Is there any difference between Alliteration and Assonance?

Would you sacrifice money, comfort, and security for what you believe in? Give me a response as to WHY you would sacrifice money

oee [108]

Yes.

You're belief is essentially your core, and without it, you would not survive. It is not a true belief if you are going to give it away easily. Ever heard of the question, "What is the meaning of life?". What everybody finds is the meaning is extremely different from everyone-else.The meaning is shaped through your actions, beliefs, your influences, and even nature. Without 'beliefs', you are empty inside.

As the quote says: "Yet when I considered all the works that my hands had accomplished and what I had toiled to achieve, I found everything to be futile, a pursuit of the wind; there was nothing to be gained under the sun."

Without meaning, you would think everything is rubbish, and that you had no purpose in life.

How do you find purpose? You find purpose through your own core beliefs, as well as those around you. When everyone's beliefs has a positive aspect to it, humanity is able to grow for the better, and everything would work out well. If the beliefs of some are not right, it would destroy themselves and possibly others too.

Personally, I would sacrifice money, comfort, and security, for what I believe in, because it is a part of me. If i sacrifice my beliefs, it would be like taking away my inside, leaving me as an empty shell. Without the beliefs, "Every is meaningless, a chasing after the wind."

One can argue that if one is rich, and has all the goods in the world, they would be happy they would be secure and comfortable, but that is not true, for "For what profits a man if he gains the whole world but loses his own soul."

In the end, it is up to the viewer, should one keep their worldly riches and desire but find no meaning, or should one continue in their beliefs, in hope of what they believing being the correct, and the answer to their meaning of life?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

hope this helps

7 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Why does Edwards claim that nonbelievers are akin to spiders in "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God"?

SCORPION-xisa [38]

Answer:

II. Spiders are powerless should a rock fall on them.

Edwards uses this comparison of non-believers to a spider to show that should God decide to send someone to hell, he or she does not have the power to stop it. Even if the non-believer felt assured and arrogant about it, he would still not have the ability to keep himself out of Hell. Option I is incorrect because Puritans, like Edwards, did not believe that any of God's creations were a mistake. Option III is also incorrect because the purpose is not to show the expendable nature of the spider, but rather the almighty power of God.

Explanation:

3 0

3 years ago

I need help with this question!!!!

damaskus [11]

1. Alternate forms

2. Synonym (These are all guesses)

3. Entry word

4. Part of speech

5. Definition

6. Respelling (One of these is incorrect, for sure.)

7. The very bottom thingy "etymology"

Sorry if any/all of these are incorrect. Please do some research, or wait for another person to respond.

8 0

3 years ago

What words can you spell with T E A G

ra1l [238]

Answer:

gate

Explanation:

5 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Who is the first human in the world?

Ivenika [448]

Answer:

Adam (religiously)

or Lucy (scientifically; there wasn't really a first human, but if you had to come up with someone, this is what might be considered correct, as it is the earliest remains)

Explanation:

religiously [Judaism/Christianity], the first person is believed to be Adam, created by G*d.

scientifically (based on fossil records and theories of evolution), there was no first "human", or, at least, not in the way you're thinking of.

people, like all other organisms, have evolved from a very distant ancestor. This is called a common ancestor, and it is theorized to be shared by all organisms/life on earth [not the same as plants]. However, this ancestor is not even remotely human, it was likely no more than a worm-like creature.

Over time, different versions of this animal started evolving, and eventually, a species (which began to resemble humans as we see them now). Early Australopithecus would probably be the first "humans"--although, they were not really humans. These were in existence 1-5 million years ago. (This is when religion does not line up with science--we have fossil remains of Australopithecus, and they are not nearly what Adam is described as from a religious perspective, there is literally no possible way for a human to have been that evolved the same amount of time ago-

**This is why I believe that religious texts are theoretical, and were never written to be facts, they were stories that helped people understand morals. I am somewhat religious)

I digress. So, over time, these old distant versions of humans, that were really, really, different from humans evolved. This is why there is no first human, we evolved together.

One of the earliest recorded "humans" was Lucy, an Australopithecus. We don't believe her to be the first human scientifically, because there could be no first human--our existence is evolution, and there is no start to human history--it begins from a place that was not humans.

So, there was no first human, only the earliest recordings of one (which is what we often simplify to be the first human)

8 0

1 year ago

Read 2 more answers