Friday, February 5, 2010

Question for those who call themselves true Christians? Why on/in all the Jehovah Witness literature are the??

Why on and inside the literature are all the Biblical characters always White? Even Job and the Ethiopian Unich, and Adam %26amp; Eve, they are all portrayed as being White. If Jehovah's Witnesses are to preach in truth why is it that they cannot depict the Bible characters as the way they truly are? Why must everything be White and esp. in America?





For instance, Job was the greatest Oriental the Bible says in the land at his time, yet when you see pictures of him in the Watchtower and Awake, etc., his skin is so pale white and his eyes are blue, nothing truly depicting an Oriental at all.





Again, Adam %26amp; Eve were of dark skin as that was just those two who walked the earth at the time of their existence until Eve bore children. Over the years the skintone of Adam and Eve has gotten so blinding white and even the society paints them with blue eyes now.





Some of the publications show mostly white, but pictures of other ethnicities ';in the new system'; but it's quite obvious mostly white.Question for those who call themselves true Christians? Why on/in all the Jehovah Witness literature are the??
They are not the only ones to depict most characters of the bible white.Question for those who call themselves true Christians? Why on/in all the Jehovah Witness literature are the??
So...you could not provide a specific example. That is unfortunate.

Report Abuse



Saying someone is not a true christian because YOU don't agree with an artist conception is just ridiculous! How someone looked is not what's important, it was how they lived their lives.

Report Abuse



You seem to be the one with the problem with skin color.

Report Abuse



People from Jerusalem were consider from the orient. That does not mean that they looked Asian. They would pretty much look as those from Jerusalem look today. I honestly never think of any of the characters as looking ';white';, but always think of them as Jewish or Israelite. Usually dark hair and brown eyes, and a nice tan. Some such as Moses or Abraham are older and have gray hair, that may make them seem more ';white'; since gray hair is lighter than black or dark brown. Perhaps Job looked pale because he was sick with boils. I don't remember him looking ';white';.





You really don't know what Adam and Eve looked like, but blue and green eyes came from somewhere. I'm sure there are blue and green eyed Jews.





David had red hair. So there were fairer Israelites.





I think you are making a issue about something that is not important. It is an artist conception. It is more important to get your life in order so that you can survive Armageddon and actually meet Job, Abraham, Moses, Able and see for yourself.
I am more concerned about them following the true Bible and Jesus Christ than I am in the pictures they produce in their literature which is not the Bible.
I don't think you or I have a clue what color anyone undocumented was. It would be presumptuous of you to become the arbiter of PC in christian iconography. Here is a thought. Why don't you, instead of biotching about it, get out your pallette and brush and paint your ownseries of biblical righteousness for the rest of us to criticise.
You are asking Christians why a group that not only is considered a cult by all other groups but considers all other denominations heretics believe something ? You are asking the wrong people.
Jehovah's Witness publications were almost entirely devoid of color until the late 1980's. Since then, the drawings in the pages of Jehovah's Witnesses have actually depicted an enormous range of likenesses for Adam, Eve, Job, and Jesus (including many that are quite dark).





Jehovah's Witnesses are interested in both accuracy and in reaching hearts of every ethnicity. What possible purpose would be served in depicting every bible character as though he or she had been Scandinavian?





http://watchtower.org/e/20000622/
I don't believe they were white..And I am not sure if they were black... I personaly think he was an olive/dark tanish skin tone.. But every one thinks differently... Nowhere does it say, Adam and Eve were white...So you have to do a study to see what area they were in 'Middle East' then you look at their skin color and it's olive/dark tanish.





Hope this helps... haha I am still not 100% sure myself, but I like this answer the best...








You 15 yrs answerer,


Megan
Perhaps you should take a look @ some more recent Watchtower publications... as far back as I can remember, the Ethiopian eunuch has been portrayed as a black man. Jesus is shown as a Semitic, and Adam and Eve are light-skinned, but not necessarily blue-eyed.


BTW, on exactly what authority do you assert that Adam and Eve were dark skinned? (I'm not saying they were white; I'd imagine they were olive-skinned).
Because the story of the Bible in the OT was about the Jewish people.Look @ Jews today,some are fair-skin,some blue eyes,some dark and hairy.





Stop being so sentimental..
We tend to paint pictures of others in our own image. If we are white, then we think God is white, and Jesus was white. If we are black, we think of God as black, and Jesus as black. It is just human nature to want others to look like us. I wouldn't take it personally. You are quite right that the Bible characters were oriental/ and dark skinned. I have no doubt that Jesus looked very Jewish, and most of the Bible characters were dark as well.
Your accusation is races besides European such as Asian or African are displayed on watchtower literature as being white?





If that is what you are claiming then I am sure you can proved an example...
You must be blind because they aren't all white in the Jehovah Witnesses literature.
A lot of that has to do with the fact that most of these conceptions have been passed along from the time of Medeival Europe. I don't think it's necessarily racism or bigotry, I think it's just people being stupid.

Even if you don't believe the bible is literally true, do you still admire it as a piece of literature?

There is certainly a lot of stuff in the bible that I don't agree with, but I love the bible's poetry, historical significance, and symbolism.Even if you don't believe the bible is literally true, do you still admire it as a piece of literature?
Im a Muslim but I admire the King James Bible for the beauty of its language. Many Arab speaking Christians/Non-Muslims feel the same about the Quran though they dont believe in it.





Whoever insults anothers religion belittles his/her own and only a person devoid of spiritually doesnt find beauty in other religions even if he believes the whole truth is only in his/hersEven if you don't believe the bible is literally true, do you still admire it as a piece of literature?
how can you call the bible true. when it was writen 500 years after all this stuff happened. they dotn kid when they say faith is blind lol.
I believe it is literally true....and so did Jesus...He believed the Old Testament literally.











';Search the scriptures ; for in them you believe you have eternal life and they are that which testifies of me';- Jesus
As an example of Elizabethan poetry, I agree the bible has few equals. Some of the language is beautiful. I still don't believe any of it, but there are some nice passages. It's a wonderful book of stories. But I would never read it to the kids.
it has some good thoughts in there, and some sound advice. Most can be found elsewhere and better. I think the negativity it invokes, the exclusivity it fosters, and the outright absurdities that it propogates as dogma are much more harmful than the few good parts are helpful.


In its defense, that's true of most ';holy books';.
I admire the sheer volume of it.
Yes, I do.
Yes. Despite the hate it sometimes causes, there are some good stories there.
I would, because its just such an amazing piece of ancient literature and history! Nothing ever, has compared to it. Just a little bit of interesting info...Most everyone is familiar with Shakespeare, correct? Well, did you know, that there is not ONE complete manuscript of his stories, plays, or poems, all in one piece, anywhere? They had to ';fill'; in the missing parts, for what they thought he ';meant';.... That is not uncommon, as original manuscripts are hard to come by. The bible, in all its separate books, has SO many manuscripts, and was written SO much earlier than Shakespeare. Some are totally complete, and readable. Amazing! Notice, that no one doubts shakespeare's existence either, like they do Jesus. Just pointing some things out.
Alot of mythology is well written.
No, I don't admire it at all.
Not really. There's no plot... there's a metric ton of filler (like genealogies... ech), and all the characters are painfully one-dimensional.
Oh, yes. Especially Proverbs, some of the Psalms, and the Song of Solomon. I love the parts where Wisdom is personified as female.
i like shakespeare better
Retarded Klingon children have written more meaningful literature.
  • adult myspace
  • Does true love really exists or its damn creation of literature,movie etc.?

    if true love really exists why do lot of men betray their women or vice versa.Isnt love illusion created by sexaul hormone????we say we cannot live without u but the truth is we do.Does true love really exists or its damn creation of literature,movie etc.?
    True love exists, but you have to cherish it, protect it, and help it grow. True love can be broken or betrayed, but it can also last forever and be the ties that bind you in a most wonderful way for the rest of your life.





    I can't imagine a single day without spending some time in my husband's arms. He's the first person I want to tell things to, and he knows me better than anyone ever has.





    When you find someone you love like that, and who loves you like that, you'll know that true love is real, and protect it with all your heart!Does true love really exists or its damn creation of literature,movie etc.?
    True Love exists, it just depends on the person. Mostly men are the weaker ones when they have a woman in front of them. They dont know how to back out or just simply say im taken, married, or no. Women think more about how much and the things they can end up losing. Usually men as soon as they meet someone they start bringing all the negetaive stuff about their relationship and start complainig. But once they get cuaght they are weaker with their wifes and spit out the whole thruth and start begging not to leave them cause they know it will be hell for them. True love is out there, just take your time.
    True love is out there, but I think that alot of people are not lucky enough to actually find it. I think the reason is because they are looking for it, I know it sounds Korney but it really finds you. Woman didn't make it up, to throw in guys faces, in fact my husband told me first that he loved me, I think another reason why you dont hear about ';true love'; more is its scary, When you are so in love with someone that you would truly give your life for them. Alot of people are more worried about their jobs or money and dont want to worry about a relationship.
    love was invented by women so they would have something to throw in a guys face
    True Love does not really exist, it's really rare to find one. Let me take you back to the, when god asked Adam why he was naked, he said that he ate the forbidden fruit, and in other to defend himself, he said; ';I ate the forbidden fruit and i was deceived by the woman you gave to me to do so.';





    The above statement clearly states that if Adam really love eve, he will not include Eve to defend himself. Love is just a mare statement that was fashioned to deceived the heart of the simple.





    The only true love that exists is the love between mother and child. Even that is valid to an extent. Because if the love is valid on the estimate of 100%, then mothers will not offend their children, and children will not offend their mother also.





    What about mothers that kill the unborn baby in the name of abortion, and those that stops the unborn from en trying this world. That is a typical hatred.





    True love does not really exist, but what exists is THROUGH love. Because most of the thing we do are THROUGH the power of Love.





