|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Suzanne
Guest
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 11:01 am Post subject: Re: the nazis banned darwin and upheld christian literature |
 |
|
"Rupert Morrish" <rupert@morrish.org> wrote in message
news:48599c02$0$13827$8d2e0cab@news.newsgroup-binaries.com...
| Quote: |
Suzanne wrote:
[snip]
You might consider Christianity to be false, but most
people certainly do not consider it to be false,
Yes, they do, actually. There's six billion people on earth, and only 2.1
billion Christians. Many evangelicals (although I don't know where you
stand on this topic) do not consider Roman Catholics to be Christians, in
which case there are fewer than a billion Christians.
There may be people who think Christianity is true but who do not consider
themselves Christians, but there can't be many of them.
You ask about where I stand on whether or not Roman |
Catholics are Christians. My position on this is that
Christianity is not a matter of denomination, it is a matter,
according to the Bible, of a person's having trusted in
Jesus Christ to be their Savior and Lord. If a person in
any denomination puts their trust in Jesus' payment for
their sins on the cross, and they turn to God in faith
(the turning is repentance), then according to the Bible,
they are "saved." Our past president, JFK and his brother
Bobby both professed that they believed Jesus is the
full payment for their sins, and that they had accepted
him as their Savior and Lord, and these were Roman
Catholics. JFK's son John and his wife also expressed
to Billy Graham that they also believed this, and he also
confirmed that JFK believed in Jesus as well. I am sure
that some in the Catholic Church believe Jesus paid
for their sins, and some do not believe that. I am also
sure that in my own church (Baptist) there are those
that have put their trust in Jesus to be their Savior
and some that have not understood to do that.
Suzanne |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Suzanne
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 11:01 am Post subject: Re: Re: the nazis banned darwin and upheld christian literat |
|
|
"Ye Old One" <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote in message
news:ebqf5418401nk6l7onu8lfknj01g8jh15e@4ax.com...
| Quote: |
On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 03:00:34 -0500, "Suzanne" <shiloh7@flash.net
enriched this group when s/he wrote:
"Walter Bushell" <proto@xxx.com> wrote in message
news:proto-A90F65.07533109062008@70-1-84-166.area1.spcsdns.net...
In article <321m4490pd0gdnmsgmhb0rpo1ldn5kiek6@4ax.com>,
Desertphile <desertphile@invalid-address.net> wrote:
It has not been "put to rest:" one of the writers of the Hebrew
Testament implied that the promissed liberator of the Jews would
be a Nazarine, which does not and did not mean he would be from
Nazareth--- a fact "Suzanne" seems to have ignored entirely. That
is because the creators of Jesus didn't understand the Hebrew
language and the Hebrew culture well.
And from their point of view, they didn't care. Fact checking, for what?
Matthew 2:23:
"And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that
it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets,
He shall be called a Nazarene."
--
A Nazarene is a Netser-ene, or a Nezar-ene. This is
spoken of in
Isaiah 11:1:
"And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of
Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots"
Branch is "Netser."
--
I found this easily by looking up the Hebrew words in
a concordance. I believe the Lord led me to find this.
Yes, you really are stupid enough to believe that.
Since I found this, I've also discovered that it was also
the belief of Eusebius (A.D. 260-341) and also
Jerome (A.D. 345-420):
Eusebus' Onomasticon, and Jerome's Ad Marcellam,
Epist. 46.
The New Testament also says that there were prophets
(plural) that said that Jesus would be known as a
Nazarene. Besides Isaiah 11:1, the Old Testament
prophets Jeremiah, and Zechariah speak of Jesus being
"the Branch," which is the Messiah:
Jeremiah 23:5-6"
5. "Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will
raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall
reign and prosper, and shall execute judgement and
justice in the earth.
6. In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall
dwell safely: and this is his name whereby he shall
be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS."
--
Jeremiah 33:15-16:
15. "In those days, and at that time, will I cause
the Branch of righteousness to grow up unto David;
and he shall execute judgment and righteousness in
the land.
16. In those days shall Judah be saved, and Jerusalem
shall dwell safely: and this is the name wherewith
she shall be called, The LORD our righteousness."
He repeats himself a lot.
--
Zechariah 3:8; 6:12:
3:8
"Hear now, O Joshua the high priest, thou, and
they fellows that sit before thee: for they are men
wondered at: for, behold, I will bring forth my
servant the BRANCH."
6:12:
"And speak unto him, saying, Thus speaketh the
LORD of hosts, saying, Behold the man whose
name is The BRANCH; and he shall grow up out
of his place, and he shall build the temple of the
LORD"
You do like your fairy stories.
God bless you, Bob.
