| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Budikka666" |
| Date: |
02 Apr 2006 12:46:28 PM |
| Object: |
It Turns Out That Neutrinos Are Catholic! |
Well, they have mass, at any rate:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4862112.stm
Budikka
.
|
|
| User: "Llanzlan Klazmon" |
|
| Title: Re: It Turns Out That Neutrinos Are Catholic! |
02 Apr 2006 07:25:32 PM |
|
|
"Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in news:1143999988.082859.273880
@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
Well, they have mass, at any rate:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4862112.stm
Budikka
Confirms the Kamiokande findings of a few years ago. What will be really
interesting is if Fermilab eventually succeeds in detecting "sterile"
neutrinos.
Klazmon.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: It Turns Out That Neutrinos Are Catholic! |
03 Apr 2006 11:58:04 PM |
|
|
Llanzlan Klazmon wrote:
"Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in news:1143999988.082859.273880
@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
Well, they have mass, at any rate:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4862112.stm
Budikka
Confirms the Kamiokande findings of a few years ago. What will be really
interesting is if Fermilab eventually succeeds in detecting "sterile"
neutrinos.
Klazmon.
This is further proof that they are Catholic - it means they can have
all the sex they want without condoms and they don't have to worry
about producing endless offspring. On the other hand (they are
left-handed) they can't go forth and multiply so maybe they won't
qualify to sit on the right-hand of god....
B.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: It Turns Out That Neutrinos Are Catholic! |
02 Apr 2006 09:25:54 PM |
|
|
On 2 Apr 2006 10:46:28 -0700, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net>
wrote:
- Refer: <1143999988.082859.273880@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
Well, they have mass, at any rate:
:
And they are left-handed...
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/HBASE/particles/neutrino3.html
--
.
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: It Turns Out That Neutrinos Are Catholic! |
03 Apr 2006 11:55:34 PM |
|
|
Michael Gray wrote:
On 2 Apr 2006 10:46:28 -0700, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net>
wrote:
- Refer: <1143999988.082859.273880@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
Well, they have mass, at any rate:
:
And they are left-handed...
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/HBASE/particles/neutrino3.html
Only the sterile ones. The fertile ones don't need to use their
hands....
B.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: It Turns Out That Neutrinos Are Catholic! |
04 Apr 2006 03:41:34 AM |
|
|
On 3 Apr 2006 21:55:34 -0700, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net>
wrote:
- Refer: <1144126534.379696.305830@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Michael Gray wrote:
On 2 Apr 2006 10:46:28 -0700, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net>
wrote:
- Refer: <1143999988.082859.273880@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
Well, they have mass, at any rate:
:
And they are left-handed...
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/HBASE/particles/neutrino3.html
Only the sterile ones. The fertile ones don't need to use their
hands....
So they are the "left-footers" that I have heard so much about!
--
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: It Turns Out That Neutrinos Are Catholic! |
02 Apr 2006 04:55:37 PM |
|
|
On 2 Apr 2006 10:46:28 -0700, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote:
Well, they have mass, at any rate:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4862112.stm
Budikka
And they are created by God.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill" |
|
| Title: Re: It Turns Out That Neutrinos Are Catholic! |
02 Apr 2006 07:18:25 PM |
|
|
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:62i0325l1lfqgdbi9k3s6gq0phpa20ptb6@4ax.com...
On 2 Apr 2006 10:46:28 -0700, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote:
Well, they have mass, at any rate:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4862112.stm
Budikka
And they are created by God.
There are thousands of gods. Which if any created it? How do you KNOW this?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ben Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: It Turns Out That Neutrinos Are Catholic! |
03 Apr 2006 02:28:47 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 2 Apr 2006 20:18:25 -0400, "Bill" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote:
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:62i0325l1lfqgdbi9k3s6gq0phpa20ptb6@4ax.com...
On 2 Apr 2006 10:46:28 -0700, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote:
Well, they have mass, at any rate:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4862112.stm
Budikka
And they are created by God.
There are thousands of gods. Which if any created it? How do you KNOW this?
