#I know the theology is bad I know this is not how any of this works at all | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

bread-tab · 9 months

Text

okay random 4am rant time, don't take it too seriously, but: people need to recognize there's a difference between "bad worldbuilding" and "worldbuilding styles you personally don't like."

bad worldbuilding is, for example: internally inconsistent, bigoted, or something else that messes up the plot or characterization of the story itself. sloppy. careless.

things that are *not* bad worldbuilding:

minimalism.

i've been thinking about this in the first place because i saw a post about the Murderbot Diaries a while back (don't know who made it, don't care; this ain't personal) saying the worldbuilding in those books is bad and lazy. to me, as an avid sci-fi reader and writer, that is clearly not true. but i understood why they thought this. the series uses extremely minimalist worldbuilding which intentionally withholds a lot of detail, in a way that is consistent with the (nonhuman, robot, depressed robot) first-person POV. this could also be a feature of the author's writing style in general—i haven't read her other works—but i wouldn't bet too much on it.

the signature of intentional minimalism is that there *are* details about the speculative setting—they're just doled out very thoughtfully and sparingly. the intent is to leave you a little hungry for more. it's to make you think very carefully about the details you do have. this is best suited to stories that already have elements of psychological and/or mystery plot types. the worldbuilding you do see should still be believable, internally consistent, and have interesting implications if you think about it a bit. but you are for sure going to have to think harder to get it.

if you're not in the mood, i will concede, a minimalist style definitely comes off as a bit dry. if you are in the mood, it's relaxing.

whimsy.

this is a big one for sci-fi fans in particular. see: the constant debate about whether any particular story is "hard" or "soft" sci-fi, and whether soft sci-fi is bad, etc etc. but worldbuilding doesn't have to be realistic to be good. you're allowed to have Jedi and humanoid aliens and time travel in your sci-fi. you're allowed to have historical anachronisms and astrology and po-ta-toes in your fantasy. whether or not they're silly isn't the deciding factor on how "good" these worldbuilding elements really are.

the key thing is tonal consistency. you've got a serious high-fantasy setting with its own strict, un-Earth-like theology and magic system, and you throw Santa Claus in there? yeah, that's not gonna land well. but C.S. Lewis can get away with that in Narnia just fine. why? because the Chronicles of Narnia are whimsical children's stories with a strong Christian/Western mythological influence already, and their central conceit is a crossover between the mundane world and the magical world. of course Santa can cross over too. it's whimsical, but it's not actually random. (and if you ventured into straight-up comedy, you could get away with random too. as long as it's funny.)

the unreliable narrator.

i don't have a good example for this off the top of my head (maybe Murderbot again? idk, i'm sleepy, fill in your own) but i'll tell you how to recognize when this is done well.

by definition, an unreliable narrator has some key misconceptions about their own world. so how do you tell what's going on as a reader? how do you know the writer isn't equally confused?

you connect the dots. solve the puzzle. in practice this is similar to reading a minimalist setting—but instead of just sparse clues, you also have a boatload of red herrings. you can catch some of these misleading details by comparing them to your real-world knowledge and saying "wait, this doesn't add up." other times, the false clues intentionally trick you by subverting those real world expectations.

the trick is in the consequences. regardless of what the narrator says, their actions should still have logical consequences. there should be things going on that the POV character doesn't know about. the character will be forced to learn and adapt their narrative because of these shifting circumstances. you can catch them in a lie. the inconsistencies themselves tell a story.

...

i'm gonna stop myself there because this post is long and i oughtta be sleeping. just. this is a distinction worth making. is it really bad worldbuilding, or is it simply not the genre you're craving today? learn the difference for your own sake. you'll have an easier time realizing if a story is something you'll find enjoyable to read, regardless of its actual quality.

#long post #writing #worldbuilding #media literacy #media analysis #the murderbot diaries #the chronicles of narnia #Christianity mention #rant #sleep deprived

235 notes · View notes

tanadrin · 3 months

Text

The Gish Gallop was a term coined I think on the 2000s internet for a rhetorical maneuver where to buttress an argument you provide a ton of low-quality evidence; that the evidence is bad means it should be easy to refute, but the very large volume means it will take much longer to explain why it's all wrong than it did to copy-paste a bunch of links, and to a certain kind of very naive onlooker, it looks like the galloper is winning--after all, the one interlocutor has presented a ton of evidence! The second interlocutor has to spend so much time bending over backwards to refute it! Surely the first guy is more knowledgeable and authoritative. You aren't going to look at all that evidence yourself, of course--who has the time?

But listening to Dan McClellan talk about the Gospel of John this morning, it occurs to me that I don't think this is disingenuous. Not entirely. I think this is just the style of argumentation a lot of Christians (of a particular religious flavor) are used to. And I'm not just talking about in non- or para-religious matters like evolution. This is how Christianity understands the Bible.

This week's Data over Dogma is about the theology of John, and why it is non-trinitarian (because the Trinity is a much later doctrine developed as a kind of political compromise, maintained only because it had state backing) and does not actually identify Jesus with God (the theological developments are more complicated here; but suffice it to say it was not at all a given that "authorized bearer of the divine name" and "actually God" were the same being in 1st century Hellenistic Judaism, and indeed the distinction between the two had developed in Jewish thought precisely to avoid the awkwardness of anthropomorphic figures proclaiming themselves God in some of the older sections of the Hebrew Bible).

The funny thing is, there are a ton of passages in John that get trotted out as proof texts that Jesus is God. There are very good reasons in the case of each one to doubt that that is actually the correct reading; but of course, if you don't know anything about Greek, all you have are modern translations produced under the assumption of the dogma of the Trinity--mostly for devotional readers of the Bible who would be outraged if the Trinity wasn't in the New Testament--and you have been raised in a cultural and/or educational milieu where it is simply a default assumption about the way the world works that the Trinity is a timeless concept that has been in the Bible from the beginning, it sure looks like one side is spinning up tendentious arguments based on silly semantics that have nothing to do with the religion you learned as a kid.

But this exegetical approach (really, eisegetical) is common to many topics in traditional Christian theology. There are a ton of passages from the Septuagint that the Gospels warp to be about Jesus, even though, in their original context, this doesn't make any sense; sometimes even they're based on obvious mistranslations, like having Jesus ride into Jerusalem on the back of two animals simultaneously because you don't understand appositives. And you can poke holes in any individual bit of this exegesis, but psychologically having a ton of low-quality evidence for a thing is a pretty effective bulwark against thinking critically about that evidence; for every individual argument you knock down, the person you are arguing against is probably thinking, "yeah, but what about all that other stuff," even if they can't actually name all that other stuff in the moment.

And it's not mendacious! This is the stuff of true belief; this is how you get breathless Christian commentators saying the Bible couldn't possibly be written by human hands, because it so perfectly predicted Jesus even in the Old Testament--and the evidence they point to is, to anyone not steeped in traditional Christian exegesis, and especially to Jews who have their own exegetical traditions, absolutely barmy. Like really pants-on-head crazy stuff. But of course even now it is still being processed, in many parts of the world, through a two thousand year old tradition trying to reconcile it all and to normalize it all, and--to bring it back to discussions of evolution on the internet in the 2000s--I can't help but think of all those people who talk about the experience of thinking evolution was so obviously nonsense, because all they were exposed to was the fundamentalist strawman of it. When they finally sat down and began to read about it on their own, from unbiased sources--often with the intent of criticizing it--they realized how distorted their understanding was, and how limited their supposed outside view.

