#he’s the backbone of our society. the pillar of the people even | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

greenhappyseed · 2 years

Text

BnHA Ch.340 - Review, parallels & comparisons

I take back everything I said in my leak reactions post except how much I love Sansa’s faces. This chapter was great! The real thing was so much better with full art and all the wordy bits together in context. Strategy-wise, I’m glad the heroes are FINALLY taking a page out of the villain playbook — we’ve seen our heroes get separated at USJ, the forest camp, Kamino, the UA crush in the provisional licensing arc, the Shie Hassaikai raid, the war arc, Deku’s solo stint….and never with a backup plan or Plan B. They CAN be taught!

At the outset, I was struck by the All Might/Aizawa foiling that forms the backbone of the chapter. They’re in the same building at the same time; a first since They Talked™️ in Ch.257. I love seeing these two disabled heroes, who were originally staunch loners, learning to rely on each other as a team. Of course, they still have very different styles. All Might is big and theatrical and energizing the crowd; Aizawa is quiet and straightforward and helps others conquer their fears 1 on 1. But seeing each man using their individualities to bring strength to a team? Yeah, we love to see it.

I also like seeing All Might express faith in Aoyama’s heroism, because it’s the answer to the question Present Mic was asking a few chapters back; namely, can you really trust this kid? As I wrote here:

Mic is asking the kids to think hard about whether Yuga — the kid who sold out the heroes to save his family — is the right person to help the heroes deceive AFO. AFO, who wont hesitate to kill Yuga’s parents. The generations-old guy who can sense emotions and a change of heart from afar. Who uses other senses to make up for his lack of sight (meaning he likely has a Matt Murdock-like ability to sense pulse rate changes when people lie). In other words, what’s to prevent Yuga from victimizing heroes like Aizawa AGAIN when AFO goes after Yuga’s parents, as he most certainly will?

The real answer is no, they can’t 100% trust him, but they can support him and influence him with friends and faith. Friends to protect Aoyama and his family, and then faith that Aoyama will pick himself up and be a hero. Both All Might and Aizawa decide to put their faith in Aoyama, just as Izuku and 1A did last chapter.

But I was impressed we heard All Might say, out loud, that this was a matter of willpower and CHOICE. He chooses to trust Aoyama and Aizawa, just as he chooses to keep living. All Might may not have a lot of options in this final battle, but he still affirmatively chooses to speak up and support Aoyama rather than roll over. It’s a nice parallel between All Might/Yoichi and Izuku/Aoyama. Yoichi, as the vestige leader, had to convince Second to support Izuku, just as All Might is convincing Tsukauchi to support Aoyama. Is it delusional to believe a traitor can save them all? “Can these boys really bring an end to all this?” Yes, they can.

Further, All Might recognizes what AFO has done to Aoyama. AFO forced the kid to betray the heroes (or what Tsukauchi crassly refers to as “decent society”) but Aoyama did it to SAVE his parents. Aoyama knows what he did was wrong, but he had to choose who to save. He didn’t want to hurt his friends or teachers and is wracked with guilt over it. All Might, more than anyone else, knows how AFO uses lives as tools and throws them away.

Toying with and breaking people is the very source of All Might’s rage against AFO, and the reason he says he can’t forgive AFO in Kamino. (Reminder: When All Might talks “defeat” or “putting down for good,” he doesn’t mean death, even for the “unforgivable” AFO.)

There is also the harsh parallel to All Might’s own life. Since middle school, All Might has been “the pillar” and “the symbol,” but as the star-headed dude said in Ch.325, “along the way people forgot about the heart and soul that made the man.” All Might was himself exploited as a resource by citizens and other heroes. He knows the feeling of a society resting on his shoulders. He knows Aoyama’s inner turmoil. And he knows he passed all of that on to Izuku, too.

Actually, this chapter has both Aizawa and All Might reflecting on how they — as heroes and hero course teachers — are helping society exploit their students. Let’s turn to Aizawa: He’s had a similar pep talk with Izuku before the Shie Hassaiki raid, but here he is refreshingly blunt about the role of his students in this battle. Aizawa is taking personal responsibility for these kids and the choice to put them on the front lines. I don’t think we’ve EVER seen that before. Not from Nana or Gran, not from Nezu, not from the HPSC. And while both sides use people as tools, the difference is (1) Aizawa is transparent about what he is doing with Aoyama and Shinso; and (2) he won’t abandon his students afterwards when their utility is gone.

Art-wise, look carefully at the panels of prior Tartarus conversations vs this Aoyama conversation. Horikoshi generally places his heroes on the RIGHT side of the page, except when making a particular point (go back to Ch.116 and see when AFO is flipped to the right side). But here, Aoyama is on the right side at the end. Kurogiri is shown head-on. Aizawa knows these 2 characters; he’s seen what’s in their hearts. He knows they can be heroes — and he knows they have friends to support them — so THEY sit in the hero’s chair. I still think that, overall, Aizawa is out for revenge for everything the LOV has done to him and his students, but he’s become more flexible in how he thinks about villainy and unfairness starting with people he personally knows well.

