#is not an infallible authority on his inspirations

[coldgoldlazarus]

Rewatching ATLA and got to Crossroads Of Destiny, and I noticed another interesting parallel/contrast between Aang and Zaheer. Both struggled with the problem of attachment to a loved one, holding them back from reaching full spiritual balance and potential. Aang was prevented from attaining the Avatar state at all until he completed the unlocking of his Chakras, and Zaheer was unable to master the extremely difficult airbending technique of unaided flight.

But the key difference is that when it came down to the bare wire, Aang realized that the world needed to come before Katara, and that he could love and try to help her, while accepting that to some degree her fate was ultimately out of his hands. By releasing that intense attachment, he was finally able to unlock his last chakra and reach the Avatar state. (And then Azula happened, of course, but that doesn't undermine that moment.)

Meanwhile, I think Zaheer somewhat failed in that by comparison. He could not let go of his attachment to P'li until after she literally died. Only then was he able to embrace the void and attain true flight, because that attachment was severed, rather than a conscious decision on his part. It's a subtle but interesting way of showing how close he was to understanding the Air Nomads' philosophy, and yet still so far from it in a few key ways. And that of course led to his flawed overall outlook on the world, and the well-intentioned but ultimately still monstrous path he and his followers took.

[ilovefredjones]

there seems to be an unused ration of… water? yes.

martin crimp, cyrano de bergerac / raoul walsh, captain horatio hornblower

[happiest-hotch]

3 AM

part one

Summary: Aaron shows up somewhere he shouldn't be with some words for you

Pairing: Aaron Hotchner x Fem!Reader (Angst/Fluff)

Word Count: 1.4k

Content Warning: mutual cheating

You go home to a house that doesn't feel like home, which isn't anything new, but today, it upsets you. Maybe it's too late, and the case drained you too much. Your self-preservation instincts refuse you to consider an outside factor.

Thankfully, your need for sleep trumps any chance of facing an existential crisis, so instead of staring at the ceiling wondering how your life got to this point, you're asleep almost as soon as your head hits the pillow.

It doesn't last long. Too soon, a knock on your door wakes you, and you reach for your phone to check the time. 2:52- great. If it were BAU-related, Penelope would have called and left messages before pounding on your door in the early morning. You run through who it could be. Maybe your pathetic excuse of a husband lost his keys, but nothing would inspire him to come home unless he learned of your affair and was hypocritically mad. Or it could be much more mundane; police, firefighters, a neighbor. 

Speculation gets too exhausting, so you get up and walk to the front door, checking your gun is sitting on the side table before opening the door.

It's one of the last people you expect. You wrap your robe tighter around yourself, defensive and hyper-aware that he's in jeans and a shirt, and you're in a tank and sleeping shorts. 

"Hotch." You greet him coldly, colder than the chilly DC night air. 

He didn't expect a more positive reaction. "Don't call me that." He says slightly too pathetically. 

"What can I do for you?" You ask, unsure what's compelling you to continue the conversation and not just slam the door in his face.

He shouldn't be here.

He knows it, you know he knows it, and you know it.

"Let me in." The Unit Chief tone, commanding authority, is nowhere to be heard, no matter how hard he tries to muster it up.

You sigh, momentarily weighing the pros and cons before stepping aside. Aaron follows you in carefully. Houses, thus far, have been off limits, like there was some unwritten rule neither of you would show up at the other places, knowing the consequences, but he's here, and you're still not sure why.

As you lead him down the hallway, Aaron keeps his head down, obviously trying to avoid being nosey. It's amusing since the personal pieces he assumes you have and refuses to look at don't exist. You wonder if he's drawing similarities between you and where you live, both beautiful on the outside and empty on the inside.

"Is he-" His question quickly gets reframed. "Are you alone?"

"I was." You answer. "He's in Pierre, South Dakota."

"Our case was in Pierre, Sou- Oh." Unsurprisingly, he put it together quickly. Pierre, South Dakota, is not a big enough place for you not to have run into your husband.

You laugh humorlessly. "I know. It's smart to have an infallible lie, but maybe not that specific." You remark. "He's actually in Miami. I checked the credit card and told him our case was there, so he always has to look over his shoulder."

Aaron doesn't smirk at what you consider a wonderfully devious plan. Instead, he looks concerned. "You still have joint credit cards? Are you keeping any money he can't touch?"

"Surely you didn't come here to discuss my financials." You shoot back, but he raises his eyebrows, and you know you can't progress the conversation without answering his question. "Yes. I've been to a lawyer and an accountant. He's only running himself into massive amounts of debt." You assure him. "Although, I'm not sure when this became your business."

His answer doesn't come quickly, and when he speaks, it's inadequate. "It's not."

"Okay, so what are you doing here?" You prompt. "Because you look like hell, Aaron, and you could really do with some sleep."

"I went home and sat there for an hour just thinking." He tells you. So, he didn't get lucky enough to fall asleep and avoid dreadful spiraling thoughts.

"You want to talk about your feelings?" You ask incredulously, unsure how he conjured the audacity to come here. His lack of answer is an answer. "No." You shake your head firmly. "You don't get to do this. Whatever we are, we don't discuss feelings."

"We could," Aaron begs desperately. It's not hard to profile that he keeps his emotions bottled up until he's bursting, so you know Aaron's here for a different type of release, for you to drain yourself listening to his problems and leave before he can consider that you have feelings.

You could hit him hard enough that he stops talking, and it's tempting.

"I'm okay with running to you when you want to have sex, but I can't be who you run to when you want to talk to someone about your day." You explain it as simple as you possibly can. 

"I don't think of you like that," Aaron assures you, his eyes softening as his words fall short of being stern.

Frustrated, you huff. You're tired and wound up, easily upset, and Aaron shouldn't be here. "Well, I have to think of you like that... or I can't sleep with you and not feel anything."

"You're not hearing me." He argues, a tiny flicker of the fire you saw before appearing in his eyes. "I want you to feel things."

You bit down on your bottom lip to avoid crying. You've become so callous to everything around you, bottled so much of it up that it's difficult to let any emotion show without breaking the floodgate. 

"You don't." You fight back, although it comes off far weaker than you expected. "I'm messy, my whole life is just one disaster after another, and I'll never excite you if we're not sneaking around."

Aaron's hands come to cup your cheeks, surprising you completely. It's a soft touch that has your lips closed in a second. "Don't say that." He instructs, speaking firmly but gently. "You're not a mess, not at all."

"Look at where we are, Aaron!" You remind him, throwing your arm at your side. For a detail-orientated person, he's only focusing on the big picture. "I'm married, you're married, and this is so damn messy."

"I know, I know." He nods. "It's... less than ideal, but we can get through it." He promises, holding you tighter now, like he's worried you'll slip away. "I want to be there for you. I don't care about any mistakes from your past. And please, please don't say that you won't excite me because I will always be excited every time I see you." It's enough to have you in gentle tears, not angry, heavy sobs, and he does his best to wipe them up delicately. "But if you don't feel the same way..." 

Aaron's waiting for your decision, and he isn't about to add more pressure, but he will stand there for as long as you need to decide. 

"I do." You affirm. "God, Aaron, I want to be with you more than anything, but I'm not sure I know how to." Being married is just a technicality now, and a divorce is something you're fiscally ready to do now. 

"Tea." He decides, his permanently furrowed brows relaxing. 

"Tea?" You repeat. 

He moves slightly away from you. "Where's the kitchen?" You're still confused about why now is the right time for tea, so you wait for him to explain. "I'm going to make you tea, and we're going to drink it while you tell me how you're feeling, and then whatever you want- a drive, breakfast, you name it, it's yours."

You pull away from him, offering your hand to take him to the kitchen. "Sleep is what we're doing after this." You tell him. "I don't say it to be mean, but you do look like hell."

"Wait." He stops you before you're in the kitchen, turning to hold your hands in his. "You need to know that I don't care about anything in your distant or soon-to-be past, but it's always going to be my privilege to be part of your future."

Aaron isn't meant to be here, and you aren't either, but wherever you're meant to be, it's with him.

[thatthoughtatthebackofyourmind]

In Defence of Albus Dumbledore:

Look. I know this is an unpopular opinion, so I’m going to write this here because putting it anywhere else (like at the bottom of the fics which have inspired this frustration) would seem mean, and it would probably end up coming off as unintentional flaming, which I would never do to anyone ever. Also, as I’m less frustrated with individual works than I am with an entire situation, it wouldn’t really be fair to direct it at one specific person.

Get ready. This is going to be very ranty and long and I can't promise not to get off topic and onto a tangent a few times.

I understand that we all have grown up a lot since first reading Harry Potter. I get that once we realized how grey a few of Dumbledore’s decisions actually and the ways in which they affected the characters we love we all felt rightfully upset.

But can we please stop being so narrowminded about it?

