#luke would refuse on principle | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

raayllum · 2 years ago

Text

one of my favourite aspect of foil dynamics is when you have a pair of (although not always) foils who switch narrative positions. for examples i’ll use frankenstein and the creature and burr and hamilton from hamiltion bc hamilton is good from a literary standpoint good god.

frankenstein starts off in creating/playing god in order to gain recognition and glory, but also as he increasingly isolates himself for his cause. the creature awakes in a world where he’s rejected by his creator & by all other humans and endures then painstaking isolation. after killing/threatening to kill some of frankenstein’s loved ones, the creature demands victor make him a wife - an eve to his adam - despite knowing it’d condemn her to a similarly lonely life, save one person, and frankenstein refuses. the two then become mutually hellbent on killing one another, even as they’re cognizant that whoever completes the murder will truly then be alone in the world and without purpose

for hamilton and burr this is even more clear. both orphans, though in increasingly different upbringings, and both ever cognizant of mortality and the notion of history. burr never takes a stand, hamilton arguably takes too many. but over the course of the play, burr becomes more like hamilton and hamilton becomes more like burr. this means that while they switch perspectives, they still fundamentally never understand each other, and it’s this misunderstanding that makes hamilton assume burr would never act like him and shoot him, and burr assume that hamilton would never act like him and throw away his shot, yet this is precisely what happens.

we even see this in star wars. luke chooses to save leia & han, just as anakin tries to protect padme and obi-wan. anakin cuts off luke’s hand, luke cuts off anakin’s hand. farmboys on tattooine, ace shot pilots, etc etc. and luke is nearly successfully turned to the dark side, yet reaffirms his father’s place by refusing to bend... in the last movie. that point couldn’t have come any earlier because 1) it’s the triumphant victory and 2) the narrative tension of the foil dynamic means it has to go on as long as possible.

arc 1 is kind of a perfect example, where viren starts out powerful and close to the king and magically strong, and ends the season falling to his death thanks to his elven guide, and callum starts out powerful and close to the new king and magically strong, and ends the season literally soaring to new heights thanks to his elven guide. but like - that’s arc 1. that’s the arc where the heroes win. of course it ends that way.

but now we’re in arc 2.

we’re in the arc - s4 to s6 - where the heroes Lose.

and we know that TDP is aware of these principles when it comes to callum and viren precisely because they are in many ways already in the process of being switched. in arc 1, callum is the one going through a season without magic and being pursued before a powerful creature can be reunited with its place in xadia’s hierarchy; in arc 2, that’s viren, even if he’s far more passive about it and callum is more active. they’re brother-mage-advisors to the king, placed in proximity to power but never allowed to fully wield it, they both chase magical agency in s2 beat for beat (2x04 -> 2x07 -> 2x09) only really diverging in the finale of the season. viren is now going to be having dark magic dreams while callum is presented with the coined elves viren imprisoned.

like yes it’s true that they’re not the same person and won’t make all the same choices, but in a show that’s all about the younger generation struggling to not repeat the same choices as their predecessors, and still getting caught in the cycles of their own journeys... it’s like “i have always been ready to do anything to protect my family however dangerous however vile” and “i value those close to me more than anyone and anything” when callum means it even more than viren does (because viren is and has been willing to sacrifice his family - hi soren - pretty blatantly) is like... yeah they’ll Diverge. just not till s7 lmao

#the english major strikes again #it was just red #like if s6 was our last season. they'd Diverge then #bc for callum to take viren's place is a Tragedy #so it can't be the end of the story #but we have 2 Tragedy Seasons coming up so #mini meta #analysis series #analysis #and then u have the blatant terry-callum claudia-callum parallels running underneath it all #all pointing to the same thing #even callum & rayla's foils dynamic where they perpetually hit the same points / walls like. a season apart #ALL POINT TO THE SAME THING #going to dark places and making hard choices in the name of love

106 notes · View notes

adragonsfriend · 1 year ago

Text

"If Anakin had just been able to be open about his family..."

Frankly, if Anakin and Padme had been open about their relationship during the war they would've been that couple that everyone knows is pretty but dysfunctional, and whom no one wanted to invite to parties because of the risk of Anakin publicly trying to get into fights.

Don't get me wrong at all I think Anakin and Padme have the potential to be a good couple that that good for them and the people around him, I love the ship in general (even and sometimes especially for the fact that it's a messy one), I think they're characters with great chemistry and enough overlapping values to work together. That said:

We need to stop with the idea that openly having a family (while simultaneously being a Jedi or not) would've automatically fixed a single one of Anakin's issues.

This is going to get spicy and not be as well written as my usual kind of post, cause I'm tired of this idea. Fight me if you wish (but before you do, think really hard about whether this post is actually mad at you or if it's talking about someone else).

If you're familiar, Jane Austen put it best in Sense & Sensibility in this conversation where Elinor (the main heroine) and Marianne (her sister) discuss Willoughby (the man who played Marianne, unwittingly actually fell for her, then left anyway when an opportunity to marry rich came along, and afterwards came to confess than he was miserable despite his new wealth and now believed he would've been happier if he'd married Marianne and been comparatively poor),

Marianne's lips quivered, and she repeated the word, "Selfish?" In a tone that implied, Do you really think him selfish? "The whole of [Willoughby's] behavior," replied Elenor, "From the beginning to the end of the affair has been grounded is selfishness. It was selfishness which first made him sport with your affections (he intended to play Marianne), which afterwards when his own were engaged made him delay the confession of it (he didn't tell Marianne he actually fell for her when he had the opportunity), and which finally carried him from Barton (he left her when the opportunity to marry rich appeared). His own enjoyment, or, his own ease, was, in every particular, his ruling principle." "It is very true. My happiness never was his object." [said Marianne] "At present," continued Elinor, "He regrets what he has done, and why does he regret it? Because he finds it has not answered towards himself. It has not made him happy. His circumstances are now unembarrassed (he's rich now), he suffers from no evil of that kind, and he thinks only that he has married a woman of a less amiable temper than yourself (he doesn't like his new rich wife). But, does it follow, that that had he married you, he would have been happy? The inconveniences would have been different. He would then have suffered under the pecuniary distresses, which because they are removed he now reckons as nothing. He would've had a wife of whose temper he could make no complaint, but he would've been always necessitous, always poor. And probably would soon have learnt to rank the innumerable comforts of a clear estate and good income as of far more importance, even to domestic happiness, than the mere temper of a wife." --Chapter 47

(Please excuse any mistakes in the quote, I was typing it out from listening to the audiobook)

Point being, circumstances do not automatically change people. We largely create our own realities and our dissatisfactions with those realities. A greedy person who refuses to change themself will be dissatisfied no matter what they gain in life.