Neutrin....os, Nuetrinos, yeah, that 's the ticket!
Ben
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: It Turns Out That Neutrinos Are Catholic! |
03 Apr 2006 05:56:46 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 2 Apr 2006 20:18:25 -0400, "Bill" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote:
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:62i0325l1lfqgdbi9k3s6gq0phpa20ptb6@4ax.com...
On 2 Apr 2006 10:46:28 -0700, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote:
Well, they have mass, at any rate:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4862112.stm
Budikka
And they are created by God.
There are thousands of gods. Which if any created it? How do you KNOW this?
There is only one almighty God.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "George Wright" |
|
| Title: Re: It Turns Out That Neutrinos Are Catholic! |
03 Apr 2006 07:19:40 AM |
|
|
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:1rv1329e55g04hcuj9nrosa2b0ucc5efpo@4ax.com...
On Sun, 2 Apr 2006 20:18:25 -0400, "Bill" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote:
[...]
There is only one almighty God.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
Duke, since you quote Pope Paul VI, I infer you're a Roman Catholic. That
leads me to believe that the "one almighty God" you have in mind is Yahweh,
of the Catholic Bible (i.e., Douai or Jerusalem editions). Is that the
case? Is the one almighty God you have in mind Yahweh?
Geo
.
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: It Turns Out That Neutrinos Are Catholic! |
03 Apr 2006 11:53:26 PM |
|
|
George Wright wrote:
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:1rv1329e55g04hcuj9nrosa2b0ucc5efpo@4ax.com...
On Sun, 2 Apr 2006 20:18:25 -0400, "Bill" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote:
[...]
There is only one almighty God.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
Duke, since you quote Pope Paul VI, I infer you're a Roman Catholic. That
leads me to believe that the "one almighty God" you have in mind is Yahweh,
of the Catholic Bible (i.e., Douai or Jerusalem editions). Is that the
case? Is the one almighty God you have in mind Yahweh?
Geo
What you're seeing from Earl Weber (aka Early Weasel, aka Duke, aka
Duped, aka Duck *****, aka Puke, aka Hurl, aka Duck and Run) here is
impotence at its most raw.
The best comment from him was in alt.atheism on January 5th, 2004, at
5:46 pm when he said, "I've heard myself say a lot of vocal things, but
I've never heard myself think." (http://tinyurl.com/f48bq). This
explains everything, including why he's such a gashole. All he can do
is impotently snipe at people, since he has nothing of value or
intelligence to say and he demonstrably cannot support a single claim
he makes.
He has no proof, no evidence - not even an intelligent argument. He
does not think because he cannot. He's quite loco, and like a loco,
he's stuck on a pair of narrow rails. He has no clue he's on them, let
alone how to get off. And the track to which he's limited leads to a
dead end - which he hilariously thinks is "Heaven"!
The best "evidence" of a god he was ever capable of producing was a
lackluster five items he posted in thread "Scientists find new face on
back of Turin shroud" in a.a. on April 18 2004, 9:52 am:
http://tinyurl.com/c6hkg.
For someone who is so ready (and so unchristian) to libel others with
baseless accusations of plagiarism (http://tinyurl.com/fklw8), it's as
hilarious as it is ironic that he appears to have appropriated "his"
five evidences from Thomas Aquinas who, c1245, published "Summa
theologiae" which contained five "Ways" to "prove" some god's
existence, all of which have been thoroughly discredited.
He admitted his "own" five ways were nothing but blind belief in alt
atheism in a thread called "The Inquisition" message posted on
Saturday, 12 June, 2004 11:52am:
http://tinyurl.com/bc5ud
but that was all he could do after the massive pounding he got.
I used those same five items in a spoof edition of my "Why There is no
God" series (http://tinyurl.com/bz54w). I changed a word here and
there and all of his five "evidences" miraculously became evidence for
the non-existence of a god! Naturally I didn't count them in the total
of five hundred fifty (at the last count) since they were so pathetic.
