Idol Inspirational Quotes

Without music, life would be a mistake.

I hope to write someday and that’s even more terrifying than performing. You don’t just entertain the audience, you give them little bits of your soul.

The ball laughs, radiant, in the air. He brings her down, puts her to sleep, showers her with compliments, dances with her, and seeing such things never before seen his admirers pity their unborn grandchildren who will never see them.

And one fine day the goddess of the wind kisses the foot of man, that mistreated, scorned foot, and from that kiss the soccer idol is born. He is born in a straw crib in a tin-roofed shack and he enters the world clinging to a ball.

Dead or not, I have come for his heart and I will have it.

Idolatry happens when you worship or praise anything excessively to the point of causing you to believe it reigns supreme. All things on this earth are temporal, even your very own desires. Be careful that you do not create idols to worship.

you are the equal of the idol who has given you your inspiration

A personalized God can be a mere idol carved in our own image- a projection of our limited needs, fears, and desires. We can assume that he loves what we love and hates what we hate, endorsing our prejudices instead of compelling us to transcend them. When he seems to fail to prevent a catastrophe or seems even to desire a tragedy, he can seem callous and cruel. A facile belief that a disaster is the will of God can make us accept things that are fundamentally unacceptable. The very fact, as a person, God has a gender is also limiting: It means that the sexuality of half the human race is sacralized at the expense of the female and can lead to neurotic and inadequate imbalance in human sexual mores. A personal God can be dangerous, therefore. Instead of pulling us beyond our limitations, “he” can encourage us to remain complacently within them; “he” can make us cruel, callous, self-satisfied and partial as “he” seems to be. Instead of inspiring the compassion that should characterize all advanced religions, “he” can encourage us to judge, condemn, and marginalize.

People were never meant to be idols. We aren't supposed to be worshipped. Only God deserves that kind of praise.

What we see taking place in the church today is the reduction of God to an idol.

If you can find no one to become your ideal to aspire to, no one to be your ultimate example, your idol, your motivation— don't fret! You can and you must become your own ultimate aspiration, your own example, your own idol, ideal, motivation! You go and be what you haven't found yet!

Never underestimate a girl's love for her idol. Never think for even a minute, she won't defend him to her death. Because it's not just the music that makes that person her idol. It's the person, the fans. People whom of which she has interacted with thanks to her idol. That idol may have saved her life, or just makes her smile everyday. That idol has never broke her heart, and has yet to leave her. No wonder she finds such joy in the music.

Blindly inheriting idols reflected how polytheism froze critical thinking. A stone statue might be designed to appear awe-inspiring, but its inherent lack of physical dynamism signified a stagnant worldview. The Qur’an repeatedly invokes the Arabic term for idol—sanam—literally, “frozen in time.

So that when man can be in great distress having been betrayed and deserted by all friends he may find consolation in the idea that an ever true friend was still there to help him, to support him and that He was Almighty and could do anything. The idea of God is helpful to man in distress. Society has to fight out this belief as well as was fought the idol worship and the narrow conception of religion. Similarly, when man tries to stand on his own legs, and become a realist he shall have to throw the faith aside, and to face manfully all the distress, trouble, in which the circumstances may throw him.

My friends, don't idolize hardship. What you idolize is what your heart will look for and what your heart looks for is what you will have. And don't capitalize on misfortune, because you will always seek out to have capital! Throw away that pride! Don't put sorrow on a pedestal! If you ask me if I would rather have had my sorrows or not, I will tell you that no, I would rather have not had any of them! In the blink of an eye, I would rid myself of them! I have no pride. I don't rely on hardships and sorrows to mold me into someone. I don't allow myself to be dictated. When hardship and sorrow come knocking, saying "We are responsible for who you are today, let us in!" I'm going to say, in a split second, "No you're not! Go away, I don't owe you anything!

Every man inherently wants to idolize his woman. It irks us whenever we find you regular rather than enchanting.

Learn from your mistakes, take responsibility and forgive yourself.

An idol is something that we look to for things that only God can give. Idolatry functions widely inside religious communities when doctrinal truth is elevated to the position of a false god. This occurs when people rely on the rightness of their doctrine for their standing with God rather than on God himself and his grace. It is a subtle but deadly mistake…. Another form of idolatry within religious communities turns spiritual gifts and ministry success into a counterfeit god…. Another kind of religious idolatry has to do with moral living itself… Though we may give lip service to Jesus as our example and inspiration, we are still looking to ourselves and own own moral striving for salvation…. Making an idol out of doctrinal accuracy, ministry success, or moral rectitude leads to constant internal conflict, arrogance and self-righteousness, and oppression of those whose views differ.

Every great man is an idol, an oracle of inquiry. Don't aspire to know the former, but aspire to know the diety in his soul.

One of the greatest mistakes we make is to idolize the artist rather than the art; the messenger rather than the message.

St. Augustine hated the Stoics, Dostoevsky hated the Russian Liberals. At first sight this seems a quite inexplicable peculiarity. Both were convinced Christians, both spoke so much of love, and suddenly - such hate! And against whom? Against the Stoics, who preached self-abnegation, who esteemed virtue above all things in the world, and against the Liberals who also exalted virtue above all things! But the fact remains: Dostoevsky spoke in rage of Stassyulevitch and Gradovsky; Augustine could not be calm when he spoke the names of those pre-Stoic Stoics, Regulus and Mutius Scaevola, and even Socrates, the idol of the ancient world, appeared to him a bogey. Obviously Augustine and Dostoevsky were terrified and appalled by the mere thought of the possibility of such men as Scaevola and Gradovsky - men capable of loving virtue for its own sake, of seeing virtue as an end in itself. Dostoevsky says openly in the Diary of a Writer that the only idea capable of inspiring a man is that of the immortality of the soul.

