#i don't have the most biblically accurate takes I know

[ne0nwithazero]

I'm so starving for wholesome Swatchton content 😭😭😭 As much as I enjoy the edgier lore-heavy stuff, I'll see cuter stuff and I'm immediately just 🤲🤲🤲 /pos

I need it too...

[call-me-strega]

Dc x Dp prompt #1: Angel

I'd like to preface this by saying I'm incorporating tropes I've seen in other posts.

~~~

Jason has been a lot happier recently. His Pit Rage has been getting less and less frequent, he's cooking and coming over to the manor a lot more, and he even let Dick hug him last week without threatening bodily harm!

The rest of the batfam, while happy for him, are curious about the change. So one night at dinner they ask him what's up with him and why he's so happy recently. Surprisingly, instead of taking it the wrong way and getting mad Jason is eager to share.

Apparently, Jason has a boyfriend now. Yay!

He goes on and on about this civilian he met after stoping a cult who was trying to summon a deity and how he is this nerdy college kid who really likes space and how their civilian identies shared the same Gen Ed course so he made an effort to become friends. Turns out that nerdy space guy had caused the initial improvement in mood and his offer to go on a date to an incredibly diverse and well-stocked library had been the cherry on top.

The only thing is that Jason didn't want them stalking the guy and refered to him around the family exclusively as "Angel". Everyone thinks that's just a cute pet name he gave the guy as a way to both reference and distract the civilian from the cult ritual he was probably rescued from. Little do they know that it's actually because "Angel" was not a victim of the cult ritual but the summonee, that appeared in the form of a biblically accurate angel.

One day some supernatural entity decideds to attack Gotham and everyone is calling whoever they can think of for back-up. Batman calls Constantine, Nightwing calls Zatana, Red Robin and Robin are contacting the Justice League, and even Red Hood seems to call someone.

The situation is getting desperate. The JL is here but at most the can just slow the supernatural being down. Constantine and Zatana are still 20 minutes out and things are looking bad when another Eldritch Being spawns and seems to take down the threat in one move.

Everyone stands stunned as the being turns to them and in a booming voice exclaims "DON'T BE AFRAID. I WAS CALLED TO HELP". They all go through several emotions upon hearing those words. Where did this being come from? Is this a biblically accurate angel? Who called it here to help? Was it Zatana or maybe Constantine? Are they here yet? Upon looking around it is found that Zatana and Constantine are not here yet and the heroes get ready to engage this being carefully when a voice calls out

"Angel!"

Everyone whips their heads around to see Jason climbing over debris towards the Eldritch Being in front of them. The Batfam feels faint with a creeping realization and Superman swears he heard Batman's heart skip a beat for a second. Before anyone can ask Jason what he's doing the being shapeshifts into the much smaller form of a young fae-like creature with pointed ears, fangs, stark white hair, and vibrant green eyes floating in the air. He flys over to Jason before a flash of bright light leaves a young man deep black hair and frosty blue eyes in Jason's arms.

Jason turns to introduce his boyfriend to his family and the League only to find that Batman has fainted, a panicking JL, and a gobsmacked Zatana and Constantine have who've arrived in time to see the transformation. As Zatana and Constantine begin to freak out and prepare defensive magic Batman comes to and levels a scowl at Jason.

"Hood, I think you have some explaining to do."

[midnight1nk]

So, this week's episode...

[Spoilers below cut]

Past Ink: Guys, it's fine. This isn't a serious episode, it would be too soon for another arc. It's just gonna be another silly Saturday.

Current Ink: ....

(the following is my live reaction:)

[*unholy screaming*] FOUR NOOOOOOOOOOOO

WOW WHAT A GREAT START TO THIS EPISODE, SCRATCH EVERYTHING THAT I SAID ABOUT THIS BEING A "NORMAL" EPISODE

NOPE I NEED TO PAUSE, I NEED TO TAKE A WALK BC I'M NOT GONNA GET OVER IT, DO YOU KNOW WHAT THIS COULD LEAD

they're not gonna do it in this episode BUT the fact that goop!4 is being acknowledged in every way possible, we might just have a sequel in our hands

NO NO NO CUT THE INTRO, I HAVEN'T EVEN FINISHED THE EPISODE YET AND YOU WANT ME TO MAKE A THEORY ON IT ALREADY? HOLD YOUR FUCKIN HORSES, I'LL GET THERE GEEZ

anyway, we have to press play...

I'm pretty sure someone already has done a pirate au (no I'm not over what I just watched) and anyway, artists: here's pirate SMG4

Four, you should've read the file name before downloading it [*shakes head*]

Wait, is this going to be a parody of computer buddies? That's actually pretty fun..... OH NO NO NO

Ah, so we are doing computer buddies

Actually, yeah, can we have Mario as president please

love how it says "no one even compares to mario. especially smg4 who sucks booty cheeks [or ass] and mario doesn't"

Observe as the SMG4 fandom gets terrified of the word "perfect" [*screams*]

MARIO MARIO NO NO NO HE DIDN'T SAVE

I felt that in my core omg

as a graphic designer, this hurts

apparently, there's a whole new dimension in our computers, Only in the SMG4 Universe [*cheesy thumbs up*]

We really are getting all the computer buddies, huh? I wonder if KinitoPET will appear

[*silver the hedgehog voice*] It's no use!

BRITISH SMG3

wow what a funny bit... WAIT HOLD UP WAIT A MINUTE, LOOK AT THE MEDIA BOX

the eyes....

w̷̹̓e̷̼̽ ̸̯́n̴̩͆e̵̝̓v̴̼͑ë̵̤r̴͓͛ ̷̭͝l̵̦̎e̴̞͗f̵͉̐ṯ̴͗

and the left eye too... oh god, the EYE OF RA— [*gets shot*]

honestly, Four, you improved your aim ever since Western Spaghetti (ik you also did for PV but that's not the point)

I knew they were gonna bring in buff Luigi again

I'M SCREAMING

THERE IS NO WAY THE TEAM JUST DROPPED THAT ON US, THIS CAN'T BE REAL

ok first off, the fact that Four has a folder labeled "Super SECRET Spicy Memes" is giving "totally homework" folder energy (and I don't want to even think more about that)

hey, Four did say that Three brings some spice into his life (yeah, "rosemary to my bread" and all that jazz)

SECOND, the fact he has an image of SMG3 with him saying "whats the matter smg4 kun?"

THEN the "I know what you are" audio clip...

Four, buddy, you're down bad aren't you?

like "woah smg4's bisexual, I didn't know that", the closet is out of GLASS so we been knew but I DID NOT expect this

having Three be a tsundere is one thing, but FOUR....

🫵🏳️‍🌈⁉️

"they're dating behind the scenes" at this point, yeah

we have to keep going... [*secretly puts this clip on the fridge*]

I hate this so much /silly

[*chaos ensues*] [*sips my coffee*] just another tuesday saturday

GOTTA GO FAST GOTTA GO FAST— [*gets tazed*] i can never catch a break c'mon man

oh hey Swag!

four dollars is four dollars, you got yourself a deal

ok, I'm gonna need everyone to see Four's cute little hops here:

look at him go, my silly little goober :) oh, now you have? then let's keep going

holy shit, this fight scene is so well animated!!! LET'S GOOOO

never thought I'd see the day of seeing biblically accurate bonzi in an SMG4 episode and yet here we are.

SCREAMING CRYING THROWING UP

THIS IS THE MOST BEAUTIFUL THING I'VE SEEN IN MY LIFE, I'M ASCENDING

"...but they hugged before" NO YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND

A normal hug, where two people cross each other and are unable to see the other's face since it's over their shoulder, is just as it is: a normal hug. It can be seen as platonic and/or romantic.

THIS is a lot more intimate. 3 and 4's heads touch while they hold each other by the hand. This type of hug is reserved more for romantic partners when the situation leads them to a devasting end, where they face each other to look at and remember what their partner looked like, one last time before they die.

In this case, it makes sense as the computer is collapsing within itself.

"It's not actually them tho." Yes, they're digital copies of 3 and 4 but that's the thing: they're COPIES, acting on what 3 and 4 would actually do

SMG34 shippers, we are eating GOOD today yum yum

but then, that begs the question: would there be a moment where 3 and 4 would reveal their feelings for each other at the worst possible time?

(you guys are not going to be ready for my next episode concepts) What, who said that?

uh anyway them 💙💜 gotta put it on the fridge

I feel for you, Four, but I have a horrible feeling about this

...

Foreshadowing is a literary device—

no seriously, I feel like this could be part of a future arc where a past villain would ruin everything Four has and would offer up a deal when Four would be the most desperate. There's always a catch. Hmm, why does that seem familiar...?

Your life's work or your friends, it's your call, SMG4

:)

HELL YEAH FOUR, THROW IT AWAY (omg just like how he chose Three over the USB, I'm crying dude)

also congrats to Ourstor08954957 for the lovely art in the end credits 🎉 such cute doodles ❤️

.・-: ✧ :--: ✧ :-・.

Oh boy, what an episode. I feel like I'm in another plane of existence right now. Everything was absolutely incredible, great job Team!!

Everyone, say THANK YOU to whoever put the SMG34 crumbs in there, we shall treasure it for the rest of our lives. I'm gonna put those moments on my fridge. OH I would love to see the artists draw the SMG34 hug or pirate Four!

Love the fighting scene right by the end and the little details they have added in there. I guess it's "Torture Ink with the Idea that Goop!4 May Happen" day but hey, I'm so normal about it (no I'm not). I've been a bit stressed since finals are coming up so I'm thankful for anything this episode for me.

(If anyone is curious, the WOTFI website is still up and yes, I am logging its status just in case.)

I'm sure everyone is going crazy over this...

"They gay fr :3" [BenJoJoGV, Twitter]

🧍

BEN YOU CAN'T JUST SAY THESE THINGS—

[striveattemptfail]

a cursed realization: wade and logan are old men. logan especially so.

