for the joy of the Lord is your strength

is hell like this…… the only way to communicate is thru advertisments that all give you the illusion that you have a choice in worshiping money in a country that worships money?

 

And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

Revelation 20:14

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2853083/Scientists-lightning-sparking-supermassive-black-hole-appears-travel-faster-speed-light.html

https://www.quora.com/Do-gentle-singularity-exists-or-its-just-an-imagination

Key Facts About Eternity

(1) Everyone will exist eternally either in heaven or hell (Daniel 12:2,3; Matthew 25:46; John 5:28; Revelation 20:14,15).

(2) Everyone has only one life in which to determine their destiny (Hebrews 9:27).

(3) Heaven or hell is determined by whether a person believes (puts their trust) in Christ alone to save them (John 3:16, 36, etc.).

Key Passages About Hell

(1) Hell was designed originally for Satan and his demons (Matthew 25:41;Revelation 20:10).

(2) Hell will also punish the sin of those who reject Christ (Matthew 13:41,50;Revelation 20:11-15; 21:8).

(3) Hell is conscious torment.

  • Matthew 13:50 “furnace of fire…weeping and gnashing of teeth”
  • Mark 9:48 “where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched”
  • Revelation 14:10 “he will be tormented with fire and brimstone”

(4) Hell is eternal and irreversible.

  • Revelation 14:11 “the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever and they have no rest day and night”
  • Revelation 20:14 “This is the second death, the lake of fire”
  • Revelation 20:15 “If anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire”

Erroneous Views of Hell

(1) The second chance view – After death there is still a way to escape hell.

Answer: “It is appointed unto men once to die and after that the judgment” (Hebrews 9:27).

(2) Universalism – All are eternally saved.

Answer: It denies the truth of salvation through Christ which means that a person decides to either trust in Christ or else he/she rejects Christ and goes to hell (John 3:16;3:36).

(3) Annihilationism – Hell means a person dies like an animal – ceases to exist.

Answer: It denies the resurrection of the unsaved (John 5:28, etc. – see above). It denies conscious torment (see above).

Objections to the Biblical View of Hell

(1) A loving God would not send people to a horrible hell.

Response: God is just (Romans 2:11).

(2) Hell is too severe a punishment for man’s sin.

Response: God is holy-perfect (1 Peter 1:14,15).

Biblical Terms Describing Where the Dead Are

  • Sheol – a Hebrew term simply describing “the grave” or “death” – Does not refer to “hell” specifically
  • Hades – A Greek term that usually refers to hell – a place of torment (Luke 10:15; 16:23, etc.)
  • Gehenna – A Greek term (borrowed from a literal burning dump near Jerusalem) thatalways refers to hell – a place of torment (Matthew 5:30; 23:33)
  • “Lake of fire”- the final abode of unbelievers after they are resurrected (Revelation 20:14,15)
  • “Abraham’s bosom” – (Luke 16:22) a place of eternal comfort
  • “Paradise” – (Luke 23:43) a place of eternal comfort
  • “With the Lord” – a key phrase describes where church age believers are after death (Philippians 1:23; 1 Thessalonians 4:17; 2 Corinthians 5:8)
  • “New heavens and earth” – where believers will be after they are resurrected (Revelation 20:4-6; 21:1-4)

Conclusion

Our curiosity about the abode of the dead is not completely satisfied by biblical terms or verses. What we do know is that either eternal torment in hell or eternal joy in heaven awaits all people after death, based on whether they trust in Christ’s payment for sin or reject Christ.

Related Topics: Hell

 

 

differentiate or die pdf

Don’t have anything to do with foolish and stupid arguments, because you know they produce quarrels.

2 Timothy 2:23

is the antichrist or the spirit of confusion or spi5rit of mammon to “confuse you with choices? ?