    Love is just an illusion driven by sexual hormone as you really said. If you deprive a man that says that he loves you sex for a just month a month. Then, you will discover the true meaning of ';I truly love you, I cannot live without you';.
    I do not believe in ';true'; love b/c of the amount of betrayel in relationships where they claim to ';love'; their partner. I believe that they are in love with the idea of being in love with another peron.
    Love most definitly exists. In this day and age there is definitly a shortage of it but i know personally that it is there. To some people love may seem like an illusion but someday if there lucky and the ';love bug'; hits them, they're gonna say ';so this is what they were talking about. ';
    Love is commitment - as humans we are always searching for the butterflys - infatuation,


    Love is what you make it to be - it isn't anything like the movies!!
    yes I believe it does. and it is hormonal and spiritual and emotional and heartbreaking
    Love is something different in each different situation. I didn't understand what it was for me to love until my first child was born. Then I learned about caring totally for another person. In my life, I've been lucky enough to have others love me - parents, husband, kids, and a couple of others. It's always different, but the most important thing is for me to do the loving. Being loved is something that is wonderful when it happens, but it's not something you can control. 'True love'? See the movie 'Princess Bride'.
    true love exists i'm with mine! u just know in a way it's like a natural feeling like u were meant to be with that person, almost like a instinct!
    It does really exist. Realize though that its like a kind of shared myth really. Thats why only the peolple who are in love can see it. To everyone else it just looks like they are both just crazy. The challenge is making true love last. After decades it usually fades, its very sad when it does. The sex hormones create lust, its kind of related to love but is not the same as love.
    yes it does.n when it will cm to u u may not knw.but later u will find out !
    They say love hurts !
    My step dad had a definition for love I found quite interesting.


    Love, The imagination between to Fools. Adults just like each other a lot; while children really do love each other.


    As for myself I have been in love with someone for over 35 years we were once married yet she loved another.
    I believe it exists. I Know it sucks when someone cheats but not all people do. I think I have finally found true love. I have seen people who I believe have it. I hope so! Life and relationships are so complex sometimes.
    The reason most betray their spouses/girlfriends/boyfriends because they are small-minded. Only small-minded people with do b/s like that. So yes, true love exists.
    wow that is kinda a sad point of view...personally i hope that true love does exists...even though i have not found it yet...i hope its out there :O)
    Too many people base their marriage on sexual attractions. That only stays strong as long as there are other attractions such as friendship or compatability. After2 yrs the strong sexual drive is gone and now it is time to put up with the ugly habits with a person I hope is your best friend. Yes you still have sex but not like you did in the beginning. True love doe sexist for me but I started with a true friend.
    It does exist but its lifespan is very short. Lucky Romeo and Juliet.
    True love comes in many shapes and sizes. As younger people,in our teens, we love in a way that at the time it seems true and real, but in time we go our separate ways. As young adults, we love more with our hormones and our physical expectations. We have this perception of true love and it usually starts with a physical attraction to someone. As time passes, we realize that the appearance of the one we ';love'; can not substitute for true love. As we grow and live with more realism....the true love issue becomes very real. All of a sudden, we no longer see someone from the outside, we no longer judge a person by the clothes they wear. We start looking for a person we can connect with spiritually, with equal intelligence, similar humor, same sex drive.....We find a person we can honestly connect with, who loves us unconditionally, who hurts when we are apart. This person is our soul-mate and we all have one out there, but only one! You have to keep an open mind and be patient....but ';true love'; will find you. And when it does, you will never question it again.
    I think the issue here is that people confuse sex and love and think that if you really, really ';love'; someone you will only desire to have sex with that one person.





    The truth is that you can really love someone but not necessarily want to be sexually monogamous. But, in order not to hurt the person they love many people will not cheat even if the opportunity or desire is there - now THAT is ';true love'; in my opinion - having the opportunity to have hot sex somewhere else but choosing to remain faithful because the interlude isn't worth the damage it might cause to the relationship if found out.





    The hurtful part happens when people aren't capable of being monogamous and aren't truthful about that fact. A lot of people who ';betray'; their girlfriends or boyfriends do so for many reasons - selfishness, immaturity, sexual promiscuity, no self-control, boring sex life, a need for variety, a momentary lapse - you name it. People may want monogamy in relationships but they often times don't realize that either they or their partner or both of them are incapable of it.





    What would you do if someone said, ';I really love you but I want to have sex with others.'; Most people can't and won't deal with that level of truth. They want to hear, ';I love you and will be faithful only to you and never have sex with someone else.'; And that's fine when people can live up to that. A whole lot of folks can't and won't but they say they can and say they will because they don't want to lose the person they love or they are just plain selfish.





    As far as ';true love'; being fictional, well, I think the kind you often read about or see in film are idealized versions that don't take into account all the complexities of human emotion.
    a little from column A and a little from column B.
    True love does exist, but as time goes by people change and you can't change how people act. There are some people out there who can stay faithful, and there are some that cannot. But you can't change how someone feels because I'm sure many people have been at the point where they just wanted to break up with the person they ';love'; to be with someone else they are lusting, and it's horrible. If you are one of the lucky ones, it's very possible that you can find someone who is normal and beautiful on the outside as well as inside and can stay true and be faithful if they truely love you as they say they do.
    It does :)


    The true love comes at the point when you accept person the way he/she is. Love isn't illusion. Love is the end of illusion.
    it does exist


    and its wonderful


    you'll find it,


    in my opinion there's someone for everyone.


    love is out there, dont have sucha negative outlook
    Yes I do belive true love exits I feel the reason why one would stray from love is because they werent really in love to begin with today nobody really gets to know one another most cant even talk to one another and decuse things. Loveing somebody doesnt always mean sex they are to differnt things in my opion. hopefuly i helped.
    it's a blessing actually so when it happens it becomes a magic in it self....interesting enough to inspire movie,literature etc
    i think it does exist.. if you beleve in it.. i guess..

    5 True or false question relating to Literature...please help!?

    TRUE OR FALSE?


    1. Darwin published The Origin of Species in the twentieth century.


    2. Socrates was the 1st person to separate parts of speech.


    3. The purpose of grammar is to organize language into logical divisions.


    4. The originator of transformational grammar was Noam Chomsky.


    5. The language of infants is classified as casual.5 True or false question relating to Literature...please help!?
    3. this seems like its a trick question of sorts but in general i would say its true.


    4. noam chomsky is brilliant...he wrote the syntax theory of language which is more or less considered the first modern view of liquistics, meaning it wasn't based really on adding to any other work done on the subject..so given the question, i would say true.


    1. it was the 19th...so false probably...though it was published as well in the 20th...hehe...but i assume they mean when FIRST published.





    the others i could guess on but would not be comfortable doing so.5 True or false question relating to Literature...please help!?
    1. False


    2. False


    3. True


    4. TRUE


    5. False





    ';Definition: Transformational Grammar


    A linguistic theory developed by Noam Chomsky, first put forth in his book Syntactic Structures (1957), that provides a methodology for describing the relationships between sentences expressing similar concepts to underlying ';deep structures'; by means of various transformational rules. A central premise of Chomsky's work is that humans are innately predisposed to language abilities, and that such transformational processes are linguistic universals. Bernstein (1976) tries to argue for a similar existence of musical universals.';
    Okay, category review time. ';Homework help'; means help. It doesn't mean someone else does your homework verbatim.





    PS/ At least one of the above is false. But I won't say which one.
    1. Go


    2. Do


    3. Your


    4. Own


    5. Homework!
    ALL False
    Do your own homework!
    All of them are false

    Where can I get literature on which God is the true God and how will I know it's the truth?

    Well I don't think you can find a one true God. Because the same God hears everyone's prayers no matter what name they call him by. There is good every where I think you should really be trying to figure out where you belong. I belong to one church and several of my family members belong to several different churches. It really depends on what's right for you. I love my sister and she is in the right place for her. I would never tell her anything she believes in is wrong. We both pray and the same God hears us and answers our prayers. If you are looking for literature you can try many churches in your area and see which one you feel good with. Ask them about good reading and I'm sure they will give you a good long list of things. And you will know in your heart when you find it. It feels like peace and joy. It also many times feels like a burning in your soul. Or pray about each one and you will know the truth. Good luck!Where can I get literature on which God is the true God and how will I know it's the truth?
    I have found the one true God, and it is...... the God of nature!

    Report Abuse


    Where can I get literature on which God is the true God and how will I know it's the truth?
    I believe that Jesus Christ is the true God.


    Others may tell you different.


    It all depends on what you choose to believe.
    Try the Bible
    2Ti 2:15 Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.


    We are told to study God's truth not to just read it. The word dividing also means understanding





    And we are told also by God, ';Pro 2:1 My son, if thou wilt receive my words, and hide my commandments with thee;


    Pro 2:2 So that thou incline thine ear unto wisdom, and apply thine heart to understanding;


    Pro 2:3 Yea, if thou criest after knowledge, and liftest up thy voice for understanding;


    Pro 2:4 If thou seekest her as silver, and searchest for her as for hid treasures;


    Pro 2:5 Then shalt thou understand the fear of the LORD, and find the knowledge of God.


    Pro 2:6 For the LORD giveth wisdom: out of his mouth cometh knowledge and understanding.





    If you truly desire to know who God really is and what His truth really is then take your bible with a Strong's Concordance and study the bible without asking anything of men. Ask the true God to give to you His knowledge, wisdom and understanding and I promise you if you really desire it He will give them unto you.
    I suggest you read the Bible and Quran . Take both of them and start reading the first page of Bible and then the first page of Quran . Than you will certanly find yourself in one on the books, you will have the feeling , and thann read the One whole if you can gradualy ... Only One of the Books will impress you, you will have a strong feeling deep inside I guarantee, I felt it too when I touched the Quran !
    There is no simple answer to that. period.
    You can go to the following website and get the books there :





    http://krishna.tv/books-srila-prabhupada…





    The book list is below.





    You can know Lord Krishna is true God from reading.


    If you want gold you have to have some basic idea of what gold is - then you can know where to purchase it.