There are plenty of redemption fics out there. A lot of them are works that redeem characters like Severus Snape, Draco Malfoy, Draco’s parents, various Dursleys and loads of other people. I’ve seen fics that have Sirius confronting the realities of his juvenal behaviours and having to atone for past wrongs. I’ve even seen (but admittedly never read) fics that redeem Voldemort himself.

But the least popular person for a redemption story in fanfiction by far seems to be Albus Dumbledore.

I get it.

He was supposed to be an infallible genius who did no wrong and he let us down. But please.

Can we all please just admit that we’re using Dumbledore as a stand in?

The hatred we as a fan community levy at Dumbledore is influenced by so much more than his actions in cannon.

It’s the dissolution we feel at growing up. The need as young people to bite back at overbearing authority. It’s the conviction that leaders should never be allowed to fail if failure means the death of innocent people. Even though we can all recognize on a personal level that our failures are typically unintentional and are definitely what make us human.

Of late, it’s very clear that Dumbledore is a stand in for the betrayal we feel at JK Rowling’s anti-trans standing.

We all loved her so much.

She gave us this world.

She promised it to everyone.

And then she said that it was all a lie, and that it was never meant for some of us anyway.

The parallels are clear.

While we were first reading, we loved who Harry loved. Simply because he loved them, and we loved him.

When we grew up, we started acknowledging the ways in which the characters mirrored people in real life, and we chose the people we found the most familiar to love instead. Personally, I understand the reason I read Severitus so often is because I had a largely absent father who I idolized as a child, and that father was a bit of a rockstar like person. Dark, intelligent, and cruel when he wanted to be. Artistic, genius, condescending, and amazing.

As an adult, I still long for his love and approval. Learning that Severus was capable of so much good at the very end of his story, that he was in fact good all along, even when he looked exactly the opposite, gave me hope that my father was too. Even though I now understand that redemption for my father is just a fairy tale it’s still a story I hold close to my heart. A story I long for. It’s a possible happy ending for both a lonely child and a jaded grouchy adult.

Albus Dumbledore was different.

This was a man that we trusted to have everyone’s best intentions at heart. We were told he was safe. We were told he was the smartest man in any room. And then he failed us. And we looked back at all he had done, and rather than seeing the good he had tried to achieve, all we could see were the mistakes he had made.  

I firmly believe that the reason that so many people hate him so strongly now is because we all loved him so much first. Like Harry, we all believe that he was incapable of mistakes. His mistakes in cannon aren’t any more morally condemning than anyone else on the light side.

Keep in mind that I said, “in cannon.” I feel like I need to distinguish that. In cannon, though Harry asked if he could stay at Hogwarts during the summer, he never told Dumbledore about living in a cupboard under the stairs. His letter was addressed to there, but we have no way of knowing whether it was physically or magically written on the envelope. And besides, that letter was signed by Professor McGonagall, not Dumbledore. Harry also never mentioned to him the Dursleys withholding food. Or locking up his trunk so that he couldn’t do his homework. He made it clear that they disliked him, that they thought him a burden, but think. Really think. Dumbledore is the head of a school full of children. How many children misunderstand and exaggerate even in their own minds how much their families dislike them.

Let me be clear; when I say kids exaggerate I don’t mean in terms of abuse. I only mean typical things such as, “My mom’s always grouchy when she gets home from work and she never notices that I’ve tried really hard by cleaning the bathroom if she told me to clean the kitchen before she got home and I decided to do the bathroom because I wanted to clean it instead of doing the dishes and now she’s yelling at me that she just needs me to help her sometimes, and I don’t feel like that’s fair because really I do. Look, I cleaned the whole bathroom by myself! And I straitened up the living room too! The only thing I ‘forgot’ was the kitchen and now she’s acting like I do nothing. This means she hates me and appreciates nothing I do. I am clearly a burden to her, and I should go live under a rock so that she doesn’t have to deal with me anymore.” Really, your mom probably isn’t saying you’re a burden. Your mom is more than likely overworked, over-tired, and almost certainly depressed in a society that doesn’t cater to mental health awareness, and on top of all that she was raised by a generation that was allergic to admitting and self-regulating their true feelings so she can’t articulate that and she’s instead taking her frustrations out on you.

This is wrong, and she shouldn’t do it. But consider. Why didn’t you want to clean the kitchen? Was it because you had a long hard day at school and you’re overworked, over-tired, and definitely depressed in a world that doesn’t cater to mental health awareness, and all you really wanted was a break from the hardest job and you just wanted to compromise by doing the ones you felt emotionally and physically able to do? Because I promise, that’s probably exactly how your mom feels about the damn dirty dishes that she’s going to have to deal with before she can make dinner after being cussed out and yelled at by customers and or bosses all day in between doing her actual work and that’s the real reason she’s yelling.

Because, though a lot of teens believe otherwise, parents are still just people and the feelings that overwhelm kids still overwhelm adults just as badly. And they’re even less likely to know how to help themselves because they didn’t grow up with the internet where everyone shares their feeling and gets back validation and advice, so they mostly just believed those feelings were personal failings that indicated something broken specifically only in them and that they should learn to live with it and never tell anyone ever because complaining is for babies and liberals. Okay, maybe that last bit is a little too specific to my own mother, but you get the idea.

It’s a cycle that’s been going on for years. Hopefully, we can eventually all learn how to communicate peacefully and compromise on chores sometimes so we can end it someday. Or everyone can just switch to paper plates, and then we’ll worry about how we’re killing the planet later and no one will have to do the dishes ever again.

The point is, while that isn’t the best parenting style, and it can cause issue’s with your familial relationship as you age, it isn’t technically abuse. And it especially wouldn’t be considered abuse in the 90’s while Harry Potter was taking place or the early 00’s when it was being published.

Harry was not bruised when he arrived at Hogwarts. He didn’t show obvious outward signs of abuse. He never told any adults what his life was like at the Dursleys at all. He really didn’t even say much about it to Ron or Hermione either. Mrs. Weasley sent him treats for his birthday, which was a sweet motherly gesture. Hermione and Hagrid did as well but think about it. Do you believe for a second that if Molly have-another-serving, can-I-get-you-some-more-bread, try-the-potatoes Weasley honestly thought the Dursley’s were starving Harry that she would first wait until the end of July to send Harry anything, and then only send him sweets? She would scale the Dursleys’ house and stuff a full six course meal through the bars multiple times a day before she let that boy live off stale birthday cake. When she asked if the Dursley had fed him enough she meant it in the same way she always meant it, in the if ‘I can feed the world I can love the world’ way.

 Hagrid sent him rock cakes, but again, think about it. Hagrid had shown up with a cake for Harry’s birthday the day he first delivered the letter when he couldn’t have yet known of the way Harry was treated. He just wanted to show Harry he was loved and missed.

Of the people who sent him food, only Hermione really knew Harry didn’t get to eat his fill at the Dursley’s and she still only sent cake because all she knew was that he was being forced to diet with Dudley. Which is why she sent him the kind of food one would eat if they weren’t on a diet instead of true sustenance. A fourth of a grapefruit as a meal is not a diet, no matter what Petunia called it. And if he had told Hermione specifics, she likely would have told Harry that, but again, he didn’t tell anyone specifics.

 Everyone knew that Harry was unfavoured by the Dursley’s and that they wouldn’t be celebrating his birthday, and he wouldn’t receive cake or presents, but they really didn’t know much else. Ron and Hermione only understood he was being starved in the way most naive well-fed kids from happy families can understand. It sounded cruel, and they did try to tell people, but because they didn’t understand the full gravity of the situation, they couldn’t properly communicate to trusted adults that Harry was actually experiencing abuse. Plus, Harry tended to downplay it even to them.

When Dumbledore speaks about knowing Harry would come from a less than happy home, you can tell he is picturing a world where Harry is liked second best to his cousin. Where he never feels fully at home. Like an overextended visitor in a relative’s house. He thinks they’ll treat him like the weird cousin who came to stay and never left rather than an immediate family member.

He isn’t picturing Petunia Dursley slinging a frying pan at Harry’s head. Or refusing to let him drink his fill of water on a hot summer’s day spent weeding her ridiculous flower garden. Or an overly restrictive diet enforced on an already undernourished body simply to make Harry’s morbidly obese cousin feel better about his doctor changing his eating habits.

I think we’ll all agree that feeling less than welcome by stuck up relatives sucks, but it’s better than whatever Voldemort’s loyal leftover followers will do to him if they manage to track down the person responsible for their dark lord’s downfall.

I understand why a lot of people feel like Dumbledore should have just put Harry under the Fidelius Charm and hid him rather than sending him to the Dursley’s but consider: If Dumbledore trusted Sirius the way he must have done to not betray James and his family, then it makes sense that he felt Fidelius was no longer an option. He fully believed Sirius was the secret keeper. Sirius, the Potters, and Pettigrew were the only ones to know of the change. It’s likely that after learning that the Death Eaters had convinced Sirius to betray the Potters he was jaded enough to take it as a sign that no one could be a trusted Secret Keeper. No matter how much they loved the person under protection.

