#inverse compassions

[astrumocs]

🗣 oda and seifer >:3

Main Characters: Odarem Mortis (His POV) & Seifer Sanaca Side Characters/Mentioned Characters: Vrikoh Havlok (Odarem's official fleet general) & Seifer's Fleet Captain (Armand Buleis) Setting: Seifers' Newest Fleet Ship, some 2 or so sweeps back CW(s): Mentions of Blood and allusions to a murder

----- Google Docs Link -----

You step off of the small transport vessel that had ferried you to your new assignment, the scent of blood hitting your nose immediately, causing you to raise your face mask into place. Well, you’re actually catching two distinct blood trails coming from different directions, but one is a lot fresher… You can’t help but find this curious, as the murder you’re meant to be investigating happened two days ago. Despite your curiosities, your outward demeanor does nothing to show that as you approach to meet with the captain of the ship.

“Doctor Mortis… good to see you’ve finally arrived. I’m sure I don’t need to waste my time briefing you on the situation at hand, do I?” The seadweller raises a harsh brow, tapping his cane to the floor in obvious impatience.

“Not at all, Sir. I read the report on the way, with permission from General Havlok to take as long as required.”

He studies you, perhaps bothered that he can’t see most of your face to scrutinize your expression for not being respectful enough, given the eyepatch and mask you wear. “I give you free rein of the main floor to investigate and find the culprit as you must. If, for whatever reason, you require access to another floor, my Lieutenant will see to you and handle it from there. I expect this dealt with in the next two hours or less, cusp-blood.”

“Just for you, Captain, I’ll have it done in one.” He may not know you’ve got a smarmy little smirk on your face, or that you would’ve winked there as you give your ‘to attention’ salute, but you know, and that’s what really matters here.

After getting that asshole off your back, you don’t waste a second before you’re turning toward the fresh scent of blood, slipping your mask down as your nose twitches and you head towards it. You’re careful to listen for any footsteps or other noises following after you, but hear nothing besides your own boots hitting the floor.

This isn’t a scent you’ve encountered in some time, you think, puzzling over what it could be, when the scent of something distinctly unfamiliar clouds up the mix in your head. This is peculiar, it wouldn’t match up with the killer's profile at all, as far as you know. This drives your curiosity ever higher, and you walk quickly and with purpose… until you come to the end of a series of shoebox-style rooms for the military grunts and reach a… repurposed supply room?

You lean close to the door, listening in, but only hear a grunt and the creaking of a bed. Perhaps an isolated soldier with some kind of odd illness? Why the blood? Why no medical staff nearby? You can’t help it, you know you’d be able to track the murderer down in 20 minutes tops, so you have some time to spare.

With that, you raise a gloved hand to knock gently on the door and speak only loud enough to hopefully be heard by whoever’s inside. “Hey in there, I’m here under your captain's orders. My name is Odarem Mortis, may I come in?”

There’s a long pause where you wonder if they even heard you, until a rasped voice answers you, hesitant confusion lacing their tone. “What…? You... no, leave me alone...”

You’re really not one to push, but your curiosity and concern for this individual push you to ask once more. “Are you sure..? I won’t pry, but I’d just like to check and see if you’re alright, if I can. I won’t cause you trouble, swear on my last good eye.” Shifting your weight slightly from foot to foot, you await their answer through another pause.

“There is nothing to check…”

As the voice trails off, you’re readying yourself to respect the refusal when the voice interrupts your line of thought.

“But you may come in if you really wish to…”

You open the door slowly, your other hand up in the air passively as the tired-sounding stranger comes into view. The shade of violet he possesses immediately ticks your box for a likely mutant, and your gaze gets a little more sympathetic than it already was. You can’t help but note the dried blood on his clothing, that you must’ve caught the scent of to lead you here. He looks at you warily for a moment before hanging his head, as though hoping to avoid any judgement and conversation.

Still, you can’t help but want to converse with him, shutting the door and moving away from it so he doesn’t feel trapped by any chance. “Are you hurt?” you ask softly, trying to be forthright and genuine, to hopefully ease that heavy tension you can tell sits in his whole body like a rock.

His fins flick, but you can’t tell if that’s good or bad yet. “I have no injuries…” The violet refuses to look at you as he answers.

Cautiously, you approach to sit on the far end of his bed and he tenses, though he relaxes a bit more when you don’t make any further movements.

“Can I ask about the source of the blood?”

Immediately his fins flatten and his head turns a little further away from you, indicating that this was the wrong question, so you quickly supply more to follow it up, “You don’t have to tell me anything, your privacy is your own… it would be nice to know your name though, if you’re feeling adventurous?” Your tone is playful at the tail end; non-threatening.

Something about your response eases a lot of the tension he was holding, and he finally turns to look at you, even if his body language remains closed and curled in on itself.

“Seifer…”

The seadweller, Seifer as he’s told you now, studies you- though unlike his captain, his gaze is like that of a prey animal rather than a bored predator. You feel a bit of pain in your chest at whatever put this man in such a state, though instead of showing that, you smile at him brightly. “Nice to meet you, Seifer. I’m Odarem, though you probably heard that through the door already.”

Seifer gives an affirmative sound, eyeing you with a bit of curious interest of his own now as you continue.

“I’m here on work, so I can’t stay long, but… did you want some company? I’ve got half an hour to do something other than my job, give or take, and you seem like you’d be good to chat with. Handsome too, if it’s not overly forward of me to say.” The smile on your face remains relaxed and easy, keeping the pressure as low as possible.

At the compliment to his obviously disheveled appearance, he blushes, fins twitching again. You note that the twitch is probably a positive sign at this point.

“I… y-you can stay, if you would really like, but… I cannot promise I’m good company.”

“I think you’ve done a fine job of it so far, Seif, I’m already having a nice time. And well, you seem like you could use some good company, yeah?”

There’s some hard-to-read look in his ringed eyes like he’s almost in disbelief at how kind you’ve been. He leans slightly closer in your direction, though you suspect it to be subconsciously. You can’t help but wonder if the fact he let you nickname him so quickly and is no longer moving away from you means anything… is he that starved for kindness here? You suppose that you shouldn’t be surprised, given the state you found him in, and the fact he doesn’t even have a proper room- along with the sour attitude his commanding captain wears.

Cautiously you reach a hand forward, stopping when you see him stiffen a bit, though not fully retracting your reach. “Apologies, I should ask… You seem tense, is all. It isn’t my place to ask you why-- though given this place I don’t blame you.”

He seems put at ease by your casual insult to the ship, though, and he doesn’t lean away from you, so you press a little more. “I can loosen up those knots in your shoulders if you’d like. Might make the place a little more bearable? And don’t worry, I’ve got a degree in easing tension.” You joke, keeping it light.

Seifer fiddles with his necklace as he seems to consider your offer, another slight blush dusting the tips of his ears behind his fins, though you’re not sure exactly which part of your words prompted this. 

“Go… go ahead,” Seifer mumbles, looking away from you, but not moving as you shift closer now, slightly behind and beside him on the bed and lifting your hands to hover over his shoulders.

“I’m going to place my hands on you now, just a heads up, Seif.”

He makes a low, appreciative grunt of acknowledgment, and you gently place your hands down on his shoulders, easing into pressing your thumbs into the muscle to work them loose. A little bit of time passes as you feel him melt beneath your hands, giving sounds of approval when you break the tension spots up.

You lean forward to ask him how he’s feeling, right as he seems to turn his head to say something to you, and you nearly bump foreheads as both he and you still. Seifer looks a bit wide-eyed from what you think must be out of surprise until his face darkens with blush once more.

