ellauri062.html on line 118: ☑ Hiding things or believing other people are hiding things
ellauri067.html on line 545: "This same secret knowledge is what I craved as a young student, believing that there was a meaning to the world beyond all our everyday transactions."
ellauri069.html on line 762: Biographers report that Baum had been a political activist in the 1890s with a special interest in the money question of gold and silver (bimetallism). The City of Oz earns its name from the abbreviation of ounces "Oz" in which gold and silver are measured. Unssin kaupunki. For example, the Tin Woodman wonders what he would do if he ran out of oil. "You wouldn't be as badly off as John D. Rockefeller", the Scarecrow responds, "He'd lose six thousand dollars a minute if that happened." Dorothy—naïve, young and simple—represents the American people. She is Everyman, led astray and seeking the way back home. Moreover, following the road of gold leads eventually only to the Emerald City, which may symbolize the fraudulent world of greenback paper money that only pretends to have value. It is ruled by a scheming politician (the Wizard) who uses publicity devices and tricks to fool the people (and even the Good Witches) into believing he is benevolent, wise, and powerful when really he is a selfish, evil humbug.
ellauri080.html on line 765: In 1934, Gandhi resigned from the National Congress believing leaders were insincere in their adoption of non-violence. Gandhi concentrated on promoting education, home-spinning and weaving.
ellauri089.html on line 546: § 68. Metaphysics, as dealing with a "supersensible reality" may have a bearing upon practical Ethics (1) if its supersensible reality is conceived as something future, which our actions can affect; and (2) since it will prove that every proposition of practical Ethics is false, if it can shew that an eternal reality is either the only real thing or the only good thing. Most metaphysical writers, believing in a reality of the latter kind, do thus imply the complete falsehood of every practical proposition, although they fail to see that their Metaphysics thus contradicts their Ethics. …
ellauri089.html on line 552: § 71. and another seems to lie in the failure to distinguish between that which suggests a truth, or is a cause of our knowing it, and that upon which it logically depends, or which is a reason for believing it: in the former sense fiction has a more important bearing on Ethics than Metaphysics can have. …
ellauri090.html on line 126: Palha’s business flourishes as Rubião’s wealth begins to dwindle. Rubião becomes subject to fits of madness, believing that he is Napoleon III of France. When Rubião gets into a carriage alone with Sophia, she thinks he is still attracted to her. She panics and orders him to get out. Thinking he is Napoleon III, Rubião treats Sophia as if she were the emperor’s mistress, but eventually he leaves the carriage.
ellauri092.html on line 223: Many people have wondered, are baptist and methodist the same? The answer is no. However, there are some similarities. Both Baptists and Methodist are trinitarian. Both hold that the Bible is the central text in faith and practice (though groups within both the families of denominations would dispute the Bible’s authority). Both Baptists and Methodists have historically affirmed the divinity of Christ, justification by faith alone, and the reality of heaven for those who die in Christ, and eternal torment in hell for those who die unbelieving.
ellauri093.html on line 319: Officially naming and recognizing "eidership" is common to Open Brethren (cf. 1 Thessalonians 5:12–13), whereas many Exclusive Brethren assemblies believe that recognizing a man as an "eider" is too close to having clergy, and therefore a group of "leading brothers", none of whom has an official title of any kind, attempts to present issues to the entire group for it to decide upon, believing that the whole group must decide, not merely a body of "eiders". Traditionally, only men are allowed to speak (and, in some cases, attend) these decision-making meetings, although not all assemblies follow that rule today.
ellauri096.html on line 269: Binkley stipulates that the students do not forget. He needs to add that the students know that they will not forget. For the mere threat of a memory lapse sometimes suffices to undermine knowledge. Consider Professor Anesthesiology’s scheme for surprise tests: “A surprise test will be given either Wednesday or Friday with the help of an amnesia drug. If the test occurs on Wednesday, then the drug will be administered five minutes after Wednesday’s class. The drug will instantly erase memory of the test and the students will fill in the gap by confabulation.” You have just completed Wednesday’s class and so temporarily know that the test will be on Friday. Ten minutes after the class, you lose this knowledge. No drug was administered and there is nothing wrong with your memory. You are correctly remembering that no test was given on Wednesday. However, you do not know your memory is accurate because you also know that if the test was given Wednesday then you would have a pseudo-memory indistinguishable from your present memory. Despite not gaining any new evidence, you change your mind about the test occurring on Wednesday and lose your knowledge that the test is on Friday. (The change of belief is not crucial; you would still lack foreknowledge of the test even if you dogmatically persisted in believing that the test will be on Friday.)
