Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - alaric99x

Pages: 1 2 3 ... 27
1
Off-Topic / Re: To those who dont believe!!!!!!!!!!!!
« on: October 04, 2012, 05:54:07 pm »Message ID: 616944
It isn't clear who you think you are but, I can assure you that you aren't an FC moderator or staff member.  That being the case, you are 'free' to express an opinion regarding any thread or discussion herein however, you possess no command authority and your faux-commands can be duly disregarded.  A discussion ends when the participants, (or an FC moderator), ends it.  Welcome to the FC Off Topic forum; where no one was ever promised a walk in a rose garden.

Okay. Enough is Enough. Both of you have made your point. This thread has gone far enough.

Watch out, get into the secret room, the Gestapo is knocking on the door!

2
Off-Topic / Re: To those who dont believe!!!!!!!!!!!!
« on: October 03, 2012, 09:38:17 pm »Message ID: 616359
FB has been infected with virii for some time now, so have the various 'bibles', (albeit with a different sort of malicious 'mind-virii').

...for saying this...............facebook is as virus-ridden as a bible.


well i've been on FB now for a couple of years now and NEVER had a problem, maybe someone doesn't like you on there to!!

You're a complete air-head and your command of the English language is deplorable.  Are you 12 years old or did you just arrive in this country?  On the other hand, maybe you're writing your posts from some undeveloped 3rd world country.

In any case, I wish you the best of success as you continue in your efforts to learn the English language.

3
Off-Topic / Re: daily bible inverse
« on: October 03, 2012, 09:11:32 pm »Message ID: 616347
They don't affect my beliefs or standards, or studies and research, in any way whatsoever. You've made your choice and I've made mine.  

Again, such an attitude implicitly embodies blind faith and an unwillingness to question your own unsubstantiated assumptions.  At any rate, posting dissenting/opposing viewpoints isn't especially intended to penetrate the wall of darkness put up by self-inflicted blind faith but, on the off chance that others will utilize what reasoning skills they have to decide what's irrational superstition and what's not for themselves.
That's my business, not yours.  I don't get why you can't seem to understand that people are free to make their own choices, based on several different things.  Keep using those words towards me - if they make you feel stronger and bigger - go for it.  It's my personal choice what I do, and what I do does not affect you in your life - so whatever you want to think - fine, think it.  

Have a good evening.  4:45 a.m. will be here too soon.

What happens at 0445?  Hope you can understand a joke every once in a while, because some of us don't use clocks anymore, and don't get up until we feel like waking up.

4
Off-Topic / Re: cash or credit
« on: October 02, 2012, 08:43:32 pm »Message ID: 615378
I use my credit card for pretty much everything, but I do pay if off every month so I don't pay any interest or fees. I figure if they are willing to let me use their money each month then why not, but NEVER EVER will I carry a balance and have to pay interest!

That is exactly my point, just pay off the balance every month, no problem, it doesn't take a great deal of financial restraint.  Now, do you get some kind of cash-back bonus?  If not, get a card that gives you that.

My relatively young son has a credit limit of only $300.  He makes charges and gets a 1% cash-back bonus.  He goes home and transfers money from his savings acount and then charges some more and and pays off the charges again.  You can do all that on line.  It's not a great deal of money, but I make well over $50 a month with cash-back bonuses every month.

5
Off-Topic / Re: daily bible inverse
« on: October 02, 2012, 08:15:11 pm »Message ID: 615364
But He can choose to NOT BE all powerful for that time.

That's an illogical religious belief/conclusion based upon blind faith.  If such a hypothetical entity 'chooses' not to be "all-powerful" then it precludes being all-powerful according to that 'choice'.  The conclusion is that, if such a choice can be made, the one making it isn't "all-powerful" after all and not the hypothetical entity its believers bargained-away their ability to reason for.

The name Jehovah means he causes to become.

No. "Jivah - Sanskrit, 'sky god', (u=yava/java), same as Jihvah, a pagan 'g-d' preceding the judiac plagiarismm. Jove - Hebrew/YHVH (Yahweh):

The tetragrammaton YHVH would then be "e-ah-va-ah."  With the Greek/Roman Jove we can see it would be pronounced as "J-ah-va-ah."  And taking the "Jah" and converting the "J" to a "Y" we would then have "Yah" and finally "Yah-va-ah."  If we convert the "v" into a "w" as is done between YHVH and YHWH the name would be "Yah-wa-ah" or "Yahwaah."