In the panel below, Aoyama’s middle is missing, removing both his restraints AND all associations with his purchased quirk. Aoyama can still be a hero without that quirk (and, in fact, his value to the heroes right now has more to do with AFO than a belly button laser). BUT AIZAWA IS BEING HEROIC WITHOUT HIS QUIRK TOO. In this panel, Aizawa is exposing all of his physical weaknesses to the reader. His right eye, right elbow, and right leg are mutilated. Yet you can barely see that in the image. With everything hospital- and quirk-related stripped away, and both characters in clothes that aren’t their own, all you see is the teacher engaging his pupil in a vital lesson. That’s how Aizawa can contribute for now.

Finally, why is 10km (~6.2 miles) the minimum separation distance for AFO and Shig? A few possible reasons:

It’s outside the radius of most radio waves so AFO and Shig can’t communicate easily;

it’s outside the radius of AFO’s gloopy warp (which definitely goes 5km in Kamino but unclear if it can go further than that);

vertically upwards 10km is the separation line of the atmosphere between weather/water vapor and calmer skies (but thinner air and less oxygen; eg, helicopters can’t fly 10km high);

vertically downwards it’s the edge of the earth’s crust (eg, the heat will kill you unless you regenerate like Shig in the Star chapters). For reference, Tartarus is only 0.5km below sea level, and AFO was able to coordinate w/Shig there.

We learned last chapter that the UA buildings can tunnel underground AND can fly (though Power Loader hints this may not be fully operational yet). Given that tidbit, I’m guessing this battle will go all out above and below ground. Also, AFO!Shig has wings and post-Tartarus AFO does NOT have Air Walk. While we’re on the subject, AFO!Shig lost Reflect, which would have been the hard counter to Aoyama’s navel laser, but AFO should still have his copy. Of course, who knows what quirks they’re swapping around with the LOV as they prepare for war!

#bnha spoilers #mha spoilers #mha #my hero academia #bnha #boku no hero academia #bnha 340 #mha 340 #bnha meta #mha meta #all might #mha all might #shota aizawa #aizawa shouta #yuga aoyama

106 notes · View notes

skeptic42 · 7 years

Text

Why Christianity is False #3

Hell

Christianity’s invention of Hell is a gift to anyone seeking truth because it decisively reveals the man-made nature of the faith. Hell is not discussed in the Old Testament, but that didn’t stop Jesus from announcing it many times in the Gospels, mostly in a very threatening tone. He made sure to let us know that most people will be sentenced there to suffer unending physical pain. Here are three of the forty-five Gospel scriptures where Jesus mentions Hell:

Matthew 5:28-29

Matthew 13:41-42

Mark 9:45-46

A belief in Hell is unavoidable if one is to believe in Jesus. If Hell doesn’t exist, then why would God have allowed it to be so prominently addressed in the Bible? This point cannot be overstated. If God is as most Christians claim, all-knowing, all-seeing, and all-powerful, then he would not have allowed a concept so ultimate and absolute as Hell to be documented in the most important scriptures of the faith (the Gospels) if it was not a factual place of post-life punishment.

This elicits an unsettling comparison. Hitler dispatched Jews to the concentration camps and gas chambers for no reason other than their ethnic identity. This was a temporal punishment; it sometimes lasted only a few days. God, on the other hand, is prepared to send good, well-accomplished, and generous people to a place of everlasting punishment and torture for the ‘crime’ of not believing in something for which no credible evidence exists. The god of the Bible is, in effect, worse than Hitler.

This brings up another interesting point. Christians claim that the Bible is the backbone of the United States Constitution. The Eighth Amendment to the Constitution states that “cruel and unusual punishments [shall not be] inflicted”. It should be obvious that placing a person in Hell is both cruel and unusual. Consequently, Christianity violates the United States Constitution.

Rebuttle by Gary Shaddle:

Hell is one of the most misunderstood and misinterpreted doctrines in the Christian faith. One will rarely hear a sermon preached on Hell, and Christians generally do not research anything on it. The only time it usually comes up is during an atheist attack against the Christian faith, or when judgemental self-proclaimed Christians are throwing Hellish insults at various people and groups.

I recall Hell being mentioned several times, usually with descriptions of fire and eternal suffering. There was also the whole brimstone thing as well. Never a full on study certainly.

Most people cherry-pick Bible verses about Hell leaving Biblical context behind. This creates a view of Hell radically different than the view of Hell in the Bible. The view of Hell created by cherry-picking verses out of context allows non-believers, such as Mr. Runyan, to make statements like, “Christianity’s invention of Hell is a gift to anyone seeking truth because it decisively reveals the man-made nature of the faith.” Since the verses are out of context, the view of Hell created is man-made. Because of this man-made view of Hell, many people conclude that the whole faith is man-made.

It is man made, this is just one instance of many that reveals the man-made nature of the religion.

However, when studied in context, the view of Hell that is presented in the Bible is so much different than the human way of thinking that it seems more reasonable to conclude that it is not man-made. In order to study this doctrine, we need a correct understanding of man-made good versus evil contrasted with Biblical good versus evil, as well as a correct understanding of the nature of God.

First, the man-made concept of good and evil is extremely arbitrary. This is because there is no standard to measure against. The man-made idea of good is anything that the majority of people like. For example, not long ago, homosexuality was considered evil because most people did not agree with it. Now, since most people are fine with it, it is considered good. Those who still disagree with it are considered evil.