Suzanne |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Suzanne
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 11:01 am Post subject: Re: the nazis banned darwin and upheld christian literature |
|
|
"Mike L" <mike_lyle_uk@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3d9383b2-8d6c-4c9a-81ac-ae62c9f8c29c@59g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: |
On Jun 17, 9:00?am, "Suzanne" <shil...@flash.net> wrote:
[...]
I found this easily by looking up the Hebrew words in
a concordance. I believe the Lord led me to find this.
I suppose he finds it easier, after all, to whisper "Psst! If you want
information, try a reference book" in the ear of a believer who hadn't
thought of it, than to save the Iraqi and Palestinian Christians whose
lives are under daily threat.
[...]
I was not speaking to people in Iraq, I was speaking to |
a person in this newsgroup who brought up something
about an Old Testament prophecy that they thought
was missing. I also do not consider it to be evil to look
at the definition of a Hebrew word. Since I do not have
all ancient Hebrew words committed to memory I don't
think it's wrong to look in a book.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Suzanne
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 11:01 am Post subject: Re: the nazis banned darwin and upheld christian literature |
|
|
"Ye Old One" <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote in message
news:edve54l1mi88eldlcsg75a8grssqjuntru@4ax.com...
| Quote: |
On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 22:29:21 -0500, "Suzanne" <shiloh7@flash.net
enriched this group when s/he wrote:
"Ye Old One" <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote in message
news:o49454179fc9d8jrgj2fngdtv9dsrg8ike@4ax.com...
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 01:34:44 -0500, "Suzanne" <shiloh7@flash.net
enriched this group when s/he wrote:
"Desertphile" <desertphile@invalid-address.net> wrote in message
news:nrtn44tvo9dm4okdb4111rtkjcje7fqq52@4ax.com...
On Sat, 7 Jun 2008 22:30:30 -0500, "Suzanne" <shiloh7@flash.net
wrote:
"Desertphile" <desertphile@invalid-address.net> wrote in message
news:321m4490pd0gdnmsgmhb0rpo1ldn5kiek6@4ax.com...
On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 01:05:17 GMT, Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net
wrote:
On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 19:06:36 -0500, "Suzanne" <shiloh7@flash.net
enriched this group when s/he wrote:
large cut
The idea that there was supposedly no such town as
Nazareth in Jesus' time was long ago laid to rest,
Has it?
It has not been "put to rest:" one of the writers of the Hebrew
Testament implied that the promissed liberator of the Jews would
be a Nazarine, which does not and did not mean he would be from
Nazareth--- a fact "Suzanne" seems to have ignored entirely. That
is because the creators of Jesus didn't understand the Hebrew
language and the Hebrew culture well.
They were Jews all but Luke, so why would you
think such a thing?
1) Because every Bible scholar on the planet also thinks so;
No one "created" Jesus.
He seems to have come about as a result of a small group of people.
He is God, who came to
earth in the flesh.
That is very silly. Gods, all gods, are the invention of man.
Also, everyone on the planet
that is a Bible scholar does not think that there
was anyone that "created" Jesus, and that they
did not know the Hebrew culture! Of those that
wrote books in the New Testament all but Luke
were Jews!
How would you account for all the mistakes then?
2) Because the anonymous authors of the Christian Testament were
Hellenized Jews and Greeks;
99 and 44/100ths percent of the writers of the
New Testament were Heavenized Jews. : )
Do you mean 99.44% ?
No. It refers to an old Ivory commercial where they
claimed that the product was 99 and 44 one hundredths
percent pure.
Shows their ignorance then.
But besides that, this is how you actually
speak of this fraction.
No it isn't.
You evidently are used to the
modern way of cutting corners and just calling it
44 per cent.
99.44% is the same as saying 9944/10,000
On the other hand 99 and 44 one hundredths
percent. would be the same as 99.044% or 99% plus 44/100 of a percent.
"99 and 44/100 % pure" |
is read "Ninety-nine and forty-four one hundreths
per cent pure."
Saying "44 per cent" is a shortened way to say
a fraction which is really 44/100 %. You apparently
do not know this.
| Quote: |
3) Because the creator of Christianity, Saul of Tarsus, peddled
his new cult among the Greeks after failing to decieve the Jews.
Christianity existed quite before Saul got saved
and became known as Paul.
No. Wrong again! I am amazed at how little you know/understand about
the subject. Even the bible paints JC as a devout jew.
I'm not wrong.
Yes you are, and it seems to be a common problem with you.
