Later on he created the first woman from Adam's rib.
The evidence for this is found in Genesis.
-
Everyone knows the creator was Pangu. He emerged from the Cosmic Egg wherein the principles of Yin and Yang became balanced.
Pangu created the earth and sky such that they were joined together. However, Pangu then spent the next 18,000 years pushing earth and sky apart at a rate of ten feet per day.
The evidence for this is what we are told in the Sanwu Liji
Actually, it could have been Ymir who was born from poison and frost. Ymir who suckled the great cow Audumla.
From Audumla was born Buri, who fathered Borr, who fathered Odin, Vili and Ve.
Borr's sons slew Ymir and created the earth from his body.
Ask and Embla were the first man and woman and they were created from an Ash tree and elm tree respectively.
The evidence for this is in the Eddas
Silly me.
In the beginning it was just darkness, Vishnu and a giant cobra in whose coils Vishnu slept.
When Vishnu awoke he created Brahma from a lotus and Brahma went on to create everything else.
Yes, that's it.
The evidence is in the Vedas
Hang on
In the beginning, creation was a giant cloud. The lighter parts became heaven and the heavier parts became ocean.
From the ocean a sprout grew and became a gigantic flower and when it opened, the first god appeared.
The first god created Izanagi and his wife Izanami. Together they thrust a jewel encrusted spear into the ocean and when they pulled it up, out popped the islands of Japan.
Izanagi and Izanami descended to Japan and used it for a base to create the rest of the world.
That must be true and there is evidence of this in the Kojiki
Wait a minute - here's another.
This time God created the world in six days.
He started with the day and night, then the sky, sea and earth, then the sun, moon and stars.
Then the animals and then Adam the first man. Later on he created the first woman from Adam's rib.
The evidence for this is found in Genesis.
I heard Japan's islands were created from some dudes sword. Somehow it dripped seven drops of water which created the islands. I thought I needed another puff.
-
Skeptics are always seeking “proof.” But if a disease like cancer is indeed caused by Somatids bacteria, it would indicate physicians have been unable to see what was quite plain for some nineteenth and twentieth century scientists to observe using simple light microscopy.
Not asking for proof, just asking how you can know that they can survive 1000C if they can only be observed in live blood. You can't have blood at 1000C so they can't have been observed under these conditions.
-
Not asking for proof, just asking how you can know that they can survive 1000C if they can only be observed in live blood. You can't have blood at 1000C so they can't have been observed under these conditions.
But in there dormant form, they are a very tiny, extremely hard Apatite crystal that it is very difficult to cut with a diamond knife. They are resistant to all acids, and withstand extremely high carbonizing temperatures and extreme levels of radiation. Only in there dormant form can the observe.
-
Somatids are tiny bodies that exist in the blood and fluids of all living things, plant and animal. They are part of an up to now, completely unidentified biological system in all living things. They can only be viewed in live blood, not dead or stained blood, which is the normal route for studying blood. They are always vibrating, and have an electronegative repulsion. Without Somatids cell division does not occur. You cannot live without them. There is something that belongs to God in you, better change that identity.
Citation required, nn.
-
But in there dormant form, they are a very tiny, extremely hard Apatite crystal that it is very difficult to cut with a diamond knife. They are resistant to all acids, and withstand extremely high carbonizing temperatures and extreme levels of radiation. Only in there dormant form can the observe.
So are you saying that you can observe them when they are not in live blood?
-
Do we have any corroborating evidence, or is it simply this Naessens guy, nn?
-
The stuff nn is telling us about is yet more pseudo-science nonsense.
http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/Cancer/714x.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/714-X
-
Do we have any corroborating evidence, or is it simply this Naessens guy, nn?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGJW94ciq4c Gaston Naessen. Bechamp came to the conclusion that these microzymas were more basic to life than cells. This caused Bechamp to champion the idea that the cause for disease lay within the body. Pasteur’s germ theory held that the cause came from without. Pasteur’s outspokenness helped the germ theory win out and dominate medical philosophy for the past century.
-
The stuff nn is telling us about is yet more pseudo-science nonsense.
http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/Cancer/714x.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/714-X
They seem to carry information. How would the prayer of faith of the Israelites work with these Somatids?
-
They seem to carry information. How would the prayer of faith of the Israelites work with these Somatids?
Your post certainly contains words organised in the format of a sentence, but these words are also organised in the format of a non sequitur.
Out of interest, do you know of a single university-linked teaching hospital working in line with academic standards that subscribes to this 'somatids' notion?
-
Your post certainly contains words organised in the format of a sentence, but these words are also organised in the format of a non sequitur.
Out of interest, do you know of a single university-linked teaching hospital working in line with academic standards that subscribes to this 'somatids' notion?
Looks like germ theory won out and dominate medical philosophy.
-
Looks like germ theory won out and dominate medical philosophy.
Nothing to do with your pet-theory being pseudo-scientific quackery then?
-
Nothing to do with your pet-theory being pseudo-scientific quackery then?
Not my pet-theory, just learning about Somatids myself. Have learn a lot about them here from you good people. Somatids are trip.
-
Not my pet-theory, just learning about Somatids myself. Have learn a lot about them here from you good people. Somatids are trip.
Do you mean 'tripe'?
-
Do you mean 'tripe'?
They are a trip. Tripe stuff. More money to be made in germ theory.
-
new algorithm,
They are a trip. Tripe stuff. More money to be made in germ theory.
They may be a "trip" but they're also a hoax. All fun and games no doubt, but not when the fraudster who invented them claims to have a cure for cancer and sufferers believe him and abandon real medicine.
-
new algorithm,
They may be a "trip" but they're also a hoax. All fun and games no doubt, but not when the fraudster who invented them claims to have a cure for cancer and sufferers believe him and abandon real medicine.
How can a God put a person back together again? Somatids in dormant form, they are a very tiny, extremely hard Apatite crystal. How many of these dormant Somatids do you have on this earth?
-
How can a God put a person back together again? Somatids in dormant form, they are a very tiny, extremely hard Apatite crystal. How many of these dormant Somatids do you have on this earth?
Zero.
:)
-
Zero.
:)
It's been done one time so far.
-
new algorithm,
How can a God put a person back together again? Somatids in dormant form, they are a very tiny, extremely hard Apatite crystal. How many of these dormant Somatids do you have on this earth?
There’s a formula to calculate that: take the square toot of the global number of unicorns, multiply by the captive population of Loch Ness monsters and divide the result by the verified number of alien abductions.
So that’ll be (√0 x 0)/0 then…
…oh hang on though…
-
I heard Japan's islands were created from some dudes sword. Somehow it dripped seven drops of water which created the islands. I thought I needed another puff.
You'll note that the biblical account of creation was also included in those selected myths I listed.
I kept the scientific account separate but here it is now....
The universe was most likely created by some kind of big bang approximately 13.5 billion years ago.
The Earth is around 4.5 billion years old, having been born through accretion in the solar nebula and eventually cooling and acquiring an atmosphere.
Life on Earth progresses and evolved from primitive organisms to increasingly complex species through mutation and natural selection.
Hominds branched off from apes around 3 - 5 million years ago with modern man making an appearance around 250,000 years ago.
The evidence for this:
Radiometric dating, Hubble's Law, observations of cosmic background radiation, primordial nucleosynthesis, distribution and morphology of galaxies, theory of general relativity, genetics and phylogenetics, heredity, hybridisation, microevolution, the fossil record, comparative sequence alignment, vestigal and homologous structures, acquired antibiotic and pesticide resistance, geographic distribution and correlation, island biogeography, etc, etc, etc.