Speaking without thinking too much you ask, “Can I kiss you? I’d be gentle.”

Violet fins flutter even harder than they had before, though this time they remain more upright. Your question seems to do nothing to assuage his blush, though he appears too stunned to answer, so you speak again. “You can say no, of course. If that went too far, I can back off--”

“N... no, I--” He seems surprised by his own sudden protest, eyes glancing downward as he forces out the rest “Please do…”

You smile softly, brushing his lip with your thumb to catch his attention. “Of course.” And when he looks up, you kiss him gently.

[fluffylord]

TWELFTH DOCTOR I THE ZYGON INVERSION

[sillysymbol]

sybol what’s up with prince and xio. Can I hear thoughts or be directed to other posts if you’ve answered questions about them before.

SICKOS AHAHHAA YES. Not just boss and employee not consensual workplace relationship but secret third evil thing. they've got a WEIRD THING GOING ONNNN AND I LOVE IT.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! here is a post where i talk about some character dynamics and also some other fun stuff

[iruludavare]

{ ooc. Anyway since scvi has confirmed for us that Hisui variants of pokemon do still exist and we already Know eterna forest has some weird stuff going on AND serena's ancestor's whole deal + story with her hisuian zoroark

Serena likely has Sarana's in her possession post-x, after going back home, venturing back into Eterna Forest, and finding her. Like a rite of passage sort of deal. And tbh, I'd like to think said zoroark + any other hisuian zorua in there keep the people from Floaroma Town and Eterna City safe in the forest. In this essay I will- }

[nanachee]

I’m putting this in its own post because the tags of the last one weren’t the appropriate place, and I know the spirit of what I’m saying would get misunderstood and misconstrued

But it’s my earnest belief that ALL women need to genuinely cultivate masculine attributes

And when I say ‘masculine attributes,’ I mean a sense of ‘masculine’ that is detached from sex; I do NOT mean ‘masculine’ as in ‘related to men,’ ‘man-like,’ ‘male-like,’ or ‘aesthetically man-like’

I mean masculine as: the collection of abstract and fundamentally, by-nature unsexed attributes associated with proactivity, self-sufficiency, assertiveness. boldness, self-actualization, pursuit; masculinity as the burgeoning side of humanity that exerts its own will and which exists in every human, irrespective of sex

Masculinity—again, in this sexless sense—puts you in a position of pure independence because you equip yourself with the capacity to seek and obtain by your own will; the thoughts, feelings, and opinions of others are not necessarily dismissed, but they hold no power OVER you in the sense that they no longer exert direct sway over your self-image, your self-worth, your self-conceptualization, or even your course of action

In effect: ‘your opinions have been noted, and summarily disregarded,’ which is sometimes a good thing.

Being in this position protects you more so from being in a situation where you are vulnerable, dependent, or beholden to someone else's will, either because you are too concerned about their opinions, or because you doubt too much the validity of your own, or because you place greater value on the thoughts of others, or simply do not trust yourself to be capable of both making and recovering from mistakes

And, if the use of ‘masculine’ for these attributes is bothersome or disagreeable (as it was for me, until I mentally eliminated its fundamental tie to men*), you can easily just replace it with the phrase self-actualization, or whatever other synonym you prefer — I just think that doing so tends to feed into the same false dichotomy and fuels the presumption that MEN are masculine, WOMEN are feminine, and these are fundamental truths that can ONLY be subverted, rather than erroneous insistences that limit the true reality (and power) of the human individual, which possesses by right the intrinsic qualities of both.

(*according to society, as masculinity is not emblemic of men and men are not sole-possessors of masculinity, they are simply unhealthy extremes of it, just as women are unhealthy extremes of femininity)

[futurefind]

//thinking about how (receiving) anger is so familiar for Sa (derogatory) and how thus it's the worst way to express worry / try to scruff her abt her recklessness :') bc it's water off a duck's back and she'll just sass right back

Being kind/fussy about it, however... :') it's like a steel chair to the face (pos) because she's so unfamiliar with it— and, depending on the intensity and explicitness of the worry (ie not liking to see her hurt, or worse/better, that she doesn't deserve to be hurt), is liable to make her crumble like wet tissue or even cry :')

[hamyheikki]

Links between Finnish/Proto-Uralic folklore consepts and Remedyverse

Disclaimer: this is not an all-compassing information piece about Uralic/Finnish/Nordic beliefs, religions and folklore. This is purely a look into the general aspects of these beliefs and how they might relate to Remedyverse, since we know that Mister Järvi has taken some inspiration from these sources. The foreing terms used here are in Finnish, though the concepts themselves are Proto-Uralic in nature, since that's the group Finnish old belief system lands in.

THE NAIL

In Control's first DLC, "Foundation", you can find a structure referred to as "The Nail", a tall pillar-y object made of dark rocky material. During the campaing, by completing tasks as Jesse, you are able to build it back to it's former glory.

Finnish/Proto-Uralic belief has a concept known as "Taivaannaula", which roughly translates to "Sky's Nail". Taivaannaula is a star on top of a structure called "Maailmanpylväs", as in "World's Pillar" (can also be depicted as a tree or a mountain), and it has said to be the point around which the whole dome of sky turns.

The actual real life star referred here is the North Star, Polaris.

So it would stand to reason that in Remedyverse, the Nail is a link between the Foundation, our world, and the Astral Plane.

THE WORLDVIEW OF THREE REALMS

The World's Pillar runs through all 3 realms of Proto-Uralic worldview; Ylinen, Keskinen and Alinen.

Ylinen is a place above the human realm and sky where the "creator god", a deus otiosus, supposedly resides.

(Wiki: "In the history of religion and philosophy, deus otiosus is the belief in a creator God who has entirely withdrawn from governing the universe after creating it or is no longer involved in its daily operation.")

Keskinen is the realm of mortals and gods/spirits who are responsible for running the daily matters of the world, usually linked to nature or people. For example Tapio - god of forest, Ahti - god of lakes and seas, and tonttu - the guardian of the house.

Alinen is the realm of the dead, also known as "Manala/Tuonela" in Finnish. The land of the dead is said to be an island in an icy sea situated below the ground and governed by an old woman.

In Remedyverse, a neat theory would be that the Astral Plane could be seen as the game's version of Ylinen. A realm where the Former and The Board seem to reside, and a plane which has little to do with the everyday life of natural world and humans. It would also tie neatly into the fact that it seems like the Board's Pyramid fits perfectly into the empty slot on top of the Nail.

The middle realm, where the mortals live, I would say is rather self-explanatory. We already have the god of water Ahti mopping about the place (and you know, Tapio, but that one is much more muddy since we know next to nothing of the guy, and Tapio is a perfectly legitimate Finnish name regardless of one's godly status), and I feel many of the superatural elements of both Oldest House and Bright Falls could be linked to these forces and gods operating in the realm.

And lastly, I think it's pretty safe to assume that The Dark Place is at least somewhat inspired by Alinen. The Diver's Isle in the middle of a lake that's actually an ocean, an old hag lurking about and the concept of a soul becoming trapped under the Cauldron Lake.

And in addition to all of this, these is a river called "Maailmanjoki" which also flows through all these layers. It waters the roots of the Tree in Ylinen, gathers into a pond at the base of it, flows through the realm of humans as a river, travels into the world of the dead Alinen, and because everything is inversed in the Alinen (inversion, another concept Remedy seemingly likes to include in their lore), the river flows into the opposite direction, and ends up going back around to water the Tree once more.

The eternal cycle of the world.