No, you are not following the conversation very well. |
It was said that Paul started Christianity. But Paul did
not start Christianity, for it existed before Paul became
a Christian, and this is what I answered. But the reply to this
didn't make any sense (it's visible still above) for the reply
was "Even the bible paints JC as a devout jew." No one
said that Jesus was not Jewish! The Jewish faith tells that
God will send the Messiah. When he sent the Messiah, the
faith did not cease to be the Jewish faith. It was just not
recognized as being the Jewish faith by those that never
became a follower of Jesus. A Christian is grafted into
Israel by faith. God promised Abraham that he would
have descendants that were more numerous than the sands
of the seas. But he also promised that he would have
descendants that were more numerous also as the stars
which no man can number. The reference to the sands of
the seas refers to the natural children of Abraham. But
the ones referred to by the stars, since stars are located
in "the heavens," refer to Abraham's spiritual descendants,
i.e. those who turn to God through faith in his Son, the
Messiah. Christians are called "completed Jews." So you
have natural children of the Lord, which are the Jews,
but you also have spiritual Jews which are the Christians.
Have you never heard this?
| Quote: |
Saul was Paul's name before he
became a Christian
He didn't become a christian, he started christianity.
and he did not become a
Christian until after Christianity was being taught
to people.
Wrong. He started christianity, many years after the events.
And I never, ever said that Jesus was
not Jewish, so quit being so silly.
The only one being silly is you.
You have something a little mixed up. Paul says, |
himself, that he persecuted the church before he was
converted (Gal. 1:13). So the church existed before
he became a follower of Christ. However, when Paul
was later among those who were present at the church
(the already established church) of Antioch, other
disciples were also there, and it was there that the
followers of Christ were first called Christians, according
to Acts 11:13. It says nowhere that Paul started this
work. In fact, in Acts 2:41, in the days when Paul was
named Saul and persecuted the church, 3,000 people
became church members at Pentecost. Acts 5:14 calls
them "believers." Jesus says in Matthew 16:18 that HE
will build his church. Then in Matthew 18:17 He speaks
of his church that he already has begun, as he gives
instructions. It was Jesus that started his church.
| Quote: |
He did not form a
cult, and I am someone that has believed the
things that he has written, and I am not in a cult.
cult
n noun
1 a system of religious devotion directed towards a particular
figure or object.
2 [often as modifier] a thing that is popular or fashionable
among a particular group: a cult film.
DERIVATIVES
cultic adjective
cultish adjective
cultishness noun
cultism noun
cultist noun
ORIGIN
C17: from French culte or Latin cultus 'worship'.
Unless you call this newsgroup a cult, which it
is not.
DIG will be surprised.
The American Heritage Dictionary defines the word
"cult" in the manner in which people understand it
to mean.
Oh for firk sake. I give you the definition from the Concise Oxford
English Dictionary - that beats your crappy American Heritage
Dictionary hands down.
You gave a portion of it. |
The Concise Oxford English Dictionary is a derivative
of the Oxford English Dictionary. The Oxford English
Dictionary lists more definitions than you listed. Here
is what it says:
1. a system of religious worshp directed towards a
particular figure or object.
2. a small religious group regarded as strange or as
imposing excessive control over members.
3. something popular or fashionable among a
particular section of society.
| Quote: |
American Heritage Dictionary:
Cult:
"A religion or religious sect generally considered to be
extremist or false, with its followers often living in an
unconventional manner under the guidance of an
authoritarian, charismatic leader."
When people use the term "cult" in a derrogatory way, |
they are using the second definition listed in the
Oxford, and the American Heritage reflects that same
definition.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Ye Old One
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 11:01 am Post subject: Re: the nazis banned darwin and upheld christian literature |
|
|
On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 00:32:10 -0500, "Suzanne" <shiloh7@flash.net>
enriched this group when s/he wrote:
| Quote: |
"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:MzG5k.4345$L_.3803@flpi150.ffdc.sbc.com...
Suzanne wrote:
?
Tell you what, read this and then get back to me:
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/nazareth.html
Now wait a minute. You started out saying that
Nazareth didn't exist. I showed you that it did,
and that they have found the location and even
identified the pottery in the tombs of Nazareth,
AND a bath house. I gave you good references
for this.
No you did not. You gave a reference that mentioned something that
happened several years ago.
I didn't say it had to be this particular month! I said
they found the tombs of Nazareth,
|
It does appear that Nazareth in Galilee was used as a necropolis for
at least a couple of centuries.
| Quote: |
the pottery in the
tombs they've dated back to Jesus' time;
|
So?
| Quote: |
the Roman
bath house, indicative of the time of Christ when
Rome occupied the cities...
|
1) Nazareth in Galilee was not inhabited at that time.
2) Nazareth in Galilee only became city size in the 20th century.
3) Rome did not "occupy" the area until after 70AD.