And Anakin is greedy when is comes to his relationships. Not for money, but the way he wants people to make him feel. It's the whole arc of his character over the prequels and the originals. He learns to love selflessly from Luke, right at the end of his life. It's so important. It's the most important moment in the whole of Starwars, and to claim that Anakin was loving well before that moment diminishes it. Anakin's love for Padme did exist, and it had its good moments, but it was not selfless or giving like his love for Luke became in that moment.

Being open about his relationship with Padme would not have changed that quality of it. Openly having kids would not have changed the qualities in him.

Could he have found the people and time and motivation to face and deal with his issues while having a family, especially if the war somehow ended? Of course.

But having bio kids wouldn't've fixed him any more than having a padawan did. Being with Padme openly wouldn't've resolved the fact that she has a job she cares about , and is a full person who can't cater to his feelings all the time. ("Nothing matters more to me than the way you make me feel.")

Side note, but the utter hypocrisy of criticizing Yoda for assigning him a padawan and then turning around and saying, "but if he'd just not had to hide that he was having kids..." is wild. A knight raising a padawan is going to get a so much communal help and oversight from the community around them (as we see in clone wars), as oppose to a parent in a nuclear family format. If Anakin was "too young and totally unprepared for a padawan," and "Yoda shouldn't've done that," then Anakin was infinitely less prepared to be responsible for actual infants.

The only way being able to be open about his marriage would've helped him is that someone outside the relationship might've tried to step in and been like "please get help." And frankly, that's not actually anyone outside the relationship's responsibility to do. Also, Anakin displays plenty of red flags that have literally nothing to do with his relationship with Padme that people advise him to deal with, which he does not deal with.

I've said it before and I'll say it again:

Anakin could've left the Jedi. He was free to put down his laser sword and have the househusband arc he deserved at literally any point. And frankly, if his ONLY two options (and this is absolutely a false dichotomy) were commit mass murder or "fail" his duty to the Republic by retiring, I think we can all say which of those is better--both for the Republic and, for Anakin's soul or whatever.

When Ahsoka lost faith in the Jedi she was brave enough to make the decision to leave and find her own path. She left and discovered she still wanted to help people, just in other ways. Literally no one (in world or fans) considered her a failure for opting out of being a soldier in the war. Anakin could've done the same, and it was only his own ideas about status and attachment and violence (and yeah some genuine sense of duty too) that stopped him from doing so. In fact, he is the one to yell at Ahsoka that "The Jedi are your life!" Because he wants her to stay in his life.

Romantic relationships don't fix people.

Becoming a parent doesn't fix people.

People can fix themselves. When they do, it's often partly so they can be better to the people in their lives, be those spouses, friends, children, whatever--but the relationships themselves, the presence of those people in and of itself, is not what does the fixing.

It's effort. The genuine effort to act better. To follow their best impulses over their worst. To take themselves out of risky situations. To build good habits.

The idea that Anakin had to have a spouse, or had to have children in his life either to be happy or to not murder people is Hollywood and/or Sith propaganda, and we should treat it no differently than any other, "her magical vagina will cure him of his issues," or, "let's have kids to save our shitty suburban marriage," narrative.

#star wars #anakin skywalker #anidala #i can fix him #ahsoka tano #sense and sensibility #using an example from Jane Austen because it's so perfect I can't not #starwars is basically just sense & sensiblity but if Willoughby murdered half the cast at the end #krayt meta

47 notes · View notes

opalharkness · 8 months ago

Text

The Prequel Trilogy

I know I'm a RWBY page, but can I talk about Star Wars for a moment. I feel like so many Star Wars fans are so blinded by their nostalgia they refuse to critically engage with it as a piece of art. Like man how did y'all misunderstand the prequel trilogy?

Okay so as y'all know I'm watching this video by a channel called We Are Not Alive.

youtube

However, in the last post I complained about the subject of the video Just A Robot but I'm complaining about We Are Not Alive themselves. (BTW it seems to be a group channel, and I don't know the name of the person doing this video specifically)

This person complained about Just A Robot using Darth Vader as an example of a good villain while making an off handed remark on the Cruella De Vil movie and shitting on the Maleficent movie. We Are Not Alive then goes on to call the Prequel Trilogy the worst movies ever made and mischaracterize Anakin Skywalker's entire arc. Like he complained about Just A Robot doing with the female villains within his video.

Like this is what they say about Anakin Skywalker within those movies "Anakin Skywalker acts like an insufferable little shit for five agonizing hours before flipping and committing some religious genocide with a little bit of light child murder on the side all because some Tusken Raiders killed his mom and he was scared about his wife dying all of which is forgiven because he doesn't want his crusty old boss to tase his son to death if we're talking about origin stories that strip the magic away from a once intimidating villain the Star Wars prequel trilogy is the gold fucking standard"

Which is crazy. How the fuck do you miss the point of Star Wars! The point of Anakin acting like a brat in Attack of The Clone was to show that while yes. Anakin is a kind, talented, young man he is also incredibly arrogant.

He complains over and over again about Obi-Wan but shows little to no self-awareness about his own flaws or take the time to understand where Obi-Wan is coming from. He is a bratty child being manipulated by Palpatine and is reckless and impulsive and has an authoritative mindset that does not go well with Jedi principles.

This line from We Are Not Alive's weird ass rant in particular grinds my gears "before flipping and committing some religious genocide with a little bit of light child murder on the side all because some Tusken Raiders killed his mom and he was scared about his wife dying" Because

Anakin Skywalker is a person who is deeply afraid of losing those he loves. That was set up in Phantom Menace reestablished in Attack of The Clones which then paid off in Revenge of The Sith. Like he is a person who is so afraid of losing those he cares for he would do the unspeakable in their name. Like murder or genocide. How did that go over their head? What the fuck?