(If there are general lessons to be wrung from this situation, I think it's simply "beware of echo chambers." Social consensus in a bubble can make bad arguments feel much stronger than they really are, especially if you are not exposed to the actual opposing view. Be on guard against mistaking "quantity of evidence" for "quality of argument," especially if you're not gonna evaluate that evidence yourself. Also all religious traditions are fundamentally eisegetical, because in order to keep holy writ relevant to the community its meaning has to be constantly renegotiated. So, uh. If you want high-quality exegesis, ask an academic, not a theologian.)

89 notes · View notes

queerstake · 2 months

Note

As a queer drawn to the faith and trying to deal with the messiness of entering into everything, I've been trying hard to read more of the Book of Mormon because I only have a very vague understanding of it's Whole Deal, but executive dysfunction, ADHD, and honestly, a million other excuses are making it very difficult. Are there any good resources for walking through the fundamentals? Childish but I feel like I'm disappointing the Lord if I'm not more on top of this.

Hi anon! I totally get it and yes, I can think of a few ideas!

If you're looking for ways to understand the BoM (or even just general doctrine) from more of a bird's eye view:

I hope you don't find this silly, but when I was a kid, the church published an illustrated children's version of the BoM that's obviously way quicker to flip through. It might be harder for you to find those exact editions I read as a kid if you don't have ready access to a church library, BUT I found this!! It's (almost) the ENTIRE BoM illustrated and summarized and it's online!

Looks like they put out videos too that summarize the BoM beginning to end. Here's a link to the video series. I haven't seen these, so I can't vouch for them, but they might be helpful! Similarly, there's a BoM in 60 seconds video you might find helpful.

If you'd benefit from a schedule, the church is currently studying the BoM in sunday school! The past few years, we've been using a study guide called Come Follow Me with weekly assigned reading chapters. I've actually been working on posts about CFM as they relate to queer mormon theology, but I haven't had much posted yet since I've been having a rocky start to 2024. As things improve, I'll be able to hopefully even establish a schedule on this blog!

I'm not sure if missionary lessons is something you're interested in at this point, and it's definitely not something you ever need to do, but the missionary lessons themselves are a pretty good doctrine intro if you're looking for just Mormonism 101 in a digestible way. The missionaries teach out a book called Preach My Gospel, which is available right here. You'll be interested in the lessons, which are found in Chapter 3. If you just scroll down, you'll see some of the links are labeled Lesson instead of Chapter--just click on those bad boys. And if you have any doctrinal questions, I'm always MORE than happy to talk about the church! You'll probably get a faster answer DMing me personally at @logans-mormon-blog, but I'll always answer asks here as soon as time permits.

If you're looking for easier ways to finish the BoM from beginning to end:

The BoM on tape. The church has an audiobook version available on the Gospel Library app and other audio apps like Spotify.

The Reader's Edition. If you can get your hand on a reader's edition, a lot of people find this is an easier way to plow through the BoM. What's special about this one is that it's formatted not like scripture but like prose, and it really does change the reading experience!

I don't know if this helps any, but I struggle with some of the same issues as you and I'm always bitterly disappointed when I'm not able to move mountains. If I had my way, I'd be the most well-read scriptorian of all time and this blog would be updated constantly. But life often doesn't shake out that way. I spend way more time than I want to with my brain entirely burned out of my head. So you're not alone, if that's any comfort. I think God gets it--he made our brains, after all, and knows how hard it is to wrestle with. It's easier said than done, but don't beat yourself up. God loves the both of us and he's the most perfectly patient person who's ever lived. He's not frustrated or disappointed with our efforts. Religion exists, in my opinion, to help improve and enrich our lives, not make them more challenging OR even to make them perfect if we only could just run fast enough. I too wish I could be more diligent and on it, but shit happens, right? And we're not on earth to be perfect, we're here to be happy and to learn. When Joseph Smith was translating the BoM, God told him "Do not run faster or labor more than you have strength and means provided to enable you to translate; but be diligent unto the end." D&C 10:4. We're doing our damndest, and that's all God even wants from us.

If anyone else has more resource ideas, please let us know!

-Logan

#queerstake #tumblrstake #lds #mormon

41 notes · View notes

teecupangel · 1 year

Note

can you IMAGINE a Burn Notice/Leverage type show where Desmond decides to leave the Brotherhood after the solar event (having miraculously survived) and now he's on the run from both Abstergo and his dad (just like old times)

but of course he can't just run and only look out for himself, not with three mentors in his head telling him to fight from the shadows (so not completely like old times)

so it's a problem of the week show where every episode there's a new glowing golden person who has something Desmond needs who also *just so happens* to have a problem that needs solving

it's bloodier than Leverage or Burn Notice though because while Leverage never kills anyone and Burn Notice only kills the problem to death like 10% of the time

Desmond solves a surprising number of problems with stabbing

even ones that you would initially assume could not possibly be solved by stabbing

(when you're an Assassin, every problem starts to look stabbable)

And the Bleeding Effect makes Desmond a one-man con team.

Need someone to act like a rich dude? Use Haytham's bleed for a posh British old money ("I think he's a distant royal family member!") elitist or Altaïr's bleed for an arrogant oil tycoon ("He might have connections to the president, are you sure you want to get in his bad side???"). Planning to style a piece of art? Ezio's bleed makes him become an awesome art critic or a great tour guide.

Have to pretend to be smart? Take your pick. Connor has deep knowledge of the flora and fauna of the United States. Altaïr has a more general vast knowledge of the classics, especially of philosophy. Haytham most definitely has an insight into the historical and political situations of every major event the Templar had a hand before and during his time. Other than the arts, Ezio's noble background meant he would have a more religious background so theology is his jam and he can say prayers in Latin. (And the image of Desmond pretending to be a priest then charming his way into where he actually wants to go is so blasphemous I find it funny)

In terms of Leverage, Desmond is pretty much Nate, Sophie, Eliot and Parker all in one. What about Hardison? Well, what use are all these fancy expensive gadgets and security when Desmond has the Eagle Vision? Sure, he can't hack to make cameras go on a loop but he knows the exact blind spots of the cameras. He doesn't know what the red wire does but it glows gold so he just pulls it out and, voila, lasers go offline. When everything else fails, create a blackout and use the darkness to hide.

Letting Desmond loose in 21st century without any support other than his Bleed as a 'third party' against both Abstergo and the Assassins and doing shady things for other people means he's gonna be a more chill version of Agent 47. Lots of pretending to be other people and, as long as he finally covers his scar with concealer and lots of makeup, he'll just be a generic white dude. Just knock out someone with the uniform he needs and he's good to go.

It doesn't even have to be a stabbing. There are a lot of things that can become poison if applied correctly.

AND if we include Edward in his Bleeds (which we can since AC Valhalla did say that he had a dream of being Edward in one of the audio logs), Desmond would have a more in-depth sailing knowledge together with Connor's knowledge which he could probably use to figure out how to sail a boat or a yacht if he needs to and... Darts. Which includes the OP dart: Berserk darts.

But he's not a 'gun' for hire. No, no.