The nation once idolized astronauts and civil rights leaders who inspired hope and empathy. Now it worships tech innovators who generate billions and move financial markets. We get the heroes we deserve.

With that in mind, I try to imagine the greatest gift I could've given my father. And as sleep descends on me, the answer seems strangely clear: my faith in his idols. That was what he wanted all along - to feel that we were united by something permanent, to know that as long as he and I believed in the same thing, we would never be apart.

this is actualy a poem we have been called naive as if it were a dirty word, whe have been called innocent as though with shame our cheeks should burn so we visit with the careful idols of cynisism to learn to sneer and pant and walk so as not to feel the scales of judgement rub wrongly but we say some things must remain simple some things must remain untouched and pure lest we all forget the legacy we begot us the health of our origins the poetry of our fundemental selves

All founders of religious or political creeds have established them solely because they were successful in inspiring crowds with those fanatical sentiments which have as result that men find their happiness in worship and obedience and are ready to lay down their lives for their idol.

This is a world of controversies, if you speak a truth; you will be awarded as a idol of stupidness".

15. For if you look closely At the so called idols of the world They have something in common. They were ignorant They ignored the noise They created their own path.

A society whose members are helpless need idols.

Everyone should be respected as an individual, but no one idolized.” – Albert Einstein

Our collective energies make miracles happen, not the stone idol.

Reality, at first glance, is a simple thing: the television speaking to you now is real. Your body sunk into that chair in the approach to midnight, a clock ticking at the threshold of awareness. All the endless detail of a solid and material world surrounding you. These things exist. They can be measured with a yardstick, a voltammeter, a weighing scale. These things are real. Then there’s the mind, half-focused on the TV, the settee, the clock. This ghostly knot of memory, idea and feeling that we call ourself also exists, though not within the measurable world our science may describe. Consciousness is unquantifiable, a ghost in the machine, barely considered real at all, though in a sense this flickering mosaic of awareness is the only true reality that we can ever know. The Here-and-Now demands attention, is more present to us. We dismiss the inner world of our ideas as less important, although most of our immediate physical reality originated only in the mind. The TV, sofa, clock and room, the whole civilisation that contains them once were nothing save ideas. Material existence is entirely founded on a phantom realm of mind, whose nature and geography are unexplored. Before the Age of Reason was announced, humanity had polished strategies for interacting with the world of the imaginary and invisible: complicated magic-systems; sprawling pantheons of gods and spirits, images and names with which we labelled powerful inner forces so that we might better understand them. Intellect, Emotion and Unconscious Thought were made divinities or demons so that we, like Faust, might better know them; deal with them; become them. Ancient cultures did not worship idols. Their god-statues represented ideal states which, when meditated constantly upon, one might aspire to. Science proves there never was a mermaid, blue-skinned Krishna or a virgin birth in physical reality. Yet thought is real, and the domain of thought is the one place where gods inarguably ezdst, wielding tremendous power. If Aphrodite were a myth and Love only a concept, then would that negate the crimes and kindnesses and songs done in Love’s name? If Christ were only ever fiction, a divine Idea, would this invalidate the social change inspired by that idea, make holy wars less terrible, or human betterment less real, less sacred? The world of ideas is in certain senses deeper, truer than reality; this solid television less significant than the Idea of television. Ideas, unlike solid structures, do not perish. They remain immortal, immaterial and everywhere, like all Divine things. Ideas are a golden, savage landscape that we wander unaware, without a map. Be careful: in the last analysis, reality may be exactly what we think it is.

In 1961, a recovering addict was saved by the works of an uplifting novelist. Months later, the man found out his role model committed suicide one morning. Liar, he cried. It was like watching his hero say that heroes don’t exist and then flying away. What do books mean if the writer gave up? The reader decided to give heroism a try and wrote stories about how great life can be until he could convince himself of it. The experiment is still in the works.

Dialogues with such inspiring idols as Sylvia Plath, Maya Angelou, E E Cummings, Rabindranath Tagore, Lakshmi Prasad Devkota, Ernest Hemingway in one's imagination is a way to keep the creative fire burning within the artist's soul.

When we fail to believe the truth about who Jesus is and miss the impact of His astounding work in suffering and dying for our sin, it will be impossible to resist the allurement of the gods of this earth as they whisper their promised pleasures to us.

To see things as the poet sees them I must share his consciousness and not attend to it; I must look where he looks and not turn round to face him; I must make of him not a spectacle but a pair of spectacles; in fine, as Professor Alexander would say, I must enjoy him and not contemplate him.

Rather than idolizing perfection, we must choose to cherish what is real. To truly live is to love deeply, to get messy, to sometimes get hurt, and to stumble and fall. It is worth it. The alternative of living a life barren of these things in the pursuit of perfection would be tragically uninteresting.

