Author: trameditor

We currently live in a society that is over stimulated, undernourished and expected to sit still and not make too much of a fuss. I recently spent some time in Peru and one of the things I noticed is they allow children to get on with things. Kids are running around the streets doing flips, handstands and playing football. In a store you will see kids walking down aisles picking things up and curiously exploring. Other adults talk to the kids and there is not the incessant need to control. This is a far cry from what I am used to in the UK and what seems to be the trend in the US also. One of the things that is really upsetting is the need for children to be still. I was at a school assembly for my son recently and the teachers are obsessed with the children being silent and not moving. Could you imagine this anywhere else? When do we ever sit still, in a non interactive and silence way for long periods of time? There are some exceptions for this of course, but it is pretty exhausting to be silent and still, day in, day out. This spills out onto society and what is expected manifests into external expectations of our children. This often leaves parents feeling hopeless and unsure of how best to raise their children.

The following facebook post came from a young single Mum who was struggling in a supermarket and was verbally attacked:

It finally happened. As I stood in the customer service line of Walmart to cash my paycheck with a cart of groceries(and some wine), Sophie sat/stood/did heads stands in the cart, whining over a bag of chips I took away and because she called me a butthole in line. She’s relentless. I know this. I live with it. Her ADHD and obsessive little heart gets on these subjects of things she finds unjust and wrong and it doesn’t stop until she eventually falls asleep or something very dramatic happens to snatch the attention off the obsessed about subject. We stood in line for several minutes, me ignoring her whining and refusing to give in. What’s giving in to bad behavior going to do but reinforce the bad behavior? I’ve walked out of stores hundreds of times because of her. Almost every time, actually, I end up leaving with nothing I came for and a tantrum having four year attached to my hand and a baby on my hip, but this time I had to stick it out to get the groceries. I tell her for the tenth time to sit down so she doesn’t fall and the next thing I hear is a woman behind me in line saying “oh, for Christ’s sake give her a cookie so she’ll shut up!”. I could’ve responded in a nicer way. I could’ve explained to her that my four year old has pretty severe ADHD, I raise both my children alone, I’m doing my best, and had no choice but to wait it out for the groceries. Instead, I heard “she’s four years old and you need to mind your own f***ing business” come out of my mouth. I kept my composure until I finished what I was doing and walked to self check out so I could avoid facing anyone else as “that person”. The person with the misbehaving child. The person who seems lazy because they’re ignoring the behavior. The person who knows doing anything but ignoring it is only going to make it worse. By the time I made it to self check out, tears are pouring down my face. I’ve lost it. I’m angry, my feelings are hurt, I’m offended, and I’m just freakin sad that I can’t have one good experience in a store with my children. As I scan my things, a woman walks up and begins to talk to Sophie. She asks her questions to distract her, but backs me up when Sophie begins to go on about wanting the chips. “No, you can’t have those today. You have to be good for your mommy. She needs you to be good for her. I have a little girl just like you. How old are you? How old is brother?”. Honestly, this woman could’ve been the antichrist and I would’ve had more appreciation for her kindness and compassion than I have for anyone else I’ve ever encountered. It only takes one comment to break someone down. You never know what someone’s going through. You never know the problems a child has that causes them to misbehave and unless you know the struggle of being a parent to a child like mine, you cannot judge me. But It also takes one small act of kindness to make a mama feel comfort and validation. Thank you to the woman in Walmart today, for showing that kindness to my children and I. Thank you for walking us out. Thank you for backing me up. Mamas have to stick together.#lovewhatmatters #MamasUnite

This story had a happy ending and I like to believe that for every person who is inconsiderate of someone who is struggling there is at least 10 people who care. Apathy is the problem and the sooner we speak up in the face of injustice the sooner we encourage others will follow suit and do the same- the takeaway from this, is you can and should speak up and be that ray of light that is needed in times like these! Please share this beautiful story!

I am Luke Miller the author of this article, and creator of Potential For Change. I like to blend psychology and spirituality to help you create more happiness in your life.

Could adopting a vegetarian diet reduce the number of premature deaths worldwide? According to researchers with Harvard University, the answer is a resounding “yes.”

