#economics for monotheists | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

illegiblewords · 9 months

Text

SOME ILLEGIBLE RAMBLES AND REFLECTIONS: ON GALE AND MYSTRA

I've been on the fence about whether to make this analysis specifically, but after seeing a few other discussions floating around figure it's worth offering another viewpoint in case it resonates.

These analyses in particular are very subjective and offer an interpretive option more than anything. I might allude to discussions I've seen elsewhere that I have different views from, but different views don't automatically mean personal dislike for me. Life would be boring if we all thought the same way, you know? Anyway. Hugeass post ahead, proceed at your own risk lol.

One of the arguments I've seen cropping up recently is the idea that romance between gods and mortals is inherently unequal, abusive, and problematic. I am very much of the mind that Mystra abused Gale. The developers at Larian have stated that every companion in Baldur's Gate 3 is a victim of abuse in some capacity. Some of my favorite romances over the years have been between gods and mortals. Mystra/Gale is not one of those. I think blaming the divine/mortal dynamic for any abuse misses the point. Moreover, it absolves Mystra of a huge amount of personal responsibility in the abuse she committed. I think it makes the abuse focus on what she is rather than who she is, how she looks at others, and how she treats others. I reflected on the divine/mortal pairings I've enjoyed compared to the dynamic between Gale and Mystra. In every divine/mortal romance I've loved, the god found wonder and saw a kind of power they lack in their mortal partner. This power stems directly from their mortality. There are experiences and perspectives specific to being mortal that are invaluable. The god doesn't relate to those experiences and perspectives the same way. The god always needs not only humility but equal respect for their mortal partner in some capacity. Additionally, the god acknowledges that being divine does not equate to omniscience. This is not a god according to the monotheistic definition. It's closer to an immortal being who excels in a very specific area and has certain responsibilities weighing on them. The god sees the forest but may no longer see trees, while the mortal sees trees but may not see the forest. There is value in what is ephemeral and fragile, just as there is value in what is permanent. The god and mortal need to bring balance to one another in the sense that the god helps the mortal find comfort in a bigger picture while the mortal reminds the god what it feels like to be small, vulnerable, and intimately connected to the world/other lives. A healthy divine/mortal romance requires recognition of multiple forms of strength, intelligence, and value. That very, very much is not what Gale and Mystra had. Another layer to the 'divine/mortal romance is always problematic' argument ties to questions of power imbalance. I would argue that even among human beings--power imbalance always exists. Human beings are not identical or interchangeable with one another. One partner might be brilliant at math and runs finances where the other partner would be lost. The other partner might be brilliant at people and can navigate social situations the mathematician would feel helpless in. One partner may be physically larger or stronger than another. The other partner has the full weight of social/legal support in most conflicts. And this isn't touching on issues relating to mental health, physical health, economic stability, societal issues, etc. People are multifaceted. None of us excel at all things, find power in all things, or suffer all things. We each have our own pains and triumphs. We each have the ability to hurt each other if we want to. If we wanted to avoid any power imbalance in favor of 1:1 equality, the only answer we'd have would be to literally romance ourselves . And that's 1) narcissism 2) lonely 3) sad. Just ask Raphael.

But unhealthy power imbalances must exist, right? And there is a horrible power imbalance between Gale and Mystra. I would just argue it has more to do with them personally than because of Mystra being a goddess. I'd argue that we should be looking at Gale and Mystra not as mortal and god or man and woman, but as people above all else with their own experiences/motives driving choices throughout the relationship. Examine the ways they look at and treat each other versus themselves. If Mystra was the mortal and Gale was the god, if Mystra was a man and Gale was a woman, I would not change my stance regarding where abuse was committed. Imo people get too caught up trying to make sweeping generalizations instead of focusing on the individuals and how they specifically interact. This in-mind, what are some examples of unhealthy power imbalance as I define it?

A character is physically and/or mentally incapable of participating with proper awareness of the situation, as a partner with equal respect and sway within the relationship.

A character is dependent upon the prospective partner for survival and cannot refuse them without fear of retribution or withholding necessities to survival.

A character is being systematically isolated and made dependent on their partner for all socialization and self-worth.

And so on. Hopefully you get the gist. What I do want to draw attention to though is that these examples offer room to include a variety of circumstances or dynamics within their umbrella. Ex. An underage character with an adult would easily qualify for the first criteria, but an extremely, non-functioningly drunk character would also count. So lets have a look at Gale and Mystra's situation in particular again.

Gale has, by his own admission, been involved with the Weave for as long as he can remember. He sees Mystra as synonymous with the Weave, and with magic. These are things he explicitly states within the game. Gale also has notable reactions to say, saving Arabella from being killed over the idol of Silvanus or Mirkon from harpies. With Arabella especially, the idea of being treated as unforgivable or deserving death for a youthful mistake is something he talks about as if he has some experience with it. And while this is a video game with limited character models, I'm going to estimate that the tiefling kids are probably somewhere between nine and thirteen. We know Gale has been stuck largely alone in his tower with the orb for a year or so. The orb specifically is something that happened when he was an adult, but the way he talks about Arabella with implicit personal identification of facing older authority figures as a young person who didn't know better... I don't think this is the orb alone troubling him. Minsc also has a dialogue option where he talks about how in Rashemen, boys with an affinity for the Weave were hidden away and he suspects it was to keep them from being preyed on by Mystra. Not men, boys. I've seen people try to argue that Mystra would have been indisposed/dead and unable to take advantage of Gale when he was a kid due to the broader Forgotten Realms timeline. I'm inclined to say in this instance, with all evidence in the narrative pointing to a particular arc and theme for Gale and Mystra's relationship, it's more likely that the timeline was something Larian chose to fudge in the interest of storytelling opportunities. The alternative would be that none of those dialogue exchanges meant anything. The narrative is weakened if those moments are made meaningless, and the characters become flatter and less credible without them too. If it comes between trivia and the emotional core of a story, I'd argue the core wins. Gale claims to have slept with other people before Mystra, but that a romanced character is the first person he's slept with after her. I personally suspect it wasn't a lot of prior experience, and he was pretty young when his romance with Mystra began. Additionally, while it's pure conjecture on my part--given how Gale reacts to the tiefling kids it would make sense to me if Mystra started grooming him when he was between nine and thirteen years old. Other people have shared analysis pointing to evidence that Gale unknowingly dual-classed and was a storm sorcerer originally, but was told he was purely a wizard and then had all of his sorcerous abilities eaten by the orb without ever knowing they existed. I do think it makes sense for Mystra to influence Gale as a potentially very powerful sorcerer this way to 1) get him to self-limit through wizard spells so he's easier to predict and control 2) be completely dependent on and devoted to her, starting as early as possible. (For the curious, sorcerer Gale theory is here and here. Very well-done imo!) In any case, Mystra absolutely has personal motive to do what she did, that has nothing to do with Gale personally. That it turned into grooming for a sexual relationship isn't a huge leap in light of her apparent mindset either. But lets take a moment to review that.

This is a really good recap setting up Mystra's situation. Karsus too, by the by. This second video here helps explain Mystra's own situation. My understanding is like this:

Mystryl was the original goddess of magic. Mystryl was a born-goddess rather than an ascended mortal goddess, which is important to note because both exist in the Forgotten Realms. Mystryl was neutral alignment. The Weave, magic, and those casting magic all tied into her divine portfolio. Divine portfolios reflect deities' jurisdictions and callings, which empowers them through use in the world as well as mortal worship. With all this in-mind, naturally it benefited Mystryl to encourage experimentation, devotion, and arcane ambition. The more spellcasters pushed the limits of magic, the more powerful Mystryl became too. This was when the Empire of Netheril came about, with its floating cities and its magocracies. Worth noting, eleventh level spells were being used at this point in time. Cue a bunch of aberrations showing up, called phaerimm. Cosmic horror monstrosities that sort of looked like if you combined grubs and lampreys then made them way too big. On the one hand they were ridiculously powerful natural spellcasters themselves. On the other, they could straight up detect, deflect, and eat magic at will. Incidentally they were also extremely hostile to other life forms. So them existing at the same time as Netheril caused some massive problems. The wizard empire was at war, struggling, and panicking. Karsus was a prodigy and the one most people were turning to for protection at the time. Karsus decided the best way to solve the problem was to become a god himself using the first and only twelfth level spell (of his own design) then get rid of the phaerimm that way. The spell specifically required the caster to replace a god of their choice. Karsus, being a wizard, thought Mystryl was the strongest divine force of all time and chose her. The first video explained very well, but it basically sounds like as a born-goddess--maintaining the Weave was essentially an autonomic process for Mystryl. Basically required as much thought as beating your own heart. It wasn't like that for Karsus. Karsus might have been the best wizard in the sense that someone might be the best marathon runner of all time, but if you take that marathon runner and then tell them they have to pump their heart manually from now on they're not just going to lose any future races they attempt--they might just die on the spot. Which is kind of what happened to Karsus. Karsus became a god of ambition along with magic, then lost his divinity to become a Great Old One instead. These days he's a stone stained in the gore of his dead people who speaks in fountains of blood. (One of the reasons I'm not enabling Gale in his quest to become god of magic, by-the-by.) Mystryl died because of Karsus's spell. Mystryl probably hadn't considered mortals, let alone the wizards who gave her so much power as a goddess, a threat to her personally before. An incarnation of Mystra (not Gale's Mystra) was born from the ashes of Mystryl to become the new goddess of magic. One of the first things Mystra does after basically reincarnating from Mystryl is ban mortals from using magic at level ten or higher. Mystra is now aware that mortals can challenge the gods and straight up kill her personally. She still needs casters using magic at high level to empower herself as a goddess, but it's a double-edged sword that can absolutely kill her. And to make matters worse... this Mystra also gets killed later. The Mystra we have now was a mortal woman (Midnight) who kept Mystra's name to avoid confusing worshippers, who'd been chosen by Mystra previously and ascended into that role. Midnight-Mystra, from the sound of it, also got killed for a bit and had to get saved by Elminster.

