#do you think abraham might have failed god's test?

[joshthewalkingtrainwreck]

welp. apparently i decided to hold a monday sermon with a dear friend who turned out to be a pro-life conservative. she wanted to 'resepectfully [...] agree to disagree' when i pointed out there were a lot easier, a lot cheaper, and a lot more effective ways to reduce abortions than to criminalize it. i replied to her that, respectfully, the savior i worship does not allow me to be content with thought-terminating cliches when people are getting hurt because of this.

a teenaged girl in Texas (18, might be around the same age as her daughters but I'm sure her girls are completely different) died painfully and unneccessarily of sepsis because she was forced to carry stillborn. but hey, according to her, innocent lives have to be protected. courts should start finding people innocent or pregnant.

those responsible for her death are hiding behind the pulpit, using God as their scapegoat. whatever argument the american civil religion might have about protecting the sanctity of life has gone straight into the fuckin trash can as far as i am concerned, because this very thing has happened before and people were warned that this specific kind of thing would happen.

even the most ardent, women-must-be-subservient-to-men, conservative, orthodox jews know that if it came down to a zygote or a grown woman, the woman is never to be the villain in these matters. but despite christians believing themselves better because they eat bacon, they somehow are caught severely lacking in this particular comparison.

contrast that with the venn diagram between "those in this country who claim christianity (a system of rules and dictates revolving around a man who famously blessed peacemakers)" and "those thinking the Palestinian genocide isn't going hard enough" being a single circle.

hell, our government executes people who turn out to be innocent all the time and yet the death penalty is still just as popular with the crowd that likes to print Jesus everywhere but on their own hearts. a mean person would interpret the broader consensus as thinking the government should only be used as a tool of God's wrath, not His love, not His benevolence, and certainly not His mercy.

(I try not to be mean, but that doesn't necessarily mean I am good at it.)

so, no. i will argue this because it is on my heart to argue it.

this isn't even something you can write off as hospital negligence, because how many doctors were literally afraid to treat her because of all of the hassle, paperwork, and government intrusion into their lives that would have resulted due to changes in texas' laws? isn't that one thing a lot of christians specificially say they wanna change the government to avoid? surely they did not think this happened solely in a vacuum, do they?

one hospital could be negligence. three refusing to treat her is a pattern. the purpose of a system is in what it does, which means laws designed to be compassionate towards a clump of cells has produced a lot of dead women in order to do it. if one isn't enough to count as 'a lot,' especially in the field of 'unnecessary misery and death,' please tell me where you set your number and I will pray for God to humble you in a deeply meaningful way.

the british jurist lord blackstone, the man who many consider the father of british (and by some extent american) common law said that he would sooner allow ten guilty men to go free than to see one innocent man hang. mind you, this was back in the times when a dude could get drawn and quartered for farting on a picture of the king and somehow he's ended up more-advanced than christians in the year of our lord two thousand and twenty four.

this would not have happened had republicans treated pregnant women as literally anything other than irresponsible and/or slutty and democrats done literally anything about roe v wade getting repealed beyond fundraising off of it.

and yet here the fuck we are. I hope we are all proud of that, because the people got exactly what they wanted with it.

[scoobydoodean]

Hey there, I have SPN Thought Worms i thought you might appreciate: You know how there’s debate wether (in the biblical story) Abraham “failed” God’s test, if it was a blind loyalty test or to see if he’d put his moral and love over unquestioned orders? In the same vein, do you think Dean truly ‘failed’ Death’s test with the ring and carrying out his duties for the day? Like maybe Death actually wanted Dean to be unable to do it bc it proved he had limits or smth? Or did he just get Sam’s soul back despite the apparent failure because he has a massive soft spot for Dean? (relatable tbh). Hope I made myself clear lol, the concept is jumbled-up in my mind, and have a great day!

This is a really interesting question! I also have a feeling I'll have a lot better of an answer when I get to 6.11 on this rewatch and have the entire season fresh on my mind. That said, Death actually says in the end that the goal was for Dean to learn something.

DEATH Today, you got a hard look behind the curtain. Wrecking the natural order's not quite such fun when you have to mop up the mess, is it? This is hard for you, Dean. You throw away your life because you've come to assume that it'll bounce right back into your lap. But the human soul is not a rubber ball. It's vulnerable, impermanent, but stronger than you know. And more valuable than you can imagine. So... I think you've learned something today. (x)

I'd really like to watch through season 6 again to solidify this one for myself, but I have a feeling that this isn't about teaching Dean a personal moral lesson at all. I don't think Death is at all concerned with the fact that the nurse died because the little girl didn't from a moral perspective—he wouldn't have ever given Dean his ring if he was. That isn't why he said "good" when Dean said he would have acted differently if he could go back. We can guess it also isn't just a simple lesson about "bringing each other back" being bad and "letting go", because that'd be pretty hypocritical given Death is going to help Dean anyway with no one forcing his hand (and he tells us Dean has use). It isn't a moral issue Death's addressing. It's a lesson he's giving on the structure of the universe. It's about balance. As Death says cryptically later in the scene:

I think what Death wanted to get across to Dean is that souls must pass on, and their energy must be allotted to the appropriate areas in time and space. If one person doesn't die, passing their soul on as energy, another person must die so that a certain balance and energy level is maintained in the universe. Death plans to help Dean from the beginning, because "Right now, you're digging at something. The intrepid Detective. I want you to keep digging, Dean."

Death, as a person who can't ultimately involve himself without also disrupting balance, is ultimately hinting at Dean as best he knows how that he wants him to stop Crowley and Cas from sucking a bunch of souls out of Purgatory, creating absolute chaos. But he can't say that, so instead, he gives Dean a lesson. He tells Dean that human souls are extremely valuable, and that they need to go to the places the universe wants them to go and stay there. If they don't—if they are moved on a large scale—something terrible will happen. Death has to expect Dean to extrapolate all of this information, which is not an easy expectation to fulfill.

So I guess to summarize: I don't think Dean failed Death's test, because actually using the ring and experiencing what happened when Dean tried to change things was more of a lesson than a test. The test was how Dean reflected on the lesson after and evaluated his behavior. He passed when he said he'd behave differently if he could go back. Death wanted Dean to understand the idea of balance in the universe depending on where souls go, and how important it is not to disrupt their flow or move them around. Changing things makes bad things happen. When there's just one soul, the impact is small (something Death is willing to let Dean toy with by offering his ring for the day). But what if someone disrupted the flow of many many souls at once?

[witchboychan]

Those are the EXACT words i said when i first became a hellenist! My deities both force me to be a better person and are extremely kind to me.

The first deitiy I ever worked with was Apollo, and he is literally and figuratively a bundle of sunshine. Like I can JOKE and LAUGH with him. I first accidentally summoned him because i was panicking over state testing (it was algebra and biology, and i'd be fucked if i failed). He happily recommended that I work with his sister and was willing to wait several months until i was comfortable enough working with him before i reached out to her.

Aeolus, another more minor deity i work with, is literally just happy to be here. I wasn't even supposed to work with him, I just caught his attention since I was researching him so I could force him into my novel. He appeared in the middle of my research just to figure out what my intentions were.

Lady Aprodite was actually called over after the previously mentioned deities were struggling to calm me down from a horrible mental health episode. I don't think most people get how it feels to be yelled at by a goddess (whos beauty started a WAR might I add, whos in love with a WAR deity) because you said one passing, negative comment about your body.

And thats not even the HALF OF IT ×_×

Overall, as someone with a heavily Christian friend who I use as a reference point, the christian way of worshipping god has more rules and structure then hellenism, or most other non-abrahamic religions. Hell, the main rules of hellenism are don't insult the gods, do your best, and shower while some Christian sects have absurd, overly controlling rules.

So yes it could be Christian trauma, because others who switched teams, including myself, had the same experiences as you.

(Besides the Christian witches, or those who still work with angels and saints on the regular. They don't count in this discussion lol)

it's probably the christian trauma but who knew the hellenic God's were so kind

Don't get me wrong, I understand they are not to be messed with, but I just had the sweetest experience.

I've applied to a college recently and now all I can do is wait for the decision and I've fallen in love with this college recently and honestly don't know what i'll do if i dont get in. I didn't do the best in high school so I'm just praying at this point.

I had a pretty bad anxiety attack about this last night that ended up turning into health anxiety because I convinced myself I was having a stroke when in reality I think i just injured my shoulder at work and have a pinched nerve or something.

Yesterday I discovered that both Hades and Athena were wanting to talk to me as well as Aphrodite and Poseidon so I did a huge tarot session where I spoke to them one on one. -- Which I had no clue would be so exhausting.

All of them kept reassuring me that I'm on the right path and that everything will work out and they helpfully told me the type of working relationship they were looking for. By the time I got to Athena last, I was absolutely exhausted but was determined to speak with her. When I asked her to confirm she wanted to speak with me she said no, and when when I asked some follow up questions she basically told me "Ask me later, go rest." and i don't know I just found that super kind??? I think i'm just new at this.

[steveezekiel]

HANDLING CHANGES IN MATERIAL COMFORTS OR CIRCUMSTANCES 1

"Until the time came to fulfill his dreams, THE LORD TESTED JOSEPH’S CHARACTER."

Psalm 105:19 (NLT)

• In whatever you want and desire to receive from God, He will test your character before He releases it.

- Until you pass the test of character, the Word of God spoken about your Life might not come to fulfillment.

- A number of believers have failed in character testing, and that has been the reason why the promises of God are far-fetched or delayed in their lives.

- Your character matters to God in whatever He wanted to give to you.

• Why the delay in the release of the blessing? What has inhibited the flow of the blessing?

- When you experience a sudden change in the flow of God's Blessing in your Life, and the flow of the Blessing begins to ebb away, started to go out; It means something has gone wrong.

- The cause of the blessing being ebbed might be the Pride that is found in your life.

- Your heart may have gone up, and be contaminated with pride; thinking you have arrived and begin to feel that you are above others.

- Having too high opinion of yourself because of the little breakthrough that you have just experienced in what you do.

- Pride is destructive, any element of it would stop the flow of the Blessings of God in your life.

NOTE:

(i) If you have started imagining in your heart how the glory of the new thing, the Blessing, would be; the Blessing may be truncated as a result of this.

(ii) When you begin to think of how you are going to show to the people that your level has changed, you have arrived, and being vaunted of your Blessings.

(iii) When you want to show to those who have mocked you at the time of your predicaments that things have changed—to let them know that you have gotten results now.

(iv) You begin to think how you will suddenly become great and prominent than some people, because of the Blessing you anticipated, or the blessing which has just started flowing.

(v) You may even be thinking you are now higher than your spiritual leader—Pastor.

YOU think you are now better than some people. You think more of the self than God.

PERADVENTURE God has put a little measure of His anointing on your Life, and people have started testifying when you pray for them. You afterwards begin to think the anointing on your Life is higher than that of your Senior Pastor. IF such thoughts are permitted in your heart, you have permitted rebellion and may begin to despise or disdain your leader—your Pastor.

THE outcome of this may be calamitous.

GOD is not an author of confusion, He would not give you the anointing that is higher than that of your Pastor whilst you are still serving under him.

IF any higher anointing would be given to you at all, God would move you out of the place.

- When all or any of the above mentioned points are the thoughts of your mind, Because of your breakthrough or the blessing you anticipated; God would stop the Blessing.

HE would not allow the Blessing to materialize, or stop the flow of it, if the Blessing has started at all.

- The reason is, such thoughts are by-products of Pride.

• When a new thing is about to happen in your life or a new thing has just started to happen. Do not be overjoyed about it, to the point that you begin to have contempt for others, especially those who are higher than you.

- When Hagar, Sarah's maid, discovered she was pregnant, she began to look at her mistress with contempt:

"He [Abraham] went in to [the bed of] Hagar, and she conceived; AND WHEN SHE REALIZED THAT SHE HAD CONCEIVED, SHE LOOKED WITH CONTEMPT ON HER MISTRESS [regarding Sarai as insignificant because of her infertility]" (Genesis 16:4 AMP).

- Give all the glory of whatever good thing that happens to God, in your heart. Even when others are trying to praise you for the result or success, humble yourself and give all the honour and glory to God.

- Do not feel Big. And do not suddenly change in your disposition to people. Do not boast about the material breakthrough you have just experienced.

- Do not talk about it to receive people's attention: "LET ANOTHER MAN PRAISE YOU, AND NOT YOUR OWN MOUTH; A stranger, and not your own lips" (Proverbs 27:2).

• Pride is destructive!

- Many have truncated, halt what God is about to do or has started to do in their lives because of Pride.

- Pride manifested itself in speeches, greetings, dressings, and every action of whoever has it; depending on the level of the Pride in such a person.

- God detests Pride. He personally will stand on the way of a proud person:

"In fact, God treats us with even greater kindness, just as the Scriptures say, “God opposes everyone who is proud, but he blesses all who are humble with undeserved grace" (James 4:6 Contemporary English Version).

