As I began to read Job, I was amazed by the perfect person he was. Even God admitted he was perfect. "8)...Hast you considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil?" (Job 1: 8). Job was a very good man, everything he did was good and he never disobeyed God or dared to criticize him. He was said to be very faithful, he had lots of faith in God. Even when very bad things happened to him, he didn't dare to say something bad about God even though it was His fault. Job always defended God no matter what, and he lived his life according to His teachings. Supposely, this is said to be good, if you do what God says, everything in your life will be perfefct. But, is this really true?
I kept on reading Job, and I found out something that amazed me. God was convinced by Satan (who is said to be his worst enemy) to act against Job. Even though Job was one of God's most faithful man, who was always good and perfect, Got allowed Satan to do terrible things to him, to act against him. "12) And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand" (Job 1:12). I thought to myself: How is it possible that God allows such thing to happen to his most faithful people? According to religions if one is faithful, God will always help him and take care of him. But, after reading this, how can we make sure that what religions say is true? Job was a faithful man, but still God allowed Satan to do bad things to him. So, what this kind of says is that if you are faithful, God will do terrible things to you in order to prove your faith. So, at the end I asked myself: Is being faithful really worth it?
martes, 28 de octubre de 2008
lunes, 27 de octubre de 2008
Barack Obama's Acceptance Speech
When I heard Barack Obama's acceptance speech, I was able to identify many rhetoric devices such as: logos, ethos, and pathos. After hearing his speech I was able to conclude that Barack Obama is a great speaker. He uses these three devices in an amazing away. He first uses Ethos so the people who are listening to him begin to know him more and see the kind of person he is. This way they'll get to see what kind of person is addressing to them. Second, he uses Logos in order to tell the people about what's happening in the country under Bush's government. And saying how change can be better. Saying if he wins, he'll improve the United States. And for last, he uses pathos were he kinds of concludes everything he has said by touching the Americans feelings. By getting to their hearts and make them see that he will be the best next president for the United States.
Logos:
"Senator McCain likes to talk about judgment, but, really, what does it say about your judgment when you think George Bush has been right more than 90 percent of the time?"
"The truth is, on issue after issue that would make a difference in your lives -- on health care, and education, and the economy -- Senator McCain has been anything but independent.""Next week in Minnesota the same party that brought you two terms of George Bush and Dick Shany will ask this country for a third."
Ethos:
"Four years ago, I stood before you and told you my story, of the brief union between a young man from Kenya and a young woman from Kansas who weren't well-off or well-known, but shared a belief that in America their son could achieve whatever he put his mind to."
"When I -- when I listen to another worker tell me that his factory has shut down, I remember all those men and women on the South Side of Chicago who I stood by and fought for two decades ago after the local steel plant closed."
Pathos:
"In the face of that young student, who sleeps just three hours before working the night shift, I think about my mom, who raised my sister and me on her own while she worked and earned her degree, who once turned to food stamps, but was still able to send us to the best schools in the country with the help of student loans and scholarships."
"Instead, it is that American spirit, that American promise, that pushes us forward even when the path is uncertain; that binds us together in spite of our differences; that makes us fix our eye not on what is seen, but what is unseen, that better place around the bend."
After reading the speech, I was able to conclude that Barack Obama IS an amazing speaker. He uses rhetoric and its devices in an incredible way. His speech definetly touched my heart and I'm sure many people's also. If I was old enough to vote, I will vote for Obama. He is someone who will make a difference.
Logos:
"Senator McCain likes to talk about judgment, but, really, what does it say about your judgment when you think George Bush has been right more than 90 percent of the time?"
"The truth is, on issue after issue that would make a difference in your lives -- on health care, and education, and the economy -- Senator McCain has been anything but independent.""Next week in Minnesota the same party that brought you two terms of George Bush and Dick Shany will ask this country for a third."
Ethos:
"Four years ago, I stood before you and told you my story, of the brief union between a young man from Kenya and a young woman from Kansas who weren't well-off or well-known, but shared a belief that in America their son could achieve whatever he put his mind to."
"When I -- when I listen to another worker tell me that his factory has shut down, I remember all those men and women on the South Side of Chicago who I stood by and fought for two decades ago after the local steel plant closed."