Like I said before, I do think there were some timeline blips going on for Mystra with Baldur's Gate 3. As long as she's died and reincarnated twice, her psychological state is cemented. How long it took her to come back and whether there were even more deaths than that is less important. I'd argue the key ideas we're supposed to take away about Mystra from this are that she is a goddess who 1) at this point is an ascended mortal who may have certain inherited memories or experiences from born-deities 2) is hyper aware that mortals can kill her 3) has been killed and reborn multiple times, not just by mortals but the very wizards she draws power from.

This is absolutely a shitty situation. It makes sense Mystra has complexes around it. It makes sense Midnight-Mystra would feel especially afraid when it comes to wizards seeing as she herself is a former mortal, so her position likely feels even more tenuous. The way she interacts with wizards and relates to her own position as a goddess is not as someone secure in her own power, but someone who sees anyone coming close to her level as a direct threat to her life. She needs casters to be strong to fuel her portfolio, but if they're too strong they can challenge her. So she is using whatever tools at her disposal to keep them beneath her while maintaining her own strength. It's also worth remembering that Mystra has no pretense of being good-alignment. Her motive in confronting the Netherbrain wasn't to protect Toril from mindflayers, but to protect herself personally from the Crown of Karsus and protect the Weave from the Karsic Weave. If magic as a force is in danger (as per the Karsic Weave) she might try to do something, but what befalls mortals is irrelevant to her. I'd argue she's 1000% acting out of self-interest for Baldur's Gate 3. And again--it makes sense given her position. It makes sense given the track record for gods in the Forgotten Realms.

So, if we go with the in-game implications that Mystra is supposed to have been active across Gale's life and was active when Minsc was running around a century ago (referenced in his comments about Rashemen protecting boys from Mystra)... what kind of relationship has Mystra built with wizards in particular? This is heavy speculation here but I'm going off of Gale's experience, Elminster's behavior, a point of notable cattiness from Lorroakan, and Mystra's motives.

I think Mystra encourages wizards to compete for her favor, both through their arcane power and on a personal level. She encompasses their entire world and dictates everything they are capable of by holding the Weave in her portfolio. Casters are nothing without her. She is fickle in her attentions, moving between wizard paramours and chosen so they constantly feel the need to prove themselves worthy of her love. As their goddess, they have no room to question her or ask for loyalty born of personal affection. Mystra does not care. She is inherently more than they are and ever will be, and unless they have something to woo her through her portfolio specifically there is no reason for her to stick around. They're lucky she gives them the time of day. Even if she can't literally, physically, personally prevent a wizard from interacting with the Weave--she can seriously screw with them while they do. Mystra's first post-Mystryl act was to blanket-limit the spells wizards could perform, remember? And BG3 Mystra was able to pluck the orb from Gale's chest at any time, whenever she felt like it. She just didn't. Lifetimes of work, dedication, study, and innovation are not ultimately credited to the casters who built themselves through their art but to Mystra. Memorized spells, arcane gestures, the interaction of components. She can make all of that so much harder. And she takes credit for any advancement a wizard makes. Origin Gale has lines with Minthara where he struggles to see himself as capable of anything without Mystra's say-so and needs to be reminded that she can't claim everything he has ever done through magic, and she hasn't managed to stop him yet. The fact that Gale himself, as Mystra's former lover, doesn't believe this initially and needs someone who very much is not a wizard to remind him says a lot about the dynamic Mystra set up with him and (in all likelihood) other wizards. So how does all of this fit in with the grooming point? Well, magic users are going to be much easier to psychologically control if Mystra starts taking advantage of them when they're still children and don't know any better. She needs to feed off of their strength with no risk to herself, so she needs to make sure they are can't even fathom turning on her. Maximize the power difference, ingrain that shit early. And if it becomes a sexual relationship... Mystra can tell herself they're even less likely to consider turning on her because it's just one more way they depend on her for validation.

Mystra's own fear and trauma (like Cazador's) does not prevent her from becoming an abuser. And like Cazador, she's using it to fuel the abuse she commits herself.

Something else I want to highlight before I segue to focus on Gale further, is how wizards deal with each other and why policy differs toward wizards versus other casters.

Wizards are nerds with shared interests. They're fucking around to see what's possible with magic and seem genuinely excited when anyone innovates. Innovation is something they can learn from and incorporate it into their own art. But actual wizard friendships, at least in Baldur's Gate 3, seem to be rare. They undercut each other emotionally and often look for ways to elevate themselves above their peers. Gale's colleagues left him to twist alone in his tower for a year. Elminster prioritizes pleasing Mystra by passing on her message for Gale to kill himself, and defends her if the player condemns Mystra's behavior. He even gets angry for certain dialogue options.

(It bears saying, I think Elminster has been psychologically wrecked by Mystra too. He does seem to be trying in spite of that but guy's not well himself.)

Even if not all wizards look to become romantically entangled with Mystra, Mystra has definitely encouraged competition and mistrust between them. After all, if the wizards supported each other they might realize they're stronger than her and that she's been causing harm. Another potential death.

I suspect the reason Mystra focuses on wizards is because wizards are ordinary people who know they were born ordinary, and know how hard it was to build arcane power. They aren't as secure in themselves as sorcerers who use magic like a reflex. And warlocks manage to work around Mystra with patrons who aren't beholden to her. So best for Mystra to undermine, manipulate, or otherwise occupy sorcerers who are strong enough to pose threats and teach the wizards they'd be nothing without her.

... One of the other arguments I saw recently was that Gale was being disingenuous/lying to himself and the player when he claims he wanted to gift Mystra a part of herself back. That he only wants power for power's sake, is kind of a terrible person, and it would be boring if he was being genuine. I deeply disagree with this stance.

When it comes to motivation, I'd argue power is by nature a means to an end rather than the end itself. "If I'm powerful enough no one will be able to hurt me again," "If I'm powerful enough I can fix every terrible thing I feel the need to," "If I'm powerful enough I can push the boundaries of what is possible and find a sense of wonder at the results."

Power because power does not cut it as a motive. It's likewise with ambition. We're not 2-D mustache twirlers here.

Ambition includes experimenting with a project to see if you can pull off something new or particularly difficult. Finding joy in the process and challenge itself isn't evil. It isn't even unhealthy.

Competing with others isn't necessarily negative either, in the right context. Being an elite athlete at the Olympics for example, you're putting your own skills against those around you in the hopes of surpassing them. It doesn't mean you think poorly of your fellow competitors. If anything, one would hope you respect them deeply for the shared discipline and passion. (But you still want to win, course. ;P)

If you read my post about DnD's pantheon, it's pretty clear I'm not opposed to the idea of A. firing gods from positions they're neglecting or B. nominating others to oversee necessary-but-unused portfolios. There are established gods of the Forgotten Realms who need, urgently, to be sacked. Being born into divinity, set up through nepotism, or 'elected by seniority' is not enough to shield a deity from my judgment. Mystra is abusing her worshippers, and while her portfolio might be able to squeak by I'd argue she's been compromised and is committing unprofessional and detrimental behavior in her capacity as goddess of magic. ESPECIALLY knowing she's like this as an ascended mortal. Any other mortal would be well within moral bounds to replace her. She has no ethical high ground in that regard. Managing autonomic maintenance of the Weave is an issue, but if someone showed up to replace her with the argument that Mystra is unfit due to committing abuse... I don't think that person would be morally wrong. Ballsy as hell, but not wrong.

So what's going on with Gale?

Gale canonically, in dialogue, thinks he and the world might both be better off if he was dead. I'll go a step further and argue that before the game even starts Gale considers his personal self a net-negative. If he isn't offsetting that with magical skill, knowledge, achievements, material possessions, and overall usefulness--he doesn't think he has a reason to be alive. The universe is worse for his existing in it.

Gale brags because he's trying to show he has something of value to give other people when he sees nothing of value in himself. He's trying to prove he can be an asset so others will keep him around. He brags notably less as he gains a sense of self-worth, self-confidence, and general support as acts progress. The times he gets snippy with other casters are because if he isn't the only and most useful magic guy to get something done, Gale thinks he might as well be thrown away. He is replaceable. He's also terrified to admit anything about the orb in Act I because there is no way to see it as anything but a danger and a burden. When that's added to his depression, he's sure he'll get abandoned in the wilderness to explode by himself and it might even serve him right. No one will mourn him. They might even be glad to be rid of the burden he brought.

Gale wants others to like him, to see him as a good person, to see him as someone brave and smart and worthy of trust. He absolutely does not see himself that way. If he's trying to prove it to the party--he's trying to prove it to himself just as much. There's a line he can give with The Dark Urge where he comments that if people are being killed just for being annoying, he should be dead a thousand times over. If you get solid approval with him at the tiefling party, he'll admit he didn't have any friends before the game. And while I can only speak to a particular romantic route, in Act III he talks about having been told to his face at various points/in various ways that he's insufferable. He knows other people don't like him and don't believe in him. If bad things happen to him they probably think he deserves it. He might even think so too.

Gale doesn't see anything worthwhile in himself that isn't built through wizardry. It has to be because he was smart enough, worked hard enough, and showed enough character to earn his power. If it's sorcery (and this is only a standard he applies to himself) then all that effort he put in would become meaningless. He can't look at his personal self as having done anything deserving of value or respect if he's a sorcerer because magic was easier for him than other people. And if he can't provide any magic, knowledge, or resources at all then no one has reason to give him the time of day. People hate him. Mystra only paid attention for his abilities as a spellcaster. The mortal, personal aspects of him were things she put up with.

