text:
Bible LiesI have studied the Bible all my life and I summarized my findigs in a 12-page pdf I wrote today called "Bible Lies." I think I offer great insights and questions that many rational Christians (if there is such an animal) harbor. I am giving it away free. But athiests don't like agnostic writings and Satanists don't believe in God either. So I am having trouble finding interest. I may put up my own website for the pdf next month.
I want to add that I spent 15 years in prison and the Christians would come and preach Jesus but that was all. I never got money, letters,or visits. I have a website about my prison story. I am also Schizophrenic and it sounds like Satan talks to me. But God has never talked to me. I think I hold that against God more than anything else. God leaves us a Bible and a Qu'ran and billions sort it out with wars.
So...you've discovered lies? And how did you come about such a discovery?
Hebrews 11:6, "And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him." Seek Him will all your heart and you will find Him... that's HIS promise!! God doesn't make a promise and not keep it. He IS His Word... the Living, Lasting, Loving Word!
The blind leading the blind
Satan is the author of confusion. And, brother, you're confused! (I've been there... see my story on my profile page called, "God's Protective Hands") The words of Jesus in John 10:10, "The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full." The "thief" of course is satan. God did not leave us the Qu'ran, only the Bible also called His Word (His promises to us!). Feel free to keep in touch. I'd enjoy it.
Evolutionist believe the earth was formed by a 'Big Bang' of an exploding Super Nova that sent rocks and minerals crashing through space and it created life on Earth. This belief says rocks created thousands of different species both male and female of animals, reptiles, birds, fish, flowers, trees, different soils, salt and fresh water, deserts, rain forests, different types of rocks, an entire periodic table of chemicals, and combinations of chemical elements. All of these are complex systems that evolutionists believe came from rocks. They cannot say what created the explosion, the darkness, or the light; however, it started everything.
The Bible has an explanation that atheists and agnostics say is a book of fairy tales. This declaration is not valid just because 'they say so' no matter how much they try to argue their point. Anyone can 'say' something, but it doesn't make it true. Truth is determined by what can be proven. The Dead Sea Scrolls and other copies of the Bible have been carbon dated back thousands of years. The most recent discovery was in the 1950's when a complete copy of the New Testament of the Bible was unearthed in an Archaeological dig in Egypt. It was carbon dated back to 30 years after the death of Paul (the Apostle mentioned in the Bible who is responsible for writing one third of the New Testament). There is not a single other ancient text that has been able to be carbon dated so close to the lifetime of the author. The writings of Aristotle can only be carbon dated back to 500 years after his death; however, atheists and agnostics do not question their authenticity.
Why is this important? Because there are prophesies in the Bible that were written down long before they were fulfilled. Carbon dating shows the conditions and what the specifics were suppose to be in advance of them coming to fruition. Archaeology has been able to confirm hundreds of instances mentioned in both the New and Old Testament. There are 300 prophesies related to the Messiah. The chance that one person would be able to fulfill even 20 of the conditions laid out are greater than someone winning the lottery, so fulfilling ALL 300 is like every star and planet in the universe exploding and crashing into the earth at the same time. However, this is exactly what happened. ALL 300 prophesies written hundreds of years before the birth of Jesus of Nazareth were fulfilled in His birth and life.
Some of the most educated 'atheists' in the world have studied years and written papers to support their view; however, the more they studied they realized they could not explain how a rock could create so many species on this planet. Atheist Oxford professors have come out to say they spent decades trying to disprove and debunk the Bible, but they were wrong. They found the more they looked, the more the writings in the Bible could be proved. The people existed in the time frame described, events happened as written, and there are third and fourth party writings and evidence that backs up what is written in the Bible.
So........ how many fairy tale books do you know of that can be supported by Archaeology? How many have Oxford scholars coming out to say it is fact? How many can accurately predict hundreds of events thousands of years in advance . . . and not be wrong on even one of them?
It seems much more intelligent to put your faith in something that has been proven by outside sources to be true, thousands of scholars have confirmed, Einstein himself professed, than the writings of a self professed Schizophrenic that has a grudge decides to write and declare to be true. I chose to believe the Bible.
i have read and got my fill of both ignorance and small bits of mostly noted info.. this is my first time here so i wont really post yet...i see all of you have pieces of facts mixed in with your establishment educations. this is good. lol.. thought mostly sudo on both ends. plus none of your are really taking in what the other says your kinna' reflecting on portions in conjuction with predetermined notions... this is exactly what religons are for.. it has done its job here in this forum.....
thank you Lana for blocking me! i always take that as an atheist realizing they cannot win the argument when someone else speaks against them :o) you are not the first atheist to block me! not the last either! you all prove your points the same! mockery, denial, ignore, bwahahaha! what a way to prove your point! :o) *typical*
Yep, blocking people just shows how childish that is. That's what they all do when they can't stand the heat.
quote by Lanavor22 "Atheists don't claim that everything came from nothing, they admit that we don't know everything yet and they're not so insecure that they need to cling to fairy-tales"

so there you have it folks! lana admits that she just do not know enough to claim there is no God! and she will stop believing in fairy tales like the big bang and evolution because these just cannot be proven by science :o)

I am soooo proud of Lana she has come a LONG way! :o) i would suggest though getting a dictionary

Definition of atheism

noun

[mass noun]

disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

Origin:

late 16th century: from French athéisme, from Greek atheos, from a- 'without' + theos 'god

Definition of agnostic

noun

a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God.

adjective

relating to agnostics or agnosticism.

(in a non-religious context) having a doubtful or non-committal attitude towards something: until now I've been fairly agnostic about electoral reform

but i'll take you as an agnostic anytime instead of an atheist! don't you think atheists are unreasonable asserting the ignorant view that there is no God :o) I'm glad to hear your not one of those :o)

proud of you LANA!!!!!
well this is a good place to start. i love how the god lovers looove to call people names. at this point i will continue to read and see what these threads have to offer, if anything...im not here to call anyone names... believe this if you believe nothing... WHAT YOU BELIEVE (EITHER WAY) HOLDS NO VALIDATION IN RESPECTS TO WHAT SOMEONE ELSE BELIEVES...so when you call some ignorant based on opinion i believe its really a reflection i think opposite thoughts should just give life to brand new ideas not insults.. thanks and i look forward to something of substance,, maybe?
reaperofface. Nobody can prove the non-existence of something. That does not mean that that something may exist however.
A better expression of atheism is "There is absolutely no scientific evidence for the existence of God, and I therefore do not think that God exists. I will hold this to be true until I am presented with incontrovertible evidence, provable and repeatable scientifically, that God does exist."
This is not an admission in the weakness of the argument that there is no God, rather it asserts the strength that that existence needs to be proved for it to exist.
Insulting people, talking down to them and generally being offensive to people thet do not share your faith in a fairy tale does not strengthen your argument, it merely proves that you're a complete ****.
Maybe you should resort to reading your Bible. "And he made out of one man every nation of men, to dwell upon the entire surface of the earth, and he decreed the appointed times and the set limits of the dwelling of men, for them to seek God, if they might grope for him amd really find him, although, in fact, he is not far off from each one of us."

Acts 17 : 26 - 27. Then read James 4 : 8. to see what God promises to do.
sorry boshie Lana has a thing about Harry Potter. :op you'll have to excuse her she's still trying to figure the difference between modern fiction and ancient history.
Lana when harry potter sells around 6 billion copies and discusses accurate science, and history from the beginning to the end, containing accurate predictions through out, proving right without any contradictions then i will be the first to say it's true! until then it carries very little weight as an argument, yet you still use it, pretending to yourself that makes you clever? and you call christians ignorant and childish? talk about denial! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought i'd do you a favour and put your harry potter fever to rest (http://www.fanfiction.net/s/4463169/1/Pains-and-Contradictions) even that stupid book has so many contradictions, FANS build pages by the thousands to discuss them! i'm sure they'll except you Lana ;o)
denying the power of God does not make you smart!
like i said before if there was nothing miraculous you'd be saying where is the miracles! please try not to be obtuse. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't care if you don't believe the Bible! i mean lana you can't even admit to God existing! why would i are if you believe the Bible or not! it's proven true more often than "not having proof" the prophecies alone is enough to be noted. nothing else in the world can lay a claim even remotely the same! it's not a science manual no! but the science it does handle is accurate not somewhat but perfectly accurate! over and over again! it explains what we see geologically and naturally! we can see all people had a single common ancestor when we look at dna! note: not ancestor as in different species! our human dna falls towards a human ancestor! also in accordance with the bible and illogical from an evolutionary stance! if you wanna believe evolution that's fine too, even that stupid unproven theory needs a God to form order against the natural flow of chaos. you can twist this and twist this all you want lana -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the fact remains. you cannot logically claim there is no God! you yourself admit there can be no evidence! so how can you dismiss the suggested force that created the universe? were not talking about space bunnies(whatever you think they might do) This is the undeniable force needed to create the universe! you are however free and welcome to stick those fingers back in your ears, recite a harry potter book, and sing la la la la la...! the fact remains there are numerous scientific knowledge and laws, as well as philosophical principles, that lends weight to the evidence for God. you are welcome to ignore ALL of this! but you CANNOT maintain that there is "no God" or do you? still? that most ignorant of claims is what you want to carry with you?
I guess then as Lana did admit to the law of Entropy that we can now move on from is there a God to who is that God? tell me when your ready Lana and we will begin :o)
Richard Dawkings? lol bwahaha yeah that's funny really. i have a clip of him! lol Dawking isn't theDevil he's too stupid lol once again he too avoids the law of entropy! LOL you people are not helping yourselves! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://philipcarrgomm.wordpress.com/2008/11/18/debunking-the-debunker-richard-dawkins-and-spin/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.oxfordtutorials.com/Dawkins%20Debunked%20Summary.htm

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.beliefnet.com/Wellness/2007/02/Debunking-The-God-Delusion-Part-1.aspx ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

this is your richard dawkings? yeah your welcome to follow his idiotic logic LOL G you people make worse cases for yourself than those religious types you hate so much!
please combine the ideas of science to show me that there is no God :o)
You know she can't. She can't even prove what she claims here.
she has still not shown proof of where I said I knew everything. If she can't even prove what she herself has said, how is gonna prove things way over her head?
i know hebrews but i'm having so much fun it's like poking at a pinata :o) i might not gets sweets but i get laughs! I haven't had this much fun in weeks :o) always busy studying now i get a chance to play :o)
@Cowardlyshooter read the whole post before you comment!

