INXS - Need You Tonight
I would first write something misanthropic about "gay" or there about "Christians", but somehow changed his mind. Type, the weather is great and you do not want to spoil the mood of the people. And indeed, in my opinion, "bad thoughts lead to evil deeds," so that must make themselves to think "positively". Better here, in general, share-ka one of his favorite songs:
"INXS - Need You Tonight"
"Popsnya, of course ... This single, in their time, even led the hit parade of sales of U.S. .. But I still really like :-)
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
There's A Lump On My Bum Very Painful
"self" and "pride"
Many seem to be often confused with one another the notion of "self" and "pride." Yes I am, of course, is no exception. Once before, "did not betray this particular value, but then suddenly shot through the brain thought it was wrong after all mixed into one pile-mala "Self" and "pride" because it's totally different "values".
And the fact that theirs meaning wrongly interpreted, leads to the generation of various "misunderstandings." Sometimes, for example, often talk about people that de such a no respect for others, because "too many thinks about himself" (thus implicitly assuming that he does so "is not the case"). Whereas, in my opinion, correct in such cases say, such a not respect others as "too much like himself."
What I have in mind when they built the assertion in this way?
And that, perhaps, respect other people can only he who respects himself a . Because, let's ask ourselves a reasonable question, where does "respect"? Here, for me, all easier than ever: it comes "from the mind." "Respect" itself may only he who does nothing "shameful" or in the presence of others, or secretly thereof. "Knowledge" makes "respect".
talk a little more "deployed" Man thinks of himself, "analyzes what he did, and this" thinking "settling" solids ", gives him some" knowledge "that can provide it sense of "self", if to this there are some reasonable cause.
In turn, this by itself implies the fact that the person indeed "nothing to be ashamed of," can not respect someone "is not the case." For it is not the case - it is always "insincerity" and "insincerity" - it is always a "conscious hypocrisy ", which is nothing less than" true. "Man is consciously telling a lie, again, can not be myself for it to" respect "as" a lie "- is not a cause for "pride", but something in one way or another "shameful" (where "less" when "more", but "nonetheless").
Consequently, people are not respecting people "is not the case" can not and a "respected" because he has no excuse for this, but the reason to not respect yourself still there.
"Love" same - not "the mind" is something "emotional", which sometimes contradicts the arguments of reason. Type, known as that "love of evil - a calm." Even notebooks scoundrels oddly enough, sometimes "love". And as the cases when they themselves love, and not "rare", but rather the "norm".
So it turns out that, unlike human having earned "self-esteem," man "proud" may very well not to respect others is not the case "because the leadership does not" mind "and" emotion ".
Many seem to be often confused with one another the notion of "self" and "pride." Yes I am, of course, is no exception. Once before, "did not betray this particular value, but then suddenly shot through the brain thought it was wrong after all mixed into one pile-mala "Self" and "pride" because it's totally different "values".
And the fact that theirs meaning wrongly interpreted, leads to the generation of various "misunderstandings." Sometimes, for example, often talk about people that de such a no respect for others, because "too many thinks about himself" (thus implicitly assuming that he does so "is not the case"). Whereas, in my opinion, correct in such cases say, such a not respect others as "too much like himself."
What I have in mind when they built the assertion in this way?
And that, perhaps, respect other people can only he who respects himself a . Because, let's ask ourselves a reasonable question, where does "respect"? Here, for me, all easier than ever: it comes "from the mind." "Respect" itself may only he who does nothing "shameful" or in the presence of others, or secretly thereof. "Knowledge" makes "respect".
talk a little more "deployed" Man thinks of himself, "analyzes what he did, and this" thinking "settling" solids ", gives him some" knowledge "that can provide it sense of "self", if to this there are some reasonable cause.
