#Religious Perception

[personalgrowthoasis]

Navigating Faith: My Spiritual Journey Through Orthodox Christianity

Journey with me, across borders and beliefs. A dance with divinity, in church aisles and urban streets. Explore our shared values, through a lens that's uniquely ours. New blog post, embracing the spiritual rainbow of life, awaits you.

Once upon a time, nestled in the tranquil, rolling landscapes of Bulgaria, I was born into an Orthodox Christian family. In the warm, rustic embrace of my homeland, faith wove itself into the fabric of our daily lives. The chime of church bells, the fragrant clouds of incense, the powerful cadences of liturgical hymns – these were familiar threads in the rich tapestry of my childhood. However,…

[deservedgrace]

There's also a reason I almost always say "harm" when talking about issues in the church and not "bigotry". Bigotry is part of harm, sure, but it isn't the whole picture.

I think sin doctrine is harmful. I think the concept of original sin is harmful. I think purity culture is harmful. I think hell doctrine is harmful. I think vertical morality is harmful. I think mandatory forgiveness is harmful. I think sin leveling is harmful. I think emotion and behavior and thought control are harmful. I think child indoctrination is harmful. I think believing you are separate from the world ("we're in the world not of the world") is harmful. I think isolating/insulating yourself from the world is harmful. I think believing this life is your "practice life" and your "real life" is in heaven is harmful. I think believing that you alone hold the one source of truth is harmful. I think spiritual bypassing is harmful. I think atonement theology is harmful. I think proselytizing is harmful. I think telling people that their thoughts, actions, emotions, beliefs are being monitored every second of every day is harmful. I think believing you are more knowledgeable than experts because you have an all knowing God on your side is harmful. I think believing you know other people's experiences better than they do because you have an all knowing God on your side is harmful. I think encouraging/requiring victims of abuse to put up with abuse because divorce is a sin is harmful. I think prioritizing faith over evidence is harmful.

I'm certainly missing things but this is long enough as is. And not every christian or church does or believes every single one of these, but none of these are one-off or two-off or even three-off things I've experienced. These are all patterns I've noticed.

So I find it odd that when I talk about harm within christianity, a lot of christians only hear "bigotry". And I also find sentiments along the lines of "it's not the doctrine it's the people carrying out the doctrine imperfectly" odd. Even if there were a church that was 100% bigotry free, addressing bigotry doesn't automatically address any of these other things. And I think that the harm christianity does goes far beyond bigotry. I think a lot of the harm is baked into it, baked right into the doctrine. Which means that for every person causing harm by carrying out the doctrine "incorrectly", there are just as many causing harm by carrying it out "correctly".

[beebfreeb]

In one of my older Judgement Boy posts someone left the tag "Oh this guy has DID for sure" and at the time it was not intentional but *grits teeth really hard* now it is. Don't worry about it.

[quilleily]

I forgot to post these lmaoo,, the road trip was supposed to be for titversary day 1,,, they got lost cuz of tamara lmaoo

The 2nd one is an attempt to design their uniforms inspired by altar servers/acolytes. I used this design for the 'take me to church' animatic.

Random thoughts- what if magisterium has more religious symbolism,,, its literally called Magisterium

What if the magic system is similar to Clerics in DND. Theres a god that granted them powers/magic, and they pray to use it. Maybe makars are like prophets, those have a special connection to their god which allows them to have more powerful magic.

Since the symbolisms heavily references catholicism,, constantine adds more into it (u kno, since his namesake literally converted to christianity). Like- idk what if constantine being a makar made him believe that he is strong, that he can become god- thus enemy of death.

Idk idkk what do yall think? Akdnjfndejgh

[prolibytherium]

There's a LOT of things people do wrong when constructing fantasy beliefs in pantheons of gods, but one of the more specific is having only one god related to fertility and it kind of being just a horny sex thing.

Like you'll have one in the entire bunch whose sphere is listed as fertility and it's basically like Yeah this is the sex one. She's always depicted naked (but not TOO naked because censorship and/or the writer's own skittishness). She's going to have the exact body type epitomized in contemporary western beauty standards and there's usually no chance in hell that she's gonna be fat (unless MAYBE they're referencing 'venus' figurines). Her thing is fertility, which means having sex and making babies. Might be a goddess of beauty or love or marriage too, because these are kinda sex things, but that's probably it. And yeah that sort of thing is virtually nonexistent in real life.

Like the concept of fertility is so fundamentally important to the function of most societies in human history in ways that it is just Not in industrialized imperial core countries. Most people are getting food from stores, and not having to worry about harvesting crops or breeding livestock or foraging for food or having enough animals to hunt, so fertility only really comes up as a concern if you're trying to have kids (and there is certainly societal pressure to have children, but your wellbeing and survival is rarely going to Depend on it). And I think writing only from that perspective and not even trying to learn about WHY fertility is so conceptually important is why you see this trend.