"The sun needs to be controlled to be of benefit. a plant has a control mechanism called photo synthesis. a single cell in a primordial soup does not :o) no single cell anywhere can use sunlight without a process. your welcome to prove that as it's the final proof the evolutionists are hoping for, the best they got as amino acids. not close to life! but yeah nice try"

please try again trouble. show me where the sun is beneficial without a control! please explain how primordial soup filled with minerals and amino acid has a control to form life! and then has a control to keep adding order to this new life form all through time untill now! please also show this force as it has to keep adding order for us to keep evolving! IT has been proven it's not the sun! your welcome to go stand in the sun for the next month! least then i don't have to talk to you anymore, you would be cooked not changed :o) but please!!!!!! go try!
I was a minister in a non-denominational but pentecostal church for years. I did full time ministery day in and day out. And I mean 7 days a week. The church used me so much I had a huge break down, my marriage fell apart, I ended up divorcing and g kicked out of the very church that i spent my blood, sweat, tears, and tithe to build. Afer that i started studying all kinds of religions, but the bible especially. From a new perspective I could see that the god of the bible was sadistic. He was cruel to everyone. In was he directed to kill everyone and everything including women, children and animals. I know he said that he would never leave us of forsake us...does that mean he was holding my hand while those men were molesting me when I was 3-9 yrs old? If he never left me and just watched, he is no better than a modern day pedifile. I am proud to say that I no longer serve the god of any book include and especally the bible. I think that christianity is the sneakiest and most deviant of all the religions and its underlying message just puts you in this mode of having to measure up to him, meaning god, all the time, and nobody can do it. No wonder all our teenagers are killing themselves, they dont feel as though they measure up. Religion is horribly sad, it breaks my heart. And to think I led that way myself for 11 years. YUK, and I am truly SORRY!
terrible story, sorry that had to happen to you... did God molest you? or was it people? you want God to break His promise of free will? He should take away all free will? or just those you suggest? sorry but blaming God for man molesting you is like blaming planes for 911, guns for columbine or spoons for rosy o donell being fat. You say that kids kill themselves because they can't measure up? you missed the christian bit of the bible didn't you. the part that says God knows we can't be perfect so he cam himself to die to release us all from sin. If Christianity is the religion of these kids that kill themselves then they should understand that Jesus died for them exactly so that they don't have to feel that way. I speak out of the mouth of someone who is a manic depressive. Death was only ever an option when i didn't realize that God was Christ. People kill themselves when they see no purpose! If there is no God what is the purpose of life? so when life becomes too much to handle then you think of ending it. how do you relate that to christianity? i'm sorry but disliking a religion is one thing. blaming it for all the problems is ridiculous! It's a closed minded view like trying to fit races into pre-conceived ideas. I don't mind if you dislike christianity before i understood it i said the same things! but blaming it for everything bad? if you don't believe in it how can it then have all this power you bestow upon it? I will agree that over history modern man has done some terrible things in the name of christianity. but just because i call myself a "republican" or a "democrat" or any other lable does not mean that i am a true representative of that system. Just so you cannot claim to know who i am or what i believe because i believe the Bible. you will find that i disagree with main stream christianity in some very fundamental ways! so much so that i am not accepted by most denomination of christians because they label me as fundamentalist lol. anyway whatever floats your boat i suppose. you hate the fact how christians judge but judge in exactly the same way now? your just adding to a problem of unjust judgement.
troubleshooter stop blocking people if you want to give opinions about what they say! don't be a coward it's pathetic!

So the sun is your controlled energy that allows for life to form?

please point where the sun's energy is controlled by the sun! you miss something fundamental the sun's rays break down everything they encounter! after time the sun will completely destroy your roof your car and all life on this planet. unless it runs down before that time then heat death will occur also entropy!

The sun needs to be controlled to be of benefit. a plant has a control mechanism called photo synthesis. a single cell in a primordial soup does not :o) no single cell anywhere can use sunlight without a process. your welcome to prove that as it's the final proof the evolutionists are hoping for, the best they got as amino acids. not close to life! but yeah nice try

I really become disillusioned when i have to explain basic high school science to a bunch of grown ups! when you eat you apply controlled force in a multitude of ways! the first would be the force to move the food to your mouth this is controlled force. the food you eat lets say an piece of fruit. come of a tree with a method of control by photo synthases etc. you can go further to explain where the plant got it's energy from the sun. where did the sun get it's energy etc etc etc to the first part of origin of everything! starting with the external force applied to bring controlled order to the internal system of the universe!

trouble your opinion only really means something when your science is right! proving entropy is everywhere is not helping your case for no God. please go study entropy before you make comments about the subject that clearly shows you do not understand the principle. it is a very good proverb to follow. "If you don't know keep quiet"
Entropy a LAW of science says there must be an external force independent of the system to create order inside the system. As this force is not bound by the system it is eternal and super natural. Please disprove this scientific law, or disprove that i am wrong in what the law says! (note to all readers to Lana's answer :o)
if the force applied is external to the system of time space and matter why would you think it is bound by the laws of time space and matter? is the computer programmer bound by the computer code he programs? come on lana try again. I'm waiting for you to prove that Entropy can be negated.
lets try this again and then answer the question. If your not bound by the laws of the system you cannot bind yourself by the law of entropy. the law of entropy is part of this system. your reasoning is flawed by thinking there is time before the beginning of time. (if you stand on the south pole and i ask you go south - is there a point south of the south pole? exactly there is no time before the beginning of time) i don't expect you to accept that i call the force God. the fact of the Science is that the External force does exist! thus! the force is eternal and supernatural! Negate entropy! Entropy says the force applied for organizing the system has to be external to the system. if the force applied is external to time and space and matter then the laws of the system of time space and matter does not apply. Please explain how Entropy can negate this law. If this law then is true. Please explain the external force
do you agree that the law of entropy is a fact?
nope the initial point was entropy proves an external eternal super natural force :o) that is the whole point! because you assume that time exist before time exists is completely ignorant. where did you show the bible teaching defy the laws of science? please repost and i'll be sure to answer your claim! :o) your hiding again Lana. ENTROPY! :o) Einstein said what i say! so does most physicist throughout time. So your welcome to prove all of them wrong! until then you can keep trying to change the subject you still have to negate Entropy :o) please proceed :
"For isolated systems, entropy never decreases.[5] This fact has several important consequences in science: first, it prohibits
"perpetual motion" machines; and second, it implies the arrow of entropy has the same direction as the arrow of time. Increases
in entropy correspond to irreversible changes in a system, because some energy is expended as waste heat, limiting the amount of work a system can do."
"In statistical mechanics, entropy is a measure of the number of ways in which a system may be arranged, often taken to be a
measure of "disorder" (the higher the entropy, the higher the disorder)"
"It follows that heat will not flow from a colder body to a hotter body without the application of work"
"Secondly, it is impossible for any device operating on a cycle to produce net work from a single temperature reservoir;"
"Entropy is the only quantity in the physical sciences that seems to imply a particular direction of progress, sometimes called
an arrow of time. As time progresses, the second law of thermodynamics states that the entropy of an isolated system never
decreases. Hence, from this perspective, entropy measurement is thought of as a kind of clock."
"The entropy of a system depends on its internal energy and the external parameters, such as the volume. In the thermodynamic limit this fact leads to an equation relating the change in the internal energy to changes in the entropy and the external parameters. This relation is known as the fundamental thermodynamic relation"
@reaperofface: "Lanavor" Is Correct and Is Not the Real: "Troll". I am considering @reaperofface is to being the Real "Troll" On Here. And I will not be Back here to Debate. If you think I'm not correct about things. Then So Be! The Extra Terrestrial Aliens that left the Mayan Calendar about 48,000 BC (I think there around) Which it Began is Ending December 21, 2012. One cannot deny marking a Solar Celestial Event as the "Winter Solstice" (A Calendar for this can't be wrong.) and Ancient Maps of Antarctica showing Ancient Life there with ancient trees (Because they discovered them there under the Ice.) that long ago was not our Normal Ancient Man. But I'm guessing the Extraterrestrial Aliens will probably make their appearance to Us, but may finally make it known to all of Human's As their Miss Understanding of things. (I'm just hoping the Truth comes out by then (???) ... )
BWAHAHA that is some funny stuff Chakra! ET phone home! lol
@Chakra thanks for proving how much you do not know

"Earth is close to 64 Billion has much evidence to it." popular theories suggest the age of earth at 4.5 billion! note there is no scientific PROOF of this on theory. you however are welcome to bring the proof you want for 64 billion or 4.5 billion i'll listen to anything that is PROVABLE!