READ: 1 Peter 5:5

- God will deal with a proud person by Himself. If pride is found in your life, favour would be far away from you.

- Many people desire and pray for God's favour but they could not receive it because of pride.

- Humility is the key to receive from God. If you humble yourself, you will receive the desired Blessings from God.

• In addition, learning how to appreciate God for every little result you have gotten, is of great importance.

- If you do not know how to thank and praise God, you cannot cannot continue in the flow of His Blessings.

- You are nothing without God. Remain small in your own eyes and do not allow Pride.

- If you think you are better than others because of the material comforts, the Blessings you have received; the flow of it would be stopped by God.

- Many are having problems in handling their material comforts. Do not allow the Blessings of God in your Life turns to a curse.

• You will not fail in Jesus' name.

Peace!

TO BE CONTINUED

[spn-romantica]

So I watched SPN for years, right up until the end of S11, when they brought back Mary. I heard that S15 would be the last season, and I was like ‘oh ok I’ll rewatch (for like the 8th time) and finish SPN then’ BUT THEN 15x18 happened and I was violently pulled back into the SPN fandom. I still haven’t caught up fully watching yet, but I’ve read so much discourse now...and I have thoughts. Hypotheses currently. I’ll wait to finish the whole show for real to call any of this theories but, I wanted to record my thoughts.

They’re about Chuck. As a villain. Which weirds me out. As an antagonist? Sure. As evil? No. Can’t envision it. I just finished my rewatch of S5 and, damn, but if Chuck is the ultimate villain, S5 reads very differently. :0

But I recently saw a post comparing Dean’s reaction in 1x18 (I believe) to his in 10x05 (for sure) about when someone mentions his mother’s death. In 1x18, it’s Sam when they were children and Dean gets angry. In 10x05, it’s a group of high school girls and Dean just bops his head along to the song. The post was framing it as 10x05 not understanding Dean’s thoughts about his mother, but I think that both episodes understand Dean. When Dean is a child, the trauma over his mother’s murder is still fresh. By 10x05, the event is 70 years in the past. Of course it still affects Dean. Of course. You never really get over something like that. But I’d argue that after 70 years, Dean has moved through the stages of grief to acceptance. It still hurts, but like an old ache, not a fresh, still-bleeding wound.

Interestingly, 10x05 is when we see Chuck, after a long absence. He’s watching the play, probably happy that someone loves his work enough to even make a musical, but he is also watching the Winchesters. The actual episodes of the show, aka the books Chuck writes, are what Chuck knows/cares about regarding the Winchesters. Despite being God, I’d argue he doesn’t pay attention to every second and all the little minutia of the boys’ lives. So, here in 10x05, we have confirmation that Chuck is around to see that Dean has healed from his mother’s death.

Later, in S11, Dean acts as therapist/life counsellor to Chuck/God, regarding Amara and Lucifer. And it works! Dean teaches God about family and about healing. Why does God listen to Dean Winchester, a random human? Perhaps it is because of S1-5. Perhaps it is because Dean and Sam were part of God’s test, as God himself describes it in 5x22.

What was the test? Was it God’s experiment about choice and free will? About freedom vs peace? Or, perhaps, was God trying to understand sibling relationships? He and Amara are two faces of the same coin. They are siblings, but with very different outlooks and it caused a rift between them, caused Chuck to seal Amara away before she could destroy his creations. Chuck regretted this, but saw it as a necessary betrayal. But then, some time later, Chuck’s angelic children experience their own betrayal and sibling rift. Lucifer tries to turn the angels against God, rebel and reject God. He makes demons, for sure, and maybe even Hell. But why? God figures that Lucifer was maybe jealous of the new baby (humans) like others in the show postulates. Or maybe Lucifer had beef specifically with Michael, because humans are little more than amoebas from an angelic perspective. Aside from Castiel, Anna and a handful of other angels, angels consistently view humans as humans might view dust mites. Maybe humans were the cause of the rift between Michael and Lucifer, but it was Michael and Lucifer’s relationship that needed fixing in the end, regardless.

So God is left with the sad conclusion that maybe close siblings will inevitably betray each other and be unable to forgive and heal. He wants to heal with Amara. But he also wants Michael and Lucifer to be able to heal. (It doesn’t occur to God that maybe Lucifer’s problem was never with humanity or Michael; it was with God.)

So God has research to do, to see if it’s possible for siblings to experience such deep betrayal and still heal. He turns to his little hairless apes, the only sentient species on Earth with potential to parallel the angels. He starts testing siblings. Cain and Abel are first up. Needless to say, but the betrayal was too strong and left no room for healing. But on down the line of Cain, God continues testing. Eventually, we come to Sam and Dean.

God has scheduled Michael and Lucifer’s family counselling session for 2010. All the data up to this point says it can only end badly. Maybe it’ll half-kill the Earth, but it’s finally time for Michael and Lucifer to meet and for one of them to die. God isn’t happy about this conclusion, but it’s what the data says. So, finally, the last test subjects, the last in the line who will be the vessels for Michael and Lucifer’s showdown, arrive. Sam and Dean Winchester are to be the last sibling test. The conclusion seems foregone at this point, but there is no point in cancelling the last bit of the test after so long, so it continues. God watches. And Sam and Dean surprise God. Siblings after siblings had failed for millennia to heal. Betrayals too strong, healing too little, too late. But Sam and Dean. no matter how badly they hurt each other, find a way to come back together and heal. They don’t give up on each other, despite millennia of data to the contrary. Still, the angels and demons push and push at Sam and Dean until their rift is as wide and as deep as Michael and Lucifer’s, as God’s and Amara’s (in late S4). It seems, despite the brothers’ best efforts earlier on, it’s all for naught.

But there is a further element of randomness, something God couldn’t foresee. Castiel. God hasn’t had occasion for romantic love in his own experience, so he is entirely blind to what choices Castiel is likely to make. He provides an element of randomness to the experiment, an essential part that gives Dean the ultimate chance to go back to Sam and begin to heal (4x22).

Throughout S5, Sam and Dean heal. There is hurt, still, of course, but they love each other and forgive each other. By 5x22, they’ve surprised everyone. Even the angels have given up on turning them against each other, and have shrugged and settled for using Nick and Adam as the vessels for the showdown. Sam and Dean passed their test. They were siblings who betrayed each other and healed from it. God reconsiders how family counselling will go with Michael and Lucifer. He figured it would be the Apocalypse, the end of the problems between Michael and Lucifer, as one of them dies, as had always happened before. But, Sam and Dean showed God, that though it is rare, it is possible to heal. So God gives Sam and Dean an out. He gives Sam the strength to seize back control from Lucifer, should things go south.

Finally, the showdown arrives. Michael and Lucifer meet. They talk things out. To God’s surprise, Lucifer reveals that he never had a problem with Michael. He had forgiven Michael long ago. But Michael couldn’t forgive Lucifer. He had to be a ‘good son’ and do what he thought God wanted him to do. But Michael didn’t realise, that God doesn’t give orders. Free will all the way, baby! But the whole thing comes as a surprise. Apparently, all this time, the problem relationship wasn’t siblings, it was parents.

Oops.

Good thing God had a back-up plan.

Sam throws himself and Lucifer (and Michael and Adam) into the Cage. Michael and Lucifer have an eternity to figure things out between each other now. But that’s beside the point. The point is, now, that God has to start testing all over again. Not how to fix sibling relationships, but how to fix parent-child relationships.

God restores Castiel, perhaps for a few reasons because God exists outside of time, but originally it may have been just for one. He likes Castiel. He is impressed that Castiel invented free will for himself, broke free of angelic programming (multiple times over), and did it all for love. It’s novel. It’s interesting. God might even think it’s sweet. But God has had time later, and thought about it, and he has a plan. And Castiel is essential.

But Dean Winchester is the key.

Sam and Dean’s relationship with their own father has been strained, but both boys find a way to forgive John his flaws and failings, and love him. Whenever they do get a chance to see him again, post his death, they don’t hate him. They’ve healed. John’s relationship with Sam and Dean is one point of data, Abraham and Isaac another. There are many data points that God can reflect back on and consider.

But as S6 through S10 roll on, God watches Sam and Dean and Castiel. He even watches Crowley and Rowena for another data point. Dean is his main focus, however. (This is a little meta, but as the story focuses more on Dean than Sam post S5, it ties in. Prior to S6, both Sam and Dean were essential - the sibling test. Now, post S5, the parent test, Dean is the most essential. Of course, Sam and Castiel are important too. But Dean is key.)

Dean is a good father. He was a good father to Sam, even when he was only 6 years old himself. He was a good father to Ben. He was willing to die for Bobby John. He’s always good with kids. Not only that, but Dean is blunt enough, brave enough, and crazy enough to tell God to God’s face what he thinks. God needs Dean’s advice, his perspective and opinion on family relationships, but he also needs to see what Dean would do if he were in God’s shoes.

[Edit (1/04/21): After seeing Michael and Lucifer (mostly) heal, and after seeing Sam and Dean heal their relationship, God finally has hope for him and Amara. So God logically wants to retrieve Amara from her prison. But how? Well, he could just wander on up to Cain and do it himself, but what would Amara say? “So I see you’ve come crawling back, eh, Chucky?” She wouldn’t be impressed with God. She wouldn’t understand, because she’s hopeless too. SO how to give her hope? How to make her see that she and God can be okay again? Why, stick her near Dean Winchester, of course! So God sets things up for Dean to get and lose the Mark of Cain, thereby ensuring that Amara will feel a connection to Dean and stick around him/keep him alive long enough for Dean to work his life-coach magic.]

In S11, God and Amara heal their relationship because of the hope Sam and Dean gave God, and also the direct advice Dean gives God. God and Lucifer, not so much.

God needs more data. He needs to see what Dean would do. In comes Castiel’s relevance. God sets things up so that Lucifer can have a son. A nephil. Jack. And God points Castiel in Jack’s direction, trusting Castiel’s ability for unconditional love to keep Jack alive long enough for the experiment. Castiel becomes Jack’s father. But Castiel will never betray Jack, the way God betrayed Lucifer. And, besides, Castiel isn’t the target of this experiment. But it is Castiel’s relationship with Dean Winchester that provides the link needed to get the experiment rolling.

Because Jack is Castiel’s son, he is therefore Sam and Dean’s nephew. Except, God has been watching Castiel and Dean. And, frankly, their romantic love for each other is so obvious even God cannot miss it. Through Castiel, Dean sees Jack as his son too. He loves Jack, exactly like a son. In this way, Dean parallels God, and Jack parallels Lucifer.

But God knows Dean would not easily turn on any child, let alone his own child. So God had a plan for that too. One that Amara helped him with.

They brought back Mary Winchester.

Mary is the one person in existence whose loss would hurt Dean enough to spur him to action. So, she was brought back to die. It was a matter of only a few years of gentle prodding to get everything in position. Jack causes Mary’s death. Dean is faced with a horrible decision. If Jack can kill Mary, what’s to say that Sam and Castiel wouldn’t be next? Mary’s death is like everything beginning all over again for Dean as well. Her first death set off a chain reaction, a series of unfortunate events that spanned decades and nearly caused the ruination of not only Dean’s life, but Sam’s and John’s and even the world. That scar, which had healed as well as it could after 70 years, that God saw was healed in 10x05, has been violently opened up again. It’s the only thing that could force Dean’s hand, that could get him to betray Jack and try to kill him. If Jack had killed Sam or Castiel, it wouldn’t have had the same effect. Both Sam and Castiel had died and come back so many times, and while it would hurt Dean and make him doubt Jack, their deaths would be a sacrifice that Dean would feel obligated to respect, to give Jack a second chance like they would both want. (And God has been laying the groundwork for Dean, convincing him that Jack is evil, will be evil like Lucifer, can’t be allowed to live. All things God has thought about Lucifer over time. Was Lucifer inherently evil? Was their rift inevitable?)

So, here it is. The big test. Will Dean kill Jack? Will he betray Jack and cause an unhealable rift? Or will he find a way to heal, like he did with Sam against all the odds?

And, once again, Dean impresses God. He refuses to kill Jack.

But now we’re in the endgame. Sam, Dean and Castiel are aware that Jack’s life was only on the line because of God. It’s not something they can forgive, or understand. They’re all God’s guinea pigs, and while he loves his guinea pigs, he knows he’s hurt them in the name of science, of knowledge. or healing, and God can’t undo what he’s done. Free will is linear, after all. So it is time for the Winchesters, Castiel and Jack included, to be done with God. God is done with them, too. It’s time for them to be free and at peace. The experiments are done. God has decided not to kill Lucifer. He has decided to try to heal. He can get Lucifer out of the Empty and talk and try to fix things. He has forever to fix things, now that he knows he can. (The last element of this, Jack forgiving Dean for trying to kill him, is something I have limited knowledge of, but I am under the impression happens so... To be added in the edit once I finish the series.)