they MUST have weird old man habits and general body weirdness. and not the endearing shit like preferring to use old school tech, or having a "get off my lawn, my favourite miscreants" kinda attitude, or being unable to keep up in sex, or any of that kinda cute stuff

i mean the unpleasant sweaty old man smell, having walking farts, snoring while awake, their stomachs just making noises for no goddamn reason bc their digestive systems are no longer 30 y/o

all of which they don't even realize they're doing bc they're old and either a) have more pressing things to worry about [at their age]; b) stopped giving a fuck; or c) both of the above

source: i live with two very old men (my dad and uncle). one is a few years away from retirement and the other is already at that age. they are family but they are still gross old men who act like drunk uncles given half the chance

and while neither logan or wade are in their 60s, these habits don't just magically appear once you hit that age. they begin long before that and accumulate over time until the stinky old man package is complete

"but jercy," you say, "they have perfect regeneration!! they can't have any health problems!! they're too self-conscious to be that gross!!"

1: (re: perfect regeneration) that is an even worse argument for wade, who has mega cancer and canonically does not smell pleasant or have a properly functioning body. he'd 100% have old man problems as a symptom of his cancer bc his mutation is physically keeping him in a constant state of dying. everything he does is out of sheer stubbornness and willpower to make a joke out of his life

1b: to play on a popular headcanon: any aromatic, artificial fruity skincare routine he has can easily be used as a reason for him to cover up his old man smell

2: see point B above for logan

2b: see the movie, logan (2017), or the comic, death of wolverine (2014), for the fact that logan can canonically age/die. albeit it's at a vastly slower pace than everyone else, but it means logan WILL eventually have these issues with his body too, if he doesn't have them already

2c: feral/animalistic logan who takes on animal traits would be so much worse bc wolverines are called "skunk bears" for a reason. wolverines (and any wildlife/animal that you can compare logan to) fucking STINK!! they have EVEN GROSSER ANIMAL HABITS!! you just gotta accept it

3: (re: self-consciousness) you got a point there, but once again refer to point B. most folks i know at their age are on their way to or have already stopped caring about what others think of them. and even if wade and logan are somehow the exceptions to this, i'm sure they let loose in private and probably indulge in their grosser habits when they're alone

4: if you want biblically accurate old man yaoi you're gonna have to contend with the fact that it comes with the non-sexy old man problems. i'm sorry i have to break the illusion but this is the reality we must face together

5: suspension of disbelief, friends. do engage with that once in a while lol

in conclusion: i unfortunately have every bit of confidence that wade and logan are not exempt from old man behaviours and bodily functions and i will die whining about it. thanks for coming to my ted talk

[crow-caller]

Hi Crow,

Apologies if this has been asked before but I’m trying to get to the bottom of what people describe as ‘biblically accurate angels’ and I’m getting conflicting results and I thought why not ask someone who definitely knows more on the topic than me. Is the incomprehensible multi-eye wheel creature thing true?

"True" is the problem, because... it is, and it isn't, and it depends, and it's complicated!

I looooove angels, you're right, and I was working on doing a vid on this exact topic because the term 'biblically accurate angel' is a pet peeve of mine. However, no matter the power of my autistic angelic obsession, I wouldn't say I'm a perfect source. I got intimidated outta making that video because I got too anxious of messing it up and losing my angel cred. BUT! I do know some stuff.

What's wrong with "Biblically Accurate Angels?

Three things!

1. "Biblically"

Most people I see, when confronted with the word 'Biblically', think of Christianity. The Bible technically refers to a collection of texts shared by a number of Abrahamic religions, but I've a lot of people entirely unaware of that fact. There's often a general lack of recognition around 'biblically accurate angel' posting that angels aren't exclusively or originally Christian concepts. Tumblr is an outlier of a place, remember; I read youtube comments.

2. "Accurate"

This makes me lose it, just a little bit, because the idea 'real angels in the bible actually looked like scary monsters' is both incorrect and kind of a rude thing to say about a holy entity a number of religions believe in.

There are a lot of ideas of angel classification and hierarchy, but you'll usually only see one--- the Christian one. This has nine orders in three spheres, going usually angel, archangel, principality (3rd sphere, most humanoid), powers, virtues, dominions (2nd, basically no lore), thrones/ophainim, cherubim, seraphim (1st, weirdo patrol). The lowest spheres are closest to humanity, the highest are closer to the divine.

(it's worth noting there's a big difference between 'what is exactly in the canon holy text' versus 'writings/visions/ideas from scholars later'. There's differing opinions everywhere and also different sects.) Little is universal.

Speaking of, religions! Heard of them? Angel hierarchy as it's commonly see is very specifically a Christian angle! There's a number of different Jewish angelic hierarchies which include different types or interpretations of angels. There's usually 10 ranks instead of 9 too.

I know the least about angels in Islam, but they don't have a strict angel hierarchy either, though some angels are more important than others.

As for angel physical descriptions, it varies. They can take human form, but they're spirits doing that for our convenience. Some of them are doing weird stuff, but most of the time an angel is some essence of light and fire taking a lesser defined shape for our convenience.

Some of the main ideas of a 'biblically accurate angel' come from one of my fav bits of the bible, the chariot in Ezekiel.

If you've not read the fun weird bits of the bible before, let me introduce you!!

These are the Living Creatures which are considered Cherubim in Christianity. The wheels are the Ophanim, who are also Thrones. The whole thing sounds like a very intricate chariot rather than a bunch of angels, but hey, it says right there they're 'living beings'

3. "Angels"

What is an angel anyway?

Well, there's an answer, but as I think I've highlighted there's a number of different, varying ideas of them which are all equally valid! This can include, of course, the artistic choice of making them monsters ( I love doing this ), but it's incorrect to assert such a design is 'more or truly accurate'.

Angels are messengers. The word for angel originally was Messenger, and the role of angels is generally to serve as a conduit and messenger of divine will. They can be teachers or healers. They often are more extensions of the holy rather than truly independent spirits, good because they are divine rather than the choice of free will. (but like everything I'm saying it depends bc religions and opinions are not unified monoliths).

Not all angels are messengers. Even without a strict hierarchy, there's a common idea of specific angels for specific jobs. The idea of Archangels is also common, though which are and how many differs wildly, as does their function.

Angels are divine beings. Humans don't become them. There also are some sects that believe this, like the Latter Day Saints, but generally the divide between human and angel is very clear. Humans are generally above angels, because we're beloved new ocs.

angels are cool. I really like them

---

anyway, this is a very approximate ramble for you on the subject. I think I could have gone on in much more detail and I decided not to. Especially as I note I don't have that kind of 'learn and memorize everything about your special interest' kind of autism, just 'a lot more than normal over many years'. Angels are a really complicated subject because religion is, and it all differs. But I do dislike Biblically Accurate Angel because I think it's really misled people who come across it casually. Yes, there's weird angel stuff, but it's pretty rare (especially in common canon), and it isn't 'the secret creepypasta truth'.

[hyperpotamianarch]

Pleasant music playing. The logo of Camp Nephillim appears on a sky-blue background. The logo is a tilted Star of David in which all the points are stylized as wings, with the words "Camp Nephilim" above and the Hebrew equivalent - "מחנה הנפילים" - below. Underneath the logo is a tagline - a quote from the Tanach.

The logo & background slowly fade. The music also fades, though a bit later than the logo.

[Setting: Int., an office of some sort. The back wall is covered with book shelves, with many of the books being in Hebrew - the Talmud, multi volume edition of the Tanach and such books. There's a table in the middle of the room. Behind it sits Tuvia Rosenbloom, an adult Jewish man with curly dark hair, a short beard and sharp green eyes. He wears a blue Camp Nephilim t-shirt, with a Tzitzit under it and a yarmulke on his head. He sports a friendly smile.]

Tuvia (with a noticable British accent): Shalom! Hello, and welcome to Camp Nephillim. I am Tuvia Rosenbloom, the camp councelor, and I'm here to explain to you about what this camp is and why you're here. Your journey here was likely shaking, so in the meanwhile take your time to relax and drink a cup of water while you're watching this orientation video. Please remember to say the blessing before!

[He lifts a cup of water, says the blessing and drinks before continuing]

Tuvia (cont.): So, first thing first: you should know that many thing that you may have thought were merely myth are, in fact, quite real. This includes angels and demons - though they aren't exactly the same as you might've imagined them. No, the whole "Biblically Accurate Angels" meme wouldn't prepare you enough either. Angels can also sometimes appear differently than their natural form, and can even seem like regular humans. They sometimes fall in love with humans, which is how most Nephilim come to be.

[Tuvia's office disappears, to show instead a Chumash opened in the Book of Genesis, chapter 6]

Tuvia (cont.): What are the Nephilim? Well, as the Torah says,

"It was then, and later too, that the Nephilim appeared on earth—when divine beings cohabited with the human women, who bore them offspring. Such were the heroes of old, the men of renown."

[Setting returns to Tuvia's office]

Tuvia (cont.): So, those are the Nephilim, then: children of Divine beings and humans, who are heroes and men of renown. And you are likely one of them.

[Tuvia takes another sip from his cup, then sets it aside]

Tuvia (cont.): You might need some time to digest that, feel free to pause the video for a few minutes. Getting back on topic, though: you are, likely, the child of a divine being. If you always grown with a single parent who only rarely reminisced of another parent you don't know what happened to them - you are likely a Naphil. It may grant you certain abilities relating to the position your divine parent served in the universe. Note, however, that those divine beings aren't gods. We do not worship them or offer them sacrifices, even as mediators between as and G-d. Some of those Divine Beings do like to consider themselves gods and were worshipped by old civilizations - the Greek and Norse pantheons, for example. That doesn't make them any more gods than the Angels known in Jewish lore - they are merely forces. Powerful, but not omnipotent.

[Tuvia pauses for a moment, letting that sink in]

Tuvia (cont.): There are other types of people who might find their way to Camp Nephilim, however. Perhaps you were training in magic under the Egyptian ḥartumim of Per Ankh and felt uncomfortable during Passover; maybe you studied under the tutelage of the Chaldeans in New Jersey, and they were harsh on you during Tisha b'Av; or maybe you were either born with the Re'iyeh, the Sight, or were granted it by an experiment gone wrong. I, personally, am descended from one of the few Jewish bloodlines that inherited the Re'iyeh from one of our ancestors. We can see the hidden world, and the threats within... and they tend to look back. Which leads us to demons.

[Tuvia leans back in his chair, putting his hands together]

Tuvia (cont.): It is important to remember that Demons - or Shedim, as they are known in Hebrew - aren't what you've come to expect from beings with such a name. They aren't evil monsters, hell-bent on tempting you to sin. Rather, they are... adjacent beings to us, not dissimilarly to elves or goblins in modern popular media. However, they are nothing like you may have come to expect from elves of the Tolkeinian kind. They are wilder than them, and prone to hurt humans. They aren't always murderous or impossible to reason with either. Some of them, like our lore instructor Yonatan Shida, are rather friendly. Many of them crave blood, though, and nothing is tastier to them than the blood of the Nephilim, or other humans capable of seeing them. They live in the edges of society and can feel when someone is looking at them. And when you do... when you acknowledge seeing them... you become fair play.

