MURIEL YOU ARE SO BEAUTIFUL ADORABLE SEDUCTIVE RAVISHING SEXY CAPTIVATING AND PASSIONATE YOUR BEAUTY IS PHENOMENAL IF VERDI WERE ALIVE TODAY YOU WOULD BE HIS MUSE LET ME FALL IN LOVE WITH YOU PLEASE MARCVOLPE ❤
NIENTE DA INVIDIARE ALLE FILARMONICHE PIU' BLASONATE , ESECUZIONE PROFONDA E MAGISTRALE VIVA VERDI ,VIVA Radio Symphony Orchestra e la Filarmonica Ceca Coro di Brno
Fun Fact if anyone cares: In best selling author Larry McMurtry's 'Dead Man's Walk.' This is the song a leprosy ridden Countess sings to a band of bloodthirsty Comanche warriors to convince them she is some strange witch and thus saving the Texas ranger group escorting her through southern Texas.. was interesting to look up this song from that book haha loved it.
Precisione intonativa, ritmica, dinamica. Belle voci e bella vocalità. Certi cori in Italia avrebbero molto da imparare! Ormai con certe esecuzioni molto pressapochiste stiamo perdendo di vista il vero significato di alcuni brani corali dal punto di vista strettamente "musicale"!
Jehovah, the Supreme God! If the Hebrew language does not have a letter J, then why are there many other names translated from Hebrew into English, or other languages of the Latin alphabet? Some question the use of the Name of God in the form of Jehovah because of the use of the letter J. It should be borne in mind that those who think so should also question the use of the letter J in other names such as Jesus, Jeremiah, Job, Joseph, John, Jerusalem, Jericho, and many other names translated from Hebrew into English. I do not remember seeing any of these critics advocate ever changing those names! The fact is that there is nothing consistent in criticizing the letter J in such names. It would be the same as saying that in Hebrew Abraham is not used and that we should speak Avraham to what is written in Hebrew (the way it occurs in the so-called Hebrew Masoretic text). If the question were of perfect equivalence, we should have the corresponding change in hundreds or thousands of names of people and places in the Holy Bible translated into English. Translating the Bible is valid so that there is a reasonable phonetic correspondence in English with the original Hebrew language. The Hebrew letter "hete" does not have a real English equivalent. The same goes for the letter "Ayin" which does not have too, for those who advocate the exact correspondence of letters would be without alternatives in this case. Taking all this into account, which shows the inconsistency of this assumption. Do they think they are more prepared than scholars and encyclopedists who have produced exhaustive lexicons and dictionaries? Why, then, do the critics not advocate a thorough revision throughout the lexicon? Could they do that? Know that even if they did such a thing, they would not be following the example of the inspired Jewish writers, the prophets, let alone the example shown by the apostles of Jesus. When the oldest English translation of Willian Tyndale in his edition presented the name of God vocalized to read "Iehouah", someone could point to a criticism of the translator made by some scholar in view of this choice of terms of use. At the same time, I never saw anyone saying that Mary, the mother of Jesus, should be called Miriam, just because "in the Hebrew, her name is not Mary." Are there any academic articles doing this? None! Some go further and claim that the consonant S of the name Jesus makes a connection to the name of the false god Zeus. That would mean that every Greek male noun ending with SIGMA refers to Zeus, but actually has nothing to do with reality. In fact, we would have a long list of pagan names in the biblical text. What remains is to appear someone saying that we should not put the name on our children of Nathan or Jonathan, since that would be the same as relating them to Satan. This is such an absurd type of reasoning that it would be a joke to give importance to this thesis that some proponents of these ideas present! When the apostles of Jesus wrote inspired by the divine holy spirit, the part of the Bible called the