    Author: His Divine Grace AC Bhaktvedanta Swami Prabhupada





    Bg Bhagavad-gita As It Is


    SB Srimad-Bhagavatam


    AdiSri Caitanya-caritamrta Adi-lila


    MadhyaSri Caitanya-caritamrta Madhya-lila


    AntyaSri Caitanya-caritamrta Antya-lila


    TLCTeachings of Lord Caitanya


    NoDNectar of Devotion


    NoIThe Nectar of Instruction


    EJ Easy Journey to Other Planets


    TYSKrsna Consciousness The Topmost Yoga System


    KB Krsna, The Supreme Personality of Godhead


    PQPAPerfect Questions, Perfect Answers


    TLKTeachings of Lord Kapila, the Son of Devahuti


    TQKTeachings of Queen Kunti


    SSRThe Science of Self Realization


    PoPThe Path of Perfection


    LCFLLife Comes from Life


    PoYThe Perfection of Yoga


    BBDBeyond Birth and Death


    OWKOn the Way to Krsna


    RV Raja-Vidya: The King of Knowledge


    EK Elevation to Krsna Consciousness


    MG Krsna Consciousness, The Matchless Gift


    MoGMessage of Godhead


    LoBLight of the Bhagavata


    BsSri Brahma-samhita (Verses generally chanted only)


    IsoSri Isopanisad


    JSDThe Journey of Self-Discovery


    LONThe Laws of Nature: An Infallible Justice


    SC A Second Chance: The Story of a Near-Death Experience


    MM Mukunda-mala-stotra


    NBSNarada-bhakti-sutra





    NEW98 BOOKS:





    RTWRenunciation Through Wisdom (new98)


    TQEThe Quest for Enlightenment (New98)


    CATCivilization and Transcendence (new98)


    DWTDharma: The Way of Transcendence (New98)


    JDThe Jaladuta Diary (new98)


    BEGThe Beginning (new98)


    KCAThe Krishna Consciousness Movement is Authorized (new98)


    GGGeta Gan


    KCSBThe Scientific Basis of Krishna Consciousness


    TMGIntroductory Temple Mantra Guide (new98)


    SVASongs of the Vaisnava Acaryas (new98)





    Excerpt from the Srimad Bhagavatam:





    SB 4.29.48 P Talks Between Narada and King Pracinabarhi


    Generally people are not aware of their interest in life--to return home, back to Godhead. People do not know about their real home in the spiritual world. In the spiritual world there are many Vaikuntha planets, and the topmost planet is Krsnaloka, Goloka Vrndavana. Despite the so-called advancement of civilization, there is no information of the Vaikunthalokas, the spiritual planets. At the present moment so-called advanced civilized men are trying to go to other planets, but they do not know that even if they go to the highest planetary system, Brahmaloka, they have to come back again to this planet. This is confirmed in Bhagavad-gita (8.16):





    abrahma-bhuvanal lokah


    punar avartino 'rjuna


    mam upetya tu kaunteya


    punar janma na vidyate








    ';From the highest planet in the material world down to the lowest, all are places of misery wherein repeated birth and death take place. But one who attains to My abode, O son of Kunti, never takes birth again.';





    If one goes to the highest planetary system within this universe he still has to return after the effects of pious activities are finished. Space vehicles may go very high in the sky, but as soon as their fuel is finished, they have to return to this earthly planet. All these activities are performed in illusion. The real attempt should now be to return home, back to Godhead. The process is mentioned in Bhagavad-gita. Yanti mad-yajino 'pi mam: those who engage in the devotional service of the Supreme Personality of Godhead return home, back to Godhead. Human life is very valuable, and one should not waste it in vain exploration of other planets. One should be intelligent enough to return to Godhead. One should be interested in information about the spiritual Vaikuntha planets, and in particular the planet known as Goloka Vrndavana, and should learn the art of going there by the simple method of devotional service, beginning with hearing (sravanam kirtanam visnoh). This is also confirmed in Srimad-Bhagavatam (12.3.51):








    kaler dosa-nidhe rajann


    asti hy eko mahan gunah


    kirtanad eva krsnasya


    mukta-sangah param vrajet








    One can go to the supreme planet (param vrajet) simply by chanting the Hare Krsna mantra. This is especially meant for the people of this age (kaler dosa-nidhe). It is the special advantage of this age that simply by chanting the Hare Krsna maha-mantra one can become purified of all material contamination and return home, back to Godhead. There is no doubt about this.








    We request you to chant HARE KRISHNA HARE KRISHNA, KRISHNA KRISHNA HARE HARE, HARE RAMA HARE RAMA, RAMA RAMA HARE HARE, and your life will be sublime.
    It is the Holy Bible. And 1Jn2:27. The anointing you have received is the Spirit of Truth %26amp; will lead you into all truth.





    Take a bible. Look up toward heaven. Pray. God, Are you the real God %26amp; the God of this Bible? Pray it out loud %26amp; honestly from your heart.





    God sees your heart. Know the Truth %26amp; the truth will set you free. Whome the Son sets free is free indeed.








    And there is a different Holy Spirit of the Holy Bible than the spirit of the Koran or the spirit of the Mormon book.





    The Holy Spirit is One Spirit %26amp; won't contradict the Gospel of Christ. So, you have to recognize that the God of the Bible %26amp; the God of the Koran %26amp; the God of the Mormon book are not the same God.
    The true God is Jesus Christ
    Heres a story to ponder





    There was an Egyptian king who wanted to see which religion was true, Christianity, Judaism or Islam.





    He called a Christan priest, a Jewish Rabbi and a Muslim Imam, to see which one would present the best argument.





    The Christan priest was told to go first, he said no the Jews were first so the Rabbi should go first, they argued then agreed for the Imam to go first.





    The Imam was asked to present his case, he said, “If the Jews are right then the Muslims and Christians are okay because believe in Moses.





    If the Christians are right then the Jews have a problem and the Muslims are okay because we believe in Jesus.





    But if the Muslims are right then the Jews and Christian have a problem because they don’t believe in Muhammad.” (peace and blessings of God be upon him).
    You can't, and you can't. Half the world's population worships the god of Abraham, so He's the popular choice. Check your Old Testament, New Testament, Koran, Torah, Book of Mormon.
    Seoul, I would suggest getting all the information you can, reading it, studying it, then praying with all your might, because everybody you ask it going to say HIS version of God is true, and if he's unfortunately a fundamentalist, he'll also tell you that all other religions are wrong and sinful.





    So get all the literature you can and make up your own mind.
    it all depends on who you talk to, because there is no such thing as ';one true God'; and no real way to know what ';the truth'; is. if there was, then there would only be one religion and one perception of what God is. everyone thinks that their way is the right way and some people even think that any other religion besides their own is wrong and/or evil (which is completely ignorant, to me). if you are unsure about your religious beliefs or are just looking for something different, my best advice would be to read as much information on every religion there is and go with the one that makes sense to you. don't rely on others to tell you what is true and what to believe. you have to find the truth within yourself.





    Brightest Blessings!





    ps- i like Uncorny's answer above and the beliefnet quiz is awesome! i was going to link to it too until i saw someone already had! good luck on your journey :)
    Have you tried praying on it?


    Seriously, even before you decide ';who'; to pray to...just sit down, close your eyes, and ask for guidance.





    You can look up books on spirituality at any local library. You can actually read the Bible (King James version is the most popular, it seems. Skip the geneology passages.). The library will also have a Book of Mormon, a Torah, Koran or Quran, and good reference books on World Religions which will include a basic description of all. You can follow up from there. Or start with the beliefnet quiz http://www.beliefnet.com/story/76/story_7665_1.html





    Personally, I believe that there is one true God, and many interpretations. I don't think God will mind if your interpretation is a bit off, as long as you are true to your own beliefs while respecting other's right to choose their beliefs. :) Only you will know which one is right for you, and you'll know because it just seems ';right';. Pray on it, and see what you come up with.





    Good luck!
    A good source to start with is the Bible. Read it with an open mind...





    If you do this, I bet you'll find out who the one true God is.... He's the man who was innocent yet nailed to a tree to die for YOU and ME. Faith in Christ is the only way through the pearly gates. Again, you'll know this if you truly read the Bible with an open mind and heart from front to back...





    God bless you on your journey... He always meets us right where we are.

    Can you connect the poem, ';True Love';, by R.P.W. to a piece of literature?

    A book, poem, story, something?Can you connect the poem, ';True Love';, by R.P.W. to a piece of literature?
    First of all, I believe that the poem you're talking about is at:


    http://www.poemhunter.com/poem/true-love鈥?/a>





    If so, interesting comparisons could be made to other poems such as Browning's ';My Last Duchess.';





    Or check out parallels with the novel _Bastard out of Carolina_ by Dorothy Allison.





    You might think about using Larry McMurtry's _The Last Picture Show_. Rent the movie and see if it would work.





    RPW was also a member of a southern group of writers and poets called The Southern Agrarians. Try finding a work by one of them to use for your comparison.





    The Southern Agrarians were:





    * John Crowe Ransom


    * Donald Davidson


    * Frank Lawrence Owsley


    * John Gould Fletcher


    * Lyle H. Lanier


    * Allen Tate


    * Herman Clarence Nixon


    * Andrew Nelson Lytle


    * Robert Penn Warren


    * John Donald Wade


    * Henry Blue Kline


    * Stark Young

    What from the media, literature, etc. would you use as an example for a ';True American';?

    It can be from Movies, Music, Literature, TV, etc. Just about anything like that.





    Just what/whoever you think represents the better qualities of an American.





    Please be specific and EXPLAIN why you chose what you did.





    Thanks!What from the media, literature, etc. would you use as an example for a ';True American';?
    Peter Griffin





    fat, lazy, drinks too much, and has poor morals and valuesWhat from the media, literature, etc. would you use as an example for a ';True American';?
    I suggest Mr. Smith Goes To Washington (movie). It's about a newly appointed senator that refuses to compromise his morals in the face of overwhelming odds.
    yes

    JWs: Is it true that we cannot read any other Christian literature other than the Watchtower publications?

    Must we get all our information from that or the Bible?JWs: Is it true that we cannot read any other Christian literature other than the Watchtower publications?
    The Jehovah's Witnesses Cult are taught to fight and avoid independent thinking. See The Watchtower – January 15, 1983 p. 22, 27





    The emotional control as the Watchtower has makes the Witnesses to grow harden hearts and minds of those who have dedicated themselves to the cult. Their minds are geared to reject outside influence by their commitment to Watchtower authority. In time, the Witnesses view of life and their world is through the lenses of Watchtower interpretation and not their own.








    Control Of Emotion: There are two forms of control the Watchtower will use to keep their Witnesses in line: guilt and fear. If the Watchtower is successful in creating guilt and fear in the hearts of their Witnesses, they will be able to better manage emotional control.





    For example: by using fear as a tool, the Witness will...