So forget power and ambition for just a moment. What does Gale as a person in that position, who feels that way about himself, actually want? I'd argue that he probably just wanted to know the person he loved most actually gave a shit about him as a person. That he wasn't disposable or only worth as much as his skills and material possessions. I'm pretty sure he'd have wanted that regardless of whether Mystra was a goddess. Mystra both being the kind of goddess she was and the kind of person she was kept telling him he should be satisfied, that he shouldn't want any more than she was giving him. He can't climb any higher than her. No one can give him more than her. She is divine, she is the world itself. Gale never felt loved in that relationship. Due to Mystra's abuse he got to a place where the idea of wanting to be loved back became sacrilegious. It meant there was something wrong with him, that he was arrogant and insatiable. How else could he feel utterly alone and unlovable with a goddess?

Gale desperately wanted to mean something to Mystra personally, so he tried to offer a gesture of love in her language. Something he thought would be valuable to her as an individual and something requiring a ton of arcane skill/strength to deliver. He wanted her to look at him like he was irreplaceable as a person. I genuinely don't think that's a power-hungry or ambitious thing to want.

Gale didn't understand the orb, and unfortunately for him he didn't understand Mystra either. She wasn't the wise and understanding goddess he thought she was. She never wanted an equal. She does not have it in her to love someone as such. The idea of equality, for Mystra, is something that must be crushed to preserve herself.

I figure that the Gale who ascends to godhood has accumulated a divine amount of stuff and power to compensate for his belief that lacking those things, he would be worthless. If Gale wasn't a wizard it might have been music, or writing, or fighting, or politics--any skill, influence, or resource could be used the same way. It’s not that ambition is inherently bad. It’s that for Gale, it’s unhealthy. The ambition isn’t for its own sake. He’s using it as a counterweight against his own sense of worthlessness. God Gale buries his problems instead of dealing with them. He will never know if a character who romances him only did so because they saw his potential and wanted to come along for the ride. He will never know if they'd have bothered to stick around if he was only Gale Dekarios, if he didn't have so much to offer them. He tells himself it's enough that they believed he could do it.

With the mortal Gale ending, we should note that Gale doesn’t need power to enjoy the study of magic if he’s healthy. His priority isn’t about pushing the limits of spells, making new ones, or making a name for himself. Given room to decide for himself, he just wants to uplift and share with others through teaching. His trends in approval and disapproval support this preference too.

For Gale, I really think ambition and power are crutches he uses to justify being alive because he doesn't see any other reason. Give him a reason and he genuinely doesn't need them. They're the means, not the end. He does not want power for the sake of power. Guy is sad and doesn't know how to live with himself. He's not a worse or less believable character with that being his motive. Stories are about people, and people don't move through the world with static 'flaws' and 'virtues' checklists that need to be balanced. There's nothing inherently deeper or more meaningful about villainous characters compared to heroic ones. People make choices and deal with situations according to their experiences moment to moment, trying to make sense of things as best they can throughout their lives. Gale fits perfectly within this. The other cast members do too.

And for the record, while I'd argue Karsus was far more ambitious in character than Gale--even for him, it wasn't just about power. The guy was trying to save his people. He fucked up in a horrible and traumatic way so he's a Netherese blood fountain now. (RIP Karsus but also someone please pact with him.)

And as one last, controversial section... what did Gale's experience with Mystra do to him when it comes to his relationship with sex?

From how Gale talks about and shows Weave-sex, I'd argue it's an extension of him feeling inadequate as a mortal. And knowing this is a controversial point + a lot of people have done and loved the Weave scene because it reflects Gale's love of magic, I offer this: Gale would not be less worthy of love if he didn't have magic. Gale does not know this about himself. He went from an archwizard with a tower and Mystra's chosen to a level one adventurer sleeping on the ground. His entire relationship with magic for much of the game is incredibly unhealthy because he sees the person left in its absence as worthless. For Gale to have a healthy arc, I'd argue he needs to learn how to look at himself as nothing but a man and know he's still precious and irreplaceable. He needs to learn that he doesn't need to prove he deserves to be alive. He isn't disappointing. He doesn't have to try to impress others all the time to have a place in their worlds. He doesn't need to bribe people with shiny things or unique abilities so they'll tolerate the rest. He can exist as no one and nothing but himself and be treasured just for that.

I think at some point Gale could potentially have sex in the Weave again as a repairing experience where he's confident that his physical body, his reactions, and his wants weren't anything to feel ashamed of. Reclaiming that from his experience with Mystra could be very powerful and sexy. But for the first time he has sex since Mystra, when he thinks he's going to need to kill himself any day now and has been struggling between terror and self-hatred, I personally think it's healthier for him to get the validation of being enough as just Gale. Not the Wizard of Waterdeep. His life isn't being advocated for because he's strong or unique in bed. Someone wants him alive as just a person.

And not for nothing... I'm saying this as a writer who can't not write. I've had to do my own share of reflection about how I look at myself if writing isn't the metric of my worth. I wouldn't think Gale needs to abandon all magic any more than I would need to abandon all writing. But it's really important to know we aren't empty trash without our callings, you know?

Before I end this post, I do want to invite readers to think back to those bullets I made before on unhealthy power imbalance.

A character is physically and/or mentally incapable of participating with proper awareness of the situation, as a partner with equal respect and sway within the relationship.

A character is dependent upon the prospective partner for survival and cannot refuse them without fear of retribution or withholding necessities to survival.

A character is being systematically isolated and made dependent on their partner for all socialization and self-worth.

If Mystra deliberately started grooming Gale from a young age, emphasized and exaggerated the power discrepancy rather than making any effort to close the gap, that's a pretty big deal. Gale definitely never had equal respect or sway in the relationship compared to her. She'd probably find the idea insulting in the face of her godhood. She didn't want a partner but a supplicant who obeyed her with no needs for himself. Mystra actively distorted Gale's sense of boundaries and magnified what she could take from him if he displeased her. His life's work, his ability to access parts of his own mind for spells, his means of functioning in the world, his ability to defend himself... but also? His health and survival, once the orb was brought into play. And socially, Gale was incredibly isolated. It sounds like he hasn't even seen his own mother in at least a year, which I have some thoughts on. He was friendless for a long time even as Mystra's chosen. And Mystra made sure other wizards knew when she abandoned him to the point that even Lorroakan was aware. Mystra's offense was something for others to look down on him for. And Gale struggles in-game with the idea that Mystra mistreated or neglected him--because how could a goddess, his goddess, do that? He's been gaslit so hard that he doesn't quite get a moment of fully realizing it wasn't his fault. In some dialogue options Mystra even tries to frame his trauma over her abuse, unaware even that he had the Karsic Weave inside him, as wallowing in self-pity.

Gale did make a mistake, but I'd argue it matters a lot that the mistake was innocent and that he's woefully misjudged Mystra's character. He's being told it couldn't have been innocent and he deserves to be punished for it. He largely believes that. Doesn't make it true.

#Gale Dekarios #Mystra #baldur's gate 3 #baldur's gate iii #bg3 #bgiii #warning to readers there are strong opinions in here that I am very aware not everyone will share #it's okay if you have a different take and I tried to be careful about how I phrased things #I also didn't scour for all of the direct quotes from the game this time and for that I plead laziness lol sorry #I can try if there are specific moments people want to pick over #but yeah this is in the spirit of reflecting and discussing a character I adore + find really interesting for Gale #along with a character I find really psychologically fascinating and subtle as a villainess for Mystra #people are going to read both differently in places and I genuinely am not looking to fight about that #Just explore how I'm reading things + why in a way where other people are welcome to join if they wanna #If I mixed any lore details from outside the game apologies!

65 notes · View notes

sarcophagid · 2 months

Text

ithaqua backstory related headcanons/analysis

THE PLATEAU OF LENG:

Ithaqua's 5th deduction refers to the area where he lives as a 'barbaric land'.

'Plateau of Leng'/'Leng' is also a place name in the Lovecraft mythos.

I think we can infer that the Plateau is very geographically and socially isolated from the rest of 'civilization'. They are likely behind on understanding of major world events and technological advances. It is also difficult to travel in and out of the area due to environmental conditions and/or social, economic, and legal limitations. This isolation results in the cultural bubble we see in Ithaqua's story.

While Ithaqua's weibo intro post describes the area as the 'far north', I think it's still located somewhere in the UK, similar to the origins of most of the IDV cast (if only for the practical reason that Nightwatch would be going to the manor on foot). The surname 'Norwell' is also English/Scottish in origin.

addendum: It's been mentioned to me that Leng is also possibly located somewhere in the mountain ranges near lakeside village!

RELIGION:

While there are many references to christianity in the game, I don't think the dominant religion in the Plateau of Leng is a 1:1 adaptation of christianity irl, although it may reference it or be inspired by it.

Given the mentions of 'lies' and 'barbarism', as well as the mention that the practices in Leng are now archaic, I also think the religion could be an offshoot from whatever dominant religions and cultures are seen in the mainland, similar (but probably not the same) to some insular cults.

note: an example of this 'original' religious culture would be the one associated with Gravekeeper's backstory, since he presumably lives in the mainland. (also apparently Ann isn't actually a nun she just dresses like that 🤔)

Ithaqua's trailer refers to 'gods' plural, so it's also possible they don't have a monotheistic religion at all. But this could also refer to the fact there were multiple aggressors during the night of the attack, and he's conflating 'gods' with 'holy people'.

Regardless, I think there are still a lot of undeniable similarities to christianity in Ithaqua's backstory, and even direct references in essence lore like Morningstar.

WITCH HUNTS:

I think it's possible that the magistrate's persecution of Ithaqua's mother and the 'hunt' in general was more to secure social power than born out of actual religious belief. The other townspeople may truly think there are demons, but I doubt the Norwell family was genuine. If the magistrate truly believed stillborn babies were caused by the devil, and/or truly thought he was doing this for the 'good of the people', then he wouldn't quietly cover the case up and pretend nothing happened.

Creating an atmosphere of suspicion and fear of punishment based on arbitrary rules would benefit those responsible for 'justice'. Since anyone could be accused, everyone would have to tread carefully - except for the judge, who decides who is or isn't condemned.