ellauri096.html on line 275: The points made so far suggest a solution to the surprise test paradox (Sorensen 1988, 328–343). As Binkley (1968) asserts, the test would be a surprise even if the teacher waited until the last day. Yet it can still be true that the teacher’s announcement is informative. At the beginning of the week, the students are justified in believing the teacher’s announcement that there will be a surprise test. This announcement is equivalent to:
ellauri096.html on line 287: Since the surprise test paradox can also be formulated in terms of rational belief, there will be parallel adjustments for what we ought to believe. We are criticized for failures to believe the logical consequences of what we believe and criticized for believing propositions that conflict with each other. Anyone who meets these ideals of completeness and consistency will be unable to believe a range of consistent propositions that are accessible to other complete and consistent thinkers. In particular, they will not be able to believe propositions attributing specific errors to them, and propositions that entail these off-limit propositions.
ellauri097.html on line 163: Mencken ridiculed Albert Einstein's theory of general relativity, believing that "in the long run his curved space may be classed with the psychosomatic bumps of [Franz Josef] Gall and [Johann] Spurzheim." In his private letters, he said:
ellauri108.html on line 92: Rastas are monotheists, worshipping a singular God whom they call Jah. The term "Jah" is a shortened version of "Jehovah", the name of God in English translations of the Old Testament. Rastafari holds strongly to the immanence of this divinity; as well as regarding Jah as a deity, Rastas believe that Jah is inherent within each individual. This belief is reflected in the aphorism, often cited by Rastas, that "God is man and man is God", and Rastas speak of "knowing" Jah, in the biblical sense, rather than simply "believing" in him. In seeking to narrow the distance between humanity and divinity, Rastafari embraces mysticism.
ellauri108.html on line 94: Jesus is an important figure in Rastafari. However, practitioners reject the traditional Christian view of Jesus, particularly the depiction of him as a white European, believing that this is a perversion of the truth. They believe that Jesus was a black African, and that the white Jesus was a false god. Many Rastas regard Christianity as the creation of the white man; they treat it with suspicion out of the view that the oppressors (white Europeans) and the oppressed (black Africans) cannot share the same God. Many Rastas take the view that the God worshipped by most white Christians is actually the Devil, and a recurring claim among Rastas is that the Pope is Satan or the Antichrist. Rastas therefore often view Christian preachers as deceivers and regard Christianity as being guilty of furthering the oppression of the African diaspora, frequently referring to it as having perpetrated "mental enslavement".
ellauri108.html on line 100: Other Rastas see Selassie as embodying Jesus' teachings and essence but reject the idea that he was the literal reincarnation of Jesus. Members of the Twelve Tribes of Israel denomination, for instance, reject the idea that Selassie was the Second Coming, arguing that this event has yet to occur. From this perspective, Selassie is perceived as a messenger or emissary of God rather than a manifestation of God himself. Rastas holding to this view sometimes regard the deification of Haile Selassie as naïve or ignorant, in some cases thinking it as dangerous to worship a human being as God. There are various Rastas who went from believing that Haile Selassie was both God incarnate and the Second Coming of Jesus to seeing him as something distinct.
ellauri108.html on line 117: Rastas view Babylon as being responsible for both the Atlantic slave trade which removed enslaved Africans from their continent and the ongoing poverty which plagues the African diaspora. Rastas turn to Biblical scripture to explain the Atlantic slave trade, believing that the enslavement, exile, and exploitation of black Africans was punishment for failing to live up to their status as Jah's chosen people. Many Rastas, adopting a Pan-Africanist ethos, have criticised the division of Africa into nation-states, regarding this as a Babylonian development, and are often hostile to capitalist resource extraction from the continent. Rastas seek to delegitimise and destroy Babylon, something often conveyed in the Rasta aphorism "Chant down Babylon". Rastas often expect the white-dominated society to dismiss their beliefs as false, and when this happens they see it as confirmation of the correctness of their faith.