Pathos:
"In the face of that young student, who sleeps just three hours before working the night shift, I think about my mom, who raised my sister and me on her own while she worked and earned her degree, who once turned to food stamps, but was still able to send us to the best schools in the country with the help of student loans and scholarships."
"Instead, it is that American spirit, that American promise, that pushes us forward even when the path is uncertain; that binds us together in spite of our differences; that makes us fix our eye not on what is seen, but what is unseen, that better place around the bend."
After reading the speech, I was able to conclude that Barack Obama IS an amazing speaker. He uses rhetoric and its devices in an incredible way. His speech definetly touched my heart and I'm sure many people's also. If I was old enough to vote, I will vote for Obama. He is someone who will make a difference.
Nobody's Perfect
As I read the second book of Samuel, I started to see David with different eyes. I used to think that because he was chosen by God and had his support, he was a perfect being. Or at least someone that was almost all good and that follow the Ten Commandments. But when I read the second book of Samuel, this began to change. I was able to see that David was just like any human being, he made terrible mistakes and committed horrible sins. He was not any more perfect than I am. "4) And David sent messengers, and took her; and she came into him, and he lay with her; for she was purified from her uncleanness: and she returned unto her house." (2 Samuel 11: 4).
When I read this, it was when I first thought that David was DEFINETLY NOT perfect. He committed adultery, something that according to religion is one of the worst sins someone can make. Something that is said not do by the Ten Commandments. But David was seduced by temptation. Just like we all are everyday of our lives. Everyday we all face temptation and almost everytime we face this, we are sdeuced by it. The reason why we all sin is because as humans we go under temptation. Many times we are not strong enough to fight against it. None of us is perfect, no matter what.
Even God's chosen people (Abraham, Moses, David) commit mistakes. And this made me ask myself: Why does God chooses sinners as his chosen ones? Why doesn't he just pick perfect people? After thinking about these two questions, I got my answers. The reason why God chooses sinners and not perfect people is because there is not a perfect person in the world. Everyone makes mistakes because we are all humans. We all are seduced by temptations, therefore we are all sinners. This made me realize that God didn't choose these people because they are perfect or because we should be just like them. God chose these people because they show us that even though we are all sinners and we make mistakes, we can still to something good for humanity. We don't need to be perfect (because we can't), but we can help others and make the best of ourselves.
When I read this, it was when I first thought that David was DEFINETLY NOT perfect. He committed adultery, something that according to religion is one of the worst sins someone can make. Something that is said not do by the Ten Commandments. But David was seduced by temptation. Just like we all are everyday of our lives. Everyday we all face temptation and almost everytime we face this, we are sdeuced by it. The reason why we all sin is because as humans we go under temptation. Many times we are not strong enough to fight against it. None of us is perfect, no matter what.
Even God's chosen people (Abraham, Moses, David) commit mistakes. And this made me ask myself: Why does God chooses sinners as his chosen ones? Why doesn't he just pick perfect people? After thinking about these two questions, I got my answers. The reason why God chooses sinners and not perfect people is because there is not a perfect person in the world. Everyone makes mistakes because we are all humans. We all are seduced by temptations, therefore we are all sinners. This made me realize that God didn't choose these people because they are perfect or because we should be just like them. God chose these people because they show us that even though we are all sinners and we make mistakes, we can still to something good for humanity. We don't need to be perfect (because we can't), but we can help others and make the best of ourselves.
domingo, 26 de octubre de 2008
Jealousy, Our Greatest Curse
"The jealous are troublesome to others, but a torment to themselves."
-William Penn
When I began to read the first book of Samuel, I started to think about jealousy. Jealousy is one of the worst feelings people have. It is the feeling of wanting others possessions. The feeling of envy towards others. And because of this, we want the worse for those people who posses what we want but can't have. Jealousy leads people to committing terrible acts towards the people they feel envy of. This terrible feeling has always existed and it has caused terrible conflicts, killed many, and cause greast devastations. It has lead groups or nations to make wars and create conflicts among each other.
