#specifically ehrman
Explore tagged Tumblr posts
Text
thinking real hard about translations today, specifically translations of the Iliad
One of the things that Ehrman has instilled in us through class is that we, as translators, have to make a decision on what word to use and i just think that a lot of people used the wrong word for μῆνιν
i mean, the line is μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος (Sing, O Muse, of the wrath/anger of Achilles, son of Peleus)
and notice I put wrath/anger there, those are the two most common translations of μῆνιν. Wrath or Anger. but I don't think that does the story justice. Maybe it's because I've got my own story that I'm writing through the lens of the sublime and the wrath of the Gods but I think those words aren't strong enough.
I mean, book 21 Achilles doesn't get angry and throw a tantrum. Book 21 Achilles rages. Book 21 Achilles kills a God and nearly ends the Trojan War like years too early. Like, mans had to be put down like a rabid dog because he was going to upend the Trojan War Cycle and the Gods couldn't have that
that's not anger, hell, I'd say that's not even wrath
That's Rage
I think the first line should allude to that, gimme something like: Sing, O Muse, of the Rage of Achilles, son of Peleus. gimme the foreshadowing! make it dramatic! we all know the greeks loved drama, gimme!!
anyways, i'll def be using rage in my own translation but like. it's right there. and every translator has to make their own decision on what word to use, but also rage is RIGHT THERE
#anyways make the ancient greeks dramatic 2k23#y'all know they would be eating this shit up#there are also like a million translations of the iliad so there may be some that use rage that i just don't know about#but i just i'm very passionate about this old ass story#also don't come at me about Θεὰ as muse#i got so hung up on anger that i haven't even begun to think about that outside of just going with what everyone else uses#specifically ehrman#ehrman influences a lot of my linguistic decisions#read: a lot of decisions are made because he actively cringes when i say them and that's a win
7 notes
·
View notes
Text
Was Neville Goddard really trustworthy?
Figured I'd do up a post on reasons why we can be pretty damn sure Neville Goddard was full of shit so I don't have to keep linking a bunch of posts. So here it is, a list of reasons why Neville Goddard was a professional bullshitter.
Neville Goddard constantly misquoted the Bible.
When you read Goddard's works, you'll often see him citing Bible passages that supposedly support the Law of Assumption. And yet when you read those passages in context (especially with some historical background knowledge of the book or letter in question), it becomes obvious that the passages had nothing to do with the Law of Assumption at all. Examples:
Citing a passage explaining the theological significance of the crucifixion and resurrection and claiming it's about manifestation.
Citing a passage about God creating the nation of Israel through Abraham to support his claim that man can create anything through imagination.
Citing a passage describing angels as "ministering spirits" and claiming that it says angels are your personal feelings.
Citing a passage talking about the Jewish law and claiming it refers to the Law of Assumption.
Goddard quoted specifically from the New King James Version, which is available to read here. Whenever he quotes the Bible, go ahead and read it in context. You'll soon see for yourself that these passages don't actually support him at all.
Additionally, Goddard's claims that the Bible somehow encodes the truth of the Law of Assumption is literally nothing more than a conspiracy theory. The actual history of Christianity and the New Testament simply does not support this whatsoever. If you want to learn actual history of the New Testament, I recommend looking into the books and YouTube videos of Dr. Bart D. Ehrman. His work is grounded in actual research and evidence, rather than mystical speculation or theological need. You can visit Dr. Ehrman's YouTube channel here.
Neville Goddard's metaphysics are self-contradictory.
Goddard claims that "everyone is you pushed out" (EIYPO), and that you, personally, are literally responsible for each and every other person's behavior. No limitations, no exceptions. If you don't like how somebody behaves, it's your job to assume them into the person you want them to be.
And yet, he speaks as if each and every person is individually responsible for manifesting their own happiness, which doesn't make sense if EIYPO is true. If EIYPO were really true, and Goddard liked the idea of all his projections living happy, fulfilled lives, he wouldn't bother writing all of this literature. He would just go into the void state and assume a world where everyone was living their best life into being.
The fact is, the contradiction serves a sinister purpose. It allows the perpetrators of violence to be let off the hook every time while their victims shoulder all of the blame.
Abdullah probably never existed.
Goddard's loyal fans have all heard the tale of how Neville Goddard met Abdullah, an Ethiopian rabbi who supposedly taught him Kabbalah, which supposedly supports the Law of Assumption.
