#they get theological a lot in my defense
Text
ive had this drawfee comp stewing for a while and i finally finished it so come get some stew
youtube
#i thought this would be a quick comp but its almost half an hour oops#they get theological a lot in my defense#drawfee#drawfee quotes#julia lepetit#jacob andrews#nathan yaffe#karina farek#Youtube
71 notes
·
View notes
Text
Human Rights in the Time of Palestinian Genocide
I would like to extend my heartfelt congratulations to the staffers at USAID, who seem to have finally noticed that they work for the PR arm of the CIA and not a mosquito net NGO; and all it took was the US government’s explicit (and in no way unprecedented) support and endorsement of a genocide for them to see it! At least, that is, the ones working for Samantha Power have noticed, to which all I can say is that they should probably stop taking their bosses’ vanity publications at face value; let’s just say Debbie from HR isn’t posting about the food bank on Linkedin because she cares about homeless people.
“Human rights” get a lot of play in academia and media, and if you dig past the pious mumblings of elite liberals and the Military Industrial Complex, they could be read as the core theological assumption of the West’s covert religious perspective, a perspective baked into the international institutions to which all nations are subjected. In a country where such apostles of Humanism as neuroscientist and socially-acceptable demagogue Sam Harris advocate first-strike nuclear attacks on Muslim civilians to protect those very civilians human “rights”, it should surprise us little that human rights only exist in an ideal realm where there are no actual human beings to whom those rights could apply. Somehow, however, people like Power and her minions continue to be well received when they peddle the idea that the single largest global exporter of military coups is actually the greatest defender of human rights and the only obstacle to new Holocausts. This, despite the fact that the period of US global dominance has seen dozens of genocides, some under the direct supervision and support of the “civilized” Western world and its regime of human rights. The key to this paradox lies in the method of genocide prevention and human rights protection advocated by such soulless characters: geopolitical power projection and direct military intervention.
From Russia’s “holy war” against fascism in Ukraine to George W. Bush’s “crusade” against terrorism in whichever country he decides invented terrorism, the justification of human rights atrocities with the concept of human rights is a recurring theme of contemporary global politics. Such justification is actually the primary instrumental purpose of this rhetoric, with political power balancing being the only real motivating factor for states and their puppeteers. The USSR loved communism, until they noticed anti-Soviet Trotskyists fighting the fascists in the Spanish Civil War; America loves democracy, until they notice pro-Soviet Marxists have been democratically elected in Chile; the Russian Federation is the bulwark against fascism, until some fascist paramilitaries offer up their services in invading Ukraine. The real question is one of power for states and political blocs, the ideological element is only a useful justification in the event that it supports the advancement of power politics.
In the case of the Palestinian people, one need only remember the moralizing about the Uyghur genocide that took the internet-based “discourse” by storm a few years ago. The Chinese detainment, ethnic cleansing, and cultural genocide of the Muslim Uyghurs, always justified with the logic of counter-terrorism and “self-defense”, directly paralleled the Palestinian genocide in many ways, until the Palestinians’ suffering escalated following October 7th. All the human rights crusaders who wanted “stand up to China” on the Uyghur question have changed their tune now. They aren’t just silent on the Palestinian question, most of the defenders of the Uyghurs are now vocally defending Israel’s genocide. This time, rather than cultural genocide in the form of forced reeducation and the destruction of Uyghurs’ culture and religious heritage, the Israelis are truly and explicitly committing a physical genocide of the people of Gaza. Now, over 30,000 people into an open act of genocide, the reactions of humanitarians like Power and Harris range from gentle critiques and calls for dropping crates on people’s heads, to condemnation of Islam itself as the real cause of the conflict, furthering the narrative of a clash between the “human rights” oriented civilization of the West, and the Islamic civilization of the faceless oriental Other. I hope that maybe as more innocent people are fed into the gears of the Israeli military machine, more beltway ghouls and mindless media consumers will notice that they are the very goosestepping fascists they so desire to see bombed, couped, and invaded out of existence.
4 notes
·
View notes
Text
Still thinking about Demonology as a way to understand Belos’ character.
When answering “why can’t people use witchcraft/demons for good purposes if they’re super careful about it” James invokes the theological principle of “Nunquam faciendum est malum ut bonun indie eueniat (Evil must never be done so that good may result)“. Belos doesn’t follow this, and so we can see that in his fanatical centuries long quest he has violated his own morality.
Now this isn’t all the lying, tyranny, and murder he did (although I would be interested to hear if someone who is more knowledgeable in New England Puritanism could give an analysis if witch hunters would be allowed to do long cons to catch witches in extreme circumstances)- witches don’t get human rights. And certainly not witches that were never Christian and are more similar to indigenous people than Europeans. Killing his brother was acceptable as well, with the theory that og Caleb had married a Clawthorne ancestor and became amicable with the people of the Boiling Isles, he had, in Philip’s eyes, became a witch (the human kind tempted to sin that he had hunted in the human realm).
No where Belos errors is where he himself practices magic. Now there could be more nuance in applying the Elaborated Theory of Witchcraft to Glyph Magic. Belos knows he isn’t making a deal with the devil, he’s using the natural (Demonology makes a big deal about what’s natural and what isn’t) properties of the Demon Realm. He could even tell himself its inherently different from the magic that the witches of the Boiling Isles use. But there isn’t any when it comes to extending his life using Palismans. That clearly violates the natural order of the Boiling Isles. And unlike Glyph Magic, it involves internalizing “evil demonic magic”. My reading is that Belos believes that regardless of his predestined afterlife, if he were to die in the Boiling Isles, he could only go to hell, because its so far away from his god. He can’t die without his plan at an anti-climax. Except Christianity isn’t a big anti-death religion. The good Christian thing to do would be to die a martyr.
Speaking of fighting against death, creating grimwalkers would be another violation. You can’t just go creating life other than the way God has laid out for you. That’s one of the reasons why American evangelicals and Catholics objected to IVF when it was first invented. In the past, theologians spent a lot of time thinking about where souls come from, most theories agreed sex was an important part of it. Belos is making clearly sapient people, and if he thinks he’s resecurting Caleb’s soul, that’s something only God can do.
Now while maybe Philip could defend himself in theological nuance from his own people when it comes to the Palismans and the grimwalkers, he doesn’t have a defense when it comes to the Collector. My man literally makes a deal with a devil-like figure. Like dude, that’s the one thing you’re not supposed to do.
74 notes
·
View notes
Text
So this is the Howling Grotto. Interesting place.
The gateway looks more technological down here. So do the lanterns I passed, actually.
I feel like this could relate to the Artificer and something called a "Kickball" from the fables? Not sure why it was named that, but I'm getting a technological otherworld vibe here.
Anyways, more pressing:
This keeps happe-- I mean this is the very first time that I've fallen somewhere and didn't mean to.
Oh, we're talking about flying squirrels? Yeah, they have this batlike membrane between their limbs. Do you have anything like a bat membrane that I could use?
Batlike membrane. I will be the terror of the skies. The turtles won't even know what hit them.
I clearly saw a bathroom sign on my way in. This has to be a populated location, at least at one point in time. Murals are not naturally forming.
Oh, the Molekin! This is a Molekin site. Back in the day, they used to have only one settlement remaining: The one on Sleeper Island. But that was after Wentworth annihilated their civilization in the war with the lizardfolk. So this is one of their ancient places.
Also, based on all the shit I've read about wind, they might not be wrong. There are some amazing ways magic can manipulate air currents. With so many sorcerers and mystic architects creating artificial wind under their own power, who's to say natural wind isn't, itself, the byproduct of some great deity or another?
If the sun and moon are personifications of great magical forces then there's no reason the wind can't be.
Between you and Quarble, there sure are a lot of people looking out for my journey. I don't know what the Scroll is but it must be really important if you guys are doing all of this for the mail boy.
Okay, let's go have a look around the molekin tunnels.
You know, Shopkeeper was right. This is really fun. And it confirms that the titular "Howling" is the wind kind, so I don't need to worry too much about werewolves down here.
Just turtles. That's fine. Tonight I dine on turtle soup. This is so easy, I feel like a master alrea--
I do not feel like a master already oh god why
It's fine. Just take a deep breath. Focus. Fly like a squirrel. A squirrel in a mole tunnel. Just spread your wings and--
._. Yes, bestie, I think that would be--
Oh. Wait. Sorry, I have trouble discerning sarcasm when I'm impaled and bleeding in an actual chasm..
Oh good, there's a Fuck That Noise backdoor. I was a little worried I'd have to make the return trip too.
