Meillomledd, næh, det har evolusjonistan gått bort ifra. De faint jo ingen. Ingen gyldige iaillefaill.

http://the-end-time.blogspot.no/2010/04/yet-another-missing-link-has-been-found.html

De hadde sørn mæ vist fram en del "meillomledd", men de e aille avkræfta (bokstavelig talt). ( se link over). Men nu e vi jo heildigvis kvitt det problemet med det her "missing link". Nu heite det sæ at utviklinga har skjedd så smått om smått over hundretusenvis av år meillom "generasjona", at det ikkje lenger vil finnes nåkka som vil vise en forskjell, bortsett fra nån som hadde væl store skanka med længre tær, ett meinneske med litt problema med skostørrelsen p.g.a en eiller ainna sykdom, men som jo sævfølgeliig må ha vært det siste apemeinneske. Eiller deinn første meinneskeapa, sia vitenskapen har valg å plassere meinneske i apekategorien.

Og aille aindre "bevis" som vi ikkje finn, finn vi jo ikkje førdi at før i tia så spiste vi jo aille ræstan ætter kværainner opp, kainn du skjønne. Jojo. Personlig så trur nu ikkje æ at æ e i slækt med apen verken på far -eiller morsia. Men apen e jo bære 2% ainnerledes enn oss? Ja, det e mulig, men kem e det så videre nedover i kjeden som så igjæn bære e 2% førrskjellig ifra apen, og som apen stamme ifra? osv, osv. Jo, de e vesst bære spist opp, førdi vi veit ikkje kem apen stamme ifra, men oppspist, det e forgjængeran nøidd tell å være. Åja, da så. Det bli iaillefuillefaill et trosspørsmål, om mainn vælge å være evolusjonist eiller creasjonist.

Og så længe som det heite sæ at ailt av liv har utvikla sæ over milliaaaarda av år, så skjønne æ jo at folk kainn kjøpe storyen. Du har jo deinn dær fesken som har både lunga og gjeilla. Hadde vi nu drette i å evolusjonere bort de dær gjeillan, så hadde vi nu sloppe deinn dær eleindige hurtigbåtn. Åsså hadde vi svømmt tell Tromsø i flokk. Åsså har du jo blåkvaln med de der inngrodde bakføtn, som jo tyde på at "vi" har gått ned i havet, istedet førr å ha kommen opp av havet. Mens pingvinan vesstnok da må ha kommen opp av havet, i motsætning tell kvaln, som faint det likast å gå ned i havet. Kainn nån vænligst være så vænnlig å bestæmme sæ førr kor de egentlig kommer ifra, og kor de har tænkt å være???!!!

Jojo, det kainn jo fræmstå som ei utvikling, men om det e ei "saklig" utvikling, e æ nu heiller usekker på. Æ får høre med Gud Fader ka ailt det dær va vitsn med, når æ nu står å pekke på Pærleportn og skal inn. " Det va et trosspørsmål. Æ sa at dåkker ikkje kom tell å få nåkka bevis, og at dåkker blei rættferdigjort ved tro", bli æ vel å få slængt i auan. Æ e glad førr at æ trudde.

Men har nu dyrearta eksistert så langt telbake i tid som førr millionoooa av år sia? Ja, ifølge carbonmålinge av beinræsta, så har de det. De hævde at dyrelivet oppstod førr 540 milliona år sia etter fossile funn de meine e fra Cambria-perioden. Av de "ræstan" som ikkje blei spist opp, sælvfølgelig, og som jo bestaindig vise sæ å være en fuillsteindig art. Aille "meillomledd" e dessværre spist opp.

Men nu e nu carbonmålinge bære reliabel inntell 50 000 år telbake i tid, ætter 50 000 år e målingen høyst upålitelig, og det sei nu de som carbonmåle sjøl åsså. Men likevæl så måles skjelættan te mammutn & Co tell å være milliooooona av år gammle, som at det e en sainnhet. Dæm fikk støtteinnern på èn mammut gjønnom carbon-målinge tell å være 5 mill år gammel, mens skjelættet va 20 milliona år gammelt. Stakkars mammuten, han blei 15 milliona år gammel før han fikk støtteinner. Nei det her livet ailtså, det skal ikkje være ænkelt

Jaja, men ka me årringmålingen i isbrean da? Der e det jo lag på lag som mainn kainn borre sæ nedigjønna og så tælle sæ milliaaaarda av år bakover i tid? Ja, de sei så. Heilt tell de hadde smeilta sæ 75 meter nedover og traff på fleire fly som hadde nødlainda i 1942 på Grønlaind, og som låg uinder islag som va "milliarda" av år gammle. Ehhh, guess not.

