christianity 551 years old?

[Black Man]

Originally Posted by Max Munch

I knew that sentence would get picked out...

Anyways, I understand that not EVERYTHING can be taught over a computer, but surely some facts can be provided, or beliefs can be explained. Also I don't consider you as "entertainment".. I ask questions to learn, not to be entertained.

And no I can't tell you about Yacub (if that wasn't rhetorical).. my knowledge of him is very limited.

Peace.

Peace Max Munch.

That line was used not against you, more so it reflects the attitude of some people here. They don't want to learn, they want entertainment.

Of course some facts can be provided, and some facts have been provided; however when those facts are provided the people don't want that. They want what they want just like spoiled brats.

I tell dude to research John Wycliff.....I don't know if he did or didn't. I know when he posted he wasn't satisfied with what was told to him. Go back and read how he said that 1-9 don't matter. How's a blind man with no direction going to tell the person who not only holds the road map but actually travelled that terrain what's needed and what's not?

When I express the FACT that there's an order to learn something, I'm sharing facts. Maybe they're not the most exciting or the most interesting, it is what it is though. People don't want facts. They don't want proof. They say it, they don't want it.

I wasn't asking you about Yacub. The statement I made is only a reflection of the attitude of the people who ask certain people certain questions. It's fuck the 5%, or some form of disrespect, then in the next breath that same person or persons is asking the 5% questions. That's what happens here.

Everybody who respectfully asked me questions pertaining to my culture or to my nation, they get answers. Those people tend not to do it in an open forum, they private message me. Respectfully, I give them answers. Then what happened? Some of them continued with the disrespect.

Peace.

Originally Posted by V4D3R

You honestly think you can become a doctor from reading an encyclopedia?

vivien thomas

vivien thomas was a pioneer in heart surgery. began as a janitor/lab tech and read the medical books at night.

because of lack of help he was called on to be a surgical assistant. where he showed and proved his self taught skills as he surpassed the head surgeon in insight and skill.
he was so ill with his hands he could operate by touch alone.

he developed surgical tools and new surgical proceedures.

he was awarded doctorate and was an instructor at john Hopkins for 35yrs, one of the top if not THE top medical schools in the country especially in the field of cardiology. at his retirement he was awarded top honors, instuctor emeritus.

he never went to medical school.


if you want to learn more about this story. Mos Def made a great movie about him "Something the Lord Made"



never let someone else put limits your potential. thats a power play that so many of our strong brothers and sisters fall prey to.

don't cosign yourself into being helpless and worthless just so someone can act like they are filling you with power and value you had within all along.

we are all connected by the same life force as the Will cannot be divided. the Will contains all things including knowledge.

knowledge can be aquired from the subjective realm (spiritual or super conscious)into the objective realm (the world) without the help of any teacher.

the answers to life's questions are all around you.



i place serious doubts in anyone who claims to do something in my best interests but hasn't even taken the time to get to know me.

stop fakin the funk.

so now you are not NOI?

so from here on out you should not be answering any questions about NOI. correct?

this whole thread revolves around the fact that:

you tried to represent NOI by answering a question,
when in reality you didn't know the answer,
so you started with the bullshit again,

then tried to sneak out the back door 5 PAGES LATER by saying "he should seek out NOI cause i don't know the answer".

i think that should have been your 1st post as opposed to the last. don't you?

there is an order to things and apparently you have them fucked up.






since we are hung up on words here....

knowledge DOES come before understanding. but wasn't the conversation about READING BOOKS?

so we are under the assumption that A BOOK is the source of the knowledge in this particular example.

stop talking with a forked tongue and come correct. but for your sake...

you don't need to be a doctor to know AND understand how the circulatory system works.

lemme hold $50!

(BTW knowledge cannot be returned and costs you nothing to share it. if you look at teaching like you are loaning money and expect something in return then you got life fucked up.)



sincerely the staff of LSU swim team.


PS Minister Farrakhan is one of the greatest entertainers/educators on earth.

[RzaRectum]

Incidentally, I think knowledge and understanding are interchangeable in its order - however is entirely dependent on the person and situation. (Or the context of how you are framing the case)

For example, a person who draws thru experience is taught by another (who has no technical understanding either),


but although both have no technical knowledge about art, they both have an understanding of how to draw.

Until they are able to understand the technical part, they can not know it in a technical way.