ellauri108.html on line 135: Rastafari promotes what it regards as the restoration of black manhood, believing that men in the African diaspora have been emasculated by Babylon. It espouses patriarchal principles, including the idea that women should submit to male leadership. External observers—including scholars such as Cashmore and Edmonds—have claimed that Rastafari accords women an inferior position to men. Rastafari women usually accept this subordinate position and regard it as their duty to obey their men; the academic Maureen Rowe suggested that women were willing to join the religion despite its restrictions because they valued the life of structure and discipline it provided. Rasta discourse often presents women as morally weak and susceptible to deception by evil, and claims that they are impure while menstruating. Rastas legitimise these gender roles by citing Biblical passages, particularly those in the Book of Leviticus and in the writings of Paul the Apostle. The Rasta Shop is a store selling items associated with Rastafari in the U.S. state of Oregon.
ellauri108.html on line 143: Rastas refer to their cultural and religious practices as "livity". Rastafari does not place emphasis on hierarchical structures. It has no professional priesthood, with Rastas believing that there is no need for a priest to act as mediator between the worshipper and divinity. It nevertheless has "elders", an honorific title bestowed upon those with a good reputation among the community. Although respected figures, they do not necessarily have administrative functions or responsibilities. When they do oversee ritual meetings, they are often responsible for helping to interpret current events in terms of Biblical scripture. Elders often communicate with each other through a network to plan movement events and form strategies.
ellauri108.html on line 170: 1968 saw the development of reggae in Jamaica, a musical style typified by slower, heavier rhythms than ska and the increased use of Jamaican Patois. Like calypso, reggae was a medium for social commentary, although it demonstrated a wider use of radical political and Rasta themes than were previously present in Jamaican popular music. Reggae artists incorporated Rasta ritual rhythms, and also adopted Rasta chants, language, motifs, and social critiques. Songs like The Wailers' "African Herbsman" and Peter Tosh's "Legalize It" referenced cannabis use, while tracks like The Melodians' "Rivers of Babylon" and Junior Byles' "Beat Down Babylon" referenced Rasta beliefs in Babylon. Reggae gained widespread international popularity during the mid-1970s, coming to be viewed by black people in many different countries as music of the oppressed. Many Rastas grew critical of reggae, believing that it had commercialised their religion. Although reggae contains much Rastafari symbolism, and the two are widely associated, the connection is often exaggerated by non-Rastas. Most Rastas do not listen to reggae music, and reggae has also been utilised by other religious groups, such as Protestant Evangelicals. Out of reggae came dub music; dub artists often employ Rastafari terminology, even when not Rastas themselves.
ellauri108.html on line 187: Rastas use their physical appearance as a means of visually demarcating themselves from non-Rastas like the whites. Male practitioners will often grow long beards, and many Rastas prefer to wear African styles of clothing, such as dashikis, rather than styles that originated in Western countries. However, it is the formation of hair into dreadlocks that is one of the most recognisable Rasta symbols. Rastas believe that dreadlocks are promoted in the Bible, specifically in the Book of Numbers, and regard them as a symbol of strength linked to the hair of the Biblical figure of Samson. They argue that their dreadlocks mark a covenant that they have made with Jah, and reflect their commitment to the idea of 'naturalness'. They also perceive the wearing of dreads as a symbolic rejection of Babylon and a refusal to conform to its norms regarding grooming aesthetics. Rastas are often critical of black people who straighten their hair, believing that it is an attempt to imitate white European hair and thus reflects alienation from a person's African identity. Sometimes this dreadlocked hair is then shaped and styled, often inspired by a lion's mane symbolising Haile Selassie, who is regarded as "the Conquering Lion of Judah".
ellauri108.html on line 222: In the mid-1970s, reggae's international popularity exploded. The most successful reggae artist was Bob Marley, who—according to Cashmore—"more than any other individual, was responsible for introducing Rastafarian themes, concepts and demands to a truly universal audience". Reggae's popularity led to a growth in "pseudo-Rastafarians", individuals who listened to reggae and wore Rasta clothing but did not share its belief system. Many Rastas were angered by this, believing it commercialised their religion.
ellauri108.html on line 256: Rastas often claim that—rather than converting to the religion—they were actually always a Rasta and that their embrace of its beliefs was merely the realisation of this. There is no formal ritual carried out to mark an individual's entry into the Rastafari movement, although once they do join an individual often changes their name, with many including the prefix "Ras". Rastas regard themselves as an exclusive and elite community, membership of which is restricted to those who have the "insight" to recognise Haile Selassie's importance. Practitioners thus often regard themselves as the "enlightened ones" who have "seen the light". Many of them see no point in establishing good relations with non-Rastas, believing that the latter will never accept Rastafari doctrine as truth.