Well, damn near everything in society is arbitrary. It was once considered sinful, hence evil, to dance because dancing glorified the body, that’s how Gregorian chants came about. It was also considered sinful in the 1800′s and into the 1900′s, as mentioned in the Grapes of Wrath. King David danced in the bible. Now, you might here that on the fringe or when specifying certain types of dancing. Religious doctrine is arbitrary. In 1830, Pope Gregory XVI banned gas lighting because god separated the night and day, so using gas lighting at night was against god’s law. Not sure why this didn’t apply to torches or fires.

Homosexuality and religion have had an interesting history. Read Sex and Punishment. Homosexuality was both abhorred and tolerated at the same time. It was generally punished when it went “too far” or in conjunction with other crimes or lawsuits. It was only in about the late 1800′s when the governments really started coming down on it.

Majority opinion rules in the man-made view of good and evil. The problem with the view is that everyone has an opinion, and opinions are always changing. Standards do not change.

The claim that everyone has an opinion therefore black and white standards that do not change is a cop out. Majority opinion until recent times was slavery was okay. It was a natural part of the order. The bible has rules on slavery and advise slaves to obey their master to the best of their ability. Now it’s abhorred, thanks to the concept of human rights and the Enlightenment. Now only racists think slavery should be re-instituted. But it’s in the bible, so should we start it up again?

This leads to the man-made view of God. Most people see God as this old man with a long white beard hanging out in the clouds shouting commands to all the minions He created. When those minions do something He does not like, He punishes them by torturing them in an eternal fire. He even tortures good, well-meaning people for making small mistakes. He needs people to worship Him, so He also demands this and tortures those who choose not to.

And jesus is a white dude, but that somehow doesn’t affect anyone’s view of him. Punishment. The only way into heaven is through jesus, so good, well-meaning people will burn in hell. ANd for those who do believe, committing sin isn’t the problem it’s not asking forgiveness fast enough, so a punishment is required to bring about repentance.

This is a pretty close description of how Mr. Runyan and many other atheists understand God. Once again, you can notice that this view of God creates an arbitrary concept of good and evil. However, this time the opinion is God’s opinion. It certainly doesn’t take much thought to come to the conclusion that the Christian faith is false when one relies on the man-made views of God, Hell, and good and evil.

Wow, so the Western “universal” caricature of god is the only thing that atheists can understand. I wasn’t aware that it was my understanding. I hadn’t realized this was an arbitrary view created by man in the absence of any information given that god doesn’t like his image portrayed since that would be a false idol for people to worship instead of him. God is a human construct created from abstract ideology. The arbitrary image assigned this construct has little bearing on the realization that man create god, just as he created the thousands of other gods.

While the man-made view starts with good and evil then brings God in to the picture, the Bible starts with the nature of God, then brings good and evil into the picture.

This is entirely correct and part of the problem. At a young age we teach our children the difference between right and wrong, then later as they develop god is introduced into the mix. The bible creates god, then give him all authority, then he lays down some very arbitrary laws. Don’t eat shellfish? Don’t boil a kid in it’s mother’s milk? Other laws are just fine, and found in societies without christianity. And even the laws god lays down he tells them to violate. Kill all the boys, kill all the women who have known a man, save the virgins (Numbers 31:17-18). Do you know why they saved the virgins? A virgin was considered more valuable than a woman who wasn’t. Not as in the value of her life, or the fact that she could carry kids, her virginity had a monetary value. Why do you think god assigned a value to a virgin that was raped and her rapist was required to marry her? He devalued the monetary worth of her and had to repay the father for that lost value. A very early “You break it you bought it” policy.

The Bible says this about God:

Psalms 119:68 – “You are good, and you do good things. Teach me your laws.”

Notice that the verse starts with the nature of God, then speaks of His deeds. This is a consistent theme throughout the Old Testament and the New Testament.

The nature of God is good. He is everything that God should be. He is the ideal person, the sum total of all perfection. There are no defects or contradictions in Him.

A good god who wiped out almost all of humanity, and turned lots wife into a pillar of salt for the grievous sin of watching god destroy Sodom and Gomorrah. And of course the whole kill the children thing is another sign of his goodness. And then there’s “...I create evil...” in Isaiah 45:7. So god is the source of evil.

1 John 1:5 – “This is the message we heard from Christ and are reporting to you: God is light, and there isn’t any darkness in him.”

But he does create darkness, Isaiah 45:7 again.

Nothing can be added to His nature to make Him any better. He is excellence to an infinite degree, possessing every desirable quality, and therefore of infinite value.

This is just a bot of grandstanding here.

Psalms 97:2 – “Righteousness and justice are the foundations of his throne.”

Because God is Himself the highest and greatest good, He is also the source and fountain of all other good. He does good things. He extends His goodness to others. It is His nature to be kind, generous, and benevolent, to demonstrate good will toward people, and to take great pleasure in making them happy. Because God is good, He wants us to have what we need for our happiness and He sees that it is available to us. Every good thing we now enjoy or ever hope to enjoy flows from Him, and no good thing has ever existed or ever will exist that does not come from Him.