Everyone in the 'underworld' knows of him.

And if anyone asks about him... All they would hear would be...

"You don't find him. He finds you. And when he does, that means he wants something from you and, in exchange for what he wants, you can ask for anything. It will never be money. What he will always ask will be something important to you. Only if you're willing to part with it will he grant your wish."

"That's why we call him the Djinn."

#ask and answer #i know djinn don't necessary grant wishes #but it was either djinn or fae #as a mythical creature that will do a wish but would do it on their own terms #con man desmond #third party desmond #ask and replies #assassin's creed #desmond miles #teecup writes/has a plot

366 notes · View notes

carrickbender · 2 months

Text

Sunday 7-

I had 2 drs appointments on Friday, one of which was a CT that was supposed to help figure out why I have so much pain in my right testicle(TMI). It saw nothing, so now we get to keep guessing. Boss told me to "take weekend off", but was doing the morning orders/teams call every day between 5-7, trying to fix stuff and do reconciliations. Glad they trust me with this, but wanna give a 'high five' to my imposter syndrome telling me im gonna get fired any day.

- had to take Henry to urgent care on Saturday, and it turns out he has the start of pneumonia. Wanna give a big shout out to the ARNP who told me she really thought he should just 'ride it out' after 10 days of awful coughing and that their kids 'were still in it after a month'. Yeah, the PA said there was no way he wasn't leaving without antibiotics. Made me feel like an asshole parent... he's on day 2, and already more of himself.

- I went back up there today for me, and I have pretty severe bronchitis. He put me on a different antibiotic, more steroids, refilled my inhaler, and actually listened to me. I mean, I appreciated his care and actual concern. Fun situation: while I was there, a tree fell across the powerlines and tripped off most of town, so they had to go to back-up generators. There was a hall full of people, in a brown out, that the staff were managing like pros. Seriously, we are lucky to have that place.

-after today, I have 4 payments left on my car. 4. I think we will wait till June, and then it's 4 door vehicle time. The lunabug is getting taller, and we want to go see my dad/stepmom in Eastern Wa in something that has space. Everybody and their dog has sent me one of those damn, "interested in a new car loan? It's OK to check your rate, and won't hurt your credit" messages and as soon as my credit union chimes in, I'm sure we'll have something to talk about.

- speaking of something to not talk about, I learned a new term and joined a subredit today called 'dead bedrooms', and yeah, checks out completely. I don't have a therapist yet, so it's not a bad sorce of info or me trying to figure out what I have messed up(apparently, yet again).

- so I had to stop at Walmart(yay for small business destruction by a corporate giant!) for meds/a few groceries and this dingus in an f250 with a WA st license plate celebrating wrestling decided he needed to back into a compact space that was in front of me. He almost hit the first car on the way in(who had to stop and back up), but then he literally backed his 'not a farm truck but a penis extension' into the compact space in front of me, and thanks to me backing up knowing he would have been sticking out if I didn't, he took 3 feet of my spot and his hitch was literally 4 inches from hitting my car. In my space. And that entitled piece of shit didn't even look to see how close he was, he just walked away like he was the king of backing up. Look, I have no problem with wrestlers, but the only one who matters in my life is John Irving, and I think he would have been sensitive enough not to be a shit bird like that! (Part 1 of 2 rant)

- I wanted to share a thought or 2 about something I've seen going about on here for a little bit, because I think i need to say avfew things:

I love that I have so many people I follow here who take stances for the poor, marginalized, POC, and other underrepresented communities-not just in a perfunctory way of saying 'I support you'; but quite a few of you are actually involved in helping bring about change and strengthening communities by being unselfish hands that help heal hearts- you inspire me to be a better person, really. As a person of faith, I see you doing the work that many faith leaders of old spoke of when they talked of when they said, "serve as you have been served, and love as you have been loved"- and seeing that faith in action, it has made me read more about liberation theology and revisit the works of the Rt Rev Bishop Desmond Tutu, Dietrich Bonhoffer, and Dr Martin Luther King jr(and of the later, 'Why I oppose the war in Vietnam' is just as relevant now as it was then). I thank you all for this inspiration and work.

But what I have really come to realize about myself is that I am a person of privilege. I am a white CISmale, straight, accessed a good education at a young age, had a huge extended family that helped raise me when my mom had me at 17, have never had to worry about my gender causing me to be looked at differently, have a good job(for now), have access to clean water, don't live in a food desert, and save for the fact that I understood discrimination at a very young age thanks to my last name, I know that I have lived a mostly privileged life.

But there is one privilege I will never take for granted, and that's voting. And yes, I don't always vote my conscience because at heart, I am a democratic Socialist. But I always vote in my local and state house election because it is in places like your local school board or your city council where you can stop the spread of groups like 'Moms for Liberty' or any of the other neo-fascist organizations that seek to change education or change for the worse how cities deal with their population experiencing homelessness. If I stay home from these elections, I feel like I'm spitting on my great grandmother's grave(whose name I found on the voting roll of the first year that women could vote in Basin, Montana). I feel like I'm not being a good parent or a community member for sticking up for my sons right(or other kids rights) to read books in the school library that have a rainbow(let alone letting kids see representation for non-traditional families that are just the same as everybody else!). So please, if you're feeling crappy about the election, this right here is the biggest way to affect change if you don't know where to start or affirm.there is something you can do to really make a difference. Don't see enough representation of POC on your city council, especially in multi-ethnic communities? Hear a trans voice that would make for a great representative for all people? Fill in those boxes, act locally, and get those folks elected! It works if you work it!

I hear a lot of voices talking about Joe Biden these days, and I feel numb and angry about a lot of things that have been done in our names too: I hate HATE what is happening in Gaza(PBUT); I hate our support of Saudi Arabia and the proxy war in Yemen; Our jaunts in Zaire and Jordan; I hate that we are no closer to universal Healthcare, but I understand that that road and others lead through a Republican congress. I love that child poverty is declining, but programmes that were designed to make this a reality are sunsetting. We have a barbaric and truly archaic policy on immigration, and every time(that's not hyperbole, either), every goddamn time a good bill has been proposed to deal with the issue, the bill has been met by the xenophobic forces on the right and their deep pockets fueling the media and it is destroyed out of fear. And let's not forget student debt forgiveness, the continued dismantling of public education by states like Texas and Florida, Our goal of dismantling of the prison industrial complex, the protection of reproductive healthcare, and the dire need for nationwide police reform.

Yes, our laundry list is long, but it is full of necessary things that need to change or be codified in order for a great change to happen for generations and the continuatonof this great experiment called the U.S.A.

And for all of this and more, I ask: where are the leaders of our generation on this? Where are the ghosts of John Lewis, of Paul Wellstone, and of Shirley Chisholm? Thankfully, our leaders and the ghostsbof their forebearers are there- they are doing their best, and thankfully we(those of us on the progressive side) are represented by POC women who will go to the mat for these issues and more, being inspired by those who came before them. But the more that I think about it, it's time that we offer an ultimatum: we'll give you our voting block, Joe. We'll help bring along the majority of the 9 million new voters who are coming of age this year, so you will have a supermajority with which you can put forth truly transformative legislation. Sure, you'll get us- for now. But if it's businesses as usual, if we are not knocking over the tables of the money changers, and if we are not investing more in programmes of social uplift than we are for the military industrial complex, then we strike. Not in 2028, as one of my absolute favourite people on here suggest, but in 2026, in early summer. Because it is people like me, those of us who have know privilege and continue to know it, who are finally waking up to the truth that we need to do the work. We need to do the heavy lifting. I'm willing to make that offer, and I hope I'm not alone, because there either needs to be a change in the way our political system operates, or we walk away and start our own political entity. I hope I'm not alone in the way I feel, and I hope that we can all make the proposition. We have the leaders, we have the people, now it's about courage. It's time.