New Testament, preserved the Hebrew names to be pronounced in the same way by those who read and speak Greek? The answer is no! Note, for example, that Matthew wrote his gospel which, as we know, was first written in Hebrew for the Jews, and did not preserve the name of Jesus in its original Hebrew form "Yehoshua", but replaced it with its Greek equivalent , Which is Iesous. A simple reading in Matthew in chapter 1 reveals that the apostles did not preserve the pronunciation of various names by shedding Jewish names in Greek. Instead, they used the Greek equivalent of such names. Even when referring to Mary, they did not use the original Hebrew form that is "Miriam." When we take this kind of thinking seriously, then will we say that the inspired apostles erred in engraving the name of the servants of God of antiquity? Not really! The use of the letter J in English is a variation common to the languages that have it. Something that was present even within the ancient Israelite tribes. Not even among them was an exact pronunciation for the same word. Yes, it was "Christendom" itself that came to use Jehovah's name and even write it in its ancient churches in Europe, as various churches have recorded it in its architecture. However, the discussion around the letter J and the vocalization of the Name of God only worries them when the Bible Students, who are now Jehovah's Witnesses, began to demonstrate the difference between Jehovah God and Jesus Christ as two persons who are distinct, with distinct desires, and were not part of a pagan trinity syncretized by the Catholic church, which wanted to make one lord to be equal in essence, but the faithful slave do not will fall into this satanic trap. Jehovah's Witnesses know that the Father, the Creator, he is indeed different from the first Son, the created being! And also Jesus acknowledged at John 17: 3 that the heavenly Father is the only true God, Jehovah!
GOD BLESS YOU !!! ALL WORLD LOVE VERDI !!! ENDLESS THANK YOU !!! THE PLEASURE IS FULL !!! ENDLESS BBAVO FROM SOFIA - BULGARIA - EUROPE
Nadeto Mirkova
Majestueux ! Talentueux ! Splendide ! Merci pour cette exécution parfaite de voix et de musique pour mon plus grand plaisir ♡
MURIEL YOU ARE SO BEAUTIFUL ADORABLE SEDUCTIVE RAVISHING SEXY CAPTIVATING AND PASSIONATE YOUR BEAUTY IS PHENOMENAL IF VERDI WERE ALIVE TODAY YOU WOULD BE HIS MUSE LET ME FALL IN LOVE WITH YOU PLEASE MARCVOLPE ❤
NIENTE DA INVIDIARE ALLE FILARMONICHE PIU' BLASONATE , ESECUZIONE PROFONDA E MAGISTRALE VIVA VERDI ,VIVA Radio Symphony Orchestra e la Filarmonica Ceca Coro di Brno
veramente bravi,fossero sempre così le esecuzioni!
Bravissmi! Bravo il maestro di coro!
Fun Fact if anyone cares: In best selling author Larry McMurtry's 'Dead Man's Walk.' This is the song a leprosy ridden Countess sings to a band of bloodthirsty Comanche warriors to convince them she is some strange witch and thus saving the Texas ranger group escorting her through southern Texas.. was interesting to look up this song from that book haha loved it.
Wow. Didn't expect that
Precisione intonativa, ritmica, dinamica. Belle voci e bella vocalità. Certi cori in Italia avrebbero molto da imparare! Ormai con certe esecuzioni molto pressapochiste stiamo perdendo di vista il vero significato di alcuni brani corali dal punto di vista strettamente "musicale"!
Luca Rossi
Que maravilha!!! Bravo!!!
This is a good reference for our practice. Our chorus group will sing this piece and "Va pensiereo" also from Nabucco on Sunday, October 13, 2019.
Magnífico
monumental
Thank you very much!
Oblubene
Complimenti a coro ed orchestra
Ottima esecuzione. Molto bravi nei passaggi da "forte" a "piano"
viola053
Awesome
Perfecte.
Brave care colleghe anche io ho cantato questo brano quando ero nel coro lirico bellissimo complimenti❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
Esecuzione perfetta !!
La perfezione appartiene solo a Giuseppe Verdi.
2:38
ich mo^chte eine Lied dem Heimat geche^rn.
Vanja, russian fellow...
Oh no. Promotheus.
(Prometheus!)
Sorry, Muti docet...
Welcher Chor ist das und welcher Dirigent?