[Tuvia returns to his previous posture, lifts his cup and takes another sip]

Tuvia (cont.): You likely had a significant encounter with Shedim, or maybe other types of monsters, on your way here - but it probably wasn't your first time seeing them. It might have been a man who, upon a second look, had chicken legs. Perhaps you could've sworn that a weird stranger who seemed to follow you had two heads. You may have seen a horse fly on the horizon, or encountered a tall person with an umbilical cord tying them to the ground on a field trip. They were less of a threat to you back then. But yo have grown, and your powers and abilities grew with you - along with the Shedim's ability to sense you. They will be coming for you - which is why you're here. Camp Nephilim is a place for Jewish Nephilim and Ba'alei Shem to train. To get used to the powers granted to us by virtue of our parentage or via other means. We're not the only place for such training; Camp Half-Blood in Long Island offers training for children of entities from the Greek Pantheon, while the 21 Nome of the House of Life in Brooklyn offers training in Egyptian magic, and the Chaldean school in Jersey City will train you in the Mesopotamian vain. None of those, however, is built with Jews in mind: the worship of pagan gods is common in all these places. They don't supply you with Kosher food, tend to not care for our holidays and often enough rife with latent antisemitism. We offer a Jewish alternative - no matter what is your level of observance or what congregation you belong to, you can be sure we have here at least one synagogue you can daven at and one you'd never set foot in. We do not worship any god but G-d here - you can honor your parents in ways fitting the traditions of the Torah, but even if a divine parent asks of you to worship them you are not required to. Another difference between us and the other Camps and Schools is that you aren't trained to slay Shedim here. You're trained to keep them at bay, imprison them if necesarry. Unlike other monsters, Shedim die like humans do, and so killing them should be only taken as a last resort: if your life are in danger you should kill whoever threatens you, but otherwise killing Shedim is like murder. We would ask you to refrain from doing that unless necessary.

[Tuvia gets up]

Tuvia (cont.): That is it for the orientation video for now. Further explanations on your sleeping arrangemnt and schedules will be given to you when you exit the room. Welcome to Camp Nephilim! We hope you enjoy your time with us.

[Outro music playing, the picture of Tuvia's office is replaced by the blue background with the Camp's logo to the side while the credits are shown on screen]

———

Writer wishes to note he knows nothing about writing stage instructions.

[lu-is-not-ok]

Lu's Guide to Sin Analysis

Welp, since my brain is too focused on having K Corp Hong Lu go full unga bunga in Mirror Dungeons to write full analyses, I decided I might as well give something else to all the people starving for Limbus Theory content.

So, here we are. A basic guide on how I approach the Sin Analysis portion of my analyses, covering my personal interpretations for each Sin, as well as how to use those when analysing both E.G.Os and Identities.

That way, ya'll can dabble in doing some of this on your own when I'm too busy grinding my way to 400 hours of play time on Limbus to write up full analyses.

Sounds good? Awesome. Under the cut we go, wheeeee!

Sin Interpretations

Let's start with the most important part - the Sins themselves.

I want you to take a moment and think about your own associations with those Sins. Perhaps your immediate thought is to take the words used literally. Maybe you immediately think back to the Biblical ideas of the Seven Deadly Sins. Mayhaps there's some other media you know that also uses Sins in some way, which you subconsciously default to when thinking about them.

Whatever those associations are, I want you to throw them away.

That's right. Whatever is telling you that Lust = Horny, Wrath = Angry, Envy = Jealous, etc, etc? Throw all of those preconcieved notions away.

This is the biggest mistake I see people make when trying to analyse Identities and E.G.O based on their Sins - they assume that those Sins have the same meanings in the context of Limbus as the popular, more common interpretations of them.

And while, sure, some of them can definitely overlap with what one would expect them to be, I think relying on those during analysis instead of trying to understand what the game itself is trying to tell us by using those Sins as symbols is doing its storytelling a massive disservice.

Do I think my personal interpretations of the Sins are a 100% accurate reading? No, of course not. I can't see into the mind of Kim Ji-Hoon or whoever else at Project Moon might have been the mastermind behind deciding what Sins connect to what. I have no way of knowing what exactly they intended here.

However, I do wish to believe that my interpretations not only strive to meet the game's storytelling on its own terms, but also hopefully make further analysis based on those interpretations a bit easier to wrap one's head around.

...God I really need to stop writing massive preambles and just get to the fucking point.

So let's actually get to The Fucking Point. Sin Interpretations, one by one. Let's fucking do it.

Wrath

The flames of revolution burn bright in the face of cold winds.

Wrath is the Sin of self-righteousness and defiance. To act with Wrath is to decide that one deserves better, that things around then should bend to their will, and then take matters into their own hands. It's the Sin of deciding one has the right to change something simply because they don't like the current state of things.

There are many ways one can act because of Wrath. It can show through trying to rebel against authority, to subvert one's fate, to escape one's unfavorable circumstances, or to even reject one's own true nature. To act with Wrath is to stand up for oneself and tell reality "No, I refuse!" loud and clear.

A common misconception of Wrath is the idea that anger is an inherent part of it. While it's true that those feelings often coincide with defiance, they're not required for one's acts to be fueled by Wrath. Some can be Wrathful while being completely calm and collected, as their acts of defiance could be more on the quiet and simmering side.

Likewise, being quick to anger isn't always a sign of Wrath. It's very possible for someone to have a short temper, while also being fully accepting of the reality they live in (Ryoshu, I am looking directly at you), thus lacking Wrath.

Lust

One's base insticts go all the way back to that genetic code.

Lust is the Sin of self-indulgence. It's the Sin of letting one's own desires and whims dictate one's actions. It's also the Sin of seeking personal fulfillment above all else. To act with Lust is to give up one's self-control and let one's instincts and wants guide them.

Unlike what the name and symbol might initially imply, Lust can include many different types of desires, not just the carnal.

Likewise, acts of Lust can be just as varied as one's desires. Satisfying one's most basic of needs, searching for a form of spiritual enlightenment, or even just saying the first thing that comes to mind because one feels like it are just a few examples.

Sloth

A stone will not care for what happens to it, nor the world around it.

Sloth is the Sin of apathy and resignation. Unlike other Sins, which mostly show through one's direct actions, Sloth can also show through inaction.

To act with Sloth is to ignore reality, to let oneself go along with whatever is happening with barely any complaints. As such, Sloth is commonly associated with blind obedience or unwillingness to act out.

Due to its nature as a Sin of resignation, Sloth can be seen as the direct opposite of Wrath, the Sin of defiance. This creates a unique situation where the inclusion of one can drastically shift the context of the other if both are a part of the same Identity or E.G.O.

Gluttony

Plants never stop waging wars, always wanting just a little bit more.

Gluttony is the Sin of hunger, and it's unique from the other Sins in that it equally represents two different ideas of that hunger, which can appear together just as often as they can be completely seperated.

The first type of Gluttony is one of the starving hunger of survival. In this context, to act with Gluttony is to do anything for the sake of scraping by and living to see another day.

The second type of Gluttony is the hunger for more, or in other words: greed. In this context, to act with Gluttony is to do everything for the sake of this idea of "more". To gain more wealth, to find more recognition, to make more progress.

Both of these types of Gluttony are unified in one main point - they are, by definition, endless. The struggle for survival never ends, unless one fails to survive. Likewise, there is no finite "more" that greed is reaching towards, it's a neverending process of one-upmanship.

Gloom

When a wave of emotion rises, many will be swept away in its wake.

Gloom is the Sin of dwelling on feelings. To act with Gloom is to be guided by one's negative emotions, to buckle under stress and let it control one's mind and actions.

While sadness, grief, and depression are the states of mind most commonly associated with Gloom, and are often a part of it, they're not inherent to it. The only "requirement" here is the experience of severe emotional duress, and acting out in direct response to it.

In a way, Gloom is the Sin of losing control over oneself, not dissimilar to Lust. However, the main difference here is the cause of losing that control. Gloom is the loss of self-control due to being overwhelmed by negative experiences, while Lust is the loss of self-control due to seeking out positive experiences.

Pride

Be careful, for that double-edged sword may cut you as well.

Pride is the Sin of ignoring consequences. Acts of Pride are all actions taken because of the belief that their benefits outweigh the cost in some way. While the most common way this can present is through actions that benefit oneself at the cost of others, it's not the only way Pride can manifest.

One can be Prideful when believing the benefit to many outweighs the consequences. Likewise, refusing to acknowledge the harm one brings to themself because their actions benefit them in some other way also counts as Pride.

The idea that Pride is inherently tied to selfishness or self-confidence is another common misconception. In fact, Prideful acts can manifest just as often from a lack of self-confidence or a misguided selflessness. Rather, one could interpret Pride as a form of willful ignorance, in a way.

Envy

Thorns don't go out of their way to harm, they merely react to your touch.

Envy is the Sin of reaction and retribution. It's the idea of doing something because of what someone else has done. By definition, one cannot act with Envy without some form of provocation.

Like is the case with many other Sins, acts of Envy can take many forms, from taking revenge to following orders. The main connecting idea here is letting oneself be influenced by another person, whether it's being coerced, provoked, ordered, or otherwise manipulated.

Out of all of the Sin misconceptions, seeing Envy as inherently tied to jealousy might be the worst one of all. While acts done out of jealousy would likely count as acts of Envy, they are but a miniscule part of the sheer scope that Envy represents.

...

Alright, so you know what each of those Sins means. Now it's time to figure out how to Actually Apply Them.

Sin Affinities in the context of Identities

The main way Sins play a role in a given Sinner's Identity is through their Sin Affinities. Mechanically, these are the Sins attributed to each of their skills, signifying both their type of Sin damage and what Sin resource they generate upon being used.

However, this is Project Moon we're talking about, and these fuckers can't keep their gameplay mechanics seperate from the story to save their lives.

So, this begs the question: what can we learn about a Sinner's given Identity through their Sin Affinities?

Here is the method that I believe works best in my experience:

The Sin affinities of each of an Identity's skills represent a different layer of their psyche and motivations. I'm going to try to show what I mean by using base Identities of the four Sinners who already had their own Canto.

