THE DESCRIPTION OF THE BARRIER BETWEEN TWO SEAS !!!!!!!!!!!!

B

BV

Guest
THE DESCRIPTION OF THE BARRIER BETWEEN TWO SEAS

Sorry for not sending anything related to this group but it
might be something new to you
Oceanographers, in the wake of the scientific progress in this age,
have discovered the barrier between two seas. They have found that a
barrier separates two neighboring seas. The barrier moves between
them, and it is called by scientists “a front” compared to the front
between two armies. By virtue of this barrier each sea retains its own
characteristics which Allah (SWT) has assigned to it and which are
suitable for the organisms living in that environment.

Because of this barrier, the two neighboring seas mingle so slowly
that the amount of water that passes from one sea to the other
acquires the characteristics of the other sea while crossing the
barrier which overturns the waters crossing from one sea to the other,
keeping each sea with its own characteristics.
The gradual progress of human knowledge about the fact of the
differences between seawater masses and the existence of barriers
between them : Oceanographers discovered that there were certain
differences between water samples taken from various seas in 1284 AH/
1873 AD, by the British Marine Scientific Expedition of the Challenger
Voyage. It was discovered that masses of sea water vary in their
composition, in respect of salinity, water temperature, density and
types of marine organisms. The data were obtained from 362
oceanographic stations. The report of the expedition filled 29,500
pages in 50 volumes and took 23 years to complete. One of the great
achievements of scientific exploration, the expedition also showed how
little man knew about the sea. After 1933 AD another American
expedition set out in the Mexican Gulf and installed hundreds of sea
stations to study the characteristics of seas. It found out that a
large number of stations in a certain area gave similar information
about the characteristics of the water in that area, whether in
respect of salinity, density, temperature, marine organisms or
solubility of oxygen in water, while another group of stations in
another area gave a different set of data about that area. So,
oceanographers concluded that there were two distinctive seas with
different characteristics, and not just limited samples as the
Expedition of Challenger showed. Man installed hundreds of marine
stations to study the characteristics of various seas. Scientists have
found out that the differences in these characteristics distinguished
one sea from another. But why do these seas not mix and become
homogeneous in spite of the effect of tide and ebb that moves sea
water twice a day, and causes seas to move forward and backward
turbulently, besides other factors that cause sea water to be in
continuous movement and turbulence, such as surface and internal waves
and sea currents? The answer appeared for the first time in scientific
books in 1361 AH/1942 AD. Extensive studies of marine characteristics
revealed that there are water barriers separating neighboring seas and
maintaining the distinctive properties of each sea with respect to
density, salinity, marine life, temperature and solubility of oxygen
in water.