PROMETHEUS
Jehovah, the Supreme God! If the Hebrew language does not have a letter J, then why are there many other names translated from Hebrew into English, or other languages of the Latin alphabet?
Some question the use of the Name of God in the form of Jehovah because of the use of the letter J. It should be borne in mind that those who think so should also question the use of the letter J in other names such as Jesus, Jeremiah, Job, Joseph, John, Jerusalem, Jericho, and many other names translated from Hebrew into English.
I do not remember seeing any of these critics advocate ever changing those names! The fact is that there is nothing consistent in criticizing the letter J in such names. It would be the same as saying that in Hebrew Abraham is not used and that we should speak Avraham to what is written in Hebrew (the way it occurs in the so-called Hebrew Masoretic text). If the question were of perfect equivalence, we should have the corresponding change in hundreds or thousands of names of people and places in the Holy Bible translated into English.
Translating the Bible is valid so that there is a reasonable phonetic correspondence in English with the original Hebrew language. The Hebrew letter "hete" does not have a real English equivalent. The same goes for the letter "Ayin" which does not have too, for those who advocate the exact correspondence of letters would be without alternatives in this case. Taking all this into account, which shows the inconsistency of this assumption. Do they think they are more prepared than scholars and encyclopedists who have produced exhaustive lexicons and dictionaries? Why, then, do the critics not advocate a thorough revision throughout the lexicon? Could they do that? Know that even if they did such a thing, they would not be following the example of the inspired Jewish writers, the prophets, let alone the example shown by the apostles of Jesus.
When the oldest English translation of Willian Tyndale in his edition presented the name of God vocalized to read "Iehouah", someone could point to a criticism of the translator made by some scholar in view of this choice of terms of use. At the same time, I never saw anyone saying that Mary, the mother of Jesus, should be called Miriam, just because "in the Hebrew, her name is not Mary." Are there any academic articles doing this? None!
Some go further and claim that the consonant S of the name Jesus makes a connection to the name of the false god Zeus. That would mean that every Greek male noun ending with SIGMA refers to Zeus, but actually has nothing to do with reality. In fact, we would have a long list of pagan names in the biblical text. What remains is to appear someone saying that we should not put the name on our children of Nathan or Jonathan, since that would be the same as relating them to Satan. This is such an absurd type of reasoning that it would be a joke to give importance to this thesis that some proponents of these ideas present!
When the apostles of Jesus wrote inspired by the divine holy spirit, the part of the Bible called the New Testament, preserved the Hebrew names to be pronounced in the same way by those who read and speak Greek? The answer is no! Note, for example, that Matthew wrote his gospel which, as we know, was first written in Hebrew for the Jews, and did not preserve the name of Jesus in its original Hebrew form "Yehoshua", but replaced it with its Greek equivalent , Which is Iesous.
A simple reading in Matthew in chapter 1 reveals that the apostles did not preserve the pronunciation of various names by shedding Jewish names in Greek. Instead, they used the Greek equivalent of such names. Even when referring to Mary, they did not use the original Hebrew form that is "Miriam."
When we take this kind of thinking seriously, then will we say that the inspired apostles erred in engraving the name of the servants of God of antiquity? Not really! The use of the letter J in English is a variation common to the languages that have it. Something that was present even within the ancient Israelite tribes. Not even among them was an exact pronunciation for the same word. Yes, it was "Christendom" itself that came to use Jehovah's name and even write it in its ancient churches in Europe, as various churches have recorded it in its architecture. However, the discussion around the letter J and the vocalization of the Name of God only worries them when the Bible Students, who are now Jehovah's Witnesses, began to demonstrate the difference between Jehovah God and Jesus Christ as two persons who are distinct, with distinct desires, and were not part of a pagan trinity syncretized by the Catholic church, which wanted to make one lord to be equal in essence, but the faithful slave do not will fall into this satanic trap. Jehovah's Witnesses know that the Father, the Creator, he is indeed different from the first Son, the created being! And also Jesus acknowledged at John 17: 3 that the heavenly Father is the only true God, Jehovah!
k
???
TSO IMMEDIATO