Fråga Google

You searched for: sapul meaning (Indonesiska - Engelska)

Mänskliga bidrag

Från professionella översättare, företag, webbsidor och fritt tillgängliga översättningsdatabaser.

Lägg till en översättning

Indonesiska

Engelska

Info

Indonesiska

meaning

Engelska

Kecewa berat

Senast uppdaterad: 2014-09-11
Användningsfrekvens: 1
Kvalitet:

Referens: Wikipedia

Indonesiska

meaning warm regards

Engelska

warm regards

Senast uppdaterad: 2017-08-22
Användningsfrekvens: 1
Kvalitet:

Referens: Anonym

Indonesiska

the meaning of economics

Engelska

blangkon

Senast uppdaterad: 2014-10-10
Användningsfrekvens: 1
Kvalitet:

Referens: Wikipedia

Indonesiska

the meaning of my last love

Engelska

kamu adalah yang terakhir

Senast uppdaterad: 2015-10-23
Användningsfrekvens: 1
Kvalitet:

Referens: Anonym

Indonesiska

the meaning of my last love

Engelska

my last love is you

Senast uppdaterad: 2015-10-23
Användningsfrekvens: 1
Kvalitet:

Referens: Anonym

Indonesiska

the meaning of love struck?

Engelska

in love

Senast uppdaterad: 2018-10-10
Användningsfrekvens: 1
Kvalitet:

Referens: Anonym

Indonesiska

mujhe afsos hai meaning in english

Engelska

afsos hai mujhe meaning in english

Senast uppdaterad: 2016-12-01
Användningsfrekvens: 1
Kvalitet:

Referens: Anonym

Indonesiska

Indonesian-perjemahan meaning into english

Engelska

Re-type it

Senast uppdaterad: 2015-02-02
Användningsfrekvens: 1
Kvalitet:

Referens: Anonym

Indonesiska

meaning i miss you but i hate you my girl

Engelska

dont make me broke i will make broker than me i love you you dont i care you, you dont so make a choice stay or broke

Senast uppdaterad: 2017-01-05
Användningsfrekvens: 1
Kvalitet:

Referens: Anonym

Indonesiska

what does it mean what is the meaning of this lines

Engelska

apa artinya what is meaning of this lines

Senast uppdaterad: 2014-05-12
Användningsfrekvens: 1
Kvalitet:

Referens: Anonym

Indonesiska

simple past tenseSmall mainland peninsula with a national park with beaches and stunning scenery to rival the beaches of Bali on the south coast of Java. Pangandaran is one of Java's best-kept secrets as far as international tourists are concerned, but has been extremely popular with locals for along, long time. A small fishing town, it possesses one of Java's finest beaches and Pangandaran Nature Reserve teems with wild buffalo, barking deer and monkeys. The people are very friendly, this combined with the idealize surroundings make this a great place to spend a few days relaxing island-style. Pangandaran is halfway between Bandung and Yogya, about 5 hours by bus from Bandung and 8 hours from Jakarta. This is the second beach resort area on the Indian Ocean after Pelabuhan Ratu. The site is 223 from Bandung and 400km from Jakarta. The trip by car or bus is recommendable because the road conditions are good. However, if we prefer to take the train, get into Bandung-Yogyakarta Express train and get off at the Banjar railroad station about 4 hours later. From here it will be another 50 km by bus to Pangandaran. The beach is called Penanjung, where most of the cottages and hotels are located, however, of modest ratings. Nothing luxurious should be expected. Pangandaran is especially of interest to nature lovers, as there is a wildlife reserve in the vicinity where wild birds and other indigenous animals live about freely to be enjoyed by visitors. In Pangandaran visitors will like fine white beaches, blue ocean and fine seafood. Twelve kilometers before arriving at Pangandaran visitors will see a huge rock on the beach, which is called Karang Nini. Another place of special interest for nature lovers is a forest Conservation Park, close to the camping ground, which has basic facilities suitable for the younger set. Somewhat further out, west of Pangandaran, driving 23 km on the way to Parigi, lays Batu Hiu, meaning Shark's Rock, a coastal rock that has the shark shape.