First of all, Neville Goddard was a gentile, and the form of mysticism he taught was, well, pretty Christian. He may have absolutely butchered the New Testament, but he constantly quoted from it and made Jesus out to be a pretty big deal.
Meanwhile, Kabbalah is a purely Jewish form of mysticism. The notion that it would support Goddard's Christian mysticism is laughable. Kabbalah is not about Jesus, and it does not support Christianity - even if Christians have appropriated and distorted it. Even a cursory "what is Kabbalah?" search will reveal that Kabbalah has nothing to do with Goddard's teachings.
However, there is another form of mysticism that Goddard's teachings strongly resemble, and this is New Thought. It's within the New Thought movement that we see the developing idea that human beings can shape reality with thought and belief.
This whole story Goddard gave about Abdullah foreseeing his arrival is exactly the kind of thing a mystical con artist would come up with. If you study esotericism and the occult at all, you quickly learn that people just make up fake wizards all the time, from Abraham of Worms's Abramelin to Helena Blavatsky's Koot Hoomi.
It's always the same narrative; someone allegedly meets this wise mystic who shares this profound wisdom, who for some reason is unavailable for comment and never authors any works aside from those they've allegedly shared with their single chosen student. Investigations of their alleged teachings inevitably reveal that they bear very little relation to their supposed origins, but look very much like the ideas popular within their alleged students' own circles.
If you want to learn more about the history of esotericism and the occult for yourself, Dr. Justin Sledge's YouTube channel ESOTERICA is a great place to start. If you want to learn more about the history of Jewish mysticism and Kabbalah more specifically (so to see exactly why the Law of Assumption has nothing to do with it), you can check out his 14 part lecture series.
If you are leaving or questioning the Law of Assumption and need help, please see this post.
40 notes
·
View notes
Note
Hi!!
It's very late where I am so this may not be as put together as id like it, however i dont want to forget (like i have the past four times already), but anyways.
I've been noticing a few contradictions in the bible, specifically in the new testament?
For example, just one out of the few that have been bothering me recently (months), Matthew 17:20, and Luke 17:6 both mention something along the lines of "if you have even a mustard seed of faith, if you command x to do whatever it may be, x will do it, because you had faith. However, what about James 1:5-7?
And another one:
Most believers (that I've met at least), say that if you accept Christ, you can't ever back out of it, once you accept him you can't go back on that decision and hes always with you. However, what about Revelation 3:14-17 I believe 0? I've brought it up to my mother and my (multiple) youth pastors (through the years) multiple times but I just get the same things related over and over and nothing actually explained.
Anyways I was just curious on your thoughts about that, I think it's interesting that there would even be question about it, given how often I'm told "the Bible is crystal clear, all you need to do is read it" when reading it frequently leaves me with way more questions than what I started with.
I used to believe that the Christian god guided the hands of the people who wrote the Bible as well as the hands of those who transcribed and translated it. But that belief did not stand up to the inconsistencies in the text. I used my faith to patch the holes, but it eventually spread too thin. It became impossible for me to perpetuate the illusion that the Bible was an inerrant work of a god. So what was it, then? I was at a loss.
Then I started reading Bart D. Ehrman’s book Misquoting Jesus. It gave me a lot of context about how the Bible came to be, including who changed it along the way and why. I recommend looking into Ehrman’s vast body of work. He is a biblical scholar and also an ex-Christian. He has several other books and a podcast also called Misquoting Jesus which is available on YouTube. His work really shows how the Bible is a collection of ancient writings from many authors with different intentions, which explains why it’s so inconsistent not only in theology but also in tone. It is such a relief to put down the task of trying to make the Bible make sense, especially when everyone is screaming at you that “it’s crystal clear” because it’s just not! It’s a complicated ancient text whose original is lost to time and has been copied and translated for thousands of years. With that in mind, it makes sense that you feel this way. Thanks for sending this in! I wish you the best of luck, I know this is a hard thing to contend with.
12 notes
·
View notes
Text
Continuing my reading of Jesus, Interrupted by Bart Ehrman, I'm on chapter two now where he's discussing contradictions in the Bible. He's not presenting an exhaustive list, but rather ones that "in the opinion of a large number of historical critics, cannot be reconciled without doing real violence to the text."