The resulting chaos would be a good opportunity to seize a leadership role. Leng was already superstitious, and these beliefs could be leveraged and amplified to bring the people to the state it is today.

This practice of manipulating the townspeople with fear also parallels how Ithaqua later creates a persona of a 'monster' and feeds these rumours with violence in order to scare away intruders and protect his mother - although they have different motivations and goals, they're playing a similar game.

Leveraging false beliefs is also referenced in Ithaqua and Nathaniel's roles in both Morningstar lore and the Truth & Inference lore (although T&I wasn't as accurate to their characters)

#ithaqua #idv #meta #headcanons

19 notes · View notes

lk-freelance · 3 months

Text

Understanding the Roots of Antisemitism: A Historical Perspective

Antisemitism has plagued societies for centuries, manifesting in various forms and driven by different motives across different eras. To understand its persistence, it's crucial to examine some of the key historical factors that have fueled this deeply rooted prejudice.

Religious Differences

In ancient times, Jews practiced a monotheistic religion, which often put them at odds with the prevailing polytheistic beliefs of cultures like the Greeks and Romans. This religious clash became even more pronounced with the rise of Christianity. Christians began to blame Jews for the death of Jesus Christ—a charge known as the deicide accusation—intensifying resentment and hostilities.

Economic Factors

During Medieval Europe, Jews often found themselves in the role of moneylenders, a profession that Christians were prohibited from due to religious restrictions against charging interest. This economic niche led to jealousy and resentment, as many Christians indebted to Jewish moneylenders grew to view them with animosity.

Social Outcasts

Exclusion from owning land or joining guilds forced many Jews to form distinct, insular communities. This separation made them convenient scapegoats during times of social or economic crises, further entrenching their status as societal outcasts and targets of blame.

Racial Stereotypes

As history progressed, antisemitism evolved from religious and economic bias into racial hatred. The most horrific example of this shift was during the Nazi regime, which employed pseudoscience to propagate the idea that Jews were racially inferior and posed a dire threat to society. This racial antisemitism fueled the atrocities of the Holocaust, where millions of Jews were systematically murdered.

A Persistent Prejudice

These points highlight just some of the reasons behind antisemitism's persistence throughout history. It is a multifaceted and deeply ingrained issue that has adapted to the cultural and societal changes over the centuries. Understanding its complex roots is essential in combating its presence in modern society and ensuring that history does not repeat itself.

Reflecting and Educating

Recognizing the historical context of antisemitism is a step towards addressing and dismantling this age-old prejudice. Education and awareness are crucial in fostering a society that values diversity and stands firmly against all forms of hatred and discrimination. By learning from the past, we can work towards a more inclusive and just future.

#religion #christianity #jewish #antisemitism #history #bible

10 notes · View notes

enigmascosmicos · 5 months

Text

"Global Blockbuster 'Anunnaki' Banned Worldwide - Unveiling Ancient Alien Secrets and Forbidden Knowledge!"

This is the History Movie Forbidden And Blocked Worldwide

Cyberspace seems to have barely left the trail in the slightest so there is no viewing information about the movie Anunnaki. Not to escape the interview with movie director, Jon Gress, also never removed from the search for cyberspace, plus the official site of the movie Anunnaki also never disappeared.

#Anunnaki, History Movie Forbidden

Zecharia Sitchin was born in Russia and raised in Palestine, where he gained much knowledge of modern and ancient Hebrew, Semitic and European languages, Old Testament, and archaeological history in the Near East. Sitchin graduated from the University of London majoring in economic history, and became a prominent journalist and editor in Israel for many years, then lived and wrote in New York.

Sitchin has translated from the Sumerian text, based on the Vedic tale, the original Greek and Hebrew quotations from the Bible. His ability to translate multiple languages is considered a major achievement, not many people have the ability to decipher the Tablet Adapa Sumerian language made from clay originated from 6000 years ago, an elusive language.

At least Sitchin has spent decades as an archaeologist and historian in the Middle East. He examined the ancient writings of the Sumerian civilization, then published 5 Paperbacks entitled 'The Earth Chronicles', a documentary interaction of the Nibirian nation on Earth in ancient times.

Historical Movies Forbidden And Blocked Worldwide

Based on Sitchin's story, the Anunnaki film was produced independently but lacked the cost, and then various agencies set it up as a banned and banned worldwide history movie. Earth was once inhabited by Anunnaki who is considered a creature that descends from Heaven. They make colonies and mine gold and other minerals, build ports and airports suspected to be in Iraq and Iran, living as an idealist society with small colonies.

Similar Cuneiform-like tablets suddenly appear in several places around the world, which explains the continued knowledge of stars, farming, farming, even social structures introduced to mankind by advanced civilizations. The film tells the story of history once written in tablets and ancient inscriptions, written originally from civilization before Egypt appeared in the world.

They return when the earth is filled with genetic material mixed with his DNA and use it as a slave to miners, agriculture, and other work in Sumer. In the Anunnaki story has created humans, Homo sapiens and Homo Erectus, through genetic manipulation.

Then Enlil and Enki were sent from Nibiru to rule the earth, they were given the task of dealing with all the power and control of the created beings. They gave architecture knowledge to the ancient Sumerians, agriculture, astronomy, and cultural exchange / offerings to the Gods in the form of minerals, food, and other materials. The Nibiru people disguised themselves as fishmen, lions, birds, and other creatures, as a sign that people should worship them. This is what Moses opposed, he destroyed all the shapes of a creature, one of the traditions exaggerated by the ancient model.

Then the Pleiades were involved in the 3 Golden Age in Egypt, they tried to end the worship created by the Nibiru and the Sirian gods, and replaced it with the concept of 'The One' or monotheistic. But in the fight against differences in the concept of Trust has involved all humans, fighting each other instead of fighting the God who is the real enemy behind the scenes. Since then, every 3600 years there has been a major event on Earth that is currently documented as a major disaster. The Great Flood story of religion and culture in the world has narrated the destruction of the slave race for revolting their rulers, the sterile earth back from the creature without conscience.

#Limited History Films Raised From The Original Text of Ancient Sumerian Tablets

Actually Sitchin strongly emphasizes the story that mentions a creature called the Devil, building a civilization forward so that humans will worship him. Ancient texts of ancient names and events that are different from modern-day designations, occurred long before monotheistic religions were born on Earth. The ancients knew this by another name, they did not know the Devil's name, they only knew the creatures of Nibiru and the Pleiades had descended to Earth.

On July 5, 2006, X-Squared Radio has promoted the movie '1Anunnaki' in an exclusive interview with Jon Gress. He mentioned that the first digital film 'Anunnaki Trilogy' produced Jaguar Films will make the biggest jump in the history of anthropology. The film is a factual first chapter of the Sumerian Tablet, telling how it suddenly came to be the most advanced civilization in the world. Many people still do not know why there are glyphs on earth long before the Egyptians reached their peak.

In the Anunnaki movie story, it has reached two different human versions. Kill humans as demigods, in the holy books of three religions known as Nephlim or giant man, Ad. Temporary versions of other humans are smaller, more easily created and understood as mortal beings. The Second Descent The human version has now filled the surface of the earth, one that has already happened and continues to the truth.

If the Anunnaki story goes through theaters-the whole world, then the meaning of the three Western and Western monotheistic religions will emerge. Surely this would damage the religious countries, and destroy Darwin's Theory of Evolution. The impact of the Anunnaki film will change the human understanding of itself and its placement in the universe. So no wonder, various government and private parties immediately closed and set Anunnaki as a history movie that is banned from running and banned all over the world.

#history#story#blog#life

Clase de órden: Trending

[-]wanabe (61)hace 6 años

good article

2 votos

Respuesta

thanks.

Respuesta

[-]leewilliamson (-10)(1)hace 6 años

#alien #annunaki #forbidden door #ufo #cinema

4 notes · View notes

tanadrin · 2 years

Note

if you would be so kind, I'm doing a strange little survey. can you give me roughly one sentence opinions on each of the following things:

the holy trinity

ijtihad

the market

nightcore

swimming (as in, the sport)

singapore

the indie game dev scene

the orang pendek

the tv show "the x files"

gnosticism

fortran

4chan

recreational contraband

if you don't have strong opinions on any of them, feel free to hazard a guess but please don't skip any.

uhhh sure.

the result of an effort to impose univocality on disparate texts, and to understand how Jesus could invoke the authority and power of God in those texts, although one that was unnecessary--first century judaism already had a framework for that, the idea of a name-bearing agent, which was itself the result of a renegotiation of texts that had been amended to flatten the polytheistic divine hierarchy of ancient northwest semitic peoples into one that was more monotheistic in structure. the christian version seems strictly inferior: while you can construct a statement like "jesus is not the holy spirit, who is not god the father, but all three are god" in natural language, that doesn't mean it's not a contradiction. you can construct lots of nonsense statements as well-formed structures in natural language, without them being meaningful. the trinity is also not supported by any biblical texts. but christianity itself has a problem with trying to cast as the jewish messiah someone who clearly doesn't fit the bill; all in all i would say this particular philosophical incoherence is only one of many philosophical incoherences in traditional chalcedonian doctrine.

seems strictly better than taqlid if you have to pick one or the other, but based on my very, very limited knowledge of Islamic jurisprudence, as a standalone principle it does not seem very useful. if the assumptions you start from when performing any kind of reasoning are unsound, you will struggle to reach sound conclusions; this is as true of the law as anything else. it certainly isn't going to save you from the problem of being overly deferential to high-status authorities, and from skimming the Wikipedia article it looks like this is what the whole "closure of the gates" controversy is about--just like the principle of deference to earlier scholars of the law in Judaism, religious traditions that emphasize continuity with the past will tend to be bogged down by the fact that a lot of crappy conclusions made their way into the canon for political reasons, and also sometimes people in the past were actually just terrible.