[sscarletvenus]

yes suguru's plans to exterminate a vast majority of humanity is undeniably evil, but to say that he is murderous from the very start, cruel for the sake of being so, or lacks compassion or any emotional nuance is a gross disservice to his character's writing.

suguru is a case study of a romantic idealist and self-sacrificial saviour whose absurdly rigid, quixotic ideals are shattered brutally by reality intervening. the intense hatred he has for humanity is born out of, is an inverse of, the intense love he once possessesed for it. this is also why even though satoru is portrayed as brash and selfish and arrogant in the hidden inventory arc, it is suguru that turns "villainous."

suguru places his faith in the goodness of humanity, believes the duty of shamans is to protect the weak, their existence solely hinged upon saving the lives of non-sorcerers, and for that he is disappointed so tremendously, betrayed to an extent that makes it impossible for him to recover his ideals and past self.

ultimately there are also more than one reasons why satoru doesn't become "evil" : 1) "protecting humanity" was never his cause to begin with. he hardly cared about preserving human life, as is evident in his intentions to kill the cultists who cheered on riko's death, and 2) he had someone shielding his inner self : suguru. for it is suguru that tells him the duty of shamans is to protect non-shamans and the weak, suguru who asks him to sympathise with riko, suguru who persuades him to not kill meaninglessly.

satoru is indeed attached to riko, as well. he is the one who decides not to hand riko over to tengen if she wishes to return home, and tries to enliven her last days as a lucid person. it would thus not surpass one’s expectations if satoru turned to villainy post riko's demise, since he never even liked non-shamans to begin with. and yet, he doesn't. suguru protects his heart, which is a part of why he is able to steadily process his grief and anguish over riko's death.

suguru doesn't have anyone to do that for him, he is strong in his own right but not the "strongest", nobody notices how deep of an abyss his soul has sunken in, and he succumbs to the lethal loneliness, falters in this marathon of sorcery.

suguru is brimming with love and compassion: it is what drives his heroism in youth and villainy as a cult leader. he is able to protect gojo's heart but not his own. he fluctuates between two polar extremes : utter distaste of humanity Vs. a duty to protect it despite its horrors. three things serve as final nails to the metaphorical coffin : yuki's words, haibara's death, miminana's abuse. he describes imbibing curses for curse manipulation is "like eating a rag used to clean vomit". how macabre, how grotesque, how enlightening - who is he doing all this for? the humans who killed riko? it was these humans haibara died serving, these same humans violently mistreated miminana.

toji and sonoda encapsulate evil very blatantly, and aren't enough to shake suguru's belief in humanity. but the turning point is the non-shaman cultists rejoicing : suguru is thus forced to confront the banality of evil.

and suguru responds by rejecting what he once loved, embraces the darkness plaguing him. believes the only way to eradicate curses is to uproot their source : humanity. humans, for as long as they will live, will give rise to curses born out of their negative emotions. there is no one to tell him any better, or protect his self-identity. he loses himself to his own sense of empathy, his own ideals.

he isn't indifferent at all, cannot pick and choose whom he loves and doesn't. his love and hatred is collective, in both he gives his all. even amidst his hatred, he doesn't lose his love.

who does he choose to target first, once amassing enough money, power, and reputation? sonoda, the man who ordered riko's assassination. someone who lies in wait to enact vengeance does it out of love. if he was nothing more than a corrupt tyrant, he wouldn't remember the circumstances of riko's demise or care enough about them. suguru's rise as a hero and his subsequent fall as a villain has always been about love. and it seems, to me, up until his death, he prioritizes satoru over himself. doesn't see satoru as a weapon at all, or he would have directly asked satoru to join his cause. instead he poses to satoru a question, presents him with a choice - which in turn makes satoru shaken enough to question his identity, his place in the system, becoming a teacher and dedicating his all to a fitting reformist centrism from an isolated and dare i say, individualistic person such as himself, who stands on the pinnacle of power. but he wouldn't have come to such a conclusion without suguru's experiences shaping his worldview (he himself apologizes to riko during his fight with toji because rather than feeling depressed over her death, he feels the pure pleasure of the world in that moment. killing toji endows him with a sense of duty towards megumi, and riko's death but obviously impacts him, but the change from full apathy, to neutral indifference except in the case of his students, was losing suguru.)

as evil as suguru becomes, he is not a hypocrite. that he kills his own parents is to show the seriousness and conviction he has in his ideals. his code of operation is consistent, even when it turns from pro-human to pro-shaman.

reminds you of what mahito tells yuuji: does yuuji ever consider how many curses he kills? so why should mahito account for how many humans he kills? suguru geto presents us with a possible answer : someone has to care about how many shamans are killed.

you can condemn him for his use of collective punishment, but suguru is a villain!

you can criticize his killing of innocents, but jjk conveys the carefully crafted narrative of a villain who once held staunch traditional and moral ideals.

suguru is evil for proposing collective punishment, but it is incredibly consistent with how emotional he is. he is empathetic because he cares about a girl like riko, doomed by the actions of the rest of the world, forgotten in her misery. he cares and it drives him to the deepest pits of despair, where life loses all color and meaning, despite only knowing her for so long and haibara as well, he enshrines haibara in his memory, when no one other than nanami does. hardly anyone remembers riko's existence, haibara's laughing face, but he does! and for that he spends each moment sinking in the quagmire of his grief and torment. his empathy is a sword of damocles hanging over his neck! to say that he is cruel and unfeeling is to contradict the very agony that drives his (wrongful?) actions. and he is indeed wrong for externalizing this indelible pain, wanting to inflict it upon innocents. but suguru is a villain! has been set up as such!

mahito raises this question to junpei,"is the opposite of love really indifference?" to satoru, it is. but to suguru, it is hatred which is the opposite of love.

[frownyalfred]

Where do you think Alfred sees more of Thomas and Martha 's mannerisms in: Bruce or Batman?

Equal and surprising amount of them in both, actually. Shades of Martha's care and compassion in how Batman comforts a child. Reminders of Thomas' wry humor in Bruce, during late nights in the Cave. Batman fighting with all of Thomas' bulk and none of his aversions to hurting others. Bruce, charming those around him with Martha's wit and grace. But also the inverse -- where Martha could be cruel and pointed, where Thomas could be distant and zoned out. Good, bad, in the middle -- there's no clear division between Bruce and Batman, in that respect. They inherit from both of them.

[genshin-impact-updates]

New Story Unlocked - Archon Quest Interlude Chapter: Act IV

Greatness, created in the moment where miracles met life.

Neither mundane knowledge nor earthly compassion could hope to reach that light.

The arrogant slither forth from the darkness, hypocrisy draped in virtue and reason.

Their gnashing maws devour all — brothers and mothers alike.

After reaching the corresponding Adventure Rank and completing the prerequisite quests, the Archon Quest Interlude Chapter: Act IV "Paralogism" will appear in the Quest Menu.

〓Quest Start Time〓

Archon Quest Interlude Chapter: Act IV "Paralogism" will be permanently available after the Version 5.6 update

〓Archon Quest Interlude Chapter: Act IV "Paralogism" Unlock Criteria〓

• Reach Adventure Rank 40 or above

• Complete Archon Quest Interlude Chapter: Act III "Inversion of Genesis"

• Complete Story Quest "Princeps Cretaceus Chapter: Act I - Traveler Observation Report"

• The "Focused Experience Mode" function is available for this quest.

After the Version 5.6 update and before the Version 6.0 update, once you reach Adventure Rank 28 and complete Archon Quest Chapter I: Act III "A New Star Approaches," you can use the "Quick Start" function to unlock Archon Quest Interlude Chapter: Act IV "Paralogism."