In the beginning, choice was not a problem.

http://credu.bookzip.co.kr/resource/englishbook/pdf/ah30014.pdf

http://blog.capitalogix.com/.a/6a00e5502e47b28833019b0259bf40970c-600wi

Another researcher who leans towards overgeneralisation is Todorov. With Princeton colleague Nikolaas Oosterhof, he recently put forward a theory which he says explains our snap judgements of faces in terms of how threatening they appear. Todorov and Oosterhof asked people for their gut reactions to pictures of emotionally neutral faces, sifted through all the responses, and boiled them down to two underlying factors: how trustworthy the face looks, and how dominant. They then worked out exactly which aspects of facial appearance were associated with looking trustworthy, untrustworthy, dominant or submissive.

Next they generated random faces on a commercial program called FaceGen and morphed them into exaggerated caricatures of trustworthy, untrustworthy, dominant or submissive faces. An extremely trustworthy face, for example, has a U-shaped mouth, and eyes that form an almost surprised look. An untrustworthy face has the corners of the mouth curled down and eyebrows pointing to form a V (see diagram).

Have you got the look?

Finally, they showed these faces to people and asked them a different question: what emotions did they appear to be expressing? People consistently reported that trustworthy faces looked happy and untrustworthy ones angry, while dominant faces were deemed masculine and submissive ones feminine.

Todorov and Oosterhof conclude that personality judgements based on people’s faces are an overgeneralisation of our evolved ability to infer emotions from facial expressions, and hence a person’s intention to cause us harm and their ability to carry it out (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol 105, p11087).

Todorov, however, stresses that overgeneralisation does not rule out the idea that there is sometimes a kernel of truth in these assessments of personality. “I would not say there is no accuracy at all in these judgements, particularly in the case of dominance,” he says. “It is not the case that overgeneralisation and kernel of truth ideas are mutually exclusive.”

So if there is a kernel of truth, where does it come from? How exactly do some personality traits come to be written all over our faces? In the case of the ice-hockey players there are links between facial appearance, testosterone levels and personality. But there are other possibilities.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126957-300-how-your-looks-betray-your-personality/

The Yuck Factor: When Disgust Meets Discovery

Imagine you lived in a drought-stricken area and were told that from now on your tap water would come from “recycled sewage.” Might the word “yuck” describe your gut response? If your answer is yes, then you’ve got lots of company. Most people instinctively reject fearsome or repugnant things, especially when those things are unfamiliar. If shared by masses of people, that collective repugnance can fuel a social force with the power to shape environmental and public policy.

The Yuck Factor: When Disgust Meets Discovery

 

 

http://www.gotquestions.org/walking-on-water.html

 

http://8pic.ir/images/55753212475090615409.pdf

http://mgpdf.biz/

http://www.ableweb.org/volumes/vol-20/3-kosinski.pdf

your environment affects who you are?

http://www.g-w.com/pdf/sampchap/9781605251318_ch02.pdf

is broken heartedness…. loneliness?

I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you.

 John 14:18

 

The Lethality of Loneliness

In a way, these discoveries are as consequential as the germ theory of disease. Just as we once knew that infectious diseases killed, but didn’t know that germs spread them, we’ve known intuitively that loneliness hastens death, but haven’t been able to explain how. Psychobiologists can now show that loneliness sends misleading hormonal signals, rejiggers the molecules on genes that govern behavior, and wrenches a slew of other systems out of whack. They have proved that long-lasting loneliness not only makes you sick; it can kill you. Emotional isolation is ranked as high a risk factor for mortality as smoking. A partial list of the physical diseases thought to be caused or exacerbated by loneliness would include Alzheimer’s, obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure, heart disease, neurodegenerative diseases, and even cancer—tumors can metastasize faster in lonely people.

Loneliness, she said—and this will surprise no one—is the want of intimacy.

Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.

Philippians 4:6-7

 

https://newrepublic.com/article/113176/science-loneliness-how-isolation-can-kill-you

I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.