-
God is doing something different today, because he took the sin issue off his table of justice. God reconciled the human race to himself. Sin is no longer an issue today, because the human race has been freed from the law of Moses. It's a son issue during the age of grace.
No still don't get it, I'm OK with standard English, try that, if you would, thank you very much,
in advance.
ippy
PS Is this sin you refer to a bit like something you can catch such as measels?
-
You'll note that the biblical account of creation was also included in those selected myths I listed.
I kept the scientific account separate but here it is now....
The universe was most likely created by some kind of big bang approximately 13.5 billion years ago.
The Earth is around 4.5 billion years old, having been born through accretion in the solar nebula and eventually cooling and acquiring an atmosphere.
Life on Earth progresses and evolved from primitive organisms to increasingly complex species through mutation and natural selection.
Hominds branched off from apes around 3 - 5 million years ago with modern man making an appearance around 250,000 years ago.
The evidence for this:
Radiometric dating, Hubble's Law, observations of cosmic background radiation, primordial nucleosynthesis, distribution and morphology of galaxies, theory of general relativity, genetics and phylogenetics, heredity, hybridisation, microevolution, the fossil record, comparative sequence alignment, vestigal and homologous structures, acquired antibiotic and pesticide resistance, geographic distribution and correlation, island biogeography, etc, etc, etc.
Let's say the universe is that old, but the earth is older than that. The cave people during the fifth ‘a day’ in Genesis, that fifth ‘a day’ took around four and half billion years. Look at the cave people, God did not create them in his image. Being created in the image of God means that we must view ourselves as intrinsically valuable and richly invested with meaning, potentially and responsibilities. We are to be and to do on a finite scale, what God is and does on an infinite scale.
By virtue of being created in the image of God, human beings are capable of reflecting his character in their own life; animals possess none of these qualities. What distinguishes people from animals is the fact that human nature inherently has godlike possibilities.
Omniscience, omnipotence, or omnipresence, none of these other divine attributes have been ascribed to the human race as part of the image of God. We have been created to reflect God in our thinking and actions, but the physical sustained by God and dependent upon him for our existence in this world and in the world to come. Developing a godly character in this present life, this will be our personal identity in the world to come. It is the character or personality that we have developed in this life, that God preserves in his memory.
So these cave people, they would have to have everything we have, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mtLXpgjHL0&feature=related
These cave people would not have had a God conscious, like God has given to the human race a God consciousness, the conscious perception that we could say that there is a God somewhere and that ultimately the human race is accountable to that God.
Nothing made it out alive when the fifth 'a day' came to an end. In the sixth 'a day' God created blood life in the whales. Once something is created, all God has to do breath it into a body.
-
No still don't get it, I'm OK with standard English, try that, if you would, thank you very much,
in advance.
ippy
PS Is this sin you refer to a bit like something you can catch such as measels?
Religion would say you have the measles, but not God; it is a son issue today.
-
new algorithm,
There’s a formula to calculate that: take the square toot of the global number of unicorns, multiply by the captive population of Loch Ness monsters and divide the result by the verified number of alien abductions.
So that’ll be (√0 x 0)/0 then…
…oh hang on though…
Matt. 27:51, the earthquake that fractured the rock opened a fissure that ran down through 20 foot of solid rock into a cave and cracked the stone lid on top of a black stone volt where the Ark of the Covenant lie hidden inside, pushing the lid aside. John 19:34, the blood that poured from the side of Jesus, ran down through that crevice and dripped onto the Mercy Seat of the Ark of the Covenant that was hidden by God and the prophet Jeremiah, right under where they crucified Jesus, 620 years earlier when the Babylonians destroyed Salomon’s temple.
-
Let's say the universe is that old, but the earth is older than that. The cave people during the fifth ‘a day’ in Genesis, that fifth ‘a day’ took around four and half billion years. Look at the cave people, God did not create them in his image. Being created in the image of God means that we must view ourselves as intrinsically valuable and richly invested with meaning, potentially and responsibilities. We are to be and to do on a finite scale, what God is and does on an infinite scale.
By virtue of being created in the image of God, human beings are capable of reflecting his character in their own life; animals possess none of these qualities. What distinguishes people from animals is the fact that human nature inherently has godlike possibilities.
Omniscience, omnipotence, or omnipresence, none of these other divine attributes have been ascribed to the human race as part of the image of God. We have been created to reflect God in our thinking and actions, but the physical sustained by God and dependent upon him for our existence in this world and in the world to come. Developing a godly character in this present life, this will be our personal identity in the world to come. It is the character or personality that we have developed in this life, that God preserves in his memory.
So these cave people, they would have to have everything we have, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mtLXpgjHL0&feature=related
These cave people would not have had a God conscious, like God has given to the human race a God consciousness, the conscious perception that we could say that there is a God somewhere and that ultimately the human race is accountable to that God.
Nothing made it out alive when the fifth 'a day' came to an end. In the sixth 'a day' God created blood life in the whales. Once something is created, all God has to do breath it into a body.
Got as far as the first sentence; you cannot be serious (as that great philosopher John McEnroe once remarked).
-
Got as far as the first sentence; you cannot be serious (as that great philosopher John McEnroe once remarked).
The earth is old, it was before Genesis 1:1. I used figures of speech to show that. Did God create mountains or did the earth make it's own mountains. Did God create gold or did the earth make gold?
-
The earth is old, it was before Genesis 1:1. I used figures of speech to show that. Did God create mountains or did the earth make it's own mountains. Did God create gold or did the earth make gold?
The Earth doesn't have agency as such, and neither does 'God' unless you can demonstrate divine intervention as opposed to just asserting it.
-
The Earth doesn't have agency as such, and neither does 'God' unless you can demonstrate divine intervention as opposed to just asserting it.
Lucifer's flood in Genesis 1:1 shows the earth is very old. Figures of speech show Lucifer's flood.
-
The earth is old, it was before Genesis 1:1. I used figures of speech to show that.
Nope. You just claimed to have done.
The whole idea that you can use figures of speech to demonstrate the age of the Earth is madder than a bucket full of spiders.
-
Nope. You just claimed to have done.
The whole idea that you can use figures of speech to demonstrate the age of the Earth is madder than a bucket full of spiders.
I already did show Lucifer's flood using figures of speech. There has to be a earth for Lucifer to flood. The earth was was doing it's thing before Lucifer was created.
-
Lucifer's flood in Genesis 1:1 shows the earth is very old. Figures of speech show Lucifer's flood.
Nope: it would be water that 'shows' floods and not figures of speech.
I've no idea if you are one of these global flood types, and if so then here is a figure of speech that comes to mind: 'it didn't happen' (since if it did, given the scale of inundation, it would have left clear evidence).
-
Nope: it would be water that 'shows' floods and not figures of speech.
I've no idea if you are one of these global flood types, and if so then here is a figure of speech that comes to mind: 'it didn't happen' (since if it did, given the scale of inundation, it would have left clear evidence).
There are two floods recorded in Genesis. Genesis 1:1 shows the earth flooded out.
-
There are two floods recorded in Genesis. Genesis 1:1 shows the earth flooded out.
Then Genesis 1:1 is wrong, if that is what it says and if you take it literally.
Have you considered that it might be a myth dating to more credulous times?
-
new algorithm,
There’s a formula to calculate that: take the square toot of the global number of unicorns, multiply by the captive population of Loch Ness monsters and divide the result by the verified number of alien abductions.
So that’ll be (√0 x 0)/0 then…
…oh hang on though…
bhs (in admin),
You do realise that (one of the three) answers to that equation is 1...? 8)
-
Squeaks,
bhs (in admin),
You do realise that (one of the three) answers to that equation is 1...? 8)
Maths never was my long suit :(
-
Then Genesis 1:1 is wrong, if that is what it says and if you take it literally.