Engelska

simple past tense

Senast uppdaterad: 2015-12-02
Användningsfrekvens: 1
Kvalitet:

Referens: Anonym

Indonesiska

scientevid learning Originally Posted by Ocelot Hi Radrook, Thanks once again for your response. Indeed I was just checking that I'd located the one article amongst many that you thought addressed my claim. As I detailed, it doesn't. Well actually some people do make that claim. I've seen much talk from various brands of creationist that claim that MacroEvolution (evolution of new taxa of the species level and above) is impossible. They use similar arguments as you do so please forgive me for my presumption. I do apologise. Of course the fact that new species have been observed to evolve both in the lab and in the wild, make this claim one of the more ridiculous creationist claims but it is nonetheless one that I have encountered. I asgee that speciation does and has occurred. It's interesting to me that you have raised the bar. You accept that not all individual species need to have been created. Presumably you accept that Lions, Tigers and the domestic Cat all have a common ancestor? Am I correct in my estimation of your beliefs. Yes. If so do you also accept the more controversial conclusion that Homo Sapiens has a common ancestor with Chimps, Bonobos, Gorillas and Orang Utans. It may be more controversial for it's broad implications to theology and philosophy but perhaps because of this added interest it is a conclusion backed by even greater quantities of genetic evidence. No, that's where we diverge. Of course the genetic evidence that all placental mammals share a common ancestor more recent than the one they share with marsupials is as compelling as the evidence for a common ancestor amongst other Genus, Family, Order or Classes. If your theory is true, it would be interesting to see if the genetic evidence could tell us what the original common ancestors were beyond which we can find no further link. For example lets take for want of a better choice a red kangaroo named Charles. You and I both agree that Charles shares a common ancestor with all other red kangaroos, the genetic evidence backs this up. I see no reason to object. According to the genetic evidence Charles also shares a more distant common ancestor with other species of kangaroo such as grey kangaroos, and antilopine kangaroos. Ok. The genetic evidence suggests that further back in time these kangaroos shared a common ancestor with a variety of other species of kangaroo, wallaby and walleroo of the macropus genus. Would you agree? Sure. If so then the genetic evidence further indicates that the macropus genus shares a common ancestor with all other members of the macropod family including various other Kangaroos and Wallabies, the quokka and pademelons. Would you agree that these are all of the same "kind" sharing a common ancestor. That might be acceptable. If so then the genetic evidence indicates that the macropod family share a more distant common ancestor with all members of the order diprodontia. This includes possums koalas and wombats. Is it conceivable to you that the genetic evidence is correct and that these creatures all share a common ancestor with one another? Could they all be of the same "kind"? If they are of the same kind. In fact could all the australidelphia super order of marsupials share a common ancestor as the genetic evidence would suggest, if so are they collectively a "kind" Or do they, as the empirical evidence would suggest, all share a common ancestor with all other marsupials. Are marsupials a kind? I presume that you do not accept that some time in the cretaceous there was an early mammal type reptile or therapsid from whom both you and Charles can claim lineage. However how do you explain why when the genetic evidence is so clear? Because I believe that the data is being interpreted to fit into a preconceived notion. It doesn’t matter where you place the bar, the genetic evidence is clear, there is only one "kind" currently on planet earth we are all descended from the same single common ancestor. I too have no problem when seriously considering a theory of intelligent design that the designer might choose to vary their techniques. What I have a problems with is why the techniques should so closely match a picture of common descent with particular variations being more closely clustered amongst species that appear to be more closely related. Creationists did not make this prediction. Evolutionary biologists did. The examination of the evidence continues to uphold the prediction of the evolutionary biologists. Unless Creationism can explain this remarkable coincidence it is deficient as a theory. I'm afraid your meaning here is not entirely clear to me. However the assumption that evolution is true is rather the point. If you make that assumption you make a prediction that turns out to be true. If you don't make that assumption you need an alternative explanation for the prediction. I offer the analogy once more. If you assume that I am related to my son you will expect a roughly 50% match between the various genes in highly variable alleles. If you do not make that assumption and otherwise find the 50% match you must find another explanation (perhaps we are brothers...) If you find more genetic matches amongst placental mammals than between placental mammals and marsupials this is explained by assuming that placental mammals sharing a more recent common ancestor amongst themselves than