contra the lassez-faire viewpoint, states create markets. they don't arise naturally. the state of nature for human systems of value exchange seem to be various kinds of gift economy with extremely limited scalability. proabably there will never be a coherent theory of value in market economies that doesn't account for the role states have in creating value by levying taxes in some form, whether in kind or as money or as corvee labor. markets are a useful tool to accomplish certain tasks, but they're certainly not optimal for all things, or intrinsically good or holy or w/e as some libertarians seem to think. a properly redistributive market economy, while not Real Socialism™, would be close enough that the handful of marxists fuming about it would be unable to get anyone to care.

never listened to it, but i support weird extremely online niche creative genres.

humans be liking water

a friend of mine worked in singapore for six months. apparently the equatorial belt is surprisingly overcast a lot of the time, which makes sense given how much it rains there, though in my head it's very sunny. also the sun sets super quickly. i hate hot, humid weather, so i suspect i wouldn't like living near the equator very much. also, i think it's funny how historically culturally and economically contiguous regions have these deep rifts created in them by colonialism. like, indonesia and malaysia could conceivably have become one country after independence from the dutch and british respectively, but the postcolonial elites of those countries certainly didn't want to compromise and share power with another group of postcolonial elites, so they ended up on very different trajectories; and i wonder if in 200 years we'll have a situation like austria and germany where actual distinct cultural and national identities have started to develop, or if eventually the cultural similarities will overwhelm the differences and promote closer cooperation. given the expansionist and authoritarian bent of indonesia's government in much of the post-independence period, it's hard to imagine, but indonesia + malaysia + singapore + philippines is a huge chunk of the world's population--indonesia alone has a population about that of the United States!--and i can't help but think strong regional collaboration, in such a historically important part of the world, could really create a ton of prosperity and give those countries outsized influence on the global stage.

has produced some real gems. like most fields of human creative endeavor, you get a lot of dross, but all the mechanical and narrative innovation in games these days seems to come from this quarter. hard to make a living in, though--the returns on independent creative enterprises are pretty low these days, regardless of sector.

had to google this. seems like it could pretty easily be an unknown or misidentified primate? also seems pretty mundane by cryptozoological standards. like if you told me there was an unknown primate living in the jungles of sumatra and borneo, i would go "yeah, sure, seems plausible."

absolute classic of 90s culture. i think there's some explication to be done of the different ways conspiracy culture and ideas were received in the 90s vs now, drawing on the X-Files, the original Deus Ex, transitional fossils like John Titor, and modern conspiracy theories like Q Anon and resurgent Flat Earthers. They were always right-wing and allied with christian nationalism, but i think that was only partly understood in the 90s; 9/11 was a major inflection point in that it gave the Bush years their most salient features and laid the groundwork for the politics of the 2010s onward. in some ways pre-9/11 conspiracy media anticipated those shifts; in others, it fundamentally misunderstood its source material. i think it's all very interesting.

it's hard to disentangle historical heresies from the bullshit opponents of those heresies made up about them, but what we call gnosticism is plainly a Christian movement and a strongly anti-Jewish one, reflecting one early version of a current of anti-Jewishness that is perennial within various forms of Christianity across the last two millennia. but it also has interesting resonances with mystical religious movements from far-flung parts of the world, because Humans Be Enjoying Mystery Cults, and which i think are an attempt to spackle over some of the holes in early christian soteriology.

i wish i knew fortran and cobol so i could say i knew some fortran and cobol, but let's be realistic, i will never seriously study either fortran or cobol. you can't make good RTS games with them.

a major cultural hinge of the 2000s internet, and anthropologically, socially, culturally, and politically compelling, despite or because of its anthropological, social, cultural, and political pathologies.

i don't know what this means. drugs? pirated dvds? tap shoes in that town from footloose where dancing is illegal? strongly "pro" in all cases, though.

15 notes · View notes

history-time-out · 2 years

Text

“Logos Rising” | E Michael Jones

The notes come from a podcast episode of “Culture Wars” when he was a guest on the “Joe and Joe from The Frontline” back in January of 2022.

2:25 - Atheism: 10 years ago 4(horseman) atheists based their argument on logical fantasy. Darwinism is the operating system of atheism. Prime philosophical ideology of today.

3:39 - Parmenides “that which is can’t come from that which isn’t”

4:14 - St. John’s gospel “in the beginning there was logos and logos was God”

4:41 - The atheists banned meta physics as an attack on God

4:54 - Darwinism says something can come from nothing. Every little step is the same as the step before it. This was their way to sell it and make it make sense.

6:31 - Atheism isn’t a philosophical problem, it’s a psychological problem.

6:40 - psychologist Paul Vince from NYU wrote a book on the relationship between atheism and father deprivation

8:26 - Q: Why has modern philosophy taken this route? A: Logos makes a rebound due to researches of Thomism (official philosophy of Catholic Church) Notre Dame adopts as official philosophy as well until ND hires 2 physicists to run philosophy department (Irish men hessburg and McMillan) Late 1960’s.

11:20 - Talk about how God revealed logos to the Greeks. Q: How did the Greeks accept logos after throwing around different philosophical ideas which led them to the discovery of logos. A: listen to audio below for EMJs reply.

13:40 “Your thinking in physical terms with something that isn’t physical”

14:45 - God did not abandon people

15:16 - John wrote his gospel based on reason. (Greek) because he could not preach to the Jews anymore since he was kicked out. He said we needed a sound philosophical foundation.

17:30 - philosophy today, is based on science now. Physical science has become so powerful that everything has to model physics. Economics has become physics.

17:58 - Aristotle talks meta-physics (he calls it first philosophy) which he calls theology. “You can’t talk about the beginning and not talk about God.

18:02 - EMJ had this experience in India. 16 year old Hindu boy asks can you prove the existence of God? India you have hundreds of Gods and it doesn’t make sense to the boys.

21:09 - In India you have over a billion and half people in a confused state because there is no logos.

21:34 - India cosmology is that earth is a semi-circle sitting on 4 elephants that is standing on a turtle.

20:33 - It is mandatory for every rational creature to believe in God. You don’t have to believe Jesus rose from dead, you accept that by faith.

23:22 - “conform your desires to the truth or conform the truth to your desires”

Read Degenerate Moderates

23:47 - fulfilling desires by questioning the order of the universe so you can do what you wanna do.

23:54 - Polytheism exists bc you want to do something against Gods will (ex: sexual desires) Another example is you want to sleep with your neighbors wife. You can’t pray to God about that so you pray to another god. You are praying to demons. This stuff leads to demon cultures. Wilhelm Schmidt said “all primitive cultures are monotheistic and polytheistic cultures are a sign of decadence”

24:59 - Are you willing to conform your life to logos?

25:35 - Host: One problem in America is everyone is looking for political solutions instead of moral solutions…. Looking in wrong places for solutions…. In particular political parties.

EMJ - Reason “pure and practical reason”

-Pure allows you to know the truth

-Practical allows you to achieve the good AKA morality. Conform life to practical reason.

EMJ says Founding Fathers understood this:

John Adams “we have no constitution that functions in the absence of a moral people”

If you can’t have people do this to their lives you won’t have a government that can do it.

Freedom became defined as doing what you want to do as opposed to doing what you ought to do.

Host: “Perverted concept of freedoms”

License became the substitute for freedom.

31:00 - Co-Host: “Science as Opposed to Religion (modern dialogue) which is a fallacy.

“What is the Trinity? How does this concept of God lead to science itself?”

EMJ: It goes back to the gospel of St. John. It begins with logos and logos was with God. Logos is God. This is the trinity.

A meditation on that phrase and the word Son. 300 years of meditation on that phrase to come up with an understanding of God. The Trinity is God revealing himself to us.

Pythagorus: was preparation for the Trinity. Believed number was order of the universe.

1 + 2 = 3

1 is unity

2 is diversity

3 is the Trinity (unity and diversity at the same time)

Beauty

EMJ: Another characteristic of God “The true, the good, the beautiful”

Because of 20th century beauty gets lost as a result of the decline of art. Beauty is a manifestation of God. There is evidence of this Trinity throughout creation.

Relationship between Jesus Christ and God the Father

“The father, the son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen”

Aryas said “if the son comes after the father then there was a time when the son was not. If there was a time when the son was not, then the son was not God. Therefore Jesus Christ is not God” This is False

You can’t take the term son and applying it to an analogous way to God and it does not apply because all of 3 of those principals were co eternal and always existed in relationship to each other.

Muslims did not get this. Did not believe Jesus Christ was God. This is the main reason science did not develop in the Islamic world.

The universe is a manifestation of God.

Openness of Heart to Accepting Linear Truth

EMJ: Fundamental problem is basing life on satisfying irrational passions.

Aquinas “lust darkens the mind”

Dealing with people sunken in sin and have made a living with one of these ideologies.

Racism is an irrational ideology.

Lutheran church evaporated in Scandinavia and Iceland.

EMJ: Main problem in Middle Ages was collapse of Thomism and replaced with nominalism.

William of Ockham ended in Munich and died of Black Death. “no universals. Universals are all categories of the mind” (ex: Islam taking over catholic philosophy)

Martin Luther

Luther couldn’t control his passions. Violent guy, a drunk and didn’t pray. Finally broke from church and subjected to sexual temptation.

During this time the Lutherans were breaking into convents and raping nuns or pimping them out to priests to get them to join Luther.

EMJ on pornography

“Pornography is a form of social control”

He once said this to a group of zoomers and they knew exactly what he meant because they were all enslaved to their passions.

#E Michael Jones #logos rising #Martin Luther #Catholicism #nominalism #Thomism #pythagoras #holy trinity #thomas aquinas #polytheism #monotheism #wilhelm schmidt #religion #religion history #aristotle #culture wars

10 notes · View notes

jnpwt · 2 years

Text

The necessary Union of Taoism and Anarchy

Refers to:

-Tao Te Ching by Laozi

-Adam Curtis' BBC Anarchist propaganda

-Past Experiences when at one with the Tao/at True Anarchism (not longer the case)

If you watch Adam Curtis' "Can't Get You Out Of My Head" an emphasis is made on certain individuals, contrasting them with the emotional state of their societies at the time. These individuals share many things, the most common being their fight against Power Structures. The most interesting, which only takes into account a set few of the individuals chosen to be observed, are those whose Ego seems to be immense. The case of Jiang Qing is the most fascinating in how clear the demarcation between the Rise and Fall are.