On the other end (Greek), you could also pick up a book and gain technical knowledge by reading,

(mind you the knowledge is not yours until you understand it)
In this way you've gained the knowledge before you understood it.

If you gain understanding thru the written knowledge. Now the reader and author both KNOW. But you must understand before you can know.


This is like two sides to the same coin. Similar to that of which came first, the chicken first or egg.


Although the concept of knowledge has wide and various explanations I was able to clarify my reasoning thru the concept of epistemology,

(
Epistemology is a branch of philosophy that studies knowledge. It attempts to answer the basic question: what distinguishes true (adequate) knowledgefrom false (inadequate) knowledge.
)
The adequate knowledge is tried and true, where as the inadequate knowledge is not practical in it's highest applications.

But I really had to think this through, because even the pragmatic epistemology does not give a clear answer to the question where knowledge or models come from. There is an implicit assumption that models are built from parts of other models and empirical data on the basis of trial-and-error complemented with some heuristics or intuition.

[Mic Tyson]

Originally Posted by STYLE

vivien thomas[COLOR=Magenta]


so now you are not NOI?

so from here on out you should not be answering any questions about NOI. correct?

this whole thread revolves around the fact that:

you tried to represent NOI by answering a question,
when in reality you didn't know the answer,
so you started with the bullshit again,

then tried to sneak out the back door 5 PAGES LATER by saying "he should seek out NOI cause i don't know the answer".

i think that should have been your 1st post as opposed to the last. don't you?

there is an order to things and apparently you have them fucked up.






\

even if hes not an NOI if hes a 5 percenter he should still know the answer the question cuz 5 percenters also learn student enrollment 1-10. if Black Man isn't a 5 percenter or NOI then he shouldn't have even tried to answer if he didn't know

[Black Man]

Originally Posted by Mic Tyson

so i was readin the NOI student enrollment 1-10 and came across

10. What is the birth record of said nations, others than Islam?

ANSWER

10. Buddhism is 35,000 years old.

Christianity is 551 years old.

There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his Messenger.

i was just wondering where the idea christianity is only 551 years old came from, because it is older than that

Originally Posted by Mic Tyson

yeah but im tryin to find out why the NOI thinks its only 551 years old. it must not be literal but something deeper or its just plain wrong

Originally Posted by Mic Tyson

even if hes not an NOI if hes a 5 percenter he should still know the answer the question cuz 5 percenters also learn student enrollment 1-10. if Black Man isn't a 5 percenter or NOI then he shouldn't have even tried to answer if he didn't know

THE 85% KNOW THAT IT RAINS HAIL SNOW AND ALSO HEAR THUNDER ABOVE THEIR HEAD BUT DO NOT TRY TO LEARN WHO IS CAUSING ALL THIS TO HAPPEN BY LETTING THE 5% TEACH THEM. THE BELIEVE IN THE 10% ON FACE VALUE.


ISN'T CHRISTIANITY A RELIGION? WHEN DID IT BECOME A NATION?

WHAT DOES RELIGION MEAN? WHAT DOES NATION MEAN?

WHY DOES THE QUESTION REFER TO A NATION AND NOT A RELIGION?

WHAT DOES IT MEAN WHEN IT SAYS, "SAID NATIONS"?

WHEN JOHN WYCLIFF TRANSLATED THE BIBLE WHAT LANGUAGE WAS IT IN BEFORE THE TRANSLATION? WHAT PEOPLE WERE ABLE TO READ, WRITE, AND SPEAK THAT LANGUAGE?

DID WYCLIFF DO ANYTHING ELSE OTHER THAN TRANSLATE THE BIBLE? IF SO WHAT WAS IT?

WHAT CHANGE OR REFORM DID WYCLIFF BRING ABOUT?

WHAT IS A "BIRTH RECORD"?

WHAT IS THE EXACT DATE OF THE BIRTH OF CHRISTIANITY?

IF IT'S OLDER THAN 551 YEARS, HOW OLD IS IT EXACTLY?


I KNOW AND UNDERSTAND THE ORIGINAL QUESTION.

THE ORIGINAL QUESTION EVENTUALLY CHANGED INTO SOMETHING ELSE. IF THE PEOPLE WHO READ THE THREAD PAYED ATTENTION TO WHAT'S BEING WRITTEN THEN THEY WOULD SEE HOW THE QUESTION CHANGED.