This line is where I get my opening sentiment from "if we're talking about origin stories that strip the magic away from a once intimidating villain the Star Wars prequel trilogy is the gold fucking standard."

Because Darth Vader is only intimidating in the first two movies by the last one Return of The Jedi his mask is both literally and metaphorically removed. He is no longer that intimidating villain we once knew but a sad old man who deeply regrets all he has done but feels it is too late to turn back. He saves his son and is therefore redeemed in the eyes of Luke and the Force.

The only way someone could still see Darth Vader as an intimidating villain who we are meant to fear and not a tragic figure to mourn by the end of that movie is if they watched it with their eyes closed. Or if they watched it as a kid and never unpacked what it was trying to say. The prequels didn't strip the magic of intimidating Darth Vader away Return of The Jedi did.

Anyway, thank for tuning in to my TedTalk! I will never let slander against Anakin Skywalker prevail! he is one of the best characters in fiction and I will not be told otherwise! Have a wonderful day!

#star wars #star wars prequels #anakin skywalker #darth vader #Youtube

8 notes · View notes

artandthebible · 5 months ago

Text

Why did Jesus Call the Canaanite Woman a Dog?

In Matthew 15:21–28, Jesus encounters a Canaanite (Syrophoenician) woman who begs Him to cure her daughter. Jesus initially refuses her request by saying, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs” (Matthew 15:26). Taken out of context, and especially in English, it’s easy to mistake this for an insult. In the flow of the story, however, it’s clear Jesus is creating a metaphor meant to explain the priorities of His ministry. He is also teaching an important lesson to His disciples.

Jews in Jesus’ day sometimes referred to Gentiles as “dogs.” In Greek, this word is kuon, meaning “wild cur” (Matthew 7:6; Luke 16:21; Philippians 3:2). Non-Jews were considered so unspiritual that even being in their presence could make a person ceremonially unclean (John 18:28). Much of Jesus’ ministry, however, involved turning expectations and prejudices on their heads (Matthew 11:19; John 4:9–10). According to Matthew’s narrative, Jesus left Israel and went into Tyre and Sidon, which was Gentile territory (Matthew 15:21). When the Canaanite woman approached and repeatedly asked for healing, the disciples were annoyed and asked Jesus to send her away (Matthew 15:23).

At this point, Jesus explained His current ministry in a way that both the woman and the watching disciples could understand. At that time, His duty was to the people of Israel, not to the Gentiles (Matthew 15:24). Recklessly taking His attention from Israel, in violation of His mission, would be like a father taking food from his children in order to throw it to their pets (Matthews 15:26). The exact word Jesus used here, in Greek, was kunarion, meaning “small dog” or “pet dog.” This is a completely different word from the term kuon, used to refer to unspiritual people or to an “unclean” animal.

Jesus frequently tested people to prove their intentions, often through response questions or challenges (see John 4:16–18; and 4:50–53). His response to the Canaanite woman is similar. In testing her, Jesus declined her request and explained that she had no legitimate expectation of His help. The woman, however, lived out the principle Jesus Himself taught in the parable of the persistent widow (Luke 18:1–8). Her response proved that she understood fully what Jesus was saying, yet had enough conviction to ask anyway (Matthew 15:27). Jesus acknowledged her faith - calling it “great” - and granted her request (Matthew 15:28).

So, according to both the context and language involved, Jesus wasn’t referring to the Canaanite woman as a “dog,” either directly or indirectly. He wasn’t using an epithet or racial slur but making a point about the priorities He’d been given by God. He was also testing the faith of the woman and teaching an important lesson to His disciples.

#biblical question #bible scriptures #canaanite woman #jesus #bible

4 notes · View notes

kaleidoscopeminds · 1 year ago

Note

anon is so right like it’s kinda crazy how the sparkly makeup doesn’t just enhance luke, he actually embodies it<3 what’s your favorite makeup look of his?

i appreciate this ask so dearly, unfortunately asking me to pick a favourite of any of luke’s anything is going to be fruitless because i can’t make a decision to save my life and i refuse on principle to say anything of luke’s is better than anything else. however i will use this as an excuse to think about and demonstrate what i think are some highlights of luke’s makeup over the years, so thank u for the opportunity <3 here under a cut bc this got long and i know the formatting on this is going to be crazy on desktop; best viewed on mobile

firstly it’s been so interesting to see the evolution of how he’s been doing his makeup over the years, and shout out to the yb era when he started experimenting with his smudgy glitter <3 have to give a moment to these ones which make me feel all sorts of things

i’ve really been enjoying how he’s transitioned from a subtler glitter and occasional coloured liner look on stage from tmh tour which is where he really started wearing it most of the time:

to a much more obvious shimmery eye looks during the 5sos show (wow remember these pics huh):

to a full and much darker eyeshadow for the aesthetic of the nostalgia tour, which is so hard to even pick out good ones because i think all of them have been so gorgeous but here are ones that i’ve liked for various reasons

there are several more subtle make up looks which i really enjoy, to just enhance is natural beauty, firstly this sparkly liner which he wore for the fonda shows and in milan, which i think accentuates his eyes so beautifully

the second is his inner corner highlight which he’s done a few times with stunning results, but i really like the gcl one because wow, and when he had a bit of eyeliner and a glowy highlight for one of the boy press days/shoots. stunning. enhances his gorgeous eyes perfectly.

however i also think he has the perfect face for dramatic makeup and love him exploring that too. we should also have a moment for some of the editorial looks he’s had which make him look incredibly striking. i think one of my favourites was the boy album shoot, this dark dramatic glitter. ugh so good

specifically for magazine make up he’s had i loved the crazy dark smoky one for the magazine, along with again, some inner corner action from the fault magazine shoot for wfttwtaf

and here to finish, some honourable mentions below for some really nice looks that i have enjoyed and would like to highlight:

#ask #anon #i'm so annoying i'm sorry #but pls if anyone wants to disucss THEIR favourite luke makeup moment i am all ears #luke #i have been looking at pics all day long anyone feel a little crazy about him