Have you considered that it might be a myth dating to more credulous times?
The figure of speech is clear about what is going on on the earth. I don't know any myth stories that use figures of speech.
“Without form” the Hebrew word is ‘tohu va bohu’ and is the figure of speech Paronomasia or Rhyming words. The repetition of words similar in sound, but not necessarily in sense. Without form, one of the Hebrew words is ‘tohu’ and is used as a subsequent event. Not created ‘tohu’ (Isa. 45:18), but became ‘tohu’ (2 Pet. 3:5-6). The other word is ‘bohu’ and is rendered “void”, means desolate. The two words together occur in Gen. 1:2a; Isa. 34:11; Jer. 4:23.
-
bhs (in admin),
You do realise that (one of the three) answers to that equation is 1...? 8)
But the equation of this figure of speech adds up to darkness being on the earth. “Face” in Genesis 1:2a is the figure Pleonasm or Redundancy. Where what is said is, immediately after, put in another or opposite way to make it impossible for the sense to be missed.
-
Somatids in "dormant form," they are a very tiny, extremely hard Apatite crystal that it is very difficult to cut with a diamond knife. They are resistant to all acids, and withstand extremely high carbonizing temperatures and extreme levels of radiation.
Nearly: Somatids are very advanced souls who inhabit human bodies and help to keep them healthy. They are found everywhere inside a human body – in the organs, glands, tissues and everywhere else.
-
Squeaks,
Maths never was my long suit :(
You can do the math on this figure of speech. “The earth” is the figure of speech Anadiplosis or Like sentence endings and beginnings. The word or words concluding one sentence are repeated at the beginning of another.
-
You can do the math on this figure of speech. “The earth” is the figure of speech Anadiplosis or Like sentence endings and beginnings. The word or words concluding one sentence are repeated at the beginning of another.
This is all very well and good but you still haven't told me how they can be observed in blood at 1000C.
-
The figure of speech is clear about what is going on on the earth. I don't know any myth stories that use figures of speech.
“Without form” the Hebrew word is ‘tohu va bohu’ and is the figure of speech Paronomasia or Rhyming words. The repetition of words similar in sound, but not necessarily in sense. Without form, one of the Hebrew words is ‘tohu’ and is used as a subsequent event. Not created ‘tohu’ (Isa. 45:18), but became ‘tohu’ (2 Pet. 3:5-6). The other word is ‘bohu’ and is rendered “void”, means desolate. The two words together occur in Gen. 1:2a; Isa. 34:11; Jer. 4:23.
I do: how about this for some 'Paronomasia or Rhyming words'.
'Jack and Jill went up the hill' (to fetch a pail of water, allegedly).
So, let's stop discussing words and start discussing water: more specifically the lack if it in terms of ancient stories about global floods.
-
Matt. 27:51, the earthquake that fractured the rock opened a fissure that ran down through 20 foot of solid rock into a cave and cracked the stone lid on top of a black stone volt where the Ark of the Covenant lie hidden inside, pushing the lid aside. John 19:34, the blood that poured from the side of Jesus, ran down through that crevice and dripped onto the Mercy Seat of the Ark of the Covenant that was hidden by God and the prophet Jeremiah, right under where they crucified Jesus, 620 years earlier when the Babylonians destroyed Salomon’s temple.
Sorry mate - that is not Gospel. That is just making shit up to fit your twisted belief!!
-
I already did show Lucifer's flood using figures of speech.
You certainly did not.
-
Nearly: Somatids are very advanced souls who inhabit human bodies and help to keep them healthy. They are found everywhere inside a human body – in the organs, glands, tissues and everywhere else.
The term soul - nephesh is used for both people and animals because both are conscious beings. They both share the same animating life-principle or “life-breath.” Somatids might be the cause of why people living over 800 years.
-
new algorithm,
There’s a formula to calculate that: take the square toot of the global number of unicorns, multiply by the captive population of Loch Ness monsters and divide the result by the verified number of alien abductions.
So that’ll be (√0 x 0)/0 then…
…oh hang on though…
bhs (in admin),
You do realise that (one of the three) answers to that equation is 1...? 8)
There's an infinite number of answers.
Or NaN.
-
This is all very well and good but you still haven't told me how they can be observed in blood at 1000C.
How many times have I answer your question. In there dormant form.
-
I do: how about this for some 'Paronomasia or Rhyming words'.
'Jack and Jill went up the hill' (to fetch a pail of water, allegedly).
So, let's stop discussing words and start discussing water: more specifically the lack if it in terms of ancient stories about global floods.
There is science to Paronomasia. I think your ancient stories lack Paronomasia?
-
Lucifer's flood in Genesis 1:1 shows the earth is very old. Figures of speech show Lucifer's flood.
Lucifer's Duck paddled upon that flood and laughed at all the cumbersome mammals who struggled and sank into depths.
Only to be swallowed up by the Jesus Orca....
WTF are you chatting about: Lucifers flood indeed..
"1 In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth.
2 Now the earth was unformed and void, and The Darkness was upon the face of the deep, and the spirit of God hovered over the face of the waters."
Are you trying to claim that Ridley Scotts' "Darkness" is something more that Tim Curry in awesome make-up?
-
Sorry mate - that is not Gospel. That is just making shit up to fit your twisted belief!!
It is Israelite history.
-
You certainly did not.
Yes I did. You was to bewildered about the Poler Star moving.
-
The term soul - nephesh is used for both people and animals because both are conscious beings. They both share the same animating life-principle or “life-breath.” Somatids might be the cause of why people living over 800 years.
So nothing tangible then?
-
Lucifer's Duck paddled upon that flood and laughed at all the cumbersome mammals who struggled and sank into depths.
Only to be swallowed up by the Jesus Orca....
WTF are you chatting about: Lucifers flood indeed..
"1 In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth.
2 Now the earth was unformed and void, and The Darkness was upon the face of the deep, and the spirit of God hovered over the face of the waters."
Are you trying to claim that Ridley Scotts' "Darkness" is something more that Tim Curry in awesome make-up?
In Genesis 1:2a, the two verbs ‘was’ should be the verb ‘to become’. The Revisers ill-advisedly decided that “all such words, now printed in italics, as are plainly implied in the Hebrew, and necessary in English, be printed in common type. One of the consequences of this decision is that the verb “to be” is not distinguished from the verb “to become”, so that the lessons conveyed are lost.
-
It is Israelite history.
It is a story of your own concoction - take bits of shit, add some more shit and bingo-bongo - Made up shit that makes sense in your shit for brains..
-
Yes I did. You was to bewildered about the Poler Star moving.
No you didn't and no I wasn't.
You didn't seem to grasp the fact that the stars don't really rotate around the pole star.
Not that this has anything to do with the loopy-fruitcake insanity that you can prove shit with figures of speech....
-
So nothing tangible then?
The Israelites pray of faith, how could these Somatids play apart?
-
No you didn't and no I wasn't.
You didn't seem to grasp the fact that the stars don't really rotate around the pole star.
Not that this has anything to do with the loopy-fruitcake insanity that you can prove shit with figures of speech....
But for the figurative language of verses 14 and 15 no one would have thought of referring the third chapter of Genesis to a snake; no more than he does when reading the third chapter from the end of Revelation (ch. 20:2). Indeed, the explanation added there, that the “old serpent” is the Devil and Satan, would immediately lead one to connect the word “old” with the earlier and former mention of the serpent in Genesis chapter 3; and the fact that it was Satan himself who tempted “the second man”, “the last Adam”, would force the conclusion that no other than the personal Satan could have been the tempter of “the first man, Adam”.