We really are jumping straight into the deep end with this wingsuit. Mole tunnels were made to be navigated by some other means, I'm sure. And with fewer fireballs involved.
But you make do with what you've got. Adaptability. That's. Like. Life.
And sometimes you're rewarded.
...you know, now that I think about it, is Quarble an aspect of the mysterious time loop that all of these shards are symptomatic of? He said he has a magic ring that lets him freeze and rewind time and stuff. I wonder if that's a product of whatever temporal shenanigans are going on right now?
It feels related. Maybe he works for Resh'an.
Oh my god they're so cute
Little rolly polly adora-balls! Look at that little guy waddle waddle. It's the best. ^_^ Almost makes me regret having to harvest them for Time Shards.
It better be! I was robbed of a boss fight in Bamboo Creek and now I'm itching for a throwdown. Hit me with your best shot.
That person's an idiot. Everyone knows the best defense is a good offense. As the Scripture says, "Can't hit me if you're dead, fucko!" I look forward to having a spirited theological debate with whoever's in the next room. I'm going to wreck their shit. With logic.
An emerald. Golem. That's terrifying but also really cool. 10/10 craftsmanship, ancient mole people.
...I have a sword. Not. The most effective of choices for fighting a rock.
Oh, this is going to hurt, isn't it?
It did. It hurt very much. I have sharp things in places I didn't even know I had.
HEY, unfair, I did NOT. Do that. This time. I am presently innocent.
._. I just lost a philosophical debate to a pile of rocks. Why are you being mean to me?
5 notes
·
View notes
Text
Sunshine, Starlight, Sweetheart, Brightside: Bonus Chapter!!!!
Marc Spector X OC
N O T E!!! This is a BONUS CHAPTER to my ongoing fic, Sunshine Startlight, Sweetheart, Brightside. You could read this without the full fic, but it's better with all the background. The fic is on a temperary pause still as I get situated in college, but I wanted to give everyone a lil half chapter as a thanks for all the support <3 takes place between chapter 17
Bonus Chapter Summary: Marc and Sam spend a lazy afternoon talking, playing, and fucking in bed.
All fanfic masterlist here I got lots of Moon Knight content, some Star Wars and Bruce Springsteen!
Warnings: Marc's childhood, fluffy, lil bit smutty, implied smut. pretend threating (it's just part of teasing I promise) Marc Spector listens to Eminem, Steven Grant watches Doctor Who. I will not be elaborating. Will be smutty in the sense of touching, dry humping, but the actual sex part is implied.
*******************************
“Okay, okay, first crush?” Marc asked, shirtless but wearing your oversized Bobs Burgers sweatpants. Marc, surprisingly, ended up liking the show. Steven wasn’t a fan.
“Uuuhhhh you’re gonna laugh at me…” Sam pulls the blanket up, covering her eyes.
Marc pulls it back down, kissing her forehead. “I would never laugh at you, Brightside”
Sam peeks her eyes out, looking at him “Okay… Anakin Skywalker when I was 8…”
He laughs.
Groaning, Sam tries to hide her face again, but Marc stops her, still smiling. “Please tell me it was little Anakin in that first one?”
Sam shakes her head, grimacing.
“Okay… the second one?”
“Attack of the Clones,” She corrected. “And no”
“So… the one where he turns evil?” He’s stifling a laugh now.
Sam turns over, burying her face in the pillow, muttering something he can’t hear.
Marc leans closer, not letting this go. “What was that, baby girl?”
He sits up, pulling Sam’s limp body off the pillow.
“Specifically the latter half of the movie.”
He laughs again, it’s so light and jovial, it makes her turn onto her back again, wanting to see him laugh. It was a rare sight, Sam soaks it in.
Wanting to keep him smiling, she continues. “8 year old me really looked at him murdering a bunch of kids my age and said ‘He’s perfect’”
Marc grins wider and another chuckle escapes him. “Wow, that… explains a lot about you…” He tries to not laugh at Sam, but the idea of his sweet girlfriend who works with kids loving a genocidal child murderer was so odd to him. Always surprises with her.
Sam sits up, facing him on the bed “Okay, mr. judgy, who was your first crush?”
Marc puts his hand on his bare, caramel chest and looked wistfully out the window. “Rachel Rosebaum, Hebrew school, first grade.”
Feigning indignance, Sam asked “Should I be worried about her?”
“Yeah, probably.” He shrugs, trying to hide his smile.
Sam tackles him back to the bed “Hey!”
“What?” He throws his hands up defensively. “She was my first girlfriend, I’ll always have a soft spot.”
“Oh, you dated, did you?”
“Yeah, for 2 weeks”
“Wow, intense.”
“Very. My mom even-” Marc stopped, hesitating.
Sam softly carded her fingers through his hair. “It’s okay, you don’t have to talk about it.”
“No it’s fine, it was… it was before-” Before she hated me. “When things were good. She invited Rachel and her family over for dinner, but my dad and her’s got into some theological debate and they left before dinner even started.” Sam was laying on his stomach, feeling his belly laugh. “She didn’t come over again. A very Jewish end to a relationship” He was smiling, despite talking about his family, but he shifted the conversation before it went further. “What about you?”
“Hm?” Sam looked up at him.
“Who was your first boyfriend?” Marc clarified
Sam blushed, turning her focus back to tracing Marc’s arm muscles. “You actually can’t laugh about this one.” She was smiling, but she was serious.
Playing with her hair, Marc encouraged her on.
“Okay, my first boyfriend was Steven.”
Marc shifted to look at Sam, catching her eyes. “Really?”
She smiled up at him. “Yeah.”
“Nothing in high school or college?”
“No, guys were only interested in sex with me. Most of them didn’t really want to get to know me, and the ones that did were more interested in the attention I gave them. I was the emotional girlfriend, but they didn’t want to actually date me. Closest I came was my senior prom date, but that ended badly too.” Sam cringed but smiled.
“Oh? How did that end?”
Sam moved up, laying her head on Marc’s chest. “It was like a teen movie, we had this great night and I was going to tell him I loved him. He’s the only person other than you and Steven I actually loved. But, alas!” You waved your hands dramatically and felt a small laugh in Marc’s chest. “He left prom to go meet up with another girl.”
Marc sat up quickly, making Sam roll down to his lap. “Are you serious?” He looked mad.
Sam looked up at him, slightly disoriented “It’s okay starlight, it was…” She mentally did the math. “Wow I guess it was 8 years ago. But yeah it was pretty dramatic. Chris was there with one of my friends, they’ll tell you it was dramatic as hell. Yelling and crying in this crazy poofy dress, Gone With the Wind style.” She joked, trying to relax him. “I’ll show you the dress when we get to my parents.”
He looked at you, bewildered. “Has every person you ever met, fucked you over?” There was sadness in his eyes.
“Oh honey,” Sam sat up, straddling his lap and taking his face in his hands. “No, just the men.” You joke, but Marc frowned. “Sorry, that was a joke baby. No, I’ve actually been very blessed with my friendships, and with you and Steven and Chris, Teresa. It’s just a handful of shitty people.” Marc was looking over her shoulder, deep in thought. Sam turned his focus to her again “What are you thinking about, Starlight?”
“Just… all these years. I wish I had found you sooner. I wish I could’ve kept you safe.”
“Honey, you’re 10 years older than me. The ages wouldn’t exactly work out.”
Marc thought about this. If he had seen a 17 year old when he was 27, he wouldn’t have looked at her twice. “I promise, I wasn’t always alone. I had Chris growing up, Jess and Elena in college, now I have them and you and Steven. You’re here now, that’s what matters. I’m safe, I’m happy, I’m loved.”
Marc tilted her head to kiss her forehead, then her nose, then her mouth. “Always looking on the bright side, aren't you?”
Sam deepened the kiss, rocking her hips on his lap. “That’s my name, pretty boy” she felt him stir through her leggings
“How are you feeling, baby?” Her hours were a little different on break and he wanted to check in how she was feeling after a busy day. Marc and Sam had been going at it all after noon, and she fucked Steven this morning before work.
She kissed his cheek, “Like I’m a space bound rocket ship and your hearts the moon, and I can’t live without you.”
Marc pushed Sam backwards on the bed, pinning her by the shoulders. “Oh no, don’t you start quoting Eminem at me, if Eminem lyrics apply to our relationship, something is wrong.” He wraps his hand around her throat, not squeezing, just holding her.
She grinned up at him “Oh come on, it’s a cute line!”
Marc looks at her with a straight face. “Honey, he kills her in the song.” He dead pans.
She rolls her eyes as he kisses her temple and into her hair. “Okay, fair point. Surely, theirs a nice, romantic Eminem song” Sam teases sarcastically.