[aureentuluva70]

How heartbreakingly jarring is it that in a shrine dedicated to Nienna, the Vala of Sorrow, Mercy and Compassion, we see a numenorean spitefully destroy a relic of her, mock those who are there to honor "those for whom she weeps", and then murder another numenorean for the first time in the show, and one of the Faithful at that. And not just any faithful, but Valandil-whose very name means friend of the valar-who chose to show the kingsman mercy, which Kemen instantly proves himself undeserving of by literally and metaphorically stabbing Valandil in the back.

Kemen then washes his sword, now stained with the blood of one of the Faithful, in the waters of the shrine of Nienna the Compassionate as if bathing the blade in her tears, defiling them. I've heard that as a kind of ritual, swords were once dipped into water in order to receive the blessing of a deity, so with that point of view it feels very much like a deliberate inversion of a divine ritual, a mockery of that which is sacred, the complete desecration of a holy space.

And then Kemen has the gall to lie straight through his teeth, saying that Elendil-the one who convinced Valandil to grant Kemen mercy in the first place-"was the one who started the uprising."

If Kemen is supposed to be a kind of representation of the Kingsman alike to his father, he has sent one message and one message only: that mercy for the Faithful is dead in Numenor.

How incredibly tragic and yet how fitting that in the defiling of a temple dedicated to the Vala of Mercy we see the fruit of violence and the beginning of a kingdom's end sprout. With Nienna's love and compassion gone, it's only inevitable that Morgoth's shadow of terror and of hate is soon to come, and Numenor's doom with it.

[warpfactorseven]

Sometimes I think about how in the last few episodes of DS9, Julian chooses to abandon his moral compass to kidnap and then forcefully enter the mind of a dying man in order to find the cure for Odo, and all the while Garak becomes a revolutionary figure and helps wage a righteous war for Cardassian independence. They almost become inversions of eachother, with Garak stepping out of the shadows to pursue justice and Julian wielding deception and violence with surgical precision. Do you think Garak ever found out what happened between Julian and Sloan? Did Julian begin to see Garak in a different light after he helped liberate Cardassia? Do you think they kissed full on the mouth after their last scene together?

[literaryvein-reblogs]

Hey, I wanted to ask, do you have any tips for numbers and their meanings, For example: what does the number 5 represent?

Writing Notes: Symbolism of Numbers

In symbolism, numbers are not merely the expressions of quantities, but idea-forces, each with a particular character of its own.

The actual digits are, as it were, only the outer garments.

All numbers are derived from the number one (which is equivalent to the mystic, nonmanifest point of no magnitude).

The farther a number is from unity, the more deeply it is involved in matter, in the involutive process, in the“world.”

The first 10 numbers in the Greek system (or twelve in the oriental tradition) pertain to the spirit: they are entities, archetypes and symbols.

The rest are the product of combinations of these basic numbers.

Below are the most generally accepted symbolic meanings of each number.

ZERO

Non-being, mysteriously connected with unity as its opposite and its reflection; it is symbolic of the latent and potential and is the “Orphic Egg.”

From the viewpoint of man in existence, it symbolizes death as the state in which the life-forces are transformed.

Because of its circular form, it signifies eternity.

ONE

Symbolic of being and of the revelation to men of the spiritual essence.

The active principle which, broken into fragments, gives rise to multiplicity, and is to be equated with the mystic Centre, the Irradiating Point and the Supreme Power.

Stands for spiritual unity—the common basis among all beings.

Guénon draws a distinction between unity and one, after the Islamic mystic thinkers: unity differs from one in that it is absolute and complete in itself, admitting neither two nor dualism.

Hence, unity is the symbol of divinity.

Is also equated with light.

TWO

Stands for echo, reflection, conflict and counterpoise or contraposition; or the momentary stillness of forces in equilibrium; it also corresponds to the passage of time—the line which goes from behind forward; it is expressed geometrically by two points, two lines or an angle.

It is also symbolic of the first nucleus of matter, of nature in opposition to the creator, of the moon as opposed to the sun.

In all esoteric thought, two is regarded as ominous: it connotes shadow and the bisexuality of all things, or dualism (represented by the basic myth of the Gemini) in the sense of the connecting-link between the immortal and the mortal, or of the unvarying and the varying.

Within the mystic symbolism of landscape in megalithic culture, two is associated with the mandorla-shaped mountain, the focal point of symbolic Inversion, forming the crucible of life and comprising the two opposite poles of good and evil, life and death.

THREE

Symbolizes spiritual synthesis, and is the formula for the creation of each of the worlds.

Represents the solution of the conflict posed by dualism.

Forms a half-circle comprising: birth, zenith and descent.

Geometrically it is expressed by three points and by the triangle.

The harmonic product of the action of unity upon duality.

The number concerned with basic principles, and expresses sufficiency, or the growth of unity within itself.

Associated with the concepts of heaven and the Trinity.

FOUR

Symbolic of the earth, of terrestrial space, of the human situation, of the external, natural limits of the “minimum” awareness of totality, and, finally, of rational organization.

Equated with the square and the cube, and the cross representing the four seasons and the points of the compass.

A great many material and spiritual forms are modelled after the quaternary.

The number associated with tangible achievement and with the Elements.

In mystic thought, it represents the tetramorphs.

FIVE

Symbolic of Man, health and love, and of the quintessence acting upon matter.

Comprises the four limbs of the body plus the head which controls them, and likewise the four fingers plus the thumb and the four cardinal points together with the centre.

The hieros gamos is signified by the number five, since it represents the union of the principle of heaven (three) with that of the Magna Mater (two).

Geometrically, it is the pentagram, or the five-pointed star.

Corresponds to pentagonal symmetry, a common characteristic of organic nature, to the golden section (as noted by the Pythagoreans), and to the five senses representing the five “forms” of matter.

SIX

Symbolic of ambivalence and equilibrium, six comprises the union of the two triangles (of fire and water) and hence signifies the human soul.

The Greeks regarded it as a symbol of the hermaphrodite.

It corresponds to the six Directions of Space (two for each dimension), and to the cessation of movement (since the Creation took six days).

Hence it is associated with trial and effort.

Shown to be related to virginity, and to the scales.

SEVEN

Symbolic of perfect order, a complete period or cycle.

Comprises the union of the ternary and the quaternary, and hence it is endowed with exceptional value.

Corresponds to the seven Directions of Space (that is, the six existential dimensions plus the centre), to the seven-pointed star, to the reconciliation of the square with the triangle by superimposing the latter upon the former (as the sky over the earth) or by inscribing it within.

It is the number forming the basic series of musical notes, of colours and of the planetary spheres, as well as of the gods corresponding to them; and also of the capital sins and their opposing virtues.

Corresponds to the three-dimensional cross.

The symbol of pain.

EIGHT

The octonary, related to two squares or the octagon, is the intermediate form between the square (or the terrestrial order) and the circle (the eternal order) and is, in consequence, a symbol of regeneration.

By virtue of its shape, the numeral is associated with the two interlacing serpents of the caduceus, signifying the balancing out of opposing forces or the equivalence of the spiritual power to the natural.

It also symbolizes—again because of its shape—the eternally spiralling movement of the heavens (shown also by the double sigmoid line—the sign of the infinite).

Because of its implications of regeneration, eight was in the Middle Ages an emblem of the waters of baptism.

Corresponds in mediaeval mystic cosmogony to the fixed stars of the firmament, denoting that the planetary influences have been overcome.