For example, in the First Book of Samuel, I was able to see that Saul was jealous of David. "12) And Saul was afraid of David, because the LORD was with him, and was departed from Saul." (1 Samuel 18: 12). Saul felt a huge envy towards David because David had God's support, so that made him more powerful than Saul. And because of this, Saul felt that he had to overcome David, that he had to be stronger and better than him. So this lead Saul to make wars and cause many deaths, and at the end, his own's. Jealousy leads people to doing terrible things due to their hate towards someone. And because they are so focused on their hate due to their envy, they are not aware of the consequences of their actions. Every person in the world suffers of this unfortunetly, and it is the cause of many problems. It will be great if we could all be happy and proud for each other, but unfortunetly due to our great envy, this is not possible.
sábado, 18 de octubre de 2008
The Ten Commandments
As I was reading the Chapter 20 of the Exodus, I read about the Ten Commandments. The Ten Commandments are the ten basic rules all people should follow in order to go to heaven. This rules were given by God to Moses. So Moses told the people the Ten Commandments (there were only 9 shown):
1. "3) Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
2. 7)Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
3. 8) Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
4. 12) Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.
5. 13) Thou shalt not kill.
6. 14) Thou shalt not commit adultery.
7. 15) Thou shalt not steal.
8. 16) Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
9. 17) Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's. " (Exodus Chapter 20)
These rules were used before and are still used now. But they are applied differently. Before, all of these rules were the law. If anyone broke any of these rules, he or she will have been punished severly. They used to be very strict about every single Commandment. "24) Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25)Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe." (Exodus Chapter 21). They used take God and his commandments very seriously. But this has changed.
Now, some of these rules are still part of the law, but only a few of them. For example if you kill, you'll go to jail for a very long time, or you'll stay in jail forever, and sometimes depending were you are, you'll be killed. Also, if you steal or commit perjury (16 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.), you'll go to prison. You still get punished for breaking this rules but not as severly as before. I believe that if the punishments were still as they used to, most of the world's population will be dead or without body parts. The punishments before were very harsh, and this is why it is good that now they have changed.
Something else I thought about when I read, was that now, the other commandments are not so important. Because people now see them more as moral ethics instead of rules. Many people don't really care about them because they don't see them as something bad because they are not part of the law. And if they brake any of those rules, no one is going to punish them. Before, if a wife cheated on her husband it was terrible. Adultery was one of the worst things, people saw it as something terrible, and the wife and her lover will be put to death because of it. But now if a wife cheats on her husband, they just get divorced and that's pretty much it. None of them gets punished by the law or anything. I think it is good that now people don't get punished so severly for breaking the law or commiting moral mistakes. But I still think that even though these commandments don't apply to the law, people should take them more seriously.
1. "3) Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
2. 7)Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
3. 8) Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
4. 12) Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.
5. 13) Thou shalt not kill.
6. 14) Thou shalt not commit adultery.
7. 15) Thou shalt not steal.
8. 16) Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
9. 17) Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's. " (Exodus Chapter 20)
These rules were used before and are still used now. But they are applied differently. Before, all of these rules were the law. If anyone broke any of these rules, he or she will have been punished severly. They used to be very strict about every single Commandment. "24) Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25)Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe." (Exodus Chapter 21). They used take God and his commandments very seriously. But this has changed.
Now, some of these rules are still part of the law, but only a few of them. For example if you kill, you'll go to jail for a very long time, or you'll stay in jail forever, and sometimes depending were you are, you'll be killed. Also, if you steal or commit perjury (16 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.), you'll go to prison. You still get punished for breaking this rules but not as severly as before. I believe that if the punishments were still as they used to, most of the world's population will be dead or without body parts. The punishments before were very harsh, and this is why it is good that now they have changed.
Something else I thought about when I read, was that now, the other commandments are not so important. Because people now see them more as moral ethics instead of rules. Many people don't really care about them because they don't see them as something bad because they are not part of the law. And if they brake any of those rules, no one is going to punish them. Before, if a wife cheated on her husband it was terrible. Adultery was one of the worst things, people saw it as something terrible, and the wife and her lover will be put to death because of it. But now if a wife cheats on her husband, they just get divorced and that's pretty much it. None of them gets punished by the law or anything. I think it is good that now people don't get punished so severly for breaking the law or commiting moral mistakes. But I still think that even though these commandments don't apply to the law, people should take them more seriously.