ellauri108.html on line 474: Rastas turn to Biblical scripture to explain the Atlantic slave trade, believing that the enslavement, exile, and exploitation of black Africans was punishment for failing to live up to their status as Jah's chosen people.
ellauri111.html on line 112: At the Council of Trent (1546) the Roman Catholic institution pronounced the following apocryphal books sacred. They asserted that the apocryphal books together with unwritten tradition are of God and are to be received and venerated as the Word of God. So now you have the Bible, the Apocrypha and Catholic Tradition as co-equal sources of truth for the Catholic. In reality, it seems obvious that the Bible is the last source of truth for Catholics. Roman Catholic doctrine comes primarily from tradition stuck together with a few Bible names. In my reading of Catholic materials, I find notes like this: "You have to keep the Bible in perspective." Catholics have been deceived into not believing that the Bible is God's complete revelation for man (but they can come out of these deceptions in an instant if they will only believe the Bible as it is written) .
ellauri111.html on line 431: But the Lord Jesus Christ did not die for nothing. Repenting of our sins and believing in the Lord Jesus Christ is the only way that we can make it into heaven. Righteousness does NOT come by the law and good works and rituals prescribed by false religions like Catholicism, Islam, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Seventh Day Adventism, Hinduism, etc.
ellauri111.html on line 433: We need Jesus to pay the price for our sins in the right currency. We cannot do it. Righteousness comes by repenting of our sins and believing on the Lord Jesus Christ and his blood that was shed to pay for our sins. God will not accept made up religions and attempts to please him.
ellauri156.html on line 311: Now, having looked at the big picture, let's concentrate on the juicy details. The text informs us that David sees this woman bathing and notes that she is very beautiful. It is sometimes thought that David saw Bathsheba unclothed as she bathed herself publicly, and that the sight of her (unclothed/partially) body prompted David to act as he did. Virtually the identical words employed in our text (“very beautiful in appearance”) are found in Genesis 24:16 of Rebekah, as she came to the well with a water jug on her shoulder. She was neither naked nor partially clothed. Similar (though not identical) descriptions are found, where no exposure of the woman is indicated at all (see Genesis 12:11; 26:7; 29:17; Esther 1:1). I believe one of the reasons David summons Bathsheba to his palace is that he has not seen all that he wishes. (Haahaa! Bob, you are a little too bashful here. Most likely he wants to try on what he saw, like St. Thomas who wanted to put his finger in the wound. Seeing is not believing.)
ellauri156.html on line 812: That is precisely what the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ does for us. We were dead in our trespasses and sins (Ephesians 2:1-3). We were blinded to the immensity of our sins (2 Corinthians 4:4). The coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, His perfect life, His innocent and sacrificial death, His literal and physical resurrection are all historical events. But the gospel is also a story, a true story. When we read the New Testament Gospels, we read a story that is even more dramatic, more amazing, more disturbing than the story Nathan told David. When we see the way unbelieving men treated our Lord, we should be shocked, horrified, and angered. We should cry out, “They deserve to die!” And that they do. But the Gospel is not written only to show us their sins -- those who actually heard Jesus and cried, “Crucify Him, Crucify Him” -- it is written so that the Spirit of God can cry out in our hearts, “Thou art the man! Yo mon!” When we see the way men treated Jesus, we see the way we would treat him, if he were here. We see how we treat him today. With laughter and ridicule. And that, my friend, reveals the immensity of our sin, and the immensity of our need for repentance and forgiveness. Words, words, words. Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me.
ellauri158.html on line 692: All men are born ignorant of the causes of things, that all have the desire to seek for what is useful to them, and that they are conscious of such desire. Herefrom it follows, first, that men think themselves free inasmuch as they are conscious of their volitions and desires, and never even dream, in their ignorance, of the causes which have disposed them so to wish and desire. Secondly, that men do all things for an end, namely, for that which is useful to them, and which they seek. Thus it comes to pass that they only look for a knowledge of the final causes of events, and when these are learned, they are content, as having no cause for further doubt. If they cannot learn such causes from external sources, they are compelled to turn to considering themselves, and reflecting what end would have induced them personally to bring about the given event, and thus they necessarily judge other natures by their own. Further, as they find in themselves and outside themselves many means which assist them not a little in the search for what is useful, for instance, eyes for seeing, teeth for chewing, herbs and animals for yielding food, the sun for giving light, the sea for breeding fish, &c., they come to look on the whole of nature as a means for obtaining such conveniences. Now as they are aware, that they found these conveniences and did not make them, they think they have cause for believing, that some other being has made them for their use. As they look upon things as means, they cannot believe them to be self—created; but, judging from the means which they are accustomed to prepare for themselves, they are bound to believe in some ruler or rulers of the universe endowed with human freedom, who have arranged and adapted everything for human use. They are bound to estimate the nature of such rulers (having no information on the subject) in accordance with their own nature, and therefore they assert that the gods ordained everything for the use of man, in order to bind man to themselves and obtain from him the highest honor.