THE ORIGINAL QUESTION ASKS....

i was just wondering where the idea christianity is only 551 years old came from

THIS WAS ANSWERED, B.U.T. IT WAS NOT UNDERSTOOD.

AS THE THREAD CONTINUED THE QUESTION CHANGED.

yeah but im tryin to find out why the NOI thinks its only 551 years old.

DIFFERENT QUESTION HERE. NOW THE AUTHOR IS ASKING SPECIFICALLY FOR THE NOI'S THOUGHTS ON THIS PARTICULAR DEGREE.

[11th Chamber]

^^^ You make absolutely no sense

i get where he's coming from.
blackman just needs to be frank like that last post and lose the cryptic speech.

"you are asking two questions here. let me try to explain...." was all that was needed.

its like you see the discussion derailing but rather than put it on track you'd rather watch the train wreck.

communication+clarity=understanding


christianity as a nation....
Emperor Theodosius and the holy roman empire.

okay now i will ask you a question...
why doesn't noi recognize the HRE as the birthplace of the christian nation?

[TSA]

i wish i wouldn't have slept on this thread, as i am now too lazy to read through everything, but yes, you can become a doctor by reading. cause they're you actually learning the shit, as opposed to cheating in classes and bullshitting essays through medical school + cramming for tests and forgetting it as you do the test cause that's all you need it for.

[Mic Tyson]

yeah i get what u sayin black man but u should have said it your first post and things would have been less confusin. i should have read the student enrollment more clearly though

[Black Man]

Originally Posted by Mic Tyson

yeah i get what u sayin black man but u should have said it your first post and things would have been less confusin. i should have read the student enrollment more clearly though

I SHOULD HAVE SAID WHAT? ASK ALL OF THOSE QUESTIONS FOR YOU? YOU ASKED YOUR QUESTION, AND I GAVE YOU THE RIGHT GUIDANCE FOR YOU TO FIND YOUR ANSWER. THEN YOU WANT TO MAKE ME RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR ERROR? WHAT THE PUCK?

Originally Posted by STYLE

i get where he's coming from.
blackman just needs to be frank like that last post and lose the cryptic speech.

I NEED TO BE FRANK? I'M COOL BEING BLACKMAN. MY LAST POST WAS A BUNCH OF QUESTIONS. THERE'S NOTHING 'FRANK' ABOUT THAT? I DIDN'T START THIS THREAD, MIC TYSON DID, AND HE STARTED IT WITH A QUESTION. HIS QUESTION WAS BASICALLY ANSWERED. NOTHING CRYPTIC ABOUT "STUDY JOHN WYCLIFF" FOR YOUR ANSWER. VERY 'FRANK' AND TO THE POINT. OF ALL THE THINGS THAT I SAID I ASKED ABOUT TEN QUESTIONS AND MADE AROUND THREE STATEMENTS. I SEE NOW, I'M SUPPOSSED TO DO ALL THE WORK FOR YOU RIGHT? I ANSWER DUDES QUESTION FRANKLY AND TO THE POINT.

"you are asking two questions here. let me try to explain...." was all that was needed.

DUDE, I ANSWER THE FIRST QUESTION AND HIS SECOND QUESTION I STATED I'M NOT IN THE NOI. THE SECOND QUESTION CAME AFTER I ANSWERED THE FIRST QUESTION. PAY ATTENTION TO HOW THIS THREAD UNFOLDED. THE POST ARE STILL THERE, GO BACK AND READ THE ORDER OF THINGS.

its like you see the discussion derailing but rather than put it on track you'd rather watch the train wreck.

THIS COMING FROM MR. INSULT MAN. A QUESTION WAS ASKED, I KNOW THE ANSWER, I PROVIDED AN ANSWER. I'M NOT THE ONE WHO WAS DIS-SATSIFIED WITH THE ANSWER THAT WAS GIVEN AND THE GUIDANCE THAT WAS GIVEN. IF THE THREAD WAS DERAILED IT'S BECAUSE YOU REFUSE TO FOLLOW ORDER. I'M SURE YOU UNDERSTAND THE SAYING, "YOU CAN LEAD A HORSE TO WATER BUT YOU CAN'T MAKE IT DRINK" THE SAME APPLIES TO A SO-CALLED DERAILED THREAD.