But for today, if you can pull the lever for democrats nationally, I totally get it. But consider what I said about voting locally, and in local races and elect people who represent your values. It matters.

- ok, rant over: if you made it this far, know that I love you all and I hope this week brings good things for you. Remember what Pete Seeger always said: "Take it easy, but take it". Much love yall!

#me #this is my life #exhausted #singer songwriter #henry adam #washington state #in repair #democratic socialism #radical feminist safe #POC safe #we are one in the spirit of reform #time to dream it up again #Spotify

20 notes · View notes

thrashkink-coven · 3 months

Text

I’m going to say this once. This might piss some of my followers off but I see that as a positive. If this post makes you mad you are more than free to unfollow me.

I’m going to try to make this as clear as possible.

I do not hate Christianity, I do not hate Yahweh, and I do not hate Jesus. I do not love Christianity, I do not love Yahweh, and I do not love Jesus.

These things exist in a realm that is outside of my influence. To be entirely honest, I don’t care about Christianity, or the ideas of Christianity. Christianity has no place nor impact on me, my craft, or my life.

Don’t get me wrong, I love history, theology, and the symbolism in all religions. I find the way that humans rationalize big concepts to be fascinating. I have nothing against Christianity as an existing religion- it is one that I do not subscribe to or necessarily agree with- but I do respect it as a faith. I equally respect Hinduism as a faith, as I respect the Jewish religion etc. There is too much beauty in religion to discount it completely.

If you are one of those Luciferians that croaks on and on about how much you hate Jesus and God, please just unfollow me or block me I don’t care. I don’t enjoy seeing anti-religious slander as much as I don’t enjoy seeing anti-pagan or anti-science slander. I am not a fan of echo chambers in any regard.

It is extremely obvious to me every time I see a rant written by someone who has never actually read the bible. It is frustrating, not as a Christian, but as someone who just loves theology, to see uneducated people taking so boldly about a religion they are not a part of and book they have hardly read the first page of. There are thousands of legitimate things about Christianity that deserve criticism, but if you are not educated on the topic, don’t talk so boldly about it. This applies to all things. I’m not going to make a post about how evil Muslims are because I hardly know the first thing about the Muslim faith. I’m not Muslim and I have absolutely no context for the things I’d be talking about. It is not my place whatsoever to cast those judgements because my judgements would be born or ignorance.

Listen, I understand that Christianity has basically fucked the entire world. I get it. I understand that Christians have stollen and bastardized basically everyone. I know. I understand that many of us have vengeful rageful religious trauma and have absolutely no tolerance for Christianity, I understand. I know it’s triggering. I know that Christianity is not in need of a defender from pagans, the point of this post is not to defend Christianity.

My point is that endlessly putting energy into actively hating the concepts of a religion that you’re not apart of is a waste of time. In my opinion that’s not liberation, your mind is still trapped within the confines of Christianity even if you’re mad about it, even if you think you’re rebelling against it- if you’re trapped within it, you can never effectively be free from it.

If your mind is still playing with dualistic concepts of good and bad, hell and heaven, then you are still a slave to the dualistic mindset, and that is the mindset that establishes Christianity.

I say this as someone with an extremely redically Christian family that kicked me out of my home at 18. I have literally been black sheeped, and I have no contact with any of my family because of their extremism towards religion. I have sat and listened to my parents tell me that I’m going to hell for being queer. I have been physically and emotionally abused. I was made homeless before I knew how to take care of myself in the name of that God. That God and his people have inspired many tearful nights.

I have many many reasons to be an avid hater of Christianity, but that wouldn’t do anything to satisfy me. Hating God and Jesus isn’t retribution for the abuse I suffered. More hatred and anger being thrown into this miserable mix isn’t going to set me free. True freedom is being able to say “this doesn’t serve me,” and being able to actually just walk away and find something that does.

My devotion to Lucifer or any of my deities has absolutely nothing to do with the Abrahamic God. I don’t worship Lucifer to “get back at God” and I don’t care how he feels about it whatsoever. It has nothing to do with him or anyone beyond me and Lucifer.

I personally do not worship Lucifer as Satan or the Anti-God. Nor do I use him as a placeholder for that God, or worship him as one would worship the Christian God. In most contexts, Yahweh and Christian forms of worship are completely irrelevant to me. I don’t think that I’m being such a bad little sinner when I pray to Lucifer instead of Yahweh. That idea implies that I still subscribe to concepts of heaven and hell, purity and sinners. Yahweh is not my concept of good, and Lucifer is not my concept of evil.

Many occultists and Luciferians that I am friends with have told me that at some point in their devotion, Lucifer has told them to essentially “forgive God”, and it always absolutely baffles people. I have had a very similar experience with him.

I challenge you to forgive God, but not in the Christian way.

I’ll say something very controversial that many Luciferians probably won’t agree with, and that’s fine.

I don’t think that Lucifer hates Yahweh. I don’t think he has any real negative opinions of him in general. They are two different entities with vastly different roles and purposes. The actions of their followers are not a reflection of their true nature. I don’t think the Sun hates Neptune, and I don’t think the river hates the moon. I severely doubt that Venus hates Yahweh, I believe that at one point human politics created an idea about good and evil that exists only in the minds of men. I don’t think that Mars hates Jupiter, and I doubt that Pluto hates Saturn. I don’t think these concepts translate on a universal scale.

When Lucifer says to “forgive God” I don’t think he’s talking about the colonial empire of Christianity that has stollen and destroyed, and I want to make it clear that I’m not telling you to forgive Christians and their terrible acts- you have no obligation to forgive these humans.

I think he’s talking more about the concept of God as The All Father of Goodness.

You don’t have to like him or his people to forgive him, to say “you’re not for me” and free yourself of his grasp. To allow yourself to define what goodness is to you outside of Yahweh and his predetermined rules.

Forgive God, but not in the Christian way. Do not forgive to give way to further abuse. Do not forgive because the abuse was okay. Do not forgive him because you’ll go to hell if you don’t.

Forgive to free yourself of the emotional trauma bond you have with this God, and then go find something better. Walk away with your grace.

I don’t think about Yahweh or his people most days. I don’t reserve any energy- be that positive or negative- in my mind or heart for him. I forgave him a long time ago, and now I walk away from him comfortably and happily knowing that I am headed towards something greater.

I don’t hate him, I don’t love him. I don’t need to feel these things about a God that is irrelevant to me.