NINE

The triangle of the ternary, and the triplication of the triple.

It is therefore a complete image of the three worlds.

The end-limit of the numerical series before its return to unity.

For the Hebrews, it was the symbol of truth, being characterized by the fact that when multiplied it reproduces itself (in mystic addition).

In medicinal rites, it is the symbolic number par excellence, for it represents triple synthesis, that is, the disposition on each plane of the corporal, the intellectual and the spiritual.

TEN

Symbolic, in decimal systems, of the return to unity.

In the Tetractys (whose triangle of points—four, three, two, one—adds up to ten) it is related to four.

Symbolic also of spiritual achievement, as well as of unity in its function as an even (or ambivalent) number or as the beginning of a new, multiple series.

According to some theories, ten symbolizes the totality of the universe—both metaphysical and material—since it raises all things to unity.

From ancient oriental thought through the Pythagorean school and right up to St. Jerome, it was known as the number of perfection.

ELEVEN

Symbolic of transition, excess and peril and of conflict and martyrdom.

According to Schneider, there is an infernal character about it: since it is in excess of the number of perfection—ten—it therefore stands for incontinence; but at the same time it corresponds, like two, to the mandorla-shaped mountain, to the focal point of symbolic Inversion and antithesis, because it is made up of one plus one (comparable in a way with two).

TWELVE

Symbolic of cosmic order and salvation.

It corresponds to the number of the signs of the Zodiac, and is the basis of all dodecanary groups.

Linked to it are the notions of space and time, and the wheel or circle.

THIRTEEN

Symbolic of death and birth, of beginning afresh.

Hence it has unfavourable implications.

FOURTEEN

Stands for fusion and organization.

And for justice and temperance.

FIFTEEN

Markedly erotic.

Associated with the devil.

OTHER NUMBERS

Tarot

Each of the numbers from sixteen to twenty-two is related to the corresponding card of the Tarot pack; and sometimes the meaning is derived from the fusion of the symbols of the units composing it.

There are two ways in which this fusion may occur: either by mystic addition (for example, 374 = 3 + 7 + 4 = 14 = 1 + 4 = 5) or by succession, in which case the right-hand digit expresses the outcome of a situation denoted by the left-hand number (so 21 expresses the reduction of a conflict—two—to its solution—unity).

These numbers also possess certain meanings drawn from traditional sources and remote from their intrinsic symbolism:

24, for example, is the sacred number in Sankhya philosophy, and

50 is very common in Greek mythology—there were fifty Danaides, fifty Argonauts, fifty sons of Priam and of Aegyptus, for example as a symbol, we would suggest, of that powerful quality of the erotic and human which is so typical of Hellenic myths.

Repetition

The repetition of a given number stresses its quantitative power but detracts from its spiritual dignity.

So, for example, 666 was the number of the Beast because 6 was regarded as inferior to seven.

Contained within a multiple

When several kinds of symbolic meaning are contained within a multiple number, the symbolism of that number is accordingly enriched and strengthened.

Thus, 144 was considered very favourable because its sum was 9 (1 + 4 + 4) and because it comprises multiples of 10 and 4 plus the quaternary itself.

Lastly: Dante, in the Divine Comedy, has frequent recourse to the symbolism of numbers.

Sources: 1 2 3

More: On Symbolism

Hope this helps, would love to read your writing if it does!

[the-most-humble-blog]

<div style="white-space:pre-wrap"> <meta species-class="terminally contradictory"> <script> ARCHIVE_TAG="HOMO_HYPOCRITE_SAPIEN::PERFORMANCE_ETHICS_COLLAPSE::TRUTHBOMB_DISSEMINATION" EFFECT="moral inversion exposure, woke fatigue triggering, cognitive dissonance purge" TRIGGER_WARNING="ethical hypocrisy, vegan performatism, capital punishment contradiction, aggressive cadence" </script>

🎙️ “The Homo Hypocrite Sapien”

Why the f*ck are you even trying to give me advice?

You’re one bad day away from flinging your own feces like your chimp cousins. There, I said it.

You think you're the apex species? You're the apex contradiction.

You call yourself evolved. But the moment your coffee order’s wrong, you’re one delay away from biting an innocent.

You think your ethics are stable? You swap moralities like outfits. You treat outrage like perfume. You spray it everywhere. And wonder why everyone around you is gagging.

🦧 Congratulations, Homo Hypocrite Sapien. You made it to the top of the food chain by devouring your own logic. You moralize while monetizing. You preach while bleeding convenience.

You fake tears for animals and fund drones for weddings.

🥗 Let’s start with your vegan morality cosplay.

You plate compassion like it makes you holy. But you vote for systems that harvest infants like crops.

You light candles for cows but applaud scalpels in utero.

You protest meat while supporting legislation that butchers babies.

But hey, it’s “your choice.” Just not for the calf. Or the kid. Or the truth.

You cry for chickens but cheer when a man is executed.

You wail for pigs but demand prison rape jokes for predators.

You kneel for animals. You spit on humans.

You rescue cats. You block ambulances.

You say peace. You fund war.

And while you do it?

You lecture. You preach. You perform. You record yourself. Because virtue isn’t real unless someone likes it.

🧴 Let’s talk products.

You boycott fur coats but wear leather purses.

You protest palm oil then slap cruelty-free stickers on rare earth-mineral phones dug out by children in Africa.

You love nature. You flatten forests for wind farms.

You worship green. You vote for bombs.

Your empathy is audition tape-level bullsh*t.

You’re not a good person. You’re a filtered performance of what one might look like.

💍 You want the biggest diamond. Not because you understand love. Because you understand envy. You measure affection in carats. You measure status in sacrifice.

Human sacrifice.

You didn’t forget where diamonds come from. You ignored it. For the gram. For the glow.

Your engagement ring is someone else's child soldier flashback. Your white wedding is built on blood.

But go ahead.

Tell me about justice. Tell me about compassion. Tell me about humanity. I’ll wait.

🧼 You washed your hands. In water stolen from the earth. With soap tested on rats. In a sink manufactured by slave labor. In a bathroom built on bulldozed land.

And when the lights flicker? You panic. Because your “ethics” require WiFi.

🕊️ You don’t fight for peace. You perform stability. You simulate humanity. Because you can’t survive the mirror.

You don’t know what a woman is. You don’t know what a man is. You think gender is fluid, until the custody battle. Then suddenly biology matters.

You want unisex bathrooms but gender-specific shelters.

You want freedom but panic when someone disagrees.

You want conversation but label it hate if it makes you feel anything.

Your morality isn’t principle. It’s preference. And preference dies the moment you’re inconvenienced.

🔥 You love animals?

Name the five insecticides in your pantry. Name the number of mice killed by grain harvesting.

You kill millions of tiny animals just to eat your fing quinoa in peace.***

You want “ethical sourcing?” Try not eating.

🐶 You euthanized your dog. Then printed her on a pillow. You killed your best friend because she was sad. You called it mercy. You posted a tribute.

That wasn’t love. That was emotional tax evasion.

You love animals. You love the ones that don’t inconvenience you. The clean ones. The Instagrammable ones. Not the roaches you stomp. Not the raccoons you cage. Not the rats you poison.

You love life. As long as it’s pretty.

You march for women. But laugh when men kill themselves. You chant about rights. Then abuse your own sons.

You say “believe all women.” Until she accuses your favorite singer. Then it’s “nuance.”

You burn down cities to protest injustice. Then steal sneakers.

You cry for George Floyd. Then share clips of gang fights with popcorn emojis.

You pretend to care. But care is exhausting.