 John 14:18

 A father of the fatherless, a defender of widows, Is God in His holy habitation.

Psalm 68:5 NKJV

 

 

Race and Membership in American History: The Eugenics Movement

If I were to ask you the simple question,“Do you think that genes influence your personality?” The first thing you might think, is that I’m asking you a stupid question. After all, nearly all our lay beliefs about the world include beliefs that some of our genetic material influences who we become as people. And though we do believe, to varying degrees, that our experiences shape who are, I’m sure we can’t think of all that many people who believe, like Aristotle, that we are a tabula rasa (blank slate). As well, if you believe in evolution then you must have an implicit belief that genes influence who we are. If evolution has taught us anything, it is that survival means passing on the fittest of our genes to the next generation.

When my father and my mother forsake me, then the LORD will take me up.

Psalm 27:10 

Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction,and to keep himself unspotted from the world.

James 1:27

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/under-the-influence/201307/do-genes-influence-personality

Who are you? It is a question that we have all been asked. In answering, we define ourselves by placing greater emphasis on some characteristics than on others. Most of us view our identity as a combination of many factors, including physical characteristics and social ties—connections to a family, an ethnic group, a community, a religion, or a nation. Although this way of defining a person seems ordinary, it has consequences. “When we identify one thing as unlike the others,” writes Martha Minow, a law professor, “we are dividing the world; we use our language to exclude, to distinguish, to discriminate.” She continues: Of course, there are “real differences” in the world; each person differs in countless ways from each other person. But when we simplify and sort, we focus on some traits rather than others, and we assign consequences to the presence and absence of the traits we make significant. We ask, ‘What’s the new baby?’—and we expect as an answer, boy or girl. That answer, for most of history, has spelled consequences for the roles and opportunities available to that individual.1 At what point do physical differences become powerful social divisions that affect what we believe is possible for others and ourselves? How are such differences used to justify social inequalities? What role do scientists, educators, religious leaders, and the media play in the process? How does history shape the value we place on us and them? This book explores how such questions were answered at specific times in American history. Chapter 1 introduces these questions by examining the idea of difference through various lenses.

https://www.facinghistory.org/sites/default/files/publications/Race_Membership.pdf

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/12/why-you-bought-that-ugly-sweater/413161/

http://www.bronsema.info/ebook/me-myself-and-us-the-science-of-personality-and-the-art-of-well-being.html

https://hbr.org/2013/10/fergusons-formula

 

Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding.

Proverbs 3:5

 

The Effects of Institutions on Human Behavior

The Community As A Social Institution

The community is one of the oldest forms of human social organization. The private individual has little value apart from the group. The family is responsible for an individual�s behavior, and this behavior is determined by sharply defined traditional roles based on age, sex lineage, and family position. Thus, individual choice and rational decision making are precluded.

The community regards itself and its traditions as divinely created, and the elders of the community are highly respected as the transmitters of this sacred tradition, ceremony, and ritual. Violation of tradition results in ostracism or even death.

The ideal type of community emerges as an intellectual concept when social change threatens to destroy a locality�s isolation, traditionalism, and social solidarity, and the decline of the community has been a recurrent theme in theories about society from ancient to modern times. This decline has been attributed to contacts with other cultures because of depletion of natural resources, trade, conquest, the growth of city and national states, industrialism, mass transportation and communication, mass democracy, and the emergence of mass society. The ideal type of community is considered to create social and psychological limits on the individual that constitute boundaries within which he can comfortably live. The decline of the community is reputed to destroy these boundaries of self and create a sense of loss that results in personal alienation or social disorganization.