"Yet? Since say 50,000 years ago if this is when the first Debate about God from Disbelievers" you do understand that we only have proof of civilization from around 4000 years ago. again If you have any proof of any man living 50 000 ago let alone the religious discussion he had please bring PROOF!

"at least 7,000 years" now where getting closer to the age of the earth but religion only started playing a role around 4000 years ago which is coincidentally right after the Flood. once again i invite you to PROVE what you said. eagerly waiting

As for validations in the bible what are you looking for?

God knowing man can communicate with electricity? r the evidence visible today that God did stretch out the heavens? do you want to see where God said the Palestinian conflict will remain as a thorn in the sides of Israel? do you want to know of the biology and health that the bible got right thousands of years ago? there's many validations what would you like to hear first?

If you only however have more dumb comments ba<x>sed on nothing but what you think then please keep quiet! stupid makes my eyes burn!
I'm sure I got the Universe age mixed with the Earth age. So then Earth age is more likely 4.5 Billion (Correction Granted). And I can guess where I believe it to more then accurate in what I say. I do take this information subjectively by the Professional Sciences where they are harder at their Work being Objective about what they tell Us, as I do read up on such things. Because I do believe they have the Objective Evidence that exceeds greater than what Man has to say to which is much more then just being Subjective, but less Objective with the Bible. And not seeing the Objectives that I once expected from a God. As to Who is more Objective? I go by Science for being more Objective, even though I have to take things and all about my world more Subjectively. The Evidence is with the Professional Sciences (With Me). They go out into the Field of this Earth and Know the Psychics and Chemistry, that reveals Objective Evidence. The Bible is not like this.
I love Scientific evidence Chakra for one thing it keeps proving my Bible correct whether you wish to believe it or not. I personally have no problem with blind faith but even to me it's an unacceptable way of living. But i do not apply that only to religion i apply that to the whole world and all that it says. You must understand that there is a great deal of difference between seeing something happen and making assumptions on this little piece you see. we have only been studying the universe with telescopes for not even quite 500 years give or take "thank you Galileo" but scientist tells us that THIS is how things work? really? and i have to believe that? the only thing gazing up at the stars can tell you is what happened in the past that lends no evidence to what happens now, or for that matter how everything acted said "3 billion years ago" Hubble's assumptions should mean that galaxies cannot form and making up dark matter to explain why it can does not make it real! same with earh sciences! the only thing a fossil can tell you is that something lived and it died. and it was buried in wet sediment else it cannot form a fossil. the rest is speculative at the best of times! a guess is only ever a guess! but all this evid3ence that they say proves them right is proving the Bible right. You don't have to believe it but when all science points to one thing why does man make you believe what they say happened. How would "they" know what happened? where they there? what PROOF do they have other than assumptions. you are welcome to bring up any of their so called
"proof" and we can weigh the evidence. you cannot deny that at the end it's all just some human's idea! and your willing to bet on that? with your life? please if you wanna test Gods word you are welcome to try it stands against everything for it is true! please cntact me privately or in post but please do read all my stories and all the answers to the questions that have been received. one acidsanctuary had some brilliant questions that you can go read on my proof of God page. He does not believe in God and asked me some real good questions. please if you are in search of truth regardless of your mind just give it a read and see if there is problems with the science and or the facts. please also feel free to post your own questions there and please make them hard ones if you want. i won't slander or dismiss your question i will admit if i do not have an answer for a question. also ALL questions on my story will be answered unlike in the atheistic story's where no valid arguments against anything said is ever given, they all just keep ranting about how foolish we are for believing a MAN made religion. and i agree believing anything a MAN tells you is stupid. find out for yourself
Did I understand that Christians are saying the Bible it telling us that Earth is about 6,500 years old? With the Science we have now. No Way! The Evidence to knowing that our Earth is close to 64 Billion has much evidence to it. And Archeology and Physics of Science is always proving it. Yet? Since say 50,000 years ago if this is when the first Debate about God from Disbelievers. The Proof to me that God would be real is that God the Divine should had been a better Referee in our arguments and debates a long time ago. Man's continuous arguments and debates with out the supposed (Divine?) at least 7,000 years and still it is always the battle of Man who has to try to figure this all out in our little insignificant brain powers. Where is the Help from this God at the Begin with? If it hasn't come through, then the lack of there (Of) is to me an indication of the: "Lack Of There Of"! Besides again something that man can write down and make false claims this is Inspired by God. What validates these claims is Insanity!
Chakra i'd like to introduce you to my Troll :o) Chakra meet Troll, Troll meet Chakra! Troll doesn't believe God exists. Troll has no proof. Troll also has no answers for basic scientific principles mainly Entropy. Troll keeps going off on wild rants about i don't even know anymore because honestly it's so dumb and illogical that i'm just not interested anymore. Troll has no science knowledge and keeps contradicting herself to the point of admitting she believes in nothing and then still quotes evolution where it fits. till you confront her on evolution then she hides again and states she is not saying that's how it happened. you see Troll actually just like arguing! but you will soon find that Troll makes very little sense inside her little ball of hate :o) *wave* to Troll
Revised edition :

(a) {The Law of Entropy says that al things tend to disorder over time due to randomness, the only way to negate the Law of Entropy is to apply controled energy onto the system. So there must be an external force independant of the system to reverse the natural entropy of the system. This is derived from the Second Law of thermo dynamics which states that energy cannot be created inside a closed system but can only change form. The second law of thermodynamics states that it is impossible for an effect to be greater than the cause. It is also impossible to produce work in a closed system using a cyclic process connected to a single source of energy. The entropy of any isolated system, such as the universe, never decreases, and if there is no external energy applied, then all sub systems in the universe will follow the natural processes of entropy. Everything in the Universe not receiving controled energy from outside the system will follow entropy and disorder. Thus without a controled energy independant of the system applied onto the system, no processes could reach order and form anywhere inside the universe. As time is a natural process the beginning of this Universe had to start with time. Time is needed in order to govern space and the matter inside the space. Then time to has a beginning as well as an end}

(b) {God is the Cause that is needed for the Effect of the Universe to exist. Because this effect is outside of this closed system, that is governed by time and the natural laws, This Cause must be eternal. and must be Super Natural. Therefore this Supreme power is not bound by any of the laws pertaining to the separate system, of our Universe. Any attempt to quantify God will therefor not be possible using the laws of this universe. If God did apply extra Energy to this sytem we should be able to detect the extra radiation from that energy applied to the universe, in order for complex sub sytems to form against the law of entropy, this radiation will be much greater than the resultant mass and energy that we can observe in the universe today}
any further idiotic insults will be ignored. if anyone does however want to bring science to debunk the bible my profile blocks no one. I welcome anyone to prove their claims. have fun in your paradox
Wow Mental!!! did you think of that yourself? still waiting for your stupid proof you fake!

your a fraud a lier and a fool. and yes you to go hide behind S, Hawking! whether he's standing up or sitting down. the point is your a mindless fool following your human god and his silly mind. have fun. lol to the rest of you whatever! i really don't have to convince you lot. if your to dumb to make up your own minds then really your welcome to each other. when any of you do evolve a back bone come bring your proof and see if it has ANY weight. You ALL claim SCIENCE but you bring NONE! LOL! not one shred of scientific evidence any of you "clever" people have presented. your greatest argument is steven says so! LOL your the new christians of this ERA enjoy your label that history will put on you and your understanding! "can you believe in the 21st century people believed creationg began by blowing something up!" LOL BWAHAHAH
"Wow Mental!!! did you think of that yourself? still waiting for your stupid proof you fake! " Na-na-na-na-boo-boo! much?
Your maturity astounds me.
yeah whatever blame maturity when you can prove your intellect. till then your opinion has as much value as Mental's than you for your response though would you like to answer a question now? regardless i will still choose immaturity above ignorance. but being willingly ignorant as Peter called it, has no excuse. I however put it in plain english so it can't be misinterpreted. Stupid On Purpose
Troubleshooter

i really don;t care if you listen. i'm more than happy to listen if anyone is willing to answer the questions i have posed. i mean come one this post is debunking the bible then debunk already! i have answered the stupid reasoning so now the stupid reasoning can carry on with their debunking the bible. i'm listening. none of you who believe these things have come with anything better that "go see Mr Hawking" why do you seemingly intelegent people hide behind a guy in a wheel chair?

but wait lets talk about mr Steven Hawking. i formulated my theory why God does exist many many months ago. i have read all hawkings attempts at explaining a beginning without a cause but these are not even concidered true by most physisists. most of them give the answer as mr Hawking have also done that seeing as what happened before this universe doesn't pertain to this universe they cannot speculate! the law of entropy remains! the beginning of this universe have to have a cause. If you do not want to call that God fine by me i don't really care. i contacted mr Hawkings personal assistant via email with my theory and findings and i am still waiting for a reply. guess he is really busy attempting to debunk God as his whole theory at this point rests on proving there need not be a cause! i have seen his lectures and they are truly nothing more than specualtion ba<x>sed on wrong assumptions. i leave him to it.

my stories however are open to mr Hawking as well as mr Krauss if they wish they are more than welcome to debate me here in private or in any public forum. i will bring provable science to the argument they are more than welcome to bring theory. I will also be bringing a Dictionary to explain some basic principles between the two disciplines.