“Hmmm” Marc considers pulling her tank top down to kiss lower. “Maybe Love the Way You Lie?”
Sam grabs the hand on her neck, which Marc immediately removes. She takes the opportunity to wrap her legs around him and roll over, taking him with her. With Sam on top, she holds his hands to the bed. “He kills her in that one too!” Sam grinds on top of him, teasing him enough to feel him getting hard. She couldn’t help herself, he was so vulnerable under her; she started tickling his side.
Marc tries to smack her hands away, but she’s relentless.
“It’s only a threat, Brightside.” Marc picked her up by her waist, tossing her off him and towards the wall. He pinned her hands above her head and straddled over her knelt knees, preventing any movement. Sam tries to kiss him, to move her body on him, get a reaction, but she has no range of movement. Marc smirked at him, thinking he won. He started to tickle her. She wasn’t going to let him win. “Steven!” She calls.
“Don’t you dare!” He warns her, Steven was elsewhere in the headspace. He giggles, his free hand tickling her more in an attempt to make her stop talking.
She doesn’t listen. “Steven! Marc is threatening me!”
Steven took over, but he clearly didn’t buy Sam’s pleas. He kept her pinned to the wall. “What did you do sweetheart?” He smiled, but his eyes roamed over her body in the tight clothes.
“I didn’t do anything I swear!” but she couldn’t hide her smile. “Let my hands go, I have absolutely no ulterior motives!”
Don’t do it Steven! She’s trying to tickle me!
“How did he threaten you, darling?” Steven pretended to be sympathetic.
Sam pouted over-dramatically. “He said he was gonna tie me to the bed and set the house on fire, like the Eminem-Rhianna song”
Steven rolled his eyes “Oh god, Sam, I don’t know why you two insist on listening to that shit.” He kissed her, keeping her unable to do more than lean into the kiss, and he spoke out loud to Marc. “Well Marc, what’s your defense?” She started it! She was quoting Eminem first! Steven looked back at Sam, “Now sweetheart, Marc says you started it.” Steven pretended to chastise her.
She looked guilty. “Well… maybe…”
“That’s it, I’m banning Eminem!”
“No!”
“Too late! Eminem ban is effective today!”
“Steven noooooo” Sam wiggled, trying to get out of his grasp.
“Have fun with Marc, love.” He kissed her lips. “I’ll see you this evening.”
“Steven wait!” But he was gone.
Marc returned “Look what you did!” He scolded Sam, then turned to the side to yell at Steven. “If you ban Eminem, I’m banning Doctor Who.” Not happening mate.
“Marc noooo! Why do I have to suffer?” She pouts.
He cocks and eyebrow at her. “This is your fault! And yes, Steven, Doctor Who is banned.” Nope! I’m leaving bye! “Steven wait! God damn it.” He turned back to Sam, his arm getting tired. “You just haaaaaaad to get Steven!” He tried to act serious, but the smile was quipping up at his lips.
“You tried to tickle me!” Sam defended.
He scoffs, rolling his eyes “You literally tickled me first. And now” he smirked “I’m gonna punish you.”
Sam bites her lips, grinning. “Ohhhh, Marc!”
“Aht aht aht!” He shakes his head, fingers carefully running over her stomach. “Not like that, you like that shit too much.” Marc starts to tickle her side again.
“Ah! Marc, wait!”
He pauses, listening.
“If I can get Steven to lift the ban, will you punish me the way I like?” Sam pouted, making her eyes as big and innocent as possible.
Marc considered her offer. He finally dropped her arms, both arms wrapping around her waist and moving up to cup her breasts. “Hmmm… I could be convinced… How you gonna win him over though?”
Sam reaches down to feel Marc’s cock through the pants, making him twitch in her hand. “I think I have a few ideas…” She raised an eyebrow. “Don’t make me try Jake next.”
No way in hell was he letting Jake take over with her hand on his dick. Marc moans at her grip, throwing her back down to the bed. “Mmmm, okay, deal.” He pushed her tank top up, revealing her breasts to him. “You gonna be good for me, Brightside?” He took her in, spread out and open for him, her hair extra red in the burn of the setting sun. He couldn’t wait to pull it.
Sam gripped his ass in her hands, pulling his pelvis to grind on her. “I’m gonna be so good for you, Starlight.”
Marc kissed into her neck, smelling her hair. “I know you will, pretty girl, I know you will.”
@ahookedheroespureheart @kr-mlk @mt2sssss @cherryvalentine1
Reblogs are the only way these really get shared so it would mean the world if you reblog this, but also leaving a comments warms my lil emo heart!!
#marc spector fluff#marc spector fanfic#marc spector moon knight#marc spector smut#marc spector#marc spector oc#marc spector reader#moon knight fanfiction#steven grant#steven grant reader#steven grant is a whovian#marc spector listens to eminem#i wont be elaborating#tell me im wrong#moon knight fluff#moon knight smut#moon knight
27 notes
·
View notes
Note
Hi!
I just found your blog and I'm really enjoying it.
I was hoping I could get your opinion on something. I was raised a Jew while the rest of my family was raised Xian. Only one family member, the one I have to stay with is a religious zealot. He makes everything about religion all the time and he gave me a Bible for my birthday which I took as very rude.
What kind of boundaries could I set with him to limit how much he talks about his version of christianity?
Thanks
Hello!
It's a tough situation if you have to stay with someone who is very zealous. I would suggest sitting him down when you're both in a relaxed state (setting boundaries during arguments or when you're annoyed can lead to you getting dismissed out of hand) and talk about what is bothering you.
You can tell him that you don't feel comfortable when every conversation is turned into a religious discussion and you would like to talk about other things with him as well. It's important not to get defensive or accusing when setting boundaries, because that might cause him to feel like he has to defend himself, even if he was the one who overstepped.
A good way to do that is to use I statements. I feel _ instead of you make me feel _. When you talk over me, I feel disrespected, instead of you only care about your own opinions.
Stay calm, but assertive. Don't let him needle you into softening your stance, because he might push back. And he might try to cross those boundaries later to see if you'll go back on your word. It's uncomfortable, yes and you might be tempted to ignore one or two instances. But that only tells him that he can wear you down if he tries hard enough.
A lot of xtians believe they're doing you a favor when they preach to you, because in their minds they're showing you a better world/saving you from hell fire/teaching you god's love, so on. From my experience, arguing with them about whether or not they are actually helping is pointless. (Unless you're up to go into a theological debate with him)
Think about what exactly bothers you beforehand and what would be a realistic goal the two of you can achieve. He probably won't agree to never speak about his faith again, but he might agree to not talking about it while you are eating or relaxing.
I hope this helps somewhat and I hope he respects the boundaries you're laying out for him. Good luck!
Some articles that might help (and might explain it better)
59 phrases to help you set boundaries
How to set boundaries
The No BS guide to setting healthy boundaries
I Statements (this is for parents but still a good read)
6 notes
·
View notes
Text
so i’m noticing all the jedi defenders are logging on. uhhm. (long and rambling)
we don’t have to get extreme and say they all deserved to be murdered in order to realize they still got problems. the jedi as an organization is flawed theologically in my opinion — getting personal here but ive got plenty of experience with groups/orgs that read well on the surface (guardians of peace and justice) but aren’t structurally, ideologically or theologically sound (the jedi code for starters), that don’t always meet their adherents needs and loose sight of the most basic needs like companionship, love, proper mental health etc instead of enlightened platitudes. i have beef with how jedi view what they experience as the the all encompassing force underlying everything (largely in strictly in black and white, sure theres the ‘living force’ and ‘cosmic force’ but there’s a sharp divide because of their history with the sith). how they reject and try to suppress any view on the force that doesnt match their own (this is not exclusive to dark side stuff either)
dunno if this is still canon but im pretty sure the jedi automatically have custody over any force sensitive child in the republic? or how they send the kids that dont pass the exams to work camps under harsh conditions for the rest of their lives? are we gonna talk about that?
i see people saying “well millions of other jedi were able to follow the rules, why couldn’t anakin? there’s nothing wrong with the jedi! just because he couldnt obey” i mean hes not the only one to defect and/or join the dark side. the way people view the jedi that leave puts a bad taste in my mouth; they all have their own reasons for leaving and yes sometimes that means the jedi as an organization is at fault. i think also in terms of ashoka leaving the order that often it is the jedi or jedi counsel’s fault. it reminds me of how people view apostates or ex religious folks, as a threat to the image of thing they left and people immediately go into defense to shirk any criticism or responsibility. brings me to another point about the counsel: the jedi have deeply flawed leadership too and tbh that deserves its own post and in depth research because theres a lot.