There are large waves, strong currents, and tides in the
Mediterranean Sea and the Atlantic Ocean. Mediterranean Sea water
enters the Atlantic by Gibraltar. But their temperature, salinity, and
densities do not change, because of the barrier that separates them.
After 1962 AD there was known the role of sea barriers in modifying
the properties of the water masses that pass from one sea to another,
to prevent one sea from overwhelming the other. So salty seas retain
their own properties and boundaries by virtue of these barriers. A
field study comparing the waters of Oman Gulf and those of the Arabian
Gulf has shown the difference between them regarding their chemical
properties, the prevalent vegetation and the barrier separating them.
About a hundred years of research and study has been required to
discover the fact of the existence of barriers between sea water
masses and their role in making each sea retain its own properties.
Hundred of researchers took part and numerous precise scientific
instruments and equipment were used to achieve that. Fourteen
centuries ago the Holy Qur’an revealed this fact. Allah (SWT) says:
(He has let free (MARAJA) the two sees meeting together. Between them
is a barrier that they do not transgress. Then which of the Blessings
of your Lord will you both (Jinn and men) deny? Out of them both come
out pearls and carol.” (LV: 19-22) Allah (SWT) also says: “And He made
a barrier between the two seas.) (XXVII: 61) Linguistic meanings and
the commentators’ sayings: Maraja (let free): IbnFaris said:
“’maraja’: The consonants m, r and j form a root indicating a movement
of going and coming and turbulence.” Al-Bahrayn (the two seas): Al-
Asfahani said: “Some say that the word “bahr” (sea) is usually used to
mean salt water rather than fresh water.” Ibn Manzursaid: “’Bahr’ is
more frequently used to describe salt water than fresh water.” If the
word “bahr” is used without qualification it means salt water;
otherwise, it means the thing qualified.” The Holy Qur’an uses
“nahr”(river) to indicate abundant running fresh water, while it uses
“bahr” (sea) to indicate salt water. Allah (SWT) says: (And He has
made the ships to be of service to you that they may sail through the
sea by His Command; and He has made rivers (also) to be of service to
you.)(XIV: 32) In the hadith, “bahr” (sea) is also used to mean salt
water. Allah’s Messenger (Peace be upon him) was asked by a man who
said: “O Allah’s Messenger! We travel by sea and carry with us a
little fresh water. If we should use it forwudu (ablution) we would
get thirsty. May we use seawater for wudu? Allah’ Messenger (Peace be
upon him) said: “Its water is pure and its dead (animals) are lawful
(to eat).”Al-Barzakh: It is the barrier. Most commentatorssuggest that
it is invisible. Al-baghi: IbnManzur said: “’Al-Baghi’ means
transgression, exceeding the limits.” Al-Jawhari and Al-Asfahani said
the same. Al-Marjan: Ibn Al-Jawzi said: “Al-Qadi Abu Ya’li says that
Al-Marjan is a kind of bar-like pearls. Al-Zajjajsaid: “Al-Marjan is
white, very white.” IbnMas’ud said: “Al-Marjan is red beads.” Abu
Hayyan said that to some people Al-Marjan is red stone. Al-Qurtubi
said: “It is said that Al-Marjan is the big pearls. The same is also
said by ‘Ali and Ibn ‘Abbas (May Allah bestow His Mercy on them both).
The small pieces of Marjan are the small pearls. It is also reported
on their authority the opposite: the big pieces are called pearls and
the smaller are called Marjan. Al-Dahhak and Qatadah said the same.”
Al-Alusi said: “If we take into consideration the connotation of
brilliance and glitter which the Arabic word “pearls” carries, and the
connotation of movement and mixing that the word “Marjan” carries, we
can say that “pearls” is used for big pieces and“Marjan” for small
ones.” Anyhow, Marjan is a kind of ornament that is found in various
colors: white and red. It may be in big or small pieces. It is bar-
like stone. In the Verse it is something other than pearls, for the
conjunction “and” implies talking bout two different things. Marjan
(carol), however, is found in salt seas only. The Verse shows us the
minute secrets which oceanography has revealed only recently. They
describe the meeting between salt seas. Following is the evidence to
that: First: The Verse uses the word “bahrayn” (two seas) without any
qualification. This means that salt seas are intended here. Second:
The Verses in Surat Al-Rahman show that the two seas yield pearls and
“Marjan”(carol). It has become evident that Marjan is found in salt
seas only. This indicates that the Verse is referring to two salt
seas. Allah (SWT) says: “Out of them both come out pearls and carol,”
i.e. out of each of them. Who knew in the past that salt seas differ
in many respects in spite of their apparent similarity to the
observer? (They all taste salt, look blue, have waves, contain fish,
etc.) How can they differ although they meet each other? We know that
when two amounts of water are mixed in a container they get
homogenous. How can seas remain differentiated even in the presence of
the factors of mixing, such as the ebb and flow of the sea, currents
and storms? The Verse mentions the meeting of two salt seas that
differ from one another. If the two seas were similar to one another,
they would be one sea. However, differentiating between them in the
Qur’anic utterance implies the difference between them although they
are both salt. (He has let free (Maraja) the two seas meeting
together) means that the two seas are mixed; they are in the state of
backward and forward movements, of mixing and turbulence at the site
of the meeting, as is understood from the literal meaning of“Maraja”.
This is the fact that science has discovered, that is to say, the
