What would you like to do?
What is the origin of the idiom-Salt of the Earth?
It comes from the King James Version of the Bible, in Matthew 5:13, which says: "Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men." Salt was more valuable than gold in the ancient world. When Jesus said to his disciples, 'Ye are the salt of the earth.Ye are the light of the world.' he was saying they were more valuable than gold, and by extension, so was anyone who would suffer persecution for their loyalty to him. The phrase has been used ever since to praise the very best kind of people. It has come to be typically used to pay a compliment to the finest common folk, humble, unsung heroes, decent, hardworking, dependable and unpretentious, the type that quietly give of themselves for the benefit of others and their community.
12 people found this useful
Was this answer useful?
Thanks for the feedback!
The origin of Earth's name can be from the English word 'ertha' or the German word 'erde'. This name for the Earth is about 1000 years old.
more than 80 percent of the earth's surface is volcanic in origin.
All we have is a big window when it happened - and no way to prove one way or another how it happened. Let's look. The earth formed a long, long time ago. Billions of years. …We have bulletproof radiometric evidence that almost no one who understands radiometric dating disputes that the earth is about 4.54 billion years old. Life appeared somewhere between 4.4 billion years ago and 2.7 billion years ago. We just don't have any data to pin it down more than that. But what do we know? The earliest forms of life we know of are still with us today - blue-green algae. In a place called Shark Bay in southwest Australia, the formations these microorganisms create can be see alive and well and covered in the thin film of algae that created them of a long, long time. And inland from there and dating bact billions of years can be seen fossilized versions of these same structures - stomatolites. The earliest one we've been able to date goes back 2,724 million years. That's 2.724 billion years. What is the hot topic for debate? Glad you asked. When we study the fossils, we have indications that they were created through biological activity - which is what one might expect. But further study also suggests that abiotic (non-organic) precipitation may have had a hand in things. The debate continues. Life had to come from somewhere. But where? As the question asks "when do you believe..." as posted, there is plenty of room for the Bible thumpers to come along and put up what they like. Certainly if I ignore them and believe what science tells me (and science does not say how life on earth began, by the way), I won't have a problem. God will not condemn me for using what is arguably the finest gift one could get from any creator to discover the nature of the earth and how it evolved over the billions of years we know have elapsed since it was formed. Got links if you can handle the science and are curious. They're to articles posted by Wikipedia - where they are not afraid of truth, either.
Our Solar system is the accumulation of the debris of a Nova. in fact, Astrophysicists consider Earth and the Solar System to be a third generation system. Immediately aft…er the Big Bang, some 14 billion years ago, there was essentially only hydrogen and Helium in the Universe. This coalesced to form stars, and several of these accumulated to make a star that eventually became hot enough (due to gravitational pressure) that it exploded. In this process of immense heat and pressure, heavier elements were created, and in the longer run, new stars were made, composed of these heavier elements- and some of the lighter ones as well. These 'second generation' stars eventually grew too large (by their gravity attracting other matter from surrounding space), and they in turn exploded as a bigger Nova. In this process, once again, the heat and pressure existed for sufficient time, that even unlikely reactions took place. The name given to this process is Nucleogenesis. And from the debris of this explosion, the elements we know of were formed. Our Sun by comparison is only big enough to make elements up to the mass of Iron. You have to have a much bigger star to generate the heavier elements. Our Solar system was produced roughly 4.5 billion years ago.
Because the Earth's first atmosphere/ocean system didn't have free oxygen, dissolved iron accumulated in the oceans, giving them a green color. As oxygen became available, it …combined with the iron and settled to the sea floor to form banded iron formations (BIFs). Once the iron was "rusted" out of the water column, the ocean color changed from green to blue.