9 notes · View notes

corvus-ace · 1 year ago

Text

what in the name of the force is the ahsoka show,,,,

listen. i am by no means a star wars expert. sure, i'm familiar enough with the movies, the clone wars, and a few of the other shows (mostly bad batch and mando, and while i did watch all of rebels i don't remember a whole lot) but i definitely haven't deep dived through enough of the lore that i'd call myself an expert. but boy oh boy do i have some issues with this show

ahsoka - her character has always been determined and fierce. immature and rash sometimes, sure, but she's always meant well. she is definitely her master's padawan. based on what i've seen so far, which is the first four episodes, that's all gone. ahsoka left the jedi order because the order didn't trust her, and to her that meant she couldn't trust herself either. since then she's always followed her own principles. but in this show she doesn't seem to have maintained any of that. she, like luke in the book of boba fett, seems to be suddenly super attached to the old jedi ways???? and it just makes zero sense to me because both ahsoka and luke have had such strong bonds with the people they care about (anakin, rex, leia, han, etc) and that's always given them strength. hell, luke's attachment to anakin was the whole reason the empire fell! and now that's just,,,, gone???? where's the fiercely skilled, heart-of-gold ahsoka that refused to kill any of the 501st men she spent years fighting alongside even though they had turned on her, the apprentice who trusted her master so implicitly that even when the world was against her, she knew he would be by her side, and he came through for her? where's our snips????

sabine - i don't have as much of an obsession with rebels as i do with clone wars, but i remember her character distinctly enough. she's a mandalorian, of course, incredibly skilled and versatile, though also stubborn. but i do remember that through the course of rebels, she learned from the rest of the crew, particularly kanan; he taught her how to use the darksaber by teaching her parts of the jedi training he had already taught ezra. he taught her to develop her patience and to become one with the weapon. that patience has disappeared completely. i also don't know yet what happened between sabine and hera, or between sabine and ahsoka, but either way, from the last i saw of her outside this show, i definitely don't remember sabine being the type to run away from her problems instead of blasting through them forcefully. very disappointed

and finally hera - what the hell happened???? hera is a passionate, rebellious figure, intensely protective of her family and other loved ones but still following her convictions without wavering. that is not the hera i have seen in this show. she feels so unbelievably flat, not quite docile (she still fought back pretty well against the droids and imperial loyalists) but other than that she's far too quiet of a character than she's ever been before and i hate it

anyways that's all, i lowkey hate this show but i'm too committed to finishing it at this point if only for potential new nightsisters lore + more carson teva scenes (cause he is at this point the only new republic character i respect at all and i love him) so uhhhhhh guess i'll fix-it fic the shit out of all this later lmfao

#star wars #ahsoka tano #ahsoka series #hera syndulla #sabine wren #seriously wtf is this show #this could've been animated #my disappointment is immeasurable and my day is ruined #just give me back the clone wars #and anakin and ahsoka's sibling relationship #rant post

2 notes · View notes

ahopkins1965 · 2 months ago

Text

All

Images

Short videos

Forums

Videos

Shopping

Web

News

Books

Maps

Flights

Finance

Search tools

Feedback

Search Results

AI Overview

Whether it's a sin to do everything for someone else without them doing anything for themselves depends on the situation and the motivations behind both actions. While a general principle of helping others in need is often emphasized, excessive dependency can create imbalances and potentially lead to harmful consequences.

Factors to Consider:

Necessity and Severity:

If the person is facing a dire situation, like needing immediate food or shelter, then helping them is generally seen as a moral obligation.

Potential for Growth:

Over-doing for someone can hinder their ability to develop self-reliance and problem-solving skills.

Long-term Effects:

Is the situation temporary or ongoing? An ongoing pattern of doing everything for someone can create dependency and resentment in the long run.

Motivation:

Are you doing it out of genuine care and support, or are you seeking to control or manipulate the other person?

Individual's Response:

How does the person react to your help? Are they grateful and motivated to contribute, or do they take your help for granted and become complacent?

Personal Resources and Responsibilities:

Can you consistently offer help without negatively impacting your own well-being or responsibilities?

Examples:

A person struggling with homelessness:

It's generally considered right to help them with food, shelter, and resources. However, it's also important to encourage them to seek long-term solutions like job training or therapy.

A child with a learning disability:

It's important to provide extra support, but not to do all their homework or assignments for them. This can hinder their learning and development.

An adult who is chronically unemployed:

While helping them find a job may be necessary, it's also crucial to address the underlying reasons for their unemployment and support their personal growth.

In Conclusion:

While helping others is a virtue, it's important to consider the context, motivations, and potential consequences of our actions. Excessive dependency can have negative impacts, so a balanced approach that encourages both support and personal responsibility is often the most beneficial.

Is it a sin to not help somebody if you are only able to and it wouldn't ...

Jun 4, 2021 — * Author has 10K answers and 4M answer views. · 3y. Yes, it is a sin to refuse to help somebody if you are able to do it and it wouldn't hinder your...

Quora

Sin of Taking Advantage of Others. | by Shaila Touchton - Medium

Feb 13, 2024 — May we be guided by Jesus' words in Luke 6:31, "Do to others as you would have them do to you." Exploiting others' situations is a sin because it ta...

Medium

AI responses may include mistakes. Learn more

Export

Saved

Web results

Reddit · r/Christianity

90+ comments · 1 year ago

Can something be a sin for one person and not another? : r/Christianity

Absolutely. Since I am not a Christian, the rules and beliefs of Christianity don't apply to me. Thus, I have no sins.

Missing: themselves? ‎| Show results with: themselves?

is pride a sin and why? and is a sin to be proud of yourself or others? - Reddit

r/Christian·30+ comments·3y

Why is suicide considered a sin? : r/Christianity - Reddit

r/Christianity·490+ comments·1y

More results from Reddit

People also ask

Does God help those who don't help themselves?

When should you stop helping someone who won't help themselves?

What does the Bible say about protecting those who cannot protect themselves?

What does God say about letting people walk all over you?