barrier is described as being zigzag or wavy and shifting in position
during the various seasons because of the tide and winds. This Verse
by itself implies the presence of so much mixing and merging between
these seas as would deprive them of their distinctive properties. But
Allah (SWT), the All-Knower, shows in the following Verse that
“between them is a barrier which they do not transgress”, i.e. In
spite of this state of merging and turbulence that characterizes the
seas there is a barrier between them preventing them from
transgressing or exceeding their limits. This is what man has
discovered as a result of the advances achieved in his sciences and
instruments. It has been found that a third water mass separates the
two seas and it has such properties as are different from those of
each of the two seas separated by it. Yet, in spite of the presence of
the barrier, the waters of the two adjacent seas mix very slowly
without one sea encroaching upon the other through carrying over its
own properties to it, for the barrier zone is a region for changing
the water crossing from one sea to the other so that it gradually
acquires the properties of the sea that is going to enter and loses
the properties of the sea it has come form. Thus neither of the two
seas transgresses by carrying its own properties to the other,
although they mix during the process of meeting. How truthful is
Allah’s Saying: (He has let free (maraja) the two seas meeting
together. Between them is a barrier which they do not transgress.)
Most commentators suggest that the barrier that separates the two seas
referred to here is an invisible barrier created by Allah. Some
commentators find it difficult to reconcile the idea of the seas being
merging and the presence of a barrier at the same time, for the
presence of a barrier entails the prevention of merging. So the
mention of merging (maraja) entails the absence of a barrier. This
apparent contradiction has been resolved by discovering the secrets of
the seas. The Miraculous Aspects of the Previous Verses: We can
conclude the following from the discussion above: The Holy Qur’an,
which was revealed more than 14 centuries ago, includes very precise
pieces of information and knowledge about marine phenomena that have
been discovered only recently by means of very sophisticated
equipment. An instance in this respect is the existence of water
barriers between seas. Allah (SWT) says:(He has let free (maraja) the
two seas meeting together. Between them is a barrier which they do not
transgress.) The historical development of Oceanography shows that no
precise information had been available on seas before Challenger
Expedition (in 1873 AD), let alone at the time when the Holy Qur’an
was being revealed 14 centuries ago to an illiterate Prophet that
lived in a desert environment and never traveled by sea. Oceanography
has witnessed no advances except in the last two centuries,
particularly in the latter half of the twentieth century. Prior to
that a sea was considered as something fearful and mysterious. Myths
and superstitions were fabricated about it. Sea voyagers were only
interested in their own safety and how to find the correct routes
during their long journeys. Man discovered that salt seas are
different only in the thirties of the twentieth century, after
thousands of marine stations had been established by researchers to
analyze samples of sea water to measure the differences between the
degrees of temperature, salinity, density and oxygen dissolubility in
the sea water recorded at all those stations, and then realize that
salt seas are different. Man did not know anything about the barrier
that separates between salt seas till the establishment of the
aforesaid stations, and after spending a long time tracing these wavy
moving barriers that change their geographical locations with the
change of seasons. Man did not know that the water masses of the two
seas are separated by a water barrier and are mixed at the same time
till he started studying with his ships and equipment the water
movement in the meeting region of the seas and analyzing the water
masses in those regions. Man did not apply this rule to all seas that
meet together except after vast scientific surveying, investigation
and verification of this phenomenon, which occurs between each pair of
adjacent seas in the world. Now then, did Allah’s Messenger (Peace be
upon him) own stations and equipment for analyzing water and the
ability to trace the movement of various water masses? Did he carry
out a comprehensive surveying process, although he never sailed the
sea and lived at a time when superstitions were prevalent,
particularly in the field of seas? Were, at the time of Allah’s
Messenger (Peace be upon him) such researches, instruments and studies
as are available for the oceanographers of today who have discovered
all these secrets by means of research and study? This knowledge,
which the Qur’an came with, included a precise de******ion of the
subtlest secrets at a time when humanity could never have known them,
which indicates that its source is Divine, as Allah (SWT) says: (Say:
“the (Qur’an) was sent down by Him Who knows the secret (that is) in
the heavens and the earth: Verily He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.)
(XXV: 6) It also indicates that the one to whom the Book was sent down
was a Messenger inspired. Allah (SWT) but says the Truth in the Verse:
(Soon will We show Our Signs in the Universe and in their own selves,
until it becomes manifest to them that this the Truth. Is it not
sufficient that your Lord does witness all things?) to
morehttp://rapidshare.com/files/18405467…5___1586_.html
FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT ISLAM