-
It is a story of your own concoction - take bits of shit, add some more shit and bingo-bongo - Made up shit that makes sense in my shit for brains..
Israelite history says that the blood of the second Adam must fall on that Ark.
-
In Genesis 1:2a, the two verbs ‘was’ should be the verb ‘to become’. The Revisers ill-advisedly decided that “all such words, now printed in italics, as are plainly implied in the Hebrew, and necessary in English, be printed in common type. One of the consequences of this decision is that the verb “to be” is not distinguished from the verb “to become”, so that the lessons conveyed are lost.
Yet more unsubstantiated bollocks...
A bit like me using Strongs to claim that the "serpent" in gen 3 was actually an angel - especially seeing as Nachash has a different meaning when used as a noun or a verb in the Hebrew. 5172 and 5175.
(I'll give you a clue. One can be translated as Whisperer/Hisser, the other as Shining/Devine.)
Put them together and what do you get?
-
But for the figurative language of verses 14 and 15 no one would have thought of referring the third chapter of Genesis to a snake; no more than he does when reading the third chapter from the end of Revelation (ch. 20:2). Indeed, the explanation added there, that the “old serpent” is the Devil and Satan, would immediately lead one to connect the word “old” with the earlier and former mention of the serpent in Genesis chapter 3; and the fact that it was Satan himself who tempted “the second man”, “the last Adam”, would force the conclusion that no other than the personal Satan could have been the tempter of “the first man, Adam”.
What has that drivel got to do with the age of the Earth or your misunderstanding about the pole star...?
-
Israelite history says that the blood of the second Adam must fall on that Ark.
Yeah but, you still took unrelated ideas and created your own bowl of shit in that post..
You just can't see it for whatever reason!!
-
Yet more unsubstantiated bollocks...
A bit like me using Strongs to claim that the "serpent" in gen 3 was actually an angel - especially seeing as Nachash has a different meaning when used as a noun or a verb in the Hebrew. 5172 and 5175.
(I'll give you a clue. One can be translated as Whisperer/Hisser, the other as Shining/Devine.)
Put them together and what do you get?
Noun - Soul and blood are identical. Verb - The soul is the vitality and personality of human existence.
-
Where have you wandered off to now?
Are you staring at the corner of the ceiling interpreting to noises you hear in your head?
-
The Israelites pray of faith, how could these Somatids play apart?
The what now... I'm sure Bob would disagree with you..
I'm guessing a lot of the kids at your school used to play "apart" from you, hence your bitterness now!!
-
What has that drivel got to do with the age of the Earth or your misunderstanding about the pole star...?
It may be asked, “How are we to know, then, when words are to be taken in their simple, original form (literally), and when they are to be taken is some other and peculiar form (as a figure)?” The answer is that, whenever and wherever it is possible, the words of Scripture are to be understood literally, but when a statement appears to be contrary to our experience, or to known fact, or revealed truth; or seems to be at variance with the general teaching of the Scriptures, then we may reasonably expect that some figure is employed. As as it is employed only to call our attention to some specially designed emphasis, we are at once bound to diligently examine the figure for the purpose of discovering and learning the truth that is thus emphasized.
-
Awww OK, you still going on about the made up word: Somatids. You new age freak....
I'm guessing you also spend a lot of your time trying to hypnotise Chickens and Goats...
-
Here's one for ya Nutter: There was no serpent/Devil in gen 3 - the one who got Eve sucked in was an Angel. One of the high council who disagreed with Yahweh and its shit, who overthrow it and has been ruling ever since..
Where is your God now?
-
It may be asked, “How are we to know, then, when words are to be taken in their simple, original form (literally), and when they are to be taken is some other and peculiar form (as a figure)?” The answer is that, whenever and wherever it is possible, the words of Scripture are to be understood literally, but when a statement appears to be contrary to our experience, or to known fact, or revealed truth; or seems to be at variance with the general teaching of the Scriptures, then we may reasonably expect that some figure is employed. As as it is employed only to call our attention to some specially designed emphasis, we are at once bound to diligently examine the figure for the purpose of discovering and learning the truth that is thus emphasized.
Quite apart from you just asserting (without reasoning) what the "answer" is, you appear to have overlooked the obvious possibility that the scriptures of which you speak are nothing but a bunch of old and inconsistent myths.
-
I don't know any myth stories that use figures of speech.
You've obviously never read the Poetic Edda, then.
Oh, and the bible, of course.
ht
-
<SNIP> I don't know any myth stories that use figures of speech.</SNIP>
Really - The Torah is the first book of myths that comes to mind...
-
In fact, thinking about it, I'm having trouble coming up with *any* myths that don't use figures of speech...
ht
-
About this lucifers flood. WTF can I find this again? Apart from in your fetid imagination!
-
Religion would say you have the measles, but not God; it is a son issue today.
Thanks for that NN, any chance of a clarification of the original post I was asking you about?
ippy
-
Can anyone work out whether new is an intelligent person deliberately posting gibberish as a wind up, or someone genuinely away with the fairies?
Either way, it's all a bit dull for me so I'll leave it to others to engage with him or not as they wish.
-
Any chance of making more sense than the sass is what you should be asking Ip man...
-
Can anyone work out whether new is an intelligent person deliberately posting gibberish as a wind up, or someone genuinely away with the fairies?
Either way, it's all a bit dull for me so I'll leave it to others to engage with him or not as they wish.
He's bonkers, but when I pointed that out it was not allowed.
I would not bother responding to any post as it is just gibberish.
-
You've obviously never read the Poetic Edda, then.
Oh, and the bible, of course.
ht
Othin, chief of the gods, always conscious of impending disaster and eager for knowledge, calls on a certain “Volva,” or wise-woman, presumably bidding her rise from the grave. Interesting, what is the beginning of this grave Volva came out of?
-
"Othin".. another misheard bit of gibberish that swills about in that shit-pan you call a brain..
-
.. but only protestants would call Odin "othin".. or idiots.. I'm gonna go with idiots..
What are you views on Soccer v's Football?
-
Thanks for that NN, any chance of a clarification of the original post I was asking you about?
ippy
It is a judicial transaction that takes place in God’s mind the moment you believe, God is the Sanctifier, not the person, in this case. Our justification, our righteous standing before God is accomplished through our being set-apart, justification is accomplished through sanctification. God’s act of sanctification is a part of that gift transaction connected with justification. Something was true (works), but now something else is true (reconciliation). Does reconciliation mean the whole world is saved? No.
-
It is a judicial transaction that takes place in God’s mind the moment you believe, God is the Sanctifier, not the person, in this case. Our justification, our righteous standing before God is accomplished through our being set-apart, justification is accomplished through sanctification. God’s act of sanctification is a part of that gift transaction connected with justification. Something was true (works), but now something else is true (reconciliation). Does reconciliation mean the whole world is saved? No.
Yup, you are quite right. The answer is No.
Which God is the Sanctifier?
Who is the Justifier?
Where do we Transaction?
-
Quite apart from you just asserting (without reasoning) what the "answer" is, you appear to have overlooked the obvious possibility that the scriptures of which you speak are nothing but a bunch of old and inconsistent myths.
Then show me. Where are my myth inconsistent? My myth has two flood accounts. What about your myth you hold so dear too?
-
Ajhhh fuck ..
I see what have you have done here.
Don't have an answer, create a false reply with an irrelevant question.
Well played sir, well played.
-
Why do we pander to these poor delusional "souls"?
All we do is feed their falsity of content!!