I'm excited to have some specific examples because as a Christian I would have this concern thrown at me every now and then by nonbelievers I had conversations with. "The Bible is full of contradictions!" they would say and I would ask for one to be named. And every single time no one would be able to give me an actual contradiction, which of course leaves the point at a dead end.
First up on Ehrman's list:
Mark and John say that Jesus died on different days
Mark, the earliest gospel, says that Jesus was crucified at nine in the morning on Passover (Mark 15:25). John has Jesus crucified around noon on the day of preparation for Passover (John 19:14) which is a day before. It is still the day of preparation when the Roman soldiers find Jesus dead (John 19:31-34).
For clarity, the day of preparation ended Friday night as the Sabbath begins at sundown on Friday. Meaning that Mark has Jesus crucified on Saturday morning and John has Jesus crucified Friday afternoon.
Ehrman posits that since John was written later, it's likely that the author changed the time of death to make a theological point: Jesus is the Lamb of God. John is the only gospel to give Jesus the title of Lamb of God. Jesus dying on the day of preparation for Passover means he's dying with all the lambs being ritualistically sacrificed as the Jews remember passover. The timing drives home the notion that Jesus is dying as a sacrifice so that others may be spared.
In my opinion, what we are left with at minimum is the certainty of irreconcilable differences between the gospel accounts that leave the door wide open for being able to doubt their accurate accounting of events. The impact of this could be pretty severe, when you believe that the Bible is completely inerrant with no inaccuracies or contradictions. If I was still a Christian, it would give me a lot to think about.
#exvangelical#ex christian#ex fundamentalist#deconstruction#ex fundie#deconstructing christianity#jesus interrupted#contradictions in the bible#bart ehrman#biblical contradictions
28 notes
·
View notes
Note
Hi! I saw your Bible post and if you're interested in doing this, I have a few things you could look into/do which might make the process easier if you have trauma/want to approach it like a set of myths/historical document! I studied theology and religion at uni (particularly queer and eco theology) and came at it from a non-christian angle. Anyway feel free to delete this ask if it's not useful/too much etc. I just thought I'd give some ideas!
Yale has a series of online free lectures on the Old Testament which are super interesting and don't assume any faith! They go into the various myths which inspired the various stories in the bible (such as the flood), and the history of particular parts of the old testament library (they also have one for the new testament but I haven't watched it so don't know how good it is)
Look into apocrypha! The Nag Hammai scriptures, the gospel of Judas etc. Might actually be super interesting to you if you like the myth/history aspect! They're the books which were de-classified as canon (or never were canon), but all were written super early (2nd century) I specifically recommend the Gospel of Mary Magdalene and the Gospel of Judas. "Lost scriptures" by Ehrman is a great laymans book explaining the histories/controversies around this and even goes into the controversies surrounding the secret gospel of Mark aka the gospel where Jesus seems to have gay sex. (Ehrman writes a lot of good layman books on the bible which might be worth looking at!)
If you're looking at the NT maybe look at books like Jesus the Jew by Geza Vermes or The Crucified God by moltmamn. They're a bit specialised but it is SUPER important to modern historical studies of jesus to situate him as a Jew because that is who he was! Also Moltmamns book is v leftist and not fundamentalist.
"And man created God" by Selina O'Grady goes into detail about all the OTHER religions around during the 1st century (emperor cults etc.) Which is great for context for the gospels and also learning about cool religious traditions around in the 1st century!
Queer theology? Maybe? Might be fun for ya? Queer readings of the Bible are abundant from Ruth, Judas, David and Jonathan and jesus and there's quite a few books on them (I'm not dropping any here because I've read some Intense Theological Ones which Im not sure would appeal but if you Google you will find)
Look into Song of Songs the Official Sex is Good and Holy Book in the bible! (It's also just beautifully written)
Looking at things like "the Muslim Jesus" might also be interesting? Little collections of how Islam has viewed/interpreted Judaism and Christianity and why is always interesting and often another angle on those myths/historical documents
I'm sure other people could give you more ideas/ways to approach! I approached from a non religious angle but my institution was firmly situated in the Christian tradition so is slightly biased that way. But anyway! I just thought I'd give some starting points you could look at on the myth/history angle?
Have a lovely day!
I AM LOOKING??!!?? gd this is EXACTLY what I didn’t know I needed, all of this sounds very up my alley & like it’ll be great for what I’d be trying to get out of it. like. I have gone from “this is a thing I’ve been idly thinking about” to “this is a thing I could reasonably do and where I could start”!