the one they might share with marsupials. If you reject that assumption then it would benefit your case to offer an alternative that fits the known facts at least as well. I agree that certain animals share more genetic material in common than other kinds. As I said previously, some of that sharing is due to a common ancestor called a kind in Genesis. What I don't agree with is the transformation of one kind into another or that all living things are ultimately related. Or that my ancestor was a one celled creature which slowly turned into a fish, and later into a reptile, and later into some type of piglike animal as the evolutionist interpretations of data say. Not simply because it is repulsive thought, but because it all depends on a mindless process which I and most human beings on this earth, including human beings who are scientists, find unbelievable due to its inherent improbability and based on the cause and effect phenomena we perceive which indicates that machinelike complex things do not make themselves but are the product of mind or else are programmed to replicate themselves by a mind. Hi again Radrook, It's good to hear back from you. This appears to be a derail from my original question of how do you account for the genetic evidence of common descent if not through common descent. Originally Posted by Radrook It's not the frequency it's the mutation process itself that is a dubious choice for the organization of complex organisms. Originally Posted by Radrook I never denied the occurrence of neutral or beneficial mutations. It is the unlikelyhood of a mindless process with its high probability of being harmful to an organism being said to ultimately lead to the intricate organization as is evident in the human eye with its iris, to adjust the entry of light, the lens to focus that light, on a screen called the retina which is connected to an optic nerve, which reacts to the radiation by coding it into neural impulses, which in turn arrives at a specialized part of the brain which can decode those impulses and turn them into the perception of images. Sorry but in the presence of such strong evidence to the contrary, I just can't buy into the mindless mutation explanation First let me congratulate you on your acceptance of the existence of small positive mutations. This is a major step towards your understanding of what evolution is truly about. It is a step that some creationists are not prepared to make even in the face of reproducible empirical evidence. It appears that you are not sufficiently aware of the intricate complexity that can be produced by undoubtedly mindless processes. Snowflakes, have complexity, a rock arch has irreducible complexity, the water cycle is a steam engine. There is nothing you have demonstrated to be beyond the reach of a mindless process. Are you familiar with John Conway's Game of Life. Draw a random pattern in this very simple purely mechanical 2D universe. The odds that within a few generations you'll see a small glider pattern. It looks designed but you know that you didn't design it. Genetic recipes for life allow new increases in complexity to build upon previous ones. This allows many small mutations to add up to a bigger one. As such it offers us the possibility for a pinnacle of "mindless design" It is in fact so good at design that genetic algorithms have been put to good use by human designers in computer simulations. For example a genetic algorithm produces a shape which is tested virtually for various structural properties. Those algorithms which produce the best designs are then used as the seeds for the next generation of designs. It is not uncommon for such a mindless process to produce "designs" superior in structural efficiency to any of intelligent origin. What evolutionary theory accepts can never evolve is a feature than cannot be broken down into many small neutral or positive stages. The discovery of such a feature would indeed be a problem for evolution. However it is difficult to demonstrate that a feature could not be the result of an appropriate evolutionary path. To do so would probably require examination of an infinite number of possible paths. Instead we get argument for incredulity: "I cannot see how this feature could have evolved, therefore it could not have evolved." I'm sure you don't need me to point out the flaw in this logic. In all cases that I'm aware of, biologists have made progress in discovering possible evolutionary paths for the formation of seemingly problematic features. You bring up the example of the eye as one candidate. This has of course been much discussed and I'm surprised that you do not acknowledge that the solution to this apparent conundrum has already been provided. In fact it was a topic discussed by Darwin himself, who also provided a solution. From here The gradual steps listed are briefly... • photosensitive cell • aggregates of pigment cells without a nerve • an optic nerve surrounded by pigment cells and covered by translucent skin • pigment cells forming a small depression • pigment cells forming a deeper depression • the skin over the depression taking a lens shape • muscles allowing the lens to adjust From the same page you can find links detailing how each stage has been observed in the natural world. Since you accept that small positive mutation can occur and be subject to natural selection it should now be clear to you that the evolution of the eye can be broken down into a series of such steps.