Is God What We Think He Is?
As I read chapters 8-15 from the Exodus,I began to think on how God was punishing the Egyptians. I thought on how some of the nine plagues were so unfair. For example one of the plagues that impacted me the most was the tenth plague. The plague in which God was punishing all the Egyptians firstborns. "5)And all the firstborn in the land of Egypt shall die, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sitteth upon his thrown, even unto the firstborn of the maidservant that is behind the mill; and all the firstborn of beasts." (Exodus 11 verse 5).
After I read this passage all I could think about was on how unfair God had been. This tenth plague was definetly NOT just. God punished many innocent Egyptians with this plague. Many of the firstborns were children and babies, innocents, who had nothing to do or could do nothing about gving freedom to the Jewish people. And God decided to punish them, to kill them. Religions always say that God wants good for all and fairness to everyone. But after reading this how can we be sure that this is what God wants? And, is God really a perfect figure to imitate, or is it just that this is the way people want to see him as?
Something else I found interesting on Chapter 11 of the Exodus was: "7)But against any of the children of Israel shall not a dog move his tongue, against man or beast: that ye may know how that the Lord doth put a difference between the Egyptians and Israel." (Exodus 11 verse 7). When I read this I thought on how unfair God is again. This is a perfect example of discrimination. God here devided the Israelites from the Egyptians putting preference to the Jewish people. He discriminated the Egyptian children even though they were innocent children just like the Isrealites. God sentenced them to death just because they were Egyptians. If this is not discrimination then what is it? Religions always say that we should treat everyone equally, that we should not treat anyone worse no matter what. But, isn't it kind of hypocritical for them to say this when God also discriminates?
After reading this part from the Exodus, I was able to see that God isn't as perfect, as just, or as good as we think he is. And this made me ask myself: Is God really what we think he is? Or, is this just the way people want to see him as?
After I read this passage all I could think about was on how unfair God had been. This tenth plague was definetly NOT just. God punished many innocent Egyptians with this plague. Many of the firstborns were children and babies, innocents, who had nothing to do or could do nothing about gving freedom to the Jewish people. And God decided to punish them, to kill them. Religions always say that God wants good for all and fairness to everyone. But after reading this how can we be sure that this is what God wants? And, is God really a perfect figure to imitate, or is it just that this is the way people want to see him as?
Something else I found interesting on Chapter 11 of the Exodus was: "7)But against any of the children of Israel shall not a dog move his tongue, against man or beast: that ye may know how that the Lord doth put a difference between the Egyptians and Israel." (Exodus 11 verse 7). When I read this I thought on how unfair God is again. This is a perfect example of discrimination. God here devided the Israelites from the Egyptians putting preference to the Jewish people. He discriminated the Egyptian children even though they were innocent children just like the Isrealites. God sentenced them to death just because they were Egyptians. If this is not discrimination then what is it? Religions always say that we should treat everyone equally, that we should not treat anyone worse no matter what. But, isn't it kind of hypocritical for them to say this when God also discriminates?
After reading this part from the Exodus, I was able to see that God isn't as perfect, as just, or as good as we think he is. And this made me ask myself: Is God really what we think he is? Or, is this just the way people want to see him as?
miércoles, 15 de octubre de 2008
What God Says The Lord Does
By reading the Exodus, I thought about something we talked and discussed in class about one week ago. We talked about the difference between God and the Lord God. There are many theories about them. Some say they are two different ideas (or believes) but some say they are the same one. The real truth we'll never know. But I believe that they are both the same idea, but we use the terms God or Lord God depending on what we are referring to. For example, if we are talking about more general ideas like what to do, we use the term God. But if we talk about more specific things like how to do something, we use the term Lord God.
When I read the first seven chapters of the Exodus, I was able to see this. When God told Moses to go to Egypt to let the Hebrews (Israelites) out and give them freedom, I noticed that it was God the one who first talked to him. "5) And he said, Draw not nigh hither: put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground." (Exodus Chapter 3, verse 5) And after the God talked to him, the Lord did. "7)And the Lord said, I have surely seen the affliction of my people which are in Egypt,....8)And I am come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up out of that land unto a good land and a large, unto a land flowing with milk and honey;..." (Exodus Chapter 3, verses 7 and 8).