http://www.islam-guide.com

http://www.islamhouse.com/s/9661

http://www.thisistruth.org

http://www.quran-m.com/firas/en1

http://kaheel7.com/eng

http://www.knowmuhammad.com

http://www.rasoulallah.net/v2/index.aspx?lang=e

http://imanway1.com/eng

http://www.todayislam.com

http://www.thekeytoislam.com

http://www.islamland.com

http://www.discoverislam.com

http://www.thetruereligion.org

http://www.beconvinced.com

http://islamtomorrow.com

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran

http://www.quranforall.org

http://www.quranexplorer.com/quran

http://www.prophetmuhammed.org

http://www.chatislamonline.org/ar

http://www.dar-us-salam.com

http://youtubeislam.com
 
BV wrote:

(...)

You do understand that God is a delusion, yes?

--Winston
 
On Jan 18, 2:55 pm, Winston <Wins...@Bigbrother.net> wrote:
BV wrote:

(...)

You do understand that God is a delusion, yes?

--Winston
Your so called "Delusion", is hope for many troubled people.
 
Bob_Villa wrote:
On Jan 18, 2:55 pm, Winston<Wins...@Bigbrother.net> wrote:
BV wrote:

(...)

You do understand that God is a delusion, yes?

--Winston

Your so called "Delusion", is hope for many troubled people.
It isn't my delusion. God is a classical example of 'false hope'.

"The term 'false hope' refers to a hope based entirely around a
fantasy or an extremely unlikely outcome."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hope

Real hope 'removes the blinders of fear and despair'* and
prompts us to create a way to a happier future.

Personally, I would much rather do that than cower in a
corner, muttering fervently to a non-existent 'butler in
the sky' about the unfairness of life.


* Barbara L. Fredrickson Ph.D.


--Winston
 
On Jan 22, 12:31 pm, Winston <Wins...@Bigbrother.net> wrote:
Bob_Villa wrote:
On Jan 18, 2:55 pm, Winston<Wins...@Bigbrother.net>  wrote:
BV wrote:

(...)

You do understand that God is a delusion, yes?

--Winston

Your so called "Delusion", is hope for many troubled people.

It isn't my delusion. God is a classical example of 'false hope'.

"The term 'false hope' refers to a hope based entirely around a
fantasy or an extremely unlikely outcome."http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hope

Real hope 'removes the blinders of fear and despair'* and
prompts us to create a way to a happier future.

Personally, I would much rather do that than cower in a
corner, muttering fervently to a non-existent 'butler in
the sky' about the unfairness of life.

* Barbara L. Fredrickson Ph.D.

--Winston
Too bad you don't have ideas of your own...but at least you give
credit where it's due. It's not false hope if you receive the comfort
perceived or received.
 
Bob_Villa wrote:
On Jan 22, 12:31 pm, Winston<Wins...@Bigbrother.net> wrote:
Bob_Villa wrote:
On Jan 18, 2:55 pm, Winston<Wins...@Bigbrother.net> wrote:
BV wrote:

(...)

You do understand that God is a delusion, yes?

--Winston

Your so called "Delusion", is hope for many troubled people.

It isn't my delusion. God is a classical example of 'false hope'.

"The term 'false hope' refers to a hope based entirely around a
fantasy or an extremely unlikely outcome."http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hope

Real hope 'removes the blinders of fear and despair'* and
prompts us to create a way to a happier future.

Personally, I would much rather do that than cower in a
corner, muttering fervently to a non-existent 'butler in
the sky' about the unfairness of life.

* Barbara L. Fredrickson Ph.D.

--Winston

Too bad you don't have ideas of your own
I share good ideas with lots of people.
I don't feel that is 'too bad' though. :)
There is potential for good when people communicate honestly.

...but at least you give credit where it's due.
Whenever I can.

It's not false hope if you receive the comfort
perceived or received.
"A delusion is a false belief held with absolute conviction despite
superior evidence."* Uh oh. Receiving something
that was not sent is your delusion, not mine. :)

* "Delusion". Princeton - Wordnet. Retrieved 8 April 2011.

--Winston
 
On Jan 23, 4:30 pm, Winston <Wins...@Bigbrother.net> wrote:
Bob_Villa wrote:
On Jan 22, 12:31 pm, Winston<Wins...@Bigbrother.net>  wrote:
Bob_Villa wrote:
On Jan 18, 2:55 pm, Winston<Wins...@Bigbrother.net>    wrote:
BV wrote:

(...)

You do understand that God is a delusion, yes?

--Winston

Your so called "Delusion", is hope for many troubled people.

It isn't my delusion. God is a classical example of 'false hope'.