#magick #witchcraft #occultism #pagan #demonology #paganism #witch community #witch aesthetic #witchblr #grimoire #luciferian witch #theistic luciferianism #satanism #theistic satanism #deity witchcraft #deity work

20 notes · View notes

stirringwinds · 6 months

Note

I know it was a little while ago but your Portugal always cracks me up so bad, especially when he's lowkey trying to get a certain Dutch man beheaded 😂. I am so in love with the way I can see the cheekiness and cunning under the god-fearing, oh so very modest uniform and facade. One look at him and I'm thinking ohh he is so naughty, but I can also understand why Kiku would have him around. Same here Kiku, that little shit has charm even if he is a lot more transparent then he might know.

nedpan has me by the braincells lol, so naturally I'm biased towards it over portpan but I'm definitely here for integrating in portugal-japan interactions too because there’s so much history there 🤔 im still thinking about his characterisation, but I envision port back then as someone whose smile can feel like the sun—but then you realise it’s all sharp teeth. he’s a shark in a priest’s garb, and Kiku knows it—so I feel like Kiku doesn't trust him at all, compared to how imo, he eventually comes to trust Ned/Jan in a way that's pretty emotionally intimate due to very unique circumstances. And that difference is interesting to think about. 16th century Kiku's very much the sharp-eyed shogun-type of figure who enjoys falconry in his free time but is also preoccupied thinking about his enemies (foreign and domestic), given the nature of feudal Japan then. that sort of calculation and tight-fisted attitude towards trust is to a great degree, also the baseline norm for helltalias dealing with each other in the 1500s and 1700s. It’s not too different from how Yong-Soo regards Kiku, for example.

So, Kiku's always guarded whenever Port is around especially given the successful proselytisation of Portuguese priests, but he's perfectly amenable to dealing with and learning from him. for guns (and castella cakes and konpeito), as any pragmatic 16th century Japanese warlord does. Port can be a good and charming salesman and company. he probably does have more of that polish and charisma compared to Ned's rougher, blunt straightforwardness, and Kiku does recognise that. both as a 'well he's an entertaining presence at times' but it also makes him more watchful.

16th century Kiku is also frankly, an ambitious bastard himself: a fair amount of the firearms used in the Imjin War against Joseon Korea and Ming China were either Portuguese-made or manufactured in Japan based on Portuguese designs. Port's 'HELLO have you heard of our lord and saviour' got a very cool 'if you are not going to talk about the shipment of arquebuses i ordered, then we are quite done' from Kiku, but i think Kiku did learn a fair bit about Catholic theology all the same, given the significant numbers of Japanese converts and the long history of Japan studying foreign ideas (Buddhism being an import from India via China and Korea). So yes there’s quite an interesting history. Ambitious, pragmatic and shrewd shogun vs proselytising, charismatic catholic ship captain is the dynamic.

#hetalia #hws japan #hws portugal #hws netherlands

30 notes · View notes

cheeeerie · 11 months

Text

I hate summer I wanna go back to school SO BAD.

Ninjago College AU.

COLE!

He’s a Performing Arts Major with a Geology Minor :)

He doesn’t have many classes with the others, but he has had a couple classes with Nya since their minors have some overlap

Roommates with Jay, suitemates with Zane and Kai

Constantly getting in trouble for breaking quiet hours because he keeps listening to abba at 3 am

His dad is a dance professor. Cole tries desperately not to take any of his dad’s classes but he had to for his major eventually, he spends the entire time pretending he doesn’t know his dad while Lou is like “EVERYONE LOOK HOW TALENTED MY SON IS!”

Gets the most out of his meal plan. He’s in the dining hall three times a day.

Part time barista. Pretty good one too, but he keeps sleeping late and getting fired

KAI!

Sports Management Major with a Primary Education Minor

He has to take a lot of business classes for his major and he HATES all his business major classmates

He has classes with Lloyd, since his minor is Lloyd’s major

Roommates with Zane, suitemates with Cole and Jay

Every time there’s a health and safety check he sends Zane to the door to stall while he hurriedly hides all his lighters and candles. Never gets in trouble with the RA because Zane is great at stalling.

Takes FOREVER in the shower, Jay is always pounding on the door cause he has to pee. Kai repays him by banging on the walls when Jay and Cole are being way to loud in the middle of the night.

He coaches kids karate part time, plus whatever odd jobs he can find, since he’s paying for all of this himself

JAY!

Electrical Engineering Major, Digital Arts Minor

Has classes with Nya cause they’re both in engineering, plus he shares a minor with Pixal so they have a ton of class overlap.

Roommates with Cole, Suitemates with Zane and Kai

Cole and Jay have their beds bunked so Cole has room to dance and Jay has room for his gaming set-up. Jay streams, and very often Cole will just be practicing choreography in the background.

He doesn’t have a job, but he still has all the best stuff cause his parents send frequent care packages. They make sure to include goodies for everyone else too, though :)

Gets in trouble for having contraband CONSTANTLY. Do you know how many times this man has almost burned the entire dorm hall down in an electrical fire??? At least four times. Plus he’s always loudly playing video games during quiet hours.

lives on instant noodles, which he makes in his hot pot, which he is definitely not supposed to have

ZANE!

Computer Science Major with a Philosophy Minor

Has classes with Jay and Pixal because of the computer stuff, plus some classes with Lloyd because their minors have a lot of overlap.

Roommates with Kai, suitemates with Jay and Cole.

He has a lot of cooking supplies that he isn’t supposed to have, but he’s very careful so he doesn’t get caught.

Makes THE BEST dorm food, has the gang over for dinner pretty frequently.

Makes dean’s list basically every semester, man writes a hell of a paper

Sleeps like a rock, so Jay and Cole being loud all the time doesn’t bother him. He doesn’t even notice Kai banging on the walls and telling them to shut up.

He and Kai don’t bunk their beds, they each have their own side of the room. Zane’s side is very organized and well decorated. Kai’s side is a trash fire. Zane doesn’t touch the trash fire he just gently nudges is to Kai’s side of the room.

Whenever Kai stays the night somewhere else Zane washes Kai’s sheets. That is the only time Kai’s sheets get washed.

He has an on-campus job in the library

LLOYD!

Secondary Education Major with a double Minor in Psychology (because he’s traumatized) and theology (because his grandpa is god)

He’s actually still 17, he graduated early because he hated high school and wanted to be with his friends who are all older than him

He lives off campus in an apartment with his dad and step-dad, but the commute isn’t far and he stays the night at Kai and Zane’s dorm a lot

He has a lot of classes with Kai since they’re both in education, plus his theology minor and Zane’s philosophy minor have a lot of overlap so they have classes together too

He’s such an over achiever, he’s in the library studying day and night

He wanted to get a job but his dad said no because he already works too hard in school

He’s group baby. He once convinced the gang to take him with them to a party but they all just ended up baby sitting him the whole time. They ran a full investigation on every drink he was handed and stood behind him like body guards every time someone talked to him

NYA!

Mechanical Engineering Major, Coastal Environmental Science Minor

Roommates with Pixal, I haven’t decided if they have suitemates/who it would be

Her and Pixal’s room is decorated PERFECTLY.

She has a lot of classes with Jay, plus some with Cole because of their minors are both natural sciences. Her and Pixal have a ton of classes together because they have the same major

She has a pet fish in her dorm named Nyad :) Kai thinks that name is stupid

“You can’t name your pet after yourself” “I didn’t name her after myself I named her after Nyad” “who you’re named after” “…listen here you little shit—”

The boys stay the night at Nya and Pixal’s all the time, sometimes even all five of them at once, but they never get in trouble. Nya thinks it’s because she’s so sneaky.