Jove is then none other than Yahwah or Yahweh."

The Aegyptian neteru "Xeper", which preceded judeo-xtianity by thousands of years, means "to become/to come into being", and was symbolized by the scarab beetle.  It has nothing to do with the, (much later), attempt to assimulate a pagan mythology into a jw cult's beliefs.

That is all precisely correct and, falcon, since you're already aware that I speak German, "Jehovah," is the final German translation of that name before translation into English.  In German it would be pronounced, "Yehofa."  "Yahveh" is probably the closest to the actual pronounciation, but we can't be sure because Old Hebraic didn't use any vowels, you just had to know.  New Hebraic added vowels, so they were already guessing.  After that everything was translated to Aramaic, Greek, Latin, German and into English, in other cases directly from Latin to English.  This helps to explain the numerous discrepancies between the "modern" versions of the bible and other ancient biblical tests, like some Coptic texts, or the Dead Sea scrolls, discovered in a cave in Qumran in 1949.

Anyway, "Jehovah" is a totally fictitious and made up name, it has no relation to historical reality or even biblical scripture.  Look up YHVH, El, Elohim or Adonai.  Of course I understand that this entire discussion will be far too complex for the microminiature intellect like hitch has proven to be.  It just amazes me how these christians would wish to school us when they know so little about about the history of their own religion.    
The main thing for a Christian is God is real.  You don't choose to believe that - that's your belief and choice.  Christians aren't trying to school as much as some of you are just trying to mock and be hateful to those who do believe.  Your smart alec speech is condescending and ridiculous. 

Now you're confusing yourself without any help from me.  My comment has to do with translations, history, archeology and the interpretation of literary evidence.  Try not to get so overly emotional and stay with reality, you'll just make yourself look like one more irrational religious fanatic.
I know exactly what you are talking about.  Christians believe in God first and most.  Some Christians don't know all of the history like what you are speaking of, unless they take courses, like I have, or they research deeply on their own.  You are getting way too technical for the average Christian who loves their Lord and studies His Word.

That is exactly my point.  I don't want to step on your shoes, because you seem to be getting a little emotional already, but how can you get "too technical?"  I mean, is there too much education in those ideas, would the research and learning be too disturbing, will it be too troublesome and difficult to learn the actual facts?

You just made my point for me, I'm too "technical," as you say, not really the appropriate word, but I guess you mean too "complicated" for the average christian, of course, I know the average christian is much too simple minded to understand such self-evident concepts, that's why they believe in a simple minded belief like christianity.

6
Off-Topic / Re: daily bible inverse
« on: October 02, 2012, 07:54:51 pm »Message ID: 615354
But He can choose to NOT BE all powerful for that time.

That's an illogical religious belief/conclusion based upon blind faith.  If such a hypothetical entity 'chooses' not to be "all-powerful" then it precludes being all-powerful according to that 'choice'.  The conclusion is that, if such a choice can be made, the one making it isn't "all-powerful" after all and not the hypothetical entity its believers bargained-away their ability to reason for.

The name Jehovah means he causes to become.

No. "Jivah - Sanskrit, 'sky god', (u=yava/java), same as Jihvah, a pagan 'g-d' preceding the judiac plagiarismm. Jove - Hebrew/YHVH (Yahweh):

The tetragrammaton YHVH would then be "e-ah-va-ah."  With the Greek/Roman Jove we can see it would be pronounced as "J-ah-va-ah."  And taking the "Jah" and converting the "J" to a "Y" we would then have "Yah" and finally "Yah-va-ah."  If we convert the "v" into a "w" as is done between YHVH and YHWH the name would be "Yah-wa-ah" or "Yahwaah."

Jove is then none other than Yahwah or Yahweh."

The Aegyptian neteru "Xeper", which preceded judeo-xtianity by thousands of years, means "to become/to come into being", and was symbolized by the scarab beetle.  It has nothing to do with the, (much later), attempt to assimulate a pagan mythology into a jw cult's beliefs.