He also likely would have insisted on a trial for Sirius had Sirius himself not told everyone that he was the one who killed James and Lily while descending into hysterical laughter. We know what Sirius meant, (he felt responsible for them dying because switching to Peter at the last minute had been his idea) because we read the third Harry Potter book, but Dumbledore didn’t have that same advantage. All he had was the word of an apparently mad man. A man who had just tracked down another dear friend and apparently killed him and 12 innocent bystanders in a fit of insanity.

Why, when last he had heard Sirius was the Secret Keeper, would he doubt a verbal confession from a man who did nothing to try and save himself from Azkaban? The Marauders never told anyone of their animagus abilities. No one but Sirius could have understood what Peter had done. Why do we expect Dumbledore to have known better?

So, instead of Fidelius and hiding Harry away for his entire childhood, he gave him the best protection he could think of under the circumstances he had been given. He sought to give Harry a normal life and to keep him safe from the remaining Death Eaters.

Dumbledore understood that fame was power, and that power could corrupt even the best of people with the strongest of minds, so he kept Harry away from the limelight. He also understood how fickle people where about fame. This was the right decision even if the Dursley were a bad choice in guardians. We saw proof of this numerous times while Harry was at school. His fame only ever seemed to bring him more hardships. In book two they said Harry was a dark wizard because he was a Parselmouth and that that’s how he overpowered Voldemort. In book four even some of Harry’s friends refused to believe he wasn’t just a glory hound and that it hadn’t been him who entered his name in the tournament, but rather someone trying to kill him. In book five, almost everyone refused to believe Harry was telling the truth about Voldemort’s return. Every single time Harry’s name entered the limelight, it was in a way that harmed him. Imagine how much earlier it would have started had he grown up in the wizarding world. They would have been debating his kindergarten finger paintings if they could have.  

Why does the entire fandom also assume that Dumbledore thought of himself as the wisest most all-knowing man in any room? The only people who canonically acted like they believed that about him were the Golden Trio, and they were enlightened otherwise multiple times throughout the books as they grew up. Just as everyone learns new truths about trusted adults they thought of as perfect as they grow.

The fact is, Albus Dumbledore has always been just a man.

He was a great and powerful but flawed man who wanted more than anything to make sure that evil could not prevail. He obviously still holds plenty of shame and guilt over his dealings with Gellert Grindelwald in his misspent youth. We have surmised that when he looked in the Mirror of Erised he likely saw his sister Ariana, or something as equally heart-breaking which he recognized as his own fault. He fully understood that he was just a man. He encouraged everyone to understand that fact about Voldemort as well.

He was not a god, and he didn’t pretend to be.

Not in cannon anyway.

Fanon Dumbledore, on the other hand, tends to be anything from a meddling idiot to a full on manipulative dark lord complete with moustache twirling and nefarious intent. Which, I believe, further influences and enforces the fandom’s collective bad opinion of him. Most of us haven’t reread the real books in years. It gets hard to remember at some points what was something he did in canon vs. what was something he did in fanfiction.

 Every other character seems welcomed to grow in the world of fandom.

Severus was canonically a willing Death Eater in his youth, a bully to children in his care in his adulthood, and a petty grudge-holder who couldn’t let go of the past. We accept that we can’t fully know how much of his behaviour towards the students was an act to fool the Death Eater’s children, but we can assume it definitely wasn’t all of it. Still, he gets plenty of redemption fics. He had literal access to Harry’s traumatic childhood memories but still saw no signs of abuse because he was too busy trying to keep a 15-year-old child from gaining any ammunition about his own past.

Looking back, it seems obvious that as very few of Harry’s childhood memories were shown in the Occlumency scenes, he likely wasn’t as bad at clearing his mind as either he or Snape assumed, but it was also possible that Severus didn’t see those memories because that wasn’t what he was looking for. The memory of Harry getting chased up a tree by Marge’s dog as the rest of his family watched and laughed should have triggered at least a couple of red flags, but Severus was typically determined to only see the bad in Harry, so he overlooked it.

James Potter who is often thought of as the better choice for Lily was also a bully. And he spent years relentlessly pursuing a relationship with someone who had never given him any indication that his advances were welcome and had in fact outright told him the exact opposite of that many times until he finally wore her down and convinced her to give him a shot. That’s gross, unacceptable behaviour but I guess it is technically better than dating a budding racist that sees you as the exception to his views on your people, so James is rebranded as a lovable hero who changed after having a slightly misspent youth rather than a mean spirited bully who likely grew bored with his main target once he no longer saw him as competition (there would have been no reason to bully Snape if Lily wasn’t friends with him anymore after 5th year which was conveniently around the time he began to “grow up”) as well as a pushy loser who wouldn’t take no for an answer even though Lily said it multiple times. (There’s also the point that once Snape knew about Lupin being a werewolf, James likely wouldn’t have bullied him anymore so as not to provoke Snape to reveal the secret and get Lupin thrown out of school and possibly killed.)

Ron told Molly outright that the Dursley’s were starving Harry and had fixed bars on his windows to trap him after weeks of being concerned when he didn’t reply to Ron’s letters, and she still ignored it, assuming instead that Ron was exaggerating and never even tried to check with Harry to learn that he wasn’t.

Remus spent a year teaching Harry individualized lessons to repel Dementors and never once asked him why he was so sad that they affected him in ways that none of the other students experienced. I mean really, he couldn’t have been the only orphan attending that school so Remus couldn’t have thought it was just that. And Neville’s backstory was nearly just as sad (and just as well known to Remus) and even he didn’t faint like Harry. Yet, he didn’t question Harry once.

Sirius (who is also a bully and a petty grudge-holder) never wondered why a child would want to move in with an escaped prisoner who he had never met before that had just mangled his best friend’s leg and tried to commit murder in front of him instead of the relatives he had been with his entire life. Even when until that very night he had believed that prisoner wanted to kill him?

Arthur actually met the Dursley’s and saw Vernon’s rage at magic when he came to collect Harry for the Quidditch World Cup and he still questioned nothing.

Half the Order found Harry locked inside his bedroom with locks affixed to the outside of the door, and all they did was give vague unfulfilled threats to Vernon and send Harry back. You could blame that on Dumbledore, but I think that’s ridiculous. They were not under Imperious. They made their own decisions. Every adult there had a responsibility to that child, and they all failed him individually.

Yet time and time again I see Dumbledore condemned so overwhelmingly in the very fics that redeem and or absolve these other characters of those very actions.

Even McGonagall, who knew from the start that the Dursleys were awful people, never pulled Harry aside as his head of house and asked him anything about his home life. And, as I stated earlier, her name was the one on the letter addressed to the cupboard under the stairs. She also made it very clear that she wasn’t someone for Harry to confide in by constantly dismissing any concerns he presented her. The way she reacted about the Stone was ridiculous. And her non-concern over the amount of detentions Harry received from Umbridge followed by the ‘have a biscuit’ scene rubbed me the wrong way. And yet, of late she seems to be revered in the fandom community as some kind of badass grandmotherly character. All because she protested one time about leaving Harry with the Dursleys and then never brought it up again.

It’s getting a bit ridiculous. I’m exhausted by the way the fan community continues to rewrite cannon to fit their dissatisfaction with our once trusted role-model JK Rowling through Harry Potter’s once trusted mentor Albus Dumbledore.

Just once I would like to read a Harry Potter fic without having to think about the various ways in which JK Rowling let us all down. And with everyone rewriting Dumbledore as the ‘real villain all along’ I can’t help but be taken out of the fic and forced to relate it to reality.

[crowcaws]

I've had some thoughts brewing ever since I finished NATLA, and watching Friendly Space Ninja's review of PJO really brought up a lot of feelings after sitting on it for a month so I'm going to try and articulate those thoughts here.

It's very interesting this fixation on the "word of god" and its involvement making or breaking a screen adaptation, to the point where you get unwavering devotion when a creator is on board, and outright disdain when a creator isn't on board. Both are completely reactionary takes that are unhelpful, especially when adaptations can be, sometimes, excellent without their original creators involved, and awful (cough fantastic beasts cough) when they are involved.

Regardless of whether or not NATLA was bad (it wasn't, it was just fine) I love that people are going "HA I bet Netflix regret losing BRYKE!" as a sort of gotcha, as if Korra didn't prove like a decade ago that Bryke are not infallible screenwriters. As if those same people, when the show was first announced and Bryke were on board, didn't even think to consider that Bryke are just two of the writers that made a great show.

Because fandom has a problem where it doesn't actually care or consider if the original creators are a good fit or not, if their involvement will harm the adaptation or help it, or if their recent work is still up to scratch with their original work. Fandom just wants a security blanket in the form of a name on a credits list, to the point of almost cult-like devotion that makes or breaks their opinion of content before it's even released.