I’ve done a little bit of looking into queer readings of things in the past (particularly david & jonathan) but then I had a years-long period that I technically still haven’t gotten out of where I physically could not bring myself to open a bible so I haven’t tried to actually read those stories myself while keeping a queer perspective in mind. also have had more years of lit classes that I dropped out of halfway through the semester so I have slightly more knowledge of how to dissect and analyze Texts than I used to
#everything I ever learned about the bible was in *deeply* religious environments#95% of which were evangelical fundamentalism#I did also go to an episcopal church about a dozen times when I lived in [redacted]#& i’ve been to mass a few times + had One catholic friend growing up#anon#answered#save#I literally feel like i’ve been given a gift lol
46 notes
·
View notes
Text
New conference in September, specifically intended for nonscholars to learn about some of what's currently going on in the academic side of Biblical scholarship.
This is being organized by Bart Ehrman so everything is being recorded and if you sign up you will get access to the recordings to relisten whenever you want. Which is good news for those who want to listen but can't attend live.
7 notes
·
View notes
Text
youtube
COMMENTARY:
:”All we can know is the perception of the authors view of this Jesus” Robyn Faith Waslsh, PhD
So, it all comes down to epistemology and you lack the literary tools required to explore those boundaries because of Jimmy Tabor's Marxist maxim that Harmonization is the enemy of Truth, an artifact of Post Modern Historic Deconstrction. You are stuck with the understanding of the Gospels, in particular, and scriptures, genearlly, at the marketing target of Bill Bright's business model for monetizing Jesus, Campus Crusade for Christ, the business majors and jocis, coaches and atheletic directors of the Evangelical football agenda and theological schedule.based on the Salvation Gospel of Paul as promoted by Bart “Giggles” Ehrman and the Chapel Hill Campus Crusade for Apostasy coven of evangelical anti-theists.
One of the new things I have learned from Dennis MacDonald and Robyn Faith Walsh in their shared epipheny that the Gospels, especially Mark, are a literary project supervised by a editorial staff of the educated elite witnesses who wre around the Jesus Followers and Resurrection, is that the Iliad and Odyssey each had 24 chapters reflecting the number of letters in the Greek alphabet, like Pslam 119, with 22 stanzas to reflect the 22 letters in the Hebrew alphabet.
I've studied numerology since I was a freshman at Indiana University, Mark Cuban's alma mater. I've known that there are at least three different numerological systems in the Bible, including Numerics, which interprets the Bible according to the Gematria embedded in the written words, Textual numerology, which is number embedded in the narrative, such as the Seven Days of Creation and the 12 disciples, and what I call Mucdane Numberology, which are the numbers of the chapters and verses added in 1551 by a typsetter to ensure the accuracy of the copy, All three of these methods are a playground for the Holy Spirit for those who have a liberal arts degree before 1968.
Anyway, with that insight form MacDonald regarding the Iliad and the Odyssey,it immediately struck me that the Gospel of Luke had 24 chapters, just like The Odyssey, which besides illustrating the accuracy of MacDonald/Walsh's thesis that the Gospels were influenced by Greco Roman literature, but that the Gospel of Luke was specifically composed to fit into the literary genre of The Odyssey, which is why Marcion selected it as the representative literature of Christianity: because whatever in going on in the Greek Luke wrote is evocative of the necessary harmonization of the narrative and Odyseus
Why Marxion went on to include Pauline Theology on the basis of the Salvation Gospel is a mystery to me. The Salvation Gospel, as explcated by Jimmy Tabor and Pro-Life Evangelical apologetics, is for frightened people who were scared shitless of going to Vietnam in the 60s, like Tabor, or like Bart Ehrman, graspoing at any theological life preserver to keep from drowning in his own sea of scoial isolation and e ixistential impotence.
I could go on, but my point is that the Post Modern Historic Deconstrction represents a cognitive glass ceiling the has prevented you, personally, to full tapestry of the literature of the Bible. Luke understood Christianity better that Paul did and his was not Paul's unkown god of Mars Hill, The Parable of the Prodigal Son is a recasting of The Odyssey where the returning combat veteran is celebrated from a distance and received without having to fight his way into his own bedroom,
Marcion was a Shp's Master and undoubledly resonated with the navigation embedded in the Odyssey, which exists at the same level as Rishard Bauckham's intuited terrain appreciation of the eyewitness of the Gospels.
