The gods are many unique and divided. Our gods are legions but they are strong because they are united.
is what I want to say.
It is clear that monotheism is an illusion: there has never been so many gods unique to war against each other. Never have so many different truths that spit in the face one another in a continuing conflict towards universality. These people wanted to impose their only god, "three-in-one formula Empowered" ... These are the chosen people of god creator all things, yet very selective ... And even those who have found their book as their only god, their prophet ... And yet it evokes is the outline of the major current STD (STD: Monotheism Traditionalist Seriously, © Kami) . That's not counting with Akhenaten and his sun eclipse all others, the Assyrians and their national god conqueror Nabonidus and his moon god who was suddenly piqued supremacy the Sassanian Zoroastrianism and fussy, and so on and not ripe. There were Joshua and divine election of his people by the "God of hosts." Then there was Constantine and his three-in-a new formula, Justinian and his intolerance heavy cohort of popes and church. Muhammad and Allah, for the vast fortunes of warriors and Arab merchants, holy wars, crusades, heresy, witch hunts and, frankly, is it necessary to continue the list?
All for that final, monotheism is just what a great dirty trick. There is not one, but gods of unique. Their problem? Because they are unique, precisely. They are all alone. The poor. What should be said that in fact it is a single god, and that the differences of men have nothing to do with it. But this does not explain why God constantly restrained himself, in a remake of the schizophrenic Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Why each of these gods unique claims to ultimate truth. Recognize the difference between representation (of human origin and always questionable) and the power itself is a first step toward intelligence. But there's a catch: what only God Almighty allegedly let his son, his servants, his followers, and other defendants divine power, crashing so heavily? Or it does nothing to carrer and as some have thought, with Epicureanism, he is a god so transcendent that he has no part in things, does not conflict with the world. Genre, he broke to create the world for a week and he did not wake up from her Sunday off. In this case, theism or atheism, who cares what does that make?
"And God saw that it had made a mistake ..."
Precisely: what does it matter? The gods, anyway, are powers, and their representation is significant only for men who seek to understand and address these ratings. Indeed, believe in them or not has no suspicion of importance, and I think if we stopped believing in a god, this is not that it would precipitate the world into chaos. He was already running fine without it come that we should imagine feeding the gods of our sheep and our prayers. And it is a pagan who speaks to you.
Do not talk about something does not deprive the existence of a thing. Romeo, if he had another name, would still be Romeo and Juliet would love it for what it is and not because it is the Capulet clan or clan Montaigu. Similarly, the representation of a god can change the power it is hardly changed. Lightning is lightning, whether wielded by Zeus, Taranis or Percy Jackson. And with regard to morality is a matter for men, men, gods have little impact in there except when it comes to embody an abstract idea which plays its role in human morality . Otherwise, again, lightning, just like love, illness and death in the rough, have no morals.
"It is not a god either because of a tormented man."
His son Hephaestus Hera - Iliad, XXI.
The problem is that when you have to worry about the human order and morality that is supposed to underlie the, one feels the need for a god, at least one, that is the guarantor of the corporation. Which would justify the same time, the meaning of life, projecting beyond death judgments of good and evil, two concepts that are subjective as a fart in the water. This leads to the invention of hello, the famous wager of existence: I was put on the fact that there is a hello and I line my life, I did not conform with the hope that no. I j'fais The second challenge, needless to say ... Which, surprisingly, does not prevent me from having a moral. The difference is that I realize before my peers, those species with two legs of fanatics called "human" and not to the gods with whom the relationship can not be that of a servant asshole towards his master, nor that of a penitent eaten guilt before a paternal figure as ready to forgive his nimble hands.
All this, to settle a little into the heart and forget the details, however important the story leads to monotheism. A people or a group of humans is a deity of its own and chooses to honor in particular, I see it, especially since it is a logical one little pagan ... Until we say that this god is the only true universal power, in truth, j'vous'd say ... There j'commence find it insulting. Genre: you are all idiots, it's our god is good. At what time were asked the question whether the entire mess pantheons of the human world there was only one correct answer (yeah, apart from 42), that it will always remain a mystery to me. I think we especially wanted to impose an answer to which had never asked the question and others have responded "Oh yeah, that's not true ..."
thing led to another, each pulling the cover itself: my god is good, it's not mine, not mine ... then: "There is only one God and it is I who knows him best." While there, the guy in dress, in front, he took his book and worry glue binding a shot in the eye. This is the beginning of the holy war. Because a war that can be holy (sisi). I have never found it very hygienic, such as confessionals, but after all, I've never set foot in one or the other.