ellauri159.html on line 1382: Hypotheses and options, 1. Pascal's wager, 5. Clifford's veto, 8. Psychological causes of belief, 9. Thesis of the Essay, 11. Empiricism and absolutism, 12. Objective certitude and its unattainability, 13. Two different sorts of risks in believing, 17. Some risk unavoidable, 19. Faith may bring forth its own verification, 22. Logical conditions of religious belief, 25.
ellauri161.html on line 546: The targets of the satire – incompetent governments, media, tech billionaires, populace believing in politics not science – are obvious. There’s a shorthand that makes each character’s real world avatar easy to get hence the laughs but does that undermine the film’s intelligence? No, it's spot on.
ellauri162.html on line 191: [1 Corinthians 7:12-15] If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her. And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him. For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. But if the unbeliever leaves, let him (or her) do so. A believing man or woman is not bound in such circumstances.
ellauri163.html on line 893: But now comes something rather suspect: There are no gospels which are immortal, but neither is there any reason for believing that humanity is incapable of inventing new ones (1954, pp. 475-476).
ellauri164.html on line 379: I wanted to like this book so much more than I did. I actually found it incredibly difficult to understand. Some of it, I think, was that it was poorly translated. I read a 1962 edition that doesn't even cite a translator -- so many of the sentences were so convoluted as to be utterly obtuse. Poor translation or witless reader? I never could figure out why Mlle Chantal was such an angry bitch and why she insisted on tormenting the priest. What was her secret? Was the priest an alcoholic or just terminally sick? Gay? Why did M le Comte come to hate the priest? These are just some of the basic narrative issues I couldn't figure out. Forget the whole spiritual aspect--much of what the priest mused on and felt was incomprehensible to me as he described it. I can't help wondering if I'd have understood it if I had read it in French. Or maybe I'm just so spiritually challenged (in a God believing, Catholic way) that I can't comprehend it when it's described. All of that said, there were profoundly moving passages here and there, but over all I don't begin to know what I read. It's rather embarrassing actually--I feel so simple! (less)
ellauri164.html on line 577: but God Himself. The Lord had committed to Moses the burden of leading His people, while the mighty Angel went before them in all their journeyings and directed all their travels. Because they were so ready to forget that God was leading them by His Angel, and to ascribe to man that which God's power alone could perform, He had proved them and tested them, to see whether they would obey Him. At every trial they failed. Instead of believing in, and acknowledging, God, who had strewed their path with evidences of His power and signal tokens of His care and love, they distrusted Him and ascribed their leaving Egypt to Moses, charging him as the cause of all their disasters. Moses had borne with their stubbornness with remarkable forbearance. At one time they threatened to stone him.
ellauri164.html on line 804: It often happens that Bible believing Christians reject the concept of allegory as being a legitimate way of interpreting the Bible. This comes from the belief that any way of interpreting Scripture other than literal meaning is false, particularly as it concerns Genesis 3 and evolution. But in fact allegory is common in the Bible – Christ makes frequent use of it in His parables – and even Genesis 3 is allegory (which does not preclude its literal interpretation as well.) In this section we shall examine the allegorical significance of the staff and the rock.
ellauri171.html on line 1013: Jezebel is characterized as totally evil in the biblical text and beyond it: in the New Testament her name is a generic catchword for a whoring, non-believing female adversary (Revelations 2:20); in Judeo-Christian traditions, she is evil. The Bible is careful not to refer to her as queen. And yet, this is precisely what she seems to have been. Some early Jewish, albeit post-biblical, sources deconstruct the general picture: “Four women exercised government in the world: Jezebel and Athaliah from Israel, Semiramis and Vashti from the [gentile] nations” (in a Jewish Midrash for the Book of Esther, Esther Rabbah)
ellauri182.html on line 43: At times in the story, Mikage thinks about fat and freedom fries while searching for meaning. Despite believing in premonitions, she does not believe in fate, but in the individual freedom of “constantly making choices.” I realized that the world did not exist for my benefit. Hoo hoo jaa jaa. Keskittyisit bansku vaan tekemään niitä kylmiä paloja. Maaginen realismi on syvältä.