After I read to this passages I was able to conclude that my theory was right. That God and the Lord God are the same idea. But each of the terms are used depending on the context. First, the text refers to God when He told Moses, that he needed to do something with the Hebrews in Egypt. God told him what to do. But later, the text refers to the Lord. And the Lord tells Moses what he needs to do in order to take out the Hebrews from Egypt. God tells more in general what needs to be done, while the Lord tells how to do what God had said. What God says, the Lord does.
When I read the first seven chapters of the Exodus, I was able to see this. When God told Moses to go to Egypt to let the Hebrews (Israelites) out and give them freedom, I noticed that it was God the one who first talked to him. "5) And he said, Draw not nigh hither: put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground." (Exodus Chapter 3, verse 5) And after the God talked to him, the Lord did. "7)And the Lord said, I have surely seen the affliction of my people which are in Egypt,....8)And I am come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up out of that land unto a good land and a large, unto a land flowing with milk and honey;..." (Exodus Chapter 3, verses 7 and 8).
After I read to this passages I was able to conclude that my theory was right. That God and the Lord God are the same idea. But each of the terms are used depending on the context. First, the text refers to God when He told Moses, that he needed to do something with the Hebrews in Egypt. God told him what to do. But later, the text refers to the Lord. And the Lord tells Moses what he needs to do in order to take out the Hebrews from Egypt. God tells more in general what needs to be done, while the Lord tells how to do what God had said. What God says, the Lord does.
martes, 14 de octubre de 2008
Too Good to be True
When I started to read chapters 17-24 from Genesis, I first thought on how lucky Abraham was. On what a good life he had because of his faith in God. Abraham had two sons, Isaac and Ishmael. He was blessed with the two of them and he loved them very much specially Isaac, the son of his wife Sarah. In those times, having a son was one of the greatest blessings or things that could happen to a family. Then Abraham was considered to be a very lucky man. This was due to his close relationship with God. Thanks to this, God helped him whenever he needed him and this made things easier for Abraham. But as most things in the world, sometimes they are too good to be true.
After Abraham lived his very happy and lucky life, he was asked by God something he didn't expect. God asked Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, his favorite most loved son. "2] And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of."(Genesis 22 verse 2). This was something Abraham did not expect, something that he didn't thought that God, the one who had helped him with his life, will do to that him. To take away his most beloved son. To ask him to sacrifice him! Things were just going to well, now something bad had to happen.
Even though at the end this was just a test of God to proof Abraham's faith and loyalty to him, Abraham suffered very much during the process. He had a great life and then, an event was about to put an end to it. I believe that this story kind of tells how many times in life, things are going very good. But something you always have to learn about this is that there can be an event which can change this, an event which can lead things to go badly. And even though this devastating events may turn out good, always there will be a lot of suffering during the process.
After Abraham lived his very happy and lucky life, he was asked by God something he didn't expect. God asked Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, his favorite most loved son. "2] And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of."(Genesis 22 verse 2). This was something Abraham did not expect, something that he didn't thought that God, the one who had helped him with his life, will do to that him. To take away his most beloved son. To ask him to sacrifice him! Things were just going to well, now something bad had to happen.
Even though at the end this was just a test of God to proof Abraham's faith and loyalty to him, Abraham suffered very much during the process. He had a great life and then, an event was about to put an end to it. I believe that this story kind of tells how many times in life, things are going very good. But something you always have to learn about this is that there can be an event which can change this, an event which can lead things to go badly. And even though this devastating events may turn out good, always there will be a lot of suffering during the process.
The Beginning of Separation
When I began to read chapter 11 of the King James Bible, I read about a story I had heard a long time ago. I read about the Babel Tower. This story was about when some humans decided to build a very tall and powerful tower. But God found this construction as a threat from the humans. God began to see the humans as a threat, as a challenge. So he decided that they needed to be punished. Humans used to speak one language, they all used to comunicate, they used to be one. But Lord God's punishment changed this. "[7] Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech." (Genesis 11, verse 7).