This devotion is how you end up with fans doing logical backflips when their perfect book accurate Percy Jackson adaptation that "Uncle Rick" promised is now changing a bunch of stuff for not very good reasons, and now they have to either do mental gymnastics to justify questionable choices or admit that Rick can be wrong.

Percy Jackson had Rick Riordan on board and that series, let's be honest here, was just fine too. It wasn't groundbreaking, it did not surpass the source material on most points (I say most because all that Sally content was inspired) and fell short in a lot of ways that have been outlined by critics more articulate than I. Some of that, I suspect, was due to Rick's fixation on this adaptation being the antithesis of the 2010 movies to the point where it feels like they refused to let the show be fun and colourful in parts where it should have been. His involvement, as a book author delving into screenwriting, cannot be proven to have been more beneficial than if he had simply consulted and set boundaries and left it at that.

And of course Joanne is a fuckwit. But even creatively, you can't tell me that the fantastic beasts movies were better for her meddling.

But back to PJO and NATLA: I genuinely feel like we got very similar end products with both shows. An underwhelming foray into live action adaptation that suffers from too few episodes and disappointing characterisation save for a few standout roles (In this case, Sally, and Zuko and Iroh), and some problems aside that each show varies on, but ultimately still delivers something entirely and completely watchable. Percy Jackson has at least a tiny bit better characterisation overall, but cannot hold a candle to the fight choreography and special effects in NATLA (partly because in PJO they had a bad habit of cutting away or writing out every time anyone was mean to do something heroic or actually fight.) And yet you cannot speak a bad word about PJO, but NATLA is torn to shreds.

Back to NATLA and the Bryke: Almost nobody, in this whole time from the NATLA announcement to airing, has made comment on the absence of Aaron Ehasz, who was not involved with Korra either. They were happy to celebrate when Bryke was involved, and mourn when they departed, but you should have been mourning Aaron this whole time, if anyone. Aaron wrote Tales from Ba Sing Se, if you weren't aware. Arguably the most memorable episode of the Last Airbender, so emotionally rich and captivating that even hearing the instrumentals of that song in NATLA brought me to tears.

So why wasn't Aaron's absence ever felt? Well, that is because the fans saw "original creators" in headlines and ran with it without question as a sure sign of victory (and then failure when Bryke departed). Because fandom doesn't really care WHOSE name is in the credits, fandom just wants that sense of security -- and it's a false sense of security, because Annabeth and Katara both still ended up gutted of their depth at the end of the day. The presence of Rick didn't save Annabeth any more than the absence of the ATLA writers doomed Katara.

[shammah8]

As this like precious faith becomes a part of you, it will make you so that you will dare to do anything. And remember, God wants daring men, men who will dare all, men who will be strong in Him and dare to do exploits. How shall we reach this plane of faith? Let go your own thoughts, and take the thoughts of God, the Word of God. If you build yourself on imaginations you will go wrong. Y ou have the Word of God and it is enough. A man gave this remarkable testimony concerning the Word: “Never compare this Book with other books. Comparisons are dangerous. Never think or never say that this Book contains the Word of God. It is the Word ofGod. It is supernatural in origin, eternal in duration, inexpressible in value, infinite in scope, regenerative in power, infallible in authority, universal in interest, personal in application, inspired in totality. Read it through. Write it down.

Pray it in. Work it out. And then pass it on.”

And truly the Word of God changes a man until he becomes an epistle of God. It transforms his mind, changes his character, moves him on from grace to grace, makes him an inheritor of the very nature of God. God comes in, dwells in, walks in, talks through, and sups with him who opens his being to the Word of God and receives the Spirit who inspired it.

When I was going over to New Zealand and Australia, I had many to see me off. There was an Indian doctor who was riding in the same car with me to the docks. He was very quiet and took in all things that were said on the ship. I began to preach, of course, and the Lord began to work among the people. In the second-class part of the ship there was a young man and his wife who were attendants on a lady and gentleman in the first-class. And as these two young people heard me talking to them privately and otherwise, they were very much impressed.

Then the lady they were attending got very sick. In her sickness and her loneliness she could find no relief. They called in the doctor, and the doctor gave her no hope.

And then, when in this strange dilemma—she was a great Christian Scientist, a preacher of it, and had gone up and down preaching it—they thought of me. Knowing the conditions, and what she lived for, that it was late in the day, and that in the condition of her mind she could only receive the simplest words, I said to her, “Now you are very sick, and I won’t talk toyou about anything save this; I will pray for you in the name of Jesus, and the moment I pray you will be healed.”

And the moment I prayed she was healed. That was this like precious faith in operation. Then she was disturbed. Now I could have poured in oil very soon. But I poured in all the bitter drugs possible, and for three days I had her on cinders. I showed her her terrible state, and pointed out to her all her folly and the fallacy of her position. I showed her that there was nothing in Christian Science, that it is a lie from the beginning, one of the last agencies of hell. At best a lie, preaching a lie, and producing a lie.

Then she wakened up. She became so penitent and broken-hearted. But the thing that stirred her first was that she had to go to preach the simple gospel of Christ where she had preached Christian Science. She asked me if she had to give up certain things. I won’t mention the things, they are too vile. I said, “What you have to do is to see Jesus and take Jesus.”

When she saw the Lord in His purity, the other things had to go. At the presence of Jesus all else goes.☕️Smith Wigglesworth

[fountainpenguin]

Is there significance to the time key headcanon? In other words, what inspired that and how do time keys work?

For anyone who doesn't know what this means, in my fanfics, Fairies can physically remove memories from their heads and store them inside magical boxes for later. Fairies do this a lot, which was my way of playing with that one line from "Let Sleeper Dogs Lie" about how Fairies are notoriously forgetful.

I don't consider that episode canon since it contradicts a crucial / memorable episode ["The Secret Origin of Denzel Crocker"] and it pushes against the world lore itself, but every now and then I like to make fun of the "forgetful Fairies" joke.

Also, Anti-Fairies as a culture are extremely against removing their memories this way. You'll often see Anti-Cosmo bragging in my writing about how Anti-Fairies have infallible memories.

I THINK this idea of mine can be traced back to the Giant French Doors of Time: the original method of travel to the Hocus Poconos before the Fairy Elder redecorated in "Timmy's Secret Wish." Since they were called "doors of time" and Father Time himself appeared in this episode, I think I put that together to imply you can walk through those doors to time travel and you need a certain type of key to have a certain level of clearance. A wooden key lets you view the past without altering it, a silver key lets you do a bit more, a gold key a bit more, etc. Hence, "time keys" (plus an explanation of different in-universe time travel rules).

I think that's where it comes from, but I may have taken inspiration from a few other points over the years. For example:

~ Writing fanfics and needing to show photos from time periods where cameras didn't exist. Like, during Cosmo and Wanda's high school years (for their yearbooks) or when they were godparents to Erg 50k years pre-series.

I have a certain technology level I like Fairy World to develop at (and they usually develop tech by stealing ideas from godkids on various planets), so I played around with the idea that Fairies could generate a physical copy of a scene in front of them as a "photo." It's usually described in my works as a "frozen moment from the timestream" or as a "memory" in some way.

~ The opening of Timmy's Secret Wish depicts Timmy and Cosmo using keys to open a treasure chest. Nothing else to say; it just fits the vibe.

~ "77 Secrets of the Fairly OddParents Revealed" claims that Cosmo's greatest secret is that he's an "author of distinction." It even specifically says Cosmo wrote Astrophysics for Morons: a book that appeared in the "Shelf Life" episode.

Apparently this is a huge secret and he doesn't like talking about it... which I LOVE playing with because of the fact that the Fairies claim in "Wishology" that stars are actually fairies with wands. This implies that it's Very Not Okay for Cosmo to be pro-astrophysics instead of pro-fairy, but that's another can of worms.

I love playing with the idea that Cosmo struggles a lot with his past, his Not Okay beliefs, and his memories. We'll see more of that in Frayed Knots and/or the 130 Prompts and other stories at a later time.

In my one-shot "Repeat," Jorgen confronted Cosmo and told him to come with him to a safe place so he wouldn't be hunted down, and Cosmo accused Jorgen of preparing to blast his memories out the moment his back was turned. Cosmo held his wand to his head and threatened to erase his own memories so Jorgen wouldn't get the satisfaction (due to a crap ton of unresolved issues he has with Jorgen because of baby ban conflicts). While I didn't show what happened next, this is just a big moment of Cosmo backstory in my 'verse that I really like.

Present-day Cosmo in my verse is still dealing with a LOAD of issues, especially regarding his memories because his brain's pretty scrambled and he deals with a lot of trauma, guilt, postpartum depression, and stuff like that, but it all comes back to this idea of Fairies removing memories from their heads.