ellauri196.html on line 862: Mut tässä Montaigne osui naulan kantaan: The current crisis is strictly tied to the human condition, to our existence as human beings, to our illusion of believing ourselves to be privileged beings, the only ones who believe they are the masters of their destiny and the depositaries of a destiny which no other creature can lay claim to. Now that´s a fucking bad idea, and always was.
ellauri219.html on line 592: Following the surrender of Japan, Rawls became part of General MacArthur's occupying army and was promoted to sergeant. But he became disillusioned with the military when he saw the aftermath of the atomic blast in Hiroshima. Rawls then disobeyed an order to discipline a fellow soldier, "believing no punishment was justified," and was "demoted back to a private." Disenchanted, he left the military in January 1946.
ellauri223.html on line 204: In 1625, Bacon became estranged from his wife, apparently believing her of adultery with Underhill. He rewrote his will, which had been quite generous to her, leaving her lands, goods, and income, to revoke it all:
ellauri260.html on line 225: Joseph Martin McCabe (12 November 1867 – 10 January 1955) was an English writer and speaker on freethought (vapaa-ajattelija), after having been a Roman Catholic priest earlier in his life. He was "one of the great mouthpieces of freethought in England". Becoming a critic of the Catholic Church, McCabe joined groups such as the Rationalist Association and the National Secular Society. He criticised Christianity from a rationalist perspective, but also was involved in the South Place Ethical Society which grew out of dissenting Protestantism and was a precursor of modern secular humanism. William Ferguson wrote of him: "He was bitterly anti-Catholic but also actively undermined religious faith in general." McCabe was also an advocate of women's rights and worked with Mrs. Pankhurst and Mrs. Wolstenholme-Elmy on speeches favoring giving British women the right to vote. McCabe is also known for his inclusion in, and irritation at, G. K. Chesterton's funny book Heretics. Funny is the opposite of not funny, nothing else, defended Chesterton. He should know. In 1920 McCabe publicly debated the Spiritualist Arthur Conan Doyle on the claims of Spiritualism at Queen's Hall in London. Various scientists such as William Crookes and Cesare Lombroso had been duped into believing Spiritualism by mediumship tricks.
ellauri262.html on line 173: MacDonald rejected the doctrine of penal substitutionary atonement as developed by John Calvin, which argues that Christ has taken the place of sinners and is punished by the wrath of God in their place, believing that in turn it raised serious questions about the character and nature of God.[citation needed] Instead, he taught that Christ had come to save people from their sins, and not from a Divine penalty for their sins: the problem was not the need to appease a wrathful God, but the disease of cosmic evil itself.[citation needed] MacDonald frequently described the atonement in terms similar to the Christus Victor theory.
ellauri270.html on line 529: Enoch Arden, poem by Alfred, Lord Tennyson, published in 1864. In the poem, Enoch Arden is a happily married fisherman who suffers financial problems and becomes a merchant seaman. He is shipwrecked, and, after 10 years on a desert island, he returns home to discover that his beloved wife, believing him dead, has remarried and has a new child. Not wishing to spoil his wife’s happiness, he never lets her know that he is alive.
ellauri285.html on line 226: I have also argued (Lasonen-Aarnio 2010, 2021) that there is such a thing as “unreasonable knowledge”: there are also cases in which a subject is negatively evaluable, even to be blamed for believing a proposition p, even if she knows p. Jos voittaa zägällä ei voi saada kiitosta, väittää Mirja. Paskanmarjat, voittaja saa kiitoxet vaikka olisikin tehnyt virheitä (Stalin), häviäjä saa turpiin ettei kotiin löydä (Hitler).
ellauri309.html on line 509: Billy Graham varttui maitotilallisen poikana Pohjois-Carolinan maaseudulla. He started to read books from an early age and loved to read novels for boys, especially Tarzan. Like Tarzan, he would hang on the trees and gave the popular Tarzan yell. According to his father, that yelling led him to become a minister. Vuonna 1934 Graham osallistui evankelista Mordecai Hamin kokoukseen ja teki henkilökohtaisen uskonratkaisun. Ham had a reputation for racism and anti-Semitism. He believed and preached on various topics based on classical anti-Semitic canards such as believing Jews had special access to political power and influence and that they represent a subversive social force. The targets for his preaching were often "nebulous rings of Jewish, Catholic or Black conspirators plotting to destroy white protestant America."