You want me to publish a paper that proves entropy ? lol don't now if you;ve noticed but that's being proven over and over every day throughout the universe and has never been seen to be false. Hawking math does not make his assumptions right. Hawking assumes the universe is busy expanding! When we see starlight it is starlight from a distant time. note if this is where you jump up and smile! sit down! einstein's theory of general relativity says that time in a deep gravity well moves at a slower speed as time on the edge of the gravity well. this makes the creation and the earth as it's centre the middle of the gravity well which means the stars and galaxies in heaven have a lot of time to reach earth while earths time is relatively moving A LOT slower. God said that He stretched out the heavens. so the stretch would be visible in the star light we see today the red shift. that does not mean the stars are still moving, only that they moved in the past.

Hawking cannot prove they are moving! i cannot prove they are not! but one thing that is undeniable is that by the big bang's predictions andromeda should not be moving towards us. andromeda is your wake up call that Hawking is a grumpy angry close minded genius who will never except he will never prove his theory.

i point you to someone who blows your hawking god out of the water! please do yourself a favor and check this kid out i beg you! note he believes the universe was created by plasma: also note plasma follows fluid dynamics. i say this because the Bible again points to liquid.

"12 Year Old Boy Genius Sets Out to Disprove Big Bang ... Disprove the big bang, of course. .... Posted on March 25, 2011 at 11:14am"

(http://www.theblaze.com/stories/a-beautiful-mind-12-year-old-boy-genius-sets-out-to-disprove-big-bang/)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBW4S9xcTOk

as for your quote!

go read earnestly the truth that i keep demonstrating in my stories now in this response and all my others. none of you have answered anything.

If you are all so convinced then you must have personal proof that gives you belief. then present it. don't tell me to go and speak to Hawking! he doesn't talk back! tell me why what you believe is true! or must all of you admit your following some propaganda that has been fed to you without you evere knowing the proof behind the "truth" you serve.

I do not care if you believe in God or pray to him or if your a good person! that is God's business. Jesus said to me to spread the truth. so i do that. But if you have any true craving for knowledge step out of the walls the world has built around your mind. and go in search of the truth for yourself. but believing man because man says so is stupid! it's what all you anti religiouse types are preaching! not seeing that you are the ones who follow preacher hawking so blindly!

your doing what you all hate so much.

if you don't want to follow God at least follow your own mind not another man you have never met! and never talked to! and who's theories does not make sense to you or to 99% of the population taking into account that most people lie maybe not all who say they understand it truly understand it.

you wanna believe the new religion because it fits your wish that there won't be a God.
That boy had his wiki page removed due to not actually achieving anything significant yet, btw.
Jacob Barnett is a professor at the Princeton with a financial grant to do applied physics. btw
i just love how people are open to one another on here! it's not like people delete the answers they don't like or try and present a true unbiased opinion. truly if these are the minds i have to follow for true understanding? then i'd rather pray to my God. you are all guilty of the accusations you fling towards Christianity and the religions of man! of not being open minded honest or open. thanks to those who have deleted my replies. you really show truth even if it's only to me. You people truly define the word Hippocratic. if you wish an open and honest discussion my posts PROVE your wrong! :o) do i hear a challenge? God's word will stand against your "beliefs" any day of the week!
Man kind is who came up with the bible man kind is who interpreted the bible if you want to know God look to things which man kind can not physically design or interpret like nature and ask God to speak to you i believe the only truth in the bible is the verse where it says "Ask and it is Given" and it doesnt necessarily mean by words we ask everyday when your late and stuck in traffic you are asking for an easier quicker way to get where you are going but thats just an example we are asking for improved situations everyday all day and 99.99% of the times we think that by having whatever it is it will make us happy. so i strive everyday that no matter what lies before me i care how i feel and i choose to be happy and it takes practice affirmations are a good way to start.
@reaperofface: I know Christianity and Cults have a mindset into a belief and comes deeply rooted in generational hand me downs from our past. The mindset we all can have is to bend and twist what we believe into having to be the Facts, no matter what the reality of our world is. And if God is God?, than we don't need to follow something so written and the interpretations of how Man is in their desire to rule and control a lower class of cultural people for some other courses of this worldly life. Arguing with a Bias Minded person is not what I want to think of this life is all about. It is mainly the means to see life in its diversity and understand its balance in harmony. A True God should find our honesty in our own hearts and let not follow any other man in his bias ways. So leave it to God to represent herself. Then I will be honored. But again interpretations as well can be misleading. The monolithic hieroglyphs in ancient sites in this world point to me another interpretation I get. One of which disguises a nature of this universe in a more profound background then the origins of the Christian God. A Truth that I sense is trying to be detoured from our really understanding of what has been going on, as the Bible is half true and distorted to bent and twist its way of deceiving the human race. We have multiple of Intelligent Extraterrestrial Aliens that have been Interbreeding the evolution of the monkey and ape specie into intelligent creatures as we are and they have been posing as our Gods. And when I interpret the Bible in its half trues, then it comes clearer that ETs are behind it all. We are kind of a terraform on Earth from a more ancient past. And they have been trying to direct us, while others are in a sense this Devil and Demons. Makes sense that a talking snake unto Adam and Eve as being a hybrid of one ET (God) in wanting the genetics to go a certain way and another ET trying to make them Eat something that would alter the genetics of the Human hybrid that have been of another (God) ETs in their means of having us go a certain way as being a kind of specie they want us to be. Why do I say God is more Feminine? The Good ETs would. Evil has tried to make Man think he is to be Superior Gender and has tried to define these Bible sc<x>ripts from the Past by their own means of making Interpretations to gain a Power on this Earth for a kind of Ruling this Earth. The Queen Bees and Rulers of Nature is the Female. When I look at Nature. Man is trying to follow his own Ego and dominate and unbalance Earth's Polarities by these hideous by the book rules on human kind without understanding the divers-ed means of evolutionary temperaments as does the chemistry of the genetics of each of us in so many other ways. I am not going to get into a debate any further. I just wanted to recap on somethings here and I will be gone. Will not come back. My life is my Life.
lol when someone has more logic than you Mental he is a stalker! i answer ALL the questions posed. you have answered absolutely nothing! thank you for proving that you have no Proof and even integrity as you claim to address everything that apposes you. yet when confronted with me you can only insult and answer NOTHING! i will take that as you conceding the point with truly terrible sportsmanship!
korilake

i'm going to read the whole post and all the responses i do however ask for you to send me the link to your pdf as i would love to read it so that i can answer your claims.

I am not a "christian" i'm a believer and a witness for Jesus Christ. yes there is a difference. but that is not this topic. if you pass on the pdf i will answer you on it's claims in this forum.

thank you
If I could ask, have you ever read the Bible in its entirety? :)
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, and read your .pdf, if you'll send me a link to the copy. If you don't have it posted on the Internet already, you can always try posting it on Scribd...
I have an uncle and had a friend with schizophrenia. Both of them had mind conversations with all sorts. Someone on here suggested that you don't hear God because you haven't given yourself to him. I'm going to call bull on that. I was very christian and loved Jesus, yet God never once spoke to me or helped me through a tough time. I learned that I just had to help myself.

My change from religion to atheism started when I decided

to read the bible. contradictions and unspeakable violence

turned me away from God. Without religion and a god to

judge me, I've never been happier.

I would love to see your pdf. I'm sure it is very thorough and

lol no you definitely didn't come to that understanding by reading the bible. you came to that understanding because of what your church taught you!
Please i'm looking for atheist to comment on my "Proof that God exist" story your input would be enjoyed
yeah Mental whatever don't respond just insult! ignorant fool
The reason I put in the terms I did is because YOU said you had been studying for years. Let me put it as simple terms as possible:

You said the Bible says God and Jesus are one being…The Bible does not teach that:

(Philippians 2:5-6) 5 Keep this mental attitude in YOU that was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although he was existing in God's form, gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God.

(Philippians 2:9) 9 For this very reason also God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every [other] name,

(John 14:28) 28 YOU heard that I said to YOU, I am going away and I am coming [back] to YOU. If YOU loved me, YOU would rejoice that I am going my way to the Father, because the Father is greater than I am.
Yep. Agree with TS. Quoting the bible as the proof of god is an unsustainable argument. It is one book, written by a number of authors and so long after the events that it does not represent fact. the contradictions are obvious and repeated. Genesis cannot make up its mind if light became before the stars or land before water etc etc. The idea that we repent our sins and jesus then takes over our boides etc etc actually means we abandon all pretence fo using our minds for rational thought and become automatons of the zombie on a stick.
do you know what a photon is? i understand that reading the english genesis will confuse a mind such as yours maybe see the Hebrew and you will understand better. please read my stories on the big bang evolution and God's existence and please bring your science coz your gonna need it!
Free will
or do you prefer not to have yours?
Enough for now,

Chat soon my friend!
Does the Bible teach that each of those said to be part of the Trinity is God?

Jesus said in prayer: "Father, . . . this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent." (John 17:1-3, RS; italics added.) (Most translations here use the ex<x>pression "the only true God" with reference to the Father. NE reads "who alone art truly God." He cannot be "the only true God," the one "who alone [is] truly God," if there are two others who are God to the same degree as he is, can he? Any others referred to as "gods" must be either false or merely a reflection of the true God.)

1 Cor. 8:5, 6, RS: "Although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as indeed there are many 'gods' and many 'lords'—yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist." (This presents the Father as the "one God" of Christians and as being in a class distinct from Jesus Christ.)

1 Pet. 1:3, RS: "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ!" (Repeatedly, even following Jesus' ascension to heaven, the sc<x>riptures refer to the Father as "the God" of Jesus Christ. At John 20:17, following Jesus' resurrection, he himself spoke of the Father as "my God." Later, when in heaven, as recorded at Revelation 3:12, he again used the same ex<x>pression. But never in the Bible is the Father reported to refer to the Son as "my God," nor does either the Father or the Son refer to the holy spirit as "my God.")