"The term 'false hope' refers to a hope based entirely around a
fantasy or an extremely unlikely outcome."http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hope

Real hope 'removes the blinders of fear and despair'* and
prompts us to create a way to a happier future.

Personally, I would much rather do that than cower in a
corner, muttering fervently to a non-existent 'butler in
the sky' about the unfairness of life.

* Barbara L. Fredrickson Ph.D.

--Winston

Too bad you don't have ideas of your own

I share good ideas with lots of people.
I don't feel that is 'too bad' though. :)
There is potential for good when people communicate honestly.

...but at least you give credit where it's due.

Whenever I can.

It's not false hope if you receive the comfort
perceived or received.

"A delusion is a false belief held with absolute conviction despite
  superior evidence."*    Uh oh. Receiving something
  that was not sent is your delusion, not mine. :)

* "Delusion". Princeton - Wordnet. Retrieved 8 April 2011.

--Winston
It's still your word...not mine. I said comfort perceived or
received. You "may" be the deluded one.
 
Bob_Villa wrote:

(...)

It's still your word...not mine.
I calls 'em as I sees 'em. :)

Organized religion generally is composed of
two kinds of folks. Victims and sociopaths.
I feel sorry for the former and choose not
to be in the company of the latter.

I said comfort perceived or
received. You "may" be the deluded one.
IIRC you said "It's not false hope if you receive
the comfort perceived or received."

Claiming to receive anything from a source that does
not exist is a textbook example of delusion.
That way lies disappointment and bitterness for
the deluded and huge profits for the deluders.

http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/map/google_map_Vatican_City.htm

Nice, huh? :)

Thoughtful hard work, on the other hand is much
more likely to result in satisfaction, progress
and personal happiness.

--Winston
 
On Jan 23, 9:23 pm, Winston <Wins...@Bigbrother.net> wrote:
Bob_Villa wrote:

(...)

It's still your word...not mine.

I calls 'em as I sees 'em.  :)

Organized religion generally is composed of
two kinds of folks. Victims and sociopaths.
I feel sorry for the former and choose not
to be in the company of the latter.

I said comfort perceived or
received.  You "may" be the deluded one.

IIRC you said "It's not false hope if you receive
                the comfort perceived or received."

Claiming to receive anything from a source that does
not exist is a textbook example of delusion.
That way lies disappointment and bitterness for
the deluded and huge profits for the deluders.

http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/map/google_map_Vatican_City.htm

Nice, huh?  :)

Thoughtful hard work, on the other hand is much
more likely to result in satisfaction, progress
and personal happiness.

--Winston
"Organized religion generally is composed of two kinds of folks.
Victims and sociopaths."

You know little of the worlds religions...you're talking extremes here
and not the vast majority. Your hurt runs deep...maybe you should talk
to a priest?
 
Bob_Villa wrote:

(...)

"Organized religion generally is composed of two kinds of folks.
Victims and sociopaths."

You know little of the worlds religions
Just a very thinly disguised grab for power and money.
That's all anyone needs to know.

You did happen to look at the map of one of the
nicer encampments, yes?
http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/map/google_map_Vatican_City.htm

...you're talking extremes here
Yes, they are extremely corrupt, rapacious and vicious.
I did mention that I calls 'em as I sees 'em?

and not the vast majority.
Perhaps the majority are half-vast. :)

Your hurt runs deep
? Where did that come from?

...maybe you should talk to a priest?
Thanks for that.
You know how to be funny! :)

--Winston<-- Old curmudgeon. Not 'priest fodder' for sure!
 
Bob_Villa wrote:
On Jan 24, 12:59 pm, Winston<Wins...@Bigbrother.net> wrote:

Yes, they are extremely corrupt, rapacious and vicious.

This is a total supposition are your part.
You did happen to look at the map of one of the
nicer encampments, yes?
http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/map/google_map_Vatican_City.htm

Where do you think all that came from?

Of course they have
wealth...and the abuse of power has been

there is the past.
We can agree on that!

But that is simply not the case today.
Whoops.

The Pope has given back all the lovely money and land
and apologized for 2000 years of lies and theft?

Televangelists have finally stopped fleecing their
flocks and returned all the stolen property?

Priests have stopped raping the children of their
congregation and then threatening that their parents
will "rot in Hell" if they speak out?

Religious crazies (but I repeat myself) have stopped
threatening doctors who perform abortions?