After God decided to punish the human kind, all of the humans were very confused. They couldn't comunicate with anyone and no one could understand them. There were misunderstandings and great confusions. Unfourtunetly, this is something that has happened throughout time and hasn't change. Still, in the world now, in our "modern" societies we kind of live very separetly. We don't understand anyone but our own people, people from our own culture. But with people from different parts of the world, from other religions, cultures or societies, we really don't understand them. We say we do, but we don't.
For example all the fights, wars and conflicts between countries are due to misunderstandings. Because we are separated due to different believes and ways we see things, there are many problems in the world. If we weren't separated because of our believes, the world will be a better place, a peaceful one. After I finished reading this story I asked myself: If God hadn't seen humans as a threat, will we still be one whole?
After God decided to punish the human kind, all of the humans were very confused. They couldn't comunicate with anyone and no one could understand them. There were misunderstandings and great confusions. Unfourtunetly, this is something that has happened throughout time and hasn't change. Still, in the world now, in our "modern" societies we kind of live very separetly. We don't understand anyone but our own people, people from our own culture. But with people from different parts of the world, from other religions, cultures or societies, we really don't understand them. We say we do, but we don't.
For example all the fights, wars and conflicts between countries are due to misunderstandings. Because we are separated due to different believes and ways we see things, there are many problems in the world. If we weren't separated because of our believes, the world will be a better place, a peaceful one. After I finished reading this story I asked myself: If God hadn't seen humans as a threat, will we still be one whole?
miércoles, 8 de octubre de 2008
Impossible Love
Even though we seem to be for each other,
There's no way we can be,
You are my impossible lover,
Which is wish I could see,
But life is tearing us apart,
Now all I have left is my heart
There's no way we can be,
You are my impossible lover,
Which is wish I could see,
But life is tearing us apart,
Now all I have left is my heart
martes, 7 de octubre de 2008
Curiosity
When I began to read the third chapter of the Genesis, I started to think about how we, humans, have a great thirst of curiosity. As humans, we have the tendecy to want to know everything. Even if it means doing something we are not supposed to. We always have curiosity, when someone tells us to not do something, the first thing we think about is doing what they just told us to not do. And doing what we were told not to, becomes our desire, our anxiety. For example in Genesis, at the beginning of chapter 3, there was a passage which shows how curious humans are.
"[3] But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
[4] And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
[5] For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
[6] And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat."- (Genesis 3)
When I read this, I was able to see that it is true that humans like to do what they are not supposed to. And when someone prohibits something to another person, that something is more tempting, and it is more likey that that person will commit the act he/she is not supposed to commit. For example, in this passage, Eve, the woman was told by God not to eat nor touch the fruits from one tree. She and Adam could eat from any tree except that one. But one day, Eve was seduced by a serpent to eat the fruit from that tree. Eve was tempted, so she ate from the tree and led Adam to eat from it too. I believe that the snake represents the curiosity humans have. The tempting desire of doing the prohibited. The emotion which leads us to making huge mistakes that we'll later regret.
"[3] But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
[4] And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
[5] For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
[6] And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat."- (Genesis 3)
When I read this, I was able to see that it is true that humans like to do what they are not supposed to. And when someone prohibits something to another person, that something is more tempting, and it is more likey that that person will commit the act he/she is not supposed to commit. For example, in this passage, Eve, the woman was told by God not to eat nor touch the fruits from one tree. She and Adam could eat from any tree except that one. But one day, Eve was seduced by a serpent to eat the fruit from that tree. Eve was tempted, so she ate from the tree and led Adam to eat from it too. I believe that the snake represents the curiosity humans have. The tempting desire of doing the prohibited. The emotion which leads us to making huge mistakes that we'll later regret.
