Intel 4500 Second Life

passed off as truth

How did the myth of the devil (part one)

In the last article, speaking of Socrates, we anticipated the Message of Love Christ invites us to know God present in everyone, to be free and responsible persons. We must, however, keep in mind that live in our consciousness monsters induced by education received religious since childhood. We must therefore get rid of these presences negative impact on our search for God in the depths of ourselves. Now, the real problem is whether or not the demon born of ignorance of the Gospels. If you can prove, as demonstrated in the Gospels, that what we call Satan, the devil, the devil, in the original greek text not have the same meanings that were attributed by the translators in the Italian language, faith in Christ given new force and becomes what it really was originally: A message of universal love. Let there, then, the field of false translations. Let's start by understanding how they came out of these terms daimon, satan, diabolos, in the translation of the LXX, from Hebrew into Greek for the Old Testament and then directly consider the Gospels written in Greek. If we take for granted that the devil exists is easy to attribute all the evil in this world, though, honestly and using logic, it seems absurd that the Almighty will allow this work to be filthy alleged to harm human beings and He will not move a finger to defend them. So how did this primarily the term "daimon"? What did it mean in the Old Testament the word "satan"? And the word "diabolos" (which is the Greek translation of satan) that really what it meant in the Gospels in Greek? I take a practical example to show that the Gospels should be read in light of historical time in which they were written: When you read in the Gospel that some disciples of Jesus come to him to tell him that Herod look, well, Jesus says, "Go and tell that "fox" that I must preach today and tomorrow ......" In Italian we find the translation "fox" and, in fact, the translation is good, Jesus has just appointed the fox. The problem is not the word that Jesus uses but the "sense" that this term forward to our mind. Today we think of the fox when we think of a clever-clever person . Not so at the time of Jesus Jesus said "fox" of course, the fox, however, at the time of Jesus was synonymous with "criminal." see how the difference in meaning likely to change the meaning of the term ? The same applies to "daimon". We must see what it means for us today but what it meant for Jesus and his contemporaries. When the LXX translated the Bible from Hebrew into Greek, since they were in a foreign land ( Alexandria, Egypt), found in the Torah (Jewish law), many non-Jewish terms, become part of Scripture e che ormai facevano parte della tradizione ebraica della diaspora, dopo l’ultimo esilio in Babilonia . I LXX tradussero questi termini incomprensibili (fauni, centauri, sirene: presenze immaginarie) con "daimon". Non solo. Daimon a quel tempo aveva un significato positivo. In Socrate il daimon aveva significato di spirito umano buono, nume tutelare, spirito divino guida. Gli autori ebrei però, pur avendo fede nel Dio di Abramo, Isacco e Giacobbe, ritenevano che tutti gli altri esseri fossero opposti al Dio del bene. Era dunque, per loro, di facile deduzione che questi termini tradotti con daimon-daimonion descrivessero una sorta di semidei cattivi da opporre all’unico Dio. Non dimentichiamo che gli ebrei oltre a credere in God, not only believed in other gods, but believed that extra-Biblical, however, were necessarily inferior in power, the God of Israel. From this conception of the God of Israel, which are subject to the other gods of the peoples and they are saddled with extra-Biblical, the LXX, the word "daimon," the idea of \u200b\u200ban evil spiritual being, of course, opposed to God's mind Jewish, therefore, also present in the LXX, the term becomes negative daimon which in itself was positive. In other words, if the gods of other peoples, in the sacred writings are translated "daimon" and if, at the same time, objected to the good God of Israel, This suggests that these "daemons" are evil beings opposed to God The problem is exacerbated when St. Jerome approached this term referred to his mysterious Lucifer in the Hebrew Bible there is no trace. But it is Jerome who translated Isaiah 14.12 evil, to believe that one who has fallen from the sky (as Isaiah said of Nebuchadnezzar) actually is an angel rebelling against God before the Creation. Understand the catch? Isaiah speaking sarcastically said to Nebuchadnezzar: "You fell from heaven, morning star"? (Hellel). Isaiah simply wanted to tell King that his kingdom was in decline. The LXX translate "eosforos" (light-bearer) but Jerome ago born here "Lucifer" which literally means light-bearer, but just gives this be a bad connotation, saying that it is a fallen angel, using the daimon of the LXX, while Isaiah was referring to Nebuchadnezzar, and not to an alleged rebel angel in God's fallen angel So the story comes from Jerome. Later, the daemon will be matched with Lucifer. That is why today when we speak of Lucifer is thought the devil. The same thing goes for "satan" and "diabolos ". In the next article we will talk.

Figliodeltuono

Insuranceauctionautos.com

God is within us

Selfishness, dissatisfaction, indifference to others.