His comments aren't born of smarts, logic, rational or evidence,
they're born of desperation. Neither are his comments aren't aimed at
the material - they rarely are. He's incapable of having a rational
exchange on a topic. He spits out idiocy and insult and runs away.
His comments are not designed to enlighten, help, or exchange anything,
but to abuse people. He's the very antithesis of this purported
Christian love he's supposed to dispense.
He never documents or supports a single thing he says, whereas the
cowardice and lies of this pathetic hypocrite for Christ have been
fully documented on Usenet. His despicable behavior and his slanderous
unfounded charges (he thinks turning the other cheek means mooning
someone) are why he was mass-plonked by pretty near the entire regular
set on a.a.:
http://tinyurl.com/9gycg
It's a sign of how pathetic he is, how low he's sinking and how
desperate he's become since he was cut off, that he now has to beg for
atheists to talk to him by posting inane rants against us - this from
the guy who claims to be a Christian, who claims to do unto others as
he would be done by, and who lies about turning the other cheek!
His cowardice in "debate" or even discussion is legendary:
1. http://tinyurl.com/ac2vg
2. http://tinyurl.com/4dyok
3. http://tinyurl.com/664yu
4. http://tinyurl.com/apenc
He claims he can run rings around anyone on scripture, but when he was
actually taken up directly on this claim:
http://tinyurl.com/3z47u
he ran away!
He has well over a dozen documented lies:
http://tinyurl.com/5zlzx
http://tinyurl.com/ablwm
He regularly demands people open discussions on his god, and when they
do, he runs away. I personally had him run from the *same topic* well
over 100 times in direct response to a challenge he made!
He dismally failed the simplest intelligence test imaginable:
http://tinyurl.com/7zm43
He has fifty questions he can't answer or daren't answer honestly here:
http://tinyurl.com/ad89u
and fifty more here:
http://tinyurl.com/9ky7y
In short, he's a waste of a human being and not worth responding to.
Budikka
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: It Turns Out That Neutrinos Are Catholic! |
04 Apr 2006 05:59:40 PM |
|
|
On 3 Apr 2006 21:53:26 -0700, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote:
What you're seeing from Earl Weber (aka Early Weasel, aka Duke, aka
Duped, aka Duck *****, aka Puke, aka Hurl, aka Duck and Run) here is
impotence at its most raw.
Bud the dud, you need to stick with plagiarism. It's much more your style.
The best comment from him was in alt.atheism on January 5th, 2004, at
5:46 pm when he said, "I've heard myself say a lot of vocal things, but
I've never heard myself think." (http://tinyurl.com/f48bq).
Yep, that's about it. People that "hear" themselves think are headed for the
funny farm.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: It Turns Out That Neutrinos Are Catholic! |
03 Apr 2006 05:40:47 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 3 Apr 2006 08:19:40 -0400, "George Wright" <geo@loyola.edu> wrote:
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:1rv1329e55g04hcuj9nrosa2b0ucc5efpo@4ax.com...
On Sun, 2 Apr 2006 20:18:25 -0400, "Bill" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote:
[...]
There is only one almighty God.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
Duke, since you quote Pope Paul VI, I infer you're a Roman Catholic. That
leads me to believe that the "one almighty God" you have in mind is Yahweh,
of the Catholic Bible (i.e., Douai or Jerusalem editions). Is that the
case? Is the one almighty God you have in mind Yahweh?
The one and only almighty God is professed by 53% of the current world
population and consists of:
Muslims - God called Allah, submissive to God
Jews - God called Jehovah, servants of God.
Christians - God called almighty God, family of God.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "George Wright" |
|
| Title: Re: It Turns Out That Neutrinos Are Catholic! |
03 Apr 2006 08:10:02 PM |
|
|
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:iv8332thgtk80b8qmr7l7u31rthkk311in@4ax.com...
On Mon, 3 Apr 2006 08:19:40 -0400, "George Wright" <geo@loyola.edu> wrote:
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:1rv1329e55g04hcuj9nrosa2b0ucc5efpo@4ax.com...
On Sun, 2 Apr 2006 20:18:25 -0400, "Bill" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote:
[...]