Engelska

english translation into Indonesian

Senast uppdaterad: 2014-10-27
Användningsfrekvens: 1
Kvalitet:

Referens: Anonym
Varning: Innehåller osynlig HTML-formatering

Indonesiska

tdgdgdgdrgeeeThe Place of Logic in Philosophy. The sciences fall into two broad divisions, viz.: the speculative and the regulative (or normative) sciences. In the speculative sciences, philosophic thought deals with those things which we find proposed to our intelligence in the universe: such sciences have no other immediate end than the contemplation of the truth. Thus we study Mathematics, not primarily with a view to commercial success, but that we may know. In the normative sciences, on the other hand, the philosopher pursues knowledge with a view to the realization of some practical end. "The object of philosophy," says St. Thomas of Aquin, "is order. This order may be such as we find already existing; but it may be such as we seek to bring into being ourselves."¹ Thus sciences exist, which have as their object the realization of order in the acts both of our will and of our intellect. The science which deals with the due ordering of the acts of the will, is Ethics, that which deals with order in the acts of the intellect is Logic. ¹St. Thomas in Ethic. I. lect. 1. Sapientis est ordinare. . . . Ordo autem quadrupliciter ad rationem comparatur. Est enim quidam ordoquem ratio non facit sed solum considerat, sicut est ordo rerum naturalium. Alius autem est ordo quem ratio considerando facit in proprio actu, puta cum ordinat conceptus suos ad invicem et signa conceptuum quae sunt voces significativae. Tertius autem est ordo quem ratio considerando facit in operationibus voluntatis. Quartus autem est ordo quem ratio considerando facit in exterioribus rebus, quarum ipsa est causa, sicut in arca et domo. The question has often been raised, whether Logic is science or an art. The answer to this will depend entirely on the precise meaning which we give to the word 'art.' The medieval philosophers regarded the notion of an art as signifying a body of rules by which man directs his actions to the performance of some work.2 Hence they held Logic to be the art of reasoning, as well as the science of the reasoning process. Perhaps a more satisfactory terminology is that at present in vogue, according to which the term 'art,' is reserved to mean a body of precepts for the production of some external result, and hence is not applicable to the normative sciences. Aesthetics, the science which deals with beauty and proportion in the objects of the external senses, is now reckoned with Ethics and Logic, as a normative science. By the medieval writers it was treated theoretically rather than practically, and was reckoned part of Metaphysics. It may be well to indicate briefly the distinction between Logic and two other sciences, to which it bears some affinity. Logic and Metaphysics. The term Metaphysics sometimes stands for philosophy in general sometimes with a more restricted meaning it stands for that part of philosophy known as Ontology. In this latter sense Metaphysics deals not with thoughts, as does Logic, but with things, not with the conceptual order but with the real order. It investigates the meaning of certain notions which all the special sciences presuppose, such as Substance, Accident, Cause, Effect, Action. It deals with principles which the special sciences do not prove, but on which they rest, such as e.g., Every event must have a cause. Hence it is called the science of Being, since its object is not limited to some special sphere, but embraces all that is, whether material or spiritual. Logic on the other hand deals with the conceptual order, with thoughts. Its conclusions do not relate to things, but to the way in which the mind represents things. ²St. Thomas us An. Post. I., lect. x. "Nihil enim aliud ars esse videtur, quam certa ordinatio rationis qua per determinata media ad debitum finem actus humani perveniunt." Logic and