Psalms 145:9 – “The Lord is good to everyone and has compassion for everything that he has made.”

James 1:17 – “Every good present and every perfect gift comes from above, from the Father who made the sun, moon, and stars. The Father doesn’t change like the shifting shadows produced by the sun and the moon.”

With a correct understanding of the nature of God, the Biblical concept of good and evil begins to emerge. Two great examples will help explain what the Bible is saying.

Substitute Bob Dobbs in all of this and it doesn’t make it any more fake.

First, let’s look at the difference between light and darkness. Light is measured in lumens. We use this standard to measure the amount of light present in an area. We can block out light, minimize the amount of light, or add light. We cannot do this with darkness because darkness does not exist. It is merely a word used to descibe the physical reality of the absence of light.

Wow, this is just some bad science here. Light is energy measurable not only by lumens, but by frequency. Adjust that frequency up or down and we can’t see it. Darkness is the inability of humans to detect the narrow band of light. It however does still contain energy, and there are more ways of detecting energy than just light.

Interestingly, Genesis 1:2-3 says, “The earth was formless and empty, and darkness covered the deep water…Then God said, ‘Let there be light!’ So there was light.” Notice that light was created, but darkness was already present. Moses clearly understood that darkness was the absence of light.

Many creation myths start out with water. Genesis is no different. Where did this light come from? Not the sun, it wasn’t created until day 3.

Christopher Hitchens said, “One must state it plainly. Religion comes from the period of human prehistory where nobody had the smallest idea what was going on.” Since Moses did not have “the smallest idea what was going on”, Mr. Hitchens proves that Moses must have been inspired by God.

Here, idea refers to nature. No one had any idea how nature really worked. God wasn’t the inspiration, the authors of the Torah attributed their ideas to god, well, what they didn’t plagiarize from the myths of other religions and cultures.

Second, let’s compare hot and cold. Just like light, we use a standard to measure the amount of heat present in an area. We can block out heat, minimize the amount of heat, or add heat. We cannot do this with cold because cold does not exist. It is merely a word used to descibe the physical reality of the absence of heat.

Hot and cold are arbitrary terms to begin with. This is just more linguistic acrobatics that proves nothing. There are two ways to make something hotter, add heat (energy) from an outside source, or compress it. Alternatively you can remove heat by transferring it to a colder source (the way heat is transferred from your drink to the ice you put in it), or by reducing the amount of air (matter) in a given space. Using this latter method, we can reach near absolute 0 degrees Kelvin, the point at which atoms stop moving. Can’t get much colder than that, so cold does exist.

When we turn to good and evil, we can clearly see the same thing. Since God is good and He is the standard of good, evil is merely a word used to describe the physical reality of the absence of God.

Is this the same god of good that condones rape, murder, and slavery? So evil is the absence of god. A man rapes a good christian woman. How is it that god allows that to happen. Since she is good, she has god. God is clearly doing nothing to stop it. How is that defined as good? And don’t forget, god creates evil.

This is made very clear in the Bible as there was no evil before the fall. There was a complete relationship between humans and God. Adam and Eve got to experience a physical reality that was very good. When Adam and Eve decided to separate from God, they began to experience the physical reality of the absence of God, or evil.

There was evil before the fall of man, Lucifer. Also, there was the potential for evil since god put the trees with the forbidden fruit in the garden. Had he not done so, then it could not have happened.

Thankfully, God was not willing to let us spend an eternity without Him. So he pursued us and continues to pursue each one of us with His outrageous love of another kind through Jesus. God does not want to see anyone experience complete separation from Himself.

God wiped out nearly all of humanity. That type of pursuit of people is known as stalking. Obviously he does want to see people separated from him, he created Hell to put them in. He has a choice not to. He can do anything he wants. He can choose not to let people burn in hell for eternity. He has the power to do that. What he lacks is the will.

2 Peter 3:9 – God isn’t late with his promise as some measure lateness. He is restraining himself on account of you, holding back the End because he doesn’t want anyone lost. He’s giving everyone space and time to change.

Sadly, some people will never respond to His pursuit. It’s as if they are sitting in the darkness. Someone turns on a bright light. Their eyes cannot tolerate the brightness. Instead of allowing their eyes to adjust, they turn the light back off and continue sitting in the darkness.

The brightness of an all powerful god that won’t protect people, but will alter the weather and move the earth to punish people.

God will continue to pursue us until our time is up. After that, God will send us to the place we choose. Those who choose to live in the presence of God will have their relationship with Him fully restored. This is a literal place called heaven. Heaven is a reward culture with a party atmosphere, where God pours out His love and goodness on those present. There is no evil because there is no absence of God.

How can we restore a relationship with god when we didn’t have one to begin with? Heaven is the abstract idea that makes christianity a death cult. If it’s so wonderful, why aren’t people killing themselves to get there sooner?

Since God will not force anyone to choose a relationship with Him, those who wish to live separate from Him will be granted their choice as well. Hell is a literal place of separation from God. It is pure evil; complete absence of God. Where God is not present, no good can or will be present.

Hell is actually Gehenna, a garbage pit outside of Jerusalem. It’s like the Greek myth of the underworld lit on fire.