There is only one almighty God.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
Duke, since you quote Pope Paul VI, I infer you're a Roman Catholic. That
leads me to believe that the "one almighty God" you have in mind is
Yahweh,
of the Catholic Bible (i.e., Douai or Jerusalem editions). Is that the
case? Is the one almighty God you have in mind Yahweh?
The one and only almighty God is professed by 53% of the current world
population and consists of:
Muslims - God called Allah, submissive to God
Jews - God called Jehovah, servants of God.
Christians - God called almighty God, family of God.
I simple "yes" would have sufficed---if that is in fact a "yes."
I've never heard "the family of God" cognomen. Would that be a rough
translation of "Elohim?" So it's safe to say, then, that the Christian God
is the same as the Catholic God is the same as Yahweh/Elohim?
Wait.... Now that I look back at what you wrote, I'm not sure what you mean
by the appended phrases "submissive to God," "servants of God," "family of
God."
But you DO seem to be saying that Allah == Jehovah == <Christian God>,
although you seem reluctant to assign a name to the Christian God. Is this
something you do out of respect, along the lines of saying "tetragrammaton"
rather than "JHVH" or typing G-d instead of God?
Just trying to get some certainty here. After all, most religionists use
the term "God" for their Supreme Being. And sometimes I wonder whether
you're advising adherence to Christianity in general or Catholicism in
particular (which I take to be a subset of Christianity).
Geo
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: It Turns Out That Neutrinos Are Catholic! |
04 Apr 2006 05:58:03 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 3 Apr 2006 21:10:02 -0400, "George Wright" <geo@loyola.edu> wrote:
Duke, since you quote Pope Paul VI, I infer you're a Roman Catholic. That
leads me to believe that the "one almighty God" you have in mind is
Yahweh,
of the Catholic Bible (i.e., Douai or Jerusalem editions). Is that the
case? Is the one almighty God you have in mind Yahweh?
The one and only almighty God is professed by 53% of the current world
population and consists of:
Muslims - God called Allah, submissive to God
Jews - God called Jehovah, servants of God.
Christians - God called almighty God, family of God.
I simple "yes" would have sufficed---if that is in fact a "yes."
You can't figure it out?
I've never heard "the family of God" cognomen.
God the Father, God the Son, Mary Mother of God and Queen of Heaven..
Would that be a rough
translation of "Elohim?" So it's safe to say, then, that the Christian God
is the same as the Catholic God is the same as Yahweh/Elohim?
You still can't figure it out?
Wait.... Now that I look back at what you wrote, I'm not sure what you mean
by the appended phrases "submissive to God," "servants of God," "family of
God."
Muslims profess following God's instructions, and it that is to kill, so be it.
Jews see themselves as servants to/of God. And of course, we Christians are
family of God.
But you DO seem to be saying that Allah == Jehovah == <Christian God>,
although you seem reluctant to assign a name to the Christian God.
That IS his name, as is Allah to Muslims and Jehovah to Jews. All one God.
Is this
something you do out of respect, along the lines of saying "tetragrammaton"
rather than "JHVH" or typing G-d instead of God?
???
Just trying to get some certainty here. After all, most religionists use
the term "God" for their Supreme Being.
Yep, the Egyptians looked at the black wooden jackal and called it their god. As
they did to the river.
And sometimes I wonder whether
you're advising adherence to Christianity in general or Catholicism in
particular (which I take to be a subset of Christianity).
Geo
The Catholic Church is the Church founded by Christ. At one time, it was
katholocis in Greek = (c)atholic =universal = one = (C)atholic Church when named
= Roman Catholic Church as breakaway groups were forming.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "George Wright" |
|
| Title: Re: It Turns Out That Neutrinos Are Catholic! |
04 Apr 2006 07:08:22 PM |
|
|
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:61u532lvvc0lah9tj05khlbnd465t8heta@4ax.com...
On Mon, 3 Apr 2006 21:10:02 -0400, "George Wright" <geo@loyola.edu> wrote:
Duke, since you quote Pope Paul VI, I infer you're a Roman Catholic.