But the only way the Winchesters will be able to rest, is if they think God, the last and greatest villain, is out of the way. They know they’ve been manipulated their whole lives, first towards the sibling experiment and now the parent experiment, so they need to think God is gone so they can feel secure in their free will once more. Truthfully, God never took their free will. He set them up in situations, maybe even gave a bio-chemical nudge of anger (Dean) or attraction (Sam and Eileen) every now and then. But the choices were always theirs. Still, God knows they won’t see it that way. So he sets things up so that they can defeat him.

He lets them win. He wants them to win. They cannot defeat God, after all. It’s not God’s time, and Death is the only one who can claim God in the end, as the two embrace as friends and walk to the next existence. But the Winchesters need this, and so God allows it. A last gift, to the beings who have been such help, hope and inspiration to him.

With an eye for an eventual S16, 15x20 is written to be ‘an ending’ but also one that could easily be reframed as a bad dream.

For example...

Unfortunately, after Jack, suped up on a extra Grace God lent him, restores the Earth and expends all the Grace (”giving up the mantle of God so that their is no God, no plans, only Free Will”), and Dean, Sam and Jack head back to the Bunker to regroup and gather the ingredients to do the spell to rescue Castiel from the Empty, they’re jumped by monsters who are angry with how much God has fucked with them on behalf of the Winchesters. 15x20 is all a djinn dream Dean is trapped in.

16x01 is Dean waking himself up from the djinn dream, Sam and Jack escaping their own monsters, and then the end of 16x01 is Dean saying something about waking Castiel up from his own dreams in the Empty. The rest of S16 sees the boys save Castiel, reunite with Eileen, start a monster-hunting Bobby Singer/Men of Letters-esque organisation, Dean and Castiel getting together and getting married on Valentine’s Day, Jack getting to live a normal life, going to school, making friends, etc.

If their is no S16 ever (which would be criminal), then 15x20 makes no sense, unless it is plainly a recount of an old, hopeless ending written by God. However you spin it, 15x20 is not the way it seems (like owls).

All things being said, God is an antagonist, but he’s not evil. He’s an asshole, sure, but he never once worked against the Winchesters, never bet against them, never tried to erase or end them. He wanted them to win. He wanted to see the fruits of free will be love, second chances, hope, forgiveness, healing, and happiness, not just betrayal, pain, selfishness, jealousy, disappointment, and hopelessness.

Why is the ending he shows Becky ‘hopeless’? Because God is. He has spent his long existence losing his most loved family members. Amara, Lucifer. How can things end well for God, when they can’t even end well for humans? But Sam and Dean defy the script, again and again. They surprise God, defying the statistics, defying the hypotheses, throwing the experiment into disarray. Giving God hope. Sam and Dean were okay. Dean and Jack were okay. If God had a romantic love, he would find hope from Dean and Castiel being okay. But when God wrote the book he showed Becky, he was writing what he thought would happen. In the end, surely, not even Dean can be enough to hold Sam and Cas and Jack together. But in the end, as we see, as God sees, he is proven wrong and he’s happy to be wrong. He’s hopeful. And he can leave Dean, Sam, Castiel and Jack, and all the angels and all the humans, to rule the Earth and the Heavens. He doesn’t need to learn anything more from them, so he heads to the Empty, with Amara, with Lucifer, with Death (Billie or not, Death is there for God in the end), and they can all depart for a better existence of their own.

If you read all of this, thanks! I eagerly anticipate watching the remaining 10 seasons so I can come back and edit the heck outta this, but until then, if y’all have any thoughts, I’d be interested to hear them~

TLDR: God is a morally bankrupt scientist and the Winchesters are his guinea pigs, but he’s not evil and he does love his guinea pigs, even if he could really treat them nicer.

[smutandfluffohmy]

Dear Mr.Keating Chapter II

Read Chapter I here  Description:  This is a story about a closer look into the lives of the Dead Poets Society. Exploring first love, friendship and grief. This story explores elements of the book and film.

Todd Anderson had almost convinced himself that the events of yesterday were all a bad dream. He almost convinced himself of just that if he hadn’t woken up face to face with Neil Perry laying on the other bed across from him. Todd admired Neil, he wanted to be like him, speak without feeling his palms getting sweaty, to speak and have people listen to what he had to say. Todd stared at Neil, he tried to find his secret in the curves of his face. The light shone against Neil’s face, it made him feel calm and forget about what the day that waited for him. He wanted to get up to check the time but he was afraid any sound might wake him. Neils eyes started fluttering open, Todd felt a bit of panic then closed his eyes feeling that he might catch him staring.

“What time is it?” Neil asked with a yawn reaching over to the clock they sat against the windowsill. Technically a clock that belonged to Todd, more specifically a clock that belonged to Todd’s desk set. Todd pretended to wake up from a deep sleep rolling over to look over at Neil.

“Shit. We’re late for breakfast.” Neil said jumping out of bed faster than Todd had ever seen anyone do. The fact that someone had that much energy in the morning outstanded Todd. “How do you feel about today?” Neil asked as he was buttoning up his dress shirt just like he'd done many days before.

“I think I might faint.” Todd said tugging in his shirt

“You’ll be fine.” Neil smiled to himself as he looked for his tie, which he found neatly placed on top of his dresser. “I’ll stay close to catch you if you do.”  Todd watched Neil closely while he tied his tie, looking at his hands carefully he tried to mimic the movement. But yet he still failed, one end of the tie far too long than the other.

“Here let me help you.” Neil said shooing his hands away and standing in front of him to do it. Todd felt so embarrassed, it was his first day and he was already dependent on Neil to survive Welton. “There you go,” Neil smiled at Todd reaching over for his bag “Come on we’re late!” Neil said, pushing him out of the door.

Neil talked about the classes they had for today, how to act in classes and if they ran fast enough they could still grab a bit of breakfast. Todd was a ship in a reckless sea and Neil was the anchor keeping him at bay.

They walked quickly down the turning halls, Todd thought all the halls looked the same but he followed Neil without a doubt. Their dress shoes clacked against the stone floor, till they reached an arched doorway.

Chemistry. Latin.English. Gym.

That was their schedule for today. The schedule didn’t sound any different from his old school but yet he was worried. Worried that all eyes would be on him for being the new kid.

Chemistry was uneventful. Latin was difficult, Todd had never taken Latin before in his life; instead he took french and was even then still had a hard time passing that. It wasn’t until they reached their English class that Todd felt at ease again after having to sit in a class where he did not know the language. At least in English class he was sure he would be able to understand.

Mr.Keating, their new English teacher, walked into the classroom after they were all sat down at their desk. He didn’t look like the other teachers, the other teachers wore ties and freshly pressed shirts underneath blazers. Mr.Keating stuck out, with no tie and no blazer.

“ ‘O Captain! My Captain!’” Mr. Keating said, his hands in his pockets, Neil wrote on the first line of his notebook ‘O’ Captain! My Captain!’ there was no knowing what they would get tested on later.

“Who knows where that’s from? Anybody? No?” Mr. Keating asked, looking around the classroom waiting for anyone to answer “It was written, my young scholars,” He said smiling at the boys  “by a poet named Walt Whittman about Abraham Lincoln. In this class you may refer to me as either Mr.Keating or if you feel more daring ‘O Captain! My Captain” Keating pointed to the door and walked headed to the door and walked out. They all sat, unsure of what to do next, unsure of whether to follow or stay put. “Well come on!” Keating said popping his head inside. The boys all quickly followed, Todd making sure to stick close to Neil unsure if this was a usual occurrence at Welton. He knew the answer but needed an excuse to talk to Neil. Mr.Keating stopped in front of pictures of previous Welton graduates.

“They’re not that different than any of you,are they? Hope in their eyes, just like yours. They believe themselves destined for wonderful things, just like many of you.” Keatings said walking in front of the pictures. “If you listen very carefully you can hear their legacy. Come on boys listen.” Keating said, urging the boys to step closer.

“Carpe. Carpe Diem” Keatting said in a hoarse voice, Neil smiled at Todd by how odd this all was “Seize the day. Make your lives extraordinary.”

---

Neil, Todd, Charlie, Meeks, Pitts and Cameron all walked together on their way to gym class “You think he’ll test us on that stuff?” Cameron asked furrowing his brows at how odd the class was.

“Come on Cameron,” Charlie laughed “don’t you get anything?”.

Cameron didn’t get anything, not anything that wasn’t spelled out for him in a neat 12 point font, not anything that couldn’t be referenced in a text. They made their way towards the outside to attend their gym class, Todd worried about the way he stood, the way he kicked, the way he stretched, the way he breathed. The class felt infinite but before he knew it he was standing in the showers, trying to wash away the embarrassment of missing the soccer ball when he tried scoring a goal.

“Are you coming?” Neil asked drying off his hair with a towel.

“Huh?” Todd asked, admiring how Neil looked. Todd wished he looked like that, he liked looking at Neil and decided it would be easier to stare at him if they had the same face.

“Study group?” Neil said.

“Thanks, but… I’d better do history.” Todd said, it was a lie he wanted to lie in bed and forget about how he didn’t know Latin and how he barely made the grades to get in here in the first place and he already felt himself drowning in homework.

“Okay, you can always change your mind.” Neil said smiling at him, hoping to see Todd there.

Todd only nodded, not knowing the way to reach the library even if he changed his mind. They got changed, talking about how Knox was due at the Danburrys but Todd was only looking down at the tie in his hand and shoving it in the pocket of his blazer. While they spoke of the Danburrys status and prestige, Neil tugged the tie over his head and wordlessly handed it to Todd and stuck out his palm face up for Todds hidden tie. Which Todd wordlessly complied to. He shared a room with Neil, he had classes with Neil, he spent almost every moment of his day with Neil but somehow this tie nudged him over the edge.

Knox sighed “They're probably old and boring, like my parents.” he said, rolling his eyes at the thought of having to be stuck listening to them talk for hours.

Charlie draped an arm around Knox’s shoulder “Cheer up Knox, anything is better than the food they give us here.” He said laughing.

“What if they give me chowder and,” Knox sighed, preferring Weltons mystery meat over conversations about the old days in the law firm  “and what do old people eat?” he asked

“Prunes.” Meeks said with a smile, imagining Knox having to force himself to eat buckets of chowder and prunes.

“What if they give me prunes!” Knox cried out.

Pitts sighed looking at his friends “They’re old not on the way to kick the bucket.” he said.

“Talking about old prunes,” Charlie said, “Cameron asked if he could join the study group.”

“It’s not our fault he’s your roommate.” Knox sighed, grateful at least he won’t have to hear Cameron talk about all the extra curriculars Nolan gave him. This comment made Todd who was following closely behind Neil perk up at the sound of. At least for once, for now he wasn’t the least desirable person in the group.

Charlie huffed “It’s not mine either,” he said  “So is he in?”

-----

Knox went back to his room to change for dinner, Todd went back to his room, and the rest of the boys went on to the library to study.

Todd laid his papers and books on his bed, it would’ve all been easier if done at his desk but he couldn’t manage the thought of opening up his drawer for a pen or even just setting his things down on the desk set.

He didn;t get much done, getting frustrated with himself for not knowing Latin and for not remembering when the declaration was signed. Instead Todd looked at their room and then out to the courtyard. It was large but unbearably small at the same time.

-----

“How was dinner?” Pitts asked as soon as he saw Knox making his way towards them.

Neil looked up from his notes to see his friend standing there, his blazer resting on his shoulder and a look of despair on his face “Dear god Knox, what did they tie you up and feed you prunes?” Neil asked.

“Worse.” Knox sighed, slumping down on the open chair.

“Worse?” Charlie said, laughing at the thought of what the old Danburry’s did to Knox.

“Terrible! I met the most beautiful girl I have ever seen in my entire life! And she’s practically engaged to that meathead Chet Danburry.” Knox said.

“Too bad,” Pitts said.

“Too bad! It’s a tragedy!” Knox wailed  “Why does she have to be in love with a jerk?” He sighed looking at his friends desperately for a reason as to why an idiot like Chet Danburry would have an angel like Chris.

Pitts placed a reassuring hand on Knox shoulder “All the good ones are,” He said  “You know what forget her. Take out your trig book and figure out problem 12.” Pitts said pushing his trig book closer to Knox.

“I can’t forget her, Pitts, and I can’t think about trig” Knox said, pushing the trig book away from him. ‘They’ve never been in love that wouldn’t understand’ Knox thought to himself. Which was true, outside of a few mumbling words to girls over summer break they didn’t have any experience with girls.

Meeks walked around Pitts to look at a problem open in front of Knox “You need to use tangent here.” Meeks said pointing at the problem.

“Do you really think I should forget her?” Knox said, pain written on his face at the thought of forgetting Chris, his Chris, future hims Chris.

“You’ve only spoken once to the girl,” Cameron said, gathering up his things “you’ll forget her by morning.” he assured Knox.

“I’d never forget an angel like Chris.” Knox said sighing, painting her face to memory scared of when the next time he would see her might be. The rest of the boys couldn’t help but imagine a Marilyn Monroe or a Brigitte Bardot, and even a Raquel Welch. Neil wondered how pretty a girl must be to have to have him all twisted around. Neil gathered his books in his arms and made his way back to his room.