There's no absolute universal statement about how people believe in gods but it's broadly accurate that systems with many deities will Usually have more than one deity associated with fertility, and these associations will certainly include human reproduction but also the fertility of livestock/hunted animals, plants, the land itself.

Some fertility deities may also be heavily associated with seasonal changes or environmental factors that agriculture or foraging is dependent on (spring/summer/fall, seasonal rains, seasonal flooding, rain itself, sunlight, good soil, rivers, wetlands, etc). Some certainly might be related to love, marriage, sex, and beauty, but that's VERY RARELY going to be the sole way the concept of fertility is embodied. And they'll often will have other associations not directly about fertility, or related to fertility in culturally specific ways.

[real-odark]

noel and elder mckinley meeting

sure you can have one but theres nowhere to plug it in :(

[varilien]

(dress ref)

there's aus where u try to recreate the "effect" of a character's personality and behavior through an alternative "cause", and then there's this shit where i Just think umm well personally wolfwood being down to kill for vash is hot and it's a bummer vash doesn't think so too, but what if an au where he does ?

it's not a true "villain" vash au, basically it goes that vash decided to stick it out with knives in the hopes he could mitigate the damage knives planned to do to mankind, and it's worked for the most part-- at the expense of vash taking on much of knives' ire himself. this vash is even more isolated than in canon, unable to meet the standard knives enforces for what a god is supposed to look like, and constantly concerned with appeasing knives: dressing and styling his hair in a way that doesn't annoy him, talking very little, always offering compromises that put himself at a disadvantage

it's a wholly bad deal, up until the eye (yeah i'm blending stuff from other triguns in even tho it's a 98 au lol) offer vash their latest up-and-coming disciple to protect and serve him directly, though the "protecting" thing ends up being extremely mutual. wolfwood is the first bright spot in vash's life in a hundred years, and he's not going to allow anybody to take that away

[triumviiirate]

i spend a lot of time thinking about the empty space between jim and bones at spock's funeral

[ahli-stuff]

An Overanalysis of That Bsd 119 Panel

“If God does not exist, everything is permissible.”

��Fyodor Dostoyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov

With one of the most intense displays of genuine emotion that we’ve seen from Fyodor paired with the Expression emphatically taking up over half the page, I immediately wondered, what does this tell me about Fyodor?

I’ve seen a lot of interesting analysis floating around already, with the main two being: Fyodor doesn’t think Atsushi represents the “noble” beast of his ability, and/or Atsushi’s attitude reminds Fyodor of his past self.

However, to me, it seems that Fyodor’s reaction is a natural culmination of his obsessive and hypocritical search for perfection.

Part I: Fyodor’s Impossible Idealism

Fyodor has always been a romantic.

Not a romantic as in someone interested in ‘romance,’ but a romantic as defined by Oxford Languages: “[someone or something] characterized by…an idealized view of reality.”

From the beginning, Fyodor’s goals has always been steeped in idealism. “Saving” the world! Though thankfully a departure from the omnicidal maniac trope (I hate it! If you destroy the world, what then, genius), saving the world is as nearly nebulous as destroying the world. What does saving the world mean?

To Fyodor, it has been stated that he means cleansing the world of sin: ability users.

But I would argue that a better way to phrase this would be to cleansing the world of imperfection. Fyodor doesn’t only view ability users as imperfect, he views humanity as a whole as imperfect. I hinge this arguement where upon Dazai meeting Fyodor for the first time and talking with him in prison, Dazai says “people are sinfully stupid,” not ability-users, in opposition to Fyodor’s ideologies.

The second reasoning for this arguement is that while Fyodor hates ability users, he has no problem killing non ability users. You would think for someone who puts so much emphasis on abilities users as “sinful” that he would subsequently view non ability users as pure, right? Yeah, no.

“But Fyodor,” someone asks. “After you erase all the ability users how the fuck are you going to fix the rest of humanity?”

For one, he��d be dead (someone correct me on this if he said he’d kill all ability users but himself). For two, if the former () is the case, then is he just going to… write all of the rest of humans as perfect? Is he going to kill them to a write a version of humanity that is perfect? If that’s the case, then what the hell does ‘perfect’ mean to fyodor?

Another popular theory is that Fyodor is attempting to rewrite the world from the beginning without abilities, but that brings up the same issue in my second point—Fyodor doesn’t exclusively view ability users as imperfect, he views all of humanity as imperfect.

His plan is full of holes when you consider how exactly he defines “perfect.”

Therefore, I’d like to go forward in this analysis with the assumption that Fyodor is attempting to kill all ability users, including himself, through the “salvation” of death to create a “perfect” world despite all logistical fallacies.