That is all precisely correct and, falcon, since you're already aware that I speak German, "Jehovah," is the final German translation of that name before translation into English.  In German it would be pronounced, "Yehofa."  "Yahveh" is probably the closest to the actual pronounciation, but we can't be sure because Old Hebraic didn't use any vowels, you just had to know.  New Hebraic added vowels, so they were already guessing.  After that everything was translated to Aramaic, Greek, Latin, German and into English, in other cases directly from Latin to English.  This helps to explain the numerous discrepancies between the "modern" versions of the bible and other ancient biblical tests, like some Coptic texts, or the Dead Sea scrolls, discovered in a cave in Qumran in 1949.

Anyway, "Jehovah" is a totally fictitious and made up name, it has no relation to historical reality or even biblical scripture.  Look up YHVH, El, Elohim or Adonai.  Of course I understand that this entire discussion will be far too complex for the microminiature intellect like hitch has proven to be.  It just amazes me how these christians would wish to school us when they know so little about about the history of their own religion.    
The main thing for a Christian is God is real.  You don't choose to believe that - that's your belief and choice.  Christians aren't trying to school as much as some of you are just trying to mock and be hateful to those who do believe.  Your smart alec speech is condescending and ridiculous. 

Now you're confusing yourself without any help from me.  My comment has to do with translations, history, archeology and the interpretation of literary evidence.  Try not to get so overly emotional and stay with reality, you'll just make yourself look like one more irrational religious fanatic.

7
Off-Topic / Re: daily Bible verse
« on: October 02, 2012, 07:47:09 pm »Message ID: 615352
Satan and his demons are also responsible for much of the evil as well.

And they have been thrown out of heaven...woe to the earth cos the devil knows his time is short.....happened in 1914.....beginning of WWI

Many put the year 1914 the year the world went mad

Bible students in the 1800s pointed to the year 1914 when Gods kingdom would start to rule and satan ousted from heaven with his hordes.

Right, Satan and his minions, and zombies are the next threat that we need to prepare for.  There have been a number of predictions for the end of the world from the Jehovah's witlesses.  Tell me what's the latest, when is the next end of the world event?  I want to know when to conclude some more insurance policies, so when will it be time to drink the magic kool-aid?

8
Off-Topic / Re: daily bible inverse
« on: October 02, 2012, 07:34:45 pm »Message ID: 615343
But He can choose to NOT BE all powerful for that time.

That's an illogical religious belief/conclusion based upon blind faith.  If such a hypothetical entity 'chooses' not to be "all-powerful" then it precludes being all-powerful according to that 'choice'.  The conclusion is that, if such a choice can be made, the one making it isn't "all-powerful" after all and not the hypothetical entity its believers bargained-away their ability to reason for.

The name Jehovah means he causes to become.

No. "Jivah - Sanskrit, 'sky god', (u=yava/java), same as Jihvah, a pagan 'g-d' preceding the judiac plagiarismm. Jove - Hebrew/YHVH (Yahweh):

The tetragrammaton YHVH would then be "e-ah-va-ah."  With the Greek/Roman Jove we can see it would be pronounced as "J-ah-va-ah."  And taking the "Jah" and converting the "J" to a "Y" we would then have "Yah" and finally "Yah-va-ah."  If we convert the "v" into a "w" as is done between YHVH and YHWH the name would be "Yah-wa-ah" or "Yahwaah."

Jove is then none other than Yahwah or Yahweh."

The Aegyptian neteru "Xeper", which preceded judeo-xtianity by thousands of years, means "to become/to come into being", and was symbolized by the scarab beetle.  It has nothing to do with the, (much later), attempt to assimulate a pagan mythology into a jw cult's beliefs.

That is all precisely correct and, falcon, since you're already aware that I speak German, "Jehovah," is the final German translation of that name before translation into English.  In German it would be pronounced, "Yehofa."  "Yahveh" is probably the closest to the actual pronounciation, but we can't be sure because Old Hebraic didn't use any vowels, you just had to know.  New Hebraic added vowels, so they were already guessing.  After that everything was translated to Aramaic, Greek, Latin, German and into English, in other cases directly from Latin to English.  This helps to explain the numerous discrepancies between the "modern" versions of the bible and other ancient biblical tests, like some Coptic texts, or the Dead Sea scrolls, discovered in a cave in Qumran in 1949.

