|
Post by rafael on Jun 20, 2008 1:29:21 GMT 10
Now choose one: don't believe God exists and wait for our final days in this world that we are not holding any assurance at all... or believe and have faith in God even if we cannot see Him but we feel and believed that the air we breathed comes from Him... that's faith! Science cannot explain that! Migy The way you explained things tells that you seperate science from faith (religion) or whatever. Can you prove that Science is agaisnt faith?
|
|
|
Post by rafael on Jun 20, 2008 1:45:15 GMT 10
You are giving yourself away here Rafael You easily exposed what you really know by leaning from old shool paraphernalias of skepticism (which I also doubt). If you look closely on the details of Darwin's researches and studies in his book Autobiography of Charles Darwin 1st Edition written by himself, you'll be able to realize the true intention of his research which was discriminately manipulated by skeptics around the world just to prove a point (even though). They proved a point alright by dispoving their own basis of stance. Rather than having positive results for them, using evolution against creationism resulted into more problems for skeptics because they passed over on the knowledge that Darwin himself used Gnostism in the line of Hebraic notion in all of his research studies.
Contradictions you say? Not quite In fact, the study of Darwin's Evolution as he intially intended is modelled into the nature of God. Darwin believed in God; but, because of his Gnostic belief, he concluded that God is altogether removed from this world. He always believed that God is not personally involved in this world and this is clearly implicated in his question about the swallow.
This comes to mind:
a) The Bible did not start with Adam and Eve having computer and electricity; instead they were let out of the garden because of sin and to progress through labor b) Nakalagay sa Ecclesiastes 3:20 na
"All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again."
at sinabi din iyan ni Job sa 10:9
Remember, I beseech thee, that thou hast MADE ME as a clay, and wilt thou bring me into dust again?"
at pati si Abraham sinabi din iyan bago parusahan ng Diyos ang Sodom na siya ay galing din sa "Lupa at Abo"
As you can see Rafael, if evolution came about due to the ground elements of Earth even before secular humanism has used it as a part of its doctrines, the Bible had already stated that the first man was created through a formation from elemental ground. Thus, Abraham and Job were the first God believers to admit to have came from dust and to dusk they'll return.
You can say that they were ebolosyunis kaso nga lang hindi cla mga atheists
Btw, try reading the princple of non-overlapping magisteriaor NOMA, then you'll be able to know why I can easily use the doctrines of skepticism against them just like you Quite interesting, but the ever existinence of skepticism to know about a God seems to be everlasting.
|
|
|
Post by Always on Jun 25, 2008 15:00:22 GMT 10
And look what happened to the old USSR and what is happening now to China Kapit sa Patalim ba ang tawag jan o Kapit sa Diyos? Alam ko na Hawak Kamay at di kita iiwan sa paglakbay
|
|
|
Post by rafael on Nov 27, 2008 0:55:08 GMT 10
USSR now has no international debt whatsoever,they paid their dues. Unlike the USA who is so much indebted, and who hides its Imperial Church in the guise of a Christian Church.
|
|
|
Post by Always on Nov 30, 2008 10:28:29 GMT 10
Reminder of the week:
"Do your research first so that you will not be left behind."
When the United States of America and the IMF helped the old USSR from the ashes of bankcruptcy, one of the promulgations set by the U.S. for the old empire in order to stand again on its own was to cancel and to clear all debts to other countries.
In a way it is in analogy with the term tabula rasa. Try researching on it, wilyah.
|
|
|
Post by leanne. on Dec 8, 2008 23:15:32 GMT 10
|
|
|
Post by rafael on Dec 23, 2008 1:37:16 GMT 10
Reminder of the week:
"Do your research first so that you will not be left behind."
When the United States of America and the IMF helped the old USSR from the ashes of bankcruptcy, one of the promulgations set by the U.S. for the old empire in order to stand again on its own was to cancel and to clear all debts to other countries.
In a way it is in analogy with the term tabula rasa. Try researching on it, wilyah.
If the United States set that promulgation, why don't other coutries get the same way? Why can't you just admit that Russia has paid its debts, and the US is indebted more today due to its ailing economy? That the US is more responsible for the world's economic downturn and in return could not help itself heading towards serious economic recession.
|
|
|
Post by rafael on Dec 23, 2008 1:50:14 GMT 10
As of March 28, 2001
Russia has rejected an offer of a new loan from the International Monetary Fund, insisting it has enough financial resources and wanted to stop being "under constant IMF control".
so what has promulgation of any kind do with Russia?
MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti economic commentator Mikhail Khmelev) - The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank no longer interest Russia as sources of loans. It stopped listening to their advice long ago. The only thing that still attracts Moscow to these financial institutions is their possible assistance in recovering multibillion-dollar debts from other countries. It was with this purpose that a Russian delegation went to Washington to attend the spring session of the IMF and the World Bank.
The country's total foreign debt stood at $52 billion, or 5.1% of GDP, on January 1, 2007. In 2005, the country repaid its debt to the IMF early. The Finance Ministry is not worried about its debt to the World Bank, which is the cheapest to service of all the debts it has. So the only thing these international financial organizations can do for Russia now is to help it recover debts from other countries that it inherited from the Soviet Union.
|
|
|
Post by Always on Dec 23, 2008 13:04:51 GMT 10
You're not getting my point Rafael
Neway, MERRY CHRISTMAS TO YOU MY FRIEND!!!