Jiang Qing wanted to be the best actress in 1930s New China, post Qing collapse. Her abilities to act were excellent, but she came across a better actress, Li Lili, who upstaged her in the production of "Bloodshed on Wolf Mountain". The Director chose Li over Jiang. The Power Structure of cinema at the time got in the way of Jiang. Therefore she left, and found herself allied with the most determined Revolutionary in China at the time. Revolutionaries whose purpose was to destroy Power. Jiang and Mao were a glamourous couple, together, they were undefeatable and could not be stopped. All the Chinese Communists were enthralled, and for all the flaws of the couple, they were doing their best as Revolutionaries. Then, a man more powerful but more cynical, Stalin, split the couple on behalf of a jealous few within the existing Communists. This marked the end of the inspiring couple, and both fell into cycles of despair, jealousy and all sorts of negative emotions, while retaining their skills in Charisma. Such Charisma ensured Mao could make the mistake of the Great Leap Forward, and Jiang's Charisma enabled the CCP to act out its Cultural Revolution. All traceable back to a moment where the USSR, a more powerful nation, interfered with the affairs of a couple who were truly glorious.

The pattern of proud, inspired individuals or couples throughout history, excelling in their field and encouraging others to join their revolutionary cause, whether in arts or politics, is made extremely clear by Curtis. Fortunately, the details of when the Power Structure interfered and made these individuals fall from their heights is left in so the viewer can connect the dots. One may look back at the legacies of Political Revolutionaries such as Mao and Lenin, as well as Artistic Revolutionaries such as John Lennon or Eduard Limonov, and be able to see them as good people until a certain point in time. The point in time when a pre-existing Power Structure was unable to be broken, as they are not all connected directly. It takes effort to convert Political Power to Economic Power (the effort of corruption), and therefore one could imagine a pair of structures, where the biggest one (nowadays economic power) dominates the other, and therefore dominates those who try to destroy such power structure. Money Corrupts even the most ardent geniuses, whether they be a genius in art, politics, crowd charisma, or humour (one can realise that these strengths are one and the same, but applied to different contexts).

And now we get to Taoism. Not the entirety of it, simply the original text of the Tao Te Ching by Laozi, who is attempting to describe their current state of "Enlightenment" with the language at hand. When wanting to completely understand the concept of reaching either Enlightenment, Nirvana, monotheistic Salvation, the original Brahmin, the Ubermensch, or in this case, Tao, one must also take into account the language such texts were written in. Latin became crucial due to the Bible, Arabic from the Koran, and of course Mandarin, enabled by the works of Laozi and Confucius, who "wrote down" what sages were sharing verbally, making history of tradition. The Tao Te Ching makes many references to different kind of ideas regarding morality, morality which the sages at the time spent much time understanding. Reaching Tao is an attempt to transcend morality by placing oneself in the shoes of all, not just all people, but all things, as the Tao is all.

Quote drop:

-Being and non-being produce each other.

-> everything is relative

-If you overvalue possessions, people will begin to steal.

-> unnecessary pride causes jealous envy

-The Tao is like an empty container

->reaching Tao frees one of desires that are to be considered sins

-Heaven and Earth are impartial

-> there is NO OBJECTIVE MORALITY OF ACTION

-The best leaders are those the people hardly know exist. The next best is a leader who is loved and praised.

-> Goebbels and Hitler (who shared a hatred of the Elite which they foolishly believed to be entirely composed of Jews, a foolish take that became evil action)

-> Mao Zedong and Jiang Qing (Mao was loved, but Jiang aided in the background, leading her to not be seen as "valuable" by the other communists, especially Stalin)

-> Eduard Limonov and Yelena Shchapova (allied in the arts until Yelena switched to sucking up for money, leaving Limonov seething against money and become anti-capitalist radical, but no longer an inspired poet)

-If a ruler abides by its principles, then their people will willingly follow. Heaven would then reign on earth, like sweet rain falling on paradise. People would have no need for laws, because the law would be written on their hearts

->The best leaders of any particular Power Structure are those that have reached Tao, due to their inability to be corrupted

-The Tao of Heaven nourishes by not forcing. The Tao of the Wise person acts by not competing.

-> The most interesting quote, as at no other point in the text was the detail that two forms of Tao exist.

end of Quote Drop

This last distinction is the most important, as we can pivot off this to understand the successes of Monotheistic Philosophy and Eastern Philosophy. The term Monotheistic Philosophy is used because an absolute conviction that a God exists can be used for a person to reach a form of Tao. A Tao where one is nourished by not forcing, emotionally nourished knowing that this anthropomorphized version of morality will give them Heaven. The catch is, God doesn't exist. Christ did. He had reached a form of Tao where one could nourish the confusion of others by not forcing. That is until the Power Structure of the Roman Empire got in the way.

Christ was an early Anarchist. He wanted to give the people around him a morality that superseded the laws of the Romans, who themselves simply applied what made the most sense to them, as Urban Dwellers with cool lore. In the stead of Christ, were born something strange, unexpected. Martyrs. They wouldn't teach morality, but apply it, in whatever way they knew possible, which when confronted with the unknown, would fail. Martyrs made great tales for the Bible and for the effort of conversion, but also inspired Crusaders to go on a pilgrimage, one that necessitated bloodshed due to the politics of the time (another issue of Power, but one too complex to flesh out here). Martyrs and Crusaders were trying to reach a different form of Enlightenment, where you would give yourself up to another person, a brave, proud individual who would fight against evil, you would be nourished for purpose by not forcing away the teachings of another, one more wise.

Europe re-learnt this lesson as they grew sick and tired of incompetent leadership. France begun the tradition of Western Anarchism, in the forms of democracy, unions and strikes. Robespierre inspired a nation to get rid of not just the King, but a corrupt and self-serving court. Unfortunately, bloodlust once unleashed cannot be stopped. Robespierre did not try to describe morality, as all the efforts of French Intellectuals at the time could only go as far as to say "I think, therefore I am", without anything practical. Such philosophies were philosophies of destroying Power Structures, but not one of finding good leaders. And then a drunk neuro-divergent German, pissed off at the control money had over his life and his marriage, wrote a Manifesto. One that would inspire a century of Revolutions, a century of Great Leaders, Enlightened Leaders. And yet, none managed to sustain the connection between the Tao of Heaven and the Tao of the Wise due to Power Structures splitting such individuals up. Communism for Morality, the Morality of all being equal in the eyes of Power, or whatever structure we delegate resource management to. Anarchy as a system to allow flexible changes of leadership, so that those who have reached the Tao can rise as far up as they are required to.

TO BE NOTED: in some cases ignorance holds power over an individual, this need not exist thanks to the Internet.

WHAT CAN YOU DO?

-criticize my work. It sucks, my writing style was developed independently of any criticism. write something better

-encourage me to write more

-reach Tao, through meditation with moral mantras (the Tao Te Ching has many useful mantras to be used)

-be moral, but understand that without amorality, there is no morality. pity, then forgive those that are currently amoral, and encourage them to be more moral. this applies to yourself too. what is morality? just guess lmao no one rly knows, as long as you keep doing your best relative to your limitations (including the limitation of your current position relative to whatever power structure stops you from doing what you REALLY want)

#adam curtis #can't get you out of my head #taoism #laozi #anarchocommunism #anarchism #tao te ch #jiang qing #eduard limonov #karl marx

8 notes · View notes

irunevenus · 14 days

Text

Islam: The Faith That Transformed the World – From Arabia to Global Reach

Islam, one of the world’s largest monotheistic religions with over 1.9 billion followers, originated in the Arabian Peninsula in the 7th century AD. Founded by the Prophet Muhammad, Islam not only unified the peoples of Arabia but also laid the foundation for a vast empire that stretched from Spain to India. This article explores the origins of Islam, its core beliefs and practices, and the profound impact this faith has had on global history and civilization.

The Origins of Islam: Muhammad’s Revelation and Mission Islam originated in Mecca, in present-day Saudi Arabia, in the early 7th century. Muhammad, born in 570 AD, was a respected merchant and member of the Quraysh tribe. At the age of 40, while meditating in a cave on Mount Hira, Muhammad received his first revelation from the angel Gabriel. These revelations, which continued for about 23 years, were compiled into the Quran, the holy book of Islam, which Muslims consider to be the literal word of God (Allah). Muhammad’s message was clear: there was only one God, Allah, and he was the last and greatest of the prophets, succeeding biblical figures such as Abraham, Moses, and Jesus. Muhammad preached the unity of God, moral responsibility, social justice, and the importance of charity. These messages attracted many followers, but they also faced fierce opposition from the leaders of Mecca, who saw the new faith as a threat to the social and economic order. In 622 CE, Muhammad and his followers migrated to Medina in an event known as the Hijrah, which marks the beginning of the Islamic calendar. In Medina, Muhammad consolidated his leadership, unified the Arab tribes under the new faith, and eventually returned to Mecca in triumph. Before his death in 632 CE, he had established a new religion that would quickly spread far beyond the Arabian Peninsula.

Fundamental Doctrines and Practices of Islam Islam is based on five pillars that guide the spiritual and daily lives of Muslims:

Shahada (Profession of Faith): The declaration of faith that affirms the unity of God and the role of Muhammad as his prophet. This is the central belief of Islam and the gateway to the faith.

Salat (Prayer): Muslims pray five times a day facing Mecca at specific times as an act of submission and devotion to God. Prayer is a vital component of Muslim life, establishing a constant connection with God.