~ Also, I like playing with wacky Fairy anatomy. I already made things like Wanda's radar, H.P.'s laser canon, and even Cosmo's empty head shell - all of which are kept in their forehead domes - totally canon parts of Fairy anatomy by saying that Fairies don't have hearts in my Classic 'verse. Instead they have "cores," which develop into physical objects that represent them.

If you can develop enamel in your forehead that allows your body to form an object that represents your personality, it's definitely not out of the question for you to physically remove memories from your head.

It's kind of a weird piece of worldbuilding and lore but there you go, that's the story behind why it's there. Mostly for things like photo albums, ha ha.

[psalmonesermons]

About the bible Part 1b

Possible objections to the authority of the Bible

If we reject the authority of the Bible, then we appoint someone or something else as the authority for your own faith. We can usually agree that some parts of the scripture are true, but which ones will we accept, and which ones will we reject? We need to pray to the Lord that He will show us what is the truth in the Bible.

At this stage, new believers will come to understand that their view of the scriptures will be directly affected by their view of God. If you think that God is distant, and never speaks directly or communicates with people then you will doubt that he communicates through the Bible and directly with us. We need to realize that God both speaks to mankind and that he has written a book specifically for his children i.e. the Bible. The Bible is self-consistent all through its 66 books since it is God who wrote it in tandem with the human authors (see study 2 for more details).

God communicates with humans.

A few examples of God speaking to humans.

Genesis 1:28 God speaks to Adam

Genesis 3:9 God asks Adam, where are you?

Genesis 6:13 God tells Noah the technical specifications of the ark.

Genesis 12:1 The Lord speaks to Abraham.

Deuteronomy 5:22 Two million people heard God, and we learn that the finger of God performs the writing of the ten commandments on the tablets.

Exodus 31:18 We can read the ten commandments written by God.

God is a communicating God. Are you listening?

God is a God who intervenes, like in our salvation experience.

What do we believe about the Bible?

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God as the authors were moved by the Holy Spirit, we therefore believe that the Bible in its original manuscripts (Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek) is without error and therefore it is historically and scientifically true. This view is less popular nowadays. You may wish to look up the lower and higher critics to see how they (former) defend or in the latter case attack the Bible (the JEDP authorship of the Pentateuch). The Bible says in many places that Moses wrote the Pentateuch [1].

In other words, we believe in the verbal, plenary, infallible, inerrant inspiration of the Bible.

Why verbal? Some people came along and said, well, the Bible contains truth, but It is not the real words of God that God spoke. Oh yes, it is. We believe in the verbal inspiration of the Bible i.e. that God spoke these very words.

Why plenary? The Bible was spoken by God. Did he just miss a little bit out? No all of it (the full scripture in the OT and the NT) was spoken by God. The Bible is filled with the words of God.

Why infallible? The Bible is the good rule for our lives. It is the only rule that we have for our lives although this is unpopular with many people.

4. Why Inerrant? This means it is without error, in the original manuscripts. By the way, if you say any part of this has error in it, then why should you believe any of it?

So that is what we believe. The Bible is the verbal, plenary, infallible, inerrant, and inspired word of God. God breathed it. That is the word of God that we believe.

It is OK to get excited about the Word of God. What a wonderful book. The Bible has 66 books, 1189 chapters every one of them given by God. That is what we believe. Written in three languages. Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek and written over a period of 1600 years. That is the time span between the books written by 40 authors over 60 generations, and the authors are all entirely different types of people. And yet they all agree the Bible is the inspired Word of God.

Amen

Questions to be answered in Part 2 Why should I read the Bible?

Is there any indication in the Bible that it is the Word of God? We will consider some of the science in the scripture that was known to the writers of the Bible thousands of years ahead of the relevant scientific discovery.

How did God give the bible to us?

[1] Romans 10:5 For Moses describes the righteousness, which is of the law, that the man which doeth those things shall live by them.

[awideplace]

hi, an unbeliever keeps questioning me on the accuracy of the Bible after being translated from it's original language. how might I answer his questions about how we know it to be accurate? he seems to be stubborn and as though I am not very smart for believing in the Bible. I know that I can't change his mind rather possibly sew a seed. I'm just not sure how to approach this question specifically because I feel it will lead to him debating me which I do not want.

The translation of the Bible into English was an incredibly detailed, laborious, careful work. The English Bible can be deemed a “literal” translation that attempts to stick as closely as possible to the Greek and Hebrew texts, while still being readable English.

Q. How does the translation process impact the inspiration, inerrancy, and infallibility of the Bible?

A. This question deals with three very important issues: inspiration, preservation, and translation.

The doctrine of the inspiration of the Bible teaches that scripture is “God-breathed”; that is, God personally superintended the writing process, guiding the human authors so that His complete message was recorded for us. The Bible is truly God’s Word. During the writing process, the personality and writing style of each author was allowed expression; however, God so directed the writers that the 66 books they produced were free of error and were exactly what God wanted us to have. See 2 Timothy 3:16 and 2 Peter 1:21.

Of course, when we speak of “inspiration,” we are referring only to the process by which the original documents were composed. After that, the doctrine of the preservation of the Bible takes over. If God went to such great lengths to give us His Word, surely He would also take steps to preserve that Word unchanged. What we see in history is that God did exactly that.

The Old Testament Hebrew scriptures were painstakingly copied by Jewish scribes. Groups such as the Sopherim, the Zugoth, the Tannaim, and the Masoretes had a deep reverence for the texts they were copying. Their reverence was coupled with strict rules governing their work: the type of parchment used, the size of the columns, the kind of ink, and the spacing of words were all prescribed. Writing anything from memory was expressly forbidden, and the lines, words, and even the individual letters were methodically counted as a means of double-checking accuracy. The result of all this was that the words written by Isaiah’s pen are still available today. The discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls clearly confirms the precision of the Hebrew text.

The same is true for the New Testament Greek text. Thousands of Greek texts, some dating back to nearly A.D. 117, are available. The slight variations among the texts—not one of which affects an article of faith—are easily reconciled. Scholars have concluded that the New Testament we have at present is virtually unchanged from the original writings. Textual scholar Sir Frederic Kenyon said about the Bible, “It is practically certain that the true reading of every doubtful passage is preserved. . . . This can be said of no other ancient book in the world.” 

This brings us to the translation of the Bible. Translation is an interpretative process, to some extent. When translating from one language to another, choices must be made. Should it be the more exact word, even if the meaning of that word is unclear to the modern reader? Or should it be a corresponding thought, at the expense of a more literal reading?

As an example, in Colossians 3:12, Paul says we are to put on “bowels of mercies” (KJV). The Greek word for “bowels,” which is literally “intestines,” comes from a root word meaning “spleen.” The KJV translators chose a literal translation of the word. The translators of the NASB chose “heart of compassion”—the “heart” being what today’s reader thinks of as the seat of emotions. The Amplified Bible has it as “tenderhearted pity and mercy.” The NIV simply puts “compassion.”

So, the KJV is the most literal in the above example, but the other translations certainly do justice to the verse. The core meaning of the command is to have compassionate feelings.

Most translations of the Bible are done by committee. This helps to guarantee that no individual prejudice or theology will affect the decisions of word choice, etc. Of course, the committee itself may have a particular agenda or bias (such as those producing the current “gender-neutral” mistranslations). But there is still plenty of good scholarship being done, and many good translations are available.

Having a good, honest translation of the Bible is important. A good translating team will have done its homework and will let the Bible speak for itself.

As a general rule, the more literal translations, such as the KJV, NKJV, ASB and NASB, have less “interpretative” work. The “freer” translations, such as the NIV, NLT, and CEV, by necessity do more “interpretation” of the text, but are generally more readable. Then there are the paraphrases, such as The Message and The Living Bible, which are not really translations at all but one person’s retelling of the Bible. (Source: https://www.gotquestions.org/translation-inspiration.html)

Something every Christian should read in order to appreciate their Bible further: What is the history of the Bible in English?

[hiswordsarekisses]

2 Peter goes on in more detail about these false teachers and false prophets. One of the main characteristics about them is their view on money and wealth. And the fact that, in Jude’s words, they run in the way of Balaam’s error and the sons of Korah’s rebellion. You won’t have to dig too deep to discover that there was money involved for a prophetic word with Balaam. I was pretty shocked to see how easy it was to find this out, yet how boldly people do this in so many churches these days. Many have been warned, yet they keep right on doing it. Just a study in 2nd Peter and Jude will get someone’s attention really fast, but they have no love of the truth. According to 2 Thessalonians chapter 2, it is the love of the truth that would save those who are being deceived by the lie that is coming on the whole world. To love the truth will lead one pray for God to reveal it to them even if it’s not what they want it to be. The love of the truth will still want the truth even if they know it may prove them wrong.