4) The "bath house", if that is what it is, was not built before 130AD
because Nazareth in Galilee was not inhabited until that time.
| Quote: |
and I told you that it was
all very near to Sephoris.
|
Yes. So what?
| Quote: |
Now if you don't want to
believe this, that is your problem, but don't say that
someone didn't tell you what evidence is available.
|
You still don't get the basic fact that Nazareth in Galilee was not
inhabited at the time of JC.
| Quote: |
You don't see that information in your reference and there is no later
information.
No later information than ...what? There is currently
a work going on in the vicinity of Nazareth that is an
archaeology group. How can I give you something
later than what is current?
|
The "bath house" is not current.
| Quote: |
The area was discovered in
part in about 1996-7, and work began there then and is
currently still going on.
|
Cite?
| Quote: |
You took "maybe" and made it int a "proof".
If it had any real validity the christians scholars who do much of the
work in that area wold have been all over it. Instead, even your little
article talks about the trouble the man who owns the site is having.
These people that are excavating in the Nazareth "Village"
are Christian archaeologists and scholars.
http://www.uhl.ac/nazareth.html
|
You see that site lies. It says "At harvest time, all 300
villagers—Jesus likely included—would stomp grapes to extract juice,
and huddle in watchtowers at night to guard their produce against
thieves." when in fact we know there were no villagers at that time -
it was a necropolis at the time.
| Quote: |
http://www.uhl.ac/dig.html
|
This really does not look good. Self-serving at best.
| Quote: |
This link does not show any knowledge by the author
that proof has been found in Caesarea Philippi, of
Pilate being a real person, or the find of Nazareth in
Caesarea Maritima, OR the current find of Nazareth,
as told to us by the archaeologists that head that
particular project. You are also showing that you
don't understand that even in the last hundred years,
many biblical things have been now unearthed and
they verify exactly what the Bible says. For example,
Jericho was unearthed and they found, just as the
Bible says, that there had been a fire in the layer that
would refer to the Exodus level, and bricks in it
were "blackened and reddened by fire."
"They" found no such thing.
Either you are lying or taking your source from fundamentalists sites
which lie for you.
Perhaps you should read some of the Christian websites
then because you have your information wrong.
|
I would prefer to read scientific web sites. Do you have any to cite?
| Quote: |
I've
reported exactly what they have found and I didn't get it
from Christian websites,
|
Yes you did.
| Quote: |
I got if from my mother who
was there and saw the place.
"Significantly he suggested that the walls could have been destroyed by an
earthquake. However, like much early biblical archaeology, his work later
became criticized for using the Bible to interpret the evidence rather
than drawing conclusions based on scientific evidence."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Jericho
Kathleen Kenyon, a now famous archaeologists wrote
in her report:
"The destruction was complete. Walls and floors were
blackened and reddened by fire, and every room was
filled with fallen bricks, timbers, and household utensils;
in most rooms the fallen debris was heavily burnt."
This is as I reported it. Rahab was promised to be
saved during the destruction, and her family, and this is
just what the Bible says. It also says that her house was
built "on the wall" itself. Just as it says in the Bible, this
was found. A portion of the wall that still remained
undestroyed is on the north part of the wall and has
been found, photographed, and the two houses also
photographed.
|
The archeology of Jericho is complex. It is, after all, one of the
oldest walled "cities" in the world. It has been destroyed a number of
times, but none of them match up with biblical stories.
| Quote: |
We do, since I gave references to it, and established
this earlier, and this is what I am meaning here by
saying "we know." This is how one talks when they
systematically and orderly present something to
someone. It is not meant to make you salivate and
attack. It's a manner of presenting something by
going back over formerly explained things.
This from a woman who believes you can hear light when it slows down
enough.
I'm sorry, but this does not reflect what I think about
light or sound. However, it does show that you have
nothing to contribute but insults.
|
What he said does reflect what you have posted.
| Quote: |
So it was a mistake by later bible writers to claim JC was from one
of the Nazareth?
I just established that Jesus was from Nazareth.
You have made a claim based on information that no modern scholar accepts.
Even the christian group that owns the caves admits it was a necropolis at
the time.
All this chatter and she still is a afraid to answer a few simple language
questions.
Your statement "no modern scholar accepts...etc." is
simply not accurate. The very ones that are excavating
the place are scholars. Hello?
|
Are they?
| Quote: |
Your continual claim that someone does not answer
your questions is not quite accurate. They answer you,
but you just don't like the answers. However, your
including this in a discussion about Nazareth shows
your motives to not be quite on the up and up. That's
English for not quite cricket. : )
|
When are you going to accept that Nazareth in Galilee was not
inhabited at the time the fictional character of Jesus was claimed to
have lived?
| Quote: |
Best Regards,
Suzanne
-- |
Bob. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Suzanne
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 11:01 am Post subject: Re: the nazis banned darwin and upheld christian literature |
|
|
"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:w8l6k.5920$N87.683@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com...
| Quote: |
Rupert Morrish wrote:
Suzanne wrote:
[snip]
You might consider Christianity to be false, but most
people certainly do not consider it to be false,
Yes, they do, actually. There's six billion people on earth, and only
2.1 billion Christians. Many evangelicals (although I don't know where
you stand on this topic) do not consider Roman Catholics to be
Christians, in which case there are fewer than a billion Christians.
