Last Ent Wife (RCIA)

I'm trying to create a list of all conceivable tangible skills a person can have. Yes, it's a bit daunting, but it's for charity.

So I'm asking for help. Please help complete my list! Thanks.

Reading & Reading Aloud

Penmanship

Typing

Fluent in more than one language

Sewing – by hand

Sewing – by machine

Darning/Stitching

Crochet

Embroidery

Needlepoint

Drawing

Painting, Art

Calligraphy

Pottery

Wood working/Whittling

Metal Working

Cooking, basic

Baking, basic

Cake Decorating

Recipe Creator/Writer

Cleaning (sweeping, mopping)

Laundry, basic

Hair Cutting

Hair Styling

Nail work : pedicure, manicure

Cosmetics application

Writing/English skills (grammar, spelling, punctuation)

Computer skills, basic

Software skills (list all known software programs you are comfortable using)

Hunting, Bow

Hunting, Rifle

Trapping

Fishing

Leather working

Tanning/Buckskins

Carpentry

Plumbing

Electrical Work

Singing

Dancing (any style)

Poetry

Canning

Preserving Food

Root Cellaring

Gardening, flowers

Gardening, food

Farming, small scale

Farming, large scale

Foraging (mushrooms, berries, etc)

Fermentation (beer & wine)

Crafting, general

Photography

Pattern making/Clothing Design

Mathematics

Sciences (Biology/Physics/Chemistry, etc)

Historical Knowledge

Ancestry Knowledge (family tree information)

Cobbling (shoe making)

Painting, house

Painting, industrial

Construction work/labor

Forklift Operation

CDL license

Jewelry Making (any type)

Soap Making

Bee keeping

Paper making

What am I missing??

Abiogenesis: Literally, "from nothing life." It is the theory that life sprang from that which was non-life. It has never been proven in all the years of recorded human history. Not one single scientific test has ever gotten life from non-life, even though many, many attempts have been made to do just that.

And yet, the pro-choice position seems to state that life, that is, a fully developed human child, came from non-life, a fetus inside the womb.

Isn't that inherently illogical, and extremely unscientific?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSlKKHoBXf4&feature...

4 and half minute video on an 8 year old pastor in Indonesia who prays and preaches for reconciliation and peace between Muslims and Christians.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/us_israel_archaeology

QUOTE Experts have not yet been able to decipher the text fully, but carbon dating of artifacts found at the site indicates the Hebrew inscription was written about 3,000 years ago, predating the Dead Sea Scrolls by 1,000 years, the archaeologists said. END QUOTE

Matthew 7:21 Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven. 22 Many will say to me in that day: Lord, Lord, have not we prophesied in thy name, and cast out devils in thy name, and done many miracles in thy name? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, you that work iniquity.

Somehow I don't think the Atheists are going to say, "I cast out demons in your name, Lord," nor do I think Hindus or Muslims will be calling Christ "Lord, Lord." Will the pagans tell him they performed miracles in his name?

So who is the Savior speaking to in this passage and what does it mean for us?

If you were reading an ancient historical document and came across a reference to Satyrs (mythical half-men, half-goat creatures), would you:

A) Dismiss the entire document because modern science knows Satyrs aren't real, therefore the entire document is false. (Atheist perspective)

B) Argue that because you believe the rest of the document, therefore Satyrs must have at one time been real. (Fundamentalist perspective)

C) Consider that either Satyrs were not to the author what they are to us, or that maybe at one time there was a group of people who called themselves Satyrs, dressed in goat skins and told everyone they were half goat and half man to scare their enemies. (Catholic perspective)

Which choice seems more reasonable?

Isa 13:21 But wild beasts of the desert shall lie there; and their houses shall be full of doleful creatures; and owls shall dwell there, and satyrs shall dance there.

http://www.gulfnews.com/world/India/10254327.html

Is there any doubt that this is state-sponsored persecution of Christians in India? Consider how the police responded.

QUOTE "State police failed to stop the crimes, failed to protect me from the attackers, they were friendly with the attackers," Sister Meena told a news conference on Friday. END QUOTE

So it's around 4am west coast time, is that when the trolls decide to ramp up the R&S section? Is that mommy goes to bed and they can sneak down into the basement for a little R&R on R&S?

QUOTEMosul police have reported finding the bullet-riddled bodies of seven Christians in separate attacks so far this month, the latest a day laborer found on Wednesday. On Saturday, militants blew up three abandoned Christian homes in eastern Mosul, police said.

Father Bolis Jacob of Mosul's Mar Afram Church said he was at a loss to understand the violence. "We respect the Islamic religion and the Muslim clerics," he said. "We don't know under what religion's pretexts these terrorists work.END QUOTE

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081011/ap_on_re_mi_ea...