    1. Avoid relationships with non-Witnesses


    2. Avoid thinking apart from Watchtower teaching


    3. Avoid behavior the Watchtower has defined for him


    4. Avoid reading non-Witness publications warning him of “demonic influence';


    5. Be reminded of the penalties for violating the Watchtower's policies


    6. Be reminded of how dangerous it is outside of the organization


    7. Be reminded of the penalties for keeping in contact with ex-Witnesses defined as apostates


    8. Be reminded of the coming of Armageddon. It's safer in the Watchtower organization.


    9. Control of Information: Information is the key to understanding the world unless the individual is shielded from the world around him. The control of information, (or lack thereof) is the final tool which serves to isolate and shield the Witnesses from the outside world. This is the tool used to drive the Witness to conformity.





    The Jehovah's Witnesses are not allowed to read literature critical of their movement. Exposure to well-documented research may cause the mass exodus out of the Watchtower organization. See Survival Into A New Earth, 1984 pp. 142-143; The Watchtower – March 15, 1986 p. 12








    God Bless!JWs: Is it true that we cannot read any other Christian literature other than the Watchtower publications?
    The Bible is the ultimate authority.





    Of course you can read other works of literature! How else will you make an informed decision as to what is or is not the truth?!





    If you are like me however, eventually you come to realise that reading innaccurate or incorrect writings is simply a waste of time spent reading good uplifting, accurate writings.





    I have chosen to reduce my reading of other writings simply because I see it often - but not always - as a waste of my time.
    You can read anything you want to, but, from what 'other' source would that 'Christian literature' come from? Would you want to read apostate christian material? Would you want to read gross untruths about hellfire, the immortality of the soul, etc?





    It's like saying: ';All paths lead to God.'; Meaning it doesn't matter which religion you follow. Is that true? Remember Christs words at Matthew 7:13 “Go in through the narrow gate; because broad and spacious is the road leading off into destruction, and many are the ones going in through it; 14 whereas narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are the ones finding it.





    Keep in mind that even the purest glass of water is no longer drinkable after only a single drop of poison falls into it.
    No


    (to the first question in bold).





    A Jehovah's Witness may choose any reading material he chooses. It seems rather obvious that the publications of Jehovah's Witnesses (that is, ';Watchtower publications';) quote from so-called ';Christian literature';. It would be quite reasonable for a Jehovah's Witnesses to investigate those quotes in their entirety, and presumably the investigation would involve ';reading'; the literature.
    Jehovah has only one organisation on earth and he sends spiritual food only through one channel. Reading ';any other Christian literature'; would be mind poisoning but it isn't something Jehovah's Witnesses are forced not to do. It is an advise which keeps us clean and strong spirituality.





    ';You cannot be drinking the cup of Jehovah and the cup of demons; you cannot be partaking of “the table of Jehovah” and the table of demons.'; -- 1 Corinthians10:21
    Our primary source of information is the Bible. That bible does not have to be the New World Translation. Any good translation should do (the KJ is not really adequate any longer, the language that it was written in was common and usual several hundred years ago and is now hard to understand in places, but if you want use it, go for it),





    The other Watchtower publications help us understand what is written in the scripture, much like 'Cliff Notes' help us understand Calculus.





    There are many publications that strive to answer the questions about our existence. Not all are very useful.





    With limited time and lots to do, how much should we spend on 'other' publications? Your choice. But do so wisely. not out of guilt or fear. We are told to exam all things carefully. Our lives depend on it.





    It's good to have some knowledge of our neighbor's beliefs, but how much is some, your choice.





    It all comes down to where you want to be. What you want to do with your precious life. It is not up to the Society to live your life for you. Their job is to provide you with information that you, me and they need to make wise choices, wise in God's eyes, not other humans,
    Would you want to?? The Bible is our source of learning. It disclaims what Christiandom teaches and is the word of God. What other source can claim and prove that?? 2 Timothy 3:16,17. Our publications are bible aids, not independent of the bible. Cited scripture prove what is being said. CD Rom Library is great for research.
    Umm....we can read anything we want- even non-Christian stuff. Not that i'm saying you should get info from The Enquirer or anything :^), but we can read you know, other christian and non- xian stuff like Multnomah (christian) or Moody (christian.) Hope this helps you. I read the Harry Potter books, and I have not been struck down by God yet so i am assuming that they are safe. :^)
    There are some good scriptures in the Bible regarding this subject:





    ';One body there is, and one spirit, even as you were called in the one hope to which you were called; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all persons, who is over all and through all and in all.'; (Ephesians 4:4-6)





    ';Stare in amazement, O YOU heavens, at this; and bristle up in very great horror,’ is the utterance of Jehovah, ‘because there are two bad things that my people have done: They have left even me, the source of living water, in order to hew out for themselves cisterns, broken cisterns, that cannot contain the water.’'; (Jeremiah 2:12, 13)





    We are already able to drink of the the living water which comes from ONE source: Jehovah; and which comes THROUGH his Son, Jesus Christ, through his word the Bible, and through the food provided for us by his faithful and discreet slave whom he has appointed over his belongings (Mat 24:45-46; John 4:7-15; 2Tim 3:16-17)





    The faithful and discreet slave today act in the same capacity that the apostles and older men in Jerusalem did in Paul's day, by giving instruction, guidance and encouragement to the congregations (Acts 16:4, 5; Acts 15:2, 30, 31). But in addition to just the letters that the early disciples received, we today also receive other encouraging Bible based publications: the Watchtower and Awake, to name a few.





    So as Jeremiah brought out, why would we ever want to want to abandon the living water in order to drink from broken cisterns and ';fountains without water';? (2Pet 2:17) The living water is all that we need. (Luke 10:42)





    Those other sources that we avoiding reading from are nothing but ';waterless clouds carried this way and that by winds; trees in late autumn, [but] fruitless, having died twice, having been uprooted; wild waves of the sea that foam up their own causes for shame; stars with no set course, for which the blackness of darkness stands reserved forever.'; (Jude 12, 13)
    being a non christian myself...i think the JWs can use the christian bible and still be more right as what new christianity practices is even far from the bible..


    1....the sense of a total unseparated community in acts of apostle


    2...hear o isreal your god is one


    3...believe in me as said by jesus to mean believe what i say and not worship me








    a lot of things being thought to christians nowadays, i wonder if they get to read the bible by themselves, just follow pastors and televangelists all the way
    Most people who are now Jehovah's Witnesses have already been familiar with religious denominations in the past, and they have no need of going back to consider what they already know, so what they concentrate on now is the Bible, since God's word teaches all that a person needs.
    Not true. Many other forms of literature, e.g Bible encyclopaedias, provide extra information. We should just be selective, and avoid wasting time on rubbish.





    Look at the links I provided for you on your other question.





    How would I have found all that info if I did not read anything except the Watchtower?


    http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;…


    ==================


    Seems Mr. Kip is back with his copy%26amp;pastes from the sites he *allegedly* contributes to.








    Vot is still waiting for his email reply stating his sources for the *fact* that the NWT has been ';rewritten'; in 2006.....


    ==================


    People, give her a break. Many people studying with Jehovah's Witnesses start to identify themselves with JWs long before their baptism. I know I did.
    Who do you mean by: ';we'; ???





    A few days ago, did you not say that you were wanting to learn about JWs, but were receiving opposition...?


    You surely could not have become one that fast!





    --- --- ---


    No.


    However, anyone ought to be very careful about *what* they read, %26amp; what *effect* it might have, even time-wise. Notice the many cautions in God's Word:





    ';The words of the wise are like oxgoads....


    As regards anything besides these, my son, take a warning: To the making of many books there is no end, and much devotion [to them] is wearisome....'; --Ec 12:11,12





    ';You hypocrites, Isaiah aptly prophesied... ‘This people honors me with their lips, yet their heart is far removed from me. It is in vain that they keep worshiping... because they teach commands of men as doctrines.’” --Matthew 15:7-9


    Jesus Christ himself gave several stern warnings %26amp; rebukes, an additional one of which is:





    “Many will say to me in that day, ‘Lord, did we not prophesy, and expel demons, and perform many powerful works in your name?’ Yet, then I will confess to them: I never knew you! Get away from me.... --Matthew 7:21-23





    Compare his words at: Mt 23:27-28; 24:24-25; Lu 6:45-46; and other's warnings, at: 2 Co 11:13-15; 1Ti 4:1-3; 2 Pe 2:1-3; http://watchtower.org/bible/index.htm





    Proverbs 26:11 reads: ';Just like a dog returning to its vomit, the stupid one is repeating his foolishness.';





    The Apostle Peter elaborates: ';Certainly if, after having escaped from the defilements of the world by an accurate knowledge of the Lord %26amp; Savior Jesus Christ, they get involved again with these very things %26amp; are overcome, the final conditions have become worse for them than the first. For it would have been better for them not to have accurately known the path of righteousness than after knowing it accurately to turn away from the holy commandment delivered to them. The saying of the true proverb has happened to them: “The dog has returned to its own vomit, %26amp; the sow that was bathed to rolling in the mire.” --2Pe2:20-22





    Each individual is responsible for themselves %26amp; others--all whom their behavior %26amp; choices may have an affect on. If the effect is negative, they will suffer the consequences. This can easily become as serious as loss of life, as the Apostle Peter describes in such 'picturesque' detail... In total agreement, The apostle Paul commands:





    ';Make Sure of all things; hold fast to what is fine.'; --1 Th 5:21





    EDITED IN LATER:





    The article cited 1st by 'Rev Kip' is: titled ; based on...





    ';Armed for the Fight Against *Wicked Spirits*';





    “We have a wrestling . . . against the *wicked spirit forces* in the heavenly places.” --Eph6:12.





    (Obviously this person takes things out of context, %26amp; is thus lieing.)
    We??? You've made it very clear you are by no means a Witness.





    The central source for information, on how to live as a Christian, is the Bible.
    Its a free country! But people are advised not too. Just the same w/ the LDS.
  • adult myspace
  • Do you think many true believers need to brush up on their literature and reading comprehension?

    I think it would benefit them greatly to know metaphors, symbolism, irony, sarcasm.....


    Do any other atheists/agnostics regularly see this problem?Do you think many true believers need to brush up on their literature and reading comprehension?
    The only problem I see is the self righteous, vapid, condescending vitriol from your genre who vehemently screeches to be left alone and free from harrassment in how you live your lives yet steadfastly continue your attacks and malignment of people of Faith.