“We missed you at study group.”Neil said once he saw Todd looking out the window, a forgotten textbook sitting beside him on his bed. Todd didn’t answer and only nodded   “Penny for your thoughts?” Neil said, sitting on his own bed, waiting to hear about Todds day. Despite them sharing the exact same day he couldn’t wait to hear how Todd felt about today, how he liked the classes, if he thought Keatings was a little odd.

“Not even worth that much.” Todd laughed flipping through his history textbook trying to find the answer for the next question.

“Bet they’re worth a lot more than you think.” Neil said smiling, Todd looked up to see his face. Todd was surprised when Neil’s face held no mockery and for the first time in his life Todd Anderson felt seen.

[ray-moo]

I know the Bible moderately well and am a practising Christian

>acted as a f-ing terrorist in Egypt (killed the farm animals, the croos, the water of the Nile, created a plague and Then, killed all the firstborns, like... are they not all also God's creation at the same level than the hebrew ?) The Egyptians were keeping the Hebrews in chattel slavery, slavers don't get any sympathy. Killing animals to make a point about freeing humans is worth it. You have a point about the firstborn, but sadly every child dies because God allows it so the deaths of the firstborn in Egypt isn't really atypical. There are sound biblical arguments for why children go to paradise upon death, for what it's worth.

>Asked Abraham to sacrifice his son just to see if he would do it (bro WTF ?!) My personal interpretation was that that was God teaching Abraham how valuable a son really was (Abraham sent Hagar and Ishmael into the desert. God gave the go-ahead since He was going to turn Hagar and Ishmael into a great nation, but Abraham may have been considering it before God made that promise.) It also might have not been a test of Abraham's loyalty, but of his capacity for being a priest. Abraham had previously interceded for the sake of Sodom and Gommorah with God (one of the jobs of a priest is to intercede with God, that's what Jesus does theologically. He intercedes on our behalf in the justice of God). If so, Abraham failed the test but he was still loyal so God gave him a blessing.

>Destroyed all life except what was on the arch during the big rain/inundation That story's probably allegorical there's no proof the flood actually happened and it foreshadows Baptism way too well

>Created Adam and Eve with reproductive organs and then ban them from their world just because they used them That story isn't in the Bible, I'm pretty sure that's a gnostic interpretation. God told Adam and Eve to use their reproductive organs.

>Impregnate a young girl/woman (first wtf) Mary consented to the plan, and technically God is the creator and sustainer of every child ever conceived. The absence of a biological father doesn't make pregnancy any weirder than it already is.

>To have with her a prophet son whose destiny is to be tortured and killed to expiate the sins of humanity (second wtf) Yeah that's kind of the crux of christianity right there. Soteriology is complicated. But notice how Jesus' crucifixion parallels both the (probably allegorical) flood, the sacrifice of Isaac, and the plagues of Egypt.

We are saved through being buried in Baptism and brought out of the water like Noah and the Flood (Romans 6)

We have both Jesus as a High Priest (Hebrews 4) and a living sacrifice (Hebrews 10) And it is Jesus who is the passover lamb who's blood covers us from the Wrath of God (1 Corinthians 5)

I think you do have a point about whether God can be considered 'good' in a human sense though. In the early bits of the Bible God is like a sentient force of nature who decides to adopt Abraham and His descendants. But the Psalms frequently praise God for being good and ontologically God is good. The Bible claims that God is the source of all good (James 1:17). Since God is infinite by nature, every part of Him is infinite so He is either maximally good or evil. Since there would be much more suffering if God was maximally evil, my conclusion is that God is maximally good and refrains from being manifest in this world out of respect for free will, the redemption of the evil, and not smiting everyone with His presence.

Whether 'good' means 'good for us' is another discussion. The Bible describes the presence of God as being pretty unhealthy for humans to endure, which is the function of Jesus in that He allows humans to enter into God's presence, and thus God's maximal goodness.

To people who know the 💫Bible💫, can you explain to my little atheist brain if, at any point, it is said that God is the nice one.

Because, from what I know of the book, God :

- acted as a f-ing terrorist in Egypt (killed the farm animals, the croos, the water of the Nile, created a plague and Then, killed all the firstborns, like... are they not all also God's creation at the same level than the hebrew ?)

- asked Abraham to sacrifice his son just to see if he would do it (bro WTF ?!)

- destroyed all life except what was on the arch during the big rain/inundation

- created Adam and Eve with reproductive organs and then ban them from their world just because they used them

- impregnate a young girl/woman (first wtf) to have with her a prophet son whose destiny is to be tortured and killed to expiate the sins of humanity (second wtf)

I'm sure there is a lot of other examples but that is all I can think now.

So... is there a moment like at the beginning where it is said that God is the good guy and y'all just accepted it or did you choose them over everything without a clear indication ? If so, why ?!

Like all they seem to do is horrible thing for selfish reason, so please explain how it is the epitome of a good creator ?

[togglesbloggle]

So, @argumate is up to some more prosocial atheistic trolling.  As is usual with such things, the conversation isn’t particularly elevated, but it does make me nostalgic for the old bbc days.  So I thought I’d be the Discourse I’d like to see in the world.  This is the post that kicked things off; correctly noting Platonism as a philosophical foundation underpinning most versions of Abrahamic faiths.  And it’s probably the most useful place for me to target also, since hardly anybody just identifies as a Platonist but most westerners are one.  So, without further ado, a halfhearted and full-length defense of Platonism:

Well, strike that.  A little bit of ado.

I’m not a Platonist myself, so this is a devil’s advocate type of thing.  Or maybe you could call it an intellectual Turing test?  As I discuss here, my philosophical commitments are mostly to skepticism, and for instrumental reasons, to reductionist materialism.  That combo leaves me some wiggle room, and I find it fairly easy to provisionally occupy a religious mindset, so I can generally read and enjoy religious polemics.  I also have a fairly deep roster of what are often called ‘spiritual experiences’; I’m probably in the set of people that are by nature predisposed to religion.  I am not religious, and I approve of Argumate saying things like ‘God is not real’ a lot.  This is in no way a retread of the arguments in The Republic or Plato’s other writings; you can go read those if you want, but I’m going to play around with stuff that I think is better suited to this audience.

Attention conservation notice: yikes.  This got pretty long.

Anyway, on to the argument.  Argumate’s main point is pretty clear, I think: ‘forms’ in the Greek sense are a function and product of the perceiving mind.  Birds don’t conform to bird-ness; instead brains naturally produce a sort of bird-ness category to make processing the world easier, and to turn a series of wiggly and continuous phenomena into a discrete number of well-modeled objects.  Basically, we impose ‘thing-ness’ on the wavefunction of reality.  And there are some good reasons to think that it might be true!  Our understanding of categories gets a lot sharper when reality conveniently segregates itself, and whenever that boundary gets a little blurry, our ability to use categories tends to break down.  If the recognition of animal-ness came from contact with a higher plane of reality, you wouldn’t necessarily expect people to get confused about sponges.

But.  While there’s certainly plenty of support for Argumate’s position, it doesn’t strike me as anything near self-evident, or necessarily true.  So what I’ll argue is that Platonism isn’t obviously false, and that if we ever converge on a true answer to the question of our reality, then that truth could plausibly be recognizably Platonist.  My opening salvo here is, predictably enough, mathematics.

‘Mathematical Platonism’ is a whole other thing, only distantly related to Classical Platonism, and I only really mean to talk about the latter.  But nonetheless, mathematics really actually does appear to be a situation where we can simply sit in a chair, think deeply, and then more or less directly perceive truths.  Basic arithmetic can be independently discovered, and usefully applied, by almost anybody; ‘quantity’ comes naturally to most humans, and the inviolable laws of quantity are exploited just as often.  It’s also very hard to argue that these are ‘mere’ linguistic conventions, since fundamental natural behaviors like the conservation of mass depend on a kind of consistent logical framework.  In most chemical reactions, the number of atomic nuclei does not change, and the atoms added to a new molecule are perfectly mirrored by the loss of atoms in some reactant; this remains true in times and places where no thinking mind exists to count them.

There are a lot of debates about what math is, fundamentally.  But inevitably when we study math, we’re studying the set of things that must be true, given some premise: we’re asking whether some proposition is a necessary consequence of our axioms.  The so-called ‘unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics’ suggests that the phenomena that Argumate mentions- hotdogs and birds and whatnot- are observed only within the auspices of a sort of super-phenomenon.  Loosely speaking, we can call this super-phenomenon self-consistency.  

We treat phenomena as having a natural cause.  Platonism, at its crunchy intellectually rewarding center, represents a willingness to bite the bullet and say that self-consistency also has a cause.  Plato himself actually provided what might be the most elegant possible answer!  Basically, posit the simplest thing that meets the criterion of being A) autocausal and B) omnicausal, and then allow the self-consistency of the cosmos to follow from its dependence on (in Platonist terms, its emanation from) that single, unitary cause.  The universe is self-consistent for the very straightforward reason that there’s only one thing.  Any plurality, to the extent that plurality is even a thing, happens because ‘the only real thing’ is only partially expressed in a particular phenomenon.  To skip ahead to Lewis’ Christian interpretation of all this, you’d say that humans and moons and hotdogs are distinguished from God not by what they have, but by what they lack.

And for present purposes, I do want to take a step back and point out that this does feel like a reasonable answer to a very important question.  Materialism fundamentally has no answer to the question of self-consistency and/or the presence of logic and order, and that is (for me) one of its least satisfying limits.  We’ve got things like ‘the origin of the universe’, sure.  But we probe the Big Bang with mathematical models!  That’s a hell of an assumption- namely, that even at the origin of our universe, self-consistency applies.  It’s not like materialism has a bad explanation.  It just remains silent, treats the problem as outside the domain.  If we’re adopting the thing for utilitarian reasons, that’s fine.  But if we’re treating materialism as a more comprehensive philosophy, a possible approach to the bigger questions, then it’s a painful absence.  In that domain, far from being self-evidently true (in comparison to Platonism), materialism doesn’t even toss its hat in the ring!

Which, uh, gets us to the stuff about Forms and shadows in Plato’s Cave and all that- the intermediate form of existence between the omnisimple core of Platonism and the often chaotic and very plural experience of day-to-day life.  And frankly, we’re not especially bound to say that the forms are exactly as Plato described them, any more than atomism is restricted to Democritus.  Whether there is some ‘bird-ness’ that is supra- to all extant birds might be contestable; however, it’s easier to wonder whether ‘binary tree’ is supra- to speciation and the real pattern of differences between organisms that we map using Linnaean taxonomy.

But, this is an attempted defense of Platonism and not Toggle’s Version of Platonism that He Invented Because it’s Easier, so I’ll give it a try.  Fair warning to the reader, what follows is not fully endorsed (even in the context of a devil’s advocate-type essay), except the broader claim that it’s not self-evidently false.  And on the givens we came up with a couple paragraphs ago, this is a reasonable way to tackle what necessarily follows.  So let me see how far I can defend a very strong claim: in a self-consistent (or: mathematical) cosmos, beauty cannot be arbitrary.

Remember that Plato never argued that his Forms were arbitrary, or even fully discrete as such; their apparent plurality, like our own, emanates from the unitary Thing What Exists.  And so, bird-ness is treated as a contingent thing, not an absolute.  It’s just not contingent on human experience.  And so for us to believe in ‘bird-ness’ is to believe that there exists some specific and necessary pattern- a Form- which any given material bird must express.

Let’s take an obvious example: any flying bird will, for fairly simple aerodynamic reasons, tend to be symmetrical.  Usually, this means two wings.  In theory, you could… have one in the middle?  Maybe?  Even that seems rather goofy to try to imagine, but you could probably get away with it if you were extremely creative biologically.  And if we see a bird with only one wing (without a prosthetic or other form of accommodation), then we will tend quite naturally to recognize that something awful is in the process of happening.

A fully materialist explanation of our reaction here would say: we think of the one-winged bird as problematic because A) we have been socialized to recognize and appreciate two-winged birds, and spurn deviations from that socialization, or maybe B) because natural selection has given us a set of instincts that recognize when a body plan has failed in the past, so things like ‘being crippled’ or ‘being sick’ are recognizable.  

Platonism, I think, would offer a third option, that C) we recognize (as emanations of The Real Thing) that a one-winged bird body is insufficiently reflective of The Real Thing, and that accordingly it lacks the ability to keep existing.  Plato had some… basically magical ideas, about how Forms are recognized, but here I’ll point out that ‘deduction’ is a completely serviceable kind of magic for our purposes.  It is, after all, our direct experience of the self-consistency of the cosmos, which follows from the fact that we are ourselves an expression of that same self-consistency; it meets the criteria.  