Speaking of Socrates, of its "Know thyself" introduces us to a sensitive issue that still has to be addressed in order to understand the deeper mechanisms. Selfishness, dissatisfaction and indifference towards the next birth by lack of self-knowledge, for which there is a risk of finding themselves to act not for personal conviction, but only for a profit, which may manifest itself through the desire Power, money, success at the expense of others. It is not always the fault of those who suggests these negative values. It depends on us. If we are careful and we do not influenced by fashion or by the mass media, We have all the tools to build a personality that can look at himself as a "Being on the other." This happens if we take into account three fundamental dynamics that are an integral part of our human nature, which we ignored condemn itself to be perpetually dissatisfied.

In my opinion there are three basic steps:
1) Knowledge (We are made to know the reality at 360 degrees and evaluate it personally)
2) Awareness-ethics-positive (born from the knowledge of others and by 'acceptance of the things that unite us and those that never divide us. So spread the love)
3) Evolution of Consciousness in the well- (Love moving human nature to build a united world).

Knowledge, therefore, generate awareness, and the latter (which carries the ethical sense of existence, so we are led to love your neighbor as yourself) gives impetus to a leap forward in the evolution of consciousness to the social good.

Any form of religious dogmatism, unfortunately still present in our society, which brakes individual knowledge, it makes the ignorant man, it blocks the ethical awareness and delays his inner evolution, generating self-interest, dissatisfaction and indifference to everything related to the fate of humanity.

Ecco il motivo per cui spesso si ha a che fare con individui che, pur avendo magari alte cariche religiose-ecclesiastiche, sono rimaste nella “fase narcisistica dello sviluppo psichico”. Tutto ciò che conoscono che, in questo caso, non chiamerei conoscenza vera ma solo una mera somma di informazioni ricevute, non li ha proiettati verso l'esterno, per cui non avendo sviluppato il senso della consapevolezza e men che meno il senso etico, se non quello egoistico del tornaconto personale (da qui la fase narcisistica perdurante nel tempo), non hanno avuto neanche un chiara evoluzione della coscienza verso il bene. Sono forse potenti? Certo ma pericolosi, in quanto ancora adolescenti nella psiche. Se, da essere potenti quali sono, proiettano their lives outside of this model, you run the risk of creating clones.
If we begin to understand they have a brain that can learn and reason without external influence of any kind, we have the antidote to this form of cloning psychic.

Figliodeltuono

Angel Lola Luv Genitalia

Frida Kahlo - Biography imaging

Frida Kahlo - Biografia per immagini
di autori vari (Abscondita)

"Questa scelta di ritratti Frida Kahlo brings together the work of some of the greatest photographers of the twentieth century. Pictures of the masters of modern photography, such as Edward Weston, Imogen Cunningham, Manuel Alvarez Bravo. Works of the greatest post in the international press as Gisèle Freund, Bernard Silberstein, and photographs of relatives, friends, lovers. The photographs depict the life of Frida Kahlo from the early years, with the image of a plump, confident little girl clutching a bouquet of wilted roses, to the end, on his deathbed: an emaciated body, ravaged, wrapped in a valuable pre-Columbian dress. The objective is focused on the painter, his paintings, his studio, his shows, but also on the sick woman, his wife, la figlia, l'amante, l'amica. Consente di scrutare nella sua camera da letto, di sedere al suo tavolo, di visitarla nella sua stanza d'ospedale, di aggirarsi nel suo giardino, di osservare gli oggetti delle sue collezioni e gli animali a lei cari. Alcune fotografie nascondono forse più di quanto rivelano di questa donna che definiva se stessa "la grande occultatrice". Molte offrono l'opportunità unica di intravedere la donna al di là delle apparenze, altre, forse meno rivelatrici ma altrettanto affascinanti, consentono di gettare lo sguardo su una delle più interessanti creazioni dell'artista, la costruzione della propria immagine, concepita e progettata come una delle sue opere". (Dallo scritto di Margaret Hooks)
Buy

How To Wear Jelly-bracelets In Different Styles.

Modotti Tina Modotti

Tina Modotti, Pino Bertelli (Author's note Press)

On Photography subversive. From the poetry of revolt ethics utopia.

The anarchist and communist subversive photographer's pen Pino Bertelli meets the eye and the history of one of the most enigmatic and iconic figures of communism and the world of photography. A book of a lifetime, that of the author, and strongly desired by the publisher, which in addition to replace the work of Tina Modotti in context, subversive, naturally, is a tribute that had filled a gap in the literature that the more poor ' Italy has dedicato a questa importante artista rivoluzionaria.

Questo libro non è una biografia, né un romanzo, né una tesi accademica su Tina Modotti. È un pamphlet ereticale, un saggio irriverente, uno studio amoroso in forma di elogio, anche sulla filosofia politica, estetica e sovversiva di una donna libera, di un’artista straordinaria e di una rivoluzionaria di professione che, al di là di ogni tentazione celebrativa o di crocifissione, resta una protagonista della fotografia contemporanea e una delle figure più importanti e scomode del ‘900.

Introduzione di Maurizio Rebuzzini. Con oltre 40 fotografie di e per Tina Modotti.

Acquista qui