The rise of modern mass industrial urban society has undoubtedly destroyed the �natural boundaries� created by social isolation. But the need for a sense of limits within which personal identity and response can be expressed has led to the construction of �discretionary communities�, where the psychological benefits of community life can be gained without recourse to the social isolation of an ecological community. These newer forms, including occupational and professional groups, neighborhood groups, social cliques, and ethnic, political, and purely cultural groups, become the functional equivalents of the older, ecological, isolated community, and they make is possible for their members to avoid the social and psychological problems of an infinite, multidimensional mass society. Their members can find a focus for their relations, loyalties and interests.10

http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1987/5/87.05.03.x.html

Talking to employees

Workplaces where employees are involved in taking decisions about health and safety are safer and healthier. Collaboration with your employees helps you to manage health and safety in a practical way by: ■ helping you spot workplace risks; ■ making sure health and safety controls are practical; ■ increasing the level of commitment to working in a safe and healthy way. You are legally required to consult all your employees, in good time, on health and safety matters. In workplaces where a trade union is recognised, this will be through union health and safety representatives. In non-unionised workplaces, you can consult either directly or through other elected representatives. Consultation involves employers not only giving information to employees but also listening to them and taking account of what they say before making health and safety decisions. Employees have important knowledge of the work they do, problems they have, and their impact on health, safety, and performance. While talking to them, you could also ask them some specific questions about their work such as: ■ are their working postures comfortable (or not)? ■ do they experience discomfort, aches, pain, fatigue, or feel unable to keep up with the flow of work? ■ is the equipment appropriate, easy to use and well maintained? ■ is the person satisfied with their working arrangements? ■ do they make the same errors and mistakes repeatedly? ■ are they following procedures, and if not, why not?

http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg90.pdf

 

Classification and Assessment of Abnormal Behavior

Assessment techniques must also be valid; that is, instruments used in assessment must measure what they intend to measure. Suppose a measure of depression actually turned out to be measuring anxiety. Using such a measure may lead an examiner to a wrong diagnosis. There are different ways of measuring validity, including content, criterion, and construct validity. The content validity of an assessment technique is the degree to which its content represents the behaviors associated with the trait in question. For example, depression includes features such as sadness and refusal to participate in activities the person once enjoyed. In order to have content validity, then, techniques that assess depression should include items that address these areas. Criterion validity represents the degree to which the assessment technique correlates with an independent, external criterion (standard) of what the technique is intended to assess. Predictive validity is a form of criterion validity. A test or assessment technique shows good predictive validity if it can be used to predict future performance or behavior. For example, a test measuring antisocial behavior would show predictive validity if people scoring high on the measure later showed more evidence of delinquent or criminal behavior than did low scorers. Another way of measuring criterion validity of a diagnostic test for a particular disorder is to see if it is able to identify people who meet diagnostic criteria for the disorder. Two related concepts are important here: sensitivity and specificity. Sensitivity refers to the degree to which a test correctly identifies people who have the disorder the test is intended to detect. Tests that lack sensitivity produce a high number of false negatives—individuals identified as not having the disorder who truly have the disorder. Specificity refers to the degree to which the test avoids classifying people as having a particular disorder who truly do not have the disorder. Tests that lack specificity produce a high number of false positives—people identified as having the disorder who truly do not have the disorder. By taking into account sensitivity and specificity of a given test, we can determine the ability of a test to classify individuals correctly. Construct validity is the degree to which a test corresponds to the theoretical model of the underlying construct or trait it purports to measure. Let’s say we have a test that purports to measure anxiety. Anxiety is not a concrete object or phenomenon. It can’t be measured directly, counted, weighed, or touched. Anxiety is a theoretical construct that helps explain phenomena such as a pounding heart or the sudden inability to speak Phrenology. In the 19th century, some people believed that mental faculties and abilities were based in certain parts of the brain and that people’s acumen in such faculties could be assessed by gauging the protrusions and indentations of the skull. content validity The degree to which the content of a test or measure represents the content domain of the construct it purports to measure. criterion validity The degree to which a test correlates with an independent, external criterion or standard. construct validity The degree to which a test measures the hypothetical construct that it purports to measure. NEVIDMC03_068-101HR.qxd 1-10-2007 11:34 Page 79 80 Chapter 3 when you are asking someone out on a date. Anxiety may be indirectly measured by such means as self-report (the client rates the personal level of anxiety) and physiological techniques (measuring the level of sweat on the palms of the client’s hands). The construct validity of a test of anxiety requires the results of the test to predict other behaviors that would be expected, given your theoretical model of anxiety. Let’s say your theoretical model predicts that socially anxious college students will have greater difficulties than calmer students in speaking coherently when asking someone for a date, but not when they are merely rehearsing the invitation in private. If the results of an experimental test of these predictions fit these predicted patterns, we could say the evidence supports the test’s construct validity (Smith, 2005). A test may be reliable (give you consistent responses) but still not measure what it purports to measure (be invalid). For example, 19th-century phrenologists believed they could gauge people’s personalities by measuring the bumps on their heads. Their calipers provided reliable measures of their subjects’ bumps and protrusions; the measurements, however, did not provide valid estimates of subjects’ psychological traits. The phrenologists were bumping in the dark, so to speak.