domingo, 5 de octubre de 2008
Truth Lies in the Eye of the Beholder
When I read Chapter 10 of God Secretaries, there was something that began to pervade my mind. There was a passage, a phrase which got my attention: "How can one of the most pacific moments in English history be the source of something which in retrospect, looks like one of its greatest ruptures? It is in part, a question of scale and of perspective. From the point of view of the English establishment, the events in the small agricultural communities around Scrooby and Gainsborough, on the borders of Lincolnshire and Nottinghamshire, were no more than a minor irritations at the outer edge of their concerns." (Gods Secretaries pg. 174-175)
After I finished reading this passage I began to think about a very famous phrase that my dad once told me: "Truth lies in they eye of the beholder." I had never really analyzed or thought about what this quote meant. But when I read the passage above, I started to think on how stories and history changes depending on who tells them. And that the point of view of the person or people who are telling a story is not always the only truth. Because people can live the same event, but they each tell it differently because of their point of view. None of the different parts of the story is a lie, the story is just told from different perspectives.
For example in God Secretaries, the English people saw the famous voyage of the Mayflower as a small, not that important moment in English history. They saw that event as kind of "pathetic," they didn't really care about it. While the Americans and the people who were in the Mayflower, saw that moment as kind of tragic. What they saw was that the Separatists suffered very much in England because the English didn't respect their religious believes. And that they really had a hard time. So by reading this I began to see that in every story, there are many truths. This is because in every story there are many witnesses, and each of them see the story with their own point of view, with their own perspective. Truth lies in the eye of the beholder.
After I finished reading this passage I began to think about a very famous phrase that my dad once told me: "Truth lies in they eye of the beholder." I had never really analyzed or thought about what this quote meant. But when I read the passage above, I started to think on how stories and history changes depending on who tells them. And that the point of view of the person or people who are telling a story is not always the only truth. Because people can live the same event, but they each tell it differently because of their point of view. None of the different parts of the story is a lie, the story is just told from different perspectives.
For example in God Secretaries, the English people saw the famous voyage of the Mayflower as a small, not that important moment in English history. They saw that event as kind of "pathetic," they didn't really care about it. While the Americans and the people who were in the Mayflower, saw that moment as kind of tragic. What they saw was that the Separatists suffered very much in England because the English didn't respect their religious believes. And that they really had a hard time. So by reading this I began to see that in every story, there are many truths. This is because in every story there are many witnesses, and each of them see the story with their own point of view, with their own perspective. Truth lies in the eye of the beholder.
sábado, 4 de octubre de 2008
Intolerance
When I began to read Chapter 6 of Gods Secreatries: The danger never dreamt of, that is the danger, there was a passage which made me think about how things seem to have changed, but they really haven't. "November 1605: the attempt by a group of desperate and marginalised Catholic renegades and romantics-terrorists is the word we would now use-to blow up the king, queen, princes, peers and other members of parliament at its opening on 5 November. It would come to define Jacobean England as much as Septemer 11 2001 would shape the attitudes, fears and methods of revenge of the western world in the first decade of the twenty-first century."(pg. 105). After I finish reading this, I began to think about how even though we think that now we are more tolerant, we really are still as intolerant as we used to be.
For example in the 5th of November in the 17th century, there was a great dispute between two different realigions. And this lead to a terrorist attack. The intolerance between the two religoins, between two different ideals lead to terrible actions. And even though we think we now are better, that now we are more tolerant, we really are the same. An example of this is the event in New York City, September 11, 2001 when the muslims destroyed the World Trade Center killing a lot of people. We thought that in the twenty-first century the whole world was going to be more open-minded, more tolerant to cultures and better.
But really what we were able to see after this event was that we still need to learn to be more tolerant. And also that some people just take it too far with their religion, they take things to literally instead of analyzing its real meaning so they cause a great devastation. I began to ask myself: How is it possible that thousands of people die just because of religious believes? And isn't religion supposed to be opposed to killing?
For example in the 5th of November in the 17th century, there was a great dispute between two different realigions. And this lead to a terrorist attack. The intolerance between the two religoins, between two different ideals lead to terrible actions. And even though we think we now are better, that now we are more tolerant, we really are the same. An example of this is the event in New York City, September 11, 2001 when the muslims destroyed the World Trade Center killing a lot of people. We thought that in the twenty-first century the whole world was going to be more open-minded, more tolerant to cultures and better.