Psychology. The object of Psychology is the human soul and all its activities. It investigates the nature and operations of intellect, will, imagination, sense. Thus its object is far wider than that of Logic, which is concerned with the intellect alone. And even in regard to the intellect, the two sciences consider it under different aspects. Psychology considers thought merely as an act of the soul. Thus if we take a judgment, such as e.g., "The three angles of a triangle are together equal to two right angles," Psychology considers it, merely in so far as it is a form of mental activity. Logic on the other hand, examines the way in which this mental act expresses the objective truth with which it deals; and if necessary, asks whether it follows legitimately from the grounds on which it is based. Moreover, Logic, as a regulative science, seeks to prescribe rules as to how we ought to think. With this Psychology has nothing to do: it only asks, "What as a matter of fact is the nature of the mind's activity?" The Scope of Logic. Logicians are frequently divided into three classes, according as they hold that the science is concerned (1) with names only, (2) with the form of thought alone, (3) with thought as representative of reality. The first of these views — that Logic is concerned with names only — has found but few defenders. It is however taught by the French philosopher Condillac (1715 — 1780), who held that the process of reasoning consists solely in verbal transformations. The meaning of the conclusion is, he thought, ever identical with that of the original proposition. The theory that Logic deals only with the forms of thought, irrespective of their relation to reality, was taught among others by Hamilton (1788 —1856) and Mansel (1820 —1871). Both of these held that Logic is no way concerned with the truth of our thoughts, but only with their consistency.In this sense Hamilton says: "Logic is conversant with the form of thought, to the exclusion of the matter" (Lectures. I. p. xi). By these logicians a distinction is drawn between 'formal truth,' i.e., self-consistency and 'material truth,' i.e., conformity with the object and it is said that Logic deals with formal truth alone. On this view Mill well observes: "the notion of the true and false will force its way even into Formal Logic. We may abstract from actual truth, but the validity of reasoning is always a question of conditional truth — whether one proposition must be true if the others are true, or whether one proposition can be true if others are true" (Exam. of Hamilton, p. 399). According to the third theory, Logic deals with thought as the means by which we attain truth. Mill, whom we have just quoted, may stand as a representative of this view. "Logic," he says, "is the theory of valid 'thought, not of thinking, but of correct thinking" (Exam. of Hamilton, p. 388). To which class of logicians should Aristotle and his Scholastic followers be assigned? Many modern writers rank them in the second of these groups, and term them Formal Logicians. It will soon appear on what a misconception this opinion rests, and how completely the view taken of Logic by the Scholastics differs from that of the Formal Logicians. In their eyes, the aim of the science was most assuredly not to secure self-consistency, but theoretically to know how the mind represents its object, and practically to arrive at truth. The terms Nominalist, Conceptualist, and Realist Logicians are now frequently employed to denote these three classes. This terminology is singularly unfortunate: for the names, Nominalist, Conceptualist and Realist, have for centuries been employed to distinguish three famous schools of philosophy, divided from each other on a question which has nothing to do with the scope of Logic. In this class we shall as far as possible avoid using the terms in their novel meaning.

Engelska

Woww photonya terlalu seksi

Senast uppdaterad: 2013-11-29
Användningsfrekvens: 1
Kvalitet:

Referens: Anonym
Varning: Innehåller osynlig HTML-formatering

Indonesiska

去阻擋這一切的情意 這感覺太奇異 我抱歉不能説明 我相信這愛情的定義 奇蹟會發生也不一定 風溫柔的清晰 也許飄來好消息 一切新鮮 有點冒險 請告訴我怎麼走到終點 沒有人瞭解 沒有人像我 和陌生人的愛戀 我想我會開始想念你 可是我剛剛才遇見了你 我懷疑這奇遇只是個惡作劇 ah~ 我想我已慢慢喜歡你 因為我擁有愛情的勇氣 我任性 投入你給的惡作劇 你給的惡作劇 我找不到很好的原因 去阻擋這一切的情意 這感覺太奇異 我抱歉不能說明 我相信這愛情的定義 奇蹟會發生也不一定 風溫柔的清晰 也許飄來好消息 我才發現你很耀眼 請讓我再瞧瞧你的雙眼 沒有人瞭解沒有人像我 和陌生人的愛戀 我想我會開始想念你 可是我剛剛才遇見了你 我懷疑這奇遇只是個惡作劇 ah~ 我想我已慢慢喜歡你 因為我擁有愛情的勇氣 我任性 投入你給的惡作劇 你給的惡作劇 Credit:http://wiki.d-addicts.com/It_Started_with_a_Kiss_OST[edit]Last edit by on Wednesday 19 Aug, 2009 at 20:29 +8%[/edit][edit]Last edit by on Wednesday 19 Aug, 2009 at 20:26 +100%[/edit] Translation Practical Joke I can't find a good reason to stop this affection I have This feeling is too complicated, I'm sorry, I can't explain it I believe the meaning of this love is that miracles have a few possibilities of happening Maybe the pure and gentle wind will blow in good news Everything requires fresh expreience, and contains risks Please tell me how to make it to the end Nobody unserstands, unlike me and the stranger I'm in love with I think I will begin to miss you though I just saw you a moment ago I suspect that this unusual meeting is only a practical joke I think I will slowly continue to like you because I have the courage to love I've sunk myself into the practical joke you've played The practical joke you've played I can't find a good reason to stop this affection I have This feeling is too complicated, I'm sorry, I can't explain it I believe the meaning if this love is that miracles have a few possibilities of happening Maybe the pure and gentle wind will blow in good news I've dicovered that your secret weapon are your dazzling eyes Please let me continue to look at them Nobody understands, unlike me and the stranger I'm in love with I think I will begin to miss you though I just saw you a moment ago I suspect that this unusual meeting is only a practical joke I think I will slowly continue to like you because I have the courage to love I've sunk myself into the practical joke you've played The practical joke you've played

Engelska

Hi, my name is Prisca Deo please will you be my friend if yes write me back through my e-mail address for me to tell you more about myself and give you more of my pictures (priscadeo24@yahoo.com) hope to hear from you soon

Senast uppdaterad: 2013-10-09
Användningsfrekvens: 1
Kvalitet:

Referens: Anonym

Indonesiska

terjemahanAntidoron (from Greek, meaning "instead of the gifts"; in Arabic, qurban) is the remaining bread from a loaf of prosphora after the Lamb has been removed for the Holy Eucharist. In Byzantine practice, it is blessed during the megalynarion to the Theotokos immediately after the epiclesis in the Divine Liturgy and is given by the priest to the faithful after the service. Historically, it was distributed only to those who had not received 'the Gifts', Holy Communion so that they would receive a Blessing in place of Holy Communion but this practice has changed over time and all those present at the Divine Liturgy receive Antidoron as a blessing. In some practice, antidoron may be distributed to non-Orthodox Christians who attend an Orthodox liturgy, but in other places, it is reserved only for the faithful. Portions that are uneaten are disposed of either by burning or by being placed outside where they are consumed by the elements or by animals.

Engelska

‎1. Why do children need an adult who both cares for them as individuals and can serve as a model of an educated person? 2. What does the slogan “All children can learn” meant? How might it be better phrased to capture its meaning? 3. Are all the steps of Dewey’s problem-solving model necessary? Is it accurate to call Dewey’s educational philosophy “child-centered’? 4. What must children learn in order to participate intelligently in democracy? 5. Existensialist put great emphasis on the individual as free agent-one who chooses, creates a self, and takes responsibility. Do you think this stance is compatible with Pancasila? 6. In choosing subject matter content, are there values more important that truth? 7. How do Dewey and Piaget differ in their epistemological position? 8. Should teachers be urged to use research? Is there an alternative that is preferable from a professional perspective? 9. Do you believe that “to know the good is to do the good’? Why? 10. What is the role of trust in education