Let's say, if you have a savings of only $100.00 but you owe the banks more than hundreds of thousands of dollars and the only way to get out of debt is to file banckruptcy.
Once the court heard of your case and decision has been rendered it is the action of the court to order the banks not to collect from you anymore. Did get it so far?
"If the United States set that promulgation, why don't other coutries get the same way?"
And fyi, countries which face the same scenario get sthe same benefits as a standard procedure per se. Please try to research on that.
"Why can't you just admit that Russia has paid its debts, and the US is indebted more ..."
Why will I admit on something to which I never denied in the first place. The point is, who went banckrupt first, the capitalism of the United States or the communism of Russia?
Btw, Russia never paid its debts because almost all of them were FORGIVEN in the first place.
[/b][/color]
|
|
|
Post by rafael on Jan 3, 2009 4:30:00 GMT 10
Btw, Russia never paid its debts because almost all of them were FORGIVEN in the first place.
NO, Russia never paid its debts by default. Russia has paid back practically all of its Soviet-era debt. Now you have to do the research about this since you started it.
The ultimate question, of course, is whether Russia's debt is large enough to be a significant worry.
The answer is a definitive no. Experts at the International Monetary Fund say that the country's gold and hard currency reserves and the Stabilization Fund are more than adequate to protect Russia from any sudden shocks caused by a change in business conditions.
They also add that the policy of internal borrowing pursued by the government is not an unreasonable one.
Russian national debt is only 8% of the GDP. That figure, if compared with the debt of such developed countries as the U.S., is very low, fund experts say.
|
|
|
Post by rafael on Jan 3, 2009 4:30:59 GMT 10
Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to all.
|
|
|
Post by Always on Jan 9, 2009 19:00:33 GMT 10
"NO, Russia never paid its debts by default. Russia has paid back practically all of its Soviet-era debt. Now you have to do the research about this since you started it."
HUH? If Russia paid them all back as you say, then, please show us your proof by referencing such from any articles or documents. Now, you really have to research on this one.
|
|
|
Post by rafael on Jan 12, 2009 2:53:34 GMT 10
I repeat, Russia's payment of its debt was never a default as you mentioned.
Russia's economic power lies in its key natural resources - oil and gas. The energy giant Gazprom is controversially close to the Russian state and critics say it is little more than an economic and political tool of the Kremlin.
At a time of increased concern over energy security, Moscow has more than once reminded the rest of the world of the power it wields as a major energy supplier. In 2006, it cut gas to Ukraine after a row between the countries, a move that also affected the supply of gas to Western Europe .
Overall, the past eight years represent a period of numerous economic successes. Growth has been strong, unemployment and inflation have fallen and the government has paid off most of its foreign debt.
Today, we see a very different economic environment. From being the world's 22nd largest economy in 1999, Russia ranked 11th in 2006, and could even rise to ninth position in 2008, according to IMF forecasts.
Dollar GDP in 2007 is projected to reach $1.3 trillion, 6.4 times higher than the reported figure in 1999. The average salary has increased to $540 per month in August 2007, from $65 per month in August 1999, and the population's real disposable income doubled between 1999 and 2006
|
|
|
Post by Always on Jan 12, 2009 11:36:50 GMT 10
Again, HUH? ;D Did you not post this:
"Russia has paid back practically all of its Soviet-era debt."
Don' tell the P7 readers that you never posted such. AMININ
You do not need to have a 20/20 vision because all things base on lies cannot help any argument. This is the main reason as to why I asked you to research on the term TABULA RASA. For the simple fact of what the New Russia is experiencing as a NEW BEGINNING since its "Collapse" has been from the help of the United States of America & the IMF specifically.
But instead of admitting that, you post yet another lie. So I am asking you again, where is your source of such claim.
|
|
|
Post by rafael on Jan 15, 2009 4:30:13 GMT 10
Before throwing your accusations, you must also post in this board on how you get the idea that Russia paid its debt by default. If you are reading my posts you will have an easier grasp of how Russia boast of its gas.
|
|
|
Post by Always on Jan 15, 2009 18:05:03 GMT 10
"Before throwing your accusations, you must also post in this board on how you get the idea that Russia paid its debt by default. If you are reading my posts you will have an easier grasp of how Russia boast of its gas."
BABBLING AGAIN?
It seems that you just don't know what you're talking about? What default? Do you know what default means? It means that if you have a loan and you didn't pay it, then, you're on default. Got it? so, ...
* Please tell us how did Russia pay its debt if the country is in default?
;D As you can see, default is of not monetary value except that it is an escape in payment.
This is the reason why you kept on reading and posting things which you don't even try to understand them - embarrassing concept of misunderstanding.
Neway, let me cite you the overview of rules & regulations of a general banckruptcy proceedings; and you may ask any specialty lawyer regarding such overview because ...