In turn, this by itself implies the fact that the person indeed "nothing to be ashamed of," can not respect someone "is not the case." For it is not the case - it is always "insincerity" and "insincerity" - it is always a "conscious hypocrisy ", which is nothing less than" true. "Man is consciously telling a lie, again, can not be myself for it to" respect "as" a lie "- is not a cause for "pride", but something in one way or another "shameful" (where "less" when "more", but "nonetheless").
Consequently, people are not respecting people "is not the case" can not and a "respected" because he has no excuse for this, but the reason to not respect yourself still there.
"Love" same - not "the mind" is something "emotional", which sometimes contradicts the arguments of reason. Type, known as that "love of evil - a calm." Even notebooks scoundrels oddly enough, sometimes "love". And as the cases when they themselves love, and not "rare", but rather the "norm".
So it turns out that, unlike human having earned "self-esteem," man "proud" may very well not to respect others is not the case "because the leadership does not" mind "and" emotion ".
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Bread Made With Raisin Juice
faith "conditional" and "unconditional"
Shalaya baby, little thought breaks to rush after him, so I will say something else. In order to sort of sort of opinion to "of their own observations" , I would like to try to move a cursory explanation why I personally raised there "beliefs" seem to be something from the category of "not very much good" (or at least case, one of the "points"). Not sure if I can express in a concise format pomyslennoe, but still try sdyuzhit ...
start, probably better all from the very beginning, from this and start ... What is "faith"? In my opinion, "faith" - a representation of a person that is taking place. And, by itself, it is "not good not bad. "The trick is that" faith "is not something" homogeneous ", it can be different. For example, one could easily notice that sometimes it is the" true "and sometimes" false. "
I mean, the belief in what is "- is one thing, but faith in what is not - totally different, is not it?
Whatever it was, but personally I think that faith "In what is not - is the direct connivance of Lies and Lying is not something" good. "
From this arises the following question ... How do I determine what kind of faith "true" and what is "false" (that is to say, "false")?
Well, as I understand it, the "true" faith - it is nothing like good old "knowledge." Something affordable comprehend the mind and something "verifiable."
And no matter what said "believers", whatever "evidence" and "evidence" vehemently not shaken, but even under their own ideas, to comprehend the mind of God can not, accordingly, any "knowledge" about him, too, have not. Since no "comprehension" no "knowledge" can not be.
So it turns out that their faith in God represents a certain conventionality in which they blindly "believe", without having to then somehow seeing "Knowledge".
And, then, in any case, such a belief is not the nature of "true" because the truth is always unconditional.
Shalaya baby, little thought breaks to rush after him, so I will say something else. In order to sort of sort of opinion to "of their own observations" , I would like to try to move a cursory explanation why I personally raised there "beliefs" seem to be something from the category of "not very much good" (or at least case, one of the "points"). Not sure if I can express in a concise format pomyslennoe, but still try sdyuzhit ...
start, probably better all from the very beginning, from this and start ... What is "faith"? In my opinion, "faith" - a representation of a person that is taking place. And, by itself, it is "not good not bad. "The trick is that" faith "is not something" homogeneous ", it can be different. For example, one could easily notice that sometimes it is the" true "and sometimes" false. "
I mean, the belief in what is "- is one thing, but faith in what is not - totally different, is not it?
Whatever it was, but personally I think that faith "In what is not - is the direct connivance of Lies and Lying is not something" good. "
From this arises the following question ... How do I determine what kind of faith "true" and what is "false" (that is to say, "false")?
Well, as I understand it, the "true" faith - it is nothing like good old "knowledge." Something affordable comprehend the mind and something "verifiable."
And no matter what said "believers", whatever "evidence" and "evidence" vehemently not shaken, but even under their own ideas, to comprehend the mind of God can not, accordingly, any "knowledge" about him, too, have not. Since no "comprehension" no "knowledge" can not be.
So it turns out that their faith in God represents a certain conventionality in which they blindly "believe", without having to then somehow seeing "Knowledge".
And, then, in any case, such a belief is not the nature of "true" because the truth is always unconditional.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)