"They forgot to put the PQ ..."
Confessional Tastavy the rectory.
short, monotheism is the great answer to a big question that nobody ever asked, but who knew very well agree with all the evidence "legal" small business people. As humans are diverse and made various representations, a variety of legal and business various gods unique (or the only god, if you will) are more numerous than universal.
each his gods and hippos are well kept ...
They are cons all agree on one point: bumpkins (Latin pagani , pagans) who have complete outfits of gods, all at once diverse, varied, anywhere, any time, for everything and for nothing, like a department store where the man pushes the cadi of religion and uses the pantheons shelves before going to the fund pay offerings, all these bumpkins therefore, are morons primitive. I tend to think at first sight between the lambda pushing his cart and pay lots of different books and the character chi-rho, which uses a single book to hit the other, the cretin primitive is not always who you think ... But again, this is a matter point of view. It is subjective (with the pet in the water and all that).
Yet bumpkins polytheists have something in common. They have more or less aware of diversity and have more or less accepted by birth. They more or less conscious choice, plurality and difference. They agree that their divergent representations of deities does not really matter the reality of them. What all this is to humanize, to be more easily anthropised affordable, at bottom lightning, carried by Zeus or Taranis, it is always better lightning and not drag in the neighborhood when you see the flash the device. The Pagan has an empirical knowledge of divinity, he does not expect that the reveals, at least the heathen today. Believe it or not is a false question. The question is "how we think of the gods?". And we will do deals. But every choice is a thing of their own, particular, individual, who commits the pagan lambda and not the entire universe. And in terms of morality, we see that with other humanoids. After the unity of this diversity appears, and we can say that the gods are legion, but they are more united than the gods themselves unique.
is what I want to say.
It is clear that monotheism is an illusion: there has never been so many gods unique to war against each other. Never have so many different truths that spit in the face one another in a continuing conflict towards universality. These people wanted to impose their only god, "three-in-one formula Empowered" ... These are the chosen people of god creator all things, yet very selective ... And even those who have found their book as their only god, their prophet ... And yet it evokes is the outline of the major current STD (STD: Monotheism Traditionalist Seriously, © Kami) . That's not counting with Akhenaten and his sun eclipse all others, the Assyrians and their national god conqueror Nabonidus and his moon god who was suddenly piqued supremacy the Sassanian Zoroastrianism and fussy, and so on and not ripe. There were Joshua and divine election of his people by the "God of hosts." Then there was Constantine and his three-in-a new formula, Justinian and his intolerance heavy cohort of popes and church. Muhammad and Allah, for the vast fortunes of warriors and Arab merchants, holy wars, crusades, heresy, witch hunts and, frankly, is it necessary to continue the list?
All for that final, monotheism is just what a great dirty trick. There is not one, but gods of unique. Their problem? Because they are unique, precisely. They are all alone. The poor. What should be said that in fact it is a single god, and that the differences of men have nothing to do with it. But this does not explain why God constantly restrained himself, in a remake of the schizophrenic Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Why each of these gods unique claims to ultimate truth. Recognize the difference between representation (of human origin and always questionable) and the power itself is a first step toward intelligence. But there's a catch: what only God Almighty allegedly let his son, his servants, his followers, and other defendants divine power, crashing so heavily? Or it does nothing to carrer and as some have thought, with Epicureanism, he is a god so transcendent that he has no part in things, does not conflict with the world. Genre, he broke to create the world for a week and he did not wake up from her Sunday off. In this case, theism or atheism, who cares what does that make?
"And God saw that it had made a mistake ..." Precisely: what does it matter? The gods, anyway, are powers, and their representation is significant only for men who seek to understand and address these ratings. Indeed, believe in them or not has no suspicion of importance, and I think if we stopped believing in a god, this is not that it would precipitate the world into chaos. He was already running fine without it come that we should imagine feeding the gods of our sheep and our prayers. And it is a pagan who speaks to you.