There is no such thing as a Christian epistemology of theory of knowledge: Jesus imports Greek philosophy into the Shema, along with the “love thy neighbor” atheist clause, in Mark 12:29 – 31. perfecting the 3 legged stool of the Moses Shema in Deuteronomy 6, with the elements of Fire, Water and Earth to the stool 4 square to the world of Fire, Water, Air and Earth of the Christian Shema of Heart, Sould, Mind and Strength, The difference between the ontology of the Hewbrew Bible and the ontoloyg of the Gosples is that the Messiah of the Hebrew Bible is a graven image while the Messian of the Gosples has a pucker factor and the same gestalt epistemology as all humans.
0 notes
Text
Was listening to a podcast that is otherwise very interesting. It had on some biblical scholars like Bart Ehrman and Elaine Pagels, so I gave it a shot. And unwittingly, I listened to a long episode with Destiny as a guest.
For one thing, I can see why he’s liked by rationalists and debate bros. But ironically, he is a walking contradiction.
The first half of the podcast involved a pretty agreeable discussion on the limits of individual principles. Most people aren’t principled, we have ideals with limits. Almost no one is a free speech absolutist, for example. Additionally, "being principled" isn't inherently virtuous--an ardent Nazi can be principled, after all.
And these are ideas that I basically agree with. It's very related to my thoughts on intellectual consistency.
But then, Destiny starts talking about a debate he had with Norm Finkelstein. Destiny complained about Norm and audience members misinterpreting his principled stance on the definition of genocide. As if a) being definitionally principled is virtuous and b) anyone outside of the most annoying people even abide by total principled prescriptivism.
His argument was that, genocide definitionally requires special intent. Therefore, Israel could nuke all of Gaza and still not "technically" commit a genocide. Basically, if Israel was trying to achieve a specific goal and total extermination was simply a side effect, then it's not genocide.
But the vast majority of people, if they REALLY wrestled with his argument, wouldn't say "wow, sound logic!"
Most people, because they see definitions as tools rather than rules, would say, "wow, that's evil! sounds like we need to change to official definition of genocide! or at least create a new word to cover this scenario that carries the same weight and legal implications!"
Anyways, maybe the ancient Greeks were onto something by teaching rhetoric. Or maybe we are lucky that Destiny is too obsessed with solving word problems to develop charisma.
0 notes
Text
Mark 2:26 "Abiathar high priest" passage does not contradict with 1 Samuel 21:1
A lot of atheist skeptics, even the famous Bart Ehrman, an atheist New Testament manuscripts scholar, would like to mention the supposed Bible contradiction of 1 Samuel 21:1 with Mark 2:26. Mark 2:26 reads
"How was it that he went into the House of God during the lifetime of Abiathar the high priest and ate the Bread of the Presence, which was not lawful for anyone but the priests to eat, and gave some of it to his companions?”
The atheist skeptics or any skeptic in particular but lets call them "the skeptics" will jab at this noting how Abiathar was in fact not the high priest who gave David (the "he" in this verse) the bread of the presence. But rather it was Ahimelech who did.
Abiathar was the son of Ahimelech. Ahimelech was high priest at the time. Sons of the high priest usually help the high priest preform ritual duties, and sons thus tend to be priests themselves. Only priests are allowed to be in the Taberknackle or in the Temple.
Now to the solution.
Mark 2:26 only says "during the life of..." which is true, because Abiathar was Ahimelech son, and was alive during the time Ahimelech was alive.
However later in this verse, it then says "Abiathar the high priest..." the word "the" grammatically indicates a singular. As if Abiathar was the high priest of the time.
However, singular use of titles are common in Biblical literature. For instance, David in the New Testament was called David the king. Was there only one king?
No. It is a title to specify who this David was. People back then could have same names you know. This Abiathar son of Ahimelech was not the only Abiathar in existence. Jesus here in Mark 2:26 was specifying who this Abiathar was by saying "Abiathar the high priest," because everybody knows who Abiathar is. The succeeding high priest of King David after Ahimelech the first high priest during the time of David was killed.
So the only question remaining is, why didn't Jesus just say David ate the bread given by the high priest Ahimelech, instead of David ate the bread of the presence that occurred during the time of who we know as Abiathar as the high priest?