Materialists, obviously, would agree that deductive reasoning could allow a person to recognize the problems inherent in a one-winged bird, but as I said a few paragraphs up, their(/our) explanation of this process is rootless.  “Yes, logic and a few high-confidence assumptions let you assume that a bird with only one wing is in trouble,” they might say.  And we might ask- “what makes you so sure?”  And then the materialist must respond, “Well, let me be more clear.  It always worked in the past, and my Bayesian priors are strongly in the direction of the method continuing to bear fruit.”  True enough, but it’s not an explanation and doesn’t pretend to be.  The universe just does this weird thing for some reason; it works ‘by magic’.  So why not call it that?  Theurgy for all!

So, consider.  We recognize (deductively, let’s say for the sake of argument) that a one-winged bird is on the road to becoming nonexistent, absent some change in circumstances.  It may keep going for a little while, but it’s not in homeostasis.  And if we reasonably admit this very basic duality to our thinking- things which can persist, and things which cannot- then we start to recognize a sort of analogy between physical phenomena and mathematical propositions.  A lemma can be right or wrong, albeit sometimes unprovably so.  Basically, it can follow- or not- from the axioms we’re working with.  And in a softer but very real sense, that one-winged body plan is wrong analogously to the lemma’s wrongness.  Not ‘wrong’ as in ‘counter to cultural norms’, but ‘wrong’ as in ‘unstable given the premises, given the Thing That Exists Most’.  Look up research on fitness landscapes, if you’re so inclined- actual biological research isn’t totally unacquainted with the notion.  There exists a surprisingly discrete ideal or set of ideals, both for flying birds as a whole and subordinately for any given flying bird species.  And we have discovered this using magic.

Insofar as beauty is something to be admired, or pursued, or is otherwise desirable, then our sense of beauty must necessarily correlate with those abstract, and dare I say supra-real, qualities which allow things to persist, and which can therefore be understood deductively.  And that set of qualities does, effectively, meet the Platonic criterion of a ‘form’.

The immediate materialist objection is: hey, wait a minute.  The supposed ‘objective’ criterion of a bird is contingent, not absolute!  It follows from the strength of gravity, the thickness of the atmosphere, the availability of food sources, and on and on.  This is one of the most important reasons why genetic drift and speciation happens in the first place, because the ‘ideal’ bird depends on an environment that’s in constant flux.

True enough.  But!  How do you think the atmosphere got there?  It’s an old trick in religious discourse, but in this case I think a valid one.  The rightness of the bird depends on the atmosphere, the rightness of the atmosphere depends on the planet, the rightness of the planet depends on the solar system, and ultimately it all depends on that necessary self-consistency which (we proclaim) implies our unitary Most Real Thing.  This does mean that we can’t really think of Platonic forms as wholly discrete objects, unconnected to one another and without internal relation among themselves- unfortunately, that’s part of the original Plato that I don’t see as defensible, even with maximum charity.  But there’s such a thing as a ‘ring species’, and if we admit Platonic Forms of that type, a kind of dense network of paths being traced through higher-dimensional spaces that correspond to the shadow of That Than Which There Is No Whicher, then it’s more than salvageable.  It’s both satisfying to imagine and, I think, quite consistent with the spirit of the original philosophy.

One thing this doesn’t mean.  Even if we were to accept all of this, we aren’t obliged to resign ourselves to the lot of that one-winged bird.  Indeed, if anything this gives us a rich language by which to justify a prosthetic wing or other form of accommodation: we can talk about ‘making the bird whole’, and can see how our compassion for that bird might lead us to create the conditions of homeostasis once again.  But it does mean that if we take a position on the merits of existence- if we’re in favor- then we don’t treat a one- and two-winged bird as coequal scenarios.

Anyway, this has gone on hideously long already for what’s basically an intellectual exercise, so I won’t dive into immortal souls or any of the other ancillaries.  I mostly want to reiterate that, far from being obviously false, I do think that (some forms of) Platonism are quite defensible, and can provide coherent answers to questions that I A) care about very deeply and B) can’t resolve to my own satisfaction.  Of course, it is not obviously nor trivially true, either.  But one can be Platonist without being willfully wrong.

[pickledchickenetti]

Growing up Baptist, the stories of Abraham were frequently taught to us. In one particular story, God tells Abraham to take his favored son, Isaac, and offer him as a sacrifice in a specific place. Abraham does as he’s told, and when they get halfway up the mountain and Isaac asks Abraham why they don’t have an animal for the sacrifice, Abraham tells Isaac that God will provide. He gets to the top of the mountain, sets up the altar, ties Isaac up to it, and is about to kill Isaac when an angel shows up and tells him to stop, then a ram appears and they sacrifice that instead. (This story is found in Genesis 22.)

In Baptist Sunday school classes and sermons this story is typically used to illustrate two things. First of all, it is a story that is used to show an example that God will always provide for your needs. This is evidenced by God providing the ram for them to sacrifice. But much more commonly, this was used as a story to teach us that we should always do what God tells us to do, even when it feels morally wrong or might cause us pain. They teach of how God will sometimes test us, and like Abraham we must do what we’re commanded in order to pass the test. It is also often paralleled to God sacrificing his son on the cross.

As an adult who is in the ongoing process of deconstructing my faith and its relation to the things I was taught, most of the commonly-taught lessons about doing what you’re told no matter how wrong or painful it seems are things that I see as big red flags now. This is one of those many examples. And then I came across this Twitter thread:

This interpretation has left me reeling. I’ve found my mind continuously going back to it since I read it. I even went back to the Bible and read that chapter and the next few to confirm that yes, neither God nor Isaac is recorded talking to Abraham again after this story. Sure, the story ends with the angel telling Abraham that God will bless him for his obedience, but this blessing doesn’t include anything that God hasn’t already promised Abraham. God has already promised Abraham numerous offspring who will be successful in Genesis 15. So really this "reward” for his obedience is nothing more than not revoking the previous promise. 

Viewed in this light, this story takes on a whole new meaning for people who wish their parents would choose their child over what they think their religion is commanding them to do. It means that Abraham chose his God over his child and he lost his child as a result. Not only that, but the Bible doesn’t really show Isaac as being in the wrong for not talking to his father. Isaac becomes the central character the story, and Abraham dies without his beloved son, who only comes to bury him alongside the other son Abraham abandoned. 

I’m not saying I want my parents to die alone. I’m still working on my relationship with my parents, and that is a process that will likely continue for most of my life. But the idea that a father failed a test by refusing to wrestle with his beliefs to defend his son is possibly the most comforting thing to come out of the Bible for me for years. The story was not about blind obedience even when it hurts you, it was about not sacrificing your child for your religion. 

My family entered a new place this year where now two of my parents’ three children refuse to go to their church. As far as they know, my sister’s only reasons for leaving are personal, and while my parents acknowledge that their pastor behaved inexcusably toward their child they have yet to address it. She has shared other reasons for leaving, ones that are more based in doctrine, but if they know those they’ve chosen to focus on the personal reasons. I can’t imagine how she must be hurting to know that her parents are failing to defend her despite agreeing that she is not in the wrong. (My parents, of course, believe that I’m in the wrong for “choosing” to be gay, and still hope that I will one day return to the flock.) The way the church has wronged my sister has strengthened my resolve to never attend there again, a change from previously attending while visiting to keep the peace.

The emphasis the church places on blind obedience at all costs is abhorrent. I’m one of the “lucky” ones by having a strained relationship with my parents rather than a completely severed one. Neither option is healthy or right. It continues to baffle me how people can claim their religion is all about love while simultaneously believing it teaches them to behave in such unloving ways. Finding validation for my feelings in a Bible story I’ve known my whole life is easily the best thing to happen to me this week, and I hope anyone in a similar situation who has made it this far in this post feels encouragement from it as well. 

[ademocrat]

What Homophobic Hell Will the GOP Unleash on a Gay Frontrunner?

If Pete wasn’t gay, I’d say with some confidence, that he could win the presidency.

Or, because Pete is gay, I could say that’s quite a differentiator, and with his impressive approach. he just might win the presidency.

ADVERTISING

Finally, I can’t say that it doesn’t matter that Pete is gay. Because it does, and it’s personal.

I’ve spent my entire life obsessed with politics, and was lucky, as most of you may know by now, to work in it for a while. Presidential elections are like another sport for me. I study the polls, know the candidates’ messages and platforms inside and out, watch the debates, the town halls, and all the political shows filled with punditry, i.e., Morning Joe, Deadline White House, The Situation Room, Inside Politics, and Hardball (I’ll stop there lest you think I don’t have a life). I read all the political columns and columnists.

So, what I’m about to write is not based on data, stats, polls or the pundits, so I don’t bore you with the wonkery of “inside baseball” factoids. The following thoughts come from the heart of a gay man, who happens to write a column, loves politics, and can name every president. Always could. When I was as young as six, my parents would call me down to recite them to guests during their dinner parties. I named them in order and with their middle initials. “You’re going to be president one day,” they always said. And at that age, I dreamed that I would.

Pete’s campaign has rekindled all the memories of my recitations — and scrapbooks — of the presidents. The letter recognizing my great-great grandmother’s 100th birthday auto-penned signed by Richard Nixon. I had the president’s autograph, even if I didn’t realize it wasn’t real. I devoured presidential biographies, written for kids, Meet George Washington, Meet Abraham Lincoln, Meet John F. Kennedy. My great-grandmother gave me her Franklin D. Roosevelt scrapbook, and all her political buttons that stretched back to Theodore Roosevelt. I treasured each artifact, each book, each newspaper clipping declaring “NIXON RESIGNS,” because the presidency was my destiny.

As a Catholic, I was young enough to know and comprehend that John F. Kennedy was the first person of my faith elected to the presidency. I was, and still am, fascinated with all things Kennedy. Which is why, when Senator Edward Kennedy, and President Kennedy’s daughter Caroline endorsed Barack Obama for president, I knew that he would go on to win, and become another first.

Now, here we are again, faced with another pioneer, and groundbreaker, Pete Buttigieg. He is making our community so proud. His message is clear and resonating. His demeanor calm and welcoming. His background stellar and reassuring. His pitch convincing and investing. He’s raising the money and his profile the way a good candidate should.

He has had early success in Iowa, giving him a big boast going forward. He’s come further than probably anyone of us expected. He’s still a long shot, but he is raising eyebrows, in a good way, and now the campaign heads into new regions, populaces, and mindsets.

As a leader in the primary, he has momentum, his poll numbers, while still trailing nationally, are inching up. And as he gains traction he also gets a target on his back. So, the real and new test for Buttigieg is about to begin. So far the other candidates and the media have questioned his youth and inexperience as a small town mayor. And they have not gone beyond those critiques. What lies ahead, if he picks up steam, is an untested excursion, not just for him, but for everyone in our community.  

After it was revealed that the congressman I worked for from blue-collar, southwestern Pennsylvania had a child-out-of-wedlock, our constituency shrugged it off. And they did so by telling him, “just as long as you’re not gay (the actual word was much more vulgar).” That stung, and still does.

The congressman used to say to me all the time, “Casey, when I retire, you can run for my seat.” But at that point, my childhood dreams of becoming president gave way to the cold, dark reality, that as much as I wanted to, I couldn’t possibly be elected in a district that didn’t accept the type of person that I was. And president? Would never happen in my lifetime.

Pete’s upcoming venture into the bible belt, the rust belt, the southern belt and beyond makes me wonder if that “as long as you’re not gay” attitude still persists? We saw a viral video of a horrified woman in Iowa rescind her caucus vote for Pete after she realized he was married to a man.

She’s not alone. “Scorched earth.” That’s the type of campaign that’s planned to be run by the Republican incumbent. God only knows what that entails, but I think we have a good idea. This ribald tactic will surely be adopted by the so-called base; a tear-down of anyone seeming to take the lead during the primary, and then vilification for the Democratic presidential nominee.

So what happens if Pete surges? His ascendency will surely test the breaking point of how far “scorched earth” will go to demonize Pete, his marriage and our community. The vitriol likely to increase as Pete’s support does too.

He’s a military veteran, so he can fight. And what does it say about me, or any of us, if we can’t help him in the battle that lies ahead? Isn’t it the most consequential election of our time? Exceptionally for our community? Aren’t we committed to supporting each other when one of us is breaking barriers? Especially, when that wall shattering is for the most powerful job in the world?

He needs all of us to get behind him, in the event that the opposition puts a bulls-eye on him — and us — and goes “scorched earth.” We need to stick together and fight with him. It’s not going to be easy. For him, or for us, if Pete pulls out a miracle.

Is it in his best interest to succeed, when ultimately, he might fail? And what does that say about me when I fear for his success? Or us, if we don’t honestly consider the pain his success might spill upon us? I’m excited for Pete. I’m scared for Pete. I’m excited for us. And I’m scared for us.

But we can’t sit back and be frightened, and we can’t let Pete fight this alone. So until he’s finished, I’ll root for Pete.