Men ka med tabællan te evolusjonsteorien da, da?

Jo, dæm e det som kainn kailles førr sjølførklaranes. Så deinn eine "pyramiden" henvise ganske ænkelt tell deinn ainner, og vica versa, og sånn bekrefte tabællan kværainner som en sainnhet. Men faktum e at begge pyramidan e bygd på meinneskelige teoria om fossila og tidsepoka, som så igjæn e basert på carbonmålinge.

Og bli det nu storbom i målingen, så får vi nu ihvertfaill putte skjelættfuinne i rætt kategori når det kommer tell dyrearta. Vældig ænkelt. Æ e førøvrig klar over at det nu i skolen kailles førr evolusjonslære, men æ vil påpeike at det fortsatt i ailler høyeste grad e en teori. "Mine karra" skal nu iaillefaill bli opptrænt tell å spørre en del kritiske spørsmål fra skolebænken når "evolusjonslærern" står på tapetn. Så det e en del lærera som aillerede nu bære kainn byinne å glede sæ. Førr de skal få sveitte. Kraftig.

In the years to follow, a few people occasionally recalled the legendary Lost Squadron of 1942, but it was only in 1980 that anyone thought of a salvage mission. U.S. airplane dealer Patrick Epps told his friend, architect Richard Taylor, that the planes would be like new. ‘All we’d have to do is shovel the snow off the wings, fill them with gas, crank them up and fly them off into the sunset. Nothing to it.’ As a small, makeshift steam probe began to melt a hole in the ice, expedition members watched dumbstruck as more and more extensions were added to the hose, some 75 metres (250 feet) before reaching the first airplane!

None of the discoverers thought that the planes could possibly be buried under more than a light cover of snow and ice. And why would they? After all, the impression the general public has is that the buildup of glacial ice takes very long time periods—thousands of years for just a few metres (see ‘deep freeze salamanders’). [Ed. note: We were not claiming that the salvagers’ perceptions were correct. Published figures of average ice accumulation rates are quite a bit lower than 1½ m/year that clearly must be true here, but not nearly as low as the salvagers thought. But it shows how much the ‘millions-of-years’ ideas have permeated into the general public, and the point of this article was to undermine this common preconception, as the subtitle should make clear]

In fact, ice cores in Greenland are used for dating, based on the belief that layers containing varying isotope ratios were laid down, somewhat like the rings of a tree, over many tens of thousands of years.

Long hair

A lot of stuff being said about long hair being a disgrace for men. And I know what Pauls said, about long hair during that era. But that era is over now, and God never really had an hair- issue with Samson, did he?

But when I start about that being a culture then, some christians get problems. Cause if having long hair no longer is valid and can be "taken away" from the bible, then christians are afraid that we open up for take away things like "adultery" and so one. And fear of being consumed by the world overtake them. Thats why you dont only need to know the bible, you also need to dwell on it.

New International Version:

Roles in Worship

…6For if a woman does not cover her head, let her also have her hair cut off; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, let her cover her head. 7For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. 8For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man;… …13Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? 14Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him, 15but if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her? For her hair is given to her for a covering.…

But, the contradiction herein is, if her hair is given to her for a covering, why does Paul keep arguing that she should cover up? He even says that if she doesnt cover up, she should cut all of her hair of.

So then I will argue that if a man have long hair, he isn`nt covered up already. And he isnt standing in shame in front of the Lord. This `cause the women obviosly aren`t seen as covered up, even though they HAVE long hair. Because Pauls says:" Still cover up!"

This is from the site: http://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/11-14.html and says:

Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him,...

"Does not even nature itself teach you,.... By nature is either meant, the law and light of nature, reason in man, common sense, or rather custom, which is second nature; and which, in this case, must be restrained to the Greeks and Jews; for though among the Grecians the men cut their hair, and did not suffer it to grow long, as also did the Jews, yet there were many nations (k) who did not, even at that time, observe such a rule or custom; but as the Jews and Greeks were the persons chiefly, if not solely, known to the Corinthians, the apostle signifies, that the usages of these people might direct and inform them in this matter: That if a man have long hair it is a shame unto him; he looks unmanly and womanish, and exposes himself to ridicule and contempt."