ellauri324.html on line 273: Why is America in such poor shape, with its crumbling roads, crappy power distribution, and pitiful public transport systems? It is because Americans have been propagandized for decades into believing that “liberty” is the ultimate virtue, and this “liberty” is so valuable that it justifies the cost of living as a selfish asshole under a dysfunctional government. “Raise taxes to pay for public infrastructure?” “Jeez Louise; over my dead body! Taxation is theft, government is bad!” For much of the 20th century, America defined itself against the collectivist USSR, and the fatuous argument was made that since everything was under the control of the state in the USSR, the US government should do as little as possible, apart from outspending the evil Commies in national defense.
ellauri384.html on line 214: For me, the reason is because those things are fundamentally hard to believe. If I told you that I had a unicorn friend named Gary, and that Gary had created the universe, and that he was my own personal special friend, and Gary loved me, and Gary was going to take me and everybody I care about to a magic kingdom in the clouds called “Sallbach” where everybody gets a flying pony, but if you don’t love Gary and accept him as your best, most special friend, then he’s going to send you to a place called “Moplach” where you will be drowned in molasses, not only would have have a hard time believing in Sallbach and Moplach…
xxx/ellauri068.html on line 123: Staying at a bed-and-breakfast, Borat and Azamat are stunned to learn their hosts are Jewish. The two escape after throwing money at two cockroaches, believing they are Jews. Borat attempts to buy a handgun to defend himself, but is turned away because he is not an American citizen, so he buys a bear instead.
xxx/ellauri085.html on line 258: Also how these types think about themselves and what they supposedly contribute. Yes some contribute a lot while others have a sense of self worth that far exceeds reality believing they contribute more therefore work all the time.
xxx/ellauri091.html on line 384: Right: Strong supporters of the Second Amendment (the right to bear arms), believing it’s a deterrent against authoritarian rule and the right to protect oneself. Generally, does not support banning any type of weaponry.
xxx/ellauri114.html on line 350: Rev. 12:13-17 tells us that after Satan is confined to Earth he will go after “the woman”, symbolic of Israel. But the woman will be given the wings of a great eagle, enabling her to flee into the desert to a place prepared for her, where she will be taken care of for a time, times and half a time, which is 3 ½ years, the duration of the Great Tribulation. This agrees with Matt. 24:15-21 where the Lord warned the believing remnant of Israel to flee to the mountains to escape the Great Tribulation. The closest mountains to Jerusalem are in Moab and Edom.
xxx/ellauri114.html on line 357: Combining these prophecies we have the anti-Christ, now indwelt by Satan, determined to rid the world of God’s people once and for all. Heeding the Lord’s 2,000 year old warning, the believing remnant will flee to the mountains of Edom where the city of Petra has been standing empty for centuries, as if in preparation. The phrase “wings of a great eagle” in Rev. 12:14 is reminiscent of Exodus 19:4 where the Lord used the same phrase to describe the way he delivered Israel from the Egyptians. This implies the same kind of supernatural assistance, such as when Satan spews out a river of water to sweep the woman away. But the Lord will open the earth to swallow the river and save the woman. This will enrage Satan, but he will leave the woman and go after other followers of Jesus (Rev. 12:15-17).
xxx/ellauri114.html on line 377: From the above we can see that it won’t be out of any consideration for Edom, Moab, and Ammon that God will protect them from the anti-Christ, but out of a need to preserve the believing remnant of Israel. After the 2nd Coming the homelands of these three antagonists of Israel will become desolate wastelands forever.
xxx/ellauri114.html on line 384: A: The Iranians are the modern day Persians who originated in Elam, not Edom. Edom was the birthplace of the Ammonites and the Moabites and was later inhabited by the family of Esau, Jacob’s brother. Edom got its name from Esau, and is called Jordan today. Elam was located further east on the other side of Iraq, where Iran is today. Obadiah prophesied against the Edomites who were driven out of their capital (Petra) by the Nabateans, a Bedouin people descended from Ishmael, in fulfillment of Obadiah’s prophecy. Many believe that during the Great Tribulation, the Jordanians will hide believing Jews in Petra where God will protect them against the anti-Christ. The area is called Bosrah in Isaiah 63.