You will hear it more and more as the end draws closer and closer of how the Bible is not enough, and how it’s got errors - and you will even hear of people adding to it. I couldn’t see how it could be possible 10 years ago even - but now it’s just right in our faces. The ones who are not grounded in the written word of God are falling for anything and everything. And we have all of the warnings and prophecies right there in print and all we had to do is read it and study it and we would not fall for any of it. The devil does not even have to be sneaky when there is no foundation there to protect them. Especially when people get to thinking they are too “spiritual” to be deceived - that they are “above deception” - because as soon as they reach that point they have already swung the door wide open and invited it in.

“Direct those people to the law and to the testimony! If their teachings are not in accord with this word, it is because there is no light in them.” Isaiah 8:20

“Peter testifies to the God-given origin of Scripture and affirms that all the prophecy contained in God's Word originated from God, not from humans. This assures us that God's message is infallible (i.e., incapable of mistakes or failure, never wrong, completely true and effective in its teachings) and inerrant. (i.e., free from error, falsehood or deceit).

Infallibility and inerrancy cannot be separated, for the inerrancy (i.e., incapable of any error) of Scripture is the result of the infallibility (i.e., incapable of mistakes or being wrong) of God himself and his own Word. (2 Sam. 23:2; Jer. 1:7-9; 1 Cor. 14:37)

Peter affirms here about the God-given origin and authority of the prophecy recorded in Scripture is true about all things in his written Word: “men spoke and wrote from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit." Believers must maintain a strong uncompromising view of Holy Scripture as inspired (i.e., given directly by God through Holy Spirit-led people of his choosing) and authoritative (i.e., completely reliable, backed by solid evidence and established authority). There are several reasons for this. (1) It is the only way to be loyal and true to what Jesus Christ, the apostles (i.e., those he personally authorized to deliver his original message) and the Bible itself teach about Scripture. Psalm 119 is a really good place to start.” (M.Hendrickson)

The Holy Spirit repeatedly warns that there will be many false teachers within the churches. These warnings against destructive beliefs and teachings among God's people began with Jesus (see Matt. 24:11, and were continued by the Holy Spirit through Paul in 2 Thess. 2:7, 1 Tim. 4:1, 2 Tim. 3:1-5, 1 Peter 1:1-22). Also John (1 John 2:18; 4:1; 2 John 7-11), and Jude (Jude 3-4, 12, 18). Once you start digging you will find even more. But the best thing to do is study - first praying for not only “truth” but for a “love of the truth” and pray for understanding, insight and revelation.

[reformationcartoons]

The Wicked Sodomite Theology of Paradox & What to Do With It

by Monty L. Collier

The importance of logical deduction from Scripture alone in the formulation of Christian doctrine—especially the doctrine of justification by faith alone—cannot be emphasized enough. The Bible is logically consistent, so it can be rightly divided. The Bible is infallible and inerrant, so it has no mistakes, nor can it make a mistake. The Bible alone is the special revelation of God, who cannot lie, so there are no contradictions in Scripture.

While absurdity, irrationalism, and mysticism have always found a home in Roman Catholicism, they also flourish in Neo-orthodox theology, dialectical theology, and the theology of paradox. Even so, and by logical contrast—such insanity and confusion are entirely absent from theology based on Scripture alone (a.k.a. Calvinism).

There is simply no place for irreconcilable paradoxes, antinomies, apparent contradictions that cannot be harmonized, unsolvable mysteries, nor logical paradoxes in Christian theology—for the Bible does not teach such nonsense.

Presbyterians should not tolerate men who peddle such satanic irrationalism. When churches teach absurdity and confusion, should we be surprised when society calls good evil or vice versa?

It is not a surprise that many Americans are confused about their gender and their sexual orientation, for men like Cornelius Van Til, Greg Bahnsen, Douglas Wilson, R. Scott Clark, John MacArthur, James White, and others have been teaching ministers that the Bible is replete with irreconcilable paradoxes for decades.

According to the absurd and satanic teachings of men like Van Til—since all the teachings of the Bible are irreconcilably paradoxical—when the Bible teaches that boys are male, then it also necessarily implies that boys are NOT male. Simply put, Van Til’s theology results in gender confusion, as well as the moral affirmation of every behavior condemned by God’s Law—and the moral negation of every work required by God’s Law!

To persuade chumps to accept their idiotic teachings, men like Van Til had to disparage logical deduction and advocate for non-linear reasoning. The wicked theologians of paradox had to convince their followers that the Bible was wrong when it describes God as being reasonable: “Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord” Isaiah 1:18. The satanic imposters had to convince men that the Bible is wrong when it describes Christians as men who reason in a linear fashion—using logical deduction—from Scriptute alone to establish clear and authoritative teaching: “And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures” Acts 17:2.

The blasphemous wolves that disseminate the lie that biblical teaching is irreconcilably paradoxical should be removed from any and every Presbyterian teaching position they may hold.

In the old days, Presbyterians refused to tolerate absurdity, irrationalism, and confusion thinly disguised as Reformed doctrine. This can be seen in the subsequent quote on Sola Fide by Scottish Presbyterian James Buchanan (1804-1870):

“The reasoning of the Apostles with the Jews on the subject of justification relates chiefly to the doctrine which was revealed in the Old Testament; and, apart from its inspired authority, or considered simply as a process of logical deduction from the facts which are there recorded, it is one of the finest specimens of close, consecutive, conclusive reasoning to be found in the whole range of human authorship.”

(The Doctrine of Justification, Lecture 2, page 51)

Actual Calvinists, for example, do not accept the heretical notions of those who follow Norman Shepherd (a Van Tilian). Shepherd spent his career arguing that Romans 3:28 could not be logically reconciled to James 2:24. Shepherd was rightfully fired from his seminary job for espousing that Papist heresy. It’s too bad his defenders escaped termination and excommunication (Cornelius Van Til, Greg Bahnsen, John Frame, and a host of other professors at Westminster Seminary, Pennsylvania publicly defended and endorsed Shepherd’s justification-by-faith-and-works heresy).

We have pointed out for years that the dialectical theology of men like Cornelius Van Til and Herman Bavinck necessarily leads to agnosticism, utter skepticism—or to speak plainly—satanism (i.e., do whatever you want). If Presbyterian churches are to ever be reformed, then the sodomite theology of paradox running rampant in our land has to be thrown out, along with the bums that teach it.

[almost-a-class-act]

Fluffy Seasonal Prompts - December 4th

Slow dancing to old Christmas songs.

Fandom: Band of Brothers (HBO) Pairing: Liebgott/Tipper Author's Note: I read a really great Lieb/Tip fic recently (maybe one of like, two in the entire fandom?) and it inspired me. I will be compiling my holiday fills and posting them together on AO3 after Christmas, where you can find me under roaroftheninth.

--

Joe turns over the sleeve that holds the record and slides it out, placing it on the turntable as Ed breaks off, mid-story about one of his college professors.

“What are you putting on?”

“Would you hold your horses?” Joe demands with the usual irritation that he doesn’t really lean into, glancing over his shoulder at him. “You’re gonna find out in a second.”

Ed grins at him, that helpless, fond thing that takes over his whole face. Joe is pretty sure he would see it less often if they didn’t live two thousand miles apart, but as it is, Ed never gets a chance to get sick of him before he’s headed back west again. Couple that with the fact that they’ve both had a couple of festive beverages and it’s the week before Christmas, it’s made Ed’s cheeks irredeemably rosy, and he’s been in an infallibly good mood all day.

It makes Joe want to do over-the-top, sentimental things for him. He can’t be held responsible, honestly.

When the first few bars of White Christmas fill the room, Ed raises an eyebrow, still smiling, like he’s waiting for Joe to explain the joke. Instead of doing anything of the kind, Joe crosses to where he’s sitting in the armchair next to the window and holds out his hand, palm up.

Ed hesitates. There is a part of him that is obviously surprised and pleased to be asked, but it wars with doubt over whether he’ll be able to keep his balance without his cane. “Oh, I don’t – I wasn’t much of a dancer before.”

Joe, who knows him well enough by now to know his precise hang-ups – not that Ed puts much effort into hiding them – doesn’t rescind the offer. “Come on, Tip. Do I ever let you fall?”

Ed looks down at his hand again for a long few seconds before he gathers his courage and takes it, letting Joe pull him to his feet. Joe immediately steps into his space, tucking an arm securely around his back, keeping a hold on that hand.

Ed’s smile is less certain, but he leans into Joe’s grip and soon they are cutting slow, shuffling arcs across the living room. It is only once Ed feels like he’s getting the hang of it and that it’s okay to trust this much in Joe to keep them both upright that the unguarded smile comes back.

“I thought you weren’t a Christmas guy,” he says.

Joe snorts. That’s one way of putting it. “Yeah, well, this one was written by Irving Berlin, famously not a Christmas guy, either.”

Ed’s chuckle is contagious enough that it pulls a smile out of Joe, too.

“I didn’t know you were a dancing guy, either,” Ed says, resettling his grip on Joe’s fingers as they take a gentle turn.

“I get by okay.” Joe ducks his head with half an eye roll and admits, “You also told me your friends never invite you out dancing.”