The idea of solvitur ambulando (in walking it will be solved) has been around since St. Augustine, but well before that Aristotle thought and taught while walking the open-air parapets of the Lyceum. It has long been believed that walking in restorative settings could lead not only to physical vigor but to mental clarity and even bursts of genius, inspiration (with its etymology in breathing) and overall sanity. As French academic Frederic Gros writes in A Philosophy of Walking, it’s simply “the best way to go more slowly than any other method that has ever been found.” Jefferson walked to clear his mind, while Thoreau and Nietzsche, like Aristotle, walked to think. “All truly great thoughts are conceived while walking,” wrote Nietzsche in Twilight of the Idols. And Rousseau wrote in Confessions, “I can only meditate when I am walking. When I stop, I cease to think; my mind only works with my legs.” Scotland

More we know more we know our ignorance. Darkness can be perceived with the help of light. Facts are stranger than fiction. Have you ever thought why there are many religions and there is only one science on the Earth? Devotees of different religions follow different customs, rituals, prayers, attributes of gods, etc. Each religion has many sects; these sects are further divided as per the geographical locations of the devotees. Thus, religious concepts of different people are altogether different. For example, people of one religion sacrifice animals to appease their gods; whereas, people of other religion appease their gods through the service of those animals. To take another example, the idol worship is core of one religion; whereas, the other religion has imposed a taboo over idol worship. One can say that this discrepancy among religions is due to the fact that religions originated in different geographical locations. Not only religions, science was also conceived by the scientists of diverse origin. However, all those unconnected scientists discovered exactly similar scientific principles. Have you ever heard Indian science, British science, or American science? All over the world, many pioneer scientists discovered their principles and later other scientists attested those. If some principle was found incorrect, soon its inventor accepted the truth. There is one concrete reason behind existence of many religious concepts and only one science on the Earth. About one thing or concept, there is only one truth but there can be many lies.

As a minister of the Lord in whatever way the Lord decides to use you and with the gifts he gives you for the work, there is the tendency to start idolizing the work itself or the gifts that you forget it is the father who gave it to you. Who picked you up and dusted you from nothing and adorned you. You forget and make the work a god before him. Exodus 20:3 "You shall have no other gods before me". ----- This can be very subtle especially for social media ministry. You begin to love your social image over the word of God. You begin to dampen and tweak the word of God to appeal to a wider audience. You're suddenly no longer about the raw truth of the gospel. As the followers and likes increase you begin to get more and more addicted to the fruit of the works and the response to YOUR messages and posts. If a post doesn't do too well and get many likes and comments you are not happy. It hurts you deeply. That is how you know It has become about you. ------ If this is you and this message has touched your heart, if this post is like a mirror to your face, go back to God and ask for forgiveness. Ask God to forgive you for elevating yourself and your work as a god before him and return back to when it was just about loving him and preaching the good news. You probably may have noticed you lost the fire of inspiration you used to have at the beginning. This is why.

Maisie was with the idea of the sentiment Sir Claude had inspired, and familiar, in addition, by Mrs Wix’s anecdotes, with the ravages that in general such a sentiment could produce, she was able to make allowances for her ladyship’s remarkable appearance, her violent splendour, the wonderful colour of her lips and even the hard stare, the stare of some gorgeous idol described in a story-book, that had come into her eyes in consequence of a curious thickening of their already rich circumference.

People love it when you criticise some things which they do not believe in, practices which are contrary to what they practice or contrary views. They call you objective and truthful But immediately you start disagreeing with their views, criticising their beliefs, expressing contrary views against what they support, they call you foul names, say you are not a child of God, ask who you are to judge. Listen and listen good, I love writing and I write based on inspiration and experience. I don't just write, I write to capture the minds of my readers and to spark reaction. I welcome contrary views, I love you opposing my stance cos in the process I learn some things from you. Don't get mad at me for expressing myself via writing. I love putting things down. Learn to tolerate my views and counter me when you don't agree. Stop holding grudges and developing unnecessary hatred. Life is too short to be closed minded and inclined. Life is too short for me to idolize anybody. I can't always be dancing to your tunes, you also have to dance to mine.

If the Pentateuch be true, religious persecution is a duty. The dungeons of the Inquisition were temples, and the clank of every chain upon the limbs of heresy was music in the ear of God. If the Pentateuch was inspired, every heretic should be destroyed; and every man who advocates a fact inconsistent with the sacred book, should be consumed by sword and flame. In the Old Testament no one is told to reason with a heretic, and not one word is said about relying upon argument, upon education, nor upon intellectual development—nothing except simple brute force. Is there to-day a christian who will say that four thousand years ago, it was the duty of a husband to kill his wife if she differed with him upon the subject of religion? Is there one who will now say that, under such circumstances, the wife ought to have been killed? Why should God be so jealous of the wooden idols of the heathen? Could he not compete with Baal? Was he envious of the success of the Egyptian magicians? Was it not possible for him to make such a convincing display of his power as to silence forever the voice of unbelief? Did this God have to resort to force to make converts? Was he so ignorant of the structure of the human mind as to believe all honest doubt a crime? If he wished to do away with the idolatry of the Canaanites, why did he not appear to them? Why did he not give them the tables of the law? Why did he only make known his will to a few wandering savages in the desert of Sinai? Will some theologian have the kindness to answer these questions? Will some minister, who now believes in religious liberty, and eloquently denounces the intolerance of Catholicism, explain these things; will he tell us why he worships an intolerant God? Is a god who will burn a soul forever in another world, better than a christian who burns the body for a few hours in this? Is there no intellectual liberty in heaven? Do the angels all discuss questions on the same side? Are all the investigators in perdition? Will the penitent thief, winged and crowned, laugh at the honest folks in hell? Will the agony of the damned increase or decrease the happiness of God? Will there be, in the universe, an eternal auto da fe?

Jesus calls us to … “hate” money, give it away to the poor, simplify our lives, practice universal love and compassion, and focus our attention, time, and energy on the God of love and peace. Of course,, this either/or teaching can be applied to all the consequences of the idolatry of money. Jesus could just as easily say: “You cannot serve both God and country. You cannot serve both God and war. You cannot serve both God and nuclear weapons. You cannot serve both the God of life and peace and the false gods of death and war. It’s one or the other.