-
Yup, you are quite right. The answer is No.
Which God is the Sanctifier?
Who is the Justifier?
Where do we Transaction?
Does your myth story have a gift from God to the whole human race? Tell me about it.
-
Yup, you are quite right. The answer is No.
Which God is the Sanctifier?
Who is the Justifier?
Where do we Transaction?
The answer is apparently to be found in Romans:
"Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.
What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us?
He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things? Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth.
Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us."
or something.......
-
Ajhhh fuck ..
I see what have you have done here.
Don't have an answer, create a false reply with an irrelevant question.
Well played sir, well played.
Let's compare myths. Let's see who has the coolest myth.
-
Then show me. Where are my myth inconsistent? My myth has two flood accounts.
Which are contradictory.
-
Which are contradictory.
1st flood - “Without form” the Hebrew word is ‘tohu va bohu’ and is the figure of speech Paronomasia or Rhyming words. The repetition of words similar in sound, but not necessarily in sense. Without form, one of the Hebrew words is ‘tohu’ and is used as a subsequent event. Not created ‘tohu’ (Isa. 45:18), but became ‘tohu’ (2 Pet. 3:5-6). The other word is ‘bohu’ and is rendered “void”, means desolate. The two words together occur in Gen. 1:2a; Isa. 34:11; Jer. 4:23.
2nd flood- The progeny of the fallen angels before the flood. These abnormal beings, their destruction was necessary for the preservation of the human race, and for the faithfulness of Yahweh’s Word (Gen. 3:15).
-
1st flood - “Without form” the Hebrew word is ‘tohu va bohu’ and is the figure of speech Paronomasia or Rhyming words. The repetition of words similar in sound, but not necessarily in sense. Without form, one of the Hebrew words is ‘tohu’ and is used as a subsequent event. Not created ‘tohu’ (Isa. 45:18), but became ‘tohu’ (2 Pet. 3:5-6). The other word is ‘bohu’ and is rendered “void”, means desolate. The two words together occur in Gen. 1:2a; Isa. 34:11; Jer. 4:23.
2nd flood- The progeny of the fallen angels before the flood. These abnormal beings, their destruction was necessary for the preservation of the human race, and for the faithfulness of Yahweh’s Word (Gen. 3:15).
I meant the two accounts of Noah's Flood, which are cobbled together in one chapter, to appear to read as a continuous story. It is anything but.
-
I meant the two accounts of Noah's Flood, which are cobbled together in one chapter, to appear to read as a continuous story. It is anything but.
Genesis 1:1-2a is before the 'a days.' Your talking about the sixth 'a day.' Noah's flood happened after the fall.
-
Genesis 1:1-2a is before the 'a days.' Your talking about the sixth 'a day.' Noah's flood happened after the fall.
Jolly good - when did the Somatids arrive? Was that before or after the Thetans?
Sorry, you're probably not a Scientologist, but no doubt there has been some cross-fertilisation.
-
Jolly good - when did the Somatids arrive? Was that before or after the Thetans?
Sorry, you're probably not a Scientologist, but no doubt there has been some cross-fertilisation.
Those Somatids are a trip. How our body is a machine. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f9ff4FQ39CE&spfreload=10
-
Othin, chief of the gods, always conscious of impending disaster and eager for knowledge, calls on a certain “Volva,” or wise-woman, presumably bidding her rise from the grave. Interesting, what is the beginning of this grave Volva came out of?
It's a figure of speech.
ht
-
Jolly good - when did the Somatids arrive? Was that before or after the Thetans?
Sorry, you're probably not a Scientologist, but no doubt there has been some cross-fertilisation.
I suspect it was probably just after the Midichlorians got here...
ht
-
It is a judicial transaction that takes place in God’s mind the moment you believe, God is the Sanctifier, not the person, in this case. Our justification, our righteous standing before God is accomplished through our being set-apart, justification is accomplished through sanctification. God’s act of sanctification is a part of that gift transaction connected with justification. Something was true (works), but now something else is true (reconciliation). Does reconciliation mean the whole world is saved? No.
Sorry I don't get whatever it is you have in mind NN, I do however notice your constant referrences to something like a god figure or whatever that's supposed to be, since there is no evidence that supports this god idea, well I've never seen any evidence of that kind; perhaps it might be better if you could establish that there is more to this god idea than the magical, mythical or the superstitious, before you continue with this thread.
ippy
-
Can anyone work out whether new is an intelligent person deliberately posting gibberish as a wind up, or someone genuinely away with the fairies?
Either way, it's all a bit dull for me so I'll leave it to others to engage with him or not as they wish.
I think he is intelligent, someone like Steven Fry. He could make up shit like this, adding a few grammatical errors to fool everyone.
No complete idiot could compose this sort of gibberish, answering posts as though he hasn't even read them! And he obviously has no interest in convincing anyone.
It's a great method of showing religion in it's true light ... complete bollocks!
-
It's a figure of speech.
ht
The figure Hypocatastasie for grave. This grave is something much more real and truer to truth is intended.
-
I suspect it was probably just after the Midichlorians got here...
ht
Mitochondria, with their own DNA, they replicate on their own. Somatids are not cells and do not contain DNA or any kind of genetic material. But they seem to carry information.
-
Sorry I don't get whatever it is you have in mind NN, I do however notice your constant referrences to something like a god figure or whatever that's supposed to be, since there is no evidence that supports this god idea, well I've never seen any evidence of that kind; perhaps it might be better if you could establish that there is more to this god idea than the magical, mythical or the superstitious, before you continue with this thread.
ippy
The bible doesn't prove there is a God. My God wasn’t known through nature or natural phenomena. He was known through history, events and a particular relationship with a man, which he formed from the dust of the earth.
-
I think he is intelligent, someone like Steven Fry. He could make up shit like this, adding a few grammatical errors to fool everyone.
No complete idiot could compose this sort of gibberish, answering posts as though he hasn't even read them! And he obviously has no interest in convincing anyone.
It's a great method of showing religion in it's true light ... complete bollocks!
A person couldn't make this stuff up. Religion hates me more for showing this made up stuff. I get it from both sides.
-
A person couldn't make this stuff up. Religion hates me more for showing this made up stuff. I get it from both sides.
Diddums, this is for you then
https://m.youtube.com/?hl=en-GB&gl=GB#/watch?v=TCULiAKoDcM
-
Diddums, this is for you then
https://m.youtube.com/?hl=en-GB&gl=GB#/watch?v=TCULiAKoDcM
Here's a crazy one for you. The word "lord" doesn't belong in any of Paul's writings.
The Lord: The Hebrew states God’s name, YHVH, meaning according to v.14): ”He Will Be.” The Lord is actually a translation of “adonai” (lit. “my Lord”) because that is what the Israelites now pronounce whenever the consonants YHVH appear. YHVH was probably originally pronounced “Yahweh,” but in Second Temple times, as an expression of reverence, Israelites began to avoid uttering it, substituting “adonai” and other surrogates. (As a reminder to do so, in printed Hebrew Bibles the consonants are accompanied by the vowels of the surrogate words, leading to such hybrid English forms as Jehovah [I.e., “Yehovah” or the consonants Y-H-V-H with the vowels from “adonai”].)
Paul (Philippians 3:4-6) would have never used Lord in Romans 10:9! Paul would insist that a person confess Jesus as Savior, not Jesus as Lord.
-
The bible doesn't prove there is a God. My God wasn’t known through nature or natural phenomena. He was known through history, events and a particular relationship with a man, which he formed from the dust of the earth.
How can you confirm any of this, "he was known through history"?
What's this about "a man being formed from the dust of the earth"?