http://www.csun.edu/~hcpsy002/Nevid_ch03.pdf

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/.a/6a00d8341bf7f753ef01b8d178eda8970c-pi

http://www.shieldandrefuge.org/articles/onegod.htm

Taking Happiness seriously Most people agree that societies should foster the happiness of their citizens. The U.S. Founding Fathers recognized the inalienable right to the pursuit of happiness. British philosophers talked about the greatest good for the greatest number. Bhutan has famously adopted the goal of Gross National Happiness (GNH) rather than Gross National Product. China champions a harmonious society. Yet most people probably believe that happiness is in the eye of the beholder, an individual’s choice, something to be pursued individually rather than as a matter of national policy. Happiness seems far too subjective, too vague, to serve as a touchstone for a nation’s goals, much less its policy content. That indeed has been the traditional view. Yet the evidence is changing this view rapidly. A generation of studies by psychologists, economists, pollsters, sociologists, and others has shown that happiness, though indeed a subjective experience, can be objectively measured, assessed, correlated with observable brain functions, and related to the characteristics of an individual and the society. Asking people whether they are happy, or satisfied with their lives, offers important information about the society. It can signal underlying crises or hidden strengths. It can suggest the need for change. Such is the idea of the emerging scientific study of happiness, whether of individuals and the choices they make, or of entire societies and the reports of the citizenry regarding life satisfaction. The chapters ahead summarize the fascinating and emerging story of these studies. They report on the two broad measurements of happiness: the ups and downs of daily emotions, and an individual’s overall evaluation of life. The former is sometimes called “affective happiness,” and the latter “evaluative happiness.” 65409_Earth_Chapter1v2.indd 6 4/30/12 3:46 PM 7 World Happiness r epor T What is important to know is that both kinds of happiness have predictable causes that reflect various facets of our human nature and our social life. Affective happiness captures the day-to-day joys of friendship, time with family, and sex, or the downsides of long work commutes and sessions with one’s boss. Evaluative happiness measures very different dimensions of life, those that lead to overall satisfaction or frustration with one’s place in society. Higher income, better health of mind and body, and a high degree of trust in one’s community (“social capital”) all contribute to high life satisfaction; poverty, ill health, and deep divisions in the community all contribute to low life satisfaction. What we learn in the chapters ahead is that happiness differs systematically across societies and over time, for reasons that are identifiable, and even alterable through the ways in which public policies are designed and delivered. It makes sense, in other words, to pursue policies to raise the public’s happiness as much as it does to raise the public’s national income. Bhutan is on to something path breaking and deeply insightful. And the world is increasingly taking notice. A household’s income counts for life satisfaction, but only in a limited way. Other things matter more: community trust, mental and physical health, and the quality of governance and rule of law. Raising incomes can raise happiness, especially in poor societies, but fostering cooperation and community can do even more, especially in rich societies that have a low marginal utility of income. It is no accident that the happiest countries in the world tend to be high-income countries that also have a high degree of social equality, trust, and quality of governance. In recent years, Denmark has been topping the list. And it’s no accident that the U.S. has experienced no rise of life satisfaction for half a century, a period in which inequality has soared, social trust has declined, and the public has lost faith in its government. It is, of course, one thing to identify the correlates of happiness, and quite another to use public policies to bring about a society-wide rise in happiness (or life satisfaction). That is the goal of Bhutan’s GNH, and the motivation of an increasing number of governments dedicated to measuring happiness and life satisfaction in a reliable and systematic way over time. The most basic goal is that by measuring happiness across a society and over time, countries can avoid “happiness traps” such as in the U.S. in recent decades, where GNP may rise relentlessly while life satisfaction stagnates or even declines. The Bhutan case study tells the story of GNH in Bhutan, a story of exploration and progress since the King declared in 1972 the goal of happiness over the goal of wealth. Happiness became much more than a guidepost or inspiration; it became an organizing principle for governance and policy-making as well. The Gross National Happiness Index is the first of its kind in the world, a serious, thoughtful, and sustained attempt to measure happiness, and use those measurements to chart the course of public policy. I leave description of Bhutan’s wonderful adventure, still unfolding while already inspiring others, to the case study.