Understanding the context of the Bible as a whole will allow us to interpret those verses about Hell correctly. Consider the following:

Understanding that the bible is a collections of book written by men who had no understanding of nature put it into context. Knowing that some of the myths are bastardized derivatives from other religions (genesis, the flood, the Resurrection) further damns the whole thing.

Matthew 8:12 – The citizens of that kingdom will be thrown outside into the darkness. People will cry and be in extreme pain there.

Matthew 25:41 – “Then the king will say to those on his left, ‘Get away from me! God has cursed you! Go into everlasting fire that was prepared for the devil and his angels!

But you’ve already established that darkness does not exist. Using more verses to scare people into believing proves nothing.

Both of these are descriptions of Hell. They are simply using imagery to describe a place of infinite evil and suffering. We know that it is imagery for the simple fact that fire provides light which cannot be darkness. However, everyone would understand the negative imagery associated with darkness and fire.

Here are a few more verses:

<snip>

This is already getting to be too long, and I’m only half way through. It’s more obfuscation through the use of verses that proves nothing and is ultimate proselytizing.

So the question for you is: Will you be an eternal blessing, or an eternal horror? It is YOUR choice, but YOU cannot blame God for YOUR choice.

Told you.

#religion #chrstianity #fake #proselytizing #atheism #reason

1 note · View note

rjhamster · 4 years

Text

The Berean - Amos 2:6-8 NKJV

(6) Thus says the LORD: " For three transgressions of Israel, and for four, I will not turn away its punishment, Because they sell the righteous for silver, And the poor for a pair of sandals. (7) They pant after the dust of the earth which is on the head of the poor, And pervert the way of the humble. A man and his father go in to the same girl, To defile My holy name. (8) They lie down by every altar on clothes taken in pledge, And drink the wine of the condemned in the house of their god. New King James Version Change your email Bible version

The Israelites' immorality fell into three major areas:

1) Indifference to and oppression of the poor. 2) Covetousness displayed by placing primary importance on material possessions. 3) Unrestricted promotion of self-advantage—doing anything to anyone to get their way.

The Hebrew words for poor are very similar to our "underdog." Amos uses two different words, 'ebyôn anddal, to designate the poor (see Amos 4:1). 'Ebyônusually designates the very poor, and dal describes the lowest social class. However, both words connote "wanting because of oppression or exploitation" and refer to the weaker members of society. To God the poor are those without the worldly resources or connections to defend themselves. As a result of their weakness, the wicked look upon the poor as fair game to exploit (Isaiah 10:1-2). Today, "poor" could refer to the small businessman or consumer at the mercy of the huge corporations, or the "little guy" under the thumb of "big" government.

One of the means of oppression was the courts, and Amos frequently shows how the poor "took it on the chin" within the "justice" system. In a lawsuit the guilty party, one of the "strong," bribed the judge, who found the innocent person—the weak—guilty (Isaiah 5:23). As so often happens today in America, the ancient Israelites shunned out-of-court settlements. They went to court even over minor matters because their chances for a larger settlement were better.

When a person was found guilty by the court, he, of course, had to pay a fine. If he did not have enough in his pocket to pay it, he could pay in produce. For example, a vintner could pay in wine. The victors then took their winnings—"the wine of the condemned"—and partied (Amos 2:8). They had turned into self-centered parasites who lived by the code, "get the other guy before he gets you." Israelites can be a mercenary, unmerciful lot of people.

Obviously, God was not happy with this system of justice, and it is even worse now. Today's "wine of the condemned" awarded to the injured party—reaching into the millions of dollars—goes mostly for exorbitant lawyer and court fees. Governments of all sizes include expected fines from lawbreakers in their budgets.

In addition, Israelites coveted real estate to the ridiculous extent that the buyer begrudged the small amount of dust the seller threw on his head to symbolize his grief over losing his ancestral properties (Amos 2:7). In a similar vein, God accuses the Jews of moving the boundaries between parcels of land (Hosea 5:10). In those days, instead of driving a stake into the ground to mark their property lines, landowners set up pillars of stones on the boundaries. God pictures the Jews kicking the boundary stones over a few feet when no one is looking. They may have justified it with, "Doesn't everybody do it?" but it was still outright theft.

Because the strong could so easily exploit the weak, land and wealth in Israel fell into fewer and fewer hands. God cries, "Woe to those who join house to house, who add field to field, till there is no place where they may dwell alone in the midst of the land!" (Isaiah 5:8).

It is no different than today's big international combines buying up farmland and displacing farmers, who must then find jobs, usually in urban areas. How soon we have forgotten that small family farms played a large role in keeping the United States economically and socially stable for generations! America's agrarian heartland was the backbone of the nation. We need to be aware that the resulting instability will lead us down the same path of destruction as it did Israel!

"They lie down by every altar on clothes taken in pledge" (Amos 2:8). Under the Old Covenant, a person's cloak could be taken as security for a loan, but Exodus 22:26-27 shows that it was to be returned every evening if it doubled as his blanket at night. God considers keeping a poor man's coat overnight as taking advantage of him.

Remember, our judgment from God largely depends on how we treat our fellow man (Matthew 25:33-46). Good relationships with others are vital to maintaining a good relationship with God (Matthew 5:23-24). This means we must always do the right things toward others no matter how much it hurts us (Psalm 15:4) or how they might react (Matthew 5:44-45).

