A small answer, GOD.
2006-09-26 22:05:37
·
answer #1
·
answered by Ylia 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
ok, it is a humorous prank. you're taking a garbage can and fill it about 3/4 way with water. You lean this up hostile on your position's door. Knock on the door, run, and cover so that you will see it from a distance. at the same time as the unsuspecting man or woman opens the door the water will fall into their abode flooding it. it is a very humorous prank. yet do not get stuck. yet another one is to get a distant that works on the significant t.v. and mute it, happen the volume, change the channel, and turn off the flexibility do it at the same time as they are gazing their in demand instruct. ok- right here's one for revenge. it will be suitable to purpose this someplace the position the guy you're pranking can not get yet another pair of garments-like tenting as an celebration. What you do is get a field of Bleach and placed a gaggle of hair in it and go away it there over nighttime. next morning, drain it and chop the hair genuine nice... and it is going to change into itching powder!!! placed all of it over the different man or woman's outfits
2016-11-24 21:36:17
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
No one can ask the biggest question better than what you have just done. The biggest question indeed is the one you have asked viz. 'what is the biggest question?'.
We are struggling to even identify the most important question. Should it relate to here and now - well, that would only be urgent. Should it relate to the orgin - well, that would be pre-historic. Should it relate to the end - well, that would be uncertain future. Maybe, the question should therefore relate to timelessness or the unchangeable or the eternal certainty - we can't know nor understand nor imagine, we can only name it GOD. Our existence as such is subject to impregnable time and space limitations. Hence, as we exist, we can't know nor understand nor imagine what it is to 'be' without existing, given that existence has a beginning and an end i.e. time dimension.
2006-09-26 18:12:57
·
answer #3
·
answered by small 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Who we are and what are we doing here?
Spirits travelling towards God.
Is there a God?
Yes
Do we know what we really know?
Yes through memory and sense perception.
Do we know what we really need to know?
Not always but Omniscience knows.
Who we are?
a society of human beings.
What is the biggest question?
Will you or will you not rise to a higher state of being?
If you were an animal, and knew that a human life was more intelligent, would you choose to exit your animal body and go into a human body?
Same goes for right now. Will you (eventually) exit your human body for a higher body, or will you remain in human form?
2006-09-26 18:37:40
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
"Some would ask, how could a perfect God create a universe filled with so much that is evil. They have missed a greater conundrum: why would a perfect God create a universe at all?" -- Sister Miriam Godwinson, "But for the Grace of God"
2006-09-26 18:59:20
·
answer #5
·
answered by R[̲̅ə̲̅٨̲̅٥̲̅٦̲̅]ution 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
In the end, you'll have to define the "biggest", and likewise you'll have to state the "question" (if your being so desires). ... Having said that, Heidegger's ultimate metaphysical / phenomenological question should easily rank among the Top 10 candidates, namely: "Why are there essents - why is there anything at all - rather than Nothing?"
2006-09-26 17:56:28
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The biggest question was asked by Senator Edward Kennedy at the confirmation hearings for Chief Justice John Roberts. It is 514 words long. Here it is in its entirety:
Let me, if I could, go to the Civil Rights Restoration Act. In 1981, you support an effort by the Department of Education to reverse 17 years of civil right protections at colleges and universities that receive federal funds. Under the new regulations, the definition of federal assistance to colleges and universities would be narrow to exclude certain types of student loans and grants so that fewer institutions would be covered by the civil rights laws. As a result, more colleges and universities would legally be able to discriminate against people of color, women and the disabled. Your efforts to narrow the protection of the civil rights laws did not stop there, however. In 1984, in Grove City v. Bell, the Supreme Court decided, contrary to the Department of Education regulation that you supported, that student loans and grants did indeed constitute federal assistance to colleges for purposes of triggering civil rights protections. But, in a surprising twist, the court concluded that the nondiscrimination laws were intended to apply only to the specific program receiving the funds and not to the institution as a whole. Under that reasoning, a university that received federal aid in the form of tuition could not discriminate in admissions but was free to discriminate in athletics, housing, faculty hiring and any other programs that did not receive the direct funds. If the admissions office didn't discriminate, they got the funds through the admission office, they could discriminate in any other place of the university. A strong bipartisan majority in both the House and the Senate decided to pass another law, the Civil Rights Restoration Act, to make it clear that they intended to prohibit discrimination in all programs and activities of a university that received federal assistance. You vehemently opposed the Civil Rights Restoration Act. Even after the Grove City court found otherwise, you still believed that there was, quote -- and this is your quote -- a good deal of intuitive appeal to the argument that federal loans and grants to students should not be viewed as federal financial assistance to the university. You realize, of course, that these loans and grants to the students were paid to the university as tuition. Then, even though you acknowledged that the program-specific aspect of the Supreme Court decision was going to be overturned by the congressional legislation, you continued to believe that it would be, quote, too onerous for colleges to comply with nondiscrimination laws across the entire university unless it was, quote, on the basis of something more solid than federal aid to students. Judge Roberts, if your position prevailed, it would have been legal in many cases to discriminate in athletics for girls, women. It would have been legal to discriminate in the hiring of teachers. It would have been legal not to provide services or accommodations to the disabled. Do you still believe today that it is too onerous for the government to require universities that accept tuition payments from students who rely on federal grants and loans not to discriminate in any of their programs or activities?
2006-09-26 17:28:25
·
answer #7
·
answered by John F 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Your FAITH will answer all your questions,
Believing is important. Follow the things which are right and necessary.
And God? The heaven declare his personality, and the people who loved you SHOWS his love and care.
Guys! STAND FOR WHAT YOU BELIEVE!
And the BIGGEST question and ANSWER to you now is:
Do you his PRESENCE?
2006-09-26 17:34:17
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Your orginal question "What is the biggest Question?". That's the biggie. Religio-socio-econ based questions are bound by planet earth and all its inhabitants.....go figure.
2006-09-26 17:24:00
·
answer #9
·
answered by strong_n_tender_2006 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
The biggest Question continues to be the same... the one we haven't figured out how to ask yet... :)
2006-09-26 21:24:44
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