Im by the way an Norwegian who are in a charismatic church and currently I work as an journalist. I was having an interview with to catholic fathers/priest and asked them, because no- one in my own church has been able to share some light over the issue, What the catolic fathets/ priests told me was that it was only the rich people in Israel that wore long hair. Somewhat they claimed that it was expensive to maintain long hair. How it could be expensive I don`t know. In Greece and Rome men had short hair.

What the catholic fathers/ priest ment, obviously, are that you would be assosiated with rich people, who had an upward-down attitude against poor people or the averrage man, which would be a sin in itself. ( But we dont have that problem in the church today, do we? We dont look down on "new", or for thats sake, old christians with no "experience", who doesnt have an important position in the church, do we? Im beeing sarcastic and ironic.) And if you had long hair as an christian you would push poor people away from you automatically. A bit far fetch maybe. The catholich fathers/ priest also said that at the same period in Italy it was only rich people who could afford to get a hair cut, and the poor and the slaves had long hair. But I dont know, the slave owners could easily have cut off the ponytale with a knife for free, or maybe they wanted to ridicule them and make them look as women? Or didn`t even wanna touch them?. Just dont know.

Many refer to the Turin cloth of Jesus, and says that this shows he had long hair. I dont know what the Rabbi/Sadukee or Farisee look was at the time, except that they shouldn`t cut the hair by the ears, according to jewish customs. By the way, Paul struggled a bit with those orthodox jews. Personally I dont have my identity in the Turin cloth, and I certainly dont base my faith on it.

What about Samson, his power was in his hair? God didn`t seem to have any problems with that. Neither did Samson think he looked as a woman, and he certainly wasn`t gay. He was a womenizer. Another cultural period with different habits. Just like in Greece hundreds of years later.

Me myself has long hair at the time,`cause I refuse to pay 80 bucks, yes you heard me righ, to get a hair cut in this wealthy, overprized, high cost- country. And I believe in the spiritual gifts and that healing and prophesying still occur. Here the other day I put my hands on my neighbourg who had a jumpers knee. He was instantly healed. Next day he came back and told me the he had muscular issues in his lower back. After I heldt my hand right on the spot for a minute or two his muscles started shaking, and he got healed. Now I see him running all the time with his dog. So does God have a problem with me having long hair? Am I a disgrace to Him? It doesn`t seem so. He still chooses to heal people through me.

And it`s so many other reasons that makes you holy and sacred to the Lord. But first of all you need to have a relationship with Him and get your sins washed away and accept the gift of atonement. And not just live after a christian church culture where a certain set of rules apply. You can struggle to keep alle the commands and rules through your hole life and do your best, but if you never repent and get you spirit alive in the Lord so you can have a relationship with Him, you aint gonna make it to heaven. Hard and brutal truth. He loves you despite of your failures, if you have walked home to Him and got your sins washed away. Have you walked home?

Back to hair style. So to make doctrines about if men are allowed to have long or short hair is just plain silly. There have even been written books about it being a disgrace to have long hair, its ridiculous. That said, to make a connection between men having long hair, and that being a sign of being homosexual, or look womenish is even more far fetched. Not all homosexual men have long hair. Or looks womanish even if they do. Maybe they did when Paul walked this earth, maybe all the homosexuals in Corinth wore long hair, I just dont know.

But only some small passages indicates that it`s a disgrace to have long hair, (not a sin) because of nature showing us that. I might even claim that only two bibleverses says something about it. No other verses gives me a chance to make an thesis about the issue. And writing a book out of theese bibleverses???!!! Making a connection to the homosexual having long hair, and that what they are doing is a sin, I understand. But the Bible does`nt say that. The bible says that having long hair is a disgrace. The verse doesn`t mention homosexuals at all, or a man looking womanish, but if its so, I believe it must be seen as a cultural thing at the time. Would it be a disgrace for me to have long hair just because it would imply that I am an homosexual, or look like a woman? Today? With my kind of beard???!!! One christian friend of mine told me the other day that he dreamt that I had cut my hair and shaved off my beard. Lets hope thats not profetic.

So come on, get a grip ( Or a life with the Lord, this also goes for the born again christian). It`s time for you to start listening more to The Holy Spirit than to your own witts and over-exaggerated ego. Long hair is my crusade. Im gonna make the world understand that its WRONG. Im right, Im right, Im right! No your not. Its only The Holy Spirit that would make you able to wrap your brains around difficult issues such as this. Im being just as arrogant, but I think this verse must be seen in an historical context and as a cultural thing at the time. My opinion.