— John W. Ritenbaugh

0 notes

halas1 · 5 years

Audio

A New Religion

Due to his dual expertise, which encompasses the fields of music and philosophy, Yoav Beirach offers us a unique point of view in relation to our ongoing research topic. Beirach, a bass player, came originally from Jazz. This fascination led quite seamlessly into the realm of free jazz, a practice that, for Beirach, represented the epitome of artistic radicalism at the time. In fairness, one must mention that Beirach is a product of the late 70s, and hence, was a tad late in boarding the free jazz train. However, it was only a matter of time before Beriach’s high school friend and classmate, the drummer Ariel Armoni, introduced him to Assif Tsahar and Daniel Sarid, who, due to their future involvement in the creation of the mythical Levontin 7, represent experimentalism for an entire generation of Israeli musicians. For Beirach this quartet was not only a means to expand his understanding of jazz, but also an ‘invitation’ into a new fledgling scene that encompassed more than merely experimental practices. This is the scene that formed the backbone of what could later be described as the Israeli experimental scene.

True to his holistic understanding of art in its politico-historical and hence, social context, Beirach decides to quite music for a while and simply reflect on his trait. His main difficulty was with “the way music is practiced.” His personal feeling was that “one must be more critical of his intentions.” The underlying question for Beirach was “how do people act when they create music?” For him, academicism in its artistic context represented an artificial escape, and he found no need for it. His inner voice begged an awareness of the context in which one creates, and this, in the widest possible sense.

Beirach’s first example is of a technical nature, yet drives his point home in a clear fashion: “The advent of audio recordings begs a revised inspection of musical form and notation. However, in this sense, experimentation and research should not be the ideal, but rather a means towards an end. I would like to hope that, in essence, a Madonna concert and an experimental one are pretty much the same.” The ideal presented here by Beirach, in essence almost political, is an attempt to soften the boundaries between that which is considered ‘serious’, and that considered popular/folk: “Our privileged artistic and social standpoints require us to find a new language. Yet how do we avoid detracting from our past artistic and social milestones whilst still setting course towards a new trajectory that takes into account all there really “is” in social and cultural terms?” A standpoint that presents a built-in contradiction, as it requires us to forgo the age-old paradigm that equates diatonicism with progress.

This train of thought leads us clearly and seamlessly into Beirach’s current musical practice which encompasses traditional and popular Arab music as well as free improv, rock, pop and more. Finding the non-collaborative approach problematic, Beirach attempts, as much as possible, for his practice to be devoid of boundaries and hierarchies. The underlying political question to his practice is: “what does it mean to be together?” This presents Beirach with yet another ingrained conflict, namely between musical professionalism, and his broader stance as a naïve anarchist.

In immediate relation, Beriach’s PhD explores an intersection between music and philosophy; specifically it researches the philosophical history of music theory. One of the pillars on which his entire theory stands, stems from questions regarding “a moralistic approach towards art in a godless age”: “We seem to completely disregard the fact that past artists were predominantly religious. As such, their art, and indeed its building blocks, would have represented for them a sort of objective truth. It was much easier to speak of things in terms of good vs. bad, or pretty vs. ugly, as there was an external moral compass guiding society at large.” For Beirach this observation immediately begs the Kantian query regarding our (western) authority on supposed objective knowledge. In god’s world, the western privileged authority over truth seemed a given. However, in a godless world such as presented by the west today, has god’s representation not been merely replaced with the ‘religion of atheism’? For Beirach, Kant’s assumptions on the matter were not only visionary, but quasi-prophetic. In a true godless universe, our stance towards questions of authority over truth and supposed objective knowledge must be shattered. Accordingly, our new stance should enable us to embrace much more than we were historically accustomed to, and allow room for points of view that potentially negate or even contradict our ongoing historical trajectory.

Going even deeper into this question, Beirach reminds us that western music theory has always been based on science, and specifically Maths. This immediately promotes supposed objectivism, which in turn leads towards a quasi-fanatic following. In effect, there is no difference in our approach towards these supposed cultural ‘truths’ in a religious world vis-à-vis a godless one. In both we are confronted with representations of a higher order, which we can only accept as gospel. “Hence”, asks Beirach, “does the non-religious stance really deliver what it claims? Have we simply replaced one religion with another, or are we truly at a point of qualitative change allowing us to perceive truth as relative, or culture as representing a superficial construct?” No doubt, all questions begging an experimental approach towards art, and indeed life at large.

#Experimental Israel #Yoav Beirach #ישראל הנסיונית #יואב ביירך #Ophir Ilzetzki #אופיר אילזצקי

0 notes

maelliottcrucible-blog · 7 years

Text

Chapter 1

A rock nearly gave way beneath Zera’s feet, the almost inaudible hiss of stone against gravel warned him to change his footing. He let out the breath he didn’t know he was holding; he was getting too old for this. There had been a time when he would have easily scaled the narrow paths that snaked along the windswept canyon wall. It seemed that now he was just too big for the task. Another rock trembled beneath his wide feet and he adjusted, shifting his substantial weight until he was parallel with the rock face. Muscle was unfortunately far more dense than fat and he had plenty of it. Red tinted stone irritated the tip of his nose. It was only a bit further. Three, maybe four meters between him and the roughly hewn steps that had been once part of some ancient structure.