But really what we were able to see after this event was that we still need to learn to be more tolerant. And also that some people just take it too far with their religion, they take things to literally instead of analyzing its real meaning so they cause a great devastation. I began to ask myself: How is it possible that thousands of people die just because of religious believes? And isn't religion supposed to be opposed to killing?
miércoles, 1 de octubre de 2008
Spelling-Exercises
Incorrect:
In deeling with students on the hih-school level - that is, the second, third, and forth year of high school - we must bare in mind that to some degree they are at a dificult sychological stage, generaly called adolesence. Students at this level are likely to be confused mentaly, to be subject to involuntery distractions and romantic dreamines. They are basicaly timid or self-consious, they lack frankness and are usualy very sensitive but hate to admit it. They are motivated iether by great ambition, probably out of all proportion to their capabiltys, or by extreme lazines caused by the fear of not suceeding or ataining their objectives. Fundamentaly they want to be kept busy but they refuse to admit it. They are frequently the victims of earlier poor training, and this makes evary effort doubly hard. They are usually wiling to work, but they hate to work without obtaining the results they think they shoud obtain. Their critical faculties are begining to develop and they are critical of their instructers and of the materiels they are given to laern. They are begining to feel the presher of time; and althouh they seldem say so, they really want to be consulted and given an oportunity to direct their own afairs, but they need considerable gidance.
Correct:
In dealing with students on the high-school level - that is, the second, third, and fourth year of high school - we must bear in mind that to some degree they are at a difficult psychological stage, generally called adolescence. Students at this level are likely to be confused mentally, to be subject to involuntary distractions and romantic dreaminess. They are basically timid or self-conscious, they lack frankness and are usually very sensitive but hate to admit it. They are motivated either by great ambition, probably out of all proportion to their capabilities, or by extreme laziness caused by the fear of not succeeding or attaining their objectives. Fundamentally they want to be kept busy but they refuse to admit it. They are frequently the victims of earlier poor training, and this makes every effort doubly hard. They are usually willing to work, but they hate to work without obtaining the results they think they should obtain. Their critical faculties are beginning to develop and they are critical of their instructors and of the materials they are given to learn. They are beginning to feel the pressure of time; and although they seldom say so, they really want to be consulted and given an opportunity to direct their own affairs, but they need considerable guidance.
In deeling with students on the hih-school level - that is, the second, third, and forth year of high school - we must bare in mind that to some degree they are at a dificult sychological stage, generaly called adolesence. Students at this level are likely to be confused mentaly, to be subject to involuntery distractions and romantic dreamines. They are basicaly timid or self-consious, they lack frankness and are usualy very sensitive but hate to admit it. They are motivated iether by great ambition, probably out of all proportion to their capabiltys, or by extreme lazines caused by the fear of not suceeding or ataining their objectives. Fundamentaly they want to be kept busy but they refuse to admit it. They are frequently the victims of earlier poor training, and this makes evary effort doubly hard. They are usually wiling to work, but they hate to work without obtaining the results they think they shoud obtain. Their critical faculties are begining to develop and they are critical of their instructers and of the materiels they are given to laern. They are begining to feel the presher of time; and althouh they seldem say so, they really want to be consulted and given an oportunity to direct their own afairs, but they need considerable gidance.
Correct:
In dealing with students on the high-school level - that is, the second, third, and fourth year of high school - we must bear in mind that to some degree they are at a difficult psychological stage, generally called adolescence. Students at this level are likely to be confused mentally, to be subject to involuntary distractions and romantic dreaminess. They are basically timid or self-conscious, they lack frankness and are usually very sensitive but hate to admit it. They are motivated either by great ambition, probably out of all proportion to their capabilities, or by extreme laziness caused by the fear of not succeeding or attaining their objectives. Fundamentally they want to be kept busy but they refuse to admit it. They are frequently the victims of earlier poor training, and this makes every effort doubly hard. They are usually willing to work, but they hate to work without obtaining the results they think they should obtain. Their critical faculties are beginning to develop and they are critical of their instructors and of the materials they are given to learn. They are beginning to feel the pressure of time; and although they seldom say so, they really want to be consulted and given an opportunity to direct their own affairs, but they need considerable guidance.
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)