Zakat (Charity): Muslims are required to donate a portion of their wealth to help the poor and needy, promoting social justice and collective responsibility.

Sawm (Fasting during Ramadan): During the holy month of Ramadan, Muslims fast from dawn to dusk, abstaining from food, drink, and other indulgences. Fasting is a spiritual exercise aimed at increasing awareness of God and personal discipline.

Hajj (Pilgrimage to Mecca): All Muslims who are physically and financially able to do so must make the pilgrimage to Mecca at least once in their lifetime. The Hajj is a powerful spiritual experience that unites Muslims from all over the world in an act of collective worship.

In addition to the five pillars, Muslims follow Sharia, the Islamic code of law based on the Quran and Hadith (the sayings and actions of the Prophet Muhammad). Sharia covers all areas of life, from religious practices to family and business matters.

The Expansion and Division of Islam: Sunni and Shia After the death of Muhammad, the Islamic community (Umma) faced significant challenges regarding who should lead the Muslims. This debate led to the division of Islam into two main sects: Sunni and Shia.

Sunni: They constitute about 85-90% of Muslims. They believe that the leader of the community (Caliph) should be chosen from among Muhammad's close companions. The first four Caliphs, known as the "Righteous Caliphs", are revered by Sunnis.

Shia: Representing about 10-15% of Muslims, Shia believe that Muhammad's legitimate successor should be someone from his direct lineage, specifically Ali, his cousin and son-in-law. Shia religious leadership continues through a series of Imams who are seen as spiritual and political guides.

The expansion of Islam was rapid and impressive. Within a century of Muhammad's death, Islam had spread throughout the Middle East, North Africa, Spain and even parts of Central Asia. This expansion was not only military but also cultural, scientific and intellectual. Islamic empires became centers of learning and innovation, preserving and expanding the knowledge of ancient civilizations.

Islamic Contributions to World Civilization Islam not only unified diverse tribes and nations, but also fostered a flourishing of culture and science during the Islamic Golden Age (roughly the 8th to 13th centuries). Cities such as Baghdad, Damascus, and Cordoba became centers of learning where Muslim, Jewish, and Christian scholars collaborated in fields such as mathematics, medicine, astronomy, and philosophy.

Science and Medicine: Avicenna (Ibn Sina) and Al-Razi were prominent figures in medicine, whose works influenced medical practice in Europe for centuries. Mathematics: Algebra was developed by Al-Khwarizmi, while trigonometry and the concept of the number zero were refined by Muslim mathematicians. Astronomy: Islamic observatories produced accurate astronomical tables and helped develop instruments such as the astrolabe. Philosophy and Literature: Philosophical works by thinkers such as Al-Farabi and Averroes (Ibn Rushd) helped shape European thought, while Islamic literature flourished with iconic works such as “Arabian Nights”. Islam in the Modern Era: Challenges and Global Impact In the contemporary world, Islam continues to be a vital and dynamic force. However, it faces complex challenges, such as secularism, extremism, and internal debates over the interpretation of Sharia. The role of women, human rights, and the modernization of Muslim societies are topics of ongoing discussion.

In addition, Islamophobia and misunderstandings about Islam pose significant challenges to Muslim communities, especially in Western countries. Religious leaders and scholars often seek to clarify that Islam is a faith of peace and justice, contrary to the violence that some extremist groups practice in its name.

Contemporary Islamic movements, from moderate to conservative, reflect the diversity within the faith. Sufi Islam, for example, with its mystical focus, promotes a deeply personal experience of connection with God, while reformist movements seek to harmonize Islamic traditions with modern values.

The Legacy of Islam The legacy of Islam is vast and multifaceted, encompassing cultural, scientific, and spiritual achievements that have shaped the course of human history. As one of the world’s major religions, Islam continues to influence millions of lives every day, providing a spiritual and ethical framework that guides its followers in all areas of life.

The impact of Islam transcends geographic and cultural boundaries, keeping alive the heritage of one of the most influential religious movements in history. With a legacy of knowledge, art, and spirituality, Islam remains a global force, rich in diversity and resilience, that continues to inspire its followers in their quest for a more just and spiritual world.

Islam, with its deep roots in the Arabian Peninsula and its global reach, is a faith that has transformed societies and continues to shape the lives of millions. Its message of unity, justice and devotion resonates through the centuries, reflecting the rich tapestry of Islamic heritage and its continuing relevance in the modern world.

#islam #history of religion #religion

0 notes

drogba-prospect · 3 months

Text

Material religion - Wikipedia

Religion Minuit-Saint Bembé Catholicism Theology

The religious institute of the Salesians of Don Bosco (SDB), founded by John Bosco in 1859 (approved by the Holy See in 1874), is also known as the Society of Saint Francis de Sales, and is placed under his patronage

The French school of spirituality was the principal devotional influence within the Catholic Church from the mid-17th century through the mid-20th century, not only in France but throughout the Church in most of the world. A development of the Catholic Reformation like the Spanish mystics and the Society of Jesus, it focused the devotional life of the Catholic faithful on a personal experience of the person of Jesus and the quest for personal holiness. It was perhaps more concrete than the Iberian example and thus easier to teach, but it shared with the Spanish saints their focus on the divine person. This movement in Catholic spirituality had many important figures over the centuries, the first being its founder, Cardinal Pierre de Bérulle (1575–1629), along with St. Francis de Sales, who in 1877 was declared a Doctor of the Church.

The Council of Trent (Latin: Concilium Tridentinum), held between 1545 and 1563 in Trent (or Trento), now in northern Italy, was the 19th ecumenical council of the Catholic Church. Prompted by the Protestant Reformation at the time, it has been described as the embodiment of the Counter-Reformation. The Council issued key statements and clarifications of the Church's doctrine and teachings, including scripture, the biblical canon, sacred tradition, original sin, justification, salvation, the sacraments, the Mass, and the veneration of saints[4] and also issued condemnations of what it defined to be heresies committed by proponents of Protestantism. The consequences of the Council were also significant with regard to the Church's liturgy and censorship.

Initiated in part to address the challenges of the Protestant Reformations,[3] the Counter-Reformation was a comprehensive effort arising from the decrees of the Council of Trent. The effort produced apologetic and polemical documents, heresy trials, anti-corruption efforts, spiritual movements, the promotion of new religious orders, and the flourishing of new art and musical styles.

In short, the gun-toting angel was a multifaceted metaphor. “It undoubtedly also reflected the Catholic Counter-Reformation militaristic rhetoric,” wrote Donahue-Wallace, “which promoted the church as an army and heavenly beings as its soldiers.”

BELMÔNT'S SIN: STREET IDENTITY MURAL CROWN APOTHEOSIS; In religion, apotheosis was a feature of many religions in the ancient world, and some that are active today. It requires a belief that there is a possibility of newly-created gods, so a polytheistic belief system. The major modern religions of Christianity, Islam, and Judaism do not allow for this. In Hellenistic culture, a mural crown identified tutelary deities such as the goddess Tyche (the embodiment of the fortunes of a city, familiar to Romans as Fortuna), and Hestia (the embodiment of the protection of a city, familiar to Romans as Vesta). The high cylindrical polos of Rhea/Cybele too could be rendered as a mural crown in Hellenistic times, specifically designating the mother goddess as patron of a city. Nightlife entertainment is often more adult-oriented than daytime entertainment. Location theory has become an integral part of economic geography, regional science, and spatial economics.

The demiurge (/ˈdɛmi.ɜːrdʒ/) (sometimes spelled as demiurg) is an artisan-like figure responsible for fashioning and maintaining the physical universe. The Gnostics adopted the term demiurge. Although a fashioner, the demiurge is not necessarily the same as the creator figure in the monotheistic sense, because the demiurge itself and the material from which the demiurge fashions the universe are both considered consequences of something else. Depending on the system, they may be considered either uncreated and eternal or the product of some other entity Gnosticism presents a distinction between the highest, unknowable God or Supreme Being and the demiurgic "creator" of the material, identified in some traditions with Yahweh, the God of the Hebrew Bible. Several systems of Gnostic thought present the Demiurge as antagonistic to the will of the Supreme Being, with his creation initially having the malevolent intention of entrapping aspects of the divine in materiality. In other systems, the Demiurge is instead portrayed as "merely" incompetent or foolish: his creation is an unconscious attempt to replicate the divine world (the pleroma) based on faint recollections, and thus ends up fundamentally flawed. Thus, in such systems, the Demiurge is a proposed solution to the problem of evil: while the divine beings are omniscient and omnibenevolent, the Demiurge who rules over our own physical world is not.[15]

An illusion is a distortion of the senses, which can reveal how the mind normally organizes and interprets sensory stimulation. Although illusions distort the human perception of reality, they are generally shared by most people.[1]

Gnostic cosmogony generally presents a distinction between a supreme, hidden God and a malevolent lesser divinity (sometimes associated with the biblical deity Yahweh)[1] who is responsible for creating the material universe. Consequently, Gnostics considered material existence flawed or evil, and held the principal element of salvation to be direct knowledge of the hidden divinity, attained via mystical or esoteric insight. Many Gnostic texts deal not in concepts of sin and repentance, but with illusion and enlightenment.[2] Gnostic writings flourished among certain Christian groups in the Mediterranean world around the second century, when the Fathers of the early Church denounced them as heresy.[3]

The Bible typically describes the Heavenly host as being made up of angels, and gives several descriptions of angels in military terms, such as their encampment (Genesis 32:1–2), command structure (Psalms 91:11–12; Matt.13:41; Rev.7:2), and participation in combat (Job 19:12; Rev.12:7). Other passages indicate other entities make up the divine army, namely stars (Judges 5:20, Isaiah 40:26).[1][full citation needed] In Christian theology, the heavenly host participate in the war in Heaven.

Mystery religions, mystery cults, sacred mysteries or simply mysteries, were religious schools of the Greco-Roman world for which participation was reserved to initiates (mystai).

In religious studies, an ethnic religion is a religion or belief associated with notions of heredity and a particular ethnic group.