It’s actually because Pixal writes most of the RA’s papers.

Nya is on the school’s swim team, but she hates it. She’d quit if she could, but she’s there on a swim scholarship and she can’t afford to pay for school herself.

PIXAL!

Mechanical Engineering Major, Digital Arts Minor

Nya’s roommate

She’s constantly making things to make everyone’s lives just a little easier

She’s like the princess of the tech/engineering department, every professor wants her as a TA soooo bad, both because of who her father is AND because she’s insanely talented

She’s surprisingly artistic. Well, it’s a surprise to her, no one else is surprised, they just expect her to be good at everything at this point. Makes some very pretty things in the design classes she has to take for digital arts

She doesn’t need the money (her father is seriously filthy rich) but she works at a mechanic shop part time for fun. Whatever money she makes she uses to buy things for the rest of the gang

President’s list

Fuck I accidentally hit the poll button and it won’t let me get rid of it ummm uhhh

#ninjago #lego ninjago #pixal borg #cole brookstone #zane julien #jay walker #nya smith #lloyd garmadon #kai smith #this isn’t very interesting is it #oh well posting anyway #ninjago au

134 notes · View notes

imperial--orthodoxy · 4 months

Note

How and why did you leave Catholic Church to embrace Orthodoxy? Pls I'm sorry if it's a bad question, I'm catholic and I'm passing through a faith crisis.

It's not a bad question, there's no need to apologize. I had to sit on this ask and ponder how to respond.

When I switched to Orthodoxy, it was less of a crisis of faith on my part and more of a...wow, "Orthodoxy really does answer everything I had questions or misgivings about in Roman Catholicism". There wasn't any doubt in the basics, after all. So for this reason, I don't know what to advise without knowing more about why you're going through a crisis in faith.

That said, when it really comes down to it, the Liturgy is first and foremost what drew me to the Orthodox Church. It is difficult to explain without a shared experience, but if I had to try and put it into words, I'd call it a glimpse of the kingdom of heaven on earth. Everything else, the theology and the more earthly aspects sort of just....fell into place, but it would never have called to me without that crucial, most important form of worship.

25 notes · View notes

givemearmstopraywith · 27 days

Note

As a lover of god, I’m curious. what are your thoughts on Satanists? 👀

they're cool! i am not a huge fan of anton lavey. this isn't true, i actively really dislike him the same way i dislike, for instance, martin luther, on both personal and "theological" levels, although laveyan satanism isn't theistic so i'm not sure you can call it a unified theology. in terms of lavey as the originator of satanism, i think his thought was unsound and more sensationalistic than genuine, more out of a desire to rile people and poke fun at major religions than any particular sense of moral or ethical reasoning. i see this in his exploitation of his daughter in particular. i empathize with zeena lavey, i feel for her, and have always been interested in the paralells between her relationship with her father and that between aleister crowley and his daughter lola.

i like that satanism acts as a foil to religion by calling attention to its hypocrisy and the overprivileging of christianity, especially evangelicalism/christian nationalism, over other faith practices. but i have the same criticism of satanism that i do of martin luther and christianity. if your ideology can be coopted by nazis, its bad ideology. of course this is a very generalized assessment since almost anything can be coopted by white supremacists and nazis for their own ends, but lavey was lenient on white supremacists who found empowerment in satansim, and i never liked that much. i mean, he did admit that satanism was just ayn rand philosophy with ceremony and ritual, so im not surprised.

i have less of a unified thought on theistic satanism because of how splintered it is- i don't really believe in the christian notion of satanism, or any particular notion of satan in general. i don't know enough about it to have any useful comments to make. i've met lots of satanists i like (one of my closest friends was a satanist when we met), and in terms of politics i think the satanic panic of the 80s never died and was a concerted effort to disguise much worse abuses within christian institutions and family units by playing off religious anxieties.

there is little comprehensive philosophical or theological thinking on satanism, but as much as i can venture it in a tumblr post all belief, in anything, even only the self, is still ultimately a belief in the same thing i believe in. the way i understand God he is as present in his absence as in his evidence: so in my mind, as long as we are all working towards ultimate good (even personal good) rather than purely self-service without due interest in goodness that transcends what is dictated by authority to be "good" in an attempt to be absolutely good, which i think many satanists ultimately do, we all believe the same intrinsic thing. God is matter, thinginess: the fact that God is matter sanctifies the world as part of him. but i also see God as absence. God's absence is also holy: what many christians might call profane is then also holy. if i love God, i love his absence too. satanism seems to me, an intentional manifestation of that absence: religion without God, or a very christian-style theism without the trinitarian godhead, and frankly both are a valid undertaking that i genuinely think should be considered as potentially fruitful by people in my own field (christianity desperately needs to get humble in how it deals with comparative theologies and interreligious dialogue).

#replies

15 notes · View notes

philosopherking1887 · 1 year

Note

Re: Capitalism vs Calvinism (you make a solid point, btw), do you have any thoughts on why the two are conflated as much as they are?

For context, here is the post that this is about.

There are sort of two ways to answer that question:

Why is it natural or tempting to conflate capitalism and Calvinism? That is, what are people getting right when they do this?

Why do people make the mistake of conflating capitalism and Calvinism -- what leads them to get it wrong?

The answer to the first question is pretty obviously that the culture of capitalism in northwestern Europe was strongly conditioned by the culture of Calvinism. They grew up at the same time, intertwined with each other. The Commercial Revolution, people other than Jews (and much more numerous) who were allowed to charge interest on loans (which Catholics couldn't), etc. It also has to do with the Calvinist doctrine of predestination and how people's success and industriousness in the world were taken to be signs of God's favor -- not that you could earn it, because God's grace is given by His free will alone, but it was supposed to be an indication that God liked you and was allowing you to be virtuous (which you couldn't claim credit for on your own).

The ideology we think of as capitalist, about how people are naturally lazy and selfish and need to be manipulated with the right incentives into serving the public good, is originally Calvinist: it views human nature as irretrievably fallen without God's special grace (as I learned in a very interesting talk on Hobbes recently). You can't teach people to be truly good, to recognize the good and desire it for its own sake (as Catholic theologians thought you could, even though fallen human nature made that difficult); all you can do is set things up so that it's in their interests to do the things you (the community leader/ ruling authority) want them to do. @squeeful's tags on the instigating post nicely sum up this pessimistic view about human nature: #it's a viewpoint that people are inherently flawed #not in like a human way #but in a 'if given free time they will Sin'

So, given that people will Sin if you give them any leeway at all, you have to make sure you're taking up all their time with Something Productive. If they're working all the time, they won't have time to sin; if they're always thinking about work, they won't have mental space to think about sinning (which is just as bad as sinning, according to the Calvinist worldview); if they're "wholesomely" exhausted from work, they won't have the energy or inclination to sin. But of course people are naturally lazy and hate working, so how do you make them do this? Make it in their interests! Reward them with wealth and praise if they work all the time! Punish them with starvation and shame if they don't! The culture and worldview of capitalism follow from the culture and worldview of Calvinism.