    Sorry for the big words, hypocrite--buy a dictionary and brush up on your own reading comprehension.Do you think many true believers need to brush up on their literature and reading comprehension?
    Oh yes, I agree. They should also invest in a good dictionary, then look up terms such as ';myth'; and ';scientific theory';.
    Not if they want to remain ';true believers.';
    It is glaringly apparent. When they watch, ';The Atheist Delusion'; video on YouTube, they think it proves atheists are wrong! Even though it clearly calls itself a ';a P1SSPOOR PRODUCTION'; (you have to read the beginning credits) Yikes!
    I don't think we should limit lack of grammar, literature and reading comprehension to ';true believers';, it is just as likely to attack all religions since it has nothing to do with religion. Those of you who profess to a belief in the innate good of humans (Humanists, etc.) should know that tolerance for others has no barriers. It is not your place to criticize the beliefs of others any more than it is their place to criticize yours. Do not be a hippocrite! You derive satisfaction in your philosophy, allow others their right to derive satisfaction from theirs (i.e. - belief in God and the Bible) even if you do not. This is suppose to be a forum to discuss religious questions, NOT make catty remarks about people with different religious beliefs than our own.

    I was told that Fumi means literature in Japanese. Is this true? And is it okay to give this name to a pet?

    The most common meaning of fumi is letter, but yes, the character used to write it also means literature. Fumi is the correct spelling, but you might also see it written ';Humi'; as the Japanese ';f'; is more like an h. Of course you can name your pet Fumi, or Fumiko (for a female) if you like.

    Can you connect the poem, ';True Love';, by R.P.W. to a piece of literature?

    A book, poem, story, something?Can you connect the poem, ';True Love';, by R.P.W. to a piece of literature?
    ';Araby'; by James Joyce has many of the same elements and beautiful descriptive language. It follows the desire and heart break present in ';True Love.'; You should read the story and see if you agree.

    What does literature throughout the ages reveal to be most true about a man's personal journey through life?

    ummm wat

    True or False? Literature?

    1. The novel as we know it developed before drama.


    2. The plot and characters should operate within the atmosphere established in a novel.


    3. Plot and conflict operate within the setting.


    4. In Eliot's novel Silas Marner, the incident that brought Eppie to Silas was a new job.


    5. William Congreve was an accomplished Elizabethan dramatist.


    6. William Shakespeare was an accomplished Elizabethan dramatist.


    7. Some early novels were partially a reaction against what the authors considered the immoral content of burlesque and pantomime.


    8. Heroic dramas were sometimes written in rhymed couplets.True or False? Literature?
    1. False


    2. True


    3. False


    4. Idk


    5. False


    6. True


    7. True


    8. TrueTrue or False? Literature?
    1. false...drama is prehistoric.


    2. true, thats the basic element of a good novel.


    3. true that is convention.


    4. Haven't read


    5. can' say...google him


    6.True


    7. maybe


    8. True
    1. False


    2. True


    3. True


    4. False...actually I don't really know.


    5. False


    6. True


    7. True


    8. True
    no, yes, yes, dunno, dunno, yes, dunno, yes.

    Mormons: If Mormonism is true, reading ';anti-Mormon'; literature won't make it any less true, do you agree?

    If Mormonism is true - it should be able to stand up to anti-Mormon arguments, correct? You should be able to read them %26amp; if it is true, you won't be swayed by it, right? Or do you shy away from anti-Mormon literature?





    If so, why?Mormons: If Mormonism is true, reading ';anti-Mormon'; literature won't make it any less true, do you agree?
    I find anti-Mormon literature offensive and no religion should be ';bashed.'; However, I am just as offended when any church or organization gently (or not so gently) tries to regulate how its members learn about the organization. The LDS church teaches its members that they should only learn about the church from approved church sources.





    There are/were other organizations that tell/told their people not to learn from any other source: the Nazi's and Communist Russia and China.





    Every time I have shared historical data with an LDS person that they did not like they said ';That's not official church doctrine/history.'; Since when did something have to be official to be accurate? I'm not sharing anti-LDS information, just things, from reliable, non-partisan sources, that they don't want to hear.





    The only point is that teaching people that only one source can really be trusted produces a people that don't think for themselves and automatically discount credible sources of information and truth. It doesn't matter what organization, religion, or government is doing this; it's still wrong.Mormons: If Mormonism is true, reading ';anti-Mormon'; literature won't make it any less true, do you agree?
    Anti mormon literature twist, speak out of contextmake fun of our church, claim something that isn't LDS doctrine as LDS doctrine. It may have been said...but it doesn't necessarily make it doctrine. I can any Protestant leader said this and that and should I claim that is Protestant doctrine?





    Lds Doctrine is in our standard works..(Bible, Book of Mormon, Doctrine %26amp; Covenants and Pearl of Great Price.)


    And any new doctrinal or ethical matter comes from the First Presidency, sustained by the general Assembly at General Conference.





    No I'm not swayed by anti mormon arguements.


    It's a challenge to correct the mis notions on what we believe.





    They won't persuade us nor we will persuade them.


    But I will correct them for any new investigator or a new member in the church.
    Well I am LDS and I get annoyed sometimes by anti mormon stuff because some of it is just trash.





    I heard one thing that said an angel appeared to joseph smith with a sword and was going to kill him unless he got multiple wives.





    THis is just insane, and cant be proven, its just some made up story.





    All we can really do is say no, thats not what we believe happened, this is what happened.... etc





    All we can say is yes we believe that or no we dont, we cant really ';prove'; anything to you and give you paper facts on a book or a picture like you want.
    Something can be less than true and still be persuasive. I have read enough anti-mormon stuff to know that most of it is incorrect and much of it is willfully deceptive.
    Good question.





    The problem with the anti-Mormon literature is that often it will be 80% true and 20% lies.....but it doesn't indicate which.





    Imagine trying to learn from a professor who taught that way. You'd be scratching your head and confused fairly regularly. You'd question, not just the 20%, but everything. It makes no sense to learn that way.





    Further, you wouldn't go to a tutor who hated that subject and thought that it would be better if you failed miserably.





    Now that I'm older, sometimes I'll read it to see what angle they're trying to spin things now, however, I'm glad that I avoided it for a long time. Even now, I don't seek it out, but I'll read it and look for their errors.





    If someone is sure of what they believe, it won't do any harm.





    It is interesting, however, that nearly all of it is put out by ';Christian'; groups who believe in the Bible, including the part that says:





    Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness.
    Repent and return to the Lord.
    I don't shy away from Anti-LDS literature, but I don't seek it out either.
    The church and the doctrine do stand up to any and all critics. I've never read any critique that didn't have an answer. However, not all Mormons have done the studying or understand the doctine well enough to hold up against these arguments.





    I don't make a habit of reading anti-Mormon literature. I tend to get upset and argumentative while reading it. I'd rather read things that build my faith than try to tear it down.
    Some of the stuff is wild, and some of it is out there. For the record, it wa snever the anti material that helped me to leave the church. I had already left when I stumbled upon it, I did however compare what my ex-mormon brother said happen in the temple and what the anti-mormon sites said and they were correct in their information.
    You should read everything and then Judge for yourself..... You are a independent and responsible person..... it is your decision which will take you to hell or heaven.....





    On the day of judgement you cannot complain that i read this book or that book....








    As God has revealed his last book the Quran for human guidance...... It is up to you to accept it or not...





    Peace be on you...
    If there was some prohibition against Mormons reading anti-Mormon material then all the Mormons answering questions on Yahoo!Answers would be pretty naughty.





    I, like all the other Mormons here, read quite a bit of it. We find it misinformed, illogical, distorted, and often malicious. Of course our beliefs stand up to any and all arguments. But while we sometimes can clarify our own thoughts and feelings about the church when reading what others have said and thought, and this makes us stronger, a constant diet of negative thoughts, criticism, scorn, ridicule, misrepresentations, and lies is not exactly uplifting.





    Sometimes anti-Mormon literature is destructive. Fawn Brodie will tell you what evil thoughts Joseph Smith had in his mind when he reviewed the Nauvoo Legion. How does Fawn Brodie know what Joseph Smith was thinking? She doesn't, but hearing this kind of evil gossip and speculation about someone I love does not help me to develop Christlike love and charity. Some things cannot be answered at this time because we don't know all the facts.





    Let me turn this question around. If Mormonism is not true, why not allow it to self-destruct on its own? Why not look for the good, true, beautiful, and wonderful in the LDS teachings, and celebrate that? Why wallow in the garbage of anti-Mormon lies and distortions?
    Im catholic, but I know that it pissed me off when people bash my faith and I dont like being angry- its bad. I assume its the same for mormons
    It doesnt matter what religion you are. If you trully believe in your religion, no one will show you anything that will ever sway you. No matter which religion, religion requires faith, and belief. If you truelly have that faith and belief in your religion, why would you ever be swayed by anything?
    This question could be expanded to ';Adherents of religion X, if religion X is true, reading ';anti-religion X'; literature won't make it any less true, do you agree?





    I also wager you'll get much the same answers no matter which group you address.
    I have a friend who is LDS!


    And he reads the anti literature all the time, to keep on top of what the detractors say!


    He tells me that he cannot believe the lies, or the distortion of the information given!


    He says why not just put the information out, and let people DECIDE for THEMSELVES!


    We discuss religion all the time, so I am familiar with the doctrine!


    But, lo and behold (pardon the pun), the crap I read on here put out by the anti, and the exes, is unbelievable, as in,, not true!


    The delighted viciousness if the attack on here is NOT to be believed!


    So Christians, keep up your dirty work, you won't change a thing!
    You're right, reading anti-mormon literature doesn't make it any less true. I have read anti- mormon literature but I find that it is a waste of time. What's the point of reading criticism when you know something is true?
    Anti-Mormon literature is typically not accurate. I read it out of curiosity, recognizing that most of it is BS. I then read the pro-Mormon arguments that refute the false claims.





    allaboutmormons . com
    No reading anti-Mormon literature would not make the Church any less true. On the other hand, we believe in doing things that would be considered uplifting and edifying.





    Watching movies of people getting murdered, raped, tortured would not make the Church any less true either. But doing so would harm your spirit, hurt you countenance and would not improve your life. It would not be spiritually edifying to watch such movies.