Ed blinks. “I did?”

“In one of your five thousand letters, yeah,” Joe mutters.

Ed beams at him, and Joe caves under the pressure and slows their motion, holding him steady so that he can kiss him, unhurried and tender.

Over-the-top, sentimental things. Joe really can’t be held responsible.

[sepublic]

            Among the Skull Kin trapped in Shogaken’s domain, there are some who genuinely believe they are in Hell and at the mercy of the Devil; To them, this is their punishment for the sins in life, and after being given a final chance to accept their deaths, those who go against that by agreeing to Shogaken’s ‘salvation’ are instead doomed to torment instead. Some would argue that even if Shogaken simply let his subjects be, it would still be Hell, just by being the absence of Heaven.

            But there is no divine punishment; Shogaken’s domain was once meant to be a place of healing and restoration, a manmade second chance for many who died. But he has since corrupted his purpose into what the Skull Kin experience now. There may have been ancient legends in the world of the living of a Hell very similar to Shogaken’s kingdom, possibly inspired by someone who glimpsed it and somehow managed to tell the tale.

            One of Shogaken’s lieutenants, Niekap, is convinced he has been condemned to Shogaken’s realm not to be punished, but to be the punishment; It sounds like a huge cope to many other Skull Kin, but they avoid saying this to his face, and the validation of being promoted by Shogaken only further feeds into his sadistic delusions. Some Skull Kin are more loyal and valued by Shogaken than the rest, and as such act as enforcers in his absence, embracing subordination now that they too can exercise authority over others below. Besides, some reason; It’s not as if they can do anything to challenge Shogaken!!!

            Shogaken’s solution to rebellion is quite simple; When constructing a Skull Kin, he installs something akin to a magic ‘magnetism’ that keeps their bones together, and helps draw their bones back into place whenever a Skull Kin is disassembled, such as by outside forces that knock them apart. Skull Kin can sense the location, vaguely, of each and every one of their bones, and will sometimes take advantage of this to disconnect parts and limbs and use them for other purposes.

            But since it’s all that’s keeping them together in the absence of actual musculature, it also means a Skull Kin is nothing without this. And as the one who cast this very magic, Shogaken can turn it off at will; Meaning any Skull Kin who goes up to defy him, even in droves, will find themselves collapsing into a pile of unmoving bones. And anyhow, all were convinced that even if Shogaken did grant them a fighting chance, they’d still lose to his power… But Wayvren’s victory did convince a few that their ‘god’ was not so infallible after all.

            In rare cases, Shogaken may opt to outright execute a Skull Kin, instead of merely burying them for a to-be-decided-later amount of time; In these scenarios, he’d prefer to preserve the orichalcum body, which he still takes pride in crafting. The only faulty component is the soul, which wasn’t really of Shogaken’s making, and thus not reflective of any inability on his part (besides the inability to craft souls from scratch).

            Thus, he’ll hook an insubordinate Skull Kin to his personal fishing rod, and then cast them out into the Spirit Currents; All other Skull Kin usually gather to watch these executions, since there’s not much else to pass the time with. Left in the drift of the Spirit Currents, a Skull Kin’s soul will be washed away and returned to its original trajectory in the soul cycle. Shogaken will reel in the lifeless body, which he will hang to ‘dry’ on a clothesline, awaiting another soul to take its place. This process has been dubbed unceremoniously by some as ‘laundry’.

            Lifeless bodies aren’t the only ones hung, sometimes; In some areas, one can find a Skull Kin deprived of limbs and pinned to some wall, as a form of punishment. It’s much lighter compared to burial and execution, especially when one is still able to watch and even converse with fellow Skull Kin. Still, it’s not desirable.

            Because Shogaken values recycling the bodies of Skull Kin ‘put into the wash’, just as the Spirit Currents themselves recycle souls for new lives, he forbids his subjects from committing suicide by jumping into the Spirit Currents themselves; For many, this is the only way to escape Shogaken once they’ve accepted his offer of ‘salvation’.

            Shogaken of course doesn’t want the bones he forged being lost in the Spirit Currents, which he can at least prevent with a controlled execution. And Shogaken is aware that some Skull Kin will attempt to garner his wrath in the hopes of being executed, which is why he usually opts for a burial; Execution is only for when he’s genuinely just sick of a soul, and thinks they’re trying to avoid death. To prevent unplanned suicides that run the risk of losing a hand-crafted body, Shogaken has constructed invisible barriers along the shores of his floating island. Souls cannot pass through them, so any beings with souls are stopped, though objects can pass through; The barrier isn’t strong enough to filter the soul from a body, either. Only Shogaken can bypass the barrier.

            When not putting a Skull Kin into the wash, Shogaken also uses his orichalcum fishing rod to salvage souls from the Spirit Currents himself, instead of relying only on the nets he casts out. Sometimes he’ll relax by the shore on a chair, fishing rod nestled in his bones, as its cast-out line drifts by; His fishing rod is enchanted to pass through the barrier he cast. During fishing hours, Shogaken allows himself to space out for extended periods of time, which for the Skull Kin, is the closest to sleep they can ever get.

            Another form of entertainment for Shogaken is forcing his subjects to duel with one another in an arena; Weapons and other tools, many of which incorporate orichalcum bones, are offered as selection for gladiators to experiment with. Frequent champions may experience promotion, depending on Shogaken’s mood. When Wayvren began pushing the Skull Kin into conquest, they took advantage of this arena to act as a training grounds.

[yhwhrulz]

Morning and Evening with A.W. Tozer Devotional: November 30th

Tozer in the Morning Worldly Pollution

What, then, is that world against which we are warned by the apostles? That world whose friendship constitutes spiritual adultery, the love of which stands in opposition to the love of God?

It is the familiar world of sinful human society which swells about and beneath us as the waters of the flood once surged and churned around the ark of Noah. No Christian need fail to recognize it, provided he wants to know what it is and where it is located. Here are a few infallible marks of identification:

Unbelief. Wherever men refuse to come under the authority of the inspired Scriptures, there is the world. Religion without the Son of God is worldly religion. To have fellowship with those who live in unbelief is to love the world. The Christian's communion should be with Christians.

Impenitence. The people of the world will readily admit that they are sinners, but their lack of sorrow for sin distinguishes them from the children of God. The Christian mourns over his sin and is comforted. The worldling shrugs off his sin and continues in it.

Tozer in the Evening To Know God is to Love Him

God is love, and is for that reason the source of all the love there is. He has set as the first of all commandments that we love Him with all our hearts, but He knows that the desired love can never originate with us. We love him, because he first loved us, is the scriptural and psychological pattern. We can love Him as we ought only as He inflames our minds with holy desire. Yet there is also a love of willing as well as of feeling. Though we may not be conscious of any great degree of inward sensation, we may set our wills to love God and the feeling will come of itself. Let us bring ourselves under obedience to His revealed Word and our love for Him will grow. Obedience will strengthen faith and faith will increase knowledge. And it is a well-known law of the spiritual life that our love for God will spring up and flourish just as our knowledge of Him increases. To know Him is to love Him, and to know Him better is to love Him more. . Copyright Statement This material is considered in the public domain.

[inhiswordihope]

What is Biblical Counseling? (Part 1)

The inspiration of Scripture is defined as the supernatural and divine work of the Holy Spirit in the writers of the Scriptures (Word of God). The word inspired means “breathed out of God” and, therefore, it is God speaking to humanity.  The writers of the Scriptures were carried by the power of the Holy Spirit in their recordings and writings which are the very breath of the Word of God (1 Peter 1:20-21).  The Holy Spirit used gifted human authors and led each of them to communicate exactly what He intended from the very mouth of God.  The Holy Scriptures is God speaking and therefore God-breathed.  Since the Scriptures are the very breath of God, it is useful in teaching, training in righteousness, and equipping all Believers (2 Timothy 3:16-17).

The inerrancy of Scripture states the Holy Scriptures is without error and truthful in all of its teachings.  God’s Word is truth because of the doctrine of inspiration.  Every word of God is perfect and pure (Proverbs 30:5a).  The Scriptures speak accurately and clearly in all that is written. Charles Rylie states “God is true (Romans 3:4); the Scriptures were breathed out by God (2 Tim. 3:16); therefore, the Scriptures are true (since they came from the breath of God who is true).  As the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy states, the complete work of the Scriptures is inerrant, being free from all falsehood, fraud, or deceit.  Most importantly, it is true because of the doctrine of inspiration coming from the very breath of God.

The authority of Scripture means that the Word of God has the supreme rule in what I think, believe, and live.  The Scriptures reveal the attributes of God and created man in His image. Authority is defined as one who is master, one in power, and able to give orders or commands for others to follow and obey.  It is written in Romans 13:1 that even governing authorities are established by God.  With this understanding, God’s Word is the rule that humankind must follow and obey.  The works of men in false ideologies fade, but I am confident even if the grass fades withers, the flowers fade, but the word of our God will stand forever (Isaiah 40:8).