OK, so, what about the second question? Why do people attribute this crap to capitalism alone rather than tracing it back to its deeper origin in Calvinism? Well, probably because capitalism is blatantly all around us, while Calvinist theology isn't -- at least, not obviously. We don't have stern bearded guys preaching at us about how God finds us loathsome and repulsive and it's only by His infinite grace and mercy that any of us are saved from the eternal torments of Hell that our degraded, sinful nature so richly deserves. Calvinism has been pretty thoroughly secularized in our daily experience, to the extent that we might think we're not religious at all, even when our mindset is profoundly shaped by religious ways of thinking.

But what I wanted to get across is that the dependency is asymmetric, not just in the sense that Calvinism came first and modern capitalism as we know it developed later, but in the sense that Calvinism could have given rise to systems and practices other than capitalism (and sometimes does), while capitalism as we know it (probably) couldn't have developed without the underpinnings of the Calvinist worldview. That's why you can see the Calvinist way of thinking even in anti-capitalist Social Justice movements, especially in the US, whose dominant culture has been profoundly shaped by Calvinism (from the English Puritans, the Dutch, and some proportion of early German immigrants). That is, you still get the view that people, or certain kinds of people, are inherently sinful (racist, sexist, homophobic, bourgeois, etc.); that the only way to not be contributing to evil forms of oppression is to be actively working against them at all times, including purifying your mind of all oppressive, bourgeois ways of thinking; and that even your moments of rest, idleness, and pleasure have to be justified in terms of the aims of work: your 'self-care' is so that you're refreshed to keep working more effectively for liberation, or else you're taking your joy in defiance of the systems that want you to be miserable, so it counts as its own form of resistance. And these subcultures, like OG Calvinism and its capitalist offspring, also rely heavily on the mechanism of shame to get people to be constantly policing their thoughts, words, and actions, ever-vigilant lest someone catch them Sinning. After all, people are sinful, so you can't rely on their natural inclination toward the good; you need to leverage their impure desire for acceptance and the good opinion of others.

(Figuring out how this cultural strain relates to the neo-Rousseauian "humans are Good, only the corruption of capitalism makes them evil" ideology in the online Left would be a further project... I suspect there's a tension between the official line and the way people actually think and behave subconsciously; and I also suspect there may be a bifurcation between the groups of people who are regarded as Fallen, on the Calvinist model, and those who are taken to represent the prelapsarian naturally good state of being.)

#calvinism #capitalism #social justice #philosophy #religion #cultural commentary

71 notes · View notes

twistedtummies2 · 1 month

Text

Gathering of the Greatest Gumshoes - Number 14

Welcome to A Gathering of the Greatest Gumshoes! During this month-long event, I’ll be counting my Top 31 Favorite Fictional Detectives, from movies, television, literature, video games, and more!

SLEUTH-OF-THE-DAY’S QUOTE: “You attacked reason. It’s bad theology.”

Number 14 is…Father Brown.

Originally created by author G.K. Chesterton, Father Brown is one of the most famous detectives in English literature. Having said that, I must immediately make a confession: I’m not THAT well-versed (perhaps surprisingly) with the original “Father Brown” short stories Chesterton wrote. I’ve read some of them; specifically, I’ve now read all the ones collected in the book “The Innocence of Father Brown.” (My favorite is “The Invisible Man,” which, for the record, has absolutely nothing to do with anyone named Griffin). However, beyond that, I’m not especially familiar with the original writing. I also have not seen either of the two English-language film versions I know about (one played by Walter Connolly, another by Alec Guinness), both of which were based on the story “The Blue Cross.” And I should also immediately state that I have seen only one episode of the TV series starring Kenneth More from the 1970s, which I know has been highly lauded in years since.

So…since it seems like I am unfamiliar with nearly EVERYTHING that has brought this character into popular culture…how DO I know Father Brown, and why is he so high on the list? Well, because there is one version of the character and his universe that I am VERY familiar with: the most recent TV series adaptation of the stories, which began in 2013 and is still going strong today (with a new season coming this year). This show, simply and appropriately titled “Father Brown,” stars Mark Williams (whom many may recognize for playing Mr. Weasley in the Harry Potter films). While it frequently changes a LOT from the original Chesterton stories, the show is still EXTREMELY good. In my opinion, it modernizes the stories in a way that is pretty decently handled, so that even if you haven’t read the originals, you can still get a lot out of what’s being given to you. The spirit of Chesterton’s work is still intact. Much of what I say here will be informed by Williams’ portrayal of the character, which is why I wanted to make all this clear right off the bat.

Father Brown is an example of what might be called “the busybody detective,” or even more appropriately “the accidental detective.” What I mean by this is that he’s not in any way officially tied to the police; in fact, the police frequently see him as a nuisance, who gets in the way of their work and often makes them look like fools. He also never makes a career or a proper hobby out of his detective work. Being a detective just…kind of happens to him. Father Brown, on the surface, is a simple and humble local priest; a God-fearing, God-loving man of the cloth who is charitable, good-hearted, and at times seems sort of fumbling and shambolic. He’s not someone, therefore, you’d expect would make a great sleuth.

A great sleuth, of course, is exactly what this mild-mannered Catholic priest is. Father Brown’s rather simple demeanor belies a steely will, an even more steely faith, and a very cunning and alert mind. He typically ends up playing detective not so much out of a desire to one-up the police or some obsessive desire, but simply because he notices something amiss and begins to question why that is. His greatest assets as a sleuth can be summed up as two simple attributes: common sense, and, above all, human empathy. Father Brown doesn’t necessarily look for fingerprints or psychoanalyze criminals like a forensic profiler, but simply notices things that don’t make sense and then tries to make sense of them. He uses his understanding of people’s personalities, looks at their character traits and ideals, and uses them to his advantage; if he feels it isn’t in someone’s nature to shoot in cold blood, he follows his instinct, and he’s usually proven correct. If he sees someone showing some weakness or vulnerability, he latches onto that to try and sway them. He tries to redeem his enemies more often than he tries to ruin them. Contrariwise, this man also knows when NOT to trust people. While he’s noble and forgiving, Father Brown isn’t a pushover. In fact, the Williams version is revealed to be a war veteran; he’s seen some action (and horror) in his lifetime. This, combined with his devotion to the confessional booth, means that he knows very well that people are not perfect. With that said, despite being a religious soul, he isn’t superstitious, and tries to be tolerant of others with different beliefs. In short, Father Brown seems to understand that good people are good people, and tries to find the good in everyone, even those he seeks to defeat. Whether you’re spiritual or not, he’s not only a good detective, but arguably a good role model: I think a lot of us wish we had a Father Brown in our lives.

Tomorrow, the countdown continues with Number 13!

CLUE: “Are you with me? You might even be way ahead of me.”

#list #countdown #favorites #best #top 31 fictional detectives #gathering of the greatest gumshoes #number 14 #father brown #mark williams #g.k. chesterton #literature #tv #television #mystery #murder mystery

12 notes · View notes

applesjuice · 2 months

Note

WAIT, does that mean that Kieran/Akari still captured legendaries?!!! When they're hearing Cinhtya talking about myths and legends of Hisui to see if there is a semblance of truth, and Akari just goes "Oh, ye." And just, sent Palkia/Dialga, darkrai (Lord of nightmare?!!!), GIRATINA (the fu-) and plenty others?!

...GOD?!