When the sun began to form, clouds of gas formed in rings around the sun. They eventually coalesced into gaseous balls orbitting the sun. These proto-planets consisted mainly… of hydrogen and helium, and thus could not have formed into the rocky planets. However, they did have gravitational fields and they were able to sweep other matter up from interstellar space. The fusion process in stars, such as our sun, will eventually produce abundant light elements, but very little of the heavy elements. However, from time to time a supernova star explodes at such high temperatures as to produce the heavy elements of our planetary system. Each supernova scatters its matter into interstellar space, to be attracted towards other stars and solar systems such as our own. Over the eons, some of this was accumulated by the planets, including our own, Earth. These balls cooled, to become the planets we know today. But they still had massive atmospheres consisting mainly of hydrogen and helium. The larger planets, such as Jupiter, with their greater gravity, were able to retain those lighter gases and are today the "gas giants". Intermediate planets, such as Earth and Venus, gradually lost most of the gaseous hydrogen and helium, but retained the heavier gases, such as oxygen and nitrogen. Smaller planets, with their weaker gravitational fields, gradually lost nearly all their atmospheres. Thus, the Earth formed, as one of the planets in our solar system, at first into a barren planet, hostile to life forms.
According to science, the earth was formed by gases that solidified through gravity.
It originated April 22nd 1970
Earth is the modern form of the Old English word eorthe. It derives from an Indo-European root -er3, meaning the ground. Erde (personified as Erda) is the German form of wor…d earth. It derives from an Indo-European root *er-. ANSWER: It comes from the olde English word erda. Answer2: The name earth is Egyptian. Earth is the phonetic name used by the Egyptians to describe themselves. The determinant hieroglyph is a plow. The plow , indicating the Egyptians saw themselves and named themselves as "farmers". The German language appears to be a direct derivative from the Egyptian phonetically. Hallstat Austria(?) may be the place Egyptians first settled in Europe. German language and culture reflects Ancient Egyptian language and culture.
No-one is certain, but the current hypothesis is in the depths of the ocean, near sources of geothermal energy. These are the most hospitable environments, providing an enviro…nment for a huge diversity of organisms. There are some biologists who believe that life(or its building blocks) may have been brought here by comets. It's not so outlandish when you consider that bacteria and viruses can survive space, and that amino acids have been detected on comets.In the case of Earth,both hypotheses may be true.Neither would disprove the other.It is also possible that there were primitive bacteria here before the oceans formed,when the earth was still hot, and water was only able to condense into pools at high altitudes.Maybe the first life evolved in these.
Yes the earth was originally of homogeneous composition.
Wikipedia describes the English idiom "down to earth" as meaning "practical and realistic", implying a stable footing for one's behaviour. It's not difficult to i…magine how the phrase came about if you think of it as having the same origins as "keep your feet on the ground". If you jump up in the air, it's not a stable position... gravity rather gets in the way and brings you... "down to earth" Think of all the phrases meaning having or finding stability which are rooted in the same idea (actually even the word "rooted" implies the same thing): "He's a down to earth kinda guy", "Keeping your feet on the ground", "Coming back down to earth", "That idea is grounded in reality (the emphasis being on grounded here)" ...or those which imply instability by being away from planet Earth "That's all up in the air", "Head in the clouds" etc.
it is the theory of the origin of the solar system, involving the approuch near the dun
Creationist View God created it in the beginning. And despite, the general scientific consensus otherwise, there is no evidence that this has ever happened or could conceiv…ably happen. In fact the known factual scientific evidence including especially Genetics, Biochemistry and the Second Law of Thermodynamics, together with the Law of Biogenesis are all dead against it 'making itself.' This is scientific nonsense and pure fiction. In particular, water itself is destructive of the very components which make up the cell. Once, however, water is 'under control' inside the cell it is beneficial. However it dilutes and destroys the elements necessary for the cell to form and so it is impossible for this cell to form of itself in the first place. A Scientific View:(Dr Krishnagopal) Life on the earth has originated from primordial membranes. This is the sequence of events. First the hydrocarbon molecules formed and in watery medium became bi-layered membranes. A biological big bang occurred which imparted electrical potentials across these membranes. These membrane potentials represent consciousness even now. Formation of 'Phantom cells' from membranes which started metabolism inside them. This gave rise to organic molecules. Formation of 'True cells' happened gradually. The need to execute repeated tasks resulted in DNA/RNA formation through 'molecular etching'.