    On a very elemental level, playing in the dirt and mud would not hurt you, but you sure don't stay clean that way.





    Likewise, it would not be edifying to to listen to anti Mormon literature and so forth. A barrage of hurtful material is never good for the soul, for uplifting your spirits.
    I think it has more to do with respect for others beliefs. I tend to listen more to someone who tells me about the positive of THEIR beliefs, rather than what they believe is WRONG with someone else's. It seems like those who seek to tear something down, rather than build, are missing the point.
    I just find them rather tedious. I find that they will harp on the same item repeatedly. Because saying something about Satan being Jesus' brother is 'shocking'. Mormons think they are gods is 'offbeat'. They will ignore the simple answers direct from their own Bible. These sites make little difference to established members but they are the tares that Jesus said would choke the seed.
    Well it survived cults an Ben alive since 1830
    I find myself looking at anti-Mormon things or listening to what anti-Mormon people have to say sometimes. I think it's interesting to see other perspectives. Listening doesn't ruin my faith, because a lot of times the things these websites or people have to say are not true or are twisted forms of the doctrine of the LDS church (and I would know, seeing as I have been Mormon my entire life and have done a lot of research on Joseph Smith). It seems to me as if these people are just insistent on proving Mormons ';wrong'; and will say what they need to to make Mormons look bad-- I'm sure many religions (not just Mormons) can relate to this because all religions have people who are against them.
    Cause just like the jw's, they are a cult.





    I've never seen any archeological evidence to back mormon beliefs. If all that supposed stuff with indians and the battle of hill komrah really happened...why isn't the evidence on display?





    We still find plenty of archeological evidence in the Bible and it back the claims of the Bible, therefore biblical Christianity is the only true way to God.





    Besides, we don't have to wear majic mormon underwear.





    http://youtube.com/watch?v=KsXzHLiHTOU
  • adult myspace
  • Atheists : Evolution is true but Muslim literature?

    Evolution is also controlled by God . As I saw in Muslim literatture one of Gods name is Al BARI which means THE EVOLVER..





    So isnt reasonable to conclude that God is the origniator of evolution?





    I dont want answers bashing Islam religion or insulting the religions.





    Short and good answers would be better





    Also: If God didnt started evolution , then how did it began by itself?Atheists : Evolution is true but Muslim literature?
    Oh oh!!!


    Now you looking for trouble.Atheists : Evolution is true but Muslim literature?
    Yes it is unreasonable. If god supposedly started it, where did god come from?
    It is often seen that Darwinism and Religion clash; what is clashing is ignorance and not the diciplines.





    Darwinism is in regards to the body.





    Religions are in regards to the Spirit.





    The two are separate and become one upon incarnation.





    For one to claim the others role is to mix oil and water. This mixing is the Ego-self placing itself in charge as it usualy does.





    Al Bari is no doubt a direct term in regards to how Muslims may view God, a constant evolution of spirit, always growing, always learning.
    So because someone has given him the title ';the evolver'; that MUST mean he causes evolution...





    Oh dear





    It's....sheer stupidity to observe science, call a deity a name attributing said observations to the deity, and then say ';look, the deity has that name, he must be the cause of the scientific observations';.





    For instance, I could start calling Leviathan ';the gravity maker';, or Eleventy ';the sun riser';. By the same logic as your argument I can now say ';Of course Leviathan is responsible for gravity, why else would he be called 'the gravity maker'? And of course Eleventy makes the sun rise every morning, otherwise he wouldn't have the name 'the sun riser'.';
    I feel stupid after reading that.
    Brownian motion.





    Argument from necessity is a fool's game.
    How?





    Now that would be asking. Perhaps you should ask first how we would know one way or another?





    The limited evidence we have strongly suggests that a lot of simple organic molecules, a lot of energy and a lot of time can quite easily result in self-replicating proteins... and from there, evolution takes over.
    No, there is nothing reasonable about your claim. It's like asking if Batman is the father of all bats because someone put the word ';bat'; in his name when they imagined that fictitious person.





    Also, your additional comment ';God is Eternal ! so something which is eternal doesnt need a start!'; is circular logic.





    Read up on Occam's Razor. The Universe doesn't require any supernatural explanations for any aspect of its existence. Your assumption of an ';originator of evolution'; unnecessarily adds complexity and therefore is not the most parsimonious hypothesis.
    am i getting this straight? you are using circular logic to state your opinion: ';Also: If God didnt started evolution , then how did it began by itself?';





    take a course on writing and then ask us the question
    Please read the books written by Harun Yahya on evolution and all will become clear.
    evolution occours by natural means, why bring a ';god'; in, if you're going to concede natural means of existing?
    perhaps, but there is not any evidence of it.





    thus, whatever god or gods (if any) created evolution, he/she/it/they did not want us to know for sure it was them.





    if one or more gods did not create evolution, how did life begin? We don't know yet. Science does not claim to have all the answers; there is no evidence that I am aware of offering a foundation for even an educated guess. It is okay to admit that we do not have all the answers, but lack of answers does not automatically make one religion or another's correct by default.
    Wow....that's....tidy.


    Perhaps a little...too..tidy?
    If one can believe that God is everlasting and has always existed, then why can't Atheists say the same thing about the universe?
    funny %26amp; all these years I have been saying the same thing from the ';Christian standpoint of this argument.';





    I put god %26amp; creation together %26amp; got a fuller picture of what could be!





    the whole time the Qua ran beat me to it %26amp; till now I never knew it did so!





    Cool!
    I dont believe in evolution however i believe that the big bang theory happened and god made it happen.





    p.s this is only my opinion. Its is not neccessaryily every muslims belief.
    If you knew what the theory of evolution was you would understand that there is no outside influence.
    Abiogenesis is closer to chemistry than biology, but there are many scientific theories about the beginning of life, none of them require God's help.





    Of course, it's possible that there is a supernatural being responsible, but it's just an unnecessary layer of complexity.
    Well the vast majority of muslims are creationists so... what the hell are you talking about?





    What do you mean if god didn't start evolution? It sounds like you don't understand what evolution actually IS. It has nothing to say about the origins of life.





    http://www.talkorigins.org/


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution


    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/


    http://www.livescience.com/evolution/





    Maybe you want to go read about abiogenesis.





    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis


    http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob鈥?/a>
    last i checked muslims believed adam was made from a handful of dirt that some invisible man sneezed on





    and if they accepted evolution please explain harun yahya

    For those who know literature is Barack Obama a true ';Native Son';?

    No. I don't understand your question. Your questions you have post lately have been really weird. (=

    Some people say bible is good literature, is that even true?

    moses came of the mountain with the ten commandments,and said they shall not kill.couple of pages later,they are killing,looting,and satan knows what else.the author seemed to have a short memorySome people say bible is good literature, is that even true?
    I became a Christian in 2000. I read the New Testament that year, and I have read the whole Bible every year since then. (that's about 8 times at the end of this month, besides just what I read on the side). If that qualifies me or not, I don't know, but it seems to be more than most people have read it as far as I have experienced. To answer your question, the best parts of the Bible as far as literature are Genesis, Judges, Ruth, 1Samuel, Esther, Job (opening and closing chapters), Psalms, Proverbs, Song of Songs, Jonah, and basically all of the NT. The rest of the Bible is not quite entertaining if you don't believe the gospel. HOwever, if you do believe the gospel (that Jesus died in your place, to pay for your sins, and rose again), then the whole thing takes on a whole new level of meaning, and you can't put it down. Some people say bible is good literature, is that even true?
    Of course, but it varies considerably because the Bible was written by so many different people in such different times. Something like 60% of the Old Testament is poetry, Paul was a master of the Greek art of persuasion, and the author of Hebrews had very polished Greek.
    Revelation Chapter 22





    6 And he said to me: These words are most faithful and true. And the Lord God of the spirits of the prophets sent his angel to show his servant the things which must be done shortly. 7 And: Behold I come quickly. Blessed is he that keepeth the words of the prophecy of this book. 8 And I, John, who have heard and seen these things. And, after I had heard and seen, I fell down to adore before the feet of the angel who showed me these things. 9 And he said to me: See thou do it not. For I am thy fellow servant, and of thy brethren the prophets and of them that keep the words of the prophecy of this book. Adore God. 10 And he saith to me: Seal not the words of the prophecy of this book. For the time is at hand.





    I hope that answers your question.
    It is full of interest. It has noble poetry in it; and some clever fables; and some blood-drenched history; and some good morals; and a wealth of obscenity; and upwards of a thousand lies.



    It's wonderful. Filled with drama and imagination, not to mention such wonderful characters! There's also a few important themes here and there too.









    Fear of fire and brimstone to a 5-year old must be traumitizing,








    and also, some people crap on other peoples front seats and think its a ';good joke';, doesn't mean it actually is.
    what solly said :) if you read the hebrew bibile, ';tanak';, you'll find a masterfully written piece of literature.
    No. It's so awful and boring that most Christians won't even read it.

    What is literature? the true value of literature?

    Mark Y is 100% right.





    The value of literature is the same as the value of visual art or music. It is an art and an expression of the thoughts and feelings of the artist. If you see a picture or sculpture you like and connect with, the artist has been successful. If you see a film and enjoy it or are inspired to think or explore, the artists that created it are successful. The same is true of a poem, a short story or a novel.What is literature? the true value of literature?
    *creative writing of recognized artistic value


    *the humanistic study of a body of literature


    *published writings in a particular style on a particular subject; ';the technical literature';; ';one aspect of Waterloo has not yet been treated in the literature';


    *the profession or art of a writer; ';her place in literature is secure';


    *Literature is literally ';an acquaintance with letters'; as in the first sense given in the Oxford English Dictionary (from the Latin littera meaning ';an individual written character (letter)';). The term has generally come to identify a collection of texts. The word ';literature'; as a common noun can refer to any form of writing, such as essays or poetry; ';Literature'; as a proper noun refers to a whole body of literary work, world-wide or relating to a specific culture. ...


    hope this will help.. =)

    ';Everyman'; is one of the most important mysteries of English literature. Is it true or false?

    What do you mean?? Every man is a mystery as in English Literature...


    do you mean a title of a book?? Is Everyman a book??