So you scroll past genocide. You mute the inconvenient.

You turn tragedy into moodboards.

🪞 You don’t want truth. You want catharsis.

You want virtue without consequence.

You want moral superiority without moral consistency.

You despise billionaires. But worship Oprah. You hate the rich. But dream of private jets.

You bash corporations. While drinking Starbucks. Every day.

You cancel people for saying slurs in 2006. While streaming Kanye.

You boycott Chick-fil-A. But own six Nest cameras and a Ring doorbell.

You brag about empathy. Then giggle at memes about people dying.

You blast “mental health awareness.” Then ignore the friend who’s withdrawing.

You talk about inclusion. Then gatekeep movements.

You are terminally performative.

A cosplay of compassion. A mannequin of morality. A flesh puppet of fashionable ethics.

🌱 You don’t care about plants. You care about aesthetics.

You don’t care about minorities. You care about points.

You don’t want equity. You want power redistribution— to YOU.

You don’t want peace. You want quiet compliance.

You don’t want freedom. You want permission to feel superior.

And you expect me to take your advice?

You? The walking contradiction? The moral flipbook? The face-swap of sincerity? The ethical weather balloon?

Nah. I’m good.

You want to save the world?

🛑 Admit you’re a hypocrite. Admit your compass is broken. Admit your kindness is cosmetic. Admit your activism is aesthetic.

Because once you admit you’re full of sh*t…

You can start being real.

You can start choosing integrity over identity.

You can start owning the contradictions.

And maybe—just maybe— you’ll evolve into Homo Honest Sapien.

But until then?

Stay in your lane, Hypocrite.

And maybe...

Start by shutting the f*ck up.

[AUTO-MIRROR SHATTER IN: 00:00:00 — IDENTITY FRACTURE COMPLETE]

🧠 Read more respect-coded doctrine and emotional architecture at: 👉 https://linktr.ee/ObeyMyCadence 🛡️ Masculine polarity. Scrolltrap psychology. Unforgiven words. 🚪 Warning: This post made a therapist retire and a TikTok activist enter monkhood. </div>

[lostintransist]

The Real Problem With The Trolley

Coffee Shop Meet Cute | Part 4

Part 1 here. AO3

Kyle wormed his way into your life with the skill of an abuser isolating you but inversed; mint spreading from the single pot on the porch only to be found halfway across the yard two weeks later. When you finally allowed him to add you on Snapchat, months and months into texting about, well, everything, you saw the women who rolled through his days home. None looked like you. Conventionally attractive, makeup never out of place or sweated off from work, all of it confirmed what you thought. Platonic, philosophical conversations were all this friendship would allow.

He had met some of your friends after they asked to meet him. You spoke about him often enough that your bestie would no longer be satisfied with stalking his Snapchat when you hung out.

“What’s wrong with him?”

“What?” Her question pulled you from the overabundance of videos she had sent you to work through. “What’s wrong with who?”

You were both lounging on her couch the quiet sounds from your phones only interrupted by the purring of her cat between you.

“Your Kyle,” she flipped her phone around showing you a picture she had taken from her phone of his recent snap.

Sitting up you fight back the panic that hits like a hammer to the back of your ribs.

“He’s not my anything. And I don’t like you insisting that he is.”

“I have never seen a man as attentive to you as he was when we all went out for a drink,” she counters as if Kyle’s normal behavior was some grand scheme to get close to you.

It wasn’t. Couldn’t be. You saw him in person less than once a month and had never once expressed interest in him or caught a whiff of him sniffing your direction. Focusing down on Fiona, the cat, you lift her into your lap and begin loving on her as a way to prolong responding. Memories flooded through you.

Your friends all raved, still, about how he walked them all to their cars and made you laugh. You grumbled that it wasn’t hard to make you laugh, but made a point to bite back the laughter Kyle caused over text and in person. If he noticed he didn’t say anything.

The most he had shared with you was that he worked in the military and would randomly be unreachable for long stretches. You would have thought it a bald-faced lie if you hadn’t first met him with his team. Those men reeked of queen and country. He would tell you about his mum though, and how his sister was going through a divorce. Replying in kind you find interesting ways to gloss over the issues you had with your family. It sounded so trivial and petty compared to the depth of love and compassion he held for his.

You had only picked up his call after ten pm once.

His snaps had been full of long nails and beautiful skin flush with his on a park bench that day. You rolled your eyes and sighed when you saw them, ignoring the buzz in your chest that wished it had been, could be, you.

Tucked into bed scrolling your phone you dropped it with a squeak when his face appeared on it. It buzzed twice more before you swiped to answer.

“Hey, sorry. Did I wake you?” Tears roughed up his voice, confirmed by the sniff at the end of his question.

“No. What’s up?”

Talking on the phone whispered of danger—like the sailors of old failing to fill their ears with beeswax. The smooth cadence of his accent could convince you to wreck on the rocks. It might be more enticing if you cared to swim.

A slam of a door in the background had you wincing as it assaulted your ears.

He coughed, wet and ragged.

“Long night is all.” You had never heard him defeated before and it pricked at your compassion.

“Wanna talk about it?”

The offer is met with a small laugh and you imagine him wiping his face with the heel of his hand.

“Not really. Tell me about your day instead?”

“My day?” Your day had been shitty, interview bombed, work riddled with Karens and the awful manager had been on shift today. “It fucking sucked. Still wanna hear about it?”

“Yeah. Yeah, I do.”

So you tell him, all the gritty bits and the silly things that you do to make it through the day. He is laughing before long, sounding calmer than when the call had started.

“Ready to tell me what the door slamming was all about?”

Kyle’s teeth clicking together tells you he might skirt the issue like he does with work conversations.

Counting in your head you read forty-seven when he speaks.

“I am not a good man.” He pauses so you take your turn.

“Uh-huh.”

“What do you mean uh huh?” His tone sharp in your ears.

“Kyle, you don’t talk about work. So either you can’t or you won’t. Doesn’t really matter which. You are a soldier. A soldier who can’t talk about what he does can’t be doing good things and no one comes out of those situations without stains. So, following that train of thought, since you keep coming home you must not be a good man.” You lay the facts out, the thoughts neatly lined up in your mind. “Am I wrong?”

He takes til fifteen to reply this time.

“You’re not.”

His eyes would be boring into you if this were an in-person chat or a video call, thank god you were in bed and wouldn’t answer a video call without a bra on.

“Why do you keep talking to me then?” His question fires like a bullet through a silencer.

He expects you to end the conversation and your association with him. That happening with the woman from the snaps today would make sense.

“Do you hurt people for fun?”

“No.” His answer is swift and alarmed.

“Take things too far on purpose?” Dragging a hand over your blanket you focus on the texture.

He is slower to respond this time.

“Not…not on purpose.”

“Mmm. So you are asking me why I still talk to a man who does bad things in a world that requires bad choices for safety, is that right?” Folding one arm across your chest you hold onto your bicep that holds the phone up to your ear still.

“I guess?”

“They say when someone shows you who they are to believe them. Kyle, you have shown me honesty, compassion, intellect. Yes, you do bad things in places worlds away and that does make you a bad man. But,” continuing carefully you voice your thoughts, “you aren’t evil and until you show me something repugnant, I enjoy having you as a friend.”

“Repugnant huh? Gonna have to run that word by Soap.” He sniffs and swallows his candor and confidence coming back online.

“Soap is the scary one or the one with a hat?”

That startled a laugh out of him.

“Neither, he was Scot with the mohawk and the loud voice.”

“Aah, okay. So what’s the scary one’s name?” Unable to fathom what odd collection of sounds would make his name.