That
leads me to believe that the "one almighty God" you have in mind is
Yahweh,
of the Catholic Bible (i.e., Douai or Jerusalem editions). Is that the
case? Is the one almighty God you have in mind Yahweh?
The one and only almighty God is professed by 53% of the current world
population and consists of:
Muslims - God called Allah, submissive to God
Jews - God called Jehovah, servants of God.
Christians - God called almighty God, family of God.
I simple "yes" would have sufficed---if that is in fact a "yes."
You can't figure it out?
Well, sure, Duke, I can make inferences; I mean, I'm not a dim bulb. But
anybody who has posted to the Internet as long as you and I knows that it's
always risky to assume. (You must have noticed that I try to assume as
little as possible---not that I always succeed :-(.) How often have you
read an exchange in which one party "figures it out," only to have the other
party reply, "I never said that!"? But, how about this? I'll start
interpreting your responses provided you'll agree that you won't complain if
I do.
I've never heard "the family of God" cognomen.
God the Father, God the Son, Mary Mother of God and Queen of Heaven..
I've never heard of this particular trio. (I deliberately avoid using the
word "trinity," because I thought that referred to God the Father, God the
Son, and God the Holy Spirit.) If this is a common "term of art" in a
particular religious faith, I have never heard of it.
Would that be a rough
translation of "Elohim?" So it's safe to say, then, that the Christian
God
is the same as the Catholic God is the same as Yahweh/Elohim?
You still can't figure it out?
Duke, I really don't think it's that simple. After all, the Jewish God is
referred to as Adonai (which I understand to mean "Lord"), Elohim (which I
understand to be a generic term for "God"), and YHWH (which I understand to
be representations of the Hebrew consonants and vowel signs for Yahweh or
Jehovah).
Perhaps I'm overly compulsive, so.... Given my comments above about
reluctance to avoid assumptions, I'll assume that, when you say "Almighty
God," you mean Yahweh.
Wait.... Now that I look back at what you wrote, I'm not sure what you
mean
by the appended phrases "submissive to God," "servants of God," "family of
God."
OK, I now know what you mean by "family of God."
Muslims profess following God's instructions, and it that is to kill, so
be it.
I think it's safe to say that adherents of ALL religions profess following
God's instructions. For example, Abraham, following God's instructions, was
prepared to kill Isaac, until God stayed his hand. While I'm not familiar
enough with the Old Testament to bring other examples to mind, I'd bet there
are other examples in scripture in which the Chosen People actually did
follow God's orders to kill.
Jews see themselves as servants to/of God. And of course, we Christians
are
family of God.
How can I "figure it out" when you use the same term (to wit, "family of
God") to refer to two different concepts? Immediately above "family of God"
means "we Christians." A bit more above, you use the same term to designate
"God the Father, God the Son, Mary Mother of God and Queen of Heaven."
In my experience (posting on the Internet), this is bad practice. Why not
be consistent with terminology? Is the reader to determine from context
which definition is intended? If the reader makes the wrong determination,
who is at fault? The reader or the definer of the ambiguous term? Why not
just use different terms for different concepts?
But you DO seem to be saying that Allah == Jehovah == <Christian God>,
although you seem reluctant to assign a name to the Christian God.
That IS his name, as is Allah to Muslims and Jehovah to Jews. All one
God.
Duke, please! The antecedent of the pronoun "that" is vague! The
proximate noun is "God," modified by the adjective "Christian." Surely no
Muslim would agree that this is the name of God!
As for Jews, consider the distinctions among Adonai, Elohim, and YHWH.
Though I'm by no means a scriptural scholar, I consistently read that Jews
do not use the actual, proper name of God, YHWH, opting instead for Adonai
or Elohim.
Is this
something you do out of respect, along the lines of saying
"tetragrammaton"
rather than "JHVH" or typing G-d instead of God?
???