Yet a personal God can become a grave liability. He can be a mere idol carved in our own image, a projection of our limited needs, fears and desires. We can assume that he loves what we love and hates what we hate, endorsing our prejudices instead of compelling us to transcend them. When he seems to fail to prevent a catastrophe or seems even to desire a tragedy, he can seem callous and cruel. A facile belief that a disaster is the will of God can make us accept things that are fundamentally unacceptable. The very fact that, as a person, God has a gender is also limiting: it means that the sexuality of half the human race is sacralized at the expense of the female and can lead to a neurotic and inadequate imbalance in human sexual mores. A personal God can be dangerous, therefore. Instead of pulling us beyond our limitations, “he” can encourage us to remain complacently within them; “he” can make us as cruel, callous, self-satisfied and partial as “he” seems to be. Instead of inspiring the compassion that should characterize all advanced religion, “he” can encourage us to judge, condemn and marginalize. It seems, therefore, that the idea of a personal God can only be a stage in our religious development. The world religions all seem to have recognized this danger and have sought to transcend the personal conception of supreme reality.

to be ultra is to go beyond. is to attack the scepter in the name of the throne, and the miter in the name of the alter; it is to mistreat the thing you support; it is to kick in the traces; is is to cavil at the stake for undercooking heretics; it is to reproach the idol for lack of idolatry; it is to insult through an excess of respect; it is to find to little papistry in the pope; in the king to little royalty, and too much light in the night; it is to be dissatisfied with the albatross, with snow ,with the swan, and the lily for not being white enough; it is to champion things to the point of becoming their enemy, it is to become so pro you become con.” ~Victor Hugo

Une condamnation de la vie de la part du vivant n’est finalement que le symptôme d’une espèce de vie déterminée : sans qu’on se demande en aucune façon si c’est à tort ou à raison. Il faudrait prendre position en dehors de la vie et la connaître d’autre part tout aussi bien que quelqu’un qui l’a traversée, que plusieurs et même tous ceux qui y ont passé, pour ne pouvoir que toucher au problème de la valeur de la vie : ce sont là des raisons suffisantes pour comprendre que ce problème est en dehors de notre portée. Si nous parlons de la valeur, nous parlons sous l’inspiration, sous l’optique de la vie : la vie elle-même nous force à déterminer des valeurs, la vie elle-même évolue par notre entremise lorsque nous déterminons des valeurs…

G. Eliot. -- They are rid of the Christian God and now believe all the more firmly that they must cling to Christian morality. That is an English consistency; we do not wish to hold it against little moralistic females à la Eliot. In England one must rehabilitate oneself after every little emancipation from theology by showing in a veritably awe-inspiring manner what a moral fanatic one is. That is the penance they pay there. We others hold otherwise. When one gives up the Christian faith, one pulls the right to Christian morality out from under one's feet. This morality is by no means self-evident: this point has to be exhibited again and again, despite the English flatheads. Christianity is a system, a whole view of things thought out together. By breaking one main concept out of it, the faith in God, one breaks the whole: nothing necessary remains in one's hands. Christianity presupposes that man does not know, cannot know, what is good for him, what evil: he believes in God, who alone knows it. Christian morality is a command; its origin is transcendent; it is beyond all criticism, all right to criticism; it has truth only if God is the truth--it stands and falls with faith in God. When the English actually believe that they know "intuitively" what is good and evil, when they therefore suppose that they no longer require Christianity as the guarantee of morality, we merely witness the effects of the dominion of the Christian value judgment and an expression of the strength and depth of this dominion: such that the origin of English morality has been forgotten, such that the very conditional character of its right to existence is no longer felt. For the English, morality is not yet a problem.

AUGUST 19 THE “ACCURSED THINGS” And you, by all means abstain from the accursed things, lest you become accursed when you take of the accursed things, and make the camp of Israel a curse, and trouble it. . . . But the children of Israel committed a trespass regarding the accursed things, for Achan . . . took of the accursed things; so the anger of the LORD burned against the children of Israel. —Joshua 6:18; 7:1 (NKJV) We have to leave “accursed things” behind. Led by Joshua, God delivered the city of Jericho into the Israelites’ hands. God just had one requirement: after the city is conquered, the Israelites should leave the “accursed things”—the idols, the spoils, the wicked items that corrupted Jericho—behind. After the victory, most of the Israelites obeyed God’s command. But one man, Achan, “took of the accursed things; so the anger of the LORD burned against the children of Israel.” We have to scan our lives to see if there are items within them not of God. Are we watching, consuming, or participating in things that the enemy can use for our destruction? If so, we have to leave them behind—not only for our sake, but for our children, and our children’s children.   Dear God, help me leave behind the “accursed things.” Break me of any dependencies, and bring me into your light. Amen.