Dr. Walter Willett, a professor epidemiology and nutrition with the university, says the benefits of a plant-based diet is vastly underestimated. This is because he and his colleagues concluded that up to one-third of early deaths — or approximately 200,000 lives each year — could be prevented if everyone were to adopt a vegetarian diet.

Said Willett, at the Unite to Cure Fourth International Vatican Conference in Vatican City: “We have just been doing some calculations looking at the question of how much could we reduce mortality shifting towards a healthy, more plant based diet, not necessarily totally vegan, and our estimates are about one third of deaths could be prevented.”

“That’s not even talking about physical activity or not smoking, and that’s all deaths, not just cancer deaths. That’s probably an underestimate as well as that doesn’t take into account the fact that obesity is important and we control for obesity,” he added. “When we start to look at it we see that healthy diet is related to a lower risk of almost everything that we look at. Perhaps not too surprising because everything in the body is connected by the same underlying processes.”

At the same conference, Professor David Jenkins of the University of Toronto (who is credited with developing the glycemic index), said the benefits of consuming a vegetarian diet have been “undersold.” As The Telegraph reports, Jenkins said human health would improve if a “simian” diet were to be adopted. Unlike the “paleo” diet which cuts carbohydrates but allows meat, the “simian” diet is rich in stems, leaves, vines, and fruit.

After traveling to central Africa to study the feeding habits of gorillas, Jenkins and his colleagues recreated the diet for humans — which amounted to 63 servings of fruits and vegetables in a day. When the unconventional diet was adopted, participants experienced a 35 percent fall in cholesterol in just two weeks.”

Said Jenkins: “That was quite dramatic. We showed that there was no real difference between what we got with the diet and what we got with a statin.”

“We’re saying you’ve got a choice, you can change your diet to therapeutically meaningful change or you can take a statin. Drug or diet,” he added.

Now that researchers with Harvard University recommend adopting a plant-based diet, hopefully the masses will consider adding more fruits, vegetables, leafy greens, nuts, and seeds into their diets.

In the 21st century, the name of the ‘Son of God’ has been synonymous with Jesus. But, several theologians and historians show that the very name of Jesus has gone through multiple translations and alterations over the centuries. This implies that Jesus’ real name is actually not Jesus, but some ancient name that is different in different regions. In ancient Greek, the real name is Iesous. In other Hebrew texts, the name of Jesus is Joshua. And in multiple versions of the Bible- the New Testament- the name of Jesus is Hoshea. This name is in itself a variant of the name Jehoshua. The latter predates the mass exodus of the Jews centuries before he was even born, which then evolved to Jeshua, and finally- Jesus. Needless to say, this name has been in usage since modern times as his devotees call him by it.

JESUS’ REAL NAME- YESHUA, JOSHUA, OR IESOUS?

Interestingly, there is a certain section of the Christian population that believes that when people call out to Jesus- their Son, they are actually worshipping the wrong person. Jesus’ real name is Joshua or Yeshua- not Jesus- which leads to some Christians commenting on the veracity of their Gods. For example, Messianic Jews believe in worshipping Yeshua, rather than Jesus.

Some believe that Jesus’ real name wasn’t given to him by his parents, the name was a ‘command from the Heavens’. It should also be mentioned that Christ’s name was not at all unique, and there were quite a lot of people who had the name Yeshua or Joshua. During the second century AD, the name Joshua or Yeshua was quite common among the Jewish population. Therefore, in order to differentiate between them and the “real Jesus”, several Biblical texts changed the name to Jesus of Nazareth. He himself was born among humans who had the same name as he did.

THE ETYMOLOGY BEHIND THE NAME JESUS

According to multiple theologians who have worked on Biblical texts, the name of Jesus has quite a vibrant etymological and historical background associated with it. Jesus is the Grecian form of the Hebrew name that was ascribed to Joshua, the son of Nun, and the great Israelite leader. Apparently, Jesus’ parents also decided to call him Hoshea or O’Shea in this Jewish tradition. In the Bible, Joshua succeeded Moses as the Lord’s Servant. He managed to bring Israel to the promised land as he had sworn to Abraham, and was a very important figure to Hebrews all over the world. From an etymological standpoint, when the word Jesus is broken down- it means ‘Lord is Salvation’.

When it comes to matters of Theology, it is advised that religious texts not be translated on the basis of their etymological meaning- but rather the purpose behind the name.