The reason why was because Ahimelech did not adhere to the law as well as his son Abiathar. Abiathar was known as a renowned priest for his adherence to the law. Adherence to the law is one of the most important things during the time of the second temple to Jews. This was because Jewish thinking of the law was if bad things happened, which did for centuries to the Jews, from the division of Israel into Judah and Samaria, to the Babylonian exile, to captivities of captivities as nations moved in and out, the Jews saw their solution to this issue by turning to the law, becoming more and more pious for the Torah. So a high priest who holds to the law more than another high priest who does not, is considered more revered.
So when Jesus spoke to the Pharisees in Mark 2, he decided to chose a more renowned and law abiding figure to fully detail the account of David eating the bread. Describing figures from the past, usually when doing so associates them with another figure from the past. Like an example would be in Hosea 1:1, "A message from the LORD came to Beeri’s son Hosea during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah, and during the reign of Joash’s son Jeroboam, who was king of Israel."
This sort of language of acquanticing a specific figure with another figure living during the same time was common Jewish rhetoric. And so Jesus did the same here.
Final note. Some Bibles translate verse 26 as "was the high priest." This translation was the translation Ehrman in fact used when he was in seminary. However, this reading is entirely unnecessary. The renowned manuscript scholar and even long time good friends with Ehrman since seminary, Daniel B. Wallace, states this reading is unnecessary, and a better translation would be "during the lifetime of Abiathar the high priest."
In conclusion, there is no contradiction in Mark 2:26 and 2 Samuel 21:1.
#bible#biblicalstudies#religion#atheism#christianity#gospelstudies#gospel#christianityisfalse#antitheist#antitheism#secularism#secular#religion kills#anti theism
1 note
·
View note
Text
Tagging System & Info
#Hellscream - Vent posts and Vent art
#Temple - Political content and general commentary
#Seven Roars - Posts I made
#Crow - Shitposts, jokes, and memes; not to be taken very seriously
Honey - Poetry and art
-----
I am an Atheist.
This blog is meant to be Christianity-specific.
No, I do not use atheism as an instrument of hatred against Judaism and Islam because I'm "Culturally Christian". Look elsewhere for the straw man you want to tear down.
I am not an anti-theist or anti-Christian. Theism is a significant part of human culture that deserves to be recognized and practiced by those who wish to.
Theism should be a choice. I am against those in positions of power that want to enforce their doctrine onto others by threat or law.
-----
Despite what this blog and it's themes may suggest, I'm fascinated with Christianity from an outside-looking-in perspective. My interest is specifically around the culture and beliefs of Southern Baptists, Evangelicals and nondenominationals. I participate in a weekly Bible Study (where I do my evangelical moonlighting).
I genuinely enjoy learning about these beliefs, even though I do not accept them and am often opposed to them.
The history of the Bible and its cultural context is also a point of interest. Bart Ehrman is my favorite source on the topic
-----
#obviously there are cruel people out there#people who spew hatred for things they never understood#but we're not all like that#I'd be willing to wager that its not even a lot of us#the meanest people are often the loudest#Seven Roars
0 notes
Text
A Little Meditation for the Inauguration of the Twelve Days of Christmas, 2022
A Little Meditation for December 25, 2022
The next twelve days are set aside in several cultures as so-called intercalary days (they aren’t really, since they don’t make up for the ways that imperfect calendars get out of sync with the seasons)—days outside of ordinary time, days associated with marvels and wonders and mysteries, culminating in the bright feast of Twelfth Night. For most of Protestant America, it is mostly taken up with a week or so of nothingness in which everything shuts down till after New Year’s.
Today is Christmas (in case you didn’t notice) for those who operate according to that particular calendar. And I have been noticing anew the motivations behind the stories in the Gospels that give rise to the Christian feast that gave rise to the secular feasting.
Matthew and Luke recite details of Nativity stories that are drenched in politics that couldn’t possibly be of any interest to the Cappadocian and mainland Greek congregations that presumably were consuming the texts into which the stories found their way. Why would Corinth or Thessalonica or Colossae or Galatia care much about who was governing as tetrarch or king or legate or whatever of a confusing slew of sub-provinces a few decades previously in the imperial province of Syria of which Judea, Galilee, et cetera were lesser districts? The angels and the star in the East, part of the expected Jewish (and Greek, sort of) worldview of the time in which angels occasionally incarnated as hypostases of the Supreme God, are less puzzling than this relentless focus on all the small societal details (which have their own glitches in terms of chronology, few in number but some of them tricky).