There may be people who think Christianity is true but who do not
consider themselves Christians, but there can't be many of them.
[snip]
And the more fundamental you become the more likely it is that *only* your
particular sect is the the true one.
Not so, Mike. In my church we believe that any person |
who has put their trust in Jesus Christ to be the payment
for their sins, in other words to be their Savior, and who
has turned to the Lord through his Son, they automatically
then have righteousness (Jesus' righteousness not their
own) imputed unto them. We believe that in John 3:16,
which says "For God so loved the world that he gave his
only begotten son; that whosoever believeth in him, has
everlasting life." We emphasize that this says "whosoever,"
and not "whosoever and is a Baptist," or "whosoever and
is a Catholic," or "whosoever and is an Episcopalian..." etc.
That who ever that person is, he is saved if he has received
Christ as his Savior and also as his Lord.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Mike Painter
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 5:28 am Post subject: Re: the nazis banned darwin and upheld christian literature |
|
|
Mark VandeWettering wrote:
| Quote: |
On 2008-06-25, Suzanne <shiloh7@flash.net> wrote:
"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:w8l6k.5920$N87.683@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com...
Rupert Morrish wrote:
Suzanne wrote:
[snip]
You might consider Christianity to be false, but most
people certainly do not consider it to be false,
Yes, they do, actually. There's six billion people on earth, and
only
2.1 billion Christians. Many evangelicals (although I don't know
where you stand on this topic) do not consider Roman Catholics to
be Christians, in which case there are fewer than a billion
Christians.
There may be people who think Christianity is true but who do not
consider themselves Christians, but there can't be many of them.
[snip]
And the more fundamental you become the more likely it is that
*only* your particular sect is the the true one.
Not so, Mike. In my church we believe that any person
who has put their trust in Jesus Christ to be the payment
for their sins, in other words to be their Savior, and who
has turned to the Lord through his Son, they automatically
then have righteousness (Jesus' righteousness not their
own) imputed unto them.
Too bad there is so little evidence to suggest that it is true. There
is very little evidence that suggests that Christians are any more
righteous than anyone else. Indeed, there is some evidence to suggest
that they might be somewhat less (e.g. greater percentage of
Christians in prisons).
|
It is common for Christians to hold "once saved, always saved"
I have had several tell me face to face that it means that they can do
*ANYTHING* and still go to heaven.
The actions of most christians upholds this view.
Many will also argue that they can do no good on their own only god does
good.
What this says about free will is interesting.
You would think that if "Jesus' righteousness " was half what was claimed,
it would show and that given a group of two or more of them, they would
agree on things.
| Quote: |
We believe that in John 3:16,
which says "For God so loved the world that he gave his
only begotten son; that whosoever believeth in him, has
everlasting life." We emphasize that this says "whosoever,"
and not "whosoever and is a Baptist," or "whosoever and
is a Catholic," or "whosoever and is an Episcopalian..." etc.
That who ever that person is, he is saved if he has received
Christ as his Savior and also as his Lord.
Tell it to Jack Chick.
|
If an atheist was to ask if this should be taken literally, the answer would
be yes.
If the atheist, or anybody, then said that he or she believed in JC and was
therefore saved, the "explanations" would come forth.
You have to read this, you have to understand that, it only applies if you
wear green. (I lied about the green)
Literal statements stand on their own. None of what they believe does. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Eric Rowley
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 11:02 am Post subject: Re: the nazis banned darwin and upheld christian literature |
|
|
From: Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net>:
| Quote: |
On 25 Jun 2008 20:26:29 GMT, none@no.nix (Eric Rowley) enriched
this group when s/he wrote:
From: Ye Old One <usenet@mcsuk.net>:
On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 03:24:13 -0500, "Suzanne"
shiloh7@flash.net> enriched this group when s/he wrote:
"Ye Old One" <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote in message
news:edve54l1mi88eldlcsg75a8grssqjuntru@4ax.com...
On Mon,16 Jun 2008 22:29:21 -0500, "Suzanne" <shiloh7@flash.net
enriched this group when s/he wrote:
"Ye Old One" <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote in message
news:o49454179fc9d8jrgj2fngdtv9dsrg8ike@4ax.com...
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 01:34:44 -0500, "Suzanne"
shiloh7@flash.net> enriched this group when s/he wrote
snip
99 and 44/100ths percent of the writers of the
New Testament were Heavenized Jews. : )
Do you mean 99.44% ?