Skill 1's Sin Affinity is the surface level motivation of the Sinner's actions. This is the most obvious and "shallow" reading of them and their actions, and also likely the one the Sinners themselves are most aware of.

Gregor's Skill 1 is Gloom due to him being constatly haunted by his trauma, with much of his cynicism and dark-ish sense of humor being shaped by his war experiences. Rodya's Skill 1 is Gluttony due to her tendency to value material goods and love for food, which are signs of her greed and will to survive respectively. Sinclair's Skill 1 is Pride due to him taking many actions (such as sharing his father's secrets or giving Kromer his basement key) for their immediate benefits, without considering the consequences. Yi Sang's Skill 1 is Gloom due to him falling into deep depression and letting the trauma of the past shape his current actions.

Skill 2's Sin Affinity is a deeper motivation of the Sinner's actions. It's delving deeper into their psyche to see what guides them in less obvious ways. This Sin Affinity can also have noticeably closer ties to the Sinner's background in one way or another.

Gregor's Skill 2 is Gluttony due to him being driven by the will to survive, most notably expressed by him leaving the rest of the veterans to escape the war and try to live after it ended. Rodya's Skill 2 is Pride due to her fully believing in what she does working out in her favor, completely ignoring consequences on the way. Her killing the pawnbroker is the biggest example of an act of Pride, as she fully believed that it would help her neighbourhood despite the consequences that murder would bring. Sinclair's Skill 2 is Wrath due to him not accepting his circumstances. His want to defy his future prosthetics procedure is what eventually led him to agreeing with Kromer, and his will to defy her is what drove him through the events of his chapter. Yi Sang's Skill 2 is Envy due to his passive nature and how easily he lets other people dictate his actions. It's especially notable in how after the League fell apart, he would have been willing to do anything Gubo told him at that moment.

Skill 3's Sin Affinity is what I would like to call a Sinner's Core Sin. It's the true main reason behind their actions, and has a much closer and direct tie into their past than the other Sin Affinities. In a way, this is the deepest layer of their psyche.

Gregor's Skill 3 is Sloth as his resignation to his circumstances is what colors much of his past. He learned that resistance is futile early in life, and it shows. Though he didn't want to fight in the war, he felt like he had no choice but to. All of his life, he simply listened to orders without complaint, unable to see a way to change his situation. Rodya's Skill 3 is Wrath as her self-righteousness and defiance is what drove her actions at the deepest level. She first joined the Yurodiviye because she wanted to bring change the state of her neighbourhood, and likewise left them when she no longer agreed with how they did things. Her murder of the pawnbroker was her biggest act of defiance, of taking matters into her own hands and trying to bring change to her reality at all cost. Sinclair's Skill 3 is Envy as much of his actions were dictated by other people. Social pressure was what led to him first breaching the trust of his family, and Kromer's coercion and manipulation is what then led to his family's death. In a way, you could also interpret Sinclair's arc in Canto III as one big act of Envy, as he finally tries to take revenge on Kromer for what she has done. Yi Sang's Skill 3 is Sloth as his apathy to the reality around him is what led to him ignoring the warnings signs of the League falling apart, and the resignation that followed could have resulted in him helping Gubo and the New League out with their horrible plans had there not been an intervention. It's only by the end of Canto IV that he finally manages to break out of this state for long enough to stand up for himself and decide to keep on living.

So, that's the basics of Sin Affinities when it comes to Identities! Now, some of you might be asking, "Hey Lu, what about Sin resources needed for Passives?", and my answer to that is...

Honestly, I don't entirely know! I do think there probably is some reason beyond pure gameplay mechanics... Buuuuut I don't think their importance is as major as the main Sin Affinities of a given Identity, especially since there isn't a single Passive that is activated by a Sin that the given Identity doesn't have any Affinity to.

Sin Affinities in the context of E.G.Os

Alright, so, when it comes to E.G.O, we run into some additional complexities. Unlike Identities, which can usually have their Sins Analysed with minimal additional context, E.G.O Sin Analysis has to be done under a specific angle.

This is because while Identities represent the Sinner as a whole person, E.G.Os represent a specific singular part of that Sinner.

Base E.G.Os usually seem to tie back to a specific event or action or some other thing in that Sinner's past. Likewise, E.G.Os derived from Abnormalities represent the ways that Sinner connects to that Abnormality's own themes.

In a way, the game's worldbuilding even acknowledges the fact that a Sinner can only use the E.G.O of an Abnormality they relate to in some way, as Dante's Notes describe the process of the Sinners using E.G.O as trying to make the Abnormality's emotions and identity their own.

That little tangent aside, there are two main things to analyze sin-wise when it comes to E.G.O - the Sin Affinity, and the Sin Resources necessary to use that E.G.O.

An E.G.O Sin Affinity works similarly to an Identity's Sin Affinities - for a Base E.G.O, it's the main Sin that action manifests as. For an Abno-derived E.G.O, it's the Sin that contextulizes the way the Abno's themes connect to the Sinner in question.

The Sin Resources an E.G.O needs is where things get fun. These are what a Sinner needs to be able to use the E.G.O, both mechanically AND story-wise. The Sins here represent what a Sinner has as their motivation and drive to fully reflect what that E.G.O represents. For Base E.G.Os, it's why they took the actions they did. For Abno E.G.Os, it's why they connect to that Abno's themes and why they're able to relate to it.

Now... There is one more thing about E.G.Os that I don't really talk about.

Sin Resistances.

The reason why I don't talk about them... Is because I have No Fucking Clue how to interpret them. There has to be some importance to them (Hong Lu being weak to Wrath in all of his E.G.O thus far, I am looking at you), I just don't know what it is. In fact, I doubt we even have enough information available to us right now to be able to say for sure.

I don't know how to end these posts dear fucking lord-

So uh. Yeah. That's. Everything that I think is important to mention on the topic of Sin Analysis and how I do it. If I ever change my mind on something or have an epiphany regarding one of the things I currently have no idea about, I'll probably reblog this post with an addendum or something, but until then...

Uh. Yeah. Hope this helps the people who wanna get into analyzing Limbus stuff but don't know where to begin. Or just people who wanna understand the method to my madness a little bit better.

I'm gonna go to sleep now, cause it's 4 AM already and I spent like the whole fucking night writing this post.

[blessedarethebinarybreakers]

Hey, this is going to be long and wordy but I’m kinda desperate. Lately I’ve been having doubts about whether Jesus actually said what’s recorded in the gospels and whether those accounts are true, and the uncertainty there scares me, especially since I know the gospel writers almost certainly had their own agendas and that’s why accounts of the same event can sound different, why the birth narrative was skipped over or not, etc. On top of that I’ve seen posts from Jewish users outlining why Judaism typically doesn’t accept Jesus as Messiah/why you can’t be Jewish if you believe that, and their arguments seem pretty sound. So it all boils down to this big scary question of “What if this whole Jesus-as-Messiah thing was just the result of projection onto some random guy who seemed to be the real deal because the writers were so desperate to be rescued from the Roman occupation?” It sucks cuz I’ve been enjoying my renewed interest in church (for the most part) and while I’ve tried my best to learn not to take the Bible literally all the time (yay for growing up in an inerrantist doctrinal tradition 🙄), I still want to take it seriously and I still want to believe in Jesus as savior/Lord/etc. I don’t want to just be like, “Yeah I don’t buy the whole Messiah thing but I can still follow his example!” I want there to be meat behind why I follow, if that makes sense. So inasmuch as this could be my OCD being bored and trying to take hold of whatever it thinks would bug me the most (wouldn’t be the first time!), I would really appreciate any advice you have. I know there may not be any certainty or reassurance to be found here, but I still want to hear from someone who’s been there before so I can chart a path forward, and I think this is an important question to wrestle with. Plus I remember from one of your posts you said you have seminary notes on this exact topic so I’m curious lol.

"Gospel Truth": how do we know what Jesus really said and did?

Hey again! Sorry for the long delay on this one but I wanted to do some research before responding! You're right that these are important questions, and you're absolutely not the only one to feel doubt and anxiety over them. You're also right that I can't offer you certainty, but I do hope you'll find encouragement here, and places to go as you continue your journey.

This got super long (as always lol), so let's start with aTL;DR:

In this post, you'll find that there's a lot that we can surmise is very probable about Jesus' life story, but that ultimately we can't know much for certain — and that's okay. In Evolving in Monkey Town: How a Girl Who Knew All the Answers Learned to Ask the Questions), Rachel Held Evans gets to the heart of the matter:

"I don’t know which Bible stories ought to be treated as historically accurate, scientifically provable accounts of facts and which stories are meant to be metaphorical. I don’t know if it really matters so long as those stories transform my life."

This is a time where scholarship & faith go hand-in-hand: using the minds God gifted us, we study and learn what we can; and we cultivate faith in the things we can't — a faith that doesn't deny doubt, but makes room for it, and calls us into community so that we can wrestle out meaning together.

A couple other notes before we kick off:

Please know that you don't Have To Study All The Things if you decide it's healthier for you not to go chasing those rabbit holes. You don't need to be an expert in Biblical studies to be a "good Christian" or to take scripture seriously or to get to know God deeply.

I trust you know yourself and how your OCD works better than I could. So I'm going to share the information I have, and leave it to you to determine for yourself how much information you need in order to feel reassured, without giving your mind new problems to ruminate over.

So here's a link to a Google doc that has A Lot of information — like, too much lol. But save it for after you read this post; I'm putting the most relevant & important info here! If you finish this post and feel satisfied, you never even have to look in the doc.

However deep you go, if you find yourself getting overwhelmed, know that whatever you are feeling is valid and probably pretty common, and take a break! Do a calming meditation or an activity you enjoy to help regulate your mind and body. If possible, have someone you can unpack this stuff with — or have a notebook ready to journal in. <3

Okay, all that outta the way, let's dig in!

Who wrote the Gospels?

Tradition goes that the authors of the four canonical Gospels are three of Jesus' closest disciples — Matthew, Mark, and John — plus a disciple of Paul — Luke. But academics have determine that this tradition is very improbable; it's much more likely that none of the four authors knew Jesus personally, and that the earliest of them (Mark) wasn't recorded till the 60s — decades after Jesus lived and died!

When people learn this, it often leads to something of a crisis of faith. If these writers didn't even know Jesus firsthand, where the heck did they get their information?? And come to think of it, why do their accounts differ? Is some of it made up? Is all of it made up??