Şi totuşi, un Dumnezeu personal poate deveni o mare răspundere. Se poate transforma într-un simplu idol , făcut după chipul şi asemănarea noastră, o proiecţie a nevoilor noastre limitate, a temerilor şi a dorinţelor pe care le avem. Putem presupune că El iubeşte ce iubim noi şi urăşte ce urâm noi, accentuându-ne prejudecăţile, în loc să ne oblige să le depăşim. Când nu izbuteşte să împiedice o catastrofă sau atunci când pare că vrea o tragedie, Dumnezeu poate să pară nemilos şi crud. facila convingere că un dezastru exprimă vrerea lui Dumnezeu ne face să acceptăm lucruri care sunt, în esenţa lor, inacceptabile. Însuşi faptul că, fiind o persoană, Dumnezeu are sex, impune de asemenea nişte limite, căci ar însemna că jumătate dintre reprezentanţii rasei umane sunt sacralizaţi în detrimentul femeii, lucru care poate cauza un dezechilibru anormal, nevrotic, în convenţiile sexuale umane. Aşadar, ideea de Dumnezeu personal poate fi periculoasă. În loc să se tragă dincolo de limitele noastre El ne poate încuraja să ne complacem în ele. Ne poate face la fel de cruzi, neîndurători, aroganţi şi părtinitori ca El. În loc să inspire compasiune care ar trebui să caracterizeze orice religie avansată, ne poate încuraja să judecăm, să condamnăm şi să marginalizăm. Prin urmare, ideea de Dumnezeu personal nu poate fi decât o etapă a dezvoltării noastre religioase. Toate religiile lumii par să fi recunoscut acest pericol şi să fi căutat a depăşi concepţia personală despre realitatea supremă.

En admettant que l’on ait compris ce qu’il y a de sacrilège dans un pareil soulèvement contre la vie, tel qu’il est devenu presque sacro-saint dans la morale chrétienne, on aura, par cela même et heureusement, compris autre chose encore : ce qu’il y a d’inutile, de factice, d’absurde, de mensonger dans un pareil soulèvement. Une condamnation de la vie de la part du vivant n’est finalement que le symptôme d’une espèce de vie déterminée : sans qu’on se demande en aucune façon si c’est à tort ou à raison. Il faudrait prendre position en dehors de la vie et la connaître d’autre part tout aussi bien que quelqu’un qui l’a traversée, que plusieurs et même tous ceux qui y ont passé, pour ne pouvoir que toucher au problème de la valeur de la vie : ce sont là des raisons suffisantes pour comprendre que ce problème est en dehors de notre portée. Si nous parlons de la valeur, nous parlons sous l’inspiration, sous l’optique de la vie : la vie elle-même nous force à déterminer des valeurs, la vie elle-même évolue par notre entremise lorsque nous déterminons des valeurs… Il s’ensuit que toute morale contre nature qui considère Dieu comme l’idée contraire, comme la condamnation de la vie, n’est en réalité qu’une évaluation de vie, — de quelle vie ? de quelle espèce de vie ? Mais j’ai déjà donné ma réponse : de la vie descendante, affaiblie, fatiguée, condamnée. La morale, telle qu’on l’a entendue jusqu’à maintenant — telle qu’elle a été formulée en dernier lieu par Schopenhauer, comme « négation de la volonté de vivre » — cette morale est l’instinct de décadence même, qui se transforme en impératif : elle dit : « va à ta perte ! » — elle est le jugement de ceux qui sont déjà jugés…

Although a youth culture was in evidence by the 1950s, the first obvious and dramatic manifestation of a culture generated by peer-orientation was the hippie counterculture of the 1960s and 1970s. The Canadian media theorist Marshall McLuhan called it “the new tribalism of the Electric Age.” Hair and dress and music played a significant part in shaping this culture, but what defined it more than anything was its glorification of the peer attachment that gave rise to it. Friends took precedence over family. Physical contact and connection with peers were pursued; the brotherhood of the pop tribe was declared, as in the generation-based “Woodstock nation.” The peer group was the true home. “Don't trust anyone over thirty” became the byword of youth who went far beyond a healthy critique of their elders to a militant rejection of tradition. The degeneration of that culture into alienation and drug use, on the one hand, and its co-optation for commercial purposes by the very mainstream institutions it was rebelling against were almost predictable. The wisdom of well-seasoned cultures has accumulated over hundreds and sometimes thousands of years. Healthy cultures also contain rituals and customs and ways of doing things that protect us from ourselves and safeguard values important to human life, even when we are not conscious of what such values are. An evolved culture needs to have some art and music that one can grow into, symbols that convey deeper meanings to existence and models that inspire greatness. Most important of all, a culture must protect its essence and its ability to reproduce itself — the attachment of children to their parents. The culture generated by peer orientation contains no wisdom, does not protect its members from themselves, creates only fleeting fads, and worships idols hollow of value or meaning. It symbolizes only the undeveloped ego of callow youth and destroys child-parent attachments. We may observe the cheapening of cultural values with each new peer-oriented generation. For all its self-delusion and smug isolation from the adult world, the Woodstock “tribe” still embraced universal values of peace, freedom, and brotherhood. Today's mass musical gatherings are about little more than style, ego, tribal exuberance, and dollars.

Apart from my absolute belief in National Socialism and my conviction of Hitler's superhuman heroism, I had always been attracted to Germany.

For if you look closely At the so called idols of the world They have something in common. They were ignorant They ignored the noise They created their own path.

How did we come to think that if we just did things “right” we would have a model family? Perhaps this illusion has come, in part, because we have heard erroneous teaching on the book of Proverbs. The book of Proverbs, like every book in the biblical canon, is divinely inspired, but we must understand its genre. A proverb is a maxim that we should follow because it leads us in the wisest path. But it is a probability, not a promise. For example, we are told:   A slack hand causes poverty, but the hand of the diligent makes rich. (Proverbs 10:4) This is a maxim, which means it is generally true that the lazy person will be poor and the diligent person will have plenty. But a lazy person can win the lottery and a diligent person can have a tornado destroy his crops. That does not disprove the proverb, because a proverb is simply a probability. As we looked at before when we considered God's use of metaphor, when we do not interpret Scripture according to its genre, we misinterpret Scripture. Yet many teachers quote proverbs as if they are in the genre of promises, and so we are disappointed in God when we experience an exception to what our Christian community may have promoted as a “promise.” One of the most misunderstood verses in our Christian communities is Proverbs 22:6: Train up a child in the way he should go; even when he is old he will not depart from it. This is generally true, but it is not a promise. In other words, a child who departs from the truth may still have been trained in the way he should go. Likewise, it is possible that if you are an excellent wife, your children and husband will rise up and call you blessed (Proverbs 31:28). But they might not. It's not up to us to decide what happens; it's up to us to be faithful.