The Religious Right have finally (and at last) decided
to adhere to rules involving tax-free religious
organizations and political influence?

I'm sure one of those changes would have made it on to
the evening News. :)

(Pull the other one. It plays "Jingle Bells".)

You read too much into Langdon's fiction.
Robert Langdon, the fictional character created by
Dan Brown? That Langdon?

You understand that he doesn't exist either, yes? :)

--Winston
 
On Jan 24, 12:59 pm, Winston <Wins...@Bigbrother.net> wrote:

Yes, they are extremely corrupt, rapacious and vicious.
This is a total supposition are your part. Of course they have
wealth...and the abuse of power has been

there is the past. But that is simply not the case today. You read
too much into Langdon's fiction.
 
Bob_Villa wrote:

(...)

I really enjoy your smileys! I'll respond when I have more time...I'm
at work. :)
(Brown is who I meant, sorry!)
Hey we should agree to disagree and leave
some bandwidth for folks who need to fix
their guitar amp. I'm pretty sure that
this subject was not included in the
original sci.electronics.repair charter.

:)

--Winston
 
On Jan 24, 2:36 pm, Winston <Wins...@Bigbrother.net> wrote:
Bob_Villa wrote:
On Jan 24, 12:59 pm, Winston<Wins...@Bigbrother.net>  wrote:

Yes, they are extremely corrupt, rapacious and vicious.

This is a total supposition are your part.

You did happen to look at the map of one of the
nicer encampments, yes?http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/map/google_map_Vatican_City.htm

Where do you think all that came from?

Of course they have
wealth...and the abuse of power has been

  there is the past.

We can agree on that!

But that is simply not the case today.

Whoops.

The Pope has given back all the lovely money and land
and apologized for 2000 years of lies and theft?

Televangelists have finally stopped fleecing their
flocks and returned all the stolen property?

Priests have stopped raping the children of their
congregation and then threatening that their parents
will "rot in Hell" if they speak out?

Religious crazies (but I repeat myself) have stopped
threatening doctors who perform abortions?

The Religious Right have finally (and at last) decided
to adhere to rules involving tax-free religious
organizations and political influence?

I'm sure one of those changes would have made it on to
the evening News.  :)

(Pull the other one.  It plays "Jingle Bells".)

You read too much into Langdon's fiction.

Robert Langdon, the fictional character created by
Dan Brown?  That Langdon?

You understand that he doesn't exist either, yes?  :)

--Winston
I really enjoy your smileys! I'll respond when I have more time...I'm
at work. :)
(Brown is who I meant, sorry!)
 
On Jan 24, 4:32 pm, Winston <Wins...@Bigbrother.net> wrote:

"The Pope has given back all the lovely money and land
and apologized for 2000 years of lies and theft?"

Should we give the US back to the UK?

"Televangelists have finally stopped fleecing their
flocks and returned all the stolen property?"

This is just another form of telemarketing and I haven't seen them
lately...I think they are delegated to certain channels.

"Priests have stopped raping the children of their
congregation and then threatening that their parents
will "rot in Hell" if they speak out?"

All the majors have had this problem where pedophiles have found easy
prey (no pun intended). Now, even deacons go through 6 yrs of
training including physiological profiling (and their spouse). Were
these atrocities swept under the rug? Of course!

"Religious crazies (but I repeat myself) have stopped
threatening doctors who perform abortions?"

Exactly. Crazy! End of story! :)

"The Religious Right have finally (and at last) decided
to adhere to rules involving tax-free religious
organizations and political influence?"

If you have an enormous amount of property that is not used for a
specific religious purpose...it should be taxed.

If by "political influence" you mean "abortion rights", then I believe
you have a moral obligation to use your influence to "right a wrong".
Even if you don't believe in the sanctity of life...think of the loss
of human potential!
 
Bob_Villa wrote:
On Jan 24, 4:32 pm, Winston<Wins...@Bigbrother.net> wrote:

"The Pope has given back all the lovely money and land
and apologized for 2000 years of lies and theft?"

Should we give the US back to the UK?
Er. You mean to the Indians, yes?

"Televangelists have finally stopped fleecing their
flocks and returned all the stolen property?"

This is just another form of telemarketing and I haven't seen them
lately...I think they are delegated to certain channels.
What you don't know won't hurt them.