The Dionysian Mysteries were a ritual of ancient Greece and Rome which sometimes used intoxicants and other trance-inducing techniques (like dance and music) to remove inhibitions and social constraints, liberating the individual to return to a natural state.

Civil religion, also referred to as a civic religion, is the implicit religious values of a nation, as expressed through public rituals, symbols (such as the national flag), and ceremonies on sacred days and at sacred places (such as monuments, battlefields, or national cemeteries).

Material religion is a framework used by scholars of religion to examine the interaction between religion and material culture. It focuses on the place of objects, images, spaces, and buildings in religious communities. The framework has been promoted by scholars such as Birgit Meyer, Sally Promey, S. Brent Plate, David Morgan, etc.

Material culture is the aspect of culture manifested by the physical objects and architecture of a society. The term is primarily used in archaeology and anthropology, but is also of interest to sociology, geography and history.[1] The field considers artifacts in relation to their specific cultural and historic contexts, communities and belief systems. It includes the usage, consumption, creation and trade of objects as well as the behaviors, norms and rituals that the objects create or take part in.

The doctrine or theory of immanence holds that the divine encompasses or is manifested in the material world. It is held by some philosophical and metaphysical theories of divine presence. Immanence is usually applied in monotheistic, pantheistic, pandeistic, or panentheistic faiths to suggest that the spiritual world permeates the mundane.

1758 manuscript Tableau économique (Economic Table) argued that agricultural surpluses, by flowing through the economy in the form of rent, wages, and purchases were the real economic movers.

Physiocracy (French: physiocratie; from the Greek for "government of nature") is an economic theory developed by a group of 18th-century Age of Enlightenment French economists who believed that the wealth of nations derived solely from the value of "land agriculture" or "land development" and that agricultural products should be highly priced.[1] Their theories originated in France and were most popular during the second half of the 18th century. Physiocracy became one of the first well-developed theories of economics.

The tableau économique is credited as the "first precise formulation" of interdependent systems in economics and the origin of the theory of the multiplier in economics.[5] An analogous table is used in the theory of money creation under fractional-reserve banking by relending of deposits, leading to the money multiplier.

The model Quesnay created consisted of three economic movers. The "Proprietary" class consisted of only landowners. The "Productive" class consisted of all agricultural laborers. The "Sterile" class is made up of artisans and merchants. The flow of production and/or cash between the three classes started with the Proprietary class because they own the land and they buy from both of the other classes.

Pardicé Minuit Bembé (Spirit Catalyst)

Jean-Claude Mars Angel Conversation System: Jean-Claude Church Enterprises (Planetary Intelligence Church District Real Estate; Liberal Arts Immersion Schools; Gold; Athletics; Cooking); Jean-Claude Church Gatherings (School Nights Virgil, Weekend Noon Mass then Weekend Sports League) Francis de Sales and Don St. Bosco Influence

RUSSE NOIR

0 notes

panglossesanddiadorims · 4 months

Text

Inherit the Wind of Fanaticism

youtube

Just picture this: members of parliament truly believe environmental disasters, social upheavals and disruptive behavior are the result of a godless society who does not abide by the religious scriptures, a society whose moral fabrics are not cemented on these members' interpretation of God and Christian beliefs.

Therefore a vengeful, resentful and merciless Entity (but who also loves us) has punished mankind for worshipping pagan gods, dabbling in unholy ideas, embracing liberal ideals, endorsing human rights and teaching scientific concepts.

As a result, to placate His wrath, after the daily prayers, they enact bills to make religious dogmas become societal laws, eventually abolishing the idea of a secular society. After all, History has taught us how theocracy benefit societies by propelling human development and progress.

Bear in mind they only accept religious fundaments from the Books of the Old Testament. Any monotheistic philosophy from the Torah, Tanakh, Quran, Analects of Confucius and Rig Veda are considered as corrupt and harmful as multi-gods religions like Shintoism, African and Indigenous ones. The Roman and Greek mythologies would be forbidden to even be studied. In fact, anyone not embracing their own image of God will be labeled atheists, regardless they believe in other ideas of God, others gods or not at all.

No doubt they would commence their moral crusade by labeling as abominations homosexuality, divorce, feminism and prostitution and any other communist attitude (though Marxism is a an economic theory) they claim to not meet their medieval criteria of decency traditional family values.

Abortion would not be addressed under the scope of education, public health or social conditions, but a hideous crime committed by murderous women who became pregnant on their own. Certainly the fetus would be protected until birth like Rosemary's baby was, but differently from the spawn of the devil, the baby would not be adopted by any Christian family or be provided economical and social means to have a dignified life the children of churchgoers do.

Even if the pregnancy is the result of a rape, women must be criminalized. Either their amoral behavior and inappropriate clothes fleeced men to act as irrational animals or, under medieval beliefs, a conception can only occur if a woman has orgasm, proving the rape was pleasant for her. Because undeniably rape is about love, consent and pleasure, not about power, sense of inferiority, hate and control.

After the easy part of ridding of minorities, the parliamentary sect broadens the horizons by both outlawing tattooing (Leviticus 19:28), adultery (Exodus 20:14, Deuteronomy 22:20-21 and Leviticus 21:9), blasphemy (Leviticus 19:28 and Monty Python’s Life of Brian), use of garments made of different threads (Leviticus 19:22), cutting the hair or shaving (Leviticus 19:27), sowing the same soil with different crops or touching the skin of a dead animal (Leviticus 19:22), working on the Sabbath (Exodus 35:2), sexual intercourses with menstruated women (Leviticus 20:18) and enforcing others like compelling women to be subservient to their husbands, not speaking unless given permission from their husbands (Deuteronomy 22:5).

Ultimately this last one could be re-adjusted as it has happened with the Bible itself in the past thousand years. Let it not be taken so literally; no decent society should be deprived of the coherent, loving hearts and minds of empowered women like Michele Bolsonaro, Damares, Carla Zampelli and Bia Kicis.

The enforcement of these laws would be severe and swift, since these Books also bless stoning, flaying, burning and beheading as acceptable means of capital punishment, something from which many influencers could monetize.

To not convey the wrong idea of a harsh sectarian agenda, parts of the scriptures would be legalized to foster free enterprise like selling of the youngest daughters into slavery (Exodus 21:7). In fact, to not sound feminist for favoring just the enslavement of women, why not reinstate slavery and racial segregation? Genesis 9 and 18-27 state that black individuals are cursed for being the descendants of Ham, Noah’s son who emasculated himself, so slavery is morally justified, and not enforcing it a sign of infidelity against God according to Genesis 11, Deuteronomy 32:8, Acts 1:8 and 17:26, 1 Corinthians 7:17-24, Romans 13 and Revelation 5:9 and 7:9.

To complete the path to a religious state, the abolishment of the Constitution, penal and civil codes, agreements the country is signatory, secular principles of separation of State and Church and independent forms of government would be enacted and substituted for clerical tribunals responsible to judge our moral conduct and enforce obedience to the Ten Commandments, elaborated sentences conceived by God while disguised as a flaming bush.

Perhaps He Himself could have announced the set of rules live to the tens of thousands of Jews at the bottom of Mount Sinai to prevent suspicion, but as He works in mysterious ways, it looked a better idea to ask an elderly man to do the job.

Nevertheless, as the Orwellian pigs did while running the Animal Farm, once a while the Commandments could be amended for all are equal servers of God, but some are more equal than the others.

Before the looming fundamentalist Twilight Zone episode becomes a reality, I will take the opportunity to say a few things:

1- Religion may be a source of soothing, love, tolerance, comfort and peace of mind, making one feel embraced, helping refuel hope and deal with losses. The problem starts when its fanatical fans and followers make it an obsession, use the belief in a God as the unique source to explain all phenomena, natural or not, relinquish all other forms of human knowledge and finally impose onto others this mindset as the absolute and only truth. After all, if God is responsible for all beautiful stuff like sunsets and cherry blossoms, he may be a bit culpable for bone marrow cancer in children too. In addition, why did He get so upset to the point of drowning everyone for bad behavior, including children and unborn babies, during the Flood but allowed the Nazis to closely annihilate His people in Europe? Why not obliterate Berlin or even Nuremberg during the Hitler's Youth rallies as he did in Sodom and Gomorra?

2- If one has a faith, why does it need constant validation or confirmation from others? Why do believers find it so hard to accept skepticism or questioning? It is how the human brain functions, how we manage to stop living in caves when we started to reason, challenge dogmas and develop scientific curiosity as many religious people like Kepler, Newton, Darwin, Da Vinci and Galileo did. Really, if it is your faith, just believe it, why bother and see a different opinion as a threat to your faith? Maybe you yourself have doubts about it.

3- Faith is not a scientific hypothesis that requires empirical evidence and peer review to validate it. Both traditional religious beliefs and unorthodox ones like crystals, ghosts, elves and astrology do not require proof. If someone tells me the Theory of Evolution is only a theory (which under scientific perspective means it is a validated fact, just not demonstrated through equations as a scientific law), the Earth is flat, vaccines cause autism, climate change is not caused by deforestation and carbon emissions, the moon landing was a hoax, I just ignore it. One piece of advice then: If one finds it a bit strange an 800-year old man managed to house millions of different species in perfect harmony in an ark for forty days and eventually his family managed to re-populate the world with all different ethnicities, just ignore it. It is easier and simpler, since it requires no evidence, just your faith.

4- Finally, try to imagine a reverse reality. Instead of religious groups imposing dogmas and creating a theocratic state, a Government that cancels police and firefighter support since churches and temples are granted tax exemption , allows Catholic priests to marry and nuns to celebrate masses, institutes the singing of the national anthem in seminaries and convents, forbids money transactions during religious ceremonies, prohibits the Bible and other religious books in libraries and public schools. Would you feel your so-called freedom of religion is menaced?

Well, think about it. All you have to do is think by yourself.

#Youtube

0 notes