“Ghost.”

The laugh you let out startled you into slapping your hand over your mouth.

“You can’t be serious,” you whispered once you caught hold of your laughter. “What do you call the hat guy?”

“Price,” Kyle’s smile clear in your ears.

“Okay, that’s it. Your teammates have the oddest collections of names. I can’t. I have to go to bed.” A breathless laugh and a shake of your head before you can continue, “I’m glad you’re feeling better, Kyle.”

“Thanks for taking my call, I know it’s late. Sleep well.”

“Thanks, you too.”

You had ended the call, the smile slipping from your face. You dealt with the whiplash of self-flagellation. No more late-night calls, too dangerous. After nine your phone had to go on do not disturb. Chats with Kyle after the sun dipped would leave you dreaming, and dreams like that don’t come true for people like you.

“Hey,” bestie is prodding you with her foot in your thigh. “With me again?”

Pinching the tip of your tongue between your sharpest teeth you nod.

“Sorry.” With face contorting and sighing breaths, it took you an uncomfortable amount of time to respond to her raised brow. “I…can’t let myself think of him like that.”

“Why not? He sounds into you.”

Leave it to your best friend to hold duality. Woman knew how to hype you up without understanding that you had no chance.

Running your hands down Fiona’s back with deliberate gentleness you peel yourself apart.

“You are gorgeous.” She opens her mouth in your side vision. “Do not argue with me, we are both aware of this fact.”

The mulish look she sends you tells you she will argue the point, but later.

“I am not. No. Do not start with me,” you point hard at her. “I am not pretty, I am interesting and better off for it. Kyle can’t be interested in me. You’ve seen the women he pulls; I refuse to put myself through the hurt of rejection and losing a friend over one foolish decision.”

The sadness that colors your best friend’s face is painted with the years that stretch between you. Fiona stands. Her small paw pads press to the bone as she arches in a stretch and saunters away to her feed bowl. Watching her lets you avoid the sadness you etched in your friend.

“But what about love?”

“What about it? Love is a chemical reaction and a choice, and it’s more choice than anything. If he isn’t attracted to me no amount of choosing will change that.” The stretching burn in your throat is your reminder to not cry over men but also to not let your heart reach for the impossible.

The tears come when she takes your hand.

“I love you and I’m sorry I brought it up.”

Squeezing her hard you give a small watery laugh.

“I love you too, wanna watch trashy TV for a bit?”

“With you? Watching a lecture on finance would be interesting.”

She holds your hand, head resting on yours where it touches her shoulder until you drag yourself home. The ache in your chest stays.

Coffee Masterlist | Masterlist

@soldierservant @demothers-empty-blog

[idylls-of-the-divine-romance]

"Foucault is famous (or infamous) for arguing that claims to truth about a given topic are often masks for power-seeking, or are corrupted by power-seeking."

Interestingly, to me, many elitists would verbally disagree with this claim but in practice would 100% believe that because they possess truth they are entitled to some form or another of power.

The classical philosophically theist conception is that the Creator God of All is Ultimate Reality. That to be “real” is to be in God. As such it is not for the Christian to says that there is no Absolute Truth or Ultimate Reality. It is a common criticism among conservative evangelicals at postmodernists that they do not believe in Absolute Truth, however this is not true for all: postmodernists who believe in Absolute Truth’s rather assert that by the time it enters the human mind it's always already mediated by subjectivity. To the Christian then this would mean that God is not able to be known (a word which in biblical theology is relational and intimate, not abstract and intellectual) in completion. This too is a traditional Christian belief: the ways of God are not the ways of this kosmos(“structured order”, commonly but unhelpfully translated “world”). Qohelet says that all is smoke, hevel, enigmatic and vain and absurd; Paul says that we see reality as if looking through a dim and cloudy glass; the apocalyptic tradition sees all of humanity as seeing through a veil (apokálupsis means “revelation” or “unveiling”). In all three cases Christians assert that, one, our perception of reality is fundamentally obscured in some way and, two, only God can reveal to us the divine perspective on the happenings of reality. As such the Christian has no reason to object when a postmodernist claims that by the time a conception of Truth has entered into the human mind that it it's always already mediated by our subjective experience looking through the veil. 

If I am right to say that God is Absolute Truth and that all of humanity’s perceptions of reality are metaphorically veiled, then it stands that Foucault is right that people who claim to possess Absolute Truth are claiming to either be or speak for God. And he who claims to be or speak for God is ALWAYS making a power move and very often is corrupted by power. Because power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

The only way out of this problem is to redefine, to deconstruct and reconstruct, the very meaning of the word “power” until we have a meaning of the word that is not corrupting, and, would you look at that? Jesus already did: "He who wishes to be the greatest among you must become a slave." 

This redefinition of power — as well as related concepts such as glory and honor and lordship and riches; as well as poverty and slavery and submission and service — has been a big struggle for Christianity as a religion. Friedrich Nietzsche, particularly in his book On the Genealogy of Morality, argues that there are two fundamental types of morality: "master morality" and "slave morality".

The master morality is marked by a strong will: they, the aristokratíā, the self-designated Best, are the definers of “good” and “bad” the former of which is defined based on whether it benefits them and their pursuit of self-defined personal excellence. "The noble type of man experiences itself as determining values; it does not need approval; it judges, 'what is harmful to me is harmful in itself'; it knows itself to be that which first accords honour to things; it is value-creating." 

Meanwhile, the slave morality is said, by Nietzsche, not to be a created morality but a reactionary one in response to the masters’. The slave devalues what the master values and what the slave does not have. It is nondirect and subversive, dēmokratía rather than aristokratíā, emphasizing compassion and meekness, humility and charity, freedom and equality. 

…the Jews achieved that miracle of inversion of values thanks to which life on earth has for a couple millennia acquired a new and dangerous fascination - their prophets fused "rich", "godless", "evil", "violent", "sensual" into one, and were the first to coin the word "world" as a term of infamy. It is this inversion of values (with which is involved the employment of the word for "poor" as a synonym for "holy" and "friend") that the significance of the Jewish people resides: With them, there begins the slave revolt in morals.

In case it’s unclear, Nietzsche believes this is a bad thing. 

Friedrich Nietzsche was not wrong when he called Christianity a slave religion though he was in his estimation of its value; the Early Jesus Movement was mocked as a cult of women and slaves and little children (2nd century Greek philosopher Celsus is rather infamous for this insult). In its earliest stages it was radically egalitarian; it was also deeply devoted to both political critique and non-violence from its beginnings in Galilee up until even 336 Christ Era.

But here is where I arrive at the problem, which is multifold:

A cosmic shift in the way in which we organize and structure our perceptions of reality is personally dis-easing and unnerving. 

There is no such thing as a private definition and a redefinition of power as agápē — other-centered, life-giving, intimate and sacrificial love — has immediate public (and thus political) implications. 

A religion with a slave ethic (I prefer “ethic” to “morality”) is fundamentally incompatible with an imperialized institution: when Christianity becomes the religion of Rome, either Rome must become Christian and fall into the sea or Christianity must become Roman and thus become defiled (Jesus and the apostles repeatedly condemn oppressive political powers as intrinsically demonic). Which one happened is up for debate among historians and theologians alike; I am inclined to believe that both took place.

The biggest issue however is that Christianity, religion of women and slaves and children that it is, does claim to have intimate and relational knowledge to Ultimate Reality. To put it in Hegelian-Marxist terms: Christianity is a religion of dialect between humility (God becomes a human and dies the death of a slave in order to liberate creation from its slavery to sin and death) and supremacy (it is the only way through which to access God and ergo salvation, thus making us the New Creation People while outsiders are slaves to sin and death — extra Ecclesiam nulla salus). 