There’s an old adage, “bet with your head, not with your heart.” Am I betting on Pete? Not yet. But I am putting my heart behind him. And, I am going to live vicariously through Pete. He will do all that I fantasized about, read about, and pasted onto the pages of my scrapbook about. Maybe, because it was so far-fetched that it’s just my generation that understands the enormity of this moment? We’ve been accepted in the military. Our marriages are legal. It’s easy to think that the worst is behind us, when hypothetically, the worst — or the best — could be in front of us.

Who knows what the impending primary race will bring? And it’s way too early to forecast or confront the general election.

But fantastically, in a year from now, when someone calls on me to recite the 46 Presidents of the United States, I can proudly end my oration with Peter P.M. Buttigieg.

A boy can dream, can’t he?

John Casey is a PR professional and an adjunct professor at Wagner College in New York City, and a frequent columnist for The Advocate. Follow John on Twitter @johntcaseyjr.

[averagemarvelbitch]

Undercover Love / STONY

Summary: The hospital bills keep on coming and Steve doesn't know how to help his mother. He decides the army is his best bet. Destiny has a different idea, though, and puts Dr. Erskine and Project Rebirth on his path.Soon, he becomes Captain America and a special forces SHIELD agent with a dream team, ready to take on even the most dangerous missions.

A few years later, Director Carter's nephew is kidnapped by the Ten Rings and it's Captain America and the Avengers to the rescue! Falling in love with said nephew wasn't on Steve's plans, but he isn't complaining.

Director Carter might complain. If she ever finds out.

TAGS: Secret Agents AU / Stony / Alternate Universe

Chapters: 1/3

---

When Steve was little, he dreamed about being an artist. His mother, bless her soul, was very supportive of his dream and whenever they had any money to spare, which wasn’t often, she would buy him paint and a canvas. Sometimes he even managed to sell some of his art, using the money to help around the house.

If Steve had had a choice, he’d have chosen to go to art school. He would’ve stayed with his mother, happily using his creativity to create beautiful pieces of art and hopefully one day his work would be worth something, at least enough to give his mother the quiet life she deserved. But as it were, destiny had a very different plan for Steve Rogers.

He was on his way to an interview for a scholarship when he got the call. He took a cab and got to the hospital as fast as he could. Sadly, they didn’t have good news. Sarah Rogers was sick, very sick. As they explained to the young man everything she would have to go through (the chemo, the many nights at the hospital, the physical therapy, the experimental drugs), Steve’s mind wandered. How are we going to afford this?

He spent the night sitting in a very uncomfortable chair beside her bed, all the while thinking of ways to get the money. As the night went on, his ideas got crazier and crazier, going from “selling everything they owned” to “robbing a bank”. By the time the sun finally showed up outside, Steve had made a decision.

His mother cried when he told her. She even begged him not to do it. But he had no choice. She needed the treatment and that was the only way he could pay for it. The army was a hard choice, but it was the right one. Even if he died, at least his mother would get enough money to pay for part of the treatment. It was all he could do. So he enlisted that same afternoon. Passing the ASVAB was easy. The real problem was the medical exam.

The doctor in charge had taken one good look at Steve and another at his medical file and quickly stamped a 4-F in his enrolment paper. Steve tried to make his case, but the man would not hear it. Still, the young artist didn’t give up. He lied on his form and tried again. And again. And again. And again. Sometimes he would consider giving up, but then the hospital bills would arrive and he would think of his mother, his beautiful, kind, hardworking mother who had given up everything to care for her only son. His mother, who had worked more shifts than she could possibly handle to put her son through school. The woman who took beating from her drunk husband in order to protect her boy. He would think of her and remember every single that she had done for him and that always gave him the strength to try again.

Everything changed when he met Dr. Erskine.

---

For the fifth time in two months, Steve was sitting in a medical bed, waiting. The doctor had his back to him, probably getting ready to poke Steve with medical instrument known to man. Suddenly, a nurse came, giving the blonde a small smile before leaning in closer to the doctor, whispering something in his ear. The nurse left and the doctor turned to follow her, making Steve even more nervous than he was before.

“Wait here”, the doctor said, leaving the room.

“Something wrong?” Steve called out, worried.

“Just wait here”.

Something was wrong. Something was definitely wrong. Steve looked behind him, finding a warning on the wall. It is illegal falsify your enlistment form, he read. God, what would his mom say if he got arrested? Worse, what would happen to his mother if he couldn’t work to at least try to pay for her treatment? Without much choice, Steve decided the best course of action was to get the hell out of there was quickly as possible.

He jumped down from the bed and found his shoes, trying to put them on as fast as he could. Before he could finish, though, a soldier entered the small room, posting himself by the door, staring silently at Steve. The young artist stared right back, trying to calm himself down. I’m going to get arrest. Fuck, ma is gonna kill me.

After five minutes, the longest five minutes of all his life, a doctor walked in, dismissing the soldier with a polite thank you. He looked at Steve, a kind smile on his face.

“So! You want to be a soldier. Kill some bad people overseas, is that right?”

Steve frowned, not quite understanding what was going on. “Excuse me?”

“I’m Doctor Abraham Erskine. I represent the Strategic Homeland Intervention, Enforcement and Logistic Division”.

“That’s a mouthful”.

“Well, we go by SHIELD as well”.

“I’ve never heard of that”, Steve replied, suspicious.

“Not many people have, Mr. Rogers. So, five attempts to join the army, huh”.

“That might not be the right file”, the blonde tried to reason, trying not to show just how terrified he really was.

“No, no. It’s not the five failed exams I’m interested in. It’s the five tries. Tell me, Mr. Rogers. Do you want to punish some bad people?”

Steve just stared at the doctor for a second, unsure on how to answer that. “Is this a test?”

“Yes”, the doctor answered, nodding his head.

“I don’t want to punish people, or kill them. I… I want to protect people. And, to be completely honest, I want this so I can help my mother. She’s sick”.

“I see. Well, Mr. Rogers, I believe I may have a solution to your troubles. Tell me, are you afraid of needles?”

Confused, Steve replied, “No, sir, I’m not”.

“Good, good. I’ll need you to sign these papers”, he said, taking said papers from inside the file he had in his hands and putting them on the table near Steve, “they are just a precaution, to make sure you won’t repeat to anyone what I’m about to tell you. Should you do that, you will be charged with treason, Mr. Rogers, so think carefully”.

Steve stared at the papers. “This solution you’re talking about. What does it entail?”

“Basically, you’ll become a special agent of SHIELD. And the pay will be enough to care for your mother’s medical needs, I’m sure. But I’m afraid, until you sign those papers, that is all I can tell you about it”.

But he didn’t have to say anything else. If this could help his mother, then he’d do it, no matter what it was. Besides, these papers were only to find out what exactly the solution the doctor had mentioned was. If it happened to be something Steve wasn’t comfortable with, he could just walk away and never mention it again. Without a second thought, he got up from the chair he’d been sitting, taking the pen from Dr. Erskine’s hand and promptly signed the papers.

When he was finished, he looked at Erskine, curious.

“Well, Mr. Rogers. Let me tell you a little bit about Project Rebirth”.

---

ASK TO BE TAGGED  or  READ IT ON AO3

[wilhelmjfink]

The Great Divide - Chapter Four

Summary: Daryl had told Riley a hundred times: people are not to be trusted and one day she’d run into the wrong person and learn pretty quickly that her confidence in strangers would get her into a lot of trouble. They both knew he was right. He was just trying to teach her before it was too late for her to learn.

Warnings: this is chapter 4. if you haven’t figured out every chapter at least swears by now i don’t...... i don’t know what to tell you

A/N: for the like three ppl who are as excited as i am for this series..... here ya go :-D

Previous Chapter • Next Chapter

Daryl slowed the bike to a stop where Tara directed him, stowing it in an old alleyway between two buildings and far out of sight. The two hour long journey led them through a winding adventure and they arrived there just before the sun rose for the morning, the empty streets lit with the eerie glow of dawn. It was dead silent, a good sign regularly, but it only made Daryl suspicious; he felt as though he might have had more success if somebody was around, no matter whom it might have been. But they were alone to his disappointment, and as he pulled open the doors to the hotel that they’d sent out for the morning prior, Tara began to offer what little information she had.

“Aaron and I were in the basement and the sub-basement,” she explained. “We split up, but Aaron came up to help me carry some crates of canned food up.”

Daryl nodded, not particularly interested as it didn’t give him any lead.

“We never got the stuff. We should have the others grab it before we leave.”

“Ya split up,” he disregarded the last part, knowing that bit of information was useful and any other time they would’ve been jumping for joy at the sight of crates full of food. But not now; he didn’t have the time to worry about anything else. “Where did she go?”

“She took the top floor,” Tara motioned to the stairs to their side, so Daryl started toward them right away. “We searched all of the rooms,” she added from the entrance where she stood. “We found... we found all of the room keys we’d given her all over the hallway.”

Daryl had to pretend like that last bit didn’t bother him as much as it really did.

He climbed the main staircase, Tara suddenly at his heels, flashlight shining and crossbow slung securely over his shoulder. It was dark, but that only meant he had the whole entire day ahead of him to spend looking for any sjgn of Riley. And he would search every single room in his hotel — every closet, every corner, underneath every fucking table and behind every single shower curtain until he found her and he would not stop until she was in his arms again.

The first door was already cracked open and so he began his search there, trying to think like her, mimic her steps and thoughts. But Tara stood in the doorway, seemingly already haven given up. 

And Daryl noticed, too, slamming the bathroom door after finding no hint of Riley, even though that was exactly what he’d been expecting.

“Ya just gonna give up already?” He growled, shoving by Tara to the next room. The anger bubbling inside of him was overflowing and he would take it out on the people around him, just like he always fucking did.

“No, Daryl — “

“Sure don’t look like you’re doin’ much to help!”

“We already searched here!” Tara’s voice rose furiously and Daryl stopped, aware of the emotion that had her yelling and her words wavering unsteadily. “Aaron and I were eight hours late coming back, Daryl. Eight hours — you know why? Because we searched this entire fucking hotel for eight fucking hours, Daryl! We searched everywhere!”

“Y’all shouldn’a fuckin’ split up in the first place!”

Tara was trying to contain her rage and she sighed in frustration. Remain level headed. After all, it was Daryl she was dealing with. “It was her idea to split up, Daryl. It wouldn’t have made a difference, anyway. She just ran off. She left us. She ditched her backpack and left.”

“Riley wouldn’t just fuckin’ leave, Tara!” Daryl was shouting now, seeing red, overwhelmed with emotions and the inability to control them. Not like Tara who was focusing primarily on staying calm and failing miserably. “Not unless ya just let her go!”

“Oh, my god, Daryl, you are fucking infuriating sometimes!” She was exasperated and before he could come back at her, she continued yelling. “I know that you love her — I get it, I really do — but, Jesus Christ, you are not the only one that cared about her!”

Tara was right, and he knew it.

It had been a long, long wait for the three to return to Alexandria and maybe it was because deep down, Daryl had known something was wrong. And the second that they’d pulled through the gates and only Tara and Aaron had hopped out of the car Daryl swore someone had punched him right in the gut, knocking all of the breath from his longs in an instant. He didn’t want to believe it; he couldn’t believe it.

He hadn’t meant to take it out on Aaron, either. There were very few people he trusted Riley with, and Aaron and Tara were two of them.

So Tara stood before him, huffing angrily while she waited for a response, and he let her words sink in. They’d searched this entire hotel already and likely its surroundings as well and came up empty handed. He needed to believe them. And he could track, yes, but if he had no leads on her, he would end up walking endlessly for miles and miles and have nothing to show for it but exhaustion and hopelessness.

And he’d done that before with Beth.

“I’m sorry, Daryl.” Tara interrupted his thoughts, her voice softer than it was before. Watching him before her slump down in defeat and contemplate her words had her feeling guilty. “I really, truly am. You trusted us, and we let you down.”

“Nah,” Daryl shook his head. “It’s not yer fault. I know ya tried. I know ya...”

He trailed off and Tara could tell he was fighting his emotions that were rising to the surface, as he so often did, refusing to show how much he cared about her.  So she did all she could think of that may offer some sort of comfort to someone so shut out like him, stepping forward and grabbing his shoulders gently to get him to just fucking listen to her for once.

“Riley is tough, Daryl.” He met her gaze trying to find solace in the sincerity in her eyes. “And we will find her. I promise you.”

All he could do was nod.

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

It wasn’t too much longer before the same Chevy pulled up in front of the Hampton where the pair had been waiting, the familiar Dodge Challenger following it. Rick, Aaron, Michonne, Glenn and Abraham all piled out, armed and ready... though they had absolutely no clue where to start. 

Daryl and Tara met them at the front door, trying not to look as disappointed and hopeless as they both felt. With a silent shake of his head, Daryl conveyed to Rick that they’d already had no luck with their search.

“Hotel’s empty,” Tara told them. “But I haven’t showed him where we found her backpack yet. I figure we can search around out back too. We might see something we didn’t catch when it was dark.”