Anyway, "Jehovah" is a totally fictitious and made up name, it has no relation to historical reality or even biblical scripture.  Look up YHVH, El, Elohim or Adonai.  Of course I understand that this entire discussion will be far too complex for the microminiature intellect like hitch has proven to be.  It just amazes me how these christians would wish to school us when they know so little about about the history of their own religion.    

9
Debate & Discuss / Re: Daily bible inverse
« on: October 02, 2012, 07:04:56 pm »Message ID: 615333
"Come" when Jesus said come to Peter when He was walking on the water. 

Peter started to walk on the water, but when he took his eyes off from Jesus, guess what?  He became afraid and started to sink!

The 'walking on water' hearsay belief has no basis in substantive evidence.


Not true, I've walked on water many times.  Of course, that only works when the water is 1/2 inch or less in depth, or when the surface of much deeper water is thoroughly frozen.

10
Off-Topic / Re: Chinese food
« on: October 01, 2012, 10:32:32 pm »Message ID: 614745
I like beef stroganoff.

That's not a Chinese dish, it's Russian.  Look it up.

11
Off-Topic / Re: Why don't the windows open in airplanes?
« on: October 01, 2012, 10:10:15 pm »Message ID: 614739
OK, but why can't you open the hatches on a submerged submarine?
because the submarine is pressurized.

OK, that was meant as a joke.  Not a very complex joke, but you obviously didn't get it.

Additionally, submarines are not "pressurized," as you say, the pressure comes from the weight of the water outside the sub.  The deeper the sub, the greater the pressure.  Subs, especially modern subs, don't require any pressurization from inside the sub, in fact, if you choose to research the subject, you'll find that there can sometimes be such an overpressure inside the hull of a sub that crew members can get blown out of the hatch when it's opened upon surfacing, if they're not careful.

12
Off-Topic / Re: Why don't the windows open in airplanes?
« on: September 30, 2012, 01:47:09 pm »Message ID: 613533
OK, but why can't you open the hatches on a submerged submarine?

13
Off-Topic / Re: daily Bible verse
« on: September 28, 2012, 09:49:20 pm »Message ID: 612699
....and, if I may further inquire from all you biblical scholars and experts of scripture, when is it appropriate for me to beat my wife, and what method should I use when doing so?  I know the bible has some other interesting verses that discuss this specific subject.  I would be particularly interested in hearing from some of the ladies who have posted biblical verses and the lessons you may have to offer about what the bible says about disciplining our wives.

It's only a question of further biblical wisdom.  I would never think of beating my own wife because, rightly so, I would wake up the next morning (or not) wondering why I had gone to bed with a knife now imbedded in my torso.

14
Off-Topic / Re: daily Bible verse
« on: September 28, 2012, 09:24:44 pm »Message ID: 612693
Or a more reliable translation of Exodus21:20-21

 “Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result,but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property."

The idea behind this law,of course,is to have a fairness in punishment.If a slave dropped dead two weeks later,no one could say "Well,Henry hit Joe a fortnight ago.It must be murder!" The incidents being most likely unrelated.
But at least Falconer is getting in the spirit of the thread,unlike others I know....

You just provided another excellent example of how useless, stupid and infantile these biblical quotes are.  Maybe next time you can give us all some advice on how best to change gears when we're driving our chariots?

In case you haven't been keeping up, we're in the year 2012 now.

15
Off-Topic / Re: daily Bible verse
« on: September 28, 2012, 09:14:40 pm »Message ID: 612692
Or a more reliable translation of Exodus21:20-21

 “Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result,but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property."

The idea behind this law,of course,is to have a fairness in punishment.If a slave dropped dead two weeks later,no one could say "Well,Henry hit Joe a fortnight ago.It must be murder!" The incidents being most likely unrelated.
But at least Falconer is getting in the spirit of the thread,unlike others I know....

I recommend that you don't beat your slaves with a rod, that's what the biblical verse is trying to tell you.  Smite them mightily with a rawhide whip, that will hurt them a great deal, but will rarely kill them.

Just one more lesson of the holy bible and the word of god, amen.

Pages: 1 2 3 ... 27