Pfffhehehe, it's just funny to think of the reaction the Poke-world could have to these XD. (Legend AU)

Yeah! They completed the pokedex and helped Laventon get the ball rolling in his research since everything got derailed thanks to a certain someone. I don't think they'd bring the legendaries back with them since like, they're literal gods who are worshipped. They captured them but they still do what they want, like showing up to work on the farm randomly or appearing to Kieran in dreams like they're the Virgin Mary descending to bestow a prophecy and its just Palkia or whoever wanting some attention. Kieran feels very bad for Giritina, and projects a bit on it like they did with Ogerpon, but I genuinely think Kieran is just a very empathetic kid.

The clans worship their specific pokemon like gods with carved figures in their homes that they make daily offering too. At some point Kieran makes one for Giritina and puts little hats on it when it gets cold and leaves berries and treats as an offering. Maybe the big baddie of the Distortion World is that way because nobody ever gave it a hug or tucked it into bed we dont know!

Kieran and Dawn in the future: maybe the real gods of creation are the friends we made along the way

I think there'd be pockets of people descended from the clans in modern Sinnoh who still worship Palkia or Dialga in their homes. Cynthia's family grew up with the church of arceus (and we all know why) but she loves theology and has so many questions because surely that one photo of the Big Three frolicing on a farm is some Ancient Alien level hoax and Kieran is just like: on no they just really like soybeans. I think they were competing to see whose plot got the highest yield.

Diamond and Pearl still happened so Dawn has current "ownership" of the Sinnoh legendaries but they have zero sense of time on a human scale so they'd be stoked to see their buddy Akari again but. But like, morally and ethically can you bring god to a pokemon battle? They'd probably enjoy battling for fun on the occasion but they're not normal pokemon and can't be treated as such. Im my mind there's a parctice of every generation or so since pokeballs became a thing, someone has to catch whichever legendary to keep it safe from your average nutjob drying to take over the world. Pokeballs are technology they're not forever and after a while they degrade and stop functioning. Or at least in my mind that's how it works. It would likely make sense to like. Just bury a legendary's pokeball somewhere and let it live its best life while there's ensurance for like 30 years some rando can't catch it.

Sorry this went on a tangent about my thoughts on religion in the pokemon world, but I see the Legendaries as being too Other and beyond our understanding to stick around on someone's team. I consider the various protagonists who catch them have gained their favor so they will pop in during their lifetime to visit because humans and pokemon need eachother to get stronger. Legendaries imo are just different in that they need exposure to that humanity to keep them grounded and present mentally. They have PHENOMENAL COSMIC POWERS, but itty bitty understanding of humanity, or like, the pokemon equivalent of it.

So yea Kieran doesnt bring any legendaries back with them but they'll still ask to see them occasionally to see if they're doing ok.

#ask #not art #legends arceus au #kieran praying to arceus like its santa: dear arceus please let me upgrade my arcphone #i think i take legendaries and the various religions based upon them too seriously

12 notes · View notes

santacoppelia · 9 months

Text

The (long) meta about Good Omens, the Ineffables and free will

I know I wrote a very brief sketching of this ideas as soon as I finished watching season 2, but right now I have some time and the idea has been marinating, so I decided to come back to it.

I studied almost all my life (even university) in Catholic schools, so Theology was one of those things I had to study a whole more lot than I would have expected (being the agnostic I am, it is).

I won't bore you all with a lot of theory, but one of my favorite things about those theories was understanding the difference between "human dignity" and the value that spiritual creatures (such as angels in all of their presentations) have. One of those differences, that has already been mentioned in season 1, is the possibility of free will.

"Free will is reserved to human beings, it makes them distinct from any other creature and is a fundamental aspect of their dignity. Being able to perform free actions is a distinctive trait of humankind". (Quotes because these are not my words, but a very liberal translation from a catholic site I'm not going to link because why would I?)

What about angels? Well, according to one of those classes I took 20+ years ago, they are created, as humans are, with a personality, emotions, and are even more intelligent than humans. However, as free will is a special gift of grace to humanity, angels are created with sort of a "one-use ticket" of free will: they can choose to dedicate their full existence to honor God, or they can choose to FALL *cackles*

That, apparently, didn't happen in the "Good Old Days" (before Luzbel). But legends... I mean, theological studies, say that Luzbel "filled with Pride" and after that some angels decided to follow that same path... and, oh, well, you get it. One of my favorite teachers even said that it was not Pride but Envy what made Luzbel fall: envy for humans and their apparent protagonism (Rings any bells from ep 02 01?)

So... What does this have to do with Good Omens, with our Ineffable pair, and specially with season 2?

For starters, our humans:

Free will was what Adam Youg used during season 1 to stop the Apocalypse altogether. And what Anathema decided to use when burning the second book of Agnes Nutter prophecies.

Free will is why Nina and Maggie tell Crowley "you and your partner have been messing around in our lives... We're not a game, we're real people".

Now, to our Ineffables.

Well... Crowley is an authentic master of free will. We have seen him "thinking by himself" all over the series: he is creative, decides when to obey and when not to, chooses his own clothing, decides when and who to help. In that measure, he is absolutely different to any other creature of the spiritual realm.

Aziraphale, on the other hand, started as a standard angel: intelligent, compassive, perfectly aligned with the instructions that come from "above"... But after meeting Crawley (intentional "a" here, I'm not counting their first encounter), he starts "second guessing" his orders.

This season was a full journey around how being with Crowley has given Aziraphale the possibility and the ability to explore free will. If demons and angels have sort of a "simplified moral code" (obeying is all there is, "like bees", sides are clearly labeled, good kind do good deeds, bad kind do bad deeds), having free will implies undestanding all the complexities of not having such a clear cut, simplistic moral.

The Job story represents the start of a real change in status for Aziraphale -questioning the real impact of their actions, being able to feel real empathy for human suffering, and even discovering the pleasures of the flesh... when eating *winks*. It is also the only time we hear God in this series, and... God gives no answers. Not even to Job, who receives a "when you are able to do what I can do, then you can come question me" (now imagine how the happy, friendly redhead angel who created beautiful nebulas was received when he arrived with "some questions and suggestions" during Creation)

"The Resurrectionist" minisode builds over these ideas. Crowley teaching Aziraphale that notions of "good" or "bad" are not as clear cut as they seemed while not having real free will, how to put a decision in a human scale and not in a divine one... And ends with Crowley putting up with the consequences of his good actions, which he is trying to minimize while talking with Aziraphale nad before being taken. The next we will know of Crowley will be in the "Ducks have ears" scene, when he asks for holy water.

So... Crowley has the gift of free will. Has had it since the beggining of time, has defended it both from Heaven and Hell, and has been trying to share it with Aziraphale for the last 6,000 years, with medium results.

That's one of the reasons why the last exchange between them is so, so hurtful. After all that has happened, Crowley expected to find Aziraphale more than ready to "break the chain" and excercise his own free will, together. Aziraphale, however, is ready to "make his own decisions", but not yet to totally leave his old morals behind. And he decides against Crowley, and doesn't notice he is deciding against himself there.

That would have to do with his alignment (and their character development arc) but I'll leave that for a further meta, as I've been writing for HOURS here.

#good omens spoilers #good omens season 2 #good omens #good omens meta #good omens analysis #good omens s2 spoilers #anthony j crowley #aziraphale #crowley x aziraphale #aziracrow

43 notes · View notes