So they split up into pairs with the exception of Michonne who went with both Rick and Daryl to search the property behind the hotel, around the fenced in pool full of murky green water that Tara had described to them. She and Abraham opted took the eastern side of the block and spread out further while Glenn and Aaron took the west. Tara had already informed the trio where Riley’s bag was which lead them to wanting to investigate behind the hotel as it seemed the most likely spot to find any evidence of her.

Daryl was the first to spot the deceased body in the forest from where he stood along the tree line, scanning for anything out of the ordinary. He beckoned for the other two to join them and they arrived at his side quickly, approaching it cautiously, weapons poised and their stomachs dropping as they neared it.

“That looks like the guys that Tara and Aaron described,” Michonne voiced what they were all thinking first. Neither one of the men responded while they eyed the corpse where it lay up against the tree trunk, the exact spot it had been when Riley had seen it last. Rick kicked over a rock that had blood stains on the rough sides of it, not thinking twice of it, assuming it belonged to the dead soldier in front of him; completely oblivious to the fact that the blood belonged to their girl he was searching for.

“Where the hell is he from, do you think?” He reached out and gently touched one of the spikes protruding from the leather shoulder pad of its armor to test its authenticity, hoping it may be some dull plastic prop on a costume. “This is  high-tec stuff... I’ve never seen anything like this.”

The other’s didn’t have a chance to answer before a cry for help rang out around them: “Someone help! Please help us!”

Daryl, Rick and Michonne all jumped into action instantly, like programmed robots, back to back as they scanned the area around them for the source of the yelling. It had interrupted their quiet contemplation, scaring off animals and flocks of birds that had been surrounding them. At the sound of frantic footsteps running toward them they turned to them only to find Tara and Abraham headed their direction, eyes wide, also in search of the disembodied voice.

Then it was silent for a moment before Tara recognized and pointed to the body laying still beside them: “This -- this is what they all looked like,” she explained breathlessly, still quiet in anticipation of the cries returning. “The ones that took Riley, they had spikes. Some of them just had leather pads on, but — “

“Help me, please!”

This time the direction the man was yelling from was clear as day and they all simultaneously turned toward the man who stood before them, their weapons aimed and ready while his empty hands were already up, offering peace and surrender.

“Please, you gotta help me,” he begged, winded and desperate. “My name’s Warner. Those guys there — they took my wife!”

:-o gasp

stay tuned till next wednesday when he find out what poor riley is going thru :-) 

@crossbowking @jodiereedus22 @apossiblegentleman @mtngirlforever @sourwolf-sterek32 @winchester-angel @qrangr @cole-winchester @the-bottom-of-the-abyss @twdeadfanfic @crazyaboutnorman @deliciousassafrasssandwich @bunnymother93 @96ssi @fireeyes-on-teller-dixon-grimes

cover image source: background daryl i am the girl on the right lmao

[scifigeneration]

Yes, there is a war between science and religion

by Jerry Coyne

Doubting Thomas needed the proof, just like a scientist, and now is a cautionary Biblical example. Caravaggio/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY

As the West becomes more and more secular, and the discoveries of evolutionary biology and cosmology shrink the boundaries of faith, the claims that science and religion are compatible grow louder. If you’re a believer who doesn’t want to seem anti-science, what can you do? You must argue that your faith – or any faith – is perfectly compatible with science.

And so one sees claim after claim from believers, religious scientists, prestigious science organizations and even atheists asserting not only that science and religion are compatible, but also that they can actually help each other. This claim is called “accommodationism.”

But I argue that this is misguided: that science and religion are not only in conflict – even at “war” – but also represent incompatible ways of viewing the world.

Opposing methods for discerning truth

The scientific method relies on observing, testing and replication to learn about the world. Jaron Nix/Unsplash, CC BY

My argument runs like this. I’ll construe “science” as the set of tools we use to find truth about the universe, with the understanding that these truths are provisional rather than absolute. These tools include observing nature, framing and testing hypotheses, trying your hardest to prove that your hypothesis is wrong to test your confidence that it’s right, doing experiments and above all replicating your and others’ results to increase confidence in your inference.

And I’ll define religion as does philosopher Daniel Dennett: “Social systems whose participants avow belief in a supernatural agent or agents whose approval is to be sought.” Of course many religions don’t fit that definition, but the ones whose compatibility with science is touted most often – the Abrahamic faiths of Judaism, Christianity and Islam – fill the bill.

Next, realize that both religion and science rest on “truth statements” about the universe – claims about reality. The edifice of religion differs from science by additionally dealing with morality, purpose and meaning, but even those areas rest on a foundation of empirical claims. You can hardly call yourself a Christian if you don’t believe in the Resurrection of Christ, a Muslim if you don’t believe the angel Gabriel dictated the Qur’an to Muhammad, or a Mormon if you don’t believe that the angel Moroni showed Joseph Smith the golden plates that became the Book of Mormon. After all, why accept a faith’s authoritative teachings if you reject its truth claims?

Indeed, even the Bible notes this: “But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen: And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.”

Many theologians emphasize religion’s empirical foundations, agreeing with the physicist and Anglican priest John Polkinghorne:

“The question of truth is as central to [religion’s] concern as it is in science. Religious belief can guide one in life or strengthen one at the approach of death, but unless it is actually true it can do neither of these things and so would amount to no more than an illusory exercise in comforting fantasy.”

The conflict between science and faith, then, rests on the methods they use to decide what is true, and what truths result: These are conflicts of both methodology and outcome.

In contrast to the methods of science, religion adjudicates truth not empirically, but via dogma, scripture and authority – in other words, through faith, defined in Hebrews 11 as “the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” In science, faith without evidence is a vice, while in religion it’s a virtue. Recall what Jesus said to “doubting Thomas,” who insisted in poking his fingers into the resurrected Savior’s wounds: “Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.”

Two ways to look at the same thing, never the twain shall meet. Gabriel Lamza/Unsplash, CC BY

And yet, without supporting evidence, Americans believe a number of religious claims: 74 percent of us believe in God, 68 percent in the divinity of Jesus, 68 percent in Heaven, 57 percent in the virgin birth, and 58 percent in the Devil and Hell. Why do they think these are true? Faith.

But different religions make different – and often conflicting – claims, and there’s no way to judge which claims are right. There are over 4,000 religions on this planet, and their “truths” are quite different. (Muslims and Jews, for instance, absolutely reject the Christian belief that Jesus was the son of God.) Indeed, new sects often arise when some believers reject what others see as true. Lutherans split over the truth of evolution, while Unitarians rejected other Protestants’ belief that Jesus was part of God.

And while science has had success after success in understanding the universe, the “method” of using faith has led to no proof of the divine. How many gods are there? What are their natures and moral creeds? Is there an afterlife? Why is there moral and physical evil? There is no one answer to any of these questions. All is mystery, for all rests on faith.

The “war” between science and religion, then, is a conflict about whether you have good reasons for believing what you do: whether you see faith as a vice or a virtue.

Compartmentalizing realms is irrational

So how do the faithful reconcile science and religion? Often they point to the existence of religious scientists, like NIH Director Francis Collins, or to the many religious people who accept science. But I’d argue that this is compartmentalization, not compatibility, for how can you reject the divine in your laboratory but accept that the wine you sip on Sunday is the blood of Jesus?

Can divinity be at play in one setting but not another? Jametlene Reskp/Unsplash, CC BY

Others argue that in the past religion promoted science and inspired questions about the universe. But in the past every Westerner was religious, and it’s debatable whether, in the long run, the progress of science has been promoted by religion. Certainly evolutionary biology, my own field, has been held back strongly by creationism, which arises solely from religion.

What is not disputable is that today science is practiced as an atheistic discipline – and largely by atheists. There’s a huge disparity in religiosity between American scientists and Americans as a whole: 64 percent of our elite scientists are atheists or agnostics, compared to only 6 percent of the general population – more than a tenfold difference. Whether this reflects differential attraction of nonbelievers to science or science eroding belief – I suspect both factors operate – the figures are prima facie evidence for a science-religion conflict.

The most common accommodationist argument is Stephen Jay Gould’s thesis of “non-overlapping magisteria.” Religion and science, he argued, don’t conflict because: “Science tries to document the factual character of the natural world, and to develop theories that coordinate and explain these facts. Religion, on the other hand, operates in the equally important, but utterly different, realm of human purposes, meanings and values – subjects that the factual domain of science might illuminate, but can never resolve.”

This fails on both ends. First, religion certainly makes claims about “the factual character of the universe.” In fact, the biggest opponents of non-overlapping magisteria are believers and theologians, many of whom reject the idea that Abrahamic religions are “empty of any claims to historical or scientific facts.”

Nor is religion the sole bailiwick of “purposes, meanings and values,” which of course differ among faiths. There’s a long and distinguished history of philosophy and ethics – extending from Plato, Hume and Kant up to Peter Singer, Derek Parfit and John Rawls in our day – that relies on reason rather than faith as a fount of morality. All serious ethical philosophy is secular ethical philosophy.

In the end, it’s irrational to decide what’s true in your daily life using empirical evidence, but then rely on wishful-thinking and ancient superstitions to judge the “truths” undergirding your faith. This leads to a mind (no matter how scientifically renowned) at war with itself, producing the cognitive dissonance that prompts accommodationism. If you decide to have good reasons for holding any beliefs, then you must choose between faith and reason. And as facts become increasingly important for the welfare of our species and our planet, people should see faith for what it is: not a virtue but a defect.

About The Author:

Jerry Coyne is Professor Emeritus of Ecology and Evolution at the University of Chicago.

This article is republished from our content partners at The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. 

[incarnationsf]

Lament, Trust, Pray, Strive

By the Rev. Darren Miner

 This is only the second Sunday in Lent, but I am already longing for Easter, for that glorious celebration of the Resurrection. But that is in the future, and for now, I find myself lamenting. I lament not just my own sins, which are many, but the brokenness of this world. The news coming out of New Zealand about a mass murder weighs heavily on my soul. Such evil is a mystery, and it is hard to live with mysteries, with things we just can’t explain or understand. But, if the truth be known, evil is a lesser mystery. Fortunately for us, there is a greater Mystery, a countervailing Mystery, a triumphant Mystery, whom we call God.

We encounter that Mystery in the first reading from Genesis. Abraham, who has not yet received his new name from God and is known as Abram at this point, is the recipient of a divine vision. God promises Abraham a great reward. But Abraham laments to God that no reward has any meaning to him since he has no children. God responds by promising Abraham offspring, despite the fact that Abraham and Sarah are both far too old to expect children. And God further promises that, from his offspring, he will have as many descendants as there are stars in the sky. To his great credit, Abraham believes the Lord.

What happens next seems bizarre to us. God commands Abraham to collect five animals and to cut three of them in half! Why? Well, this is where a little knowledge of ancient Near Eastern customs comes in handy. What is being proposed is a solemn oath-taking. In the ancient Near East, one way a person might make a solemn oath was to cut an animal in two and then to walk between the two halves while making the oath. The idea, whether spoken or left unspoken, was that the person passing through the cloven animal was accepting a curse upon himself should he fail to fulfill the oath: “May I die like these animals if I forswear myself.”

So, the cutting up of the animals is not all that strange after all. What is strange is that it is not Abraham who passes through the cloven animals and takes the solemn oath. It is God! At sundown, Abraham falls into a deep trance, and in that altered state of consciousness, he witnesses a smoking fire pot and a flaming torch being carried through the midst of the slaughtered animals by an invisible figure. A voice then declares this oath: “To your descendants I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates.”

God kept his oath to Abraham. He had children. And they had children. And some of their descendants did indeed inherit the Promised Land. Nowadays, we have DNA tests that you can take at home and mail in. And I suppose that it would be possible to try to trace one’s ancestry back to Abraham. But that would be missing one important point. Not only did Abraham have many descendants according to the flesh. He had even more descendants according to the spirit.

Three world religions claim Abraham as their spiritual forefather: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. That’s why they are often called the Abrahamic faiths. And all combined, there are billions of us, as many as there are stars in the sky!

In a sense, the followers of these three faiths are family, spiritual descendants of a single ancestor; even so, we kill one another! Muslim extremists from the so-called Islamic State behead Christians in the Name of God. In Israel, the very land promised to the descendants of Abraham, Jews oppress their brother Muslims and Christians. Muslims kill Jews in revenge. And all the while, evangelical Christians from the United States spend money to maintain the status quo. The so-called Holy Land is, in fact, an unholy mess!

And then we come to the story of the massacre in New Zealand, in a city called Christchurch, named for the followers of the Prince of Peace; there fifty Muslims were murdered while at prayer. Although little is currently known about the murderer, he claims to have sought the blessing of a secret group of Christian Crusaders before he began his attack, and in his manifesto, he quotes Pope Urban the Second, the man responsible for the First Crusade. In other words, this evil and deluded man thinks he is on a mission from God to save Western culture from Islam.