Once again, you see my compulsive avoidance of assumptions. In your last
message, you never said, "The name of God is <name>." I've seen many posts
in which the author declines to name God lest the name be taken (more or
less) in vain (e.g., Tetragammaton or G-d). I didn't want to assume that
you were avoiding naming God for some reason, so I asked if your reluctance
to name God is a gesture of respect or humility. This is quite common among
orthodox Jews. For all I know, this is also a practice of yours.
Just trying to get some certainty here. After all, most religionists use
the term "God" for their Supreme Being.
Yep, the Egyptians looked at the black wooden jackal and called it their
god. As
they did to the river.
Indeed, and the jackal god was Anubis, by name. I (reluctantly) will assume
you mean Hapi as the Egyptian river god.
And sometimes I wonder whether
you're advising adherence to Christianity in general or Catholicism in
particular (which I take to be a subset of Christianity).
The Catholic Church is the Church founded by Christ. At one time, it was
katholocis in Greek = (c)atholic =universal = one = (C)atholic Church when
named
= Roman Catholic Church as breakaway groups were forming.
OK, given your apparent impatience with my reluctance to draw conclusions,
I'll assume from this that you're a Catholic. I think this is important.
Consider that, in discussing scripture, Catholics will prefer a version of
the Bible with an imprimatur and a nihil obstat, such as the Douai version
or the Jerusalem Bible. Evangelical Christians will generally prefer the
King James version. Other Christian denominations seem (to me, anyway) to
prefer more recent translations and versions. I will try to refer to the
appropriate canon.
Geo
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: It Turns Out That Neutrinos Are Catholic! |
06 Apr 2006 05:40:16 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 4 Apr 2006 20:08:22 -0400, "George Wright" <geo@loyola.edu> wrote:
The one and only almighty God is professed by 53% of the current world
population and consists of:
Muslims - God called Allah, submissive to God
Jews - God called Jehovah, servants of God.
Christians - God called almighty God, family of God.
I simple "yes" would have sufficed---if that is in fact a "yes."
You can't figure it out?
Well, sure, Duke, I can make inferences; I mean, I'm not a dim bulb. But
anybody who has posted to the Internet as long as you and I knows that it's
always risky to assume. (You must have noticed that I try to assume as
little as possible---not that I always succeed :-(.) How often have you
read an exchange in which one party "figures it out," only to have the other
party reply, "I never said that!"? But, how about this? I'll start
interpreting your responses provided you'll agree that you won't complain if
I do.
Ok, as long as you read what I say and not what you imagine I said.
I've never heard "the family of God" cognomen.
God the Father, God the Son, Mary Mother of God and Queen of Heaven..
I've never heard of this particular trio. (I deliberately avoid using the
word "trinity," because I thought that referred to God the Father, God the
Son, and God the Holy Spirit.) If this is a common "term of art" in a
particular religious faith, I have never heard of it.
This is not the Holy Trinity. The Mother of God is not part of the Trinity. But
my reference was to reflect "family" of God, as opposed to "submissive to" or
"servant of."
Would that be a rough
translation of "Elohim?" So it's safe to say, then, that the Christian
God
is the same as the Catholic God is the same as Yahweh/Elohim?
You still can't figure it out?
Duke, I really don't think it's that simple. After all, the Jewish God is
referred to as Adonai (which I understand to mean "Lord"), Elohim (which I
understand to be a generic term for "God"), and YHWH (which I understand to
be representations of the Hebrew consonants and vowel signs for Yahweh or
Jehovah).
Could be - I'm not Jewish nor do I understand the language.
Perhaps I'm overly compulsive, so.... Given my comments above about
reluctance to avoid assumptions, I'll assume that, when you say "Almighty
God," you mean Yahweh.
Yes, if you choose to limit the reference to the Jewish name "Yahweh". Both are
one and the same Supreme Creator.
Wait.... Now that I look back at what you wrote, I'm not sure what you
mean
by the appended phrases "submissive to God," "servants of God," "family of
God."
OK, I now know what you mean by "family of God."
Muslims profess following God's instructions, and it that is to kill, so
be it.