AD 1750 Philadelphia – Missionary Church Laodicea Denies    Pre-millennialism    Gifts of the Spirit    Inspiration of Scripture    Israel’s right to exist   Allows    Idols    Calvinism    Abortion    Euthanasia    Multiple Interpretations    of Scripture This is the period of Missionary activity, AD 1750 to AD 1948. Notice this period overlaps with Laodicea. Jesus said nothing bad about this church. The Philadelphian Church restored the remaining doctrines forgotten by Sardis. They recognized pre-millennialism and that the gifts still function. They rejected Calvinism in favor of true missionary activity. This period saw the reestablishment of the nation of Israel. Anyone who thought the church had replaced Israel completely, once seeing the restoration in AD 1948 would leave the Synagogue of Satan, also called replacement theology, and come and bow at the feet of this church. The Lord promised that this church would be kept from the hour of (Jacob’s) Trouble.

One of the greatest mistakes we make is to idolize the artist rather than the art.

Miriam Adeney writes that the "'prosperity gospel' teachers are partly right. Christian faith often helps the family budget. People get drunk less. Their lives become more orderly. They become more accountable. Many churches help people in dysfunctional situations. . . . Christian faith encourages and inspires and motivates. Renouncing idols and serving Christ blesses individuals and can also bless communities and nations."13 The problem with the prosperity gospel, of course, is that faith is not a formula or a divine ATM at which the proper code guarantees a release of funds or health.

Consumerism promises happiness, as if the acquisition of novel technologies, exciting vehicles, and spacious homes were capable of satisfying all the wants of the human heart. Many people today have traded out church attendance on Sundays for shopping in malls. Name brands become patron saints, and vendors become idolized; greed is sated, and mammon is worshipped, while the poor are left to starve and die in the streets.

It always turns out this way: at first people idolize you, swear to be your faithful friend forever and then spit in your tea and in your soul, too.

The story of John Ritter illustrates what it means to be a hero and how we treat our heroes. When we idealize real people they lose their humanity. They are turned into idols that we worship and may later want to destroy. Heroes are transformed from conscious-feeling fellow homo sapiens into characters in our stories. The greatest hero-characters will become legends or even mythic characters. We might think we know them, but when they are idolized they become more like treasured memories, existing in our minds as archetypal characters, rather than living-breathing human beings with thoughts and feelings of their own.

There is something heroic in the way a migrant abandons his native land. Nevertheless, in his everyday life, he is fragile, confused, and at times ridiculous, like a card player who dreams of that one amazing trick but lacks essential knowledge of the rules of the game. He thought that he had arrived in a place where everything would be easy, where help would be at hand, where people would explain the rules to him, and not only that, would praise him if he managed to beat them. Now he discovers that his idols don't give a damn about him; he discovers something worse; that no-one asked him to come, that he is there uninvited and nobody notices him. An invisible creature, which , on the rare occasions it is noticed, inspires either momentary pity or enduring disgust.

There are thousands today echoing the same rebellious complaint against God. They do not see that to deprive man of the freedom of choice would be to rob him of his prerogative as an intelligent being, and make him a mere automaton. It is not God’s purpose to coerce the will. Man was created a free moral [332] agent. Like the inhabitants of all other worlds, he must be subjected to the test of obedience; but he is never brought into such a position that yielding to evil becomes a matter of necessity. No temptation or trial is permitted to come to him which he is unable to resist. God made such ample provision that man need never have been defeated in the conflict with Satan. As men increased upon the earth, almost the whole world joined the ranks of rebellion. Once more Satan seemed to have gained the victory. But omnipotent power again cut short the working of iniquity, and the earth was cleansed by the Flood from its moral pollution. Says the prophet, “When Thy judgments are in the earth, the inhabitants of the world will learn righteousness. Let favor be showed to the wicked, yet will he not learn righteousness, ...and will not behold the majesty of Jehovah.” Isaiah 26:9, 10. Thus it was after the Flood. Released from his judgments, the inhabitants of the earth again rebelled against the Lord. Twice God’s covenant and his statutes had been rejected by the world. Both the people before the Flood and the descendants of Noah cast off the divine authority. Then God entered into covenant with Abraham, and took to himself a people to become the depositaries of his law. To seduce and destroy this people, Satan began at once to lay his snares. The children of Jacob were tempted to contract marriages with the heathen and to worship their idols. But Joseph was faithful to God, and his fidelity was a constant testimony to the true faith. It was to quench this light that Satan worked through the envy of Joseph’s brothers to cause him to be sold as a slave in a heathen land. God overruled events, however, so that the knowledge of himself should be given to the people of Egypt. Both in the house of Potiphar and in the prison Joseph received an education and training that, with the fear of God, prepared him for his high position as prime minister of the nation. From the palace of the Pharaohs his influence was felt throughout the land, and the knowledge of God spread far and wide. The Israelites in Egypt also became prosperous and wealthy, and such as were true to God exerted a widespread influence. The idolatrous priests were filled with alarm as they saw the new religion finding favor. Inspired by Satan with his own enmity toward the God of heaven, they set themselves to quench the light. To the priests was committed [333] the education of the heir to the throne, and it was this spirit of determined opposition to God and zeal for idolatry that molded the character of the future monarch, and led to cruelty and oppression toward the hebrews.