And so I lament. We all lament. Like Abraham who lamented that he had no children, like Jesus who lamented that the city he loved had rejected God’s messengers, we lament the sad state of this world. But we need to do more than just lament. We need to stand firm in the Lord, trusting in God’s faithfulness, as did Abraham, even as we suffer. We need to pray for our enemies, and to forgive them. And we need to strive for justice and peace among all people. And so that we may have the strength to endure the struggle, we gather at this Holy Table week by week; we give thanks to the Lord; and we share in the sacred mystery of Christ’s Body and Blood. Then fed with spiritual food, we go back into the world to do the work God has given us to do, preparing for the Day when Christ returns and all the descendants of Abraham sing with one voice, “Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord!”

 © 2019 by Darren Miner. All rights reserved. Used by permission.

[steveezekiel]

HANDLING CHANGES IN MATERIAL COMFORTS OR CIRCUMSTANCES 1

"Until the time came to fulfill his dreams, THE LORD TESTED JOSEPH’S CHARACTER."

Psalm 105:19 (NLT)

• In whatever you want and desire to receive from God, He will test your character before He releases it.

- Until you pass the test of character, the Word of God spoken about your Life might not come to fulfillment.

- A number of believers have failed in character testing, and that has been the reason why the promises of God are far-fetched or delayed in their lives.

- Your character matters to God in whatever He wanted to give to you.

• Why the delay in the release of the blessing? What has inhibited the flow of the blessing?

- When you experience a sudden change in the flow of God's Blessing in your Life, and the flow of the Blessing begins to ebb away, started to go out; It means something has gone wrong.

- The cause of the blessing being ebbed might be the Pride that is found in your life.

- Your heart may have gone up, and be contaminated with pride; thinking you have arrived and begin to feel that you are above others.

- Having too high opinion of yourself because of the little breakthrough that you have just experienced in what you do.

- Pride is destructive, any element of it would stop the flow of the Blessings of God in your life.

NOTE:

(i) If you have started imagining in your heart how the glory of the new thing, the Blessing, would be; the Blessing may be truncated as a result of this.

(ii) When you begin to think of how you are going to show to the people that your level has changed, you have arrived, and being vaunted of your Blessings.

(iii) When you want to show to those who have mocked you at the time of your predicaments that things have changed—to let them know that you have gotten results now.

(iv) You begin to think how you will suddenly become great and prominent than some people, because of the Blessing you anticipated, or the blessing which has just started flowing.

(v) You may even be thinking you are now higher than your spiritual leader—Pastor.

YOU think you are now better than some people. You think more of the self than God.

PERADVENTURE God has put a little measure of His anointing on your Life, and people have started testifying when you pray for them. You afterwards begin to think the anointing on your Life is higher than that of your Senior Pastor. IF such thoughts are permitted in your heart, you have permitted rebellion and may begin to despise or disdain your leader—your Pastor.

THE outcome of this may be calamitous.

GOD is not an author of confusion, He would not give you the anointing that is higher than that of your Pastor whilst you are still serving under him.

IF any higher anointing would be given to you at all, God would move you out of the place.

- When all or any of the above mentioned points are the thoughts of your mind, Because of your breakthrough or the blessing you anticipated; God would stop the Blessing.

HE would not allow the Blessing to materialize, or stop the flow of it, if the Blessing has started at all.

- The reason is, such thoughts are by-products of Pride.

• When a new thing is about to happen in your life or a new thing has just started to happen. Do not be overjoyed about it, to the point that you begin to have contempt for others, especially those who are higher than you.

- When Hagar, Sarah's maid, discovered she was pregnant, she began to look at her mistress with contempt:

"He [Abraham] went in to [the bed of] Hagar, and she conceived; AND WHEN SHE REALIZED THAT SHE HAD CONCEIVED, SHE LOOKED WITH CONTEMPT ON HER MISTRESS [regarding Sarai as insignificant because of her infertility]" (Genesis 16:4 AMP).

- Give all the glory of whatever good thing that happens to God, in your heart. Even when others are trying to praise you for the result or success, humble yourself and give all the honour and glory to God.

- Do not feel Big. And do not suddenly change in your disposition to people. Do not boast about the material breakthrough you have just experienced.

- Do not talk about it to receive people's attention: "LET ANOTHER MAN PRAISE YOU, AND NOT YOUR OWN MOUTH; A stranger, and not your own lips" (Proverbs 27:2).

• Pride is destructive!

- Many have truncated, halt what God is about to do or has started to do in their lives because of Pride.

- Pride manifested itself in speeches, greetings, dressings, and every action of whoever has it; depending on the level of the Pride in such a person.

- God detests Pride. He personally will stand on the way of a proud person:

"In fact, God treats us with even greater kindness, just as the Scriptures say, “God opposes everyone who is proud, but he blesses all who are humble with undeserved grace" (James 4:6 Contemporary English Version).

READ: 1 Peter 5:5

- God will deal with a proud person by Himself. If pride is found in your life, favour would be far away from you.

- Many people desire and pray for God's favour but they could not receive it because of pride.

- Humility is the key to receive from God. If you humble yourself, you will receive the desired Blessings from God.

• In addition, learning how to appreciate God for every little result you have gotten, is of great importance.

- If you do not know how to thank and praise God, you cannot cannot continue in the flow of His Blessings.

- You are nothing without God. Remain small in your own eyes and do not allow Pride.

- If you think you are better than others because of the material comforts, the Blessings you have received; the flow of it would be stopped by God.

- Many are having problems in handling their material comforts. Do not allow the Blessings of God in your Life turns to a curse.

• You will not fail in Jesus' name.

Peace!

TO BE CONTINUED

[sophieakatz]

Thursday Thoughts: What if Abraham Refused to Sacrifice Isaac?

I’ve been watching Xena: Warrior Princess with my boyfriend, and enjoying it a lot. Xena and Gabrielle’s adventures mostly focus on Greek mythology, taking new spins on the stories of Hercules, King Sisyphus, and Helen of Troy. However, on a few occasions, I’ve seen my own people’s mythos played with.

In one episode, it’s ultimately revealed that the mysterious chest Xena’s been chasing contains within it a stone tablet with the phrases “thou shalt not steal” and “thou shalt not covet” on it – though the people Xena returns the chest to are never said to be Jewish, that is the natural conclusion.

And in a later episode, titled “Altared States,” Xena comes across a family facing a conundrum. A father has been ordered by his god, “the one true god,” to sacrifice his son.

Now, the son’s name is Icus, not Isaac. And he has a nasty older brother who gives the story a heaping spoonful of Cain-and-Abel/Jacob-and-Esau vibes. And there’s a lot of ambiguity about which of this god’s commands are actually divine, or are a human pretending to be a god.

But the basic structure remains: an ostensibly benevolent god tells his devoted follower, a patriarch, to sacrifice the son he loves. The climax even takes place on top of a mountain, on a stone altar. And – spoiler alert – at the last minute, the god relents and the son is spared.

This episode got me thinking about a question I saw posed in an online discussion of Torah a couple years ago, but hadn’t thought much on since:

What if Abraham had refused to sacrifice Isaac? If he had defied G-d, how might that change both this specific story and the way we think about religion?

In case you aren’t familiar with the story of the almost-sacrifice of Isaac, here is a very short version (based on the Torah translation found here): 

G-d tells Abraham, “Take your son, whom you love, and offer him to me as a burnt offering.” And Abraham goes to do so.

Along the way up the mountain, Isaac notices the lack of a lamb for the sacrifice. He asks his father about it, and Abraham replies, “G-d will provide a lamb.”

Abraham and Isaac set up the altar for the sacrifice. Abraham ties Isaac up and reaches for the knife.

Suddenly, an angel calls out for Abraham to stop: “Do not harm the boy, for now I know that you fear G-d… and G-d has sworn that because you did not withhold your son from me, He will bless you and your descendants.”

And then a ram shows up and Abraham sacrifices the ram instead of his son.

Every story in the Torah serves as an allegory, from which we derive lessons for how to live our life today. The moral of this particular story, at least as it was presented to me in Sunday School, is that we should put faith first. I was taught that G-d was testing Abraham, and that Abraham passed the test by being willing to do whatever G-d said, even kill his only son. We should therefore put faith above all else, even when it’s hard.

That’s the stance that Icus’s father takes in “Altared States.” Even though he is clearly torn apart inside by the decision, and both Icus’s mother and Xena are telling him not to go through with it, he is determined to show his son that “faith is [not] just for those times when it’s convenient to believe.”

But what if that wasn’t the moral? What if Abraham said no?

It wouldn’t be out of character for Abraham to disagree with G-d. In an earlier story, Abraham outright haggles with G-d about the fate of the people of Sodom and Gomorrah (Torah translation here). Abraham gets G-d to agree that if there are just ten righteous people living in the city, then He will spare them all. “Far be it from You to do such a thing,” says Abraham, “to kill the righteous with the wicked.”

In the case of Sodom and Gomorrah, Abraham doesn’t just go along with what G-d says should happen. He tells G-d, “This is not who you are; this is what you should do instead.”

Arguing with G-d is practically a Jewish tradition. The name Israel literally refers to one who “wrestles with G-d” – it was given to Jacob, Abraham’s grandson, for fighting with an angel.

One of my favorite jokes is about three rabbis arguing about a law, one on one side and two on the other. Then G-d Himself comes down from heaven to declare that the one rabbi is correct – and the two rabbis reply, “Alright, so now it’s two against two.”

We respect G-d, of course. But we hold Him to the same standards as we hold ourselves: to be open to debate, to strive to improve, to be a good person.

The sacrifice of a child sounds more like the kind of thing a terrible warlike god would ask for, not the monotheistic G-d, who is generally portrayed as loving. At one point, in a moment of reluctance, Icus’s father cries out, “Our god is a benevolent master!” But he does not follow that train of thought to its logical conclusion: “So he wouldn’t, or shouldn’t, ask me to do this.”

In the Torah, Abraham doesn’t follow this train of thought, either. He doesn’t show any sign of thinking much about G-d’s demand at all. But he could have.

What if Abraham had responded to G-d’s order regarding Isaac in the same way as he responded to the fate of Sodom and Gomorrah? What if he had said, “Far be it from you to demand the life of an innocent child, the child you promised me!”? What if he had said, “I will sacrifice myself before I lay a hand on my own son!”? What if Abraham, lying on the altar himself with the knife poised towards his own neck, was then told by the angel to stop – because the real test was whether Abraham would do not the obedient thing, but the right thing?

It would change the moral. It would not be a story of thoughtless faith, but of morality, of sticking to one’s principles even when those who are supposed to guide you falter.

It would bring this story in line with the standard Jewish practice of questioning authority, of asking why, of finding a better way to live.

It also would line this story up with the rest of the Torah. Yes, it’s full of laws, especially in the last few books. But the first book, Genesis, the book where we find Abraham and Isaac, is full of people going against what is demanded or expected of them, by G-d or tradition.

G-d says that Abraham will have a son by Sarah; Sarah doesn’t believe that this will happen, so she encourages Abraham to have a son with her servant Hagar instead. Cain kills his brother and lies about it to G-d. Jacob deceives his father and steals the blessing intended for his brother Esau. Tamar disguises herself and sleeps with her father-in-law to create an heir for her dead husband. And right at the beginning is perhaps the most famous instance of disobedience of all time: Adam and Eve eat the fruit of the tree forbidden to them by G-d.

Sometimes the disobedience ends poorly. Adam and Eve are kicked out of Eden, for instance, and Cain is branded a murderer.

Other times, the Torah indicates that the disobedience is approved of by G-d. Jacob is decisively rewarded for sneaking away with Esau’s birthright, going on to literally father a nation. Tamar gives birth to twin sons, a big double-thumbs-up from G-d. Hagar learns that her son Ishmael will father a great nation of his own.

My point is that if Abraham had said no to G-d, and refused to kill Isaac, then he would be in excellent company. It would make Abraham’s behavior more like what we see in the rest of Genesis, and more like the rest of us Jews, too. We don’t always do what G-d says. And G-d seems to be more or less okay with that, as long as what we do results in a more just, peaceful, and prosperous world.

Which makes me wonder – do we actually have the “sacrifice of Isaac” all wrong?

What if G-d didn’t want Abraham to sacrifice Isaac?

Note that it is not G-d Himself who stops Abraham from killing Isaac, but an angel, who relays G-d’s message. At other times, even at the very beginning of this chapter, G-d is perfectly willing to show up and speak directly to Abraham. But in this instance, He has someone else go instead. Why is G-d, in this moment where he ostensibly approves so much of Abraham’s behavior, suddenly distancing Himself from Abraham?

Perhaps we have the test all wrong. Perhaps, by going along with what G-d commanded, Abraham failed the test – and now G-d is off hanging his head in shame.

Perhaps G-d was actually trying to see whether Abraham would continue to question G-d, as he did for Sodom and Gamorrah. Would Abraham stand up against G-d not only for strangers, but also for his own family?

Turns out, he wouldn’t.

And so G-d realized that Abraham was not yet ready to hear a message that perhaps we are now ready to understand: that sometimes disobedience is the right thing to do. Perhaps G-d wants us to protect each other first, and obey second.