The anxiety and fear that wells up is normal, and it's healthy to acknowledge that you're feeling it. But once that first shock abates, it's possible to discover a sort of freedom in the knowledge that the Gospel writers (and all the authors of the biblical texts) were human, with human biases and specific goals fitting their unique context; and that they didn't have all the answers!

This realization can free us to approach scripture without certain expectations (that it's all inerrant and prescriptive, etc.), and allows us to bring our doubts to the table with us. If something in the text seems questionable — particularly if it seems to promote bigotry and injustice rather than God's love — we can consider whether something in its author's cultural context might be responsible for that part of scripture.

So taking some time to learn the unique contexts of each writer can be quite enriching to how we engage the Gospels. For a chart that sums up the Gospel writers' unique contexts, audiences, and priorities, see this post.

For even more, you'll want a book that digs into that stuff — I recommend Raymond Brown's An Introduction to the New Testament (the abridged version!!). As you learn about the Gospel writers, I hope several things become evident:

First, that they weren't just making things up whole cloth, or relying on a game of "he said she said" telephone for their information! Each one drew from different primary or secondary sources, eyewitness testimonies or written texts (many of which no longer exist, but scholars have pieced together evidence of, like the famous "Q source" that both Matthew and Luke drew from).

Yes, each author does have an agenda in writing about Jesus, and in how they tell his story. But that's not a nefarious thing; it's true of any text, whether biography, poetry, novel, song — you don't take the time to write something without a purpose in mind! With variation between their specific goals, overall each Gospel writer's agenda was to persuade their audience that Jesus is worth following, and/or to offer encouragement to those who already believed.

Another thing that modern readers sometimes interpret as intentionally deceptive is that, yeah, the Gospels contain things that aren't strictly factual, and that the writers knew weren't strictly factual. This is because ancient ideas about history & biography are very different from our own. When we read a biography, we expect it to be all facts, with citations proving those facts. But the ancients were much less concerned with making sure every detail was accurate; instead, they were focused on making their specific point about whatever thing or person they were writing/reading about. So yes, they might embellish one detail or leave out another in order to fortify their desired message. They cared more about the Truth as they interpreted it than a purely factual account.

On a similar note, each Gospel writer understands Jesus and the meaning behind his story a little differently — hence why they all tell things in slightly different orders, and characterize Jesus differently, etc. This is also understandable — we all interpret stories differently; we all come to different conclusions even when we have the same or similar information. See the section in the google doc titled "each Gospel's essence" to learn more about the different ways each writer characterizes Jesus, and why they may have interpreted him the way they did.

On that topic, let's get to your question about...

Jesus — Messiah, or no?

If you read the Gospel of Matthew and take it as pure fact, you'll determine that Jesus is the Messiah his people were waiting for — that he did indeed fulfill various scriptures. But if you read Mark, you won't find that argument at all! To the author of Mark, Jesus clearly did not match the stipulations of the awaited-for Messiah — and for Mark, that's kinda the point: that Jesus is something new and surprising, unlike anything human beings expected, upturning our ideas of power and salvation.

...So how did they come to these vastly different views??

Well, Matthew was a Jew writing to persuade his fellow Jews that the Jesus movement was worth joining; to do so, he felt he had to "prove" that it fit into Jewish tradition. So he prioritizes showing how Jesus is a righteous Jew who abides by Torah, and that he is indeed the Messiah they've been waiting for.

(It's also worth noting that when Matthew writes, over and over, about Jesus "fulfilling" various bits of Hebrew scripture, that verb "fulfilling" doesn't mean what it might sound like to us — that a given text was always and only about Jesus, with the prophet having Jesus in mind when they wrote it. Rather, to Matthew "fulfilling" the text meant "filling it up" with more meaning — adding to its meaning, not replacing the old meaning. More on that, with citations, in the Google doc.)

Meanwhile, Mark's author was a Jew writing mostly to gentile members of the early Jesus movement. He knew they wouldn't care whether or not Jesus fit the Jewish expectations for a Messiah! (In fact, giving Jesus a bit more of a "Greek" flair would appeal to them more.) So Mark doesn't perform the mental and rhetorical gymnastics that Matthew does to try to make Jesus fit the Messiah requirements.

So which Gospel got it right?

For many matters of scripture, I say "it's open to interpretation!" or "Maybe both are right in different ways, conveying different truths!" But for this particular case, it is very important as Christians to accept that Jesus absolutely does not fit the Jewish requirements for their Messiah. To argue otherwise is antisemitic — it's supersessionist, meaning it claims that Christianity supersedes or replaces Judaism.

We might understand, as the author of Mark did, Jesus to be a messiah — which just means "anointed one" in Hebrew (the Greek counterpart is "Christ") — without making antisemitic claims that Jews "failed to recognize their own Messiah." (In fact, there are multiple messiahs in scripture, e.g. in Isaiah 45, the foreign king Cyrus is referred to as God's messiah; though later scriptures like Daniel do start talking about a specific Messiah who will usher in redemption & a new age for the Jewish people.)

We can understand why some of the biblical authors, like Matthew, interpreted Jesus as this specific Messiah as a result of their own specific context, without agreeing with their view. See this post about “Anti-Jewish Content in the New Testament: Why it’s there and what we should do about it” for more on this important topic.  (You can also find even further resources on supersessionism in this post.)

...Okay, so we've looked at the authors of the Gospels a good bit. We've learned that their idea of a "biography" is very different from ours — that they didn't consider it bad to rearrange, leave out, or embellish accounts — but what does that leave us with when it comes to knowing who Jesus "really" was?

What can we know for sure about Jesus?

Let's look at the facts. The first one is: we don't have any. Not any 100% certain ones, anyway. The guy lived before audio recorders and cameras; we're relying on written and oral accounts, which can be fabricated.

However, there are points about the Jesus story that are regarded as almost certainly historical by the vast majority of historians today, so let's look at those first:

Jesus almost 100% certainly existed. There is enough historical evidence (both inside and outside the Bible) to confirm this — even non-Christian historians almost unanimously agree that there was a historical Jesus. (Phew, am I right?)

Almost all historians also agree that several parts of Jesus' story almost definitely happened: that he was baptized in the Jordan; that he traveled around teaching and offering miracles (whether or not they agree he actually had the power to perform real miracles, of course); and that he was arrested and crucified by the occupying Roman Empire.

Some of these almost-irrefutable claims lend plausibility to others: if he traveled around teaching, what was he teaching? Why not the sermons, the parables recorded in the Gospels? And if he was crucified — the death of a criminal, an insurrectionist — what did he do to get himself crucified? He must have done something to cause Rome to see him as a threat to their Empire — why not some of the sayings and actions that are recorded in the Gospels, like his claim to be "Son of God" (a title used for Caesar); his protest march into Jerusalem satirizing Caesar; and his disruption at the Temple?

The attempt to determine which parts of scripture are "authentic," i.e. things that really happened / things Jesus really said," is often called "The Quest for the Historical Jesus."

Over the decades, scholars interested in this pursuit have developed various "criteria of authenticity," which they use to try to determine how probable any given bit of the Gospels is. In the google doc, I summarize the history of this "quest" and describe some of the most popular criteria. But what's important to understand is that these criteria have major limitations — they're often applied somewhat arbitrarily, for one thing, and ultimately they can't "prove" for sure whether something in the text is definitely historical or definitely not. So honestly, this is not a field of study that I recommend everyone go immerse themselves in! When I do, I have fun for a while, then kinda end up more overwhelmed by how much we can't know.

Still, sometimes these criteria of authenticity do yield some interesting points. For instance, the "Criteria of Embarrassment" (yes, that's what it's called lol) asserts that anything in the text that would have been embarrassing to its author is more likely to be historical fact — because why would the author have made something up that puts them in an unflattering light, or might be used to argue against their message?

For example, a lot of Gospel stories depict Jesus' disciples being kinda clueless, or saying petty things, or failing miserably (e.g. the denial of Peter). Why would the Gospel authors have wanted to make these earliest believers, who are meant to be role models for their audience, look so bad? This criterion says that wouldn't — that they must include those stories because they really happened, rather than being things the author made up to make their point.

Or take the Criterion of Multiple Attestation, which determines how many sources include a certain saying or event. The more sources contain a specific story, the more plausibly "authentic" that story is, since it means that different unconnected communities knew that story. Logical enough.

So yes, there are ways to consider the historicity of the Gospels — but not definitively. So the question becomes: is the historical knowledge we do have enough for me to feel some level of, I don't know, peace? stability in my faith?

And, at the end of the day, how important to me is it that every single thing the Gospels say is completely factual?

Back to what matters: the Good News

Facts are great — God gifted us our minds, and various scripture stories show God encourages us to wrestle with the text! — but we are called to faith as well.

Furthermore, taking the Bible seriously means accepting it for what it is — a collection of ancient texts compiled by humans, even if guided by Divinity — rather than insisting it be what it is not. For the Gospels, that means accepting that they are not biography, but story, and prioritize Truth over fact.

My pastor friend Roger puts it like this:

“For me, it isn’t about deciding which things Jesus really said or didn’t say. That’s a road that goes nowhere. As a pastoral response, I take scripture at face value and work to empathize with the people in and behind the text. Through that empathy, I can find some meaning that connects with what we’re facing here and now.”

When we acknowledge that the Bible includes human interpretations of the Divine, and that we bring our own human interpretations to our reading of it, where does that leave us?

It leaves us in need of conversation, of an expansion of our perspectives by talking through scripture in community. We do that conversing with friends, or attending Bible studies at church, or reading a variety of theological texts — getting as many unique understandings of Jesus as we can, joining our ideas together to get an ever broader glimpse of the Divine.

There's a reason Jesus taught in parables: he didn't want there to be one definitive answer to matters of life and faith! He wanted to ignite conversation, to draw us into community — because it's in community that we are the image of God, the Body of Christ.

So keep on wrestling, wondering, talking it through (taking time to rest when needed — there's no rush!). We discover scripture's meaning for us in our own place and time through the wrestling, together.

[halemerry]

Alright, I've had a few people ask for this now so time to take a break from the big draft I’m writing to dig a little deeper on angel rankings in relation to Crowley.

Before we get into it I want to preface this by saying I am not a religious scholar. Like many of us I have a complicated relationship with religion and as a result this stuff was a long time special interest of mine but, as always, take it with a grain of salt.

To be frank, even if I was an expert, I think it’s also important to keep in mind that the Good Omens angel hierarchy has already taken some liberties on its own. It hasn’t been shy about reinterpreting things to suit its needs or about pulling from various sources to establish its own lore. It's definitely its own beast and there's no guarantee the universe operates the same rules that have become the most popular ones.