I'M NOT THE AUTHOR OF THE THREAD, IT'S HIS RESPONSIBILITY AS THE AUTHOR TO TAKE CARE OF WHATEVER.

communication+clarity=understanding

TELL IT TO THE AUTHOR OF THE THREAD. I COMMUNICATED VERY CLEARLY. STUDY JOHN WYCLIFF. DON'T GET MUCH CLEARER THAN THAT. DIS-SATISFIED PEOPLE.

christianity as a nation....
Emperor Theodosius and the holy roman empire.

OK, AND YOU SAY THIS BECAUSE?

okay now i will ask you a question...
why doesn't noi recognize the HRE as the birthplace of the christian nation?

I'M NOT IN THE NOI SO I DON'T SPEAK FOR THEM. DEPENDING ON WHO YOU TALK TO IN THE NOI WILL DETERMINE THE ANSWER YOU GET. FARRAKHAN MAY RECOGNIZE THE ABOVE AS THE BIRTHPLACE OF THE CHRISTIAN NATION. HE STILL MAY NOT GIVE THAT ANSWER, HE MAY GIVE YOU HIS UNDERSTANDING OF (WHAT IS THE BIRTH RECORD OF SAID NATIONS OTHER THAN ISLAM?) AND NOT WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR. OTHERS MAY SAY WHAT YOU HAVE SAID IN THE ABOVE. IS ONE MORE RIGHT THAN THE OTHER? I DON'T TAKE MY LESSONS ON FACE VALUE, I HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF IT. EVERYBODY IN THE NOI DON'T UNDERSTAND THEIR LESSONS.

THE QUESTION THAT WAS ASKED PERTAINING TO THE CHRISIANITY (1-10) WAS MISUNDERSTOOD.

OBSERVE ALL THE REPLIES.

Originally Posted by Mic Tyson

so i was readin the NOI student enrollment 1-10 and came across

10. What is the birth record of said nations, others than Islam?

ANSWER

10. Buddhism is 35,000 years old.

Christianity is 551 years old.
There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his Messenger.



i was just wondering where the idea christianity is only 551 years old came from, because it is older than that

Originally Posted by Black Man

A person can have lessons.......and with those lessons they have, they'll never see any parts of understanding without proper guidance.

Originally Posted by Mic Tyson

i get what u sayin i don't have guidance with the lessons. thats why i asked about

THIS POST BELOW IS MY FIRST POST ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION. AS I HAVE SAID NUMEROUS OF TIMES, UNDERSTANDING COMES IN TIME. THERE IS NOTHING CONFUSING OR MISLEADING ABOUT MY ANSWER. I CLEARLY STATE WHO TO STUDY. WHAT ABOUT MY ANSWER WAS CONFUSING? IF YOU ARE CONFUSED IT IS YOUR OWN FAULT, I DID NOT CONFUSE YOU YOU CONFUSED YOURSELF.

Originally Posted by Black Man

Peace.

That's good that you realize that. People think having the lessons will bring them into the knowledge of self and the sciences of everything in life, however that isn't the case.

As far as your question, research John Wycliff and that will give you some insight into that particular degree you're dealing with.

How are you going to know and understand 10, when you don't know and understand 1?

Who is the Original Man?

The 85% knows that it rain hail snow and also hear thunder above their heads but do not try to learn who is causing all this to happen by letting the 5% teach them. They believe in the 10% on face value.

Peace.

if noone understands you, you are not being clear, regardless of what you may think about yourself.

this thread is a testament to your lack of clarity.

you can deny it but the truth is right here.

i was just giving you constructive criticism. lol it like blackman's breath is kickin and i offer him some gum and he's like "no thanks i'm cool"

[Black Man]

Originally Posted by STYLE

if noone understands you, you are not being clear, regardless of what you may think about yourself.

this thread is a testament to your lack of clarity.

you can deny it but the truth is right here.

i was just giving you constructive criticism. lol it like blackman's breath is kickin and i offer him some gum and he's like "no thanks i'm cool"

A question was asked. I gave an answer. I said study John Wycliff. Mic Tyson (I don't know if he did the research or not) came back saying that Wycliff translated the bible. If I wasn't clear, then he wouldn't have came back saying what Wycliff did. I was very clear with my answer.