NAMES OR DEVOTION- WHAT MATTERS MORE?

Jesus’ real name is usually used for identifying Christ as the Son and Servant of God who would show the path to God to other people. This not only speaks volumes about the omnipotence that Christ has, but it also indicates how favorable he is to his believers. Therefore, it is understood that while Jesus is a distinctly human name, the translation and use suggest that God has come to mortals in this form. Regardless, several questions have been raised about the name. Some people believe that Jesus’ real name is actually Yeshua. Other Christians believe that the name is nothing but an error- and somehow equate calling Christ by Jesus as calling God by the name of Zeus- the Greek God. It is possible that people who think they pray to Jesus do not pray to the actual Jesus but to someone else.

Now, while Zeus and Jesus sound similar when one is pronouncing them, the similarities end there. The name Jesus has absolutely no connection with the Greek God of thunder, with the latter being connected to a completely different form of life and worship.

The demise of the longest-serving British Monarch, Queen Elizabeth II, is an undoubtedly mournful event. However, the death heralds an unprecedented question over the role and presence of the British Empire in today’s world – particularly, their material possessions.

Queen Elizabeth’s demise at the age of 96 at Scotland’s Balmoral Castle on September 8th had made many crowds the London streets surrounding Buckingham Palace. Loving respect and condolences have flooded Windsor Castle as well as social media. However, there’s another reaction to the event that stems from the British Empire’s long colonial history.

The British Empire’s list of colonies is long and includes some of the biggest modern-day countries like India. As such, during their reign over the colonial territories, the British Empire has been accused of “looting” national treasures of the territories and using them to adorn their own royalty.

One of the biggest examples in this regard is the Koh-i-Noor diamond. The 105-carat diamond is among the world’s biggest and clears cut diamonds, and was acquired from India. It has been the centerpiece for the crown of the female monarchs of the British Empire for well over a century. To this day, it still sits there.

The second prominent example is the Great Star of Africa, which was acquired from South Africa. Known as the Cullinan I, it adorns the Sovereign’s Sceptre. Both of these crown jewels are presently on display at the Museum at the Tower of London.

THE CONTROVERSIAL HISTORY OF THE BRITISH EMPIRE’S CROWN JEWELS

The Koh-i-Noor’s worth is estimated to be about $140 to $400 million. However, because of its historical significance, it is impossible to evaluate its worth accurately. Its history is believed to begin about 5 millennia ago. A script in Sanskrit is believed to have mentioned it and called it the “Syamantaka”.

After that, the exact ownership is unknown. However, as per historical reports, the Rajas of Malwa are believed to have owned it until 1304. Following that, Alaudin Khilji, the Emperor of Delhi, is believed to be the next owner. For the following 3 centuries, since 1339, the diamond’s residence is believed to have been Samarkand.

This finally changed in 1849, when the forces of the British Empire conquered the territory of Punjab, and officially claimed it as under the rule of the British East India Company. Subsequently, the diamond found its way to Britain and was gifted to Queen Victoria in 1850.

She had the royal jewelers cut it into a centerpiece for her crown. The Queen proudly wore it as well, till her death. However, she left behind a curious instruction – only a female monarch or the head of the state’s wife is to wear the jewel. After her demise, it remained as part of the British Crown Jewels, even though India gained independence from British Rule.

SO, WHO OWNS IT NOW?

According to the website of the Tower of London, the Crown Jewels are the British Monarch’s “most powerful symbols”. As such, to the British, they hold immense cultural and religious significance. The monarchy, themselves, has maintained that the diamond was “gifted” to them.

However, India, as well as Afghanistan and Pakistan have all repeatedly contested the jewel’s ownership with the British Empire. With the demise of Queen Elizabeth, the calls have risen once more to return the diamond to their rightful owners, for these nations believe the diamond was “looted” from them. Similar to the Koh-i-Noor, South Africa also wants the Great Star of Africa back, which the African Archives claim was “stolen” from their mines in 1905. According to the same tweet, this diamond has an estimated $400 million cost as well.

With the change in the guard of the British Monarchy after an immense amount of time, perhaps such calls will become even louder. Even more so, perhaps, because the modern world seems to have moved so far away from the grandeur of monarchy.