xxx/ellauri114.html on line 688: he Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches that a significant portion of its members are descended from or adopted into the tribe of Ephraim, believing that they are charged with restoring the lost tribes in the latter days, as prophesied by Isaiah. Along with members of the tribe of Judah, members of the tribe of Ephraim are believed to be playing an important leadership roles for covenant Israel in the last days. Members' lineage is declared through patriarchal blessings.
xxx/ellauri123.html on line 762: The impassioned Humbert constantly searches for discreet forms of fulfilling his sexual urges, usually via the smallest physical contact with Dolores. When Dolores is sent to summer camp, Humbert receives a letter from Charlotte, who confesses her love for him and gives him an ultimatum – he is to either marry her or move out immediately. Initially terrified, Humbert then begins to see the charm in the situation of being Dolores' stepfather, and so marries Charlotte for instrumental reasons (päästäxeen salaa työntämään Lolan piccu tacoon isoa munakoisoa). Charlotte later discovers Humbert's diary, in which she learns of his desire for her daughter and the disgust Charlotte arouses in him. Shocked and humiliated, Charlotte decides to flee with Dolores and writes letters addressed to her friends warning them of Humbert. Disbelieving Humbert´s false assurance that the diary is a sketch for a future novel, Charlotte runs out of the house to send the letters but is killed by a swerving car. Humbert destroys the letters and retrieves Dolores from camp, claiming that her mother has fallen seriously ill and has been hospitalized. He then takes her to a high-end hotel that Charlotte had earlier recommended. Humbert knows he will feel guilty if he consciously rapes Dolores, and so tricks her into taking a sedative by saying it is a vitamin. As he waits for the pill to take effect, he wanders through the hotel and meets a mysterious man who seems to be aware of Humbert´s plan for Dolores. Humbert excuses himself from the conversation and returns to the hotel room. There, he discovers that he had been fobbed with a milder drug, as Dolores is merely drowsy and wakes up frequently, drifting in and out of sleep. He dares not touch her that night. In the morning, Dolores reveals to Humbert that she actually has already lost her virginity, having engaged in sexual activity with an older boy at a different camp a year ago. He immediately begins sexually abusing (fucking) her. And they lived happily ever after.
xxx/ellauri127.html on line 60: However, Kilmer's eldest son, Kenton, declares that the poem does not apply to any one tree—that it could apply equally to any. "Trees" was written in an upstairs bedroom at the family's home in Mahwah, New Jersey, that "looked out down a hill, on our well-wooded lawn". Kenton Kilmer stated that while his father was "widely known for his affection for trees, his affection was certainly not sentimental—the most distinguished feature of Kilmer's property was a colossal woodpile outside his home". The house stood in the middle of a forest and what lawn it possessed was obtained only after Kilmer had spent months of weekend toil in chopping down trees, pulling up stumps, and splitting logs. Kilmer's neighbors had difficulty in believing that a man who could do that could also be a poet.
xxx/ellauri157.html on line 450: In a world of fear and brokenness, Rabbi Nachman brought healing through his stories and his wisdom. He has become an iconic figure in the universe of Hasidic thinking, and today, thousands of people make pilgrimages to his grave in Uman in central Ukraine, usually around the High Holidays. People go there believing that the journey will “fix” their brokenness.
xxx/ellauri200.html on line 306: I am not believing in ceremony
xxx/ellauri234.html on line 496: I'm believing it works out better for me on the next go around, what with this vasectomy and all, I really do wish that for myself. And I hope my unborn children perhaps bury me someday. In a garbage bag. Harri Sirolan äiti toivoi että sen 2 poikaa seisoisi sen kuolinvuoteen vieressä kuin kynttilät. Harrin tuikku valitettavasti pääsi sammumaan ennen aikojaan.
xxx/ellauri255.html on line 362: Nekrasov's film The Magnitsky Act – Behind the Scenes, produced in Norway by Piraya Film, supported by a number of European film funds and the public Franco-German TV network Arte TV and completed in 2016, caused a major controversy. The film alleges that western politicians and media were "misled" by Bill Browder, a U.S. born investor and campaigner, into believing that the Russian tax consultant Sergei Magnitsky had been persecuted and killed for exposing corruption. Bill Browder's version of Magnitsky's life and death has been widely accepted across the world, and became the basis for legislations and sanctions in a number of countries, first of all the U.S. The premiere of Nekrasov's film at the European Parliament, scheduled for April 26, 2016, was stopped by Heidi Hautala at the last moment. A TV broadcast in Germany and France and film's public screenings were cancelled due to Browder's legal challenges.
63