    A man is a mystery to every one else because every body keeps secrets and no one tells some one absolutly everything so Everyman is a mystery...';Everyman'; is one of the most important mysteries of English literature. Is it true or false?
    ';Everyman'; isn't a mystery. It's a mystery play, a dramatization of religious ideas.';Everyman'; is one of the most important mysteries of English literature. Is it true or false?
    Yes, Everyman has achieved the stature of being the most powerful and most admired of that genre of pays which are called ';Mystery Plays';.


    This play is chronologically one of the last Mystery Plays and is quite highly developed. It can be staged even today, but when I did it became very clear that you need just one dominant actor. The other actors have to portray only attributes of Everyman. Nevertheless, the interest of the audience is held and the suspense of the play prevails to the end.





    therefore the play does hold itsown even today; yes it is one of the most important Mystery Plays.
    hmmm...ur not very good at asking questions are you....
    not sure

    True or false? enlightenment literature pianted a picture of a world of excess and foolishness.?

    refering to the french revolutionTrue or false? enlightenment literature pianted a picture of a world of excess and foolishness.?
    True.





    Whether or not it was really a ';world of excess and foolishness';, it certainly was common practice in Enlightenment literature to describe it as such.True or false? enlightenment literature pianted a picture of a world of excess and foolishness.?
    I am gonna say false. It came down to the haves and have nots. However, opulence and lasciviousness on behalf of the royalty helped usher in the revolution through sheer disgust, rage, anger not to mention hunger and the will to survive.
    false
  • adult myspace
  • Why does literature represent events which are true to life or to the reader's experience?

    Because it is by people tapping into their emotions to create similar emotionw within us.Why does literature represent events which are true to life or to the reader's experience?
    Because up until the modern period (early 1900s), the ideal for Literature and Art followed an Aristotilian philosophy that good Art holds up a mirror to reality. Writers of the modern and post-modern still hold true to this philosophy but with the twist that there are multiple realities and perceptions in the world.





    So good Art must represent these different realities, but again, with as much accuracy as possible. The truer the art to either the reality perceived by the author or the reader, the better the Art.Why does literature represent events which are true to life or to the reader's experience?
    Because that is the ';fount'; or the events from which literature draws parallels and from which authors write.





    Events ';true to life or to the reader's experience'; are ofen those used by authors and are often most successful at what they set out to do... which is to chronicle our events and lives and cast new thoughts on it, new ways of thinking about it.





    Those new ways of thought, or slants on life, are what authors bring when they write the literature, and when we read it, we get a new way to look at things around us, and so literature enlarges our world. It's all good.

    Myths in american literature that shaped american culture and are considered facts or true?

    I'm not sure if our civilization has gotten old enough yet to fade in to for parts of our history to fade into myth yet. Most of our history has been fairly well recorded.Myths in american literature that shaped american culture and are considered facts or true?
    George Washington and the cherry tree. It never happened.





    Abraham Lincoln as 'The Great Emancipator' of black people. No, he was not.

    PLEASE HELP!! What is Walt Whitman's idea of true American Literature?

    quotes/websites would be very helpful!! i have an essay to write and I am so lost! If it is in Whitman's essay - Democratic Vistas....that would be soooo helpful! :):):):) THANKS!PLEASE HELP!! What is Walt Whitman's idea of true American Literature?
    i think it's about teens not being able to do their own homework, now gimmy 10 points

    Is it true that books nowadays do not rise to the highest levels of literature e.g. Odyssey as they used to?

    title says it.Is it true that books nowadays do not rise to the highest levels of literature e.g. Odyssey as they used to?
    No.





    Basically, you have to ask what ';highest levels of literature'; means. There are plenty of modern books that are considered High Art; Cormac McCarthy's work, for example.





    Will they still be read 2,000 years from now? Who knows. But then, very little of *anything* is read 2,000 years later.





    Also, we've got a much larger pool of artists now, which distorts the lens. Writing was *rare* 2,000 or 1,000 years ago. It was very expensive. Very few people could do it. So only those with extremely high passion got published.





    Today, we may have about the same *number* of great books being written, but we have far more books total.





    So, when you consider that in the ';annals of great literature'; there can be decades-long gaps between great works of literature, I think we're doing fine. :-)Is it true that books nowadays do not rise to the highest levels of literature e.g. Odyssey as they used to?
    Every century you have a few books that rise to that level, over the centuries that accumulates to a lot.


    So no, it is not true.





    but there is much more output (number of books written and published) then there used to be because society has become richer and more mass market books are published. So the gems are hidden in the mountain of books.
    I think it's impossible to tell. Tastes change, as do standards of what is ';great literature';. Shakespeare, as an example, was certainly a well-respected playwright in his own time, but it wasn't until the 18th century that he became the icon of English Literature that he still is.





    As others have said, you also have to consider that there is so much more out there than even 50 years ago, so there's a lot more dreck to wade through.
    Yes and no. The books like the oddesy did usualy have morals at the end of each book, as many books did back then. Books today however, are a lot more modernized than back then and we can produce books faster, have the freedom to write almost anything we want, and a really really lot has changed since those times. It also depends on what genre you are talking about and which aurthor is writing the books. Yes their are many books out their with very few meaning and little imagination( I wont give names) but many many books are worth reading that are meaningful, imaginative, and well written that are deffinatly worth reading. Hope this helped =D
    Absolutely untrue. There is still great literature being published. Alas, it doesn't sell like popular literature, which will be all but forgotten in fifty years, replaced by new pop lit.





    But there are brilliant, insightful stories masterfully written. Maybe you're not buying/reading the right stuff.





    Consider ';The Crimson Petal and the White,'; or ';The Story of Edgar Sawtelle.';
    Yep, nowadays there are no Dantes, Shakespears, Miltons- real geniuses of literature. Now everyone are concerned to earn more monay, to satisfy the tastes of masses. Though after WW 2 there appeared some good writes, good modernists. Very few left though
    Yes and no. The difference is there are thousands of authors nowadays so of course there is going to be a good amount of crap. On rare occasion books rise to that level. Blood Meridian by Cormac McCarthy comes to mind as a recent example.
    To be commercial, they shouldn't even rise to the level of Steinbeck or Hemingway. The Odyssey -- forget it!!

    If a book was loved by everybody, then it is not true literature: True or False?

    Now, I see most of the questions of 'What do you think of my writing?' and 'Do you think this is good', so on and so forth. What did they expect, for everybody to love what they wrote.





    I mean, I believe that if a book was loved by EVERYBODY....well, actually I see that as virtually impossible. And it also strikes me as odd when BOTH Twilight and Harry Potter fans (well, some) would act as though they are having a heart attack when somebody doesn't like either books and criticizes both books and authors. Come on now.





    There would always be lovers and there would always be haters of a book, so it surprises me when I see some writers gets taken aback and defensive if nobody wanted to read their book.





    What is your take on this? And I welcome all views and opinions.If a book was loved by everybody, then it is not true literature: True or False?
    You are right - there is no book - and never will be a book - that is loved by everyone. And that's great, for it just shows how people and cultures are very different, and that makes the world interesting.But we writers are a sensitive bunch (most of us, anyway) and we want what we've written to be liked by many; when we get negative comments or scathing reviews it tends to hurt our feelings (I'm speaking for myself - I'm sure there are others who feel the same way). However, the more one writes, the more one is exposed to comments, both positive and negative, and we can accept, more readily, the bad with the good. It all comes with maturing - and I don't necessarily mean ';aging.';If a book was loved by everybody, then it is not true literature: True or False?
    People have different tastes in everything : music , art , movies , preference of color , etc.


    Books are not an exception .
    It depends how you define 'true literature'.


    Some material is too complex for the less intelligent of our population who prefer to obsess over sparkly characters. Some material is too generic and simple to satisfy others.





    You've sort of posed two questions here, and the above just answers the first one. However, it is impossible for a book to be loved by everyone.


    This is partly because a writer must draw from their own experience and opinions in order to create powerful or 'true' literature, and since everybody's views contrast then it is very easy for a group of people to object to a message that an author is attempting to portray. (This objection takes the form of disliking it.)








    So yeah. False.
    I do, very much agree with you. As you might have noticed by my avatar, I'm a big Harry Potter fan. I haven't met that many haters of the Harry Potter series, but when I do meet one, I get very defensive. I try to understand their point of view. If they have a good reason for not liking the books or perhaps their religion doesn't allow witchcraft, then I just drop the subject. But then there are those people like my sister who have never read the books but insist that they are horribly written.





    Anyway, back to the question, I do agree with you. If I'm a fan of a book and I meet a hater of that book, naturally I will defend my case, but I also try to hear the other person out and not freak out at them.... like SOME people I know.......

    Anybody to challenge me for true sahayari inspite of no literature background?

    Okay you are on.


    but i will use some english.





    Tuje dekha to aisa laga


    jaise dikhrahi hoon rerun movie fanaa


    aamir khan to vaisa bhi accha lagraha tha


    tuje dekh kar laga..ye hain bacha ya budha!!!





    wah wahAnybody to challenge me for true sahayari inspite of no literature background?
    rudadey ghame ulfat unsey hum kya khetey kya kar khetey eak hashr na nikla honto sey aur ankh mey ansu aa hee gyee


    kya kheney us khooney masti key ,kya kheney uss shama qwali keey log jaam pakad bithey hee rahey hum pee bhee gye aur chalkha bhee gyeeAnybody to challenge me for true sahayari inspite of no literature background?
    i don't even know what sahayari is..lol


    i guess im like an idiot here..lol ^_^
  • adult myspace
  • What from the media, literature, etc. would you use as an example for a ';True American';?

    It can be from Movies, Music, Literature, TV, etc. Just about anything like that.





    Just what/whoever you think represents the better qualities of an American.





    Please be specific and EXPLAIN why you chose what you did.





    Thanks!What from the media, literature, etc. would you use as an example for a ';True American';?
    That's impossible to define.





    Everyone's ideal is different.What from the media, literature, etc. would you use as an example for a ';True American';?
    Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn
    Boy this question =
    Pick anyone from the pioneer days, esp. Davy Crockett.

    Both Muhammad & Joseph Smith came out with impressive literature for their faiths. So does it make them true?