Feedback

People also search for

What does the Bible say about helping others too much

Bible verses about being taken for granted

Bible verses about taking advantage of someone

Page Navigation

More search results

Footer Links

Results are personalized-Try without personalization

45404, Dayton, OH

- From your device

Update location

Terms

AI overview is ready

0 notes

yhwhrulz · 6 months ago

Text

The Way by Kevin Pauley

Resistez! Date Posted: January 14, 2025

“And I assure you of this: If anyone acknowledges me publicly here on earth, I, the Son of Man, will openly acknowledge that person in the presence of God’s angels. But if anyone denies me here on earth, I will deny that person before God’s angels. – Luke 12:8-9

Two hundred years ago, in the southern French town of Aigues-Mortes, a young girl named Marie Durant was dragged before the court and charged with heresy. Marie was a Huguenot. She was bright, attractive and only fourteen years old. In those days, fourteen wa s marriageable. She was commanded to deny the Huguenot faith. She was not asked to commit any immoral act, sacrifice to an idol or even change her lifestyle significantly. She only had to say one French word – “J’abjure”. It means “I deny.” That was it. But she would not deny Christ. So she and thirty other women who were accused of the same crime of heresy were imprisoned in a tower by the sea.

“J’abjure.” It’s not a lot to say. Such a small price to pay for one’s freedom. She could have been at home in her village. She could have enjoyed the attentions of young suitors. Marriage and children were hers for the asking. But for thirty-eight years she continued to refuse to utter that short word. And instead of saying “J’abjure” she scratched into the stone walls of her dungeon “Resistez!” which means “Resist!”

We live in a time marked by unholy loves, persistent self-seeking and monumental indifference. We think of the nearly four decades that she survived in that hellish place and shake our heads in wonder. Imagine the agonizingly slow passage of time in such a place; time which consumed and dried the once-beautiful skin, atrophied the muscles, caused the joints to become stiff and the mind to become stupefied by lack of stimulation. To feel all this and yet persevere in stubborn refusal to give up on a matter of principle seems stupid to religiously relativistic people.

Being a Christian is more than attending church as long as it is socially useful; more than something to mark on a card; so much more than the petty squabbles over inconsequentials that characterize most churches. It is a deep, abiding passion for the Christ that confesses His lovely name not just once in a quick, fiery blaze of martyrdom, but day after day after day for decades. A true Christian places the name of Jesus Christ above all other names and would rather die than ever deny Him before others or deny Him access to a part of our lives.

If you ever find yourself wondering whether or not Christianity is real; if you begin to doubt because you have never met a person you considered to be truly changed by their faith – then meditate on what it would take for a teenager to show that much strength and character. Whatever it was, what would happen if you could unleash it upon YOUR soul?

Copyright Statement 'The Way' Copyright 2006-2025 © Kevin Pauley 'The Way' articles may be reproduced in whole under the following provisions: 1) A proper credit must be given to the author at the end of each story, along with their complete bio and a link to https://www.liveasif.org/subscription-lists/the-way.html 2) 'The Way' content may not be arranged or "mirrored" as a competitive online service.

0 notes

suwwang · 8 months ago

Text

Feeling is the secret full bookmark

Chapter 1: Law and Its Operation

Feeling is the assent of the subconscious to the truth of that which is declared to be true.

There is nothing impossible to man. Whatever the mind of man can conceive and feel as true, the subconscious can and must objectify.

The conditions of the world reflect your feeling.

"As within, so without" ["As above, so below; as below, so above; as within, so without; as without, so within", "Correspondence", the second of The Seven Principles of Hermes Trismegistus].

"The kingdom of heaven is within you"[Luke17:21].

You are already that which you want to be, and your refusal to believe this is the only reason you do not see it.

These are the two gateways into the subconscious:

Chapter 2: Sleep

Sleep, the life that occupies one-third of our stay on earth, is the natural door into the subconscious. It is in sleep and in prayer, a state akin to sleep, that man enters the subconscious to make his impressions and receive his instructions.

"As in heaven, so on earth" [Matthew 6:10; Luke 11:2]. As in the subconscious, so on earth.

You should always feel the wish fulfilled before you drop off to sleep. "How would I feel were my wish realized?" is the feeling which should monopolize and immobilize your attention as you relax into sleep.

If, as you prepare for sleep, you assume and maintain the consciousness of success by feeling "I am successful", you must be successful.

"Signs follow, they do not precede". Proof that you are will follow the consciousness that you are; it will not precede it.

Do not limit yourself to the past. Knowing that nothing is impossible to consciousness, begin to imagine states beyond the experiences of the past.

Always imagine and expect the best.

Chapter 3: Prayer

Prayer is an illusion of sleep which diminishes the impression of the outer world and renders the mind more receptive to suggestion from within.

Prayer is not so much what you ask for, as how you prepare for its reception.

"Whatsoever things ye desire, when ye pray believe that you have received them, and ye shall have them"[Mark 11:24].

The moment you accept the wish as an accomplished fact, the subconscious finds the means for its realization.

Whenever you are in the state of mind "I should like to, but I cannot", the harder you try, the less you are able to yield to the wish.

You never attract that which you want, but always attract that which you are conscious of being.

Prayer is the art of yielding to the wish and not the forcing of the wish. Whenever your feeling is in conflict with your wish, feeling will be the victor.

To yield successfully to the wish as an accomplished fact, you must create a passive state, a kind of reverie or meditative reflection similar to the feeling which precedes sleep.

An easy way to create this passive state is to relax in a comfortable chair or on a bed. If on a bed, lie flat on your back with your head on a level with your body, close the eyes and imagine that you are sleepy.

Feel – I am sleepy, so sleepy, so very sleepy. In a little while, a faraway feeling accompanied by a general lassitude and loss of all desire to move envelops you.

When this passive state is reached, imagine that you have realized your wish – not how it was realized, but simply the wish fulfilled.

Imagine in picture form what you desire to achieve in life; then feel yourself as having already achieved it.

When you emerge from the moment of prayer, it is as though you were shown the happy and successful end of a play although you were not shown how that end was achieved.

However, having witnessed the end, regardless of any anticlimactic sequence, you remain calm and secure in the knowledge that the end has been perfectly defined.

Chapter 4: Spirit – Feeling

As you capture the feeling of the state sought, you are relieved of all effort to make it so, for it is already so.

Faith is feeling, "According to your faith (feeling) be it unto you"[Matthew 9:29].

"To him that hath it shall be given and to him that hath not it shall be taken away..."[Matthew 13:12; 25:29; Mark 4:25;Luke 8:18; 19:26].

Instead of believing in God or in Jesus – believe you are God or you are Jesus.