Fire is the god for the Brahmin; the heart is the god for the devotee; the idol is the god for the less intelligent; everywhere is god for one who sees equality.

The rare quality of outstanding leadership can come in many forms. Some inspire their followers with lofty words. Others command respect due to their unrivaled competence. Puller’s ability to motivate men came from a simpler source. His Marines knew that he would ask no more of them than he was willing to put forth himself, and that was everything he had. They knew that when they were putting their lives on the line, he would be right out front with them. They knew that he would zealously look out for their welfare and shield them as much as possible from both the daunting hardships and the petty troubles of a tough profession. They knew that he understood what they were going through and saw things from their point of view. He was, in their eyes, a lofty figure who was right at home among the lowliest of them. Few men can rise to greatness and still genuinely retain the common touch. Medals and rank never changed Puller; he possessed the heart of a private throughout his long career and his men idolized him for that simplicity. One editorial mourning his passing captured the result: “There were few Marines who would not have tried to establish a beachhead in hell at a nod from Chesty Puller.”2

We are always awaiting the Messiah that never arrives. I long for bygone days where every dawn brought a new eschatology and an interminable queue of prophets preached humanity’s impending salvation as if it were syndicated. It must have been joyous to receive a fresh messiah weekly, and to be regaled with inspiring tales of the glory that lay ahead. When those false idols were smashed others took their place, from progress to the realization of History. None of this means anything to the cockroaches or rats anyway.

He never felt love’s bliss because he was paralyzed. He never get chance to marry the princess of his dream. He never dance or attain his own prom. He never get the chance to forget where he came from. He never kiss a woman whom he had loved and idolized. He never get chance to talk about love with smile. He never felt love’s bliss because he was paralyzed. He never get chance to marry the princess of his dream. He never show his fear and agony. He never let you hear his cry. He never show the tears that fell down from his eyes. That’s why he is always be the strongest man I ever knew. - Shwin J Brad

Walt Disney was one of my two boyhood idols. The other was Albert Einstein. To me, even at a young age, they represented the two poles of creativity. Disney was all about inventing the new. He brought things into being—both artistically and technologically—that did not exist before. Einstein, by contrast, was a master of explaining that which already was.

Reading books makes us more attentive to our personage and the aesthetic world that we live in. Writers that we idolize use language, logic, and nuance to paint physical and emotional scenes with refined precision. A writer’s use of vivid language creates lingering aftereffects that work their wonder on the reader’s malleable mind. A stirred mind resurrects our semiconscious memories; it causes us to summon up enduring images of our family, friends, and acquaintances. Just as importantly, inspirational writing makes us recognize our own telling character traits and identify our formerly unexpressed thoughts and feelings.

In October, 1819—six months before the first Christian missionaries arrived on the islands—Liholiho, under the inspiration of Kaahumanu, one of the widows of his father, suddenly, and in the presence of a large concourse of horrified natives, broke the most sacred of the tabus of his religion by partaking of food from vessels from which women were feasting, and the same day decreed the destruction of every temple and idol in the kingdom.

The idea for the Green New Deal began with a group called the Sunrise Movement, started by recent college graduate environmental activists who drew inspiration from Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter. Some even say their roots can be traced back to Saul Alinsky, the gift to the right who keeps on giving. Alinsky, as you might remember, wrote a book back in 1971 called Rules for Radicals in which he cited Lucifer as the father of the radical movement. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton both idolized Alinsky.

But if I simply place attributes together and mold them into a shape that pleases me then I am no better than the idol makers with their heartless and breathless images that stand along the streets and at the White Tower.

What ancient idol worshippers believed was that the objects they made were inhabited by their gods. This is why they performed ceremonies to “open the mouth” of the statue.13 The mouth (and nostrils) had to be ritually opened for the spirit of the deity to move in and occupy, a notion inspired by the idea that one needs to breathe to live. The idol first had to be animated with the very real spiritual presence of the deity. Once that was done, the entity was localized for worship and bargaining.

The God of Exodus and the prophets is a warrior God. My rejection of this God as a liberating image for feminist theology is based on my understanding of the symbolic function of a warrior God in cultures where warfare is glorified as a symbol of manhood and power. My primary concern here is with the function of symbolism, not with the historical truth of the Exodus stories, with questions of how many slaves may or may not have been freed, nor by what means, nor with questions of the different traditions that may have been woven together to shape the biblical stories. Since liberation theology is fundamentally concerned with the use of biblical symbolism in shaping contemporary reality and the understanding of the divine ground, this method is appropriate here. In a world threatened by total nuclear annihilation, we cannot afford a warlike image of God. The image of Yahweh as liberator of the oppressed in the exodus and as concerned for social justice in the prophets cannot be extricated from the image of Yahweh as warrior. In Exodus Yahweh is imaged as concerned for the oppressed Israelites. Exodus 3:7-8 is a good example. ‘Then Yahweh said, ‘I have seen the affliction of my people who are in Egypt and have heard their cry because of their taskmasters: I know their sufferings, and I have come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians.’ People in oppressed circumstances and liberation theologians find passages like this inspiring. I too have been profoundly moved by the image of a God who takes compassion on suffering, but this passage has a conclusion I cannot accept. The passage continues ‘and to bring them up out of the land to a good and broad land, a land flowing with milk and honey, to the place of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites.’ Here Yahweh promises ‘his people’ a land that is inhabited by other peoples. In order to justify this action by Yahweh, the inhabitants of the land are portrayed in other parts of the Bible as evil or idolators (a term that itself bears further examination). More recently liberation theologians have portrayed these other peoples as ruling-class opponents of the poor peasant and working-class Hebrews. However that may be, the clear implication of the passage is that Yahweh intends to dispose the peoples from the lands they inhabit.