That all being said, let's get cracking.

So in canon we actually don't know that much about angelic rank. Before season two we knew there were Principalities and Archangels and that's about it. This season decides to give us a little more information. Muriel is a Scrivener (likely they'd fall under the general Angel category) and then we get a nod to Thrones and Dominions being a thing. We also learn there are orders/classes of various ranks.

With the exception of Scrivener which isn't a traditional rank at all as far as I can tell, these ideas all fit under the traditional Christian angel hierarchy.

The most influential version of this hierarchy comes mostly from Dionysius the Pseudo-Areopagite's De Coelesti Hierarchia (On Celestial Hierarchy). He divides angels into three Spheres, with three Orders within each Sphere. The Lowest Sphere contains the orders Angels, archangels (different from Good Omen's Archangels who are at the top of the food chain so to speak), and Principalities. The Middle Sphere contains the orders Powers, Virtues, and Dominions. And then the Highest Sphere contains Thrones, Cherubim, and Seraphim.

Now onto the angel that would become Crowley.

Thanks to us witnessing Crowley opening a document only accessible to Dominions and above, we can eliminate the lower half of these rankings.

This leaves us with Dominions, Thrones, Cherubim, Seraphim and the Good Omen’s version of Archangel.

Dominions are tied to things like regulation. Their job is to keep passions in check and deliver justice and judgment (to be frank these last two are in some capacity apply to most rankings of angel), They’re built to keep ranks beneath them organized and optimize their performances. They’re organizers. They’re functionally middle management and are sometimes known as Lordships. They’re also occasionally tied to the set of angels that destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah. 

The really only thing that even kind of suits him here in my opinion is the interacting with lower ranks bit but the vibe doesn't seem quite right with that. Crowley as we know him is not even really a leader even in his own schemes and has a tendency to rely on his considerable talent at improvisation and quite frequently on the cues Aziraphale tends to send him. (We get a stellar example of this dynamic actively in play in Episode 2 this Season). We also know now that the angel in question tended to work alone. He seemed baffled by the concept of Earth, as if it had been a long time since he’d had a check in with Head Office. 

So Thrones are what people tend to think of when you say the phrase Biblically Accurate Angel. They're the wheels with a bunch of eyeballs. They contemplate the power of God and have, you guessed it, ties to justice and judgment but in a more contemplative sort of way. They are associated with peace and submission, except for when they are sometimes also associated with the erelim - a ranking in the Jewish Hierarchy that tends to be more of a warrior class. They're maybe most famously associated with being a part of the chariot that moves God's throne around. They live where material form begins to take shape and are tasked with maintaining cosmic harmony.

Honestly I don't mind this for Crowley. That last bit especially sounds close to what we see him doing. And there's something very fun to me about a former Throne going off and getting himself a big gaudy throne. I’ll admit I have a hard time associating him with something so passive and again I feel like it doesn't quite fit how out of the loop he was about Earth, but this is probably the second favorite option of mine here.

If Thrones are the wheels of God’s Throne then the Cherubim are the ones making those wheels turn. They’re often represented as pushing Thrones about and attending God directly. Their job is to magnify God’s glory and serve as representatives of God’s power. They also, notably, were thought to be the superhumanly strong guards tasked with the protection of Eden.

Because of this we get a very old piece of theory: that Aziraphale was a Cherub who had been demoted. I’ve gone through phases with this theory but I definitely think it’s at a minimum fun to consider. And though I'm hesitant to take any Amazon promotional materials too seriously during the strike, there's a post here they've made recently that refers to Aziraphale as such.

Partially because this theory is so old and so rooted in the lexicon of my headspace for this media, I don't like this for the angel who would become Crowley particularly well. Superhuman strength feels weird in regards to him, as does situating him as a guard of Eden. And even if that line from season 2 where Crowley talks to Beelzebub about scaring that cherubs was talking about young angels and not literal cherubs, it seems like a weird phrasing for someone who was once the other kind of cherub to use. I like this better than Dominions but not nearly as much as Thrones.

Now Seraphim are a little unique. Their primary job tends to get framed as singing praise to God. They seat themselves around God's throne and sing holy, holy, holy at God. Several interpretations of them argue that they are different from angels entirely and only got grouped in with them in later texts like De Coelesti Hierarchia. They purify Isaiah in a vision he has and have strong associations with smoke and heat. They're tied to clarity and purifying via fire and occasionally are thought to help keep the world in order. Interestingly enough the word Seraph comes from saraph which means to burn and Seraphim can be translated as the fiery ones or those who kindle. Saraph is also used in certain contexts to describe a fiery flying serpent.

Now I’ll admit the Seraphim theory was always one of my favorites. If the show hadn’t recently been adding more ticks to the Archangel column I think I’d still probably be in this camp. There's the obvious bits that tie in here like the fire and snake imagery associated with both. But I can't help but to think of how often we get Crowley implying that just maybe God intended what they'd done to be the right thing. Or that scene where Crowley prays on the throne in season 1. He hangs off of it instead of sitting and begs God to not destroy them. It's an echo of a twist on what a Seraph would do in Heaven.

Now that just leaves us the Archangels. I won’t reiterate my other meta other than to link it here, but I do think the show at the very least wants us to consider this as a possibility.

In my opinion? Seraph and Archangel sit near the top of the metaphorical likelihood scale. I'd then follow this up with the Throne, then the Cherub, then the Dominion in order. But who knows! Half the fun of Good Omens is it doesn't always play by the traditional rules. And honestly there's something fun in never having an answer here. After all, no matter where he started, Crowley is Crowley now and that's the way it should be.

[the-burd-lord]

Finally am confident enough to post my redesign of Charlie. Buckle up cause it’s a lot!

Kept her simple since I think her original design is kinda alright, but went with the doll aesthetic more.

Made her design simple enough for it to stand out in most any environment within Hell. Should probably have made a colored version for her, but I'm keeping the white and pink from her original design, but making her outfit yellow to compliment the reds of Hell and the blues of Heaven.

Here’s the newest design although I'm still fiddling around with different variations for the marks on her face, shown later in this post. Might lean towards stop motion look with how the mouths of the characters are always a separate segment from the face.

Eventually she goes from bellhop to more of a concierge roll as she gains more confidence in running the hotel, and eventually becomes the defacto ruler of Purgatory.

More on that later.

Also lil Lucifer resign too. Might make a whole post about him, but the basics are that I decided to go more “biblically accurate” angel for him.

He made Charlie's body, with Lilith drawing up the design for what she would look like. Overtime Charlie got to choose what she wanted to look like. She has accrued many bodies over her thousands of years of living.

Their relationship is close as although they don't see each other in person as often, Charlie always makes time to have at least one phone call a week with her dad. Especially with his worsening depression.

He doesn't fully believe in the hotel idea, but he’s willing to support his daughter anyway he can. Although he is hesitant when she requests to have an audience with Heaven as he knows how fickle they can be.

Especially when her first meeting with an angel is spent talking about rock bands.

I also changed up what Charlie is as not only is she a doll, but she is also the manifestation of “free will.” Spawned from Lilith and Lucifer’s union being an action that goes against "god's plan."

Although she barely remembers it, her actions caused Adam and Eve to eat the apple. She partially made the hotel out of guilt for condemning humanity, feeling as though she has to make it up to the sinners she condemned.

This makes her super hesitant to push the patrons to get help as although she knows that it'll help them in the long run it must fully be by their own free will to want to change. This hesitance also leads her to not fully interfere in their afterlives either, even when she knows a push is all they'll need.

She is able to literally be anyone or anything, and she is scared of this fact. Kinda getting decision paralysis. Also being that she is a being made out of pure energy this essentially means she's a bomb.

This is the result of what happens to her once her form is broken.

These are the old designs, went with a more streamlined look later.

Heavily inspired by the final form of the Princess from Slay the Princess. A game I highly recommend!

When in her "chimera form" she accidentally kills Adam, leading her to take him on as a guest at her hotel. It also leads her to convince Heaven and Hell to use Mount Purgatorio for her new liminal hotel. Kinda using Adam as a bargaining chip to show heaven that if angels can fall, then that doesn't mean sinners can't climb up the mountain to Heaven.

Overtime, with more horror influences I kept adding into her character and design I accidentally just made her into a creepy doll with some analog influences.

(It's almost like my subconscious is trying to tell me something 🤔)

Vaggie and her scary gf.

Decided to go for a more psychological route for Charlie’s abilities and personality. On the surface appearing normal, but still standing out in most environments because of her simplicity. That there's just something about her that doesn't quite fit anywhere.

Her character finally clicked for me after watching Paranoia Agent. She's not really based off any characters from the show, but some of the themes and imagery are baked into her character.

Along with the banger opening.

Eventually she builds her hotel in purgatory, and essentially becomes its ruler. Much to the chagrin of Heaven, who still only sees her as a demon. Even though she was technically born in the heavens.

Even though Charlie uses Adam as a bargaining chip they don't really care that he fell. But they don't want to be proven wrong either, so they reluctantly agree to the idea.

Also lil bonus of Charlie and Vaggie in nightwear. Gotta make another post for Vaggie, but I’m still working some things out with her story and character.

I apologize if so much of this post made no sense. I didn't realize how much I had written for Charlie. Although makes sense as she is supposed to be the main character.

I am happy to answer questions if y'all want more clarification.

[sophieinwonderland]

r/FakeDisorderCringe doesn't know what biblical canon is, atheists are offended by saying God is plural, and other people casually throwing out some blasphemies and ableism!

👎

For uncreative title.

Atheists Pretending To Be Deeply Offended...

So, let me guess, you're not actually Christian are you?

Those guys sure aren't.

So weird how people pretend to be offended over a religion they aren't even a part of.

(Let's be real though, that's most of the tulpa discourse.)

Oh... you considered converting.

That clearly gives you a say in this conversation. /s

Meanwhile, my host actually lived the religion. He was Christian through his teenage years, and as a child helped his mom teach Sunday School and went to sleep every night on a Noah's Ark pillow.

Sorry, I distracted from your point. We're thieves stealing from a religion. 🙄

Okay, let's talk "canon!"

I just... I LOVE this whole conversation! 🤣

THIS is actual cringe.

Does anyone see the issue here?

I'll let u/AdSuccessful3533 spell it out. Possibly the only person with sense in the thread.