For comments on sc<x>riptures used by some in an effort to prove that Christ is God, see pages 212-216, under the heading "Jesus Christ."

In Theological Investigations, Karl Rahner, S.J., admits: "Θεός [God] is still never used of the Spirit," and: "ὁ θεός [literally, the God] is never used in the New Testament to speak of the πνεῦμα ἅγιον [holy spirit]."—(Baltimore, Md.; 1961), translated from German, Vol. I, pp. 138, 143
Does the Bible teach that none of those who are said to be included in the Trinity is greater or less than another, that all are equal, that all are almighty?

Mark 13:32, RS: "Of that day or that hour no ones knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." (Of course, that would not be the case if Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were coequal, comprising one Godhead. And if, as some suggest, the Son was limited by his human nature from knowing, the question remains, Why did the Holy Spirit not know?)

Matt. 20:20-23, RS: "The mother of the sons of Zebedee . . . said to him [Jesus], 'Command that these two sons of mine may sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your kingdom.' But Jesus answered, . . . 'You will drink my cup, but to sit at my right hand and at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by my Father.'" (How strange, if, as claimed, Jesus is God!

Was Jesus here merely answering according to his "human nature"? If, as Trinitarians say, Jesus was truly "God-man"—both God and man, not one or the other—would it truly be consistent to resort to such an explanation? Does not Matthew 20:23 rather show that the Son is not equal to the Father, that the Father has reserved some prerogatives for himself?)

Matt. 12:31, 32, RS: "Every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. And whoever says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come." (If the Holy Spirit were a person and were God, this text would flatly contradict the Trinity doctrine, because it would mean that in some way the Holy Spirit was greater than the Son. Instead, what Jesus said shows that the Father, to whom the "Spirit" belonged, is greater than Jesus, the Son of man.)

John 14:28, RS: "[Jesus said:] If you loved me, you would have rejoiced, because I go to the Father; for the Father is greater than I."

1 Cor. 11:3, RS: "I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a woman is her husband, and the head of Christ is God." (Clearly, then, Christ is not God, and God is of superior rank to Christ. It should be noted that this was written about 55 C.E., some 22 years after Jesus returned to heaven. So the truth here stated applies to the relationship between God and Christ in heaven.)

1 Cor. 15:27, 28 RS: "'God has put all things in subjection under his [Jesus'] feet.' But when it says, 'All things are put in subjection under him,' it is plain that he is excepted who put all things under him. When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things under him, that God may be everything to every one."

The Hebrew word Shad•dai′ and the Greek word Pantokra′tor are both translated "Almighty." Both original-language words are repeatedly applied to Jehovah, the Father. (Ex. 6:3; Rev. 19:6) Neither ex<x>pression is ever applied to either the Son or the holy spirit.
Does the Bible teach that all who are said to be part of the Trinity are eternal, none having a beginning?

Col. 1:15, 16, RS: "He [Jesus Christ] is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation; for in him all things were created, in heaven and on earth." In what sense is Jesus Christ "the first-born of all creation"?

(1) Trinitarians say that "first-born" here means prime, most excellent, most distinguished; thus Christ would be understood to be, not part of creation, but the most distinguished in relation to those who were created. If that is so, and if the Trinity doctrine is true, why are the Father and the holy spirit not also said to be the firstborn of all creation? But the Bible applies this ex<x>pression only to the Son. According to the customary meaning of "firstborn," it indicates that Jesus is the eldest in Jehovah's family of sons. (2) Before Colossians 1:15, the ex<x>pression "the firstborn of" occurs upwards of 30 times in the Bible, and in each instance that it is applied to living creatures the same meaning applies—the firstborn is part of the group. "The firstborn of Israel" is one of the sons of Israel; "the firstborn of Pharaoh" is one of Pharaoh's family; "the firstborn of beast" are themselves animals.

What, then, causes some to ascribe a different meaning to it at Colossians 1:15? Is it Bible usage or is it a belief to which they already hold and for which they seek proof? (3) Does Colossians 1:16, 17 (RS) exclude Jesus from having been created, when it says "in him all things were created . . . all things were created through him and for him"? The Greek word here rendered "all things" is pan′ta, an inflected form of pas. At Luke 13:2, RS renders this "all . . . other"; JB reads "any other"; NE says "anyone else." (See also Luke 21:29 in NE and Philippians 2:21 in JB.) In harmony with everything else that the Bible says regarding the Son, NW assigns the same meaning to pan′ta at Colossians 1:16, 17 so that it reads, in part, "by means of him all other things were created . . . All other things have been created through him and for him." Thus he is shown to be a created being, part of the creation produced by God.

Rev. 1:1; 3:14, RS: "The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him . . . 'And to the angel of the church in La-odicea write: "The words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning [Greek, ar•khe′] of God's creation."'" (KJ, Dy, CC, and NW, as well as others, read similarly.) Is that rendering correct? Some take the view that what is meant is that the Son was 'the beginner of God's creation,' that he was its 'ultimate source.' But Liddell and Scott's Greek-English Lexicon lists "beginning" as its first meaning of ar•khe′. (Oxford, 1968, p. 252) The logical conclusion is that the one being quoted at Revelation 3:14 is a creation, the first of God's creations, that he had a beginning. Compare Proverbs 8:22, where, as many Bible commentators agree, the Son is referred to as wisdom personified. According to RS, NE, and JB, the one there speaking is said to be "created.")

Prophetically, with reference to the Messiah, Micah 5:2 (KJ) says his "goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting." Dy reads: "his going forth is from the beginning, from the days of eternity." Does that make him the same as God? It is noteworthy that, instead of saying "days of eternity," RS renders the Hebrew as "ancient days"; JB, "days of old"; NW, "days of time indefinite." Viewed in the light of Revelation 3:14, discussed above, Micah 5:2 does not prove that Jesus was without a beginning.
Even though, as Trinitarians acknowledge, neither the word "Trinity" nor a statement of the Trinitarian dogma is found in the Bible, are the concepts that are embodied in that dogma found there?

Does the Bible teach that the "Holy Spirit" is a person?

Some individual texts that refer to the holy spirit ("Holy Ghost," KJ) might seem to indicate personality. For example, the holy spirit is referred to as a helper (Greek, pa•ra′kle•tos; "Comforter," KJ; "Advocate," JB, NE) that 'teaches,' 'bears witness,' 'speaks' and 'hears.' (John 14:16, 17, 26; 15:26; 16:13) But other texts say that people were "filled" with holy spirit, that some were 'baptized' with it or "anointed" with it. (Luke 1:41; Matt. 3:11; Acts 10:38) These latter references to holy spirit definitely do not fit a person. To understand what the Bible as a whole teaches, all these texts must be considered. What is the reasonable conclusion? That the first texts cited here employ a figure of speech personifying God's holy spirit, his active force, as the Bible also personifies wisdom, sin, death, water, and blood. (See also pages 380, 381, under the heading "Spirit.")

The Holy sc<x>riptures tell us the personal name of the Father—Jehovah. They inform us that the Son is Jesus Christ. But nowhere in the sc<x>riptures is a personal name applied to the holy spirit.

Acts 7:55, 56 reports that Stephen was given a vision of heaven in which he saw "Jesus standing at God's right hand." But he made no mention of seeing the holy spirit. (See also Revelation 7:10; 22:1, 3.)

The New Catholic Encyclopedia admits: "The majority of N[ew] T[estament] texts reveal God's spirit as something, not someone; this is especially seen in the parallelism between the spirit and the power of God." (1967, Vol. XIII, p. 575) It also reports: "The Apologists [Greek Christian writers of the second century] spoke too haltingly of the Spirit; with a measure of anticipation, one might say too impersonally."—Vol. XIV, p. 296.

Does the Bible agree with those who teach that the Father and the Son are not separate and distinct individuals?

Matt. 26:39, RS: "Going a little farther he [Jesus Christ] fell on his face and prayed, 'My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt.'" (If the Father and the Son were not distinct individuals, such a prayer would have been meaningless. Jesus would have been praying to himself, and his will would of necessity have been the Father's will.)

John 8:17, 18, RS: "[Jesus answered the Jewish Pharisees:] In your law it is written that the testimony of two men is true; I bear witness to myself, and the Father who sent me bears witness to me." (So, Jesus definitely spoke of himself as being an individual separate and distinct from the Father.)
What is the origin of the Trinity doctrine?

The New Encyclopædia Britannica says: "Neither the word Trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament: 'Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord' (Deut. 6:4). . . . The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. . . . By the end of the 4th century . . . the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since."—(1976), Micropædia, Vol. X, p. 126.

The New Catholic Encyclopedia states: "The formulation 'one God in three Persons' was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective."—(1967), Vol. XIV, p. 299.

In The Encyclopedia Americana we read: "Christianity derived from Judaism and Judaism was strictly Unitarian [believing that God is one person]. The road which led from Jerusalem to Nicea was scarcely a straight one. Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching."—(1956), Vol. XXVII, p. 294L.

According to the Nouveau Dictionnaire Universel, "The Platonic trinity, itself merely a rearrangement of older trinities dating back to earlier peoples, appears to be the rational philosophic trinity of attributes that gave birth to the three hypostases or divine persons taught by the Christian churches. . . . This Greek philosopher's [Plato, fourth century B.C.E.] conception of the divine trinity . . . can be found in all the ancient [pagan] religions."—(Paris, 1865-1870), edited by M. Lachâtre, Vol. 2, p. 1467.