What Buddha believes about the origin of the Earth There are three schools of thought regarding the origin of the world. The first school of thought claims that this worl…d came into existence by nature and that nature is not an intelligent force. However, nature works no its own accord and goes on changing. The second school of thought says that the world was created by an almighty God who is responsible for everything. The third school of thought says that the beginning of this world and of life is inconceivable since they have neither beginning nor end. Buddhism is in accordance with this third school of thought. Bertrand Russell supports this school of thought by saying, 'There is no reason to suppose that the world had a beginning at all. The idea that things must have a beginning is really due to the poverty of our thoughts.' Modern science says that some millions of years ago, the newly cooled earth was lifeless and that life originated in the ocean. Buddhism never claimed that the world, sun, moon, stars, wind, water, days and nights were created by a powerful god or by a Buddha. Buddhists believe that the world was not created once upon a time, but that the world has been created millions of times every second and will continue to do so by itself and will break away by itself. According to Buddhism, world systems always appear and disappear in the universe. H.G. Wells, in A Short History of the World, says 'It is universally recognized that the universe in which we live, has to all appearance, existed for an enormous period of time and possibly for endless time. But that the universe in which we live, has existed only for six or seven thousand years may be regarded as an altogether exploded idea. No life seems to have happened suddenly upon earth.' The efforts made by many religions to explain the beginning and the end of the universe are indeed ill-conceived. The position of religions which propound the view that the universe was created by god in an exactly fixed year, has become a difficult one to maintain in the light of modern and scientific knowledge. Today scientists, historians, astronomers, biologists, botanists, anthropologists and great thinkers have all contributed vast new knowledge about the origin of the world. This latest discovery and knowledge is not at all contradictory to the Teachings of the Buddha. Bertrand Russell again says that he respects the Buddha for not making false statements like others who committed themselves regarding the origin of the world. The speculative explanations of the origin of the universe that are presented by various religions are not acceptable to the modern scientists and intellectuals. Even the commentaries of the Buddhist Scriptures, written by certain Buddhist writers, cannot be challenged by scientific thinking in regard to this question. The Buddha did not waste His time on this issue. The reason for His silence was that this issue has no religious value for gaining spiritual wisdom. The explanation of the origin of the universe is not the concern of religion. Such theorizing is not necessary for living a righteous way of life and for shaping our future life. However, if one insists on studying this subject, then one must investigate the sciences, astronomy, geology, biology and anthropology. These sciences can offer more reliable and tested information on this subject than can be supplied by any religion. The purpose of a religion is to cultivate the life here in this world and hereafter until liberation is gained. In the eyes of the Buddha, the world is nothing but Samsara -- the cycle of repeated births and deaths. To Him, the beginning of the world and the end of the world is within this Samsara. Since elements and energies are relative and inter-dependent, it is meaningless to single out anything as the beginning. Whatever speculation we make regarding the origin of the world, there is no absolute truth in our notion. 'Infinite is the sky, infinite is the number of beings, Infinite are the worlds in the vast universe, Infinite in wisdom the Buddha teaches these, Infinite are the virtues of Him who teaches these.' - (Sri Ramachandra) One day a man called Malunkyaputta approached the Master and demanded that He explain the origin of the Universe to him. He even threatened to cease to be His follow if the Buddha's answer was not satisfactory. The Buddha calmly retorted that it was of no consequence to Him whether or not Malunkyaputta followed Him, because the Truth did not need anyone's support. Then the Buddha said that He would not go into a discussion of the origin of the Universe. To Him, gaining knowledge about such matters was a waste of time because a man's task was to liberate himself from the present, not the past or the future. To illustrate this, the Enlightened One related the parable of a man who was shot by a poisoned arrow. This foolish man refused to have the arrow removed until he found out all about the person who shot the arrow. By the time his attendants discovered these unnecessary details, the man was dead. Similarly, our immediate task is to attain Nibbana, not to worry about our beginnings.Venerable K. Sri Dhammananda Maha Thera