    In other words, just because the Qur'an and the Book of Mormon exist, and were purportedly introduced by either an illiterate man or a child, does that automatically make it miraculous and true?Both Muhammad %26amp; Joseph Smith came out with impressive literature for their faiths. So does it make them true?
    Qur'an really isnt that impressive, if you ever read it it is very unorganized. Like one sentence talks about ibraheem walking and the nexts talks about Isa making a bird from clay. You lose track real fast. Plus many ayahs are just ripped off from the Gemara. And it wasnt compiled until Uthman ordered it to be. And the so called scientific miracles were well known at the time, and many ended up to be wrong.





    Book of Mormon was interesting, I liked how the language seemed to change from each book. But I really liked the Doctrine and Covenants.Both Muhammad %26amp; Joseph Smith came out with impressive literature for their faiths. So does it make them true?
    Either. I think you're free to judge and choose to believe or not. People can only say their stand and not in the position to make you believe.
    I hate to say it, but no, it doesn't logically follow that they are true. However, if they are impressive, it does indicate that it would be a good idea to investigate and find out for oneself.
    Snake oil, what are the fruits of the religions? Intolerance, brainwashing, just as much as good morals and acceptance. Hell, atheism does the same thing. It's a wash.
    The scientific miracles in the Quran by themselves proof that Quran came from God not from human. Muhammad is the Seal of Prophets (last one). Therefore Smith is a false one.
    No. No more than the Communist Manifesto, Mein Kampf, or any other book. Since they were written, were they automatically true?
    No, but it's funny how these words from god happen when no-one else is around.
    Lord of the Rings is far superior. Is it true?
    Clearly two false fools
    Nope.....nor does it mean that they could not be true.
    i could say the same thing bout the bible

    Does a memoir have to be ';true'; in order to be valuable as a work of literature?

    Is it possible for an autobiography to be entirely accurate? If not, is there a minimum level of truth we as readers have a right to expect, or should we treat memoirs like any other novel?Does a memoir have to be ';true'; in order to be valuable as a work of literature?
    For me, this is a question of genre. What's the difference between ';autobiography'; and ';memoir';, if both purport to be true and written by the person who occupies the central perspective? Since memory is necessarily faulty (it won't correspond to the actual ';facts';), we must expect a certain degree of fabrication. But this is a slippery slope, which leads us to blurring the lines between fiction and nonfiction. I find that the emotional truths derived from the text are far more important, and even more real, than any supposedly factual truths, but that doesn't amount to an excuse for misrepresenting a clearly ficionalized piece as memoir. It comes down to a sincerity of the author, who chooses a genre knowing full well the expectations of the audience based on that choice. The text remains valuable (even Frey's wholly debunked work has a unique value to it, in that it brings these questions to light) despite the misrepresentations, but the community has spoken (or rather, has vacantly agreed with the force of O) - Frey's going back to flipping burgers.Does a memoir have to be ';true'; in order to be valuable as a work of literature?
    There's an *intent* factor that must be examined. Clearly, if George Washington wrote his memoirs and claimed the ability to fly, we'd guess that was a dream and not reality. But memory is based on perspective - two different people seeing the same event will probably describe it differently.

    Report Abuse



    Of course it doesn't have to be true to be valuable as a work of literature, but if it is not true, why call it a memoir? If you are going to completely make up the stuff, label it fiction and get on with it. Many fictional memoirs have been written (I, Claudius for instance), and they are excellent books, but properly labeled.
    It has to be true in order to be valuable as a work of non-fiction.





    It does not have to be true in order to be valuable as a work of fiction.
    The dictionary defines memoir, as ';An account of the personal experiences of an author';. A memoir, in every sense of the word, has to be ';true'; in order to gain the acceptance of being called a memoir. I assume that you have heard of the book ';A Million Little Pieces';? The book has recently been under fire for having parts of the exaggerated, or in some instances, complete facts altered.


    Does a memoir have to be ';true'; in order to be valuable as a work of literature? If the writer deemed the book a memoir, it must be true, or else it is serving the public, and the masses, a bunch of swindle and lies.
    324g
    If its not true then its a novel based on a true story.
    They as well as an autobiograhy should be acurate in its factual state, if not you should title it as a fiction novel and sell it as such.





    Readers buy and read memoirs because they are interested in your life experience and not something created in your mind. So if you are a serious writer you should def. take this serious and publish it under the correct pretense.





    If some one discredits you, you will become a laughing stock in the writing community.
    You're asking several questions at once. There are plenty of fictional ';memoirs'; that are fine literature--but the author does not pretend to be the same person as the character narrating the work of fiction (e.g. David Copperfield by Dickens). Then there are ';memoirs'; that nobody entirely believes, but are lots of fun to read, such as the memoirs of Casanova. And there are memoirs such as James Frey's, which are presented as autobiography but are so embellished as to be fiction. That's probably where your question comes from.





    Is James Frey a good writer? I suppose so--I haven't read the book, but a lot of other people have. Is he a truthful person? Apparently not.





    I think the big stink came because he embarrassed Oprah by telling her on TV that the whole book was true, and then it turned out to be largely made up. That's not a question about literature--it's a question about personal honesty. The book may still be a good read, but it belongs in the fiction section of the library.
    Yes, if it is written under the guise of an autobiography or biography it should be all true or as true as the person can make it to their knowledge, if a book is written that is written knowingly with lies then it should not be listed as a memoir or autobiography and it should be written up front as a novel or work of fiction.
    Basically memoirs are really just historical accounts. and history is just an acculmination of lies that most have people agreed upon.
    there isnt ever going to be a 100 % memoir its someone writing their side of how things went not the whole truth but thats ok it can still be valuable as long as its acurate from that person point of view.
    Yeah! The whole thing must be ';true'; to be a valuble work of literature. Look at James Frey's ';A Million Little Pieces';: He said it was true originally, but now it's not and it's being published as a novel.
    I agree with the first answer. it is not a memroir if it has nothing but ';colourful'; untrue stories! If your life isn't as exciting then don't pull a walter mitty and lie about it. just go ahead and write a great fiction novel!
    yes and no ..it has to be as actual as the author can remember.....but then again peoples memories are always called into question .by someone elses memory of the same situation ...but no fraud is allowed.......in other words no lieing......liars are not consider reliable sourses of the facts by anyone ......unless it was billed as a fictional work and then reader beware....because you don't want to use it for a refrence on a paper, for say a science class .hee hee ......
    Memoirs are generally skewed because the author is writing about his/her own experiences rather than from a detached perspective.





    Memoirs are definitely not historical works although they might give you an insiders view into backroom dealings. But that view will always be tinted with the authors own opinions.





    With that said, a skewed perspective would not necessarily mean the work is not valuable literature. It could very well be if it's written well and provides invaluable insight.
    Memoirs are an account of a person life, some of it can be real and some can just be made up to make the story better.
    We just wrote a memior in our English class and I think sometimes if you don't remember things you can put a fake thing in there. It probably shouldn't be something like:


    ';So he flew out the window to...'; blah blah blah... you get my point. It can be used but only sometimes if you don't remember parts and if you don't remember alot of it do a different one.
    There is a certain level of personal interpretation in all aspects of life. and time does alter our memories (for better or worse) I think we have the right to expect major details in an autobiography to be accurate, but if someones first car was blue and they remember it as green, too picyune.
    write a fiction book and say it's based on a true story. Memoirs should always be true or else your publishing a li_e story
    If it's not true, it's not a memoir. I don't mean to say that it must be factually true; I mean to say that it must accurately reflect what the author believes to be true. Otherwise, don't call it a memoir, and maybe it (whatever it is) will have some literary value.
    Yes; otherwise drop the word memoir.
    Yes, a memoir has to be true. It isn't NOT valued if a story isn't true, but it gives me a chill to read a story that really happened. If you change things like names, pesonal info, and events, it can be called ';Based on a True story.';
    Well, when looking for ';truth'; in a Memoir you do have to remember who it is that wrote the memoir and that you are getting a single perspective.


    There is a memoir written by a man who was a Nazi soldier. (I can't remember the title, unfortunately). He wrote of wonderful victories of the early war and the honor of meeting Hitler himself. From his perspective, there wasn't really anything wrong with putting people in concentration camps.





    Of course we know that's not ';true';. Concentration camps were horrible places, that noone would ever deserve to go.





    Yet this book (oh my goodness I wish I remembered what it was called) is definately a valuble literary perspective when it comes to that period of history.
    Well, if it's not true, it's not a memoir.
    nothing is entirely acurate everybody lies.


    it's human nature
    yes, why write a memoir of lies?
    Any non-fiction book needs to be taken with at least a small grain of salt.





    As long as you accept that not all accounts in an autobiography are entirely accurate, it's all just a matter of extent.
    I think a memoir has to be written in good faith that the information it contains is true, at least, that it is the truth from the perspective of the author.





    If the author wants to diverge from the truth as they know it, they should be writing fiction.
    Being a writer, though not published just yet, I've learned quite a bit about writing and memoirs can be fictionalized as long as the character is fictionalized. However, some writers take ';artistic license'; and fudge a little but I wouldn't. Memoirs are like diaries so generally for a real person they are true, exept of course the ones that just came back to bite the author of ';A Million Little Pieces'; in the booty. He embellished and outright lied in his memoirs and he got called on the carpet for it and had to have 'come to Jesus' meeting with Oprah because she had endorsed his book for being the real thing and really supported it. Then, when people checked out his story, and someone always does, they found out that a lot of his writing was far from the truth. The real shame is that he could have written it as fiction and it would have sold well but he decided to lie and it not only embarrassed him and Oprah, it embarrassed his editors and publisher. Not a good thing to do. It could be embarrassing if you're not careful. Good luck.
    There was the perfect Oprah show for this. Remember hearing about the author she used in her book club, the sales when up and then a reporter showed errors in the ';memoirs';. He defended himself by saying they did not have to be completely true. His life story was reshaped into a better book with his liberties.


    Certainly most of the people involved think he should have been more truthful. At least about the book being part fiction. The Regan Biographer got into some trouble for writing himself in the early years to make the story smoother when the author actually spent time with R.Regan and his first person narative was appropriate.


    Oprah appoligised to the book club for not investigateing him Herself. {now if she would appologize for inviting GWBush on} Certainly is a good question.
    Well, a memior is supposed to be a period in your lifetime. You could ';spice it up'; a little bit by adding things that aren't entirely true, I suppose.