No. It refers to an old Ivory commercial where they
claimed that the product was 99 and 44 one hundredths
percent pure.
Shows their ignorance then.
But besides that, this is how you actually
speak of this fraction.
No it isn't.
You evidently are used to the
modern way of cutting corners and just calling it
44 per cent.
99.44% is the same as saying 9944/10,000
On the other hand 99 and 44 one hundredths
percent would be the same as 99.044% or 99% plus 44/100 of
a percent.
44/100 is .44, not .044 (or .0044)
"99 and 44/100 % pure"
is read "Ninety-nine and forty-four one hundreths
per cent pure."
Yep.
Saying "44 per cent" is a shortened way to say
a fraction which is really 44/100 %.
Yep.
44/100 maybe, not 44/100 % (unless she's talking about 44
percent of a percent)
You apparently do not know this.
Oh I do. But you are silly enough not to realize that, as
written by you, you were talking about 44/100 of a per sent -
That is almost exactly what she wrote, so why wouldn't she
realize that?
so rather than 99.44% you were talking about 99.0044%
Excuse me, I just can't figure out how you get this?
44 percent is 44% (+99%=143%)
44 tenths of a percent (44/10 %) is 4.4% (+99%=103.4%) >44
hundredths of a percent (44/100 %) is .44% (+99%=99.44%)
So where does 99.044% (or 99.0044%) come from?
.044% is 44 thousanths of a percent
.0044% is 44 ten-thousandths of a percent
(I can, just barely, see how you could get 99.0044,
but not 99.0044%)
Eric
Don't know what went wrong with your quoting at the top but it
really looks weird.
|
Sorry bout that, I thought I'd fixed it up but apperantly I just
did what was visible on the screen and forgot the rest.
| Quote: |
Ok. She wrote "the product was 99 and 44 one hundredths percent
pure."
Right, so we can all agree that 99% is 1% short of 100% can't
we?
|
Yes, or .99 (if 100% = 1)
| Quote: |
A "per cent" is 1%. Think of the dollar, a cent is 1% of a
dollar.
Now her problem comes, like so many of here problem, because of
her poor use of English. "44 one hundredths percent" is 44 one
hundredths of a one hundredth.
|
Right, .44% = .0044, 99% = .99 Sum: 99.44% or .9944
..44 cents = .0044 $, 99 cents = .99 $ Sum: 99.44 cents or .9944 $
But then you come along and tack the "%" back on the end making it
44 hundredths of a one hundredth of a one hundredth (.0044% = .000044)
Yes, you're confusing procents with procents of a procent.
Adding .0044 (.44%) to 99% and thinking you've got 99.0044%.
(Converting cents into dollars and then thinking that you're still
using cents. Adding .0044$ (.44 cents) to 99 cents and thinking you've
got 99.0044 cents.)
| Quote: |
She should have written it as 99.44%
|
It's the same thing.
Look at it this way, 44 hundredths is close to 1/2, 99 1/2 percent
is 99.5% (not 99.005%)
(If you were to insist on reading the percent as only aplying to the 44/100
then you _could_ get 99.0044 but not 99.0044%)
<snip>
Eric |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Suzanne
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 6:31 am Post subject: Re: the nazis banned darwin and upheld christian literature |
|
|
"Desertphile" <desertphile@invalid-address.net> wrote in message
news:7rfg54p4h86m153ssu4gur88pa5k7rs3it@4ax.com...
| Quote: |
On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 21:17:59 -0500, "Suzanne" <shiloh7@flash.net
wrote:
"Ye Old One" <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote in message
news:sus654ddae289h7h9p8kj9od2qhv2t61ti@4ax.com...
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 23:47:22 -0500, "Suzanne" <shiloh7@flash.net
enriched this group when s/he wrote:
"Ye Old One" <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote in message
news:qbtp44lji7mch9i2oren66qj7682pd9b8k@4ax.com...
On Sun, 8 Jun 2008 23:28:27 -0500, "Suzanne" <shiloh7@flash.net
enriched this group when s/he wrote:
"Frank J" <fnci@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ae5667f6-b034-4f4c-94aa-7853fe380432@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 3, 8:37 pm, "Suzanne" <shil...@flash.net> wrote:
"Frank J" <f...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:b53cb170-20ca-475e-b628-8c1b9f8480dc@z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 1, 9:41 pm, "Mike Painter" <mddotpain...@sbcglobal.net
wrote:
Frank J wrote:
On Jun 1, 7:37 pm, "Mike Painter"
mddotpain...@sbcglobal.net
wrote:
[snip]
He told
Moses that he was going to destroy the people for
being rebellious on the exodus trip.