basically like. dont go blindly defending a huge religious organization even if its fictional. if real life has taught us anything…yeah the good doesnt always outweigh the bad or sometimes even come close. holding organizations like that responsible is the responsible thing to do, noticing their flaws and talking about them is healthy. not to resurrect the author but im pretty sure george lucas intended for the jedi to be flawed. theyre not blameless or perfect at the end of the day, theyre not fascists or evil incarnate, they didnt deserve literal genocide either but they are intrinsically flawed and that causes problems and drives the plot. thats okay to acknowledge
#im a jedi critic actually!#some of the jedi defender posts are genuinely unsettling from a …certain pov and lived experience#idk man sure the jedi had some Points but they got a boat load of Problems too#jedism can be beautiful it can also be very fucked#thats the tea#given the choice now that im older id join the alliance rather than the jedi#i actually used to want to be a jedi when i was young bc who doesnt? but in my 20s now ive gotten a little more critical#lightsabers and being connected with the universe is still very cool though#but all the other hangups that come with it? i’ll pass#star wars#jedi critical#jedi#jedism
12 notes
·
View notes
Text
Saying and Learning
I write a lot about religion, because it’s relevant, because of my interests, and for defense in a world of religious abuse and manipulation. I am in no way against religion - in fact I am actually for it. There’s a human instinct to mix art, ritual, socialization, and connection with the world that I think is actually a good thing - or at least unavoidable so we best put it to use.
It’s just we humans kind of screw it up. I wish we didn’t, so I make my own small contribution to the world analyzing things. OK, sometimes just complaining then analyzing.
In light of not complaining as much, I want to share an interesting view of what makes religion useful, especially among people with different practices. There’s what religion says, and then what you learn.
I’m not exactly interested in what your religion says all the time, except when my theological interests arise. Anyone can say anything, write anything, have a vision (due to real things or a series of plant-based ingestions). People are saying things all the time and it can be bullshit. I know I bullshit enough - just look at the way I go on.
Besides, as we all know what a religion say and what people do can be pretty disconnected. For examples, just turn on the news and pour yourself a stiff drink - or get some plant-based ingestibles ready.
What interests me is what did you learn in your practice. Give me something that you learned, how you applied it, and how it worked for you.
It’s sort of science and engineering. You try something, you learn something, you use it, and then when it works you have a valuable lesson. Show me an applicable lesson and you have my attention because you got something out of it. You’re also being vulnerable by pointing to actual results you got from your religious practice, and giving me an opportunity to question them!
In fact, a person who has a religiously-derived lesson that really works is sort of having a secular experience. If the lesson has actual cause-and effect then it’s something they can share outside of their religion. It also makes me take their religion - or at least them - a little more seriously.
I might even take the “say” part of your religion more seriously.
It’s a practical view, of course, and one I think is quite helpful. I’m not going to write off religious and mystical experiences, I’m going to look at results. I might not agree with the metaphysics, but I am curious as to what happens. We can backtrack later on the structure of things.
This all comes from an odd series of youthful experiences where I careened from fundamentalism to mysticism to atheism and back to experimental mysticism. There were probably plenty of other detours as well, but it eventually went around a simple thing - did I get some useful results.
It’s a pretty good measure. I look forward to hearing your learnings.
- Xenofact
0 notes
Text
How did Heidegger not fall back in “ontotheology” that he criticized by virtually equating true Being with an apophatic God?
Yes, given his defense of the apophatic god of both Calvinism and the anti0christ of Hitlerism against Hegel/s Historic Gestalt. Connect the dots between Hegel’s Field of the Phenomenology of Spirt with Kurt Lewin’s political FOrce Field Analysis and you’s see what I mean
COMMENTARY:
don’t think I understand your question and, to the degree I might plumb the subtlety of your thinking, I think your premise is probably wrong.
Your question has help me clarify my own understanding of Heidegger in his context from my perspective. Newton, Kant and Hegel just blew up conventional wisdom between Aristotle and Spinoza. Both sides, idealists and empericists. Among other things, they achieved the synthesis of thought that had been put into motion about the time of Melchizedek and about 1400 years after the Boj of Job was writted. The Bible starts with the Book of Job and proceeds directly to the, which the theological code of law collided with the Roman secular rule of las arising from the ethical basis of Socrates’ example of civil law as the fundamental of a just society. The Romans had a better idea for the most efficacious of self-aware social contract. The critical path of mankind took a 90 degree re-orientation from the Law of Moses as the unique society that believed that history was going some place. Judaism was aesthe pleasing social contract, but, like the Pharoash’s, they were headed into the ozone, sort of like Jew Haley’s new tax burden on the American middleclass in the warfare of the January 6 republicans. The Roman Republic, which connected to the Roman SPQR at Socrates’ civic duty and was a creature of the roman secular rule of law and this form of government was headed to Sace, the Final Frontier. The Critical Pat oof both Jerusalem and the Roman Jesus ult originated with Geneasis 15:5 in terms of what we would call a Mission Statement, like Domino’s Mission Statement, which is my choice as the the best mission statement in the Fortune 500 and, unlike the Harvard MBA program, is based on the smal unit leadership model of the USMC. Jut like the Roman legions.
One of the things I love about Quora is that it allows me to think about things I didn’t have time for in colege. Philosophy and Literature, generally. And ROTC. I couldn’t major in ROTC, in literature because it was easy for me: I loved to read and I like things about the stuff I had read the way you do in the study of literature as cocktail party foreplay. One of the easiest ways to get laid in the 60s was to be able to discuss literature seriously with any woman and unloose the libido engaged. Getting a hard=on reading the Bible is a trope of the Total Depravity Gospel of the Pro-Life Jesus Freaks and, even reading Song of Songs does nothing for me and the Bishop, if you get my drift. But talking about scripture is how a lot of religious professionals get into the habit of sex with parishioners. Most of the good parts of sex happen in the personal psychosis and talking about literature, generally, can go straight to the ID.
What Hegel demonstrates conclusively is that the TULIP doctrine is an instrument of the anti-Christ. It is a subversive element of the strategy The Satan employed to trick God into letting The Satan to fuck with Job for no other reason that to indulge God’s pride of authorship in Job. Twice. And then God jump’s in Job’s shit a third time for impotence. Three time’s God betrayed Job with the same prideful boasting as Peter before he denied Christ three times before the cow crowed twice.
That, buy the say, is an example of the Holy Spirit at work, making the cock crow the second time on cue, if you are keeping score.
Jesus was sent by The One as atonement for fucking with Job 3 times. God promised Noah He wouldn’t destroy Israel by flood, but He didn’t stipulate against fire. Synagogue Socialism was God’s intent for Israel, al along This is the premise of process theology: The Book of Job is God’s promise of perfect Free Will to all born of woman. A consequence of Free Will is that we al emerge from magical thinking into innocent atheism, Hegel is correct about Reason: it is an acquired capacity of consciousness and begins with potty training, when pull-ups give way to the calibration of the Pucker Factor and self-actualization
Total Depravity ends when the mystery of Santa Claus is dispelled. . . The TULIP doctrine of Calvinism is grounded firmly on the Total Depravity of Eve without mitigation of the Cross. It is an excuse by the force of the anti-Christ to violate Free Will with the agony of the stake. The Total Depravity Gospel is a big part of the Jesus Inc business plan based on the Tax Free status of religious organizations as the primary money pump. Hate and Fear are big crowd pleasers in the Fire and Brim Stone branding of American Evangelicals. like Campus Crusade for Christ. .
Hegel bows it out of the water. Which is why people at Yale pretend they don’t understand Hegel when they understood Hegel exactly like William F. Buckley. It is part of the subversive agenda to conceal the shere analytic power of Hegel D-Day is a product of people who employed Hegel to wipe their butts by the numbers.
In any event, I have come to see Heidegger was engaged in a all out defense of Christianity. Hegel and Kant don’t reject Christianity in the least: they, in fact validate the natural divinity of humanity in the Categorical Imperative, with the metaphysically necessary atheism of Hume to ground Reason firmly on the unknowable essence of existence. His rules of evidence proceed from that existential benchmark. In an age when the TULIP doctrine was still hanging witches in America, thanks to the TULIP bias of thePuritans, it was safer to be a Skeptic than an atheist. It was an effective defense against the charge of heresy Kant and Hegel were accused of.