John L. McKenzie, S.J., in his Dictionary of the Bible, says: "The trinity of persons within the unity of nature is defined in terms of 'person' and 'nature' which are G[ree]k philosophical terms; actually the terms do not appear in the Bible. The trinitarian definitions arose as the result of long controversies in which these terms and others such as 'essence' and 'substance' were erroneously applied to God by some theologians."—(New York, 1965), p. 899.
The Trinity

Definition: The central doctrine of religions of Christendom. According to the Athanasian Creed, there are three divine Persons (the Father, the Son, the Holy Ghost), each said to be eternal, each said to be almighty, none greater or less than another, each said to be God, and yet together being but one God. Other statements of the dogma emphasize that these three "Persons" are not separate and distinct individuals but are three modes in which the divine essence exists. Thus some Trinitarians emphasize their belief that Jesus Christ is God, or that Jesus and the Holy Ghost are Jehovah. Not a Bible teaching.
Hello my friend,

As I knew when I first look at what you wrote, what you are saying in not accurate. Let me show you the "Truth" about what the Bible teaches.

If I understood your concerns, they would be:

1. Burning Hell and the choice

2. Man is not saved by desire or effort but by grace of God

3. Many are called but few are chosen

4. Jesus is true God and True Man

First of all, these are the most common understandings of the Bible for those who do not know the original languages, Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, and how well their translation renders the original thoughts. Some translations are not as good as others.

Let's start with the first one, Hell and Burning:
I will go to the two simplest to explain first; therefore I will skip to the fourth question today so that you can have some time to digest the information:

The Trinity

Definition: The central doctrine of religions of Christendom. According to the Athanasian Creed, there are three divine Persons (the Father, the Son, the Holy Ghost), each said to be eternal, each said to be almighty, none greater or less than another, each said to be God, and yet together being but one God. Other statements of the dogma emphasize that these three "Persons" are not separate and distinct individuals but are three modes in which the divine essence exists. Thus some Trinitarians emphasize their belief that Jesus Christ is God, or that Jesus and the Holy Ghost are Jehovah. Not a Bible teaching.

What is the origin of the Trinity doctrine?

The New Encyclopædia Britannica says: "Neither the word Trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament: 'Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord' (Deut. 6:4). . . . The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. . . . By the end of the 4th century . . . the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since."—(1976), Micropædia, Vol. X, p. 126.

The New Catholic Encyclopedia states: "The formulation 'one God in three Persons' was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective."—(1967), Vol. XIV, p. 299.

In The Encyclopedia Americana we read: "Christianity derived from Judaism and Judaism was strictly Unitarian [believing that God is one person]. The road which led from Jerusalem to Nicea was scarcely a straight one. Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching."—(1956), Vol. XXVII, p. 294L.

According to the Nouveau Dictionnaire Universel, "The Platonic trinity, itself merely a rearrangement of older trinities dating back to earlier peoples, appears to be the rational philosophic trinity of attributes that gave birth to the three hypostases or divine persons taught by the Christian churches. . . . This Greek philosopher's [Plato, fourth century B.C.E.] conception of the divine trinity . . . can be found in all the ancient [pagan] religions."—(Paris, 1865-1870), edited by M. Lachâtre, Vol. 2, p. 1467.

John L. McKenzie, S.J., in his Dictionary of the Bible, says: "The trinity of persons within the unity of nature is defined in terms of 'person' and 'nature' which are G[ree]k philosophical terms; actually the terms do not appear in the Bible. The trinitarian definitions arose as the result of long controversies in which these terms and others such as 'essence' and 'substance' were erroneously applied to God by some theologians."—(New York, 1965), p. 899.
SHEOL AND HADES

Webster's Dictionary says that the English word "hell" is equal to the Hebrew word Sheol and the Greek word Hades. In German Bibles Hoelle is the word used instead of "hell"; in Portuguese the word used is inferno, in Spanish infierno, and in French Enfer. The English translators of the Authorized Version, or King James Version, translated Sheol 31 times as "hell," 31 times as "grave," and 3 times as "pit." The Catholic Douay Version translated Sheol 64 times as "hell." In the Christian Greek sc<x>riptures (commonly called the "New Testament"), the King James Version translated Hades as "hell" each of the 10 times it occurs.—Matthew 11:23; 16:18; Luke 10:15; 16:23; Acts 2:27, 31; Revelation 1:18; 6:8; 20:13, 14.

The question is: What kind of place is Sheol, or Hades? The fact that the King James Version translates the one Hebrew word Sheol three different ways shows that hell, grave and pit mean one and the same thing. And if hell means the common grave of mankind, it could not at the same time mean a place of fiery torture. Well, then, do Sheol and Hades mean the grave, or do they mean a place of torture?

Before answering this question, let us make clear that the Hebrew word Sheol and the Greek word Hades mean the same thing. This is shown by looking at Psalm 16:10 in the Hebrew sc<x>riptures and Acts 2:31 in the Christian Greek sc<x>riptures, which verses you can see on the next page. Notice that in quoting from Psalm 16:10 where Sheol occurs, Acts 2:31 uses Hades. Notice, too, that Jesus Christ was in Hades, or hell. Are we to believe that God tormented Christ in a hell of fire? Of course not! Jesus was simply in his grave.

When Jacob was mourning for his beloved son Joseph, who he thought had been killed, he said: "I shall go down mourning to my son into Sheol!" (Genesis 37:35) However, the King James Version here translates Sheol "grave," and the Douay Version translates it "hell." Now, stop for a moment and think. Did Jacob believe that his son Joseph went to a place of torment to spend eternity there, and did he want to go there and meet him? Or, rather, was it that Jacob merely thought that his beloved son was dead and in the grave and that Jacob himself wanted to die?

Yes, good people go to the Bible hell. For example, the good man Job, who was suffering a great deal, prayed to God: "O that in Sheol [grave, King James Version; hell, Douay Version] you would conceal me, . . . that you would set a time limit for me and remember me!" (Job 14:13) Now think: If Sheol means a place of fire and torment, would Job wish to go and spend his time there until God remembered him? Clearly, Job wanted to die and go to the grave that his sufferings might end.

In all the places where Sheol occurs in the Bible it is never associated with life, activity or torment. Rather, it is often linked with death and inactivity. For example, think about Ecclesiastes 9:10, which reads: "All that your hand finds to do, do with your very power, for there is no work nor devising nor knowledge nor wisdom in Sheol [grave, King James Version; hell, Douay Version], the place to which you are going." So the answer becomes very clear. Sheol and Hades refer not to a place of torment but to the common grave of mankind. (Psalm 139:8) Good people as well as bad people go to the Bible hell.
What Kind of Place Is Hell?

MILLIONS of persons have been taught by their religions that hell is a place where people are tormented. According to the Encyclopædia Britannica, "The Roman Catholic Church teaches that hell . . . will last forever; its suffering will have no end." This Catholic teaching, the encyclopedia goes on to say, "is still held by many conservative Protestant groups." Hindus, Buddhists and Muhammadans also teach that hell is a place of torment. No wonder that people who have been taught this often say that if hell is such a bad place they do not want to talk about it.

This raises the question: Did Almighty God create such a place of torment? Well, what was God's view when the Israelites, following the example of peoples who lived nearby, began to burn their children in fire? He explains in his Word: "They have built the high places of Topheth, which is in the valley of the son of Hinnom, in order to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire, a thing that I had not commanded and that had not come up into my heart."—Jeremiah 7:31.

Think about this. If the idea of roasting people in fire had never come into God's heart, does it seem reasonable that he created a fiery hell for those who do not serve him? The Bible says, "God is love." (1 John 4:8) Would a loving God really torment people forever? Would you do so? Knowing of God's love should move us to turn to his Word to find out just what hell is. Who go there, and for how long?
Hello my friend,

As I knew when I first look at what you wrote, what you are saying in not accurate. Let me show you the "Truth" about what the Bible teaches.

If I understood your concerns, they would be:

1. Burning Hell and the choice

2. Man is not saved by desire or effort but by grace of God

3. Many are called but few are chosen

4. Jesus is true God and True Man

First of all, I understand...these are the most common misunderstandings of the Bible for those who do not know the original languages, Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, and how well their translation renders the original thoughts. Some translations are not as good as others.

Ready to become a "Real Bible Student"?