http://www.earth.columbia.edu/sitefiles/file/Sachs%20Writing/2012/World%20Happiness%20Report.pdf

 There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not been perfected in love.

1 John 4:18

 

THE IMPACT OF SCIENCE ON SOCIETY

The Legacy of Science Change is one of mankind’s most mysterious creations. The factors that operate to cause it came into play when man produced his first tool. With it he changed the world forever, and bound himself to the artifacts he would create in order, always, to make tomorrow better than today. But how does change operate? What triggers a new invention, a different philosophy, an altered society? The interactive network of man’s activities links the strangest, most disparate elements, bringing together the most unlikely combinations in unexpected ways to create a new world. Is there a pattern to change in different times and separate places in our history? Can change be forecast? How does society live with perpetual innovation that, in changing the shape of its environment, also transforms its attitudes, morals, values? If the prime effect of change is more change, is there a limit beyond which we will not be able to go without anarchy, or have we adaptive abilities, as yet only minimally activated, which wall make of our future a place very different from anything we have ever experienced before? Somebody once apparently said to the philosopher Wittgenstein, “What a bunch of no-knows we medieval Europeans must have been! back in the days before Copernicus, to have looked up at the sky and thought that what we saw up there was the Sun going round the Earth, when, as everybody knows, the Earth goes round the Sun, and it doesn’t take too many brains to understand that!” Wittgenstein replied, “Yes, but I wonder what it would have looked like if the Sun had been going round the Earth.” The point is that it would, of course, have looked exactly the same. What he was saying was that you see what you want to see.