From my point of view, The Old Testament was an rough draft. Jesus was the final product process theology that began with Job. Jesus revises the Ghema to include Plato in the attributes of righteousness with “mind” and then He added the Atheist Clasue “Love Thy Neighbor as Thy Self”, the syntehsis of which abrogates the 624 Lws of the Mishnah and Talmud and justifies the Free Will of atheism as an an ethical behavior. KISS: Keep It Simple. God is perfectly content with atheist who live by the ethic of the Golden Rule, no matter where they heard it first. It is the Tao of the Logos.
All the glossary of Heidegger's inquiry from Being and Ime to his 1043 retranslation of the Greek before Socrates was chosen to refute Hegel., For example, the logos of Dasein was chosen as a deliberate allusion to John 1″1. An you can follow the trajectory of his narrative from an examination of the person in his environment although he didn’t employ that particular linguistic register which would develop out of his narrative. His most important insight alogh the way was the relationship of the mastrr carpenter to his/Her hamer. Again this is a transparent Reference to Jesus the Carpenter and the nature of allegory in Heidegger’s argument. Transparency is the operative word, The hammer represents the authority of the carpenter just as the transparency of the relationship of Jesus to the authority o The One is evident throughout His ministry and is established existentially by He Resurrection from the instrument of the Cross, the instrument of unambiguous due process of the Roman secular rule of law. The Death of Jesus is beyond confusion within the context of Hume’s roles of evidence Pilate’s report of his Resurrection to Rome is simply beyond the slight probability that it didn’t happen: Christianity would have happened without Mark 15, which is a consequence of the entry of the authority of The Noe into history as a consequence of a mundane bureaucratic method of systematic feedback.
The trajectory of logos from being in the world through transparency to metaphor basically validates the Figure of Hegel’s Historic Gestalt. Jesus, as the living, breathing authority of The One , is the logos at the leading edge of the narrative of the Gospel of Mrk. Go on YouBube and pull up an audio video of the Gospel of Mark and play it and wathc the dot of the time—stamp advance from left to right underneath the optics. That dot is the leading edge of the narrative drama paying out in your imagination and is the logos of Heidegger’s Dasein The logos is the point where Heidegger and Hegl are joind at the hp in regards to the divine nature of Jesus. And the Categorical Imperative is the chematic for the Bing in the world of the logos in an “all humans are created equal” andthe individual is creaed in the image of The one in that the gestalt of Human Perception reflects the Gestalt of the Mind of The One.
Heidegger was engaged in what Carl Rogers called “becoming a person”> and his narrative arc defines the epistemological intent of the US Army Ranger School. Heidegger’s problem, in answer to what I think your question infers, was that, by 1943, he was trying to justify Nazi Racial theory by pre=Socratic soial contract He was like Bart Ehrman, motivated by a desire to be popular with the Nazis who made fun of his theology. Like everybody after Newton, Kant and Hegel and before Kurt Lewin stumbled over Group Dynamics., they had no way of reconciling the idealism of Plato with the empiricism of Locke. It’s why linguistics became so important \. There was a great intellectual spasm between Spinoza and Locke and Kurt Lewin that made it possible to put man on the moon
So, in a very real sense, Heidegger was defending the apophatic god of of the TUPIP doctrine, but his ture emphasis, in his heart, was coincident with the irresistible grace of the logos of Jesus. If you understand Hegel like william F. Buckley understood Hegel, the moral confusion that plagued Heidegger evaporates. The thing to rememberis that all metaphor ultimately arils and that Paradox occurs where Metaphor fails. Heidegger’s Dasein runs logos straight into Paradox in 1843, which is exactly who Jesus was: Paradox. Heidegger was the New Age guru of Nazi Germany, but the simply didn’t have the linguistic register to complete the synthesis. His flirtation with Nazi Racial Theory was his defense of the anti-Christ of the apophatic god of Hitlerism.
0 notes
Text
Getting My Is an RV Ceramic Coating Worth it? To Work
03-10-2020, 05:38 AM # 1 Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: macomb Posts: 18 paint security worth it? Quote: @Riot_of_the_Month (on Sat, Sep 25, 2016 9:16:16 AM) ludacris wrote: If you look with the total image, you are going to view that there is actually simply a couple of little red dots that only are all the means in the middle.
are going to be acquiring brand-new jayco x23b this weekend, questioning concerning the coating security sealant used. I've obtained a new jaycrown, and I presume I may perform it for at least another year. For now, it's worth checking out. The only thing left is that after purchasing it, I don't actually need to have it anymore, and I can easilyn't even utilize it to keep my head and take my eyes away coming from the camera.
thanks __________________ 2016 dodge ram v6 3.55 2016 Jay Feather x19h 03-10-2020, 05:46 AM # 2 Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2017 Location: Wolverine Posts: 707 I bought a 2016 x254. A brand new 3.5" SLS (not the new 3.5", I'm thinking). Appears merely Fine. The SLS looks wonderful! Merely obtain a much better sell 4 or 5.5". I have not found any kind of photos.
I got it after it sat brand-new in their great deal for two years, having bought it in February 2018. In June of 2017, I was alerted that I was prepared to pick up my brand-new L2. I was additionally asked for the right deal with, and I possessed a simple reply delivered coming from them – talking to me for the correct telephone amount. I received an update stating that they were not going to provide it a 2nd opportunity, and really wanted to provide it back a few hours later on.
I decided not to go with the coating defense and the outside still appears terrific. The frontal and bottom doors look terrific too as effectively. I purchased the total array of different colors coming from the Urban Decay website. One of the ideal point about Urban Decay is it has been the very first to use in any type of colorway. Every different colors that I have made use of over the previous year has been excellent, and in the past 2, 3 and 4 years my face has altered.
I wouldn't bother BUT hang around for others to chime in that differ so you can easily get both edges of the tale. My experience in this area of mine has been pretty enjoyable - I have checked out books on religious beliefs, Judaism, Islam, and many various other things. I am not a religious person, therefore I possess my own perspectives about what they need to look like and what to point out. I am from a theological loved ones and I have functioned hard on a number of problems (i.e.
"Stateboy" (Formerly "36fire412") SW Lower Michigan 2016 X254 2012 Toyota Tundra Crewmax TRD 4x4 03-10-2020, 06:30 AM # 3 Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2014 Posts: 957 If you're ready to polish it on a regular basis, no demand. Just look at how lots of of these individuals are going to have had a clean or complete trip in a while, and after that drop those people down to zero.
I polish mine 2x/yr, normally when prepared up at the CG, provides me something to carry out as an alternative of sitting around all day and drinking beer. Supreme Auto Detailing 've never bought it, but I do observe after approximately five moments, I wake up on the bedroom and start massaging it carefully against it, just about taking me out. It then relocates it onto the lavatory and I have to store it limited against my palm for around ten minutes. It receives so hard that I can't even tell.
I polish the TT and drink draft beer. I play as a gamer, get drunk along with other participants, even participate in a video game of Magic that seems incredibly improbable to receive numerous people to play it in purchase. Some actually excellent decks have produced the activity a lot more effective, but the gamers involved usually only don't feel they're receiving sufficient play.". Lorenzo has long been an frank innovator against overreaching decks in reasonable Magic.
__________________ '08 Greyhawk 31SS Traded in 2018 MR2410RL Goodyear Endurance Equalizer WDH TV 2018 F150 FX4 SC 3.5EB TP/MT 03-10-2020, 06:45 AM # 4 Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2013 Location: Kansas City Posts: 1,697 Not worth it to me. I've acquired numerous autos which have all been operating and were performing the same thing.
It's just another technique for the dealership to create more of a income off the sale. It's like a money-making gift for their suppliers.". The organization design is well-known in Canada, points out Eric Bourgeois, who handles real estate financial investments outside of the U.S., where he's a companion at B.E. 's global purchases arm Global Advisors. In 2014, in the U.S., he mentions, "it was just one huge trait on the horizon.
Polish your rv once a year and it are going to be great. We sell our equipment at the very most reasonable expense including the most reasonable prices readily available. The only trait we do not suggest doing is to steer the camper to a car dealership. There are some local area dealers in your region that have a comparable standard. Therefore if you get one of these to use for a family picture shoot, there is actually definitely nothing wrong with creating it for the public, no need to do a lot else.
When we traded it in, the house siding on our 5 year old 26BH looked the very same as the time we bough it.the factory coating is alright without any sort of specialized sealants. The front and bottom is coated with a high luster red (some were repainted with red from the inside) at that point the leading different colors is dark along with no special seals. The facility of this coating is white colored with no hues to find. I'm only interested what the red is created of.