Let's start with the first one, Hell and Burning:
I think you can share your URL. It's the SPAM types that isn't allowed. If your URL isn't taking someone to a Solicit Place or a fake place, but to a Legitament place, then it should be OK.
yeah it's all ending with a big bang!
that's where the physicists screw it up!
It didn't start with a big bang! but it's gonna end that way!
And then God will recreate everything and restore paradise the way he intended it
Yes..I believe bible book very wonder..I love that bible alots help give advice me..Mak eme more understand what many things..Not bible is lies no never..Bible book very importment give good life...I do understand that u has Schizophrenic.Same my ex-first husband has one like it..Plus some my friends same has one..I did asked them what look alike see what anything..They explain to me about it..Pretty make me scare them say..I keep cool be careful...I know what go on..That schizophernic never solve go away..Not easy..Very sad..Yes i do understand some people not believe bible book..I can't anything plus i can't judge them..They own one each person are like want believe that all...I love encouage many people need get saves do it then ready go heaven very beaustiful see many things..Well thanks your sharing..big smile
"I can't anything plus i can't judge them"
Perfect christian understanding thank you MiracleSpirits
I would like to read what you have. I have been torn for quite some time and talked to several people on the subject but can't seem to agree completely with christianity, I can't control what I truely believe and as much as I could lie and say that I do.. I just don't. I have had christians use god as a manipulative tool and a way to say that they could do things that were cruel and by definition "un-christian" all because it was what god told them when they prayed about it. I have researched pretty much every religion that sounded interesting and my whole family is christian, some form of christian or another. I always find people that want to recite the bible to me and tell me it has all the answers to life.. I don't see it. So I am not looking to debate you, in fact quite the opposite I would like to see if I feel the same way you do.
God says do not believe man only believe God ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
christian doctrine is man not God so blame man not Christ
I find the real evil people hide behind the Bible. Those who believe in it, is playing this Placebo and Quixotic Effects with themselves. Sure anything can seem real if one likes to put their mind into it. This Is why we have crazies that believe in the more extreme things. I agree with :: korilake :: I'm not a christian anymore. I used to be a christian and I know that what christian's try to say have only been fooling themselves.
"I find the real evil people hide behind the Bible." people are not behind the bible people use it to justify their beliefs yeah but God is behind it.
yes christians do tend to fool themselves. but don't put that mistake past yourself. stop believing christians and find out what Jesus truly teaches. i think if you at least know what he teaches truly then you will see he is not what the "christian" doctrine makes him out to be
"I have not had my contentions addressed"
I have not seen your contentions so i understand how you have received none
If i see them i'll answer you
Have you actually ever given your heart to Jesus? Because God is not going to "talk to you" unless He actually lives in your heart....why would He? Seriously-you talk about all the Christians who came to visit you in jail, but you never once mentioned whether you repented of your sins and asked Jesus to be your Lord and Savior and trust Him with your salvation-all you are mentioning is the fact that no one brought you any money, etc.

God never talked to me either, until I REPENTED of all my sins and asked Him to change my heart and accepted Jesus as my Lord. Then He talked and talked to me, telling me over and over how much He loves me, etc. etc.

But He's not going to talk to you if you don't know Him.

I used to think there were contridictions in the Bible too-but when I got saved, it all started making sense to me. Being a Christian means that the Holy Spirit lives in you-you actually have a personal relationship with God, and nothing anyone says against God or the Bible is going to make a bit of difference because we know He is real and that He loves us.
hold on there leyna i understand your intent is good but you have to give the right message
"Have you actually ever given your heart to Jesus? Because God is not going to "talk to you" unless He actually lives in your heart" ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
that is not scriptural.
"God never talked to me either"
I respect you know your life better than i do but didn't God have to speak to you if decided to repent? or did you do so blindly?
"But He's not going to talk to you if you don't know Him."
This is not scriptural - please reffer passage
i agree there are no contradictions in the Bible. though being saved does not make the contradictions disappear. i can show even an atheist that things do not contradict. but yes that will not make him believe in the bible ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the true message of Christ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jesus will judge everyone from christian to satanist ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jesus says if you except him as your savior and you understand the glory of his sacrifice (the same as the man next to him on the cross realized He was God) then you receive what i call your "Free Pass" to everlasting life ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jesus does not say those who do not accept him goes to hell! that is false "christian" doctrine! Jesus came to abolish the Organization of religion.
thank you and God bless
do you understand the concept of a Living God?
God says clearly that you cannot understand him. So your just proving God's word once again
Does he burn them or do they burn themselves? who's fault is it that a murdering rapist sits in jail? is it the court the judge the jury society or is it the man himself?
once again your logic is flawed
are you against punishing people for their wrong doing? because your more than welcome to invite murderers and rapists to move into your neighborhood but i prefer them in jail being punished for their actions.
you don't punish your kids?
but God isn't allowed to punish you because then He's evil! ???? your logic is flawed
Please share some of these "So Called" contradictions and discrepancies. I have taught advance Bible study for over 28 years, and every time I hear ones say the Bible has contradictions and discrepancies, it's because they don't know the Bible as well as they thought. Please share!
I'm curious about what you have. I'm sure you found the contradictions and disc<x>riptancies (No Spell check here? Sorry) I'm a bit worried about people who try to follow it as litteral and trying to make their litteral ways to seem to fit as the Bible's litteralness. Like the Anit-christ thing. Which I believe those so heavy into it, actually make themselves the real Anti-Christ by it. Some of it is followers making things Self-Fullfilling Prophecies, that bother me lately.
" I'm a bit worried about people who try to follow it as litteral" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you have it wrong it's through interpretation that people fit scripture to their lives. speaking as someone who do follow it litteraly or at least believe everything contained in the Bible. i see no basis for "christians" to do the things they have done! so sure if you dislike christians i fully understand but you need to know what Jesus truly teaches before you can say that what he teaches fuels these "worldly" beliefs


text:
Posted by Click on November 20, 2012 at 06:20:39 from (18.104.22.168):
In Reply to: Found old hay rake posted by Click on November 19, 2012 at 10:05:27:
Thank you guys... one of the major ag parts companies in Georgia also said it doesnt ring a bell with them either, never seen it before. I will keep digging, look for more names or part numbers. I have to latch one of those boat trailer jacks to the end where the wheel broke off, just to move it onto a trailer so I can get it up to the house where I can work on it easier. The Mrs. is starting to talk about lawn art now. Oh boy !
Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Optional Video Title:
Optional Video Embed:
Advanced Posting Options
TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
In all the hubbub over Hillary's meltdown on the licenses for illegals question, here is what strikes me: How does she go out there without someone having asked her that question in a prep session? Given her NY-Dem association, the uproar over comprehensive immigration reform, and the controversy stirred by the Spitzer plan, it seems like a pretty obvious question. How come she wasn't better prepared for it?
When I first came into the U.S. Attorney's Office in NY (under Giuliani) among the first things I learned was that prosecutors were expected to argue their own cases on appeal (to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit), and that — a day or two before any such oral argument — the prosecutor had to go through a moot court prep session where he or she was grilled by three colleagues (just like you could expect to be grilled by the three-judge panel). Your colleagues were expected to have read the briefs and come prepared to ask the tough questions. And because they themselves were prosecutors who were used to being beaten up on by federal judges, they also readily assumed the demeanor of especially demanding (and sometimes nasty) interrogators.
Almost uniformly, those prep sessions were tougher than the actual court session. You got asked every conceivable hard question. Moreover, because it's a lot tougher to dance away from a hard-driving appeals court judge than from Tim Russert, you were also forced to confront the reality that you just can't always expect to have it both ways — you have to either be for or against, say, licenses for illegals. When someone grills you and mocks you for trying that, you realize it's better to pick a side and defend it as coherently as you can then to bob-and-weave (which has the unfortunate spillover effect of tainting your arguments on other issues).
I don't know what Sen. Clinton does to get ready for these debates, but particularly for someone who is not used to being pressed on issues and details, there is no substitute for having people around you who are not afraid to put you through your paces before the bright lights come on.


text:
Misc. Gospel - Joy is Like the Rain
Joy is Like the Rain(Difficulty: hard)
CHORDS A A7 A7-Bm D Em Em7 G
I saw raindrops on my windowJoy is like the rain.Laughter runs across my painSlips away and comes again.Joy is like the rain. I saw clouds upon a mountain Joy is like a cloud; Sometimes silver, sometimes gray, Alsways sun not far away. Joy (gospelmusic.org.uk)


text:
American Rider Matt Goerke to defend his MX1 Crown at the Monster Energy Supermotocross
Matt Goerke will return to the Monster Energy Supermotocross, presented by Parts Canada/Thor, on Saturday, September 29 to defend the motocross 450 cc (MX1) title he captured last year at the Olympic Stadium ahead of Canadian Cole Thompson, and fellow Americans Robbie Marshall, Teddy Maier and Canadian Dusty Klatt.
Following his big win in Montreal, the rider from Lake Helen, Florida went on to win the 2012 CMRC MX1 Canadian Championship trashing the competition with 16 wins in 18 starts spread over nine weekends. At the Olympic Stadium, Goerke should be partnered with Teddy Maier of Fort Dodge, Iowa. Maier, who won the 2012 CMRC Canadian 250 cc (MX2) title, is not eligible to compete in the MX2 class in Montréal as the race is restricted to Canadian riders. Nevertheless, the Iowan, who stepped down from MX1 to MX2 in 2012 to eventually give Kawasaki its first-ever sweep of the Canadian championships, is quite able to upset the apple cart as he finished second in the Montreal MX1 race in 2010 and fourth last year. The other strong contender from south of the border is Bobby Kiniry who finished second in this year's MX1 point standings. The Holland Patent, New York rider won only one race but finished on the podium in each of the nine-weekend schedule.
There are a couple of Canadians that can put a stop to Goerke's stellar season. Top of the short list are Dusty Klatt from Campbell River, BC and Tyler Medaglia of Kemptville, Ontario. The 27-year old Klatt, who clinched CMRC MX1 titles in 2009 and 2010 and was second in last year's title chase, had a difficult start of the 2012 season. Things returned to normal for the KTM rider in round six in St. Julie, QC where he won his first of the season. He followed suit with seven consecutive podiums in the last four races of the schedule to capture third place overall in the final standings. At the Big O, fans will see a Dusty Klatt ready to meet the American armada. As for Medaglia, his season was the reverse of Klatt. He started the season strong, holding third place in the standings after five races, but was injured in the following round in St. Julie and never returned to the series. He returns to competition at the Monster Energy after a full recovery.
"Matt Goerke will be the driver to beat in Montreal," says former Canadian Motocross Champion Jean-Sébastien Roy, who is now the technical director of the event. "He is super motivated this year, much more than last year. This summer, he was able to stay out of harms way, and this should worry his opponents. He spent the winter competing in the American Supercross Series and returned to Canada where he swept the CMRC National Championship. The Canadian to watch will be Dusty Klatt. Last year at the Supermotocross, he was leading the pack up to mid-race, and then started to fade away. I think he learned a valuable lesson. You have to be in top shape here if you're looking to win here."
Fans attending the event will be treated to a full night of competition that will include the International ATV Race that will feature class champions Richard Pelchat, Chad Wienen, John Natalie and Josh Creamer; the North-American Side-by-Side Finale with Patrick Carpentier making his series debut; and the CF Moto Celebrity Race. Furthermore, the organizers have invited some of the world top motocross freestylers including Nate Adams, Adam Jones and Quebec's Ben Milot to compete in the primetime Freestyle contest. In the Canadian riders only MX2 class competition, all eyes will be on Tim Tremblay, Kaven Benoît and Jeremy Medaglia, who should provide most of the action. To top it off this year, there will be the Monster Energy Super Finale where the top finishers in the MX2 finale will face the best of the MX1 riders in a winner takes all race.
Tickets for the 35th running of the Montreal Monster Energy Supermotocross, presented by Parts Canada/Thor, on Saturday September 29, 2012 at the Olympic Stadium, are on sale at Admission.com, or by calling 1-855-790-1245. They are also available at participating motorcycle and recreational products retailers across Québec. Locate the dealer nearest you at www.supermotocross.ca and click on "DEALERS' TICKETS": Prices range from $15.00, $30.00, and $42.00. Ticket holders will have free access to the Montreal Off-Road Show which opens at 10 a.m. at Olympic Stadium.
source: Max d'Orsonnens