Have you ever discusse that with Christians and Jews who interpret
that as an allegory rather than a literal event? Or do you favor
the
Ray Martinez approach and consider such people to not be "real" Cs
and
Js?
No, I haven't. Most of the people that I know, do
believe the Bible stories are true and not allegorical,
There are a lot of very ignorant people around - especially in the
USA.
What part of "Jesus and the disciples went through
the corn field on the Sabbath Day eating corn," do
you not understand that you think is such a fantasy?
The part that reads "Jesus and the disciples went through
the corn field on the Sabbath Day eating corn." There is, when all
said and done, no real evidence that it isn't anything but fiction.
The point is that this is not something allegorical.
It describes a real event.
Therefore when Sherlock Holmes eats roast beef, it really
happened.
You have no trouble believing that I am a real person |
replying to your post, do you? You can't really see me,
hear me. So why do you beleive that I am real, if you
do?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Ye Old One
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 11:00 am Post subject: Re: Re: the nazis banned darwin and upheld christian literat |
|
|
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 20:31:28 -0500, "Suzanne" <shiloh7@flash.net>
enriched this group when s/he wrote:
| Quote: |
"Desertphile" <desertphile@invalid-address.net> wrote in message
news:7rfg54p4h86m153ssu4gur88pa5k7rs3it@4ax.com...
On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 21:17:59 -0500, "Suzanne" <shiloh7@flash.net
wrote:
"Ye Old One" <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote in message
news:sus654ddae289h7h9p8kj9od2qhv2t61ti@4ax.com...
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 23:47:22 -0500, "Suzanne" <shiloh7@flash.net
enriched this group when s/he wrote:
"Ye Old One" <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote in message
news:qbtp44lji7mch9i2oren66qj7682pd9b8k@4ax.com...
On Sun, 8 Jun 2008 23:28:27 -0500, "Suzanne" <shiloh7@flash.net
enriched this group when s/he wrote:
"Frank J" <fnci@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ae5667f6-b034-4f4c-94aa-7853fe380432@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 3, 8:37 pm, "Suzanne" <shil...@flash.net> wrote:
"Frank J" <f...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:b53cb170-20ca-475e-b628-8c1b9f8480dc@z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 1, 9:41 pm, "Mike Painter" <mddotpain...@sbcglobal.net
wrote:
Frank J wrote:
On Jun 1, 7:37 pm, "Mike Painter"
mddotpain...@sbcglobal.net
wrote:
[snip]
He told
Moses that he was going to destroy the people for
being rebellious on the exodus trip.
Have you ever discusse that with Christians and Jews who interpret
that as an allegory rather than a literal event? Or do you favor
the
Ray Martinez approach and consider such people to not be "real" Cs
and
Js?
No, I haven't. Most of the people that I know, do
believe the Bible stories are true and not allegorical,
There are a lot of very ignorant people around - especially in the
USA.
What part of "Jesus and the disciples went through
the corn field on the Sabbath Day eating corn," do
you not understand that you think is such a fantasy?
The part that reads "Jesus and the disciples went through
the corn field on the Sabbath Day eating corn." There is, when all
said and done, no real evidence that it isn't anything but fiction.
The point is that this is not something allegorical.
It describes a real event.
Therefore when Sherlock Holmes eats roast beef, it really
happened.
You have no trouble believing that I am a real person
replying to your post, do you? You can't really see me,
hear me. So why do you beleive that I am real, if you
do?
Suzanne
|
Because only a real person can be so consistently stupid.
Computers would not make the mistakes you do.
--
Bob. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Mike Painter
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 6:58 am Post subject: Re: the nazis banned darwin and upheld christian literature |
|
|
Suzanne wrote:
| Quote: |
Therefore when Sherlock Holmes eats roast beef, it really
happened.
You have no trouble believing that I am a real person
replying to your post, do you? You can't really see me,
hear me. So why do you beleive that I am real, if you
do?
Contemporary (sorry if that is not a cross word) verifiable evidence. |
Ther is none for Holmes and there is none for your Christ.
Another woooosh.
Suzanne must have a sore butt all the time.
When you stick both feet in your mouth as often as she does, landing on your
butt must be really painful after a while. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Suzanne
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 7:26 am Post subject: Re: Re: the nazis banned darwin and upheld christian literat |
|
|
"Ye Old One" <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote in message
news:p8b964lervufcdcmdh9fde94d4j9edc0s0@4ax.com...
| Quote: |
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 20:31:28 -0500, "Suzanne" <shiloh7@flash.net
enriched this group when s/he wrote:
"Desertphile" <desertphile@invalid-address.net> wrote in message
news:7rfg54p4h86m153ssu4gur88pa5k7rs3it@4ax.com...