He lives forever in his words, in his poems, and in his stories. An inspiration to many writers and poets all around the world. The man who became immortal by his words, the one and only - Ernest Hemingway.

Often people look at prayer in terms of what they might gain from it; but prayer is not about gain as much as it is about letting go of all that prevents you from witnessing your innate alignment with God. The salat shines a light on the mental idols we carry with us that we struggle with surrendering to God: whether it be obsessing about what people think of us, trying to manage our schedule for the day, thinking about how we will pay our bills, or how we can be more successful, all the distractions we experience during prayer are places in our life where God is calling us to surrender to Him. Surrendering does not mean we no longer put effort into solving the different problems of our life; rather, it means that we do not take ownership over the outcomes. It is only when we bring our awareness to what keeps us from being present with God and slowly return our consciousness to Him that we can begin to feel contentment.

Grow your relationship in the presence of GOD and always pray for guidance. You can't take love for granted. Idolize your relationship and keep nurturing the love you have for each other. It's critical for both hearts to make an effort to produce entertainment for the soul. A happy heart brings a lot of joy, and those pleasures create unforgettable memories that will last a lifetime.

I remember how surprised I was to discover that Isaiah Berlin's famous essay on the two concepts of liberty, which once inspired many Polish intellectuals, myself included, was nothing more than a collection of platitudes and falsehoods that further prevented rather than encouraged any serious reflection on freedom.

The moment you start idolizing someone, you already lost in the game called life.

We've all got them, the lighters of the way, those mythological wonders who glow in our dark.

Even more threatening to Christian assumptions than the Qur’an’s flat denial that Jesus had been crucified, however, was the imperious, not to say terrifying, tone of authority with which it did so. Very little in either the Old or the New Testament could compare. For all the reverence with which Christians regarded their scripture, and for all that they believed it illumined by the flame of the Holy Spirit, they perfectly accepted that most of it, including the Gospels themselves, had been authored by mortals. Only the covenant on the tablets of stone, given to Moses amid fire and smoke on the summit of Sinai, ‘and written with the finger of God’,13 owed nothing to human mediation. Perhaps it was no surprise, then, that Moses, of all the figures in the Old and New Testaments, should have featured most prominently in the Qur’an. He was mentioned 137 times in all. Many of the words attributed to him had served as a direct inspiration to Muhammad’s own followers. ‘My people! Enter the Holy Land which God has prescribed for you!’14 The Arab conquerors, in the first decades of their empire, had pointedly referred to themselves as muhajirun: ‘those who have undertaken an exodus’. A hundred years on from Muhammad’s death, when the first attempts were made by Muslim scholars to write his biography, the model that they instinctively reached for was that of Moses. The age at which the Prophet had received his first revelation from God; the flight of his followers from a land of idols; the way in which—directly contradicting the news brought to Carthage in 634—he was said to have died before entering the Holy Land: all these elements echoed the life of the Jews’ most God-favoured prophet.15 So brilliantly, indeed, did Muslim biographers paint from the palette of traditions told about Moses that the fading outlines of the historical Muhammad were quite lost beneath their brushstrokes. Last and most blessed of the prophets sent by God to set humanity on the straight path, there was only the one predecessor to whom he could properly be compared. ‘There has come to him the greatest Law that came to Moses; surely he is the prophet of this people.’16

I could steal words from my idol, Echo lyrics of a vinyl, But I have this feeling since we first met, That the right words haven’t been written yet.

And while the church slept, kept silent and remain indifferent and lukewarm Basking in the wealth and favors of the Sodom and Gomorrah movement Their adversary, Lucifer, went about, quietly Devouring and deceiving its people... Murderers, liars, thieves, adulterers, fornicators are all sinners And they accept the fact that they are They are not proud of what they do The thief beside Jesus on the cross ask the Lord to accept him in His kingdom However Sodomites and Gomorrahites are shameless and brazen Up in God's face Shouting look at me, look at me! Will the adulterous, fornicators, liars, murderers and thieves follow suit? Glorifying and parading their sins? Are these Sodomites the leaders of the deceivers of God? These people are pleading for God's wrath upon the earth. Shouldn't we be asking for mercy? God is not fooled. He will not be mocked. Moses went up to Mt Sanai to hear from God When he got back the people were reveling Parading in sin and idol worshiping They forgot how God had led them with His mighty hand My God. O my God Do not be deceived There is no pride in sin We should humbly ask God's forgiveness We should be ashamed of our sins But for those who are not... God is NEVER to be mocked Help us O dear God.

I haven’t yet become the kind of father that would make me feel satisfied with myself. I may have reached the level of the workaholic Hiroshi, but Charles remains beyond my reach. When will I be able to stop turning to these portraits of a family and make my own worthy one in reality? I want my children to not worship idols as I have, but to be able to look to our own real-life family and be inspired to dream for their futures.

The biggest roadblock to success is our tendency to idolize others and their achievements, portraying them as inherently superior to us. This sense of being out of our league is what holds us back the most, rather than our own shortcomings.