Zera threw himself to the left, catching a solid looking stone and holding on for his life. Sweat began to bead on his face and chest as he strained to pull up his own weight. That was no easy task. Even as a boy he had been the biggest child in Benhurst; and that was including the orcish kids. He shook the thought from his mind and pulled, heaving his bulk up a bit farther. He reached up once, twice, three times before he was able to grab hold of the next stone. Stopping to rest, he glanced to his left. The sheer red cliff face went on until the hazy mist of morning blocked it from sight.

He looked back up, just a bit further. He tensed his muscles and checked his footing. Locking his eyes on the next handhold he released the coiled tension with one burst. His fingers stretched out and onto the first of the curving stone steps. He was certain that they had been some kind of marble in the past but wind and weather had reduced them to something that reminded him more of quartz than anything else. He checked his footing, solid enough, and looked back over his shoulder.

The canyon valley stretched out as far as he could see, only a narrow river now marked the general location of its midpoint. Across the river stretched two lanes of railroad tracks, around which had been built the town of Benhurst. Not exactly a bustling town, but not the smallest in the frontier either. It was the sort of nondescript place one went to disappear and not cause trouble. After all, nothing happened in Benhurst and he liked it that way. The age of myth was over, no more heroes or great armies or dark lords. There were no more tales and legends to be spun by adventurers. The world had calmed down at last.

Zera pulled himself up and began to ascend the steps, one heavy foot at a time. He checked to make sure his weight didn’t cause the whole thing to collapse under him. Not that it would readily matter, as high up as he was he doubted he’d survive a fall even half as far as the crags he had started from, and catching himself on the rocks would ruin his hands. He peered up as the stairwell curved toward the open air above the canyon. He could see the thin outline of the Schisma mountains against the blue sky to the east.

It was the woman sitting at the summit that made him pause for only a heartbeat. He cracked a smile when she rose, black hair fluttering in the wind and her hand resting on a spellbook slung over her shoulders by a narrow leather strap attached to each end of the spine. She had a button of a nose and eyes that made him think of a pair of emerald green razor blades. He could not help but flinch under them. Her lips parted into a smile as he huffed his way up the last few steps, and she reached out to take his big hand.

“Got your note,” Zera said, his voice hoarse and accepted her hand. She stepped back and guided him over the last precarious step.

“You’ve grown a bit,” Catherine said. Her tone sounded hesitant as she looked up at him. Her eyes widened in that way they always did when she saw something that fascinated her, a subtle dilation of the pupils.

Catherine Haust was the one person he trusted the most. They had known one another since her father, a merchant, had brought her in to purchase jerky from his grandfather. They had been around the same age and she had been just a few inches shorter than him at the time. Now she stood just tall enough that her head was level with his breast, though that did not seem to intimidate her at all. She had always had a backbone of iron, something she used to get her way on more than one occasion. It was the reason why her father had allowed her to study magic instead of becoming a merchant like himself.

“Have I? I didn’t notice, practically ran up those steps," Zera shot back sarcastically, throwing himself onto the ground at the summit. To his left, the canyon dropped off into a lethal fall, to his right the world stretched out forever. She kicked him in the shoulder. He winced and reached over to rub it. “Ow, what was that for?”

“How are you so calm? You nearly slipped three times!” Catherine chided him, he cracked a smile at her and stared up at the blue sky, catching his breath. “You are a stubborn git, Zera Leigh," Her voice had changed over the years, it had deepened a bit as well as lost the sort of sing-song lilting that he remembered. Instead it struck him as strained from whispering in a library.

Zera let out a long chortle of a laugh, right from his belly. He loved laughing, singing too. He was terrible at it though. Catherine sank to a knee and stared out over the edge of the canyon, down at their home. He drew himself to a sitting position and rested his weight back on his palms. It was always beautiful up here. A sea of red stone giving way to an ocean of greens, yellows, and browns. There, at the center, was the mass of blue tiled roofs that made up the town, small white pillars of smoke rose from some, the butcher shop was no doubt one of them.

“You got here safely then?” Zera asked as he took a few breaths to ward off the fatigue of the climb.

“I assume you are talking about the raids,” Catherine asked and Zera nodded in response. “The Thuul were quiet, thank the gods,"

There were two uses for the word Thuul in modern society. It could mean a person who was not of pure Mataian descent, with the idyllic blonde hair and blue eyes that was a mark of their race. Zera was fortunate to have pure Mataian blood, which helped given the strange nature of his physique. The other use of the word, though, referenced the barbarian tribes that made their homes in the Schisma mountain range to the east of his home. They were a violent and warlike bunch that eagerly raided trains and shipments for weapons and goods. As far into the frontier as they were, the Imperial military did little to discourage their raiding.

“I was afraid you might have been delayed, the raids have picked up,” he said and looked toward the mountains.

“Did we lose anyone?” She asked and Zera nodded again, the two falling silent as the wind blew over them from the west.

“This was always our spot,” Zera said, pushing off his hands and wrapping his arms around his knees. Catherine didn’t look at him at first, too taken in by the natural beauty beyond.