http://history.nasa.gov/sp482.pdf

Behaviour Modification

Impairment/Disabilities Certain of your pupils may have a disability of some kind. Some disabilities are pronounced, e.g., motor-impairment (physical disability) while others may be mild, e.g., a hearing impairment or poor vision (not seeing some things clearly). Some disabilities can be caused by biological factors. The nervous and endocrine systems together co-ordinate the behaviour of human beings and animals. As stated earlier, biologists have long established that genetic factors are potentially responsible for variations in human behaviour. Disordered behaviour may, therefore, be a result of genetic accident, bacterial or viral disease, parasitic infection, brain injury, brain dysfunction or biochemical imbalance. The biological factors, however, cannot be considered in isolation because they interact with other social and environmental factors. These biologically-oriented problems can be medically cured and may not have direct implications for educators. Nevertheless there are some biological factors which contribute to some of the behaviour problems summarized below: a) Genetic Accidents Children inherit characteristics from their parents through genes. Genes have been suggested as the causes of behavioural difficulties, from hyperactivity to criminality. Environmental factors, particularly social learning, play an important role in modifying inherited behavioural predispositions. b) Brain Damage or Dysfunction The brain can be traumatized in different ways before, during, or after birth: during birth, in an accident, prolonged high fever, infectious diseases (such as meningitis), toxic chemicals (such as drugs or poisons taken by the child or by the woman during pregnancy), or hypoxia (reduced oxygen availability). c) Nutritional Errors Severe malnutrition in young children leads to retardation in brain growth, irreversible brain damage and mental retardation. Apathy, social withdrawal and school failure are possible long-term outcomes. d) Hyperactivity There is no supporting data that this is caused by biological factors. e) Physical Illness or Disability A child who is physically ill is more prone to irritability, withdrawal or other behaviour problems. Some physical illnesses are transitory. Regional Training Seminar on Guidance and Counselling Module 4. Behaviour Modification UNESCO February 2000 14 Physical illnesses believed to be caused by an individual’s psychological state are called psychosomatic or psycho-physiological. Disorders that are assumed to be psycho-physiological involve disruption of normal biological processes, e.g. breathing disorders such as asthma. The following are examples of disorders which have an impact on an individual’s behaviour: • eating disorder e.g.: Anorexia nervosa – self-starvation; bulimia – eating followed by purging, vomiting or extreme dieting; pica – eating non nutritional substances like paint, paper and cloth. • elimination disorders e.g: Encopresis – releasing urine or faeces at inappropriate times or places, a lack of control of the bladder or bowel function. • movement disorders e.g: Tics – sudden, repetitive and involuntary movements. • sleep disorders e.g: Sleep walking and night terrors. • difficult temperament Classroom research does not indicate that temperament is the direct result of biological factors, but it suggests that students exhibit consistent behavioural styles that teachers recognize, and should consider, when planning instructional materials. Comment: It should be clear that pupils with the characteristics listed below usually have special educational needs. A specific group to note includes: – Mental retardation – Visual impairment/blind – Hearing impairment/deaf – Motor-impairment/physical disability – Language and communication problems. Some pupils might have multiple disabilities. Each child with a disability has unique behaviour. A blind child may tilt his head, look up at the roof, or whistle in public places, in an attempt to gauge his orientation. In the company of a child with a hearing loss in one ear, you may notice that he tilts his head towards the speaker using the better ear. Regional Training Seminar on Guidance and Counselling Module 4. Behaviour Modification UNESCO February 2000 15 A pupil might, due to the severity of the disability, resign himself/herself and resort to dependence on friends. To the non-handicapped, this behaviour is unwelcome. Help is needed to fit such children into society.

For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the Spirit of adoption as sons, by whom we cry, “Abba! Father!”

Romans 8:15 

is how we look at disabilites or handicapps affect our ability to understand behavior?

http://www.unesco.org/education/mebam/module_4.pdf

9 Powerful Gifts of the Spirit From the Bible

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+12

https://www.autismspeaks.org/news/news-item/10-amazing-individuals-autism-who-shined-2013

The dove symbolizes peace between God and human beings

http://angels.about.com/od/Mastering_Nature/a/Miracles-Of-Jesus-The-Holy-Spirit-Appears-As-A-Dove-During-Christs-Baptism.htm

John 20:22New King James Version (NKJV)

21 So Jesus said to them again, “Peace to you! As the Father has sent Me, I also send you.” 22 And when He had said this, He breathed onthem, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.”

have you asked who you are?

what if you could “feel binary”? and could not “explain” “binary” to anyone?

ever wonder if you kids could “feel” or more “binary”?

would “people” want to control you or “use” you or your “kids”? why?

is the internet a “star” time machine?

out of love would you “give” for reasons no one except Him? how would you explian it to others?

combine these maybe?

would it feel like this?

9 Extraordinary Human Abilities