"Priests have stopped raping the children of their
congregation and then threatening that their parents
will "rot in Hell" if they speak out?"

All the majors have had this problem where pedophiles have found easy
prey (no pun intended). Now, even deacons go through 6 yrs of
training including physiological profiling (and their spouse).Were
these atrocities swept under the rug? Of course!
The broom is still sweeping, no doubt.
Note that the church is 'self-policing'.
Reminds one of the successes we've seen with financial
'self-policing'. :(

(...)

If you have an enormous amount of property that is not used for a
specific religious purpose...it should be taxed.
Which means I can stop paying taxes because I
religiously want to? What is wrong with this picture? :)

If by "political influence" you mean "abortion rights"
That an a lot of other things about your private
life that aren't any of my business.

--Winston
 
On Jan 25, 7:55 am, Winston <Wins...@Bigbrother.net> wrote:
Bob_Villa wrote:
On Jan 24, 4:32 pm, Winston<Wins...@Bigbrother.net>  wrote:

"The Pope has given back all the lovely money and land
and apologized for 2000 years of lies and theft?"

Should we give the US back to the UK?

Er. You mean to the Indians, yes?

"Televangelists have finally stopped fleecing their
flocks and returned all the stolen property?"

This is just another form of telemarketing and I haven't seen them
lately...I think they are delegated to certain channels.

What you don't know won't hurt them.

"Priests have stopped raping the children of their
congregation and then threatening that their parents
will "rot in Hell" if they speak out?"

All the majors have had this problem where pedophiles have found easy
prey (no pun intended).  Now, even deacons go through 6 yrs of
training including physiological profiling (and their spouse).Were
these atrocities swept under the rug?  Of course!

The broom is still sweeping, no doubt.
Note that the church is 'self-policing'.
Reminds one of the successes we've seen with financial
'self-policing'.  :(

(...)

If you have an enormous amount of property that is not used for a
specific religious purpose...it should be taxed.

Which means I can stop paying taxes because I
religiously want to?  What is wrong with this picture? :)

If by "political influence" you mean "abortion rights"

That an a lot of other things about your private
life that aren't any of my business.

--Winston
Thank God for a 'flameless' discussion.
 
On Jan 27, 8:42 am, Robert Macy <robert.a.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 25, 7:55 am, Winston <Wins...@Bigbrother.net> wrote:









Bob_Villa wrote:
On Jan 24, 4:32 pm, Winston<Wins...@Bigbrother.net>  wrote:

"The Pope has given back all the lovely money and land
and apologized for 2000 years of lies and theft?"

Should we give the US back to the UK?

Er. You mean to the Indians, yes?

"Televangelists have finally stopped fleecing their
flocks and returned all the stolen property?"

This is just another form of telemarketing and I haven't seen them
lately...I think they are delegated to certain channels.

What you don't know won't hurt them.

"Priests have stopped raping the children of their
congregation and then threatening that their parents
will "rot in Hell" if they speak out?"

All the majors have had this problem where pedophiles have found easy
prey (no pun intended).  Now, even deacons go through 6 yrs of
training including physiological profiling (and their spouse).Were
these atrocities swept under the rug?  Of course!

The broom is still sweeping, no doubt.
Note that the church is 'self-policing'.
Reminds one of the successes we've seen with financial
'self-policing'.  :(

(...)

If you have an enormous amount of property that is not used for a
specific religious purpose...it should be taxed.

Which means I can stop paying taxes because I
religiously want to?  What is wrong with this picture? :)

If by "political influence" you mean "abortion rights"

That an a lot of other things about your private
life that aren't any of my business.

--Winston

Thank God for a 'flameless' discussion.
Right...we don't want to start another one about "hell"! B^)
 
On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 05:16:20 -0800 (PST), Bob_Villa <pheeh.zero@gmail.com>
wrote:

"The Religious Right have finally (and at last) decided
to adhere to rules involving tax-free religious
organizations and political influence?"

If you have an enormous amount of property that is not used for a
specific religious purpose...it should be taxed.

If by "political influence" you mean "abortion rights", then I believe
you have a moral obligation to use your influence to "right a wrong".
Even if you don't believe in the sanctity of life...think of the loss
of human potential!
Do you really want to go into potential human beings considering just who
and what those persons seeking abortion really are? Let alone what kind
of future that can provide for them? Really?

?-)
 

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top