It sounds like you're romancing about the magical, mystic days of yore, where superstition ruled due to the ignorance of the times, hasn't most of the modern world moved on from all of that dream like nonsense.
If you do by any chance decide to answer my post, is there any chance you could use modern day intelligable English, Because I still can't make out what the point is that you're trying to make?
ippy
-
jjjohnjil: "I think he is intelligent, someone like Steven Fry. He could make up shit like this, adding a few grammatical errors to fool everyone."
Definitely and we don't have to go far to work out who.
-
How can you confirm any of this, "he was known through history"?
What's this about "a man being formed from the dust of the earth"?
It sounds like you're romancing about the magical, mystic days of yore, where superstition ruled due to the ignorance of the times, hasn't most of the modern world moved on from all of that dream like nonsense.
If you do by any chance decide to answer my post, is there any chance you could use modern day intelligable English, Because I still can't make out what the point is that you're trying to make?
ippy
Somatids are not cells and do not contain DNA or any kind of genetic material. But they seem to carry information. After death, all somatids present in the blood at that time will process to their macrocycle bringing the body into its basic elements (dust). The greenish mycelium on the surface of the dead body is the somatids in action. The decaying process of the body is caused by the polymorphism of somatids.
Somatids, a life form which is not bacterial, viral or fugal, but which instead belongs to a distinct domain unknown to modern science and medicine. We do know that Somatids are going to turn a person to dust?
-
A person couldn't make this stuff up.
And yet you did.
-
And yet you did.
In the constellation Coma (desired or the longed for), the Star of Bethlehem appeared. There was a traditional prophecy, well-known in the East, carefully preserved and handed down, that a new star would appear in this sign when he whom it foretold should be born. New stars have appeared again and again, but in 125 BC that a star, so bright as to be seen in the day-time, suddenly appeared. The second Adam (the promise seed of the woman Gen.3:25) was born, born is September.
-
And yet you did.
In the constellation Coma (desired or the longed for), the Star of Bethlehem appeared. There was a traditional prophecy, well-known in the East, carefully preserved and handed down, that a new star would appear in this sign when he whom it foretold should be born. New stars have appeared again and again, but in 125 BC that a star, so bright as to be seen in the day-time, suddenly appeared. The second Adam (the promise seed of the woman Gen.3:25) was born, born is September.
And continue to....
-
In the constellation Coma (desired or the longed for), the Star of Bethlehem appeared. There was a traditional prophecy, well-known in the East, carefully preserved and handed down, that a new star would appear in this sign when he whom it foretold should be born. New stars have appeared again and again, but in 125 BC that a star, so bright as to be seen in the day-time, suddenly appeared. The second Adam (the promise seed of the woman Gen.3:25) was born, born is September.
And continue to....
That star appearing in Coma is proof that Jesus was indeed born. But you continue to mock, just shows that Paul was right.
-
That star appearing in Coma is proof that Jesus was indeed born. But you continue to mock, just shows that Paul was right.
None of the articles I read about what astronomical phenomena could account for the Bethlehem star story mention the constellation Coma Berenices at all, so where do you get the Coma theory from?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20730828
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_of_Bethlehem
http://www.armaghplanet.com/blog/6-theories-about-the-star-of-bethlehem.html
-
Somatids are not cells and do not contain DNA or any kind of genetic material. But they seem to carry information. After death, all somatids present in the blood at that time will process to their macrocycle bringing the body into its basic elements (dust). The greenish mycelium on the surface of the dead body is the somatids in action. The decaying process of the body is caused by the polymorphism of somatids.
Somatids, a life form which is not bacterial, viral or fugal, but which instead belongs to a distinct domain unknown to modern science and medicine. We do know that Somatids are going to turn a person to dust?
You're a very strange person NN, why do you bother posting when everything you write is nonsense.
I last met someone with a similar turn of phrase about 50 years ago, I wrote him off as well; do you rember Stanly Unwin, at least he spoke a load of old bollocks for the fun of it and managed to make a bit of a name for himself, and a few bob out of it too.
ippy
-
Dear Newnature,
How you doing, enjoying the forum, good, good, remember you have to bring your own tea and biscuits :P
Gonnagle.
-
Gonners,
How you doing, enjoying the forum, good, good, remember you have to bring your own tea and biscuits :P
Is that because the medics are on strike?
-
Gonners,
Is that because the medics are on strike?
That hit the giggle muscle, full square on, like it, one of your better one liners Blue.
ippy
-
Dear Blue,
Is that because the medics are on strike?
;D ;D
No, Rhiannon is using the tea and biscuit funds for nail polish and Gordon and Horsethorn are busy stocking up the their drinks cabinet, good news though, I did hear Humphs subscription to Gay news was vetoed, his story about "purely research" was not believed. ::)
Gonnagle.
-
You're a very strange person NN, why do you bother posting when everything you write is nonsense.
I last met someone with a similar turn of phrase about 50 years ago, I wrote him off as well; do you rember Stanly Unwin, at least he spoke a load of old bollocks for the fun of it and managed to make a bit of a name for himself, and a few bob out of it too.
ippy
I think nn enjoys winding people up with his garbage.
-
Dear Floo,
As long as he is enjoying himself ::) ::)
Gonnagle.
-
The figure Hypocatastasie for grave. This grave is something much more real and truer to truth is intended.
You're a bit of a numpty, aren't you?
ht
-
Mitochondria, with their own DNA, they replicate on their own. Somatids are not cells and do not contain DNA or any kind of genetic material. But they seem to carry information.
Midichlorians, not mitochondria.
Cultural reference fail.
ht
-
Midichlorians, not mitochondria.
Cultural reference fail.
ht
Wrong. Midichlorians are not from The Culture but from the Star Wars Universe.
-
You're a bit of a numpty, aren't you?
ht
Just a thought H, what if he's actually being serious?
ippy
-
Dear ippy,
You can be serious and a numpty, some on this forum are evidence of that, myself included, but the word numpty sometimes does not do justice to what some of the serious ones are.
Gonnagle.
-
Dear ippy,
You can be serious and a numpty, some on this forum are evidence of that, myself included, but the word numpty sometimes does not do justice to what some of the serious ones are.
Gonnagle.
I just wonder if he might slip up and include the word 'dynamism' in one of his sentences, well at least that would be an explaination, Gonners.
ippy
-
Dear ippy,
Oh yes! there are hints in there of our very own Nicholas, come out newnature and show your true colours, maybe he is a follower of our Nick, if so he owes me some membership money, I am the President of the NicholasMarks fan club :P
Gonnagle.
-
Let's say the universe is that old, but the earth is older than that. The cave people during the fifth ‘a day’ in Genesis, that fifth ‘a day’ took around four and half billion years. Look at the cave people, God did not create them in his image. Being created in the image of God means that we must view ourselves as intrinsically valuable and richly invested with meaning, potentially and responsibilities. We are to be and to do on a finite scale, what God is and does on an infinite scale.
By virtue of being created in the image of God, human beings are capable of reflecting his character in their own life; animals possess none of these qualities. What distinguishes people from animals is the fact that human nature inherently has godlike possibilities.
Omniscience, omnipotence, or omnipresence, none of these other divine attributes have been ascribed to the human race as part of the image of God. We have been created to reflect God in our thinking and actions, but the physical sustained by God and dependent upon him for our existence in this world and in the world to come. Developing a godly character in this present life, this will be our personal identity in the world to come. It is the character or personality that we have developed in this life, that God preserves in his memory.
So these cave people, they would have to have everything we have, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mtLXpgjHL0&feature=related
These cave people would not have had a God conscious, like God has given to the human race a God consciousness, the conscious perception that we could say that there is a God somewhere and that ultimately the human race is accountable to that God.