It's not just Catholic Canon either, but Biblical Canon! Like, there's a whole Wikipedia article on it!

The sheer self-righteous ignorance of r/Fakerdisordercringe (and r/systemscringe) never ceases to amaze me.

All of these people so bent out of shape over the use of "canon" to describe biblical text as if that's not been in use for hundreds of years!

"Something a middle schooler would say."

The Heresies!

That's correct. This is NOT the modalism heresy.

Modalism suggests God is a single unified being who reveals himself in different forms. God being plural would mean that God is three beings in one. This is completely in-line with the views of Trinitarianism.

An example of the modalism heresy would be more like this...

Comparing God to Optimus Prime, arguing that they're just different forms like Optimus Prime in a truck form vs him in a robot form, is modalism.

But if modalism isn't enough, we've got some tritheism too!

Besides the tritheism... it's really hard to take people who are calling tulpas appropriative seriously when they don't even know basic facts about the most popular religion in the world.

Also, the part about System not being a term for a person with DID is technically correct. System is, rather, the term used for the total collection of all the alters. But it is very much a term used by psychologists and it's accurate to refer to the Trinity as a system in this way.

Also, if the Tritheism bothers you, don't worry! We're going to go right back to modalism.

The H2O metaphor is controversial for the same reason as comparing God to Optimus Prime. It suggests God is simply changing form to become these different things.

Miscellaneous

Can you show me that rabbit hole?

I'm the one who Tweeted that, and have NEVER been on the OSDD sub.

Who do you think I am?

No... it definitely doesn't sound right. Religion shouldn't just be a thing for neurotypicals.

If one believes in God, then surely God made all people, including those of us who have mental illnesses. Why should Christianity and biblical references be kept away from people with mental illness other than ableism?

I mean, if by in peace, you mean without endogenic systems, then no. You can't.

We're here and we aren't going away. Ever.

And we exist in all spaces, including in your churches and your religious communities. And Christian systems shouldn't be expected to hide who they are because our existence bothers bigots like you.

We're going to share this world, and we're going to share spaces. And that includes churches and religious spaces too. Deal with it. 🤷‍♀️

Acknowledgements:

I would like to thank everyone at r/fakedisordercringe for giving me the free material. For a subreddit that's designed to laugh at people for supposed "cringe," you all sure are a goldmine for it! 😜

[sheisaquarius-blog]

Hi! Idk if this is related to your Love Like Magic AU but if you could assign each character a familiar, what animal or magical creature would you assign for each one of them?

oh man, i LOVE this question! so, in the 'love like magic' au, most of the familiars are not-too-out-of-the-ordinary pets/animals, but i'm going to take a few liberties with this ask for fun. obviously spork, freya and zelda, and bones and birdie all make little cameos in that fic, and i also gave ianthony bowie, but i want to go a little more magical with this question! hope you don't mind. everyone's familiars look something like this to me:

ian: a canine of some kind, for sure. maybe a wolf or coyote? fiercely loyal and a little rough (ruff) around the edges.

anthony: a crow. yes, part of that is based off the wwad video, but i've always loved the idea of his magic being dark but feather-soft. also wise, piercing eyes.

damien: gotta give damien the other spooky flying creature--he gets a bat. maybe a dagger-toothed long-nosed fruit bat? just love the difference between the 'scary' perception of bats and the reality. plus, i tied damien's magic so closely with the moon and night that it had to be nocturnal.

shayne: an owl, perhaps? wise and a little fearsome. intense. broad and also loud. maybe a little nocturnal for his sun-related magic, so maybe second best would be a golden eagle. but i do love an owl for him.

courtney: courtney gives such strong horse energy. i'm partial to an akhal-teke for this particular take because of the mark i gave her. these horses have an iridescent sort of sheen to them, so i like that for her.

angela: hyena. scrappy and resourceful. an incredible laugh. dog version of a cat.

arasha: a fox. red, clever, lanky, cunning, and elegant. cat version of a dog.

trevor: some kind of fresh water turtle. the boy is 80% neck, 20% vibes. enjoys his own pace. (also he works with chanse and i love the idea of chanse's favorite animal being trevor's familiar)

chanse: spotted leopard. gorgeous, elegant, biblically accurate eyes. something in the big cat family at the very least, preferably something lithe. gotta jump that car.

spencer: a frog. i don't know if i have a good justification for this one, it's just vibes. cute and i want to hold him in my hand.

tommy: i have to give credit to @lilac-hecox for this one because i was struggling, but maybe a cuttlefish? aquatics are hard, but a) comes with its own mustache, and b) i like it as a pairing to spencer's frog. they have an incredible ability to blend and camouflage, which i love for tommy, too.

amanda: like her co-owner she also gives me horse energy. maybe a friesian? i like the idea of her and courtney both having horses. friesians are maybe the most gorgeous, and also they're good at many things, including drafting. and goodness knows amanda carried 'love like magic' on her back despite not getting the justice she deserved from me.

[intergalactic-garbage]

prev post got 2 whole notes so im doing it (thank u @odysseus-crewmate-number38. kissing u on the mouth) i tried to make them all as biblically accurate as possible, while also taking into account how i simply understand them all better than rick (imjokingimjokingimjoking). picrew is all the one belonging to @potato-lord-but-not, i love you, am begging you to make a fat option so i can make frank zhang and have a complete set <3 mwah

i'm pretty sure that upon unpacking how much of him is Being a Good Soldier, jason would find that being a man is part of that. i don't really see xem using they/them for some reason, but i do think xe would look it all up really well and find neos and think they're neat. also xe wears headphones bc xe would not be able to get shit done without them. xe, as well as leo, does have overgrown hair in this, because nobody has time to cut it on the argo ii. (xe learnt the finger heart from kids at chb and won't stop doing it)

leo has his signature hoodie in which noone ever draws him ever, and he's obviously aroace, because i know the truth. he never dated calypso, and instead accepted his aroaceness <3 (has his little elf ears.) the scarf is really just practical. also his hair is big and voluminous, i saw it myself. richard doesn't get it

reyna is. in her braid, with a cool little imperial gold piercing, and done with everyone's bullshit. give her a break. also i think she's canonically those two flags? iirc. the eyes in the background i thought looked cool, and also she would definitely be on everyone's radar all the time as praetor. she would canonically use the celestial bronze gun ithink

piper also unpacked all of her trauma, and realized that maybe the reason she didn't like feeling "like other girls" is because, she is, not, in fact, a girl. uses she/they, still uses the sapphic label, because that's what they're most comfortable with. has their little flannel shirt, and a cap, because damn, hoo is during the summer, they'd all need a cap/hat to not die of the heat

hazel would, i think, genuinely believe that she's homophobic, and be really sad about that, until she'd realize that she really would quite like to kiss piper, and that the only reason she thought she hated gay people was because the only overtly gay person she'd seen up until then was octavian. (she would like to use the old pride flag ithink) anyway she's doing the t-rex hand thing because as we all know, she is autistic and loves horses. hence the hat. also i think she would wear glasses, i mean, she doesn't need brilliant eyesight underground, and who would've thought to test her in her first life

hazel is canonically the one to curse the most out of the 7, and she's just over all really expressive! don't make her the cute one! or well, do, but don't erase that she would also yell at someone if they were being a prick.

will is so talkative and oversharing and im sad that rick didn't realize that. he's a certified yapper. his mouth is open bc he's talking right now. unfortunately, potatolord doesn't have the option to give your characters baby fat, so these two do look a bit aged up from their 14? (they are so young)

hello pjo characters who got erased from hoo <3

rachel has behind her the bigender and the aspec flag. i really think she would like microlabels, and would definitely love to try out crazy neos and stuff. her art friends make that basically commonplace for her. he does have will wood t-shirt bc of course. and the necklaces with the eyes. haha oracle joke .also they do have gapped teeth thank u for askng

i wanted to give grover crutches, but i think ambulatory wheelchair user!grover is very good as well. picrew didn't have rasta cap option, sorry my mans. he has anxiety and constantly looks ill. i thought it would be funny if he was pansexual. haha. get it. and also the gnc flag over there, bc i use genderqueer in the classic way, "person who expresses their gender in any way, that wouldn't be considered within the 'norm'", which i think grover fits, and also it's like a cultural thing for satyrs

hi this one is pretty far away from canon but bear with me. i do realistically think, that thalia would've picked up smoking from beryl, just from a young age. i just find it likely. no she doesn't have a leather jacket, that's on me. i gave her as much of alt jewelry as i could. still not enough piercings though. and yeah no she hasn't got the blue hair streak, sorry. idek if that's canon. i wanted to give her more scars (picrew ran out, sorry), so she gets the eye one, and then also an eyepatch, because that's what being a hunter of artemis does to a girl. yes i think she would be gnc (pretty much can't be alt without that), AND aroace.

drew, they did you so dirty im so sorry baby. . . .. she is a lesbian. also had no idea how to deal with the pressure of leading a cabin after learning her adored sister was a traitor and then died. she eventually unpacked it slowly, and became better. she does still bitch though <3

hello my favourite character from chb who got nerfed after the last olympian and never brought back

clarisse is a lesbian, of course she is. and she was in love with silena, yeah. she is definitely thinner than she should be (that girl is ripped), and doesn't have nearly as many scars as she should. also she is, at all times, covered in blood, at least a bit. her own or someone else's depends. also she's from arizona? probably carries a gun, not even a celestial bronze one.

nico is as pale as death, has the stereotypical early naughties long emo fringe, box dyed black. yes he has the genderqueer flag, because that's the gender expression of alt people. queer. out of the norm. and an mcr t-shirt bc of course he would are you kidding me. also braces bc he is! young

thank u for coming to my rrtalk

[radiosummons]

Even though Wolfwood is very much not an actual Catholic priest, I do find it compelling that Vash--someone without any religious beliefs and minimal exposure to "Christianity," courtesy of Rem (OG Trigun)--is the most faithful of the two.

And by "faithful," I don't mean so much in a religious or Christian sort of sense. More that Vash holds onto his faith that there is good in people and that everyone is worth saving. That the taking of a life is something so unspeakable to him that it will literally cause him immense mental, emotional and physical pain when he is forced to do so. His unshakeable belief, i.e. his faith that every life is precious and no one is beyond redepmtion irregardless of how morally corrupt an individual may be is so foundational to who he is as a character.