Do not talk about something does not deprive the existence of a thing. Romeo, if he had another name, would still be Romeo and Juliet would love it for what it is and not because it is the Capulet clan or clan Montaigu. Similarly, the representation of a god can change the power it is hardly changed. Lightning is lightning, whether wielded by Zeus, Taranis or Percy Jackson. And with regard to morality is a matter for men, men, gods have little impact in there except when it comes to embody an abstract idea which plays its role in human morality . Otherwise, again, lightning, just like love, illness and death in the rough, have no morals.
"It is not a god either because of a tormented man." His son Hephaestus Hera - Iliad, XXI.
The problem is that when you have to worry about the human order and morality that is supposed to underlie the, one feels the need for a god, at least one, that is the guarantor of the corporation. Which would justify the same time, the meaning of life, projecting beyond death judgments of good and evil, two concepts that are subjective as a fart in the water. This leads to the invention of hello, the famous wager of existence: I was put on the fact that there is a hello and I line my life, I did not conform with the hope that no. I j'fais The second challenge, needless to say ... Which, surprisingly, does not prevent me from having a moral. The difference is that I realize before my peers, those species with two legs of fanatics called "human" and not to the gods with whom the relationship can not be that of a servant asshole towards his master, nor that of a penitent eaten guilt before a paternal figure as ready to forgive his nimble hands.
All this, to settle a little into the heart and forget the details, however important the story leads to monotheism. A people or a group of humans is a deity of its own and chooses to honor in particular, I see it, especially since it is a logical one little pagan ... Until we say that this god is the only true universal power, in truth, j'vous'd say ... There j'commence find it insulting. Genre: you are all idiots, it's our god is good. At what time were asked the question whether the entire mess pantheons of the human world there was only one correct answer (yeah, apart from 42), that it will always remain a mystery to me. I think we especially wanted to impose an answer to which had never asked the question and others have responded "Oh yeah, that's not true ..."
thing led to another, each pulling the cover itself: my god is good, it's not mine, not mine ... then: "There is only one God and it is I who knows him best." While there, the guy in dress, in front, he took his book and worry glue binding a shot in the eye. This is the beginning of the holy war. Because a war that can be holy (sisi). I have never found it very hygienic, such as confessionals, but after all, I've never set foot in one or the other.
"They forgot to put the PQ ..." Confessional Tastavy the rectory.
short, monotheism is the great answer to a big question that nobody ever asked, but who knew very well agree with all the evidence "legal" small business people. As humans are diverse and made various representations, a variety of legal and business various gods unique (or the only god, if you will) are more numerous than universal.
each his gods and hippos are well kept ... They are cons all agree on one point: bumpkins (Latin pagani , pagans) who have complete outfits of gods, all at once diverse, varied, anywhere, any time, for everything and for nothing, like a department store where the man pushes the cadi of religion and uses the pantheons shelves before going to the fund pay offerings, all these bumpkins therefore, are morons primitive. I tend to think at first sight between the lambda pushing his cart and pay lots of different books and the character chi-rho, which uses a single book to hit the other, the cretin primitive is not always who you think ... But again, this is a matter point of view. It is subjective (with the pet in the water and all that).
Yet bumpkins polytheists have something in common. They have more or less aware of diversity and have more or less accepted by birth. They more or less conscious choice, plurality and difference. They agree that their divergent representations of deities does not really matter the reality of them. What all this is to humanize, to be more easily anthropised affordable, at bottom lightning, carried by Zeus or Taranis, it is always better lightning and not drag in the neighborhood when you see the flash the device. The Pagan has an empirical knowledge of divinity, he does not expect that the reveals, at least the heathen today. Believe it or not is a false question. The question is "how we think of the gods?". And we will do deals. But every choice is a thing of their own, particular, individual, who commits the pagan lambda and not the entire universe. And in terms of morality, we see that with other humanoids. After the unity of this diversity appears, and we can say that the gods are legion, but they are more united than the gods themselves unique.
PS: I is speaking in a rather simplistic and a bit too personal. But shit, I have the right, this is my blog. Still, if that can give you to cogitate on it perfectissime.
"And the royal archer Apollo replied
- Poseidon who shakes the earth, you would call me insane if I was fighting against you for the wretched men that a greening days similar to leaves, and eat the fruits of the earth, and soon wither and die. not fight, and let them fight among themselves. "
Iliad, XXI
Iliad, XXI
0 comments:
Post a Comment