Sidenote: I am using the words “Christianity” and “religion” because Modern Christianity is a religion — in fact the way we post Age of Exploration define the world “religion” is because of Christian missionaries to the Americas. In the first century it was Rome who defined “religion” and the Early Jesus Movement did not fit that definition lacking as it did anything the Romans recognized as a sacrificial system, a priesthood, a temple, etc. As such it was regarded as superstitio (what we might call “a cult”), not religio. 

Anyway, Christianity, from its very beginnings as a Jewish religious renewal movement, has had to wrestle through the relationship between having an intimate and relational knowledge of Ultimate Reality in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, and knowing that according to this God “power” is defined as humility and service. This is the core source of conflict in the book of Acts, specifically the latter section on Paul: Paul is constantly getting arrested and starting riots and disturbing the peace. Why? Because he is claiming to have power, intimate knowledge of Ultimate Reality in a way that is in no way connected to other power structures. However, whenever Paul appears before an imperial power, they always come to the conclusion that, though this man is quite possibly mad, he poses no military threat. Why? Because though Paul is claiming to have power — authority, knowledge, liberty — this power manifests not by way of revolt or warmongering but by radical, extreme, seemingly inappropriate love and generosity. Which is definitely a threat in the long run, but to imperial powers seems so ridiculous as to ultimately be something to just ignore (at least in part).

This same logic can be seen articulated throughout Paul’s first (though technically second) letter to the Corinthians: the Corinthian followers of Jesus Messiah, both Jews and non-Jews, are said repeatedly to possess liberty, authority, and great knowledge as given to them by the charis (gift, grace, favor) of God. This is the supremacy side of the dialectic and the Corinthian believers revel in this. But, Paul emphasizes the humility side of the dialectic: knowledge puffs up but love builds up; those who love each other surrender authority to each other; we have been set free from slavery to sin so that we may freely be able to love God and neighbor. One gains true freedom by choosing out of love to become a slave to right relationships (tzedakah, H; dikaiosunē, G). 

And Paul himself learns this from Jesus. Dialectic is a firm aspect of the Christian tradition. To quote Ross Douthat’s Bad Religion: 

“Christianity is a paradoxical religion because the Jew of Nazareth is a paradoxical character. No figure in history or fiction contains as many multitudes as the New Testament’s Jesus. He’s a celibate ascetic who enjoys dining with publicans and changing water into wine at weddings. He’s an apocalyptic prophet one moment, a wise ethicist the next. He’s a fierce critic of Jewish religious law who insists that he’s actually fulfilling rather than subverting it. He preaches a reversal of every social hierarchy while deliberately avoiding explicitly political claims. He promises to set parents against children and then disallows divorce; he consorts with prostitutes while denouncing even lustful thoughts. He makes wild claims about his own relationship to God, and perhaps his own divinity, without displaying any of the usual signs of megalomania or madness. He can be egalitarian and hierarchical, gentle and impatient, extraordinarily charitable and extraordinarily judgmental. He sets impossible standards and then forgives the worst of sinners. He blesses the peacemakers and then promises that he’s brought not peace but the sword. He’s superhuman one moment; the next he’s weeping. And of course the accounts of his resurrection only heighten these paradoxes, by introducing a post-crucifixion Jesus who is somehow neither a resuscitated body nor a flitting ghost but something even stranger still—a being at once fleshly and supernatural, recognizable and transfigured, bearing the wounds of the crucifixion even as he passes easily through walls. The boast of Christian orthodoxy, as codified by the councils of the early Church and expounded in the Creeds, has always been its fidelity to the whole of Jesus. Its dogmas and definitions seek to encompass the seeming contradictions in the gospel narratives rather than evading them. Was he God or was he man? Both, says orthodoxy. Is the kingdom he preached something to be lived out in this world or something to be expected in the next? Both. Did he offer a blueprint for moral conduct or a call to spiritual enlightenment? Both. Did he mean to fulfill Judaism among the Jews, or to convert the Gentile world? Both. Was he the bloodied Man of Sorrows of Mel Gibson; the hippie, lilies-of-the-field Jesus of Godspell; or the wise moralist beloved by Victorian liberals? All of them and more….”

Secondly, as Fleming Rutledge said, “Christianity is the only major world religion to have as its central focus the suffering and degradation of its God. The crucifixion is so familiar to us, and so moving, that it is hard to realize how unusual it is as an image of God.” She goes on to say in her book The Crucifixion: Understanding the Death of Jesus Christ that it is not merely the death of Jesus that is important but the method by which he has died. Many have written about the method of Jesus’ death but what he points out is that to speak of God’s death by crucifixion is to speak of God dying a slaves death: nameless, forgotten, emasculated, violated, dehumanized. Less than children and women. Though it was not slaves alone who were crucified, crucifixion was the main deterrent of slave revolt. For those watching the excruciating death of this carpenter hanging on a tree this was the most humiliating way to die imaginable; for the apostles after the resurrection of Jesus, the crucifixion was an enthronement as king: all four accounts of the ministry of Jesus portray his death as a royal enthronement. His message is called “εὐαγγέλιον”, that is, “good declaration” of a new king. He’s given a crown and a robe and a scepter. They bow before him and worship him. The lift him up. But it’s all backwards: a crown of thrones, a back robes in blood, reed scepter, a cross for a throne. “Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews.” Our God became king of the universe and liberated creation from the curse of slavery to sin and death by dying the death of a cursed slave though he knew no sin. 

However, this paradox that power means servitude and that freedom means slavery (and vice versa) is not a dialectic tension that has been synthesized in any meaningful way by those professing to be followers of the “religion of women and slaves”.  Christus Victor (in which God becomes king and liberator of slaves by dying a slaves death) is rejected in favor of Penal Substitution (in which God is a wrathful punisher of the enslaved). Eugene F. Rogers said in his masterful work “Same-Sex Marriage as an Ascetic Practice in the Light of Romans 1 and Ephesians 5”, “In typology, earthly realities do not define heavenly realities, even if we learn earthly things first. Rather, heavenly realities redefine earthly ones.“ But we have not done that. Those who claim to believe that Christ is victor and king have completely ignored the way Jesus redefined those concepts and have instead made a god in the image of (sub)human beastly kings who conquer their enemies with violence and bloodshed. The apostolic tradition of recasting violent imagery in light of the crucifixion/enthronement of God is ignored so that we may cry that “Deus Vult”. Deus definitely does not vult. “Christian” Nationslists care about the morality of scripture when it comes to abortion or homosexuality, but they ignore the numerous prophetic oracles against idolatry of state and wealth, and the emphasis on advocating for women, foreigners, and the marginalized. Both individually and corporately we do everything we can to avoid having to live by the Sermon on the Mount. 

So it seems that Foucault was right: claims to truth are claims to power. And Lord Acton was also right: power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. If the Church is going to be who she was created to be — an immortal multiethnic community of other-centered, life-giving, intimate and sacrificial love — and assert true Real power over the forces of darkness, we are going to have to do as Jesus did: empty ourselves and become slaves of right relationships. For if we try to seize freedom and power, we will find ourselves enslaved to sin and death. If we willingly bond ourselves, out of love, into slavery, we will find ourselves elevated as a royal priesthood by the Most High God. 

May the favor of our God and LordJesus the Anointed One be with us. May the Lord God have mercy on us. May the God of peace crush the adversary underneath our feet. Amen.