On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 21:17:59 -0500, "Suzanne" <shiloh7@flash.net
wrote:
"Ye Old One" <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote in message
news:sus654ddae289h7h9p8kj9od2qhv2t61ti@4ax.com...
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 23:47:22 -0500, "Suzanne" <shiloh7@flash.net
enriched this group when s/he wrote:
"Ye Old One" <usenet@mcsuk.net> wrote in message
news:qbtp44lji7mch9i2oren66qj7682pd9b8k@4ax.com...
On Sun, 8 Jun 2008 23:28:27 -0500, "Suzanne" <shiloh7@flash.net
enriched this group when s/he wrote:
"Frank J" <fnci@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ae5667f6-b034-4f4c-94aa-7853fe380432@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 3, 8:37 pm, "Suzanne" <shil...@flash.net> wrote:
"Frank J" <f...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:b53cb170-20ca-475e-b628-8c1b9f8480dc@z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 1, 9:41 pm, "Mike Painter" <mddotpain...@sbcglobal.net
wrote:
Frank J wrote:
On Jun 1, 7:37 pm, "Mike Painter"
mddotpain...@sbcglobal.net
wrote:
[snip]
He told
Moses that he was going to destroy the people for
being rebellious on the exodus trip.
Have you ever discusse that with Christians and Jews who
interpret
that as an allegory rather than a literal event? Or do you favor
the
Ray Martinez approach and consider such people to not be "real"
Cs
and
Js?
No, I haven't. Most of the people that I know, do
believe the Bible stories are true and not allegorical,
There are a lot of very ignorant people around - especially in the
USA.
What part of "Jesus and the disciples went through
the corn field on the Sabbath Day eating corn," do
you not understand that you think is such a fantasy?
The part that reads "Jesus and the disciples went through
the corn field on the Sabbath Day eating corn." There is, when all
said and done, no real evidence that it isn't anything but fiction.
The point is that this is not something allegorical.
It describes a real event.
Therefore when Sherlock Holmes eats roast beef, it really
happened.
You have no trouble believing that I am a real person
replying to your post, do you? You can't really see me,
hear me. So why do you beleive that I am real, if you
do?
Suzanne
Because only a real person can be so consistently stupid.
Computers would not make the mistakes you do.
And with all of these myriads of mistakes that you |
say that I make, have you ever perceived that I have
done anything right at all?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Suzanne
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 7:29 am Post subject: Re: the nazis banned darwin and upheld christian literature |
|
|
"Desertphile" <desertphile@invalid-address.net> wrote in message
news:k8ta64tcrusbt0v504e04mohb30ln7jd6m@4ax.com...
| Quote: |
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 20:31:28 -0500, "Suzanne" <shiloh7@flash.net
wrote:
"Desertphile" <desertphile@invalid-address.net> wrote in message
news:7rfg54p4h86m153ssu4gur88pa5k7rs3it@4ax.com...
Therefore when Sherlock Holmes eats roast beef, it really
happened.
You have no trouble believing that I am a real person
replying to your post, do you? You can't really see me,
hear me. So why do you beleive that I am real, if you
do?
Did you rise from the dead? Do people claim you are a god or
goddess?
No on both counts. Of course not!
Suzanne |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Vernon Balbert
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 8:12 am Post subject: Re: the nazis banned darwin and upheld christian literature |
|
|
On 6/27/2008 7:29 PM, Suzanne went clickity clack on the keyboard and
produced this interesting bit of text:
| Quote: |
"Desertphile" <desertphile@invalid-address.net> wrote in message
news:k8ta64tcrusbt0v504e04mohb30ln7jd6m@4ax.com...
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 20:31:28 -0500, "Suzanne" <shiloh7@flash.net
wrote:
"Desertphile" <desertphile@invalid-address.net> wrote in message
news:7rfg54p4h86m153ssu4gur88pa5k7rs3it@4ax.com...
Therefore when Sherlock Holmes eats roast beef, it really
happened.
You have no trouble believing that I am a real person
replying to your post, do you? You can't really see me,
hear me. So why do you beleive that I am real, if you
do?
Did you rise from the dead? Do people claim you are a god or
goddess?
No on both counts. Of course not!
|
Why do you say, "Of course not!" Is it because the idea is ridiculous?
--
Rule of Acquisition number 239: Never be afraid to mislabel a product. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Mike Painter
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 8:23 am Post subject: Re: Re: the nazis banned darwin and upheld christian literat |
|
|
Suzanne wrote:
| Quote: |
Because only a real person can be so consistently stupid.
Computers would not make the mistakes you do.
And with all of these myriads of mistakes that you
say that I make, have you ever perceived that I have
done anything right at all?
Suzanne
|
You usually spell words right, even if you don't know what they mean. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