__________________ 2018 28BHBE 2017 Ford F250 XLT, 6.2 gasser 2013 26BH (traded) 03-10-2020, 07:04 AM # 5 Senior Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: Minnesota Posts: 8,775 There is actually not paint on a 23B. What I discovered was that this appears incredibly a lot like it was coated by 4 different managers and is no a lot longer functional (simply like the C7, 3D5, and thus on).
0 notes
Text
Julien Baker: “The Church made me feel powerless. Even if I was Mother Theresa, I would still be gay”
Singer-songwriter Julien Baker talks to Sarah Carson about God, queerness, sobriety, and why the confessions on her exquisite third album Little Oblivions make her cringe | iNews, February 18, 2021
She used to think writing music was her humanitarian obligation – to repurpose pain for a good reason.
... A few years ago, she started to wonder if the metric she had been using to determine right and wrong didn’t exist. “Imagine playing a game for two decades of ‘get into Heaven or go to Hell’ and then finding out that that game is made up. You just feel like, ‘I just wasted two decades of my life’.”
... She spent her early 20s on tour, and at the end of 2018, after three straight years on the road, and even more of being labelled as the gay, Christian, sober face of indie-folk and bearing under the pressure prove to others in those communities that those identities didn’t need to contradict each other, she stopped. She cancelled her tour dates and in the “slowness and the stillness”, she started to wonder: “why do I adhere to these beliefs?”
“It would be reductive to call it a crisis of faith,” she says, from her home in Nashville, “or re-evaluating my sobriety. Because, man, I just re-evaluated who I was – all of it.”
She paused her career, went back to college, and finished her degree. She tried drinking again, realising that her only interactions with drugs and alcohol were when she was very young, in traumatic circumstances, and that she’d chosen sobriety out of “principle”. Things quickly got out of hand, drinking cost her, and she decided that sobriety was the better choice after all.
As for her faith, she no longer wanted to be a spokesperson on a subgroup. “So many problems that I have in my psyche come from an American evangelical internalised understanding of the world. I now feel a little weird about having so zealously supported [Christianity] – as far as the institution of religion goes. I mean God? Sure,” she pauses. “But, yeah. I was very young and vulnerable and super green.”
... Does she still believe?
There’s a long pause. “I think I would define God differently. If I thought it were useful or possible to define God at all.” She chooses her words carefully. She says belief is a slippery notion. “I don’t think of things as so literal anymore. Maybe [I used to] because I felt, ‘I’m a person who believes and is queer so it’s up to me to be super well-versed in the language of scripture and theological argument’. Now it’s like, man… Don’t believe in Hell.”
She repeats. “Don’t believe in Hell. I can’t – I don’t think that’s real. I don’t even know if our understanding of the afterlife is accurate.” She laughs, and then shouts. “I mean, OF COURSE IT’S NOT! That’s freeing to me now, instead of terrifying.”
... Growing up in the church, Baker says she internalised – and perpetuated – a lot of homophobia, “feeling so much self-punishment and ostracisation and self-loathing.” ... “It’s hard to unlearn those things,” she says.
... “Because if I accept that I am queer and that’s an innate part of how I was created, but the church and popular culture and all the people that I see screaming at Planned Parenthood and advocating for the Defense of Marriage Act are giving me the information that something I cannot change is not right, well, why would God do that? It made me feel powerless, like I had no agency to be good. Even if I was f*cking Mother Theresa I would still be gay.”
It wasn’t until she went to college that she stopped thinking about “whether I was going to hell for being gay, or not. Now, more than just saying ‘I can be loved’, and that I’m square with my identity as a queer person, I’m square with my fallibility, and a lot more merciful with myself.”
Is she able to love herself? “It makes me feel insane, but I have to do a thought experiment multiple times a day. ‘If I’m a human being and human beings are deserving of safety and compassion and respect and dignity then I am worthy of all those things’.”
#julien baker#inews#i news uk#quote#article#interview#2021#little oblivions#sobriety#christianity#faith#god#cw alcohol mention#sry this is long lol i just like all these parts
321 notes
·
View notes
Text
We learned a lot about each of Jesus's followers from episode 3. A lot of what's been beautifully displayed/shown for us had a chance to be articulated and told to us here (in a natural way--great storytelling!). So let's break it down in a meta longer than what any of you asked for:
John - the themes explored in S2E1, which are very present in his gospel, are here again! He expresses awe at the fact that he--"a nobody"--is not only alive at the time of the Messiah, and not only sees Him, but travels with Him and is close with Him. That wonder at the personal, loving relationship we can have with God--that defines both John and his writings. But, we also see him give in to pride (setting up James to be better than the others, and his comment to "ask Matthew") and anger (accusing Simon, even if ostensibly in Matthew's defense, showed both anger and pride (a "you're no better than the rest of us!" mentality)).
Big James - we learn that he loves to study and has more theological/Torah knowledge than almost all of the group. He's a rule-follower, who loves the law and its structure (a foreshadowing of his eventual reluctance to accept Gentile converts who did not first convert to Judaism). More importantly, we see him acting as a moderating influence on the group. He comforts Mary when she expresses her insecurities about her past, and tries to get Simon to stop attacking Matthew. But, we also see how quickly he can become indignant and proud (telling Simon to sit down, instead of simply sitting down himself--"someone else must give in first, not me").
Simon - finally finally FINALLY we get to understand why exactly he's so mad and spiteful towards Matthew. He comes off as kind of a jerk half the time, but this moment (although heart-wrenching for Matthew's sake) helps to humanize Simon too. We get to see the roots of that protective, communal nature that will eventually make him such a good leader, and we see how deeply and passionately he cares for Israel. But we also see that he still struggles to accept those who are unlike him, and this will be a theme for the rest of his life, as he is called to minister to the Gentiles and told that all foods are clean. "Different" is something it takes Simon a long time to get used to. Additionally, his refusal to forgive Matthew is setting up his conversation with Jesus where he asks, "If my brother sins against me, how many times must I forgive him? Seven times?" (This was two-and-a-half times more than the required amount, so he probably thought he was going above and beyond.) I can just see Jesus knowing who Simon is thinking of and telling him, "No, you must forgive your brother seventy times seven times!"
Little James - we get to know a little about him! I just threw him on here since previously we haven't seen much of him and now we understand him a little more. We get to see him bond with Thomas, who's the first person we see really reach out to him, and we see his insecurity and his worry that Jesus will think less of him or change His mind about him. (What a relatable struggle!)
Thomas - what we learn about Thomas surprises us! We're told earlier that "being methodical is his thing" (S2E1), and he seems fairly shy at points, so we assume he must be like Matthew, or Philip. But he's not! He doesn't like the rules. He's somebody who questions things. (Shocker--he questions Jesus's resurrection too! Great set-up and character-building there.) He even says "I'd like to ask Him about that" (referencing Jesus losing His father, but showing that Thomas is someone who naturally asks and seeks). His innate drive to search out the truth is an asset, similar to Nathanael, but also similar is his hesitancy (and at times, flat refusal) to accept the truth because it seems hard to believe. It can also make him combative with those who have more faith, or more respect for the rules (there is some brief tension between him and Big James when discussing Torah, for example).
Mary - we learn that she is eager to learn the Scriptures, something that she as a woman was never allowed to do--and also that she feels she needs to relearn her Jewish-ness. She is ashamed of who she was before and felt that she turned her back on her true identity...sound similar to anyone?? It's no small wonder that she's sympathetic toward Matthew. Simon's outburst directly paralleled them (and Mary did not seem pleased that he used her past in that way). Mary feels that she has a lot to make up for, and has no expectations that Jesus will give her special honors or power--she is humble, and this is why she is more receptive to and understanding of His teaching, despite her lack of knowledge, than the other disciples are.
Ramah - she, too, is eager to learn; for her, this stems mostly from a feeling of never having been allowed to be anything but a dutiful daughter. Her worth was limited and defined by the men in her life. Now she is beginning to explore the possibilities of being defined by God instead, which is a distinctly counter-cultural move. This is why it's so important that she goes with Jesus despite her father's reluctance--she is showing she's willing to be someone other than who she's told to be. Instead, she'll be who she's called to be. But she is still insecure about her lack of knowledge and her inability to take initiative; she is more passive by nature, and even when recounting her imaginings of the Messiah, she doesn't imagine helping Him, just being rescued by Him. This sets her up as someone more able to be used by Him, as, like Mary, she has no delusions of grandeur, but she is still unsure of her role in the group.