I think it's safe to say that adherents of ALL religions profess following
God's instructions. For example, Abraham, following God's instructions, was
prepared to kill Isaac, until God stayed his hand. While I'm not familiar
enough with the Old Testament to bring other examples to mind, I'd bet there
are other examples in scripture in which the Chosen People actually did
follow God's orders to kill.
As expressed in the words of revelation from God but written in the handwriting
of man.
Jews see themselves as servants to/of God. And of course, we Christians
are
family of God.
How can I "figure it out" when you use the same term (to wit, "family of
God") to refer to two different concepts? Immediately above "family of God"
means "we Christians." A bit more above, you use the same term to designate
"God the Father, God the Son, Mary Mother of God and Queen of Heaven."
"Submissive to" versus "servants to" versus "family of" are different approaches
to what people see as their place with God.
In my experience (posting on the Internet), this is bad practice. Why not
be consistent with terminology? Is the reader to determine from context
which definition is intended? If the reader makes the wrong determination,
who is at fault? The reader or the definer of the ambiguous term? Why not
just use different terms for different concepts?
Because they are different concepts.
But you DO seem to be saying that Allah == Jehovah == <Christian God>,
although you seem reluctant to assign a name to the Christian God.
That IS his name, as is Allah to Muslims and Jehovah to Jews. All one
God.
Duke, please! The antecedent of the pronoun "that" is vague! The
proximate noun is "God," modified by the adjective "Christian." Surely no
Muslim would agree that this is the name of God!
Then try Supreme Creator called Allah/Jehovah/God.
As for Jews, consider the distinctions among Adonai, Elohim, and YHWH.
Though I'm by no means a scriptural scholar, I consistently read that Jews
do not use the actual, proper name of God, YHWH, opting instead for Adonai
or Elohim.
Could be. I'm not Jewish or Muslim. THEY call God what they wish.
Is this
something you do out of respect, along the lines of saying
"tetragrammaton"
rather than "JHVH" or typing G-d instead of God?
???
Once again, you see my compulsive avoidance of assumptions. In your last
message, you never said, "The name of God is <name>." I've seen many posts
in which the author declines to name God lest the name be taken (more or
less) in vain (e.g., Tetragammaton or G-d). I didn't want to assume that
you were avoiding naming God for some reason, so I asked if your reluctance
to name God is a gesture of respect or humility. This is quite common among
orthodox Jews. For all I know, this is also a practice of yours.
Nope. His name is, and his is, God almighty.
Just trying to get some certainty here. After all, most religionists use
the term "God" for their Supreme Being.
Yep, the Egyptians looked at the black wooden jackal and called it their
god. As
they did to the river.
Indeed, and the jackal god was Anubis, by name. I (reluctantly) will assume
you mean Hapi as the Egyptian river god.
Nope. I'm a Christian.
And sometimes I wonder whether
you're advising adherence to Christianity in general or Catholicism in
particular (which I take to be a subset of Christianity).
The Catholic Church is the Church founded by Christ. At one time, it was
katholocis in Greek = (c)atholic =universal = one = (C)atholic Church when
named
= Roman Catholic Church as breakaway groups were forming.
OK, given your apparent impatience with my reluctance to draw conclusions,
I'll assume from this that you're a Catholic.
Good conclusion.
I think this is important.
Why, I have no idea.
Consider that, in discussing scripture, Catholics will prefer a version of
the Bible with an imprimatur and a nihil obstat, such as the Douai version
or the Jerusalem Bible.
No, a bad conclusion. All bibles are translations. Some authors do better jobs
than others.
Evangelical Christians will generally prefer the
King James version. Other Christian denominations seem (to me, anyway) to
prefer more recent translations and versions. I will try to refer to the
appropriate canon.
Ok.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D6" |
|
| Title: Re: It Turns Out That Neutrinos Are Catholic! |
04 Apr 2006 07:34:47 PM |
|
|
duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> said:
<...>
The one and only almighty God is professed by 53% of the current world
population and consists of:
Muslims - God called Allah, submissive to God
Jews - God called Jehovah, servants of God.
Christians - God called almighty God, family of God.
Why has there been so much killing of each other for being infidels?