Jesus found it not strange to do the works of God, because He believed Himself to be God. "I and My Father are one" [John 10:30].

When a man believes in the value of the advice given him and applies it, he establishes within himself the reality of success.

#manifestation #spirituality #booklr #neville goddard

1 note · View note

steveezekiel · 1 year ago

Text

SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY 1

"I know this because I AM A MAN UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF OTHER MEN. AND I HAVE SOLDIERS UNDER MY AUTHORITY. I tell one soldier, ‘Go,’ and he goes. And I tell another soldier, ‘Come,’ and he comes. And I say to my servant, ‘Do this,’ and my servant obeys me.” Luke 7:8 (Easy-to-Read Version)

1 Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and also took Titus with me. 2 AND I went up by revelation, and COMMUNICATED to them that GOSPEL which I PREACH among the GENTILES, BUT privately to THOSE who were of REPUTATION, LEST BY ANY MEANS I MIGHT RUN, or HAD RUN, IN VAIN." Galatians 2:1,2 (NKJV)

About our text, the above Bible passage, Paul said, he went up to Jerusalem to communicate or share the Gospel he was preaching among the Gentiles, with those who were of reputation—that he might not run, or labour, in vain.

In other words, If those who were ahead of him, whom he shared the Revelation which he claimed to receive from Christ Jesus with (Galatians 1:11,12), refused to attest or agree with it, It means all his work or labour among the Gentiles would be amounted to a waste.

It is the part of church pattern, or tradition, or a way of doing things, that whoever claim to have received a Revelation, or a vision, or a calling; that such should receive a validation or an approval, so to speak, from those who have been ahead of him or her in the work.

Paul wanted to be sure that he had received right. That he might not be heretical.

This is where the issue of relationship, or Submission, to someone for mentoring or apprenticeship comes in.

This principle is biblical and it is good for whoever is just starting or the up and coming One in the Ministry work. However, the principle has been abused or bastardized by some people. a. They have used it to manipulate and control the lives of some others who sincerely submitted to them for mentoring. b. They, such mentors, would want those who submitted to them to do their bidding or wishing, even when that is contrary to what God has instructed the person; the mentee, or the protege, or the apprentice, who submitted to them, to do. c. Such mentors have taken an advantage of those who sincerely submitted to them, to learn about the work, the assignment given to them by God, how to go by it.

Relationship in life and ministry could be a plus, If you find yourself in the right one—relagionship.

If you are in a right relationship that is ordained by God, it would add to you—cause you to have a better result.

That said, the greatest relationship which whoever is being used of God should have is, the relationship and fellowship with God.

Although the relationship with other people, humans, could be necessary and needful for the learning and the activation of your goals in life.

What is the Relationship?

In a simple term: Contacts and interactions between people of like interest—is called Relationship.

It is also a mutual dealings, connections, or feelings that exist between two parties, people, or whatever.

To relate means to be in touch, to contact, and to be involved with one and other, in the matters of life and Ministry.

Right Relationship is crucial, vital and needful, to realize your goals and objectives in life. Whilst a wrong relationship could be detrimental; devastating, heart-breaking, dream killing, and vision destroying.

A relationship would either make you or break you, no relationship would leave you neutral (Genesis 13:14,15).

A wrong relationship is detrimental to your progress and success in life and Ministry.

A wrong relationship could break you altogether, regardless of your gifts, your expertises, and the divine Grace.

If you actually wanted to be blessed, and retained or kept your blessings; Then the responsibility is on you to make quality choices of Relationships.

Someone who keeps a good company would not run dry. Such would not wither. He would constantly be refreshed, and experienced Fulfilment (Psalm 1:1-3).

Any confidential talk you had with an unbeliever, or a believer who lives in the flesh, would be a trap in disguise. a. A wrong relationship could give an access to the devil, to tamper with your life, both the present and the future. THUS, do not give a place to the devil (Ephesians 4:27), by allowing a wrong person in your life (1 Corinthians 15:33). b. A wrong relationship could even rob you of your place in God's eternal Kingdom.

The choice of the company you keep is your responsibility. No relationship could take place without the agreement of the parties involved (Amos 3:3).

Right relationships are supposed to result in progress.

That is the acid test for the right choice. Wood does not sharpen irons, so any iron that relates with a Wood, becomes blunt and the Wood also suffers reduction in size—it is chopped off. An Iron can only sharpens another iron (Proverbs 27:17).

None of the parties involved in a wrong relationship profited in any way.

I. Relationship with someone higher than you in the work of Ministry.

This is a type of master-servant Relationship. a. This was found in the Ministry of Elijah, he mentored Elisha, and the latter eventually collected double portions of the Anointing on him (1 Kings 19:16,19-21; 2 Kings 2:1-15). b. The Similar case is found in the Ministry of Paul; he mentored, Timothy, Titus, and some others (Acts 16:1-3; 1 Timothy 1:2,3; 2 Timothy 3:10,11; Titus 1:4,5). c. Above all, It was found in the earthly Ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ, He trained and mentored the twelve disciples, who later became the twelve Apostles of the Lamb (Mark 3:13-15; John 20:21).

Thus, relating with someone who is higher than you in the Ministry work is biblical, but in some quarters, It has been abused.

You will not fail in Jesus' name.

Should there be any ailment in your body, I declare your healing now in Jesus' name.

The Hold of sicknesses and diseases is broken in your life in Jesus' name. Peace! TO BE CONTINUED

#christianity #christian living #gospel #christian blog #jesus #devotion #the bible #faith #my writing #prayer

0 notes

itsyourchoicedevotionals · 2 years ago

Text

Love Laws

“Teacher, what is the most important commandment in the Law?” Matthew 22:36CEV

The McGuffey Readers were the books I started learning how to read with as a child. In fact the readers were the ‘go to books’ for schools from 1836-1960.

McGuffey Readers contained the old English verse of the Ten Commandments: “Above all else love God alone; Bow down to neither wood nor stone. God’s name refuse to take in vain; The Sabbath rest with care maintain. Respect your parents all your days; Hold sacred human life always. Be loyal to your chosen mate; Steal nothing, neither small nor great. Report, with truth, your neighbor’s deed; And rid your mind of selfish greed.”