You're dis-satisfied.

Again, I'm not the one who asked the question. The person who asked the question didn't understand what he was asking. If he, Mic Tyson did, he wouldn't have had to add another question (clarifying his intentions) stating, "yeah but im tryin to find out why the NOI thinks its only 551 years old."

Understanding comes in time. Some will get it, some won't.

Easily lead in the wrong direction.....

The 85% know that it rains hail snow and also hear thunder above their heads but do try to learn who is causing all this to happen.

Originally Posted by Black Man

The 85% know that it rains hail snow and also hear thunder above their heads but do try to learn who is causing all this to happen.

Originally Posted by wise man

Whoever knows he is deep, strives for clarity;
whoever would like to appear deep to the crowd, strives for obscurity.
For the crowd considers anything deep if it cannot see to the bottom

Originally Posted by wiser man

man who sticks cock in peanut butter is fucking nuts

peace

[RzaRectum]

Quote:
Originally Posted by wiser man
man who sticks cock in peanut butter is fucking nuts


Yo, thats some pretty wise shit right there.

[rakimkoolgrapwutang]

so i flicked through all this bullshit and this was the most satisfying answer i found.

Originally Posted by Black Man

THE 85% KNOW THAT IT RAINS HAIL SNOW AND ALSO HEAR THUNDER ABOVE THEIR HEAD BUT DO NOT TRY TO LEARN WHO IS CAUSING ALL THIS TO HAPPEN BY LETTING THE 5% TEACH THEM. THE BELIEVE IN THE 10% ON FACE VALUE.


ISN'T CHRISTIANITY A RELIGION? WHEN DID IT BECOME A NATION?

WHAT DOES RELIGION MEAN? WHAT DOES NATION MEAN?

WHY DOES THE QUESTION REFER TO A NATION AND NOT A RELIGION?

WHAT DOES IT MEAN WHEN IT SAYS, "SAID NATIONS"?

WHEN JOHN WYCLIFF TRANSLATED THE BIBLE WHAT LANGUAGE WAS IT IN BEFORE THE TRANSLATION? WHAT PEOPLE WERE ABLE TO READ, WRITE, AND SPEAK THAT LANGUAGE?

DID WYCLIFF DO ANYTHING ELSE OTHER THAN TRANSLATE THE BIBLE? IF SO WHAT WAS IT?

WHAT CHANGE OR REFORM DID WYCLIFF BRING ABOUT?

WHAT IS A "BIRTH RECORD"?

WHAT IS THE EXACT DATE OF THE BIRTH OF CHRISTIANITY?

IF IT'S OLDER THAN 551 YEARS, HOW OLD IS IT EXACTLY?


I KNOW AND UNDERSTAND THE ORIGINAL QUESTION.

THE ORIGINAL QUESTION EVENTUALLY CHANGED INTO SOMETHING ELSE. IF THE PEOPLE WHO READ THE THREAD PAYED ATTENTION TO WHAT'S BEING WRITTEN THEN THEY WOULD SEE HOW THE QUESTION CHANGED.

THE ORIGINAL QUESTION ASKS....

i was just wondering where the idea christianity is only 551 years old came from

THIS WAS ANSWERED, B.U.T. IT WAS NOT UNDERSTOOD.

AS THE THREAD CONTINUED THE QUESTION CHANGED.

yeah but im tryin to find out why the NOI thinks its only 551 years old.

DIFFERENT QUESTION HERE. NOW THE AUTHOR IS ASKING SPECIFICALLY FOR THE NOI'S THOUGHTS ON THIS PARTICULAR DEGREE.

so its not that christianity was found 551 years ago. the thing is it was considered a nation 551 years ago.

by looking up the word nation on wikipedia i found this "A nation may refer to a community of people who share a common language, culture, ethnicity, descent, or history"

so what i deduced from all this was that for christianity to be considered a "nation" all its people have to share common beliefs and rules.

which means b4 551 years ago all the christians wouldve shared the same concept of jesus being gods son but they wouldve had different rules regulations and guidelines.

but thats not right. its true that originally there was no real rules and no real body of the church at the very beginning of christianity. but christianity as a "nation" wouldve been a lot lot earlier than 551 years ago. the catholic church is older than that.

so the question is is my understanding of christianity as a nation correct and if it isnt correct then what exactly is christianity as a nation.