Andrew - (this has been more "professional" so far but oh my gosh BABY boy I love him) we learn that he is considerate of others' needs and doesn't want to be a burden (through the "sorry" stories). He likes the rules and is comfortable in order, and things like apologies are meaningful to him because they show respect and consideration for the other person. This is why Andrew gets hung up on the fact that Matthew never apologized for his past and putting them in such a predicament--but John has a point when he stands up for Matthew. Although Andrew is doing it in a nicer way than Simon, both men are setting themselves up as someone who can forgive sin, ignoring the fact that Jesus has already forgiven Matthew (edit: what I mean by this is Simon is loudly excluding Matthew from the group because he's valuing his refusal to forgive over the grace Jesus extended Matthew. Andrew is nowhere near as extreme in this, and is justified in wanting an apology (naturally) but in jumping onto Simon's comments, he seems to indicate that he agrees with Simon's overall attitude--if you don't apologize, we won't accept you). It shows that despite his sensitive nature, Andrew is still proud, and feels that the respect he shows is also what he deserves. He will have to learn, throughout his time with Jesus, that the beauty of grace is that we don't get what we deserve. We are called to forgive those who persecute us, even if they don't ask for forgiveness.
And I'm sure I missed some (I can't even find the energy to cover Jesus's mother Mary, but I loved how they handled her as well) but even with just these we can see how the showrunners are taking such care to develop these characters in a way that their eventual interactions and growth in the later portions of the gospels make sense! They feel so genuinely real, and you can see in them the seeds of who they will become--seeds that Jesus had seen all along. Excellent, excellent work, and an even better witness to the transformative power of Christ!
#the chosen tv series#the chosen#it's so long that it took me like. a day and a half to finish this post#meta#my meta posts#quality meta seal of approval#not to hype my own post up i just put that on all meta posts so that i can find them#kay can i just catch my breath for a second#christianity#my christianity
73 notes
·
View notes
Text
[Genshin Impact Meta] Did Khaenri’ah “deserve” it?: Sin and Divine Punishment
SPOILERS FOR NEW ARCHON QUEST AHEAD
I want to preface this analysis/theory with the fact that I am not an expert in Catholic Theology, hell naw, but I am a Filipino lapsed Catholic who received a Catholic education for 15 years of his life. So while I am not necessarily qualified, I am driven, and I think that’s the main driver of any Genshin Impact meta, really.
With that out of the way, let me begin. Khaenri’ah, as was revealed in the 1.4 Quest To Be Reunited, was a nation that was destroyed and cursed by the gods. So many questions came to me, when this tidbit was revealed, but one question reigned supreme:
Did they deserve it?
Destruction, in the Bible, when coming from God, is very commonly brought forth as divine punishment for sin. “Khaenri'ah, huh? You sure know a lot! The legacy of Khaenri'ah is long gone, the sinners are all that's left, and they're not worth mentioning.” says Kaeya in his voiceline “More About Kaeya: IV” and this single line is very important because it ties Khaenri’ah and its people to the concept of sin, the concept of an act that goes against divine law.
Sin, in itself, is a vast topic, but for the purposes of this analysis/theory I will use the definition I learned in my Theology classes: there, in every person, is the radical possibility of human freedom. Sin is an action a human can do with that freedom, but it is an action that results in the loss of charity and the state of grace. The “state of grace” is exactly what it sounds like; the state of having grace. “The presence of this “grace” — God’s own life — restores us to God’s own “image and likeness,”” writes Father Michael Kerper in ParableMag. In simplest terms, being in a state of grace is being how God created humans in the beginning; in his image and likeness; good, virtuous.
So what did Khaenri’ah do to fall from the state of grace?
In “A Herald Without Adherents” Dainsleif remarks that “Khaenri'ah was a nation without a god — not because it had a god that died or abandoned them, but because it never had a god to begin with. It was a powerful nation, built purely by humans, an unprecedented flourishing and glorious civilization — it was the pride of humankind.”
Things we can extrapolate from this quote are the following: Khaenri’ah was powerful, Khaenri’ah was built by humans and humans alone, Khaenri’ah was “the pride of humankind.” Pride, defined as one of the mortal sins, is hubris. It is flying too close to the sun and falling into the sea as punishment. But what was Khaenri’ah’s sun, in this metaphor? Why did it fly, what was its motivation?
Before I answer that question, I want to posit that their Khaenri’ah’s sin of pride is linked to the nation’s desire for knowledge. The 1.4 Quest To Be Reunited revealed that Khaenri’ah was very technologically and alchemically advanced. They had the knowledge to create Ruin Guards/Field Tillers and also had the knowledge to create the art of Khemia, a type of alchemy that can create life itself. Knowledge is the key word here, and Khaenri’ah hungered to know more, more, more.
But is knowing a sin?
Bruce Birch writes in “A Theological Introduction to the Old Testament” about the account in Genesis where Adam and Eve ate from the Tree of Knowledge. He writes:
“This account [Genesis] does not imply that faithful life is against knowledge. It instead asks whether there are boundaries to human knowing that must be honored. How do we live in God’s creation in a way that acknowledges the limits of our humanness and refuses to play God by reaching beyond those boundaries in ways that threaten to bring death? There may be forms of knowing that we attempt for our own human pride and self-centeredness which exact death-bringing penalties.”
Knowing, when it goes beyond what has been deemed a boundary, when it threatens to bring evil, is a sin. So now the question is this: Was Khaenri’ah playing with fire? Were they planning on going past the set boundaries of what should and should not be known?
Here is were I go into full speculation mode.
Why did Khaenri’ah make the Ruin Guards/Field Tillers? The machines do not seem to be defensive, they seem like weapons of war. Were they preparing to go to war, then? If so, with who? I believe that they were going to wage war against the very beings that set limits in the world in the first place; the gods themselves. So going back to my question earlier, why did Khaenri’ah fly towards the sun? My answer is this: they wanted to kill the sun, to kill the gods once and for all.
Pride in its most volatile: deicide, the killing of gods.
The gods, somehow, caught wind of this, and did not give Khaenri’ah any time to strike first. The gods destroyed Khaenri’ah and laid a curse among all its people. Divine punishment.
All throughout the Bible there are tales of divine punishment. The Genesis flood narrative, Sodom and Gomorrah, the Tower of Babel. In all these narratives, God takes justice into his own hands.
Because he’s the only one who has the right.
We humans can judge an act as moral or immoral, but at the end of the day, supposedly, we must entrust judgement of persons to the justice and mercy of God. Sin is placed under not the interpretation of humans, but the interpretation of the divine.
Deicide is a lofty sin, but did an entire nation and its people, many of which I assume were innocents, deserve destruction, pain, and suffering?
What humans think doesn’t matter. The gods are the ones who gets to choose who lives and who dies.
And now,
Khaenri’ah is looking for revenge.
#genshin impact#genshin impact spoilers#genshin impact meta#the abyss genshin impact#khaenri'ah genshin impact
83 notes
·
View notes
Text
The New Government Will Soon be Tested
Unless something very unexpected happens, Israel will finally get a government this coming Sunday.
I’m conflicted. I voted for Naftali Bennett and I’m happy that he will be Prime Minister, albeit in rotation with Yair Lapid, of whom I am less fond. But many elements of the agreements that the eight parties that will be in the government have signed with each other are troubling. Although they have not been officially made public, a TV news program released what it said were the details.
One of the provisions is said to be that any PM who serves eight years will have to take a four year hiatus before running again; and during this period he can’t even run for the Knesset. I am in favor of limiting the term of the PM, but it can’t be done in a retroactive way – that makes it a “personal” law aimed at one specific individual. And we know who that is.
Another provision is that if the government falls as a result of a vote of no confidence, Naftali Bennett will not be permitted to be a minister in the succeeding government. Apparently this aims to prevent the scenario in which Netanyahu persuades some members of one of the ruling parties to vote against the government, bringing it down, and then Bennett jumps to join him in a right-wing government.
These provisions require changes to the Basic Laws that serve Israel for a constitution. One of the “interesting” things about Israel’s system is that they can be changed by a simple majority of the members present in the Knesset. It’s almost as if the Democrats in the US could amend the Constitution so that nobody whose initials were D. T. could run for President.
And of course I am irritated by the fact that the government will have 28 expensive ministers and 6 Deputy Ministers, far more than are needed to run the country.
I’m very bothered by Mansour Abbas (not related to Mahmoud Abbas of the PA). The so-called “change government” – “change” meaning “without Netanyahu” – couldn’t get 61 mandates without support from one or more of the Arab parties. Mansour Abbas represents Ra’am, an Arab Islamist party that shares the ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood (as does Hamas). His coalition demands have been mostly pragmatic – that is, he wants money for Arab communities. That in itself is not bad, but part of the deal is that he will receive half a billion shekels (about $154 million) that he can direct to “special projects.” That’s called a slush fund, and will be used to build a patronage empire to make him the most powerful Arab politician in the country.