--- Jim07D6
.
|
|
|
| User: "L. Raymond" |
|
| Title: Re: It Turns Out That Neutrinos Are Catholic! |
05 Apr 2006 07:54:24 PM |
|
|
Jim07D6 wrote:
duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> said:
<...>
The one and only almighty God is professed by 53% of the current world
population and consists of:
Muslims - God called Allah, submissive to God
Jews - God called Jehovah, servants of God.
Christians - God called almighty God, family of God.
Why has there been so much killing of each other for being infidels?
People who make the claim that all Jews, Christians and Moslems
worship the same god are such fools. The Christian god impregnated a
mortal and produced a child; the Jewish and Moslem gods didn't. The
Moslem god sent additional prophets culminating in Mohammed to spread
the word, the Jewish and Christian gods didn't. The Jewish god promised
to send a messiah and hasn't yet, but the Christian god has.
And that's not even touching on doctrinal differences.
--
L. Raymond
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D6" |
|
| Title: Re: It Turns Out That Neutrinos Are Catholic! |
05 Apr 2006 02:57:03 PM |
|
|
"L. Raymond" <badaddress@mylinuxisp.com> said:
Jim07D6 wrote:
duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> said:
<...>
The one and only almighty God is professed by 53% of the current world
population and consists of:
Muslims - God called Allah, submissive to God
Jews - God called Jehovah, servants of God.
Christians - God called almighty God, family of God.
Why has there been so much killing of each other for being infidels?
People who make the claim that all Jews, Christians and Moslems
worship the same god are such fools. The Christian god impregnated a
mortal and produced a child; the Jewish and Moslem gods didn't. The
Moslem god sent additional prophets culminating in Mohammed to spread
the word, the Jewish and Christian gods didn't. The Jewish god promised
to send a messiah and hasn't yet, but the Christian god has.
And that's not even touching on doctrinal differences.
I think that if we put any two people who say they worship the same
god under scrutiny, we'd find disagreements, some of which could lead
to violence between them.
--- Jim07D6
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: It Turns Out That Neutrinos Are Catholic! |
05 Apr 2006 08:11:55 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 05 Apr 2006 19:57:03 GMT, Jim07D6 <Jim07D6@nospam.net> wrote:
- Refer: <o588329fqs7dnck7rac1c3na51cjpm9me4@4ax.com>
"L. Raymond" <badaddress@mylinuxisp.com> said:
Jim07D6 wrote:
duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> said:
<...>
The one and only almighty God is professed by 53% of the current world
population and consists of:
Muslims - God called Allah, submissive to God
Jews - God called Jehovah, servants of God.
Christians - God called almighty God, family of God.
Why has there been so much killing of each other for being infidels?
People who make the claim that all Jews, Christians and Moslems
worship the same god are such fools. The Christian god impregnated a
mortal and produced a child; the Jewish and Moslem gods didn't. The
Moslem god sent additional prophets culminating in Mohammed to spread
the word, the Jewish and Christian gods didn't. The Jewish god promised
to send a messiah and hasn't yet, but the Christian god has.
And that's not even touching on doctrinal differences.
I think that if we put any two people who say they worship the same
god under scrutiny, we'd find disagreements, some of which could lead
to violence between them.
When do we start?
--
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Santolina chamaecyparissus" |
|
| Title: Re: It Turns Out That Neutrinos Are Catholic! |
04 Apr 2006 09:02:04 PM |
|
|
duke wrote:
Christians - God called almighty God, family of God.
God, God, God.......would that be the Newport Gods?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Neil Kelsey" |
|
| Title: Re: It Turns Out That Neutrinos Are Catholic! |
04 Apr 2006 06:11:09 PM |
|
|
duke wrote:
On 2 Apr 2006 10:46:28 -0700, "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote:
Well, they have mass, at any rate:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4862112.stm
Budikka
And they are created by God.
The grown ups are trying to have a conversation about an astounding
discovery and you come in and ***** on the floor. "God" is irrelevant.
Run along and play.
.
|
|
|
|
|

|
Related Articles |
|
|