text:
What is the thing called to which my negative battery cable connects, and on the other side of it, a cable runs to the starter? I know there wasn't a voltage regulator per se on this model, but none of the pics in the I&T manual look like this thing. It's mounted under the battery on the left side. It looks like some sort of relay, about 1.25-1.5 inches square.
I think it's fried. My battery is fine, but it was crankin' really slow. I kept trying to get 'er started, and smelled burning vinyl. Looked down and the cable from this thingie to the starter was red hot at the connection to this unnamed device - glowing hot. It melted the insulation. The cable is useless - and it needed replacing anyhow. I cannot loosen the rusted, heat-fused nut to remove the piece of the old cable attached to it. plus, i think the thing is shot anyway - everything looks ready to crumble apart. It's a wonder the thing ever started upon close inspection.
But the problem is - what IS this thing? I can't find anything like it in the manual or in any parts catalogue.
Thanks in advance !
Cutout yer BAD BATTERY CABLES and trash everything. Replace with NEW HEAVY DUTY thick as yer thumb one-ought (1/0) battery cables..........Dell
Well.. If your OEM thumb/jigglestick interlocked trany mounted starter switch was bypassed... why do you still have your battery wireing going to it? Post some more info. Could you now have a real solenoid style relay?
Here's a pic from the archives. no super clear.. but this is the mechanical switch we are talking about that is activated by the big thumb switch on the tranny cover. If your thumb switch is bypassed and you are using some other method to start the tractor.. we need those details.
Here is the closest pic I could find in the ole collection. dint know if this is any clearer...Tim
TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.


text:
London (Jun. 2)
(Jewish Telegraphic Agency Mail Service)
A report on the intervention of the Joint Foreign Committee before the Council of the League of Nations against the Hungarian Numerus Clausus Law was issued here today by Mr. Lucien Wolf, Secretary of the Committee.
The final result of the intervention, the report stated, is that Hungary finds herself pledged to bring the numerus clausus Law into harmony with the Treaty of Trianon under pain of a decision by the League on the validity of the Law, the nature of which is left in very little doubt and which on that account has all along been most strenuously resisted by the Hungarian Government. The Jewish community loses nothing by the substitution of this decision for the reference to the Permanent Court which was originally asked for by the Joint Foreign Committee and the Alliance could not have done more than declare Clause 3 of the Law invalid, and even then action upon this decision could not have been more rapid than that which is likely to follow the present judgment of the Council. Moreover, the conciliatory form in which the Council has rendered its decision can only help the Hungarian Government to escape from a difficult position with dignity and without any undue excitement of popular passion. For this reason, as well as on account of the substance of the judgment the Joint Foreign Committee has good reason to be satisfied.
The Joint Foreign Committee will nevertheless continue to watch the case and will take such action as may be necessary to ensure the early amendment of the "Numerus Clausus" Law in the sense of the judgment of the Council of the League, the secretary's report stated.
The Second {SPAN}######{/SPAN}Speaker included Supreme Court Justice Mitchell May. Acting Corporation Counsel Arthur W. Hilly, Assistant District Attorney Alexander H. Geismar, Rabbi Nachman H. Ebin. Senator Philip Kleinfeld. Herman Neaderland, president of Bensonhurt Community House; Eli A. Guthman, master of Amos Masonic Lodge, and Paul Shanik.


text:
In a change from the scheduled episode, Brandi Jackola from The Insideoutcast reads the story that inspired People Are Alike All Over, Paul W. Fairman's Brothers Beyond the Void.
Be sure to subscribe and rate our show on iTunes, Stitcher and Google Play. Leave us a comment and let us know what you think.
Submit feedback to The Twilight Zone Podcast: firstname.lastname@example.com
Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 22:50 — 21.3MB) | Embed
Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Android | Email | Google Play | Stitcher | TuneIn | RSS | More


text:
Enquire Contact form
- Description
PLEASE NOTE: 'Chord Factory Terminated' branding is only used in cables terminated at the Chord factory, all cables purchased from HifiGear or any retailer utilise the same heatshrink termination, but do not bear this branding.
The Chord Company design and construct award winning hifi cables at every price category, claiming the hearts of music lovers and critics alike. Essentially all of Chord's cables are meticulously put together by Chord specialist engineers at their factory in Salisbury, UK, resulting in an unbeatable level of build quality.
The Rumour 2 is astonishingly compatible, and will make the most out of compact bookshelf speakers and large floorstanders to their best of their ability. Two sets of silver-plated conductors are insulated with PTFE, and are then arranged in a twist configuration. Chord found that this design technology was so successful, that they began to implement it to every other model of speaker cable they sell, all the way up to the reference level models.
Rumour is the first cable in their catalogue to use this critically acclaimed combination of silver-plated conductors and PTFE insulation, guaranteeing a strong and detailed signal transfer of superior quality, resulting in a performance far superior than its price point would suggest.
Sold as single metre lengths, please adjust quantity accordingly. Please ensure that the correct length, termination and quantity is selected before ordering, as once cables are custom cut to the order specifications, they can not be returned. See our terms and conditions for more information: Terms & Conditions
- Specification
Conductors 2 x 16 AWG 19 strand
oxygen free copper
Configuration Twisted pair configuration Conductor insulation PTFE (Polytetrafluoroethylene) Shielding Dual layer overlapped foil Jacket PVC Diameter 5mm Colour White Terminations Chord 24 karat gold-plated
banana plugs,
direct gold-plated copper
spade connectors
and BFA Camcon connectors.
- Reviews
- Delivery
Providing your item is in stock, the order is usually dispatched within 24 hours. Please remember that postage and packing is completely free for orders over £50*. Out of stock items will be dispatched as soon as they become available, out of stock items can take between 4 to 21 days for dispatch.
Deliveries usually take 1-3 working days. The majority of orders are sent via our couriers'; Interlink Express on a next-day-delivery service. Smaller, low value or light-weight items are normally posted using Royal Mail Recorded or Royal Mail Special Delivery.
Once your product has been dispatched, you will be notified via email and sent a unique consignment number, you can use this number at http://www.interlinkexpress.com to check the status of your delivery. If you have provided a mobile telephone number, Interlink's Predict service will notify you by text (and email) of a one-hour delivery window. If the window they suggest is inconvenient, you can change the date of delivery to a later one via text or email.
*We ship free of charge to mainland UK addresses, excluding the Scottish Highlands or 'Out-Of-Reach' Scottish locations. Please consult the post-codes below to see if your location falls within this category. If you are still unsure, please contact us on 01432 354921. We also ship to Northern Ireland, Channel Islands, Scilly Isles, Scottish Isles and Scottish Highlands, however delivery to these locations will incur a charge and can only be sent via a 2-day service.
Shipping Costs Mainland UK (Next-Day) Offshore/Out-of-reach (2-day)Northern Ireland, Channel Islands, Isle of Man, Scottish Islands, Scilly Islands Republic of Ireland (2-day) Under £50 Orders £7.50 £12.50 £15.00 Over £50 Orders FREE £19.99 £29.99 Surcharge Orders £50.00 £69.99 £79.99 Saturday Delivery £12.99 N/A N/A Sunday Delivery £12.99 N/A N/A Saturday by 12 Delivery £35 N/A N/A
Post codes exempt from the free delivery service include:
Scottish Highlands Post Codes: AB30-38, AB41-42, AB44-56, FK17-99, G83, IV1-28, IV30-39, IV52-54, IV63, KW1-14, PA21-33, PA34-40, PH15-26, PH31-41, PH49-50
Islands Post Codes: HS1-9, IV40-51, IV55-56, KA27-28, KW15-17, PA20, PA41-49, PA60-78, PH42-44, ZE1-3
Northern Ireland: All BT postcodes
Channel Islands Post Codes: JE, GY
Scilly Isles Post Codes: TR21, TR22, TR23, TR24, TR25
- Press & Awards