So… what was the purpose of this tangent? It’s that I believe Fyodor’s search for perfection is futile, he likely knows it, and his goal is simply the largest unwilling suicide pact the world has ever seen.

Part II: Does Fyodor even believe in God?

Before this section begins, I’d like to define religiousness by the unconditional belief in gods or a god.

Short answer: yes. Slightly longer answer: well, yes, but…

Fyodor embodies of the churchgoing villain trope to a tee—at every possible moment he uses religion as a directive to all his actions. God, to Fyodor, is his patron.

What makes Fyodor’s religious zealousness so interesting to me is that highly intelligent, calculating, and cunning villains are often associated with ideologies ranging from relaxed-religiousness to atheism in media. Dazai is an example of this—he a deist who believes that god exists—but has created a world which runs on inconsistencies and absurdity.

Hell, Raskolnikov, the main character from from Crime and Punishment himself is an example of an intelligent character who is non-religious. While Raskolnikov is not a villain or a necessarily an irredeemable person, he is, as opposed to BSD Fyodor (the character of whom he inspired), an intelligent “bad person” who is notably non-religious. The following is a quote from Raskolnikov, in Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment, where he cynically comments about a religious character.

“At first he was afraid that she would worry him about religion, would talk about the gospel and pester him with books.”

Which naturally leads to the next question: why is Fyodor so religious if it clashes against both his literary counterpart and the tropes associated with an “intelligent villain”?

Trick question: I don’t think Fyodor is religious at all.

I believe that Fyodor’s fervent belief in god does not come out of genuine faith, but rather a desperate need to justify his own crimes. After all,

“If God doesn’t exist, everything is permissible.”

That is an adapted quote referenced in BSD 42 from a conversation in another one of Dostoevsky’s books, The Brothers Karamazov. The meaning of the quote is that the presence of god gives moral guidance meaning, and without god, humanity falls into anarchy.

After all, if heaven and hell do not exist, if god does not exist, or if god exists but he doesn’t care, or if god exists but he hates Fyodor, then… there’s no such thing as Fyodor’s idea of perfection. All of his plannning and scheming will be for naught. The slaughter and manipulation he has enacted across centuries will be pointless.

Fyodor must believe in his idealism (his version of god) or else his world views, his idealism, his raison d'etre—crumbles.

So let me ask the question again. Why is a villain who is as intelligent as Fyodor also religious? It’s because he must be, or he’d go insane.

“God is necessary, and therefore must exist... But I know that he does not and cannot exist... Don't you understand that a man with these two thoughts cannot go on living?”

This is a quote from Dostoevsky’s Demons, which perfectly describes what I believe about Fyodor’s motivations. I believe that deep within Fyodor’s fucked up mind, he understands that either god does not exist or that god exists, but hates/doesn’t give a rat’s ass about Fyodor.

However, Fyodor’s idealism has no room for nuance, even though someone of his intelligence must already understand that. Anything that challenges his idea of god, his idea of salvation, his idea of perfection, will challenge his very reason for being alive.

Which is what brings us to:

Part III: My Bad; The Panels this Analysis was Supposed to be About

In the past few years, there has been a recent shift in the fandom’s general perception Fyodor. He is no longer perceived as a character with a god complex, but rather character with a messiah complex(also known informally known as a Jesus complex). This is basically cemented in Fyodor’s last words before ‘death’: “Eli Eli lama sabachthani,” which mirrors Jesus’s words, not god’s.

While both god complexes and messiah complexes arise from the same core insecurities and delusions of superiority, those with messiah complexes are often characterized by their extreme empathy and intense desire to “save” others.

Looking at Fyodor, you wouldn’t think that he is a highly empathetic individual, but it is only because of his advanced emotional intelligence that he understands the human condition intimately enough to manipulate it—and he uses that power to try to “save” humanity the same way he perceives Jesus would.

But… if anything, it’s Atsushi who resembles Jesus.

Atsushi is compassionate; he extended his sympathy and respect to both Kyouka and Akutagawa, two people who attempted to kill him. Atsushi is selfless; from episode 1, he attempted to use his own body to cover a bomb in order to protect the ADA (people who he had barely known at the time!). Atsushi is humble; he denies his power and affability when confronting Lucy’s anguish.

(Arguably, you could say that Atsushi’s selflessness in the beginning was more motivated from self-hatred then true altruism—and you would be right, but once Atsushi learns a sense of confidence, his selflessness does not disappear… it just becomes genuine.)

Compassion, selflessness, and humbleness—all values that Jesus is said to preach.

The prideful Fyodor knelt before Atsushi in hopes a finding a god to his “Jesus,” but all he found was a painfully human boy. Not only that, he found a man who is more of a savior than he will ever be.