Senast uppdaterad: 2013-04-07
Användningsfrekvens: 1
Kvalitet:

Referens: Anonym
Varning: Innehåller osynlig HTML-formatering

Indonesiska

terjemahanABSTRACT Consumer satisfaction is achieved when the need and desire for such services can be met. To meet customer satisfaction, companies must create and maintain a system to serve the growing consumer demand. The background to the problem and the low level of customer satisfaction with service delivery to customers Semarang Container Terminal, which was indicated by the static amount of container traffic and the high complaints from customers for services rendered. This is also supported by the apparent contradiction between the studies with one another aim of this study was to analyze the effect of the performance of services, barriers to change and corporate image on customer satisfaction for services provided in Semarang Container Terminal. The population is around consumer Container Terminal in Semarang are still active as a customer until the month of October 2012 as many as 519 customers. While the sample is customer Container Terminal in Semarang are still active by 84 respondents. The sampling technique used in this study was purposive sampling Accidental. This research analyzed using multiple linear regression analysis tool. Prior to the regression test, first tested the validity and reliability and the classic assumption test. The results showed that the performance of the service to customer satisfaction shows a positive effect, meaning that if the performance of the services provided Semarang further enhanced Container Terminal, it will further improve customer satisfaction, as evidenced by the value of 11.325 t count> t table 1.9901. Barriers to move towards customer satisfaction has a negative effect, meaning that the higher the resistance of consumers to switch, it is because of consumer dissatisfaction with the services provided. Evidenced by the t value -2.120 1.9901. Keywords: Performance of services, barriers to change, corporate image and customer satisfaction

Engelska

translaton

Senast uppdaterad: 2013-02-02
Användningsfrekvens: 1
Kvalitet:

Referens: Anonym
Varning: Innehåller osynlig HTML-formatering

Indonesiska

terjemahanAntidoron (from Greek, meaning "instead of the gifts"; in Arabic, qurban) is the remaining bread from a loaf of prosphora after the Lamb has been removed for the Holy Eucharist. In Byzantine practice, it is blessed during the megalynarion to the Theotokos immediately after the epiclesis in the Divine Liturgy and is given by the priest to the faithful after the service. Historically, it was distributed only to those who had not received 'the Gifts', Holy Communion so that they would receive a Blessing in place of Holy Communion but this practice has changed over time and all those present at the Divine Liturgy receive Antidoron as a blessing. In some practice, antidoron may be distributed to non-Orthodox Christians who attend an Orthodox liturgy, but in other places, it is reserved only for the faithful. Portions that are uneaten are disposed of either by burning or by being placed outside where they are consumed by the elements or by animals.

Engelska

translationAntidoron (from Greek, meaning "instead of the gifts"; in Arabic, qurban) is the remaining bread from a loaf of prosphora after the Lamb has been removed for the Holy Eucharist. In Byzantine practice, it is blessed during the megalynarion to the Theotokos immediately after the epiclesis in the Divine Liturgy and is given by the priest to the faithful after the service. Historically, it was distributed only to those who had not received 'the Gifts', Holy Communion so that they would receive a Blessing in place of Holy Communion but this practice has changed over time and all those present at the Divine Liturgy receive Antidoron as a blessing. In some practice, antidoron may be distributed to non-Orthodox Christians who attend an Orthodox liturgy, but in other places, it is reserved only for the faithful. Portions that are uneaten are disposed of either by burning or by being placed outside where they are consumed by the elements or by animals.

Senast uppdaterad: 2012-12-29
Användningsfrekvens: 1
Kvalitet:

Referens: Anonym
Varning: Innehåller osynlig HTML-formatering

Få en bättre översättning med
4,401,923,520 mänskliga bidrag

Användare ber nu om hjälp:



Vi använder cookies för att förbättra din upplevelse. Genom att fortsätta besöka den här webbplatsen godkänner du vår användning av cookies. Läs mer. OK