He also received promises that laws against illegal building in the Negev will be frozen, and fines levied on such construction will be canceled. In recent years, Bedouin tribes have been increasingly squatting on land that belongs to the state or to private Jewish owners. There has also been a sharp increase in agricultural theft (of crops and equipment) and other crimes – especially the theft of weapons from IDF Bases – committed by Bedouins. Reducing enforcement will encourage more violations, which some say rise to the level of challenging Israel’s sovereignty in the Negev.
This government will be the first one in Israel’s history that does not include a single explicitly religious party – except Ra’am! Historian Efraim Karsh, in a recent talk, noted that neither Jordan nor Egypt allows representatives of the Muslim Brotherhood, which wishes to overthrow their states, in their governments. Why should Israel?
Many promises have been made to the left-wing parties that are part of the coalition. One of them requires a special note: there will be a “Department of Jewish Renewal” within the Diaspora Affairs Ministry, whose function will be to aid the Reform Movement in Israel. The likely Diaspora Affairs Minister will be Gilad Kariv, who is a Reform rabbi. I don’t have a theological objection to non-Orthodox Judaism; my problem is political: the Reform Movement in Israel is controlled and subsidized by the movement in the US, which doesn’t hide its desire to remake Israel in the image of a leftist America. Israel is not well-served by an organization that pushes the fantastic and dangerous idea of a two-state agreement with the PLO, or that appears to believe that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is like the American civil rights movement. It’s also waste of resources – the Reform movement has never gained traction in Israel, and is unlikely to do so even with government help.
There is a lot of very heated rhetoric coming from the Right – that Bennett and Lapid are traitors who have sold out the country because of their overweening ambition. That is clearly not the case. I do think they have the best interests of the state in mind. It should be noted that Bennett in particular has burned his bridges. If this government does not succeed, he is dead in politics.
At the same time, I don’t trust Mansour Abbas, the extreme-left Meretz party, or the only slightly less extreme Labor party. There are already rumors that representatives of the left-leaning parties have been in contact with American officials about resuming the “peace process.” It’s impossible to forget the way Shimon Peres and his associates blindsided Yitzhak Rabin with the Oslo process.
If you look at the ideologies of the various parties that ran in the recent election, it is clear that the great majority of Israelis prefer a right-wing government. If it were not for the question of Netanyahu, we would have a solid right-wing coalition of 70 to 80 mandates. Instead, we are getting a “unity” government that includes Meretz and Ra’am.
Israel is facing some serious tests now: last month, Arabs gangs in cities with mixed Jewish/Arab populations, incited by Hamas supporters on social media, went on a rampage that can only be called a pogrom, burning synagogues, cars, Jewish businesses, and Jewish homes, and beating (and even murdering) Jews. This accompanied the Hamas rocket attacks on Israeli cities. While news outlets tend to describe these events as “Jewish-Arab clashes” the Jewish part consisted mostly of attempts at self-defense where the police were unable to respond, and a comparatively small number of violent incidents perpetrated by Jews against Arabs. There are a huge number of illegal weapons in the hands of Israeli Arabs, including criminals, terrorists, and even ordinary citizens. Will the government have the courage and persistence to collect them?
The Biden Administration is pressuring Israel to limit the right of Jews to live in eastern Jerusalem. Will the government have the spine to resist the pressure?
Hamas is demanding the release of more than 1,000 Palestinians imprisoned for terrorism in Israel in return for two captive civilians and the bodies of two soldiers killed in a Gaza operation in 2014. Will the government give in and release those with blood on their hands, as it did in the exchange for Gilad Shalit?
We’ll know soon enough.
Abu Yehuda
18 notes
·
View notes
Photo
So this is St Foy, and here are some fun facts I have about her (I am slightly drunk, I will make a better, more sources cited version of this post later);
1) The mask portion of the reliquary is leftover from Roman pagan worship, which I think is EXTREMELY funny given how a lot of medieval fans of her spent time going “No guys, she’s NOT an idol she’s a reliquary!!!”
2) One thing I love about her is that unlike other saints (aka pussies) who’s miracles were mostly healing in nature. St Foy was reported as dropping ceilings on people for disrespecting her, smiting people, and generally pulling pranks, known around the region where she operated (Southern France) as ‘joca.’ There was also an incident where she healed a man from his blindness as a miracle, but then later took away his eyesight when he pissed her off. And then for the rest of the story she kept improving/decreasing his eyesight based on how well he was behaving. Her folklore also involved her resurrecting animals like donkeys sometimes, which was apparently something medieval people outside of her region considered funny/cringe. I assume this based on the fact that the monk who compiled her hagiography (Bernard of Angers; See: The Book of St Foy, trans. Pamela Sheingorn) was oddly defensive when recounting her rezing a donkey.
3) St Foy’s remains were originally dug up in Angers, and were kept in a monastery in Angers. Then, in the 800s, the monks in another monastery in Conques conspired to straight up Ocean’s Eleven her from Angers. From what I can tell (Again, I am getting literally all my info from Sheingorn’s translation of the Book of St Foy) this was because Conques was at risk of getting taken over by another abbey, who had forged a letter from an old french king (Pippin, don’t ask me which one, I’m drunk) saying they totally had the rights to Conques. Back then, for churches and abbeys and what have you, you could get a lot of legitimacy from saint relics. You got theological legitimacy, in that you had the clout of having holy relics in your church. But you also had economic security, in that pilgrims would travel to your church, and bring money in. Anyway, so Conques sent a monk to Angers to make off with Foy. And we know this because they straight up admit it in Bernard of Anger’s account (Again, Sheingorn’s translation, go look on JSTOR) Like. They justify it by saying the monks at Angers were stupid as fuck, and also St Foy did miracles to help their heist but. They literally Did That
6 notes
·
View notes
Note
Hey I adore your blog but... why do you constantly push Platonism on people? I noticed in how the reply to the Apollo thing and well, trying to push people who just don’t know into Platonism is kinda... eh? I’m sorry if this is rude but it’s concerning because it’s pushing an ideology.
Hi anon! I'm not trying to push platonism on people at all. I talk about what I know, and Plato has been by far the one philosopher that I know better, and I suggest his philosophy to people. If I were pushing platonism on them, I'd be dogmatic. Meaning, I would only acknowledge platonism as a theological standpoint for our religion, and that's not what I do at all.
Second, platonism is not bad. I really don't understand what it is with some folks in here that just avoid anything about Plato. Dude was by far one of the first to start really questioning state religion and establishing an ontological basis through which we can know the Gods. He was hella important back then and his ideas influenced a lot of other theological and ontological systems. I'm not trying to push him on people, but I acknowledge his importance both historically and philosophically. And should I mention too that when it comes to the defense of polytheism he's a really good source to argue from (I study philosophy, by the way, so these things are important to me because I constantly try to get polytheism acknowledged as a serious philosophical stand on academic circles).
Platonism has helped me differentiate between actual experience of the Gods and simple superstition. It has helped me understand the ways in which they are present in my day to day and has given me a better grasp of their nature. Most importantly, platonism is a perfectly polytheistic system.
I'm not sure I can call myself a platonist, because he's really hard to read, but I'm an enthusiast of his metaphysics. Sorry if that bothers anyone. I will still continue to suggest his work. If people don't want to read him then that's their choice, and it's not a bad choice, but I still think he's a good philosopher to start with, simply because he's the center of ancient theology. Many authors can make him easy to read.
And as I mentioned before, he's the one philosopher I am better versed on. If I was better at Pythagoras, Aristotle, or the stoics, I would suggest them more often. But I hardly know anything about Pythagoras’ metaphysics, I enormously disagree with Aristotle, and while I enjoy the stoics a lot, I'm not as well versed on their view of the Gods either. It's just a matter of practicality in the end.
So, to conclude: I don't want anyone to think I'm pushing platonism on people. Not at all. I have a couple of posts about Plato’s dialogues and that's the system I trust the most, as I have already repeated. So I speak from there. But I don't want anyone to feel like I'm forcing Plato's ideas on them by simply suggesting him. I will try to be more knowledgeable about other systems so I can add a bit of variety to my blog. Really sorry if anyone gets offended by me being more comfortable with platonism.
#hellenic pagan#theoi#hellenic polytheism#hellenic polytheist#hellenic paganism#pagan#paganism#hellenismos
71 notes
·
View notes
Last Seen Blogs
funnyfummy2
ふみぃ☆彡
ratnumber21
An Emo Lesbian Rat
uplltd
UPL Limited
nj-blogstoread
Untitled
zaynthebest
zayn