*************************************************

Yes, here in the United States, we Christians are the majority and we have it easy. Most of the cries of "persecution" are nothing more a person who disagrees with us. But to say that Christians are not persecuted anywhere is completely false.

I hope all my brothers and sisters in Christ will pray for our Christian brethren in Iraq. Pray for their safety and strength through this trial.

http://www.livescience.com/technology/080930-synth...

How many people really had never heard of this, and what are the possible moral and ethical implications of this research?

BEFORE YOU ANSWER...read this, it might change your mind.

In the United States, there is no taxation without proper representation. If Churches lost their tax exempt status and had to pay taxes, it would be an open invitation for them to get MORE involved in government and politics. They would be able to form PACs (Political Action Committees), actively endorse specific parties and candidates, pay for and sponsor bills and measures, and even hire lobbyists to directly influence our elected officials.

The tax exempt status is not to protect churches from government. It's to protect the the government from churches.

And before you assume something you shouldn't, I am a Christian.

Still think churches should pay taxes?

http://news.aol.com/article/girl-auctions-virginit...

And --I've seen a lot of men and women claim that virginity means nothing and that they actually prefer experienced partners. If this is true, then shouldn't this girl have to pay a man to take her virginity instead of the other way around?

Please describe and quantify this proof. How could it be tested and measured in a lab? How could it be duplicated and peer reviewed? Do you keep data and logs to chart the observable quantities of love your family does or does not display?

Please note: displays of affection would not qualify as scientific proof, since the phenomenon know as love is an emotional and mental state, and outward displays could be easily faked and do not measure the thoughts and feelings of the subject being tested.

In order to get published you have to be published, or at least that's what I'm being told...so what is the best self-publishing site I can go with in the hopes that the next book will be picked up by a standard publishing company?

(I've read about the Publish America scam and I've also been to lulu.com, are there others I should check out?) Thanks!

If I wanted to start a halfway house for the homeless, what are the first steps I need to do? How do I start 501c non-profit? Can I run a charity from my home? Thanks!

Does she even exist? Are her hugs and love for real?? Prove it wrong!

Enough already, ok?

If all of God's chosen people are predestined to be "saved" before they were ever born, and hence the rest of humanity is preselected to be damned, and if irresistible grace (once saved, always saved) is to be believed, then what exactly do demons do?

--Why torture the "Elect" if they can never lose their salvation,

--Why torture the damned if they are going to Hell anyway,

--Why add sin to the Cross if Christ's atonement was limited and all your sins are already known and forgiven, and hence,

--Exactly what is the point of demons or temptation at all if Calvin is correct in his theology?

Here's a quick overview of Calvin's TULIP for those who don't know:

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

Consider this OT verse:

This thought of yours is perverse: as if the clay should think against the potter, and the work should say to the maker thereof: Thou madest me not: or the thing framed should say to him that fashioned it: Thou understandest not.

And then this one:

7 The potter also tempering soft earth, with labour fashioneth every vessel for our service, and of the same clay he maketh both vessels that are for clean uses, and likewise such as serve to the contrary: but what is the use of these vessels, the potter is the judge.

And then what Paul writes in Romans:

20 O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it: Why hast thou made me thus? 21 Or hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump, to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

Is it reasonable to think that Paul, who was a Sadducee and knew the Hebrew scriptures so well, would borrow from them here to make his point about the potter and the clay?

Consider this Old Testament passage:

16 But the just shall live for evermore: and their reward is with the Lord, and the care of them with the most High. 17 Therefore shall they receive a kingdom of glory, and a crown of beauty at the hand of the Lord: for with his right hand he will cover them, and with his holy arm he will defend them. 18 And his zeal will take armor, and he will arm the creature for the revenge of his enemies. 19 He will put on justice as a breastplate, and will take true judgment instead of a helmet. 20 He will take equity for an invincible shield: 21 And he will sharpen his severe wrath for a spear, and the whole world shall fight with him against the unwise.

And now Paul's version in Ephesians:

13 Therefore take unto you the armor of God, that you may be able to resist in the evil day, and to stand in all things perfect. 14 Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of justice, 15 And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace: 16 In all things taking the shield of faith, wherewith you may be able to extinguish all the fiery darts of the most wicked one. 17 And take unto you the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit (which is the word of God).

Is it possible or reasonable to assume he was inspired to described the armor of God based on this Old Testament passage?

When the King James Version of the Bible was first published in 1611, how many books of the Bible did it contain?

In what year were the number of books of the Bible changed and by whom?

**HINT - IT'S NOT 66.**

Best answer will be the first to quote an accurate source.