Nothing made it out alive when the fifth 'a day' came to an end. In the sixth 'a day' God created blood life in the whales. Once something is created, all God has to do breath it into a body.
Science remains our best and most successful way of explaining natural phenomena.
It comes from years of observation, measurement, experimentation, peer testing, etc. Which, I hasten to add, is a far better way of explaining observable phenomena than crediting it to superstitious mumbo jumbo.
-
Wrong. Midichlorians are not from The Culture but from the Star Wars Universe.
Ooh - crossover story! :)
Still less of a fantasy than some of nn's comments...
ht
-
None of the articles I read about what astronomical phenomena could account for the Bethlehem star story mention the constellation Coma Berenices at all, so where do you get the Coma theory from?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20730828
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_of_Bethlehem
http://www.armaghplanet.com/blog/6-theories-about-the-star-of-bethlehem.html
It was this new star in Coma that caused Hipparchus to draw up his catalogue of stars, which has been handed down by Ptolemy (150).
http://tinyurl.com/zfkxhz5
Moderator: long url replaced.
-
You're a very strange person NN, why do you bother posting when everything you write is nonsense.
I last met someone with a similar turn of phrase about 50 years ago, I wrote him off as well; do you rember Stanly Unwin, at least he spoke a load of old bollocks for the fun of it and managed to make a bit of a name for himself, and a few bob out of it too.
ippy
No matter how old blood is, how battered, whatever it’s condition, it never dies. There are things called somatids in blood that are alive, and they belong to a distinct domain unknown to modern science and medicine.
-
You're a bit of a numpty, aren't you?
ht
Just trying to see where figures of speech are used in your myth story.
-
It was this new star in Coma that caused Hipparchus to draw up his catalogue of stars, which has been handed down by Ptolemy (150).
http://tinyurl.com/zfkxhz5
Err! NN
http://www.tinyurl.com
This thread is unreadable otherwise
Moderator: long url replaced.
-
No matter how old blood is, how battered, whatever it’s condition, it never dies. There are things called somatids in blood that are alive, and they belong to a distinct domain unknown to modern science and medicine.
Could I ask you to explain in simple terms what live blood is? Then we can determine if it ever dies.
-
The study of live blood comes under Darfield microscopy, an interesting branch of science ???.
-
Could I ask you to explain in simple terms what live blood is? Then we can determine if it ever dies.
Yet these somatids are in the blood. Somatids, a life form which is not bacterial, viral or fugal, but which instead belongs to a distinct domain unknown to modern science and medicine.
-
Yet these somatids are in the blood. Somatids, a life form which is not bacterial, viral or fugal, but which instead belongs to a distinct domain unknown to modern science and medicine.
That domain being your imagination, perhaps....?
-
Yet these somatids are in the blood. Somatids, a life form which is not bacterial, viral or fugal, but which instead belongs to a distinct domain unknown to modern science and medicine.
What are the views of modern-day haematologists on these somatids?
-
The study of live blood comes under Darfield microscopy, an interesting branch of science ???.
But what are the properties blood has to have in order to be described as live? Once we know this we can determine if it can ever be said to be dead.
I will have a google though, so thank you.
-
Yet these somatids are in the blood. Somatids, a life form which is not bacterial, viral or fugal, but which instead belongs to a distinct domain unknown to modern science and medicine.
see reply #456
-
Yet these somatids are in the blood. Somatids, a life form which is not bacterial, viral or fugal, but which instead belongs to a distinct domain unknown to modern science and medicine.
Ah but we are getting there nn, with the rise of Darkfield (or Dark Field) microscopy. Best studied with Bach's Toccata and Fugue in D Minor playing in the background.
-
just googled somatids, I'll let you know when I've stopped laughing
-
No matter how old blood is, how battered, whatever it’s condition, it never dies. There are things called somatids in blood that are alive, and they belong to a distinct domain unknown to modern science and medicine.
If somatids are alive and indestructible, shouldn't the whole Universe be made of them by now?
-
The somatid is an ultramicrosopic subcellular living and reproducing entity, which many scientists believe is the precursor of DNA and which may be the building block of all terrestrial life. So, yes, Jeremy, could be.
-
The somatid is an ultramicrosopic subcellular living and reproducing entity, which many scientists believe is the precursor of DNA and which may be the building block of all terrestrial life. So, yes, Jeremy, could be.
Really? - "an ultramicrosopic [sic] subcellular living and reproducing entity!" - How many Scientists believe this?
Can you list them?
I can only find one and he is a pseudoscientist: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/714-X
-
What are the views of modern-day haematologists on these somatids?
They call it Pseudo-Science, Gordon, so presumably the Pseudo-scientists particularly concerned with the blood ('Pseudo-haematics', not to be confused with ''Haematinics'') are, er, ''Pseudo-haematists. The modern-day haematologists are cautious about somatids. Interesting isn't it?
Thrud ;D
-
Yet these somatids are in the blood. Somatids, a life form which is not bacterial, viral or fugal, but which instead belongs to a distinct domain unknown to modern science and medicine.
What's the difference between a somatid and a bike?
They both have handlebars, except for the somatid.
-
Brownie,
The somatid is an ultramicrosopic subcellular living and reproducing entity, which many scientists believe is the precursor of DNA and which may be the building block of all terrestrial life. So, yes, Jeremy, could be.
Yay, you tell it like it is sister!
Oh, hang on a mo though - you're bang on except for the tiny detail that, well, these "somatids" of yours are entirely imaginary, a hoax, a chimera, a wiil-o'-the-wisp, a new age bullshit "like eveything happens for a reason maaaan" pile of steaming unicorn doo-doo.
Doubtless you'll be able to point us towards these "many scientists", their methodologies, their evidence, their peer-reviewed research papers, even their pictures on the front of reputable science journals for all I know in due course but, until then - fun as it may be just to make up this stuff with bad science - it's still flat out false.
Only speaking of "false", here's why it's not fun at all. If you look at the few rambling fruit loop tinfoil hat websites about these things some also casually throw in that by some mystical process unknown to medical science these imaginary somatids can diagnose and cure diseases that "traditional" medicine cannot. And sometimes people just as gullible as you and new who are ill actually believe that crap, and give up the medicine that could cure them in favour of this quackery.
And that ain't cool at all. Or fun.
You know what Ben Goldacre famously called "alternative" medicine that actually works?
Medicine.
-
Just trying to see where figures of speech are used in your myth story.
Well, it all begins back when Tyr was into cryptic crosswords, and noticed that Baldur's name was an anagram for 'u r bald'. This didn't please Odin, and they had a bit of a disagreement. However, the writers of the Prose Edda had an idea to calm them all down. They made this announcement...
Because of the Anagrams dispute it has been decided to devote the rest of this space to a page specially written for people who like figures of speech, for the not a few fans of litotes, and those with no small interest in meiosis, for the infinite millions of hyperbole-lovers, for those fond of hypallage, and the epithet's golden transfer, for those who fall willingly into the arms of the metaphor, those who give up the ghost, bury their heads in the sand and ride roughshod over the mixed metaphor, and even those of hyperbaton the friends.
It will be, too, for those who reprehend the malapropism; who love the wealth of metonymy; for all friends of rhetoric and syllepsis; and zeugmatists with smiling eyes and hearts. It will bring a large absence of unsatisfactory malevolence to periphrastic fans; a wig harm bello to spoonerists; and in no small measure a not less than splendid greeting to you circumlocutors.
The world adores prosopopeiasts, and the friendly faces of synechdotists, and can one not make those amorous of anacoluthon understand that if they are not satisfied by this, what is to happen to them?