By writing these Laws in simpler language, it’s easy to see how these Ten Commandments are the secret of happiness. Jesus put it this way— “Treat others just as you want to be treated”Luke 6:31CEV. Should everyone follow just these ten laws —all of life would be solved. Jesus looked at the laws and described the most valuable Laws as those regarding loving God, self and people— see Matthew 22:37-39— the love laws.

My brother raised his children with the actual spanking coming only for infractions of the Ten Commandments, not from infractions of their house rules or disobedience to their rules. He told me it was easy to teach the children how to live with respect for those in your circle of influence, when you made God’s Laws the principles of importance.

I look at the utter chaos in our nation today knowing 99% of our problems would be non-existent IF everyone followed God’s Ten Commandments. Instead we see greed, lies, hatred, strife, murder or character assassination ruling the land. Wicked, evil people can’t be expected to live any other way than against the Laws of God.

Believers can be expected to live much differently. We could live like the evil people of the world do— in Adam— our entire minds wrapped around get even and get more. God expects His followers to do better and live like Jesus, asking God to not hold His murderers guilty for murdering Him. Stephen the first church martyr did likewise. Our salvation for all of this is in one verse— “ I have strength for all things in Christ Who empowers me [I am ready for anything and equal to anything through Him Who infuses inner strength into me; I am self-sufficient in Christ’s sufficiency]” Philippians 4:13AMPC. We cannot do as God expects alone.

Why would we be expected to live much differently? Because we are supposed to be living in Christ. Can we follow the most important down to the least important Laws knowing Yahweh will take care of us, provide for us, win for us? Although we know— will we allow Him to do all of this for us? Or will we take matters in our own hands; leave the love laws again; and not trust Him to conquer our foes? It’s your choice. You choose.

LET’S PRAY: Lord God more often than not we don’t realize how deeply ‘in’ You we’re really hidden. Fear coaxes us out into the open where we’re sitting ducks. Help us to fight with Your Words and win, in the name of Jesus Christ I pray.

#Jesus Christ #lord of lords #word of god #God #Holy Spirit #it's your choice #devotional #laws #10 commandments #win #chaos #most important #salvation #followers #love #hope #faith

0 notes

david-talks-sw · 2 years ago

Text

As a quick addendum to this recent post:

Could the Jedi have done more to help Anakin? Sure. There's myriad more things that could've been done. For example, Mace could've sat Anakin down in the Council Chamber and gone "Skywalker, tell me what's really going on."

But it bears mentioning that the above scenario ⬆️ likely wouldn't yield any results. Because, well, Anakin barely ever opens up about his feelings or fears or past trauma.

He doesn't do it with Yoda, when the latter asks for more tangible information so he can tailor his advice.

He barely ever opened up to Ahsoka.

He barely did so with Obi-Wan.

And by Revenge of the Sith, he's even shutting Padmé out.

(Yes, part of it is due to the secrecy surrounding his marriage, but I've already explained my thoughts on why it's an unfounded fear at that point in time, and it's not the only factor behind his silence as he already didn't open up as far back as Phantom Menace, nor is it his only secret)

The only person he does confide in is Palpatine, who:

keeps enabling Anakin's flaws instead of letting him learn to overcome them,

keeps isolating him from everyone else.

And Palpatine's both the most powerful Sith in history and the leader of the free world, so he's always gonna find a way to worm himself into Anakin's life.

As long as Palpatine's in the picture, no matter what the Jedi or Padmé do, he'll be right around the corner, ready to undo it.

So at some point - short of Palpatine tripping into an empty elevator shaft and falling to his death - the only person who could've gotten Anakin out of that mess... was Anakin himself.

Would it have been difficult? Hell yes.

But as Shmi Skywalker (who let go of her attachment), Padmé Amidala (disciplined and principled), Obi-Wan Kenobi (refused to give in to anger upon losing the love of his life), Ezra Bridger (rejected the Emperor's promise of power and reunification with his loved ones), Luke Skywalker and Quinlan Vos (pulled back from the Dark Side against all odds) have shown us... it wouldn't have been impossible.

"All of my movies are about one thing, which is the fact that the only prison you’re in is the prison of your mind. And if you decide to open the door and get out, you can. There’s nothing stopping you." - George Lucas, SirusXM, American Voices, 2012

#anakin skywalker #the story is about personal responsibility #if the jedi are to blame for Anakin's downfall then that conflicts with the film's major themes #meta #star wars #sheev palpatine

880 notes · View notes

commandsir · 2 years ago

Note

To pop off, share with us your most hated misconception about Ahsoka and why it's wrong

SEND AN ASSUMPTION/MISCONCEPTION ABOUT AHSOKA

oh, alistair, you’re baiting me and i love it.

so, to, as you say, pop off: i bloody blooming despise a notion that sprouted from ahsoka’s appearance in the book of boba fett.

the takeaway from her conversation with din in “from the desert comes a stranger” became that ahsoka not only still upheld but passed on to luke the traditional jedi order principle of “no attachment”.

in practice, for grogu this would mean he’d willingly and wholly separate himself from his bond with din in order to become a part of the jedi order, forsaking any other way of life with all its trappings. unfortunately, the armorer in the previous episode said something similar which pulled this aspect of jedi life front and center. the two life paths luke ends up presenting to grogu do enforce this idea.

but ahsoka, jedi no longer and previous open critic of the order and the strict mis/understanding of the attachment principle (the clone wars s1:ep:13 “jedi crash"/14 “defenders of peace”), wouldn’t have encouraged luke to employ this. instead, she would merely have passed along her memories of how the jedi lived and operated, presenting luke with options for how to run his order. ultimately, since ahsoka would remain uninvolved with the order itself and merely be a resource for luke, it would be his choice how to move forward. he chose to go “by the book”, shown in his recycling of words obi-wan and yoda used to instruct him, despite how often luke had disagreed with them in the past.

both in the eu and in canon, luke’s call as the last of the practicing jedi order was to fall back on what had already been established. however, in the eu he had significantly more help. and older students who provided mature feedback while still technically padawans. from there the order evolved into an entity more stable though less strict in terms of lifestyle. here in canon he’s going it alone with what remains of the jedi code he can find and speak to, including ahsoka.

what is important to recall about her is her prior refusal to teach grogu. it wasn’t just about his emotions. it was about her own as well. she no longer believed in the lifestyle of a traditional jedi when grogu crossed her path and would only encourage that lifestyle for him if he truly wanted it, which is why she directs father and son to travel to tython. from that point forward, everything was luke’s responsibility. no matter what she passed on from her own training, he was the one at the helm training his student.