While I've only really experienced this through anime and various other Japanese based video games, I do enjoy seeing depictions of Christian iconography and concepts form non-Western creators. I love the art and memes of Vash being a "biblically accurate angel" (even though Plants aren't angels, I am so fucking happy that people are picking up on the unintentional symbolism) and I do enjoy the amount of, again, art and memes of Wolfwood being a cringefail Catholic priest.

But I also love the non-Western depiction of Christianity in Trigun, or rather the apocalyptic remnants of it. Despite the fact I have lost my ability to have faith in a higher being (and my own personal beef/distate with the Catholic Church/conservative Christianity as a whole), I find the worldbuilding of Trigun fascinating in this aspect as it provides its audience an alternative form of a global religion that's very relevant to our daily lives.

In Trigun, Christianity is very much a shadow of its former self, a leftover remnant of humanity--more specifically, a remnant of an old forgotten belief system--that has been essentialy been lost. Save for a few remaining Bibles and some memories of particular Catholic iconography/symbolism.

But overall, that's all that remains. Just familiar symbols and various rituals that some people are able to recall from their former lives.

So the decision to pair Vash up with someone like Wolfwood, someone who has lost his faith in humanity as a whole but has resolved himself to protect those that he can (or rather, deems worthy of saving) ... I find that relationship absolutely fascinating. Because I'd argue that in most Western depictions of a holy man (typically Christian and typically Catholic, let's be real), it's usually the holy man that is doing the saving. Or at the very least, is usually helping guide the other characters on their own paths towards redemption.

Despite the fact Wolfwood isn't an actual priest but instead an assassin trained by a mercenary group using the guise of an old religion (again, that most of humanity has clearly forgotten about), I find it to be a wonderful storywriting choice to make Vash the "holy man."

They're both incredibly tragic characters that burden themselves with crippling destinies. Destinies that ultimately lead to their own destruction, but hopefully all for the greater good. Vash holds faith that maybe, just maybe, he can make Nai realize the error of his ways and turn over a new leaf.

Understandably, Wolfwood finds this way of thinking horribly childish and naive. He even takes it as a personal insult when Vash continues to insist that killing people, even if it's for the sake of protecting someone else, is wrong.

But Vash isn't wrong for wanting to see the good in people. To borrow a quote from Everything Everywhere All At Once: "You tell me it's a cruel world, and we're all running around in circles. I know that. I've been on this earth just as many days as you. When I choose to see the good side of things, I'm not being naive. It is strategic and necessary. It's how I've learned to survive through everything. I know you see yourself as a fighter. Well, I see myself as one too. This is how I fight."

Granted, Vash doesn't express his beliefs as eloquently as this. But that doesn't really matter, though. Because Wolfwood doesn't need Vash to make express himself this way for Wolfwood to finally understand him. Vash, by the simple of virtue of being himself, is a good person who chooses to see the good in others.

And Wolfwood ... Wolfwood is someone who chooses to see the bad.

Wolfwood cannot quite bring himself to view the world the way Vash does. And Vash will never be able to share Wolfwood's opinions regarding who is worthy of living, either. But they respect each other and understand where the other person is coming from.

It does take Wolfwood a lot longer to understand Vash as a person, let alone his faith in humanity. But when he does, it's so satisfying to watch Vash become someone important to him. Someone that he wants to protects. Because if Vash won't defend himself, Wolfwood resolves to be the one to protect Vash.

Even if Vash doesn't really want that.

It's so fucking amazing to see these two clash over their ideals, whether it's in the form of playful teasing or straight up beating the shit out of each other. But they stay together and hold each other in such high regard despite their conflicting beliefs.

To me, one of the most beautiful aspescts of Trigun is that Wolfwood--a man of faith but only in name--gets to have such a close connection with Vash--a man of faith through and through--and that because of their relationship, they both inspire a existential AND spiritual crisis within one another.

Because in a world that makes no sense, they both find faith in each other. And if that isn't the most beautiful shit you've ever seen, then I don't know what is.

[untowardsthoughts]

TY @willystamplerstits AND @martinifruit FINALLY I CAN GET TO UR QUESTIONS ABOUT LUIS AND SANTI though ngl i also forgot about them for a minute - got caught up in school n shit

most of this is me fleshing them out for the first time in a while, so bear with me

but to answer ur questions!!:

☆ at first, sparrow's a bit suspicious of luis - having only heard of him from lark, who framed him as a 'stranger who can do magic and took him into his house whilst unconscious'. not a great look. but the more lark's 'investigation' goes on, the more sparrow realizes that 1. lark isnt getting harmed in any way 2. lark is leaving the house more 3. he seems calmer these days so pretty quickly sparrow's a fan of luis, and is the one to break it to lark that he might have a crush. but all in all he's happy for lark

☆ i dont know if luis would fully register sparrow using healing magic in front of him at first and instead think 'no he just knows proper medicine and technique'. he’d ask sparrow where he learned proper medical skill and sparrow’d just look at him wide-eyed

☆ i believe that once sparrow learns that luis Does in fact have magic, a bit of that skepticism returns and he starts looking more into luis [not to the length that lark did,] but i think he's the one to find that luis and santi are part angel/celestial. which is very funny to me, as someone who enjoys nark as exes, cause that means that lark has to come to terms that he just went from a half demon boyfriend to a half angel. and sometimes thats just how life goes

☆ additionally, i think they figure out that luis isnt Aware that he's performing magic, or that neither of the sanchez boys know that theyre anything other than human. they have no idea how to break it to them, but this is where i have a Shred of an idea that could come into play.

☆ long story short, its kinda like a more deadly version of the steven universe episode Nightmare Hospital, where instead of a human patient, the person being treated is a ‘monster’ - in this case, theyre doodlerized patients. luis gets partially infected, and in the middle of lark rescuing him, santi gets infected too. d.a.d.d.i.e.s. manages to get them out of the hospital, now overrun with doodlerized patients and staff, and before they can fully doodlerize, their corruption takes form of them becoming humanoid-ic biblically accurate angels, with the wings, the several several eyes, and all glowy-like, managing to burn the infection out of them. they pass out before they can see themselves, and are taken into d.a.d.d.i.e.s. hq by lark, who’s now dealing with the fact that he almost got his boyfriend and his boyfriend’s kid doodlerized. eventually they turn back to normal and the truth is broken to them, but thats a whole other thing that i havent thought out yet

JOHNNY QUESTIONS <3

☆ okay as much as i love johnny, i don't know if he comes into play much with luis and santi. kind of in the way where nicholas and marco don't interact, or veronica and rebecca and cassandra don't interact with the other parents; i love them w all my heart but the dndads s2 spouses arent much aside from their relation to the kids, so idk if johnny’d talk much to these two.

☆ if they did though, i think they’d have a pretty mutually respectful relationship. john never grows out of the role of being the “responsible older sibling”, so he recognizes the level-headedness and responsibility that luis maintains, that of which none of the kiddads [minus maybe terry] carry. 

☆ actually, scratch that. thats their relationship if they ever talked long enough to get past the initial rancid vibes they get from each other [angel and demon vibes read terribly to each other]

☆ same reason in which santi and taylor are iffy around each other. and pulling it further, same reason why santiago is initially thrown off by lark and normal, having a bit of the doodler in the oak bloodline. he comes to love the two, obv, but he’s suspicious of lark for a lot longer than luis. i think either santi is more sensitive to vibes and fiendish/otherworldly aura than luis is, or luis simply takes this intuition and puts it aside, choosing to verify for himself first rather than acting on gut feeling.

☆ all that being said, i don't know if santi would get along with taylor in the end. i mean - and i say this with all the love in my heart - its taylor. pretty quickly he chalks up normal’s weird vibes to his stank but taylor’s also just Like That, yknow?

if anyone got more questions about my darling creations or want me to go in depth bout the Nightmare Hospital thingy feel free to ask <3

[llondonfog]

This is such a weird, RANDOM, and long ask (more like a rant tbh), but I wanted to say something because I can't get it out of my head.

BIBLICALLY ACCURATE ANGEL SILVER.

Before you boo me, I COULDN'T HELP IT. I just, can't get it out of my brain.

Like, Lilia just wakes up one day, sees this mini horror in Silver's bedroom, and freaks out before realizing that IS Silver.

Everything he knew about Silver's parents is a lie.

Then, Silver transforms back, but part way, so he has these cute little wings with soft, white feathers, and Lilia just MELTS.

He's freaked out, amazed, confused, but he wants to comfort Silver, who is both confused and possibly in pain from the transformation. Growing wings seems painful.

Like, he had 6 wings (3 sets of 2) in the horror-fest form that is a Biblically Accurate Angel (I both encourage and warn you against searching that up lol), and now he has 2-4 wings (possibly with the feathers attached to his head as Seraphim Angels have. I think). Compared to his default human body, that's a big difference, right?

Anyway, I wanted to share this with someone. You don't have to do anything with this, or even respond, but THE IMAGE. I love Silver and he's already angelic, so might as well add a Horrifying version of that, AND pretty wings in the more "normal" version. I just can't write or draw my vision LMAO so I have to cope with sharing it instead.

BIBLICALLY ACCURATE ANGEL SILVER IM IN LOVE????

BABY SILVER WITH BABY ANGEL WINGS!!! oh they are so soft and fluffy, like dreams and clouds and silk all at once!! the imagery of him draping them over lilia while they nap or simply shielding him from the sun with one as he gets older....my heart!!!

And then considering the imagery of extremely pissed off biblically accurate silver protecting his loved ones against any who would seek to bring them harm!!! Absolutely terrifying to behold!! I don't know why I'm partial to the specific one of the large eye surrounded by countless wings but that's what I think of!! All those wings to sweep up and protect his loved ones, and more to deal out powerful blows of damage, with one dizzying aurora-hued eye that can seem like the most gentle gaze that allows you to simply bask in unconditional acceptance or the most horrific choking sense of inevitable judgement for what you've done against the word of good.

FANTASTIC CONCEPT I WISH I COULD DRAW IT

on the other hand, the thought of lilia being in such awe and wonder of his child, this pure and innocent being who has been granted to him, who loves him unconditionally and uses his powers to make lilia's life kinder and easier as silver tries to take away the aches and pains and nightmares... I could see it verging into a cult of two territory; lilia being very protective and possessive of his son, the thought of throwing himself into service to protect the boy?angel?savior? at any and all costs, to be his knight in shining armor to keep him safe and unsullied from the world. silver becoming like this odd forest deity creature who pours his magic so willingly into the woods and gives freely to those that need his kindness, and his father is only too happy to kneel to him, renewed in his purpose to serve his benevolent, angelic son...