What is Biblical Counseling?

Biblical counseling is interpersonal one-on-one discipleship within the context of the local church. It is not based on the wisdom of men, therapy, or psychology, but it is based on God’s Word as the ultimate source of truth and restoration for the believer in Christ.

Faith Biblical Counseling defines biblical counseling as "the process where the Bible, God’s Word, is related individually to a person or persons who are struggling under the weight of personal sin and/or the difficulties with suffering, so that he or she might genuinely change in the inner person to be pleasing to God".

1. The Bible is sufficient for life in that, when properly interpreted, it reveals to the believer all things necessary for one to understand his need for Christ. 2. The Bible is the authoritative source with which all truth claims—including claims made by science and history—must be evaluated. As a result, we must reject all counseling theories that use presuppositions, principles, and/or methodologies that are inconsistent with the proper interpretation of the biblical text.  3. Third, genuine heart change is totally dependent on the ministry of the Holy Spirit.  

Sufficiency of Scripture and Biblical Counseling

The relationship of the inspiration, inerrancy, and authority of Scripture together is God speaking, therefore, there is no error, and the Scriptures has complete authority over my life.  As the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy states, the confession of the full authority, infallibility, and inerrancy of Scripture is vital to a sound understanding of the whole of the Christian faith and this confession should lead to increasing conformity to the image of Christ. And we also thank God continually because, when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as a human word, but as it actually is, the word of God, which is indeed at work in you who believe (1 Thes. 2:13). The relationship of all three is critical in understanding theological truths.

The sufficiency of scripture states the Holy Bible (Word of God) has everything we need to live life honoring to God. The Word of God is true and we can be encouraged to live in the blessed hope of Christ Jesus- by the power of the Holy Spirit when we put our trust in God.  God gifts all believers with the Holy Spirit which indwells the believer and empowers all believers to live God-fearing lives, know Him, and serve Him (1 Peter 1:3).  The word of God is alive and active, sharper than any double-edged sword.  The Word of God, therefore, able to divide, judge the thoughts, and discern the attitudes of the heart (Hebrews 4:12).  It is true wisdom to turn to the God of the Scriptures in all matters of life.

The sufficiency of Scripture plays a vital role in biblical counseling. As Christ followers, the Word of God is the firm and sole authority we must turn to in our lives.  As a biblical counselor, my role is to exhort and encourage others to live according to Scriptures.  The same Spirit which lives in me indwells other believers. I am confident the Spirit of truth will teach other believers about Jesus Christ as Christ promised in John 16:12-13.  The Word of God is truth and it will do the work of sanctifying believers by the truth (John 17:17).  

Integrationists or Christian Psychologists do not believe the Scriptures are enough, therefore, they will integrate the Scriptures with secular psychology.  Eric Johnson is a Christian Psychologist who believes the Scriptures only address doctrine and is only able to bring people to salvation. He coined the term salvific doctrinal sufficiency. He did not believe the Scriptures could help believers in day-to-day life.

All mankind is made in the image of God and the Scriptures is the authoritative source that we draw upon in all matters.  It also has a methodology and practice of how to help mankind through all issues of life. The precepts of the Lord are right, and commands of the Lord are radiant in giving light to the eyes (Psalm 19:8).  The illumination of the Scriptures is how we should look at life.  This is the lens that we must use to view the world. It can diagnose sin issues by the power of the Holy Spirit in sanctification.  As a biblical counselor, I can support and walk with counselees in one-on-one discipleship. Just like any secular or integrated system, we have a complete counseling system (the Word of God) to help others walk in the spirit and live lives glorifying God.

For more information: ACBC

[francoiskoch]

1689 London Baptist Confession

Chapter 1 - Of the Holy Scripture

The Holy Scripture is the only sufficient, certain, and infallible rule of all saving knowledge, faith, and obedience, although the light of nature, and the works of creation and providence do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of God, as to leave men inexcusable; yet are they not sufficient to give that knowledge of God and his will which is necessary unto salvation. Therefore it pleased the Lord at sundry times and in divers manners to reveal himself, and to declare that his will unto his church; and afterward for the better preserving and propagating of the truth, and for the more sure establishment and comfort of the church against the corruption of the flesh, and the malice of Satan, and of the world, to commit the same wholly unto writing; which maketh the Holy Scriptures to be most necessary, those former ways of God’s revealing his will unto his people being now ceased.

Psalm 19:1-3; Proverbs 22:19-21; Isaiah 8:20; Luke 16:29,31; Romans 1:19-21; Romans 2:14,15; Romans 15:4; Ephesians 2:20; 2 Timothy 3:15-17; Hebrews 1:1; 2 Peter 1:19,20.

Under the name of Holy Scripture, or the Word of God written, are now contained all the books of the Old and New Testaments, which are these:

Of the Old Testament:

Genesis. II Chronicles. Daniel.

Exodus. Ezra. Hosea.

Leviticus. Nehemiah. Joel.

Numbers. Esther. Amos.

Deuteronomy. Job. Obadiah.

Joshua. Psalms. Jonah.

Judges. Proverbs. Micah.

Ruth. Ecclesiastes. Nahum.

I Samuel. The Song of Solomon. Habakkuk.

II Samuel. Isaiah. Zephaniah.

I Kings. Jeremiah. Haggai.

II Kings. Lamentations. Zechariah.

I Chronicles. Ezekiel. Malachi.

Of the New Testament:

The Gospels according to Galatians. Philemon.

Matthew. Ephesians. The Epistle to the Hebrews.

Mark. Philippians. The Epistle of James.

Luke. Colossians. The first and second

John. Thessalonians I. Epistles of Peter

The Acts of the Apostles. Thessalonians II. The first, second, and third

Paul’s Epistles to the Timothy I. Epistles of John.

Romans. Timothy II. The Epistle of Jude.

Corinthians I. Titus. The Revelation to John.

Corinthians II.

All of which are given by the inspiration of God, to be the rule of faith and life.

2 Timothy 3:16.

The books commonly called Apocrypha, not being of divine inspiration, are no part of the canon or rule of the Scripture, and, therefore, are of no authority to the church of God, nor to be any otherwise approved or made use of than other human writings.

Luke 24:27,44; Romans 3:2.

The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed, dependeth not upon the testimony of any man, or Church; but wholly upon God (who is truth itself) the author thereof: and therefore it is to be received because it is the Word of God.

1 Thessalonians 2:13; 2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:19-21; 1 John 5:9.

We may be moved and induced by the testimony of the church of God to an high and reverent esteem of the Holy Scriptures; and the heavenliness of the matter, the efficacy of the doctrine, and the majesty of the style, the consent of all the parts, the scope of the whole (which is to give all glory to God), the full discovery it makes of the only way of man’s salvation, and many other incomparable excellencies, and entire perfections thereof, are arguments whereby it doth abundantly evidence itself to be the Word of God; yet notwithstanding, our full persuasion and assurance of the infallible truth, and divine authority thereof, is from the inward work of the Holy Spirit bearing witness by and with the Word in our hearts.

John 16:13,14; 1 Corinthians 2:10-12; 1 John 2:20,27.

The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down or necessarily contained in the Holy Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelation of the Spirit, or traditions of men. Nevertheless, we acknowledge the inward illumination of the Spirit of God to be necessary for the saving understanding of such things as are revealed in the Word, and that there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God, and government of the church, common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be observed.

John 6:45; 1 Corinthians 2:9-12; 1 Corinthians 11:13,14; 1 Corinthians 14:26,40; Galatians 1:8,9; 2 Timothy 3:15-17.

All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto all; yet those things which are necessary to be known, believed and observed for salvation, are so clearly propounded and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of ordinary means, may attain to a sufficient understanding of them.

Psalm 19:7; Psalm 119:130; 2 Peter 3:16.

The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language of the people of God of old), and the New Testament in Greek (which at the time of the writing of it was most generally known to the nations), being immediately inspired by God, and by his singular care and providence kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentic; so as in all controversies of religion, the church is finally to appeal to them. But because these original tongues are not known to all the people of God, who have a right unto, and interest in the Scriptures, and are commanded in the fear of God to read and search them, therefore they are to be translated into the vulgar language of every nation unto which they come, that the Word of God dwelling plentifully in all, they may worship him in an acceptable manner, and through patience and comfort of the Scriptures may have hope.

Isaiah 8:20; John 5:39; Acts 15:15; Romans 3:2; 1 Corinthians 14:6,9,11,12,24,28; Colossians 3:16.

The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself; and therefore when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must be searched by other places that speak more clearly.

Acts 15:15,16; 2 Peter 1:20,21.

The supreme judge, by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Scripture delivered by the Spirit, into which Scripture so delivered, our faith is finally resolved.

Matthew 22:29,31,32; Acts 28:23; Ephesians 2:20.