1] it provides for a development of a plan that allows USSR , which is unable to pay its creditors (suplliers & countries), to resolve it debts through the division of its assets among its creditors.
2] This supervised divisions also allows the interest of all its creditors to be treated with some measure of equality.
Certain banckruptcy proceedings as is with the help of the United Sates of America & the IMF as in relation to the collapse of USSR, it allows the country to stay affloat and use revenue generated resources to resolve its debt through privatization and through ideology in capitalism. OMT, an ...
3] Additional purpose of backruptcy is to allow USSR to free itself (to be discharged) of financial obligations its government has accumulated while they are attempting #1 through re-organization or restructuring.
Do you still remember my post on Nov. 29th of last year?
"When the United States of America and the IMF helped the old USSR from the ashes of bankcruptcy, one of the promulgations set by the U.S. for the old empire in order to stand again on its own was to cancel and to clear all debts to other countries.With the influx of billions of dollars from the support of the United States and the IMF, debts to other countries were cleared and cancelled until the tranching program has been put in place together with the reform programs.
Below is transcript from AMERICA'S DEFENSE MONITOR with regards to Russia's Time of Troubles and as to how the United States rescued the country from FALL.
www.cdi.org/adm/Transcripts/812/
[/color][/b]
|
|
|
Post by Always on Jan 15, 2009 23:11:53 GMT 10
Going back to the course in sociology, USSR's communistic ideologies in economics failed as attached to the collective behaviour of its social institution as a functioning whole when it relates to its own DOWNFALL.
In redeeming the fate of the USSR, the United State of America authorized in October 1992 FOUR HUNDRED TEN BILLION in U.S. DOLLARS (yes, US$410B) in bilateral assistance. In addition, the United States endorsed US$12 Billion increase in its share of the IMF. The bill introduced into the U.S. Congress in April 1992 was signed into law under the "FREEDOM [Freedom for Russia and Emerging Eurasian Democracies and Open Markets ] Support Act."
Click here for review:
* findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1584/is_n43_v3/ai_12964593
Another thing, in order for you to understand the law signed by former Pres. Bush in 1992, you must study the essential nature of Tabula Rasa or else you will have a hard time comprehending as to why USSR must start with a clean slate while its debts are put on hold or made in deferred (not default) state under a tranching program.
Why do you think there's a need of securitized mortgage debt in the Post-USSR era?
* financialservices.house.gov/banking/91098tre.htm
Now that I have showed and posted here my sources & articles about the COLLAPSE of USSR and its debts; and how the United States of America & the IMF came to the rescue, it is your turn to show your justification in your claim posted on Nov. 26, 2008 that states, "[/color] USSR now has no international debt whatsoever,they paid their dues. " O'Yeah?
P7 readers are waiting
[/b]
|
|
|
Post by Always on Jan 16, 2009 14:45:41 GMT 10
Since I know that you will have a hard time researching and justiying your afore-said claim, let me play into your other post. You are prodding too much about the Russia's fuel & gas resources specifically the ones from Gazprom. True that Russian economy lies in the success of Gazprom as in the same sentiment that Guam's economy is attached to the success of its tourism. But you are forgetting one thing though ... ... ... ?
Gazprom of today is a product of capitalism, which is fixed from the turmoil of the Old Soviet era. Gazprom became the proteg'e of free enterprise being 50.002% state-owned whilst the difference is stake owned by private citizens. Even you can buy stocks from the firm if you have the funds to do so.
So whatever Russia has been doing now for the better, it is not because of communism and false ideologies BUT BECAUSE of the free & open enterprise, rights to ownership, and the healing power of capitalism from a wicked past.
Let me just leave my post at that for now.
|
|
|
Post by rowtide on May 23, 2009 2:10:33 GMT 10
More on Christian Sociology in biblical Perspection.
Ano bang magandang halimbawa dito. Maari dito ang problemang pang lipunan gaya ng poverty, pervertion, crime atbp na kasangkot ang biblical principles.
|
|
|
Post by linsi on May 24, 2009 20:45:31 GMT 10
Sociological aspect ba? Pwede ba dito ang about family? Halimbawa love ,courtship and marriage about both faiths of different faiths. Should you marry somebody outside your faith? hmmm na blog ko na to a
|
|
|
Post by Always on Jun 1, 2009 9:27:26 GMT 10
Capitalism has it own cracks that need to be cemented on time in order not to leak its weaknesses. Sociological degradation is one of the causality of such motion. Poverty is inclined to happen overtime if the abuse of the government is not dealt with on time.
|
|
|
Post by linsi on Jun 9, 2009 16:02:52 GMT 10
Sociological aspect-
Would you marry someone with a different faith from yours? Ano ano po ba ang mga pros and cons neto, - the family is the basic unit of society ika nga-
migs and jiro and all sana post ng ideas
|
|
|
Post by leanne. on Jun 11, 2009 21:54:26 GMT 10
May risk talaga ang pagpapakasal eh, pero para sa meh mas gusto ko yung pareho kami ng faith. Paano sa una pa lang saan mag papakasal, pagpapabinyag ng anak, magtatalo na kayo, tapos yung pag attend sa church saan ba, at marami pang iba.
|
|