It will attempt to really welcome all splitters of infinitives, all who are Romeo and Juliet to antonomasia, those who drink up similes like sparkling champagne, who lose nothing compared with comparison heads, self-evident axiomists, all pithy aphorists, apothegemists, maximiles, theorists, epigrammatists and even gnomists.
And as for the lovers of aposiopesis--!
It will wish bienvenu to all classical adherents of euphuism, all metathesistic birds, golden paronomasiasts covered in guilt, fallacious paralogists, tropists, anagogists, and anaphorists; to greet, welcome, embrace asyndeton buffs, while the lovers of ellipsis will be well-met and its followers embraced, as will be chronic worshipers of catachresis and supporters of anastrophe the world over.
Hope that helps
ht
-
No matter how old blood is, how battered, whatever it’s condition, it never dies. There are things called somatids in blood that are alive, and they belong to a distinct domain unknown to modern science and medicine.
Hi there N N, thanks for the post but it makes me wonder what's wrong with using standard English, without the rather amateur looking failed attempt to look as though you're talking in riddles.
If you can find the time to write without including all of the codswallop, I've described above, perhaps I might have some idea whatever it is you're trying to say and would then be able to respond.
ippy
-
Well, it all begins back when Tyr was into cryptic crosswords, and noticed that Baldur's name was an anagram for 'u r bald'. This didn't please Odin, and they had a bit of a disagreement. However, the writers of the Prose Edda had an idea to calm them all down. They made this announcement...
Because of the Anagrams dispute it has been decided to devote the rest of this space to a page specially written for people who like figures of speech, for the not a few fans of litotes, and those with no small interest in meiosis, for the infinite millions of hyperbole-lovers, for those fond of hypallage, and the epithet's golden transfer, for those who fall willingly into the arms of the metaphor, those who give up the ghost, bury their heads in the sand and ride roughshod over the mixed metaphor, and even those of hyperbaton the friends.
It will be, too, for those who reprehend the malapropism; who love the wealth of metonymy; for all friends of rhetoric and syllepsis; and zeugmatists with smiling eyes and hearts. It will bring a large absence of unsatisfactory malevolence to periphrastic fans; a wig harm bello to spoonerists; and in no small measure a not less than splendid greeting to you circumlocutors.
The world adores prosopopeiasts, and the friendly faces of synechdotists, and can one not make those amorous of anacoluthon understand that if they are not satisfied by this, what is to happen to them?
It will attempt to really welcome all splitters of infinitives, all who are Romeo and Juliet to antonomasia, those who drink up similes like sparkling champagne, who lose nothing compared with comparison heads, self-evident axiomists, all pithy aphorists, apothegemists, maximiles, theorists, epigrammatists and even gnomists.
And as for the lovers of aposiopesis--!
It will wish bienvenu to all classical adherents of euphuism, all metathesistic birds, golden paronomasiasts covered in guilt, fallacious paralogists, tropists, anagogists, and anaphorists; to greet, welcome, embrace asyndeton buffs, while the lovers of ellipsis will be well-met and its followers embraced, as will be chronic worshipers of catachresis and supporters of anastrophe the world over.
Hope that helps
ht
I think I comprehend what you are articulating, although your predilection for the simple and unembellished word, rather than the more complex and convoluted one does make it rather operose to appreciate. :)
-
I'm feeling inordinately incommoded by all this sesquipedelianism.
-
Well, I have to admit that Monty Python did have a slight influence on what I wrote...
http://www.intriguing.com/mp/_scripts/brandnew.php
ht
-
Bluehillside, sorry you didn't think my attempt at straight-faced fun was appropriate. I promise I won't do it again but I couldn't resist at the time.
-
Yet these somatids are in the blood. Somatids, a life form which is not bacterial, viral or fugal, but which instead belongs to a distinct domain unknown to modern science and medicine.
You need to disenthral your mind from these logomachies.
It makes you look like a monorchid haruspex.
-
Well, I have to admit that Monty Python did have a slight influence on what I wrote...
http://www.intriguing.com/mp/_scripts/brandnew.php
ht
Ah - what a shame. I was hoping it was original horsethorn; in which case I would have granted you the coveted award of the celestial golden bogroll.
Mixing my Latin and Greek, I wonder if NN's exposition is apodeictically related to his catastasis or indeed to his inevitable catastrophe. What is certain is that he already has his head well up his own arse. And I rather feel he likes it up there.
-
Bluehillside, sorry you didn't think my attempt at straight-faced fun was appropriate. I promise I won't do it again but I couldn't resist at the time.
Oh, please do. I'm surprised that blue didn't see past your po-face.
-
Ah but we are getting there nn, with the rise of Darkfield (or Dark Field) microscopy. Best studied with Bach's Toccata and Fugue in D Minor playing in the background.
A good example of mycelial subterfuge, since the authorship of said T&F is suspect.
-
Brownie,
Bluehillside, sorry you didn't think my attempt at straight-faced fun was appropriate. I promise I won't do it again but I couldn't resist at the time.
Well, here's what you wrote:
The somatid is an ultramicrosopic subcellular living and reproducing entity, which many scientists believe is the precursor of DNA and which may be the building block of all terrestrial life. So, yes, Jeremy, could be.
One might be forgiven I think for failing to see the intended irony. Nonetheless, if that's the way you meant it then I apologise.
-
No apology necessary at all, Bluehillside, but thank you. I must be better at pretending than I thought :D. Maybe it's not fair though because newnature, someone not well known on this forum, may be deadly serious about all this. I'm not going to 'be funny' about it any more, it was meant to be lighthearted but it could be interpreted as mocking.
-
Brownie,
No apology necessary at all, Bluehillside, but thank you. I must be better at pretending than I thought :D. Maybe it's not fair though because newnature, someone not well known on this forum, may be deadly serious about all this. I'm not going to 'be funny' about it any more, it was meant to be lighthearted but it could be interpreted as mocking.
Actually I disagree - I tend to the thin end of the wedge position whereby if we don't falsify, undermine, mock idiocy like this then we risk the accretion of these stupidities such that eventually they can have real world consequences like people throwing away their proper medicines. Richard Dawkins I recall was pilloried for being po-faced when he objected to horoscopes in newspapers for the same reason but I think he had a point - we privilege idiocy in the public sphere at our peril I think, whether religious idiocy or any other type.
-
Brownie,
Actually I disagree - I tend to the thin end of the wedge position whereby if we don't falsify, undermine, mock idiocy like this then we risk the accretion of these stupidities such that eventually they can have real world consequences like people throwing away their proper medicines. Richard Dawkins I recall was pilloried for being po-faced when he objected to horoscopes in newspapers for the same reason but I think he had a point - we privilege idiocy in the public sphere at our peril I think, whether religious idiocy or any other type.
Completely agree. Take "Till death us do part", a perfect example of showing unenlightened views for what they are.
-
I see your point, both of you, but I think I'll leave it to others to do the mick taking from now on. For all we know, nn is taking the mick!
-
I see your point, both of you, but I think I'll leave it to others to do the mick taking from now on. For all we know, nn is taking the mick!
Not so sure, have you seen his blog? Which could also be a wind up I agree but.....
-
No I haven't. I might read it if I can't sleep tonight, thanks Stephen.
A bit later: I had a peep and recognised it straight away, I obviously looked at it before. No, I don't think it's a wind up.
-
Well, I have to admit that Monty Python did have a slight influence on what I wrote...
http://www.intriguing.com/mp/_scripts/brandnew.php
ht
"What I wrote", wasn't that Morcome and Wise?
ippy