To add insult to injury in 119, Fyodor discovers Atsushi is an imperfect being who resides within what he had previously believed to be a perfect being. He is a contradiction—a nuance—and like I said before, Fyodor’s idealism has no room for what-ifs and buts. If he entertains a single contradiction(like Atsushi), his entire world view collapses.

So, Fyodor goes on the defense. In his attempt to rid himself of the so-called pathetic humanity he sees Atsushi demonstrating, he demonstrates some pathetic humanity of his own: For the first time we’ve seen since Fyodor has been introduced, Fyodor forgets his fixed benevolent, lofty, half-amused persona and gets pissed off.

More often than not I believe self-righteous anger comes as a result of insecurity and doubt. I imagine that his inner monologue is going something along the lines of: ‘how could this noble, god-like creature be so stupid, base, human? How could this faux-divine suggest that I am not already saving humanity? How could I have ever believed that he could be the perfect one I’m searching for?’

What I said before, about how Fyodor’s idea of perfection is a zero sum game and he knows it; it is reflected in his interaction with Atsushi. Atsushi’s mere existence and personality is evidence of what Fyodor has been trying to deny this entire time: his ideal of a “perfect world” does not exist.

“Your worst sin is that you have destroyed and betrayed yourself for nothing.” —Fyodor Dostoevsky, Crime and Punishment

[thoughtofadumbteenprotagonist]

Some Thoughts™️

I keep seeing stuff about Greta Gerwig making a remake of the Narnia franchise; my opinions on the need for the remake aside, I keep seeing people in the comments complaining that she better not be casting black or trans people and that she better not make it a feminist story because it will “detract from the true meaning” (Christianity) and some explicitly saying it will “ruin a good Christian story” and I can’t help but think,,,,,,,,,,, if the inclusion of POC, of queer people, of strong female characters “ruins” your Good Christian Story About Good Christian People,,,,, then I think you Christianity fucking sucks

[youreyeson1y]

never thought i'd hear chk chk boom be played at our school field on the speakers but we gone done it lol

[seoafin]

ok i 100% understand the allure of priest corruption fics whether it's the priest doing the corrupting or vice versa. but you know what really tickles my fancy? a stoic devout priest who people think would never give into the weakness of lust. a bonafide man of god who loves like worship and easily gets on his knees to devote himself between your thighs without a single ounce of guilt or hesitation.

[radlymona]

ENOUGHHHHH

[noosphe-re]

It is that our normal waking consciousness, rational consciousness as we call it, is but one special type of consciousness, whilst all about it, parted from it by the filmiest of screens, there lie potential forms of consciousness entirely different. We may go through life without suspecting their existence; but apply the requisite stimulus, and at a touch they are there in all their completeness, definite types of mentality which probably somewhere have their field of application and adaptation. No account of the universe in its totality can be final which leaves these other forms of consciousness quite disregarded. How to regard them is the question,—for they are so discontinuous with ordinary consciousness. Yet they may determine attitudes though they cannot furnish formulas, and open a region though they fail to give a map. At any rate, they forbid a premature closing of our accounts with reality.

William James, The Varieties of Religious Experience: A Study in Human Nature

[paging-possum]

was going to start writing an essay about the possible overlap between christianity and OCD and then I remembered im on Tumblr dot com and also a fucking idiot when it comes to putting things into words

[prolibytherium]

No hate I’ve just got like.. The absolute polar opposite opinion. I tend to be less into high fantasy where gods are confirmed Real with little to no room for interpretation because of the way it often sets up dichotomies of like, the Correct/Good belief systems vs the Wrong/Bad belief systems. If gods are observably materially real with exact specific natures and correct interpretations, it just kind of Adds limitations that would not otherwise exist, and a lot of the times results in worlds that feel flat and lacking in diversity. I think this framework can be perfectly fine for fantasy but approaching it with the exact same lack of nuance I'm talking about lends to executions that are reductive at BEST.

Part of why I’m into the hard realism no canon magic/supernatural fantasy is because of how much freedom it gives to explore the full spectrum of belief systems. There's nothing about this framing that prevents you from treating belief systems in a thoughtful and serious manner, and if anything it's a better framework to explore the full implications and effects on reality of religious belief (because In Real Life religion is a personal/cultural lens to subjective reality and has profound societal effects without people having Empirically Provable interactions with deities or etc). And tbh I feel like thinking that having a religion be Canon Reality in a setting is the only way for beliefs to not be treated as Stupid just kind of loops back around into treating religious belief as Being Stupid (ie: it's only NOT stupid when it's a materially provable aspect of reality)

I think you can have a setting that embraces the idea of a religion people believe in by simply having a setting that embraces the idea of a religion people believe in. You know?