“We spoke of anything we wished,” She said finally, looking back at him,. Even her manner of speaking had changed; it was so much more sophisticated. “Not a soul to chide us,"

Zera barked out a laugh and took a deep breath of the air through his nose. How long had it been since had last made the climb? Years? A decade? She had been gone for about that long, off studying at the University at the capital. She had only come home now to pick up her tuition to go back. She was to be an imperial mage, a wizard of the highest order. Something he could never afford to do as much as he dreamed about it.

“Tell me about the capital," Zera prompted, deciding it would be easier to listen to her story than to try to think about something that could never happen.

“I would much rather hear of things here,” She said, turning back to look at the view. Zera squared his shoulders and frowned at her deflection.

“Cat, you know how things are here, they don’t change,” Zera growled; nudging her arm. She glanced back at him and gave an apologetic smile. He knew what she was doing, avoiding the subject since he had been forbidden by his grandfather to travel. He knew so very, very little about the outside world. It was a fact of life now, something he had grown to accept as he passed into adulthood. That said, any sort of tales and stories of the outside were like a breath of fresh air to him.

“Beautiful," Catherine began, “They call it the Grey City for a reason. Matra is an all encompassing disk of slate gray stone. The buildings seem to rise out of it if they were cut from the same piece of rock, it goes on as far as the eye can see. It shines on mornings like this. Salt in the sea air crusting on the walls,” She said, running her fingers over the dewy grass beneath her. He tried to imagine that many buildings but the idea simply baffled him. Matra apparently held nearly a million souls within its walls. Compared to the few hundred in Benhurst.

“What about the people?” He asked.

“The people? There were so many, from different places and cultures. Gods above Zera, It was a microcosm of the world," She made a face that Zera didn’t quite understand; like she was upset about not being able to describe it. He was still wrestling with the word microcosm; though he imagined he understood for the most part what it meant.

“Find yourself a lady friend?” He asked. Her eyes went wide and she pursed her lips, a half smile threatening to break her attempt at looking upset. She dug a handful of dirt out from the ground and threw it at him. He laughed and held up his hands to protect himself.

“Now that is private you bird brain! I should turn your hair pink," Catherine retorted, slapping her hand against the spellbook. He raised a brow and waited for her, either to answer his question or actually turn his blonde hair an unseemly color. She sighed; “It… did not last long,"

Zera’s face fell and he let out a sigh. Catherine’s taste in romantic partners had always been a topic of conversation out here in the frontier, but to the west, in the greater part of the Empire, things were very different. People were far more open minded out there. He reached out and placed a hand on her shoulder, it seemed so small now compared to how it used to feel under his hand when they were children.

“I’m sorry," He offered, she just shrugged and looked out to the sky.

“It was nice while it lasted,” she began and then glanced back at him; “What about you?”

Zera had not given a single thought to romance for years. It just was not in him. How could it be? He was something of a pariah in town thanks to his grandfather and he counted very few people as friends. His life had revolved around working toward inheriting the butcher shop from his grandfather. He did not know anything else.

“Not really anything to discuss,” Zera said, she growled and tossed another handful of dirt at him.

“You have got to stop giving up on yourself, Hawk," She snapped, he winced at how harshly she used his nickname. The word Zera, in the old tongue, literally meant ‘bird of prey’. His grandfather had given him the name as an accusation since Zera’s mother died in childbirth. Catherine had done her best to make it something of a badge of pride for her friend and it had worked for the most part. He didn’t hate that part of himself as much as he had used to.

“I’m not giving up on myself," Zera shot back; “I am just happy where I am,"

“Same thing,” Catherine said, Zera looked away, warmth coming to his cheeks. What was so wrong with living a simple and quiet life? It just felt wrong to aspire to anything more than that.

They remained quiet for a while after that; just staring off toward the town far below them. Zera knew he should say something to break the silence but he also could not just let go of what was said. He was happy with his life now; he was comfortable. His grandfather was too old and small to give the beatings he used to and now contented himself with the occasional snide offhand remark. Even so, Zera had never done anything to further justify it and it was becoming apparent to the people in town that maybe Zera wasn’t the man that his grandfather claimed.

Things were getting better, so why change now?

“I’m sorry,” Catherine said, and Zera caught her gaze. He could tell she was not sorry for what she had said, she meant every word of it. She was sorry that what she had said had derailed their reunion. He supposed that was enough for now, he could not just let their first conversation in years end like that. Especially since she was not going to be here for long.

“Then tell me some stories from the academy.,” He said and she rolled her eyes. The sigh that came out was more of a ‘woe is me for being your friend you insufferable lout’ than ‘I’d rather not’. He gave her his best smile and she conceded.

“Fine, but then you are going to tell me all about what I missed here,"

“Deal,"

They spoke until the sun began to dip low in the sky. Their laughter echoed in the open air. Life was so peaceful then, there was so much to look forward to. Zera even wondered if maybe he did have a chance to ask for a little bit more for himself. If he deserved to have such a dear friend then maybe he deserved a tiny bit extra. Years after this moment, Zera would look back and wonder why he didn’t spend more time on that cliff. Because, as they told one another all about their lives apart, a train bearing fate on it was approaching in the distance.

0 notes