[ another thing i’m not sure i’ve seen mentioned yet is that luke may have purposely chosen to teach grogu the code his new padawan was used to, thinking it may have been a source of comfort to reinforce the familiar. and due to the traumatic pause in grogu’s time with the jedi, luke’s stance on teaching was a surprisingly self-centric one: protection. not of others, but of himself. a tactic essentially leaning into grogu’s remaining fears after order 66 – but that’s a meta for another blog another time. ]

when it comes to the conversation ahsoka has with din about his fondness for grogu, it’s less about the order and more a personal test for din. especially considering din’s status as a mandalorian: time honored adversaries of the jedi, regardless of ahsoka’s own past interactions with them. wars can make surprising allies, after all.

the pertinent dialogue between ahsoka and din goes this way:

din: i thought you weren’t going to help train grogu. ahsoka: i’m not. master luke is. din: then what are you doing here? ahsoka: that’s my question for you. din: i’m here to see the kid. ahsoka: that’s why r2 brought you to see me instead. [….] din: i wanna see him. ahsoka: i know you do. let us take a walk. i warned you when we met, that your attachment to grogu would be difficult to let go of. din: he was a mandalorian foundling in my care. i just wanna make sure he’s safe. ahsoka: there is no place in the galaxy more safe than here with luke. din: i don’t understand why you’re alright with skywalker’s decision to train the kid when you wouldn’t. ahsoka: because it was his choice. i don’t control the wants of others. din: then it’s my choice to go and see him. ahsoka: of course. if that is what you wish. […] are you doing this for grogu or are you doing this for yourself? din: i just… i wanna give him this. ahsoka: why? so he will remember you? din: no. as a mandalorian foundling, he should have this. it’s his right. ahsoka: foundling… perhaps he is a padawan now. din: well… either way this armor will protect him. ahsoka: [nodding] if you are set on it, then allow me to deliver it. din: i came all this way. he’s right there. ahsoka: grogu misses you a great deal. If he sees you, it will only make things more difficult for him. din: make sure he’s protected.

so, what’s the deal with ahsoka practically interrogating din about what should be a simple request?

ahsoka’s specific goal here is to ensure that din’s interest in grogu, his safety and chosen education, was out of love for grogu the child and not grogu the potential mandalorian. if din let his hope for grogu as a mandalorian instead of a son interfere with grogu’s time at the temple, their relationship might become poisoned. jedi vs. mandalorian rifts became wars time and time again. while one man like din might not have caused a great fallout immediately, the mandalorian remnant and luke’s fledgling jedi school could have become violently opposed to each other not unlike their forebears, given the right attitude and enough time. ahsoka does not need to be a jedi any longer to still have a vested interest in the success of luke’s efforts, which she does, nor does she need to be a mandalorian to care deeply for the future of recovering mandalorians.

her conversation with din is both a general test and an individual one. plus, she is aware of something that din is not: grogu will be undergoing his own test to judge for himself what lifestyle he wants. ahsoka cannot tell din this and must let him wait for the outcome, or otherwise develop false hope. which might turn into an instrument of discord were din to hold his disappointment against grogu and the new jedi order. this is why she gently urges din to determine whose best interest is at stake in going to see him. is din more willing to protect grogu’s feelings and choices, or his own? and are din’s feelings those of a father or of a mandalorian?

by the end of the conversation, ahsoka has made it clear that she will not withhold din’s gift from grogu. in fact, she immediately turns to make her way to master and padawan with the beskar in hand.

we don’t get much in terms of grogu makes his choice or luke’s reaction, but we do see the result: a balanced representation of what grogu might want laid out physically in front of him and how he acts on his choice. which ends up being a life with din as his father and potentially a life as a mandalorian over the life of a padawan who would eventually become a jedi.

i believe that in her heart ahsoka already knew what grogu wanted most. but as she said, she did not control the wants and desires of others. i also believe ahsoka urged luke to let grogu choose what he wanted, or risk yet another instance of potential resentment against the reborn jedi order should grogu ever discover luke withheld an option from him.

choice of lifestyle was something ahsoka was only implicitly granted during her time in the order, not explicitly. grogu, as long as she was able to make it so, would have the opportunity to choose the path he wanted. and to the degree ahsoka had freedom to ensure it, the little one would be able to live a life he felt at peace with. sacrifices would have to be made, but at least grogu would know ahead of time. and through this process, luke would have opportunity to learn his own lessons about attachment and letting go as a newly forged jedi master. also that not all force users who forsook the jedi order became sith or otherwise evil. she was proof enough of that.

to wrap this whole thing up, it was never about the jedi code for ahsoka. it was always about intention. it was about love and concern between father figure and child, between master and student. she freely admits that her chosen place is not with the order, but she had vested interest in its future and the future of its members. however she’s lived too long and experienced too many historical events to keep her eye on only the jedi.

din earned her respect and trust on corvus. she encourages (and tests) his trust and respect for her on ossus. in their conversation she finds exactly what she’d hoped to find: genuine, sacrificial parental care for grogu. this indicated the best case scenario for the little one either way. once everyone was informed of their options, ahsoka could step back and allow both grogu and luke the freedom to be whatever they desired. her job was done, and done well.

TD;LR: it’s not the jedi way or the highway. not for grogu, not for anyone. it’s affection and care for community, for family, forsaking selfish ambition, that matters the most.

#debelltio #𝐩𝐚𝐝𝐚𝐰𝐚𝐧 𝐚𝐜𝐚𝐝𝐚𝐰𝐚𝐧 . 𝙤𝙤𝙘 / meta #𝐩𝐚𝐝𝐚𝐰𝐚𝐧 𝐚𝐜𝐚𝐝𝐚𝐰𝐚𝐧 . 𝙤𝙤𝙘 / meme answers #long post /#so this……maybe……got longer than i intended #uh #enjoy????#i certainly had a great time verbally raging so there’s that xD #tbh this is something i’ve wanted to dissect for a while

19 notes · View notes