What is obvious is that there was a tradition linking Bethlehem and Nazareth that had to be dealt with somehow. John, the Gospel most distant from the specific political situation and most linked to the minority opinions within Jewish theology regarding the Light and the Logos that are only dimly reflected in the other Gospels, reports the controversy over how Jesus could be the Lord’s Anointed since he came from Nazareth, a Nowheresville village in Galilee (“Can anything good come out of Nazareth?”) instead of from King David’s Bethlehem. But two Gospels had already been written that explained the anomaly in slightly different politically charged ways, coming after the Gospel that takes no interest in the question, assuming that scholars’ hypothetical dating of the Gospels is correct.
It all comes out of a social and spiritual world that is far more alien to our presuppositions than we imagine, skeptics and believers alike. Margaret Barker presents a controversial contextuaiization of it in Christmas: The Original Story, while Bart Ehrman recounts what intellectually respectable historians can reconstruct of the beliefs about exaltation and divinization in How Jesus Became God. What is intriguing is that an unconventional believer who works from a wide variety of original texts and a former believer working from the same historical documents tell roughly parallel stories about the assumptions feeding into the earliest beliefs and what came after.
And it is fascinating that today’s New York Times reports on a Christian neurosurgeon who has traveled the world collecting stories of spiritual healing in hopes of proving the existence of miracles in response to the prayers of the faithful (my favorite is the comatose woman who awoke and recovered completely after being doused with a whole bottle of olive oil that the Catholic priest had reluctantly blessed because he found the whole notion too embarrassing to countenance), and on the effort in the Cajun part of Louisiana to gain Church certification of the sainthood of the twelve-year-old leukemia victim whose intervention in response to believers’ invocation is held to be responsible for far more than the two attestable miracles that Catholicism has always required as a precondition.
In each of all these situations, the event “as it really happened” (as in the famous historicist saying) is impossible to reconstruct with anything resembling a preponderance of unambiguous evidence. But they all fit into that category that fascinates me so much, the one in which some of the people involved say that it probably didn’t happen “just exactly that way,” but something very much out of the ordinary definitely happened, and it wouldn’t have happened if the people involved hadn’t believed that something very strange was already happening and decided that it would get even more strange before it was over.
That way madness lies, but also mystery that is not necessarily the “miracle, mystery and authority” of Dostoevsky’s Grand Inquisitor in the once-familiar parable from The Brothers Karamazov.
0 notes
Text
Writer Education Tag
I was tagged by @smol-feralgremlin!! Thank you!!!
Rules: Writers often have to research some pretty out-there stuff for our wips. What are some weird, unusual, or oddly specific things you’ve had to learn about or look into?
So I guess one of the biggest ones I had to search up was anything regarding burn wounds. Specifically, Icarus has two major burn wounds in Δάιος, and I needed to know how they would feel to receive. So that was fun
Another really interesting search was a deep dive into horseshoe crabs. Like, I vaguely remember what they look like from my time as a kid going to the Cleveland Aquarium but did you know they have a fuck ton little leggies on the bottom of them? You'll know what I mean when you get to that chapter but let me just say that they disgust Icarus feels was very authentic to how I felt doing research on them.
And let's do one final interesting search... This time from Desecrate. Well, I guess the entire premise of Desecrate could count as this but I specifically have gone down a rabbit hole of the imagery of Hell for this book. I just got a new reference book in! Heaven and Hell by Bart Ehrman (the little brother of my own prof Ehrman that I take greek with!) Specifically, I'm looking at when certain imagery was indoctrinated into Christian belief, seeing as Judaism doesn't have a Hell like Christians do. I need to know whether Adonai would know what the fuck is going on with that or whether they would be all "why are you talking about Hades?"
So yeah, those are rather fun searches lol
Gonna soft tag @flowerprose @authoralexharvey and @doom-inique-writes!!
3 notes
·
View notes
Text
Here's the summary on Neville Goddard:
The guy claimed that he learned the type of mysticism he taught from an Ethiopian rabbi and Kabbalah scholar named Abdullah. However, "I learned it all from this foreign mystic" basically just means "I pulled it out of my ass" in the world of mysticism and the occult (literally so many people made up fake wizard mentors; EG, Helena Blavatsky and Koot Hoomi), and it's pretty obvious that what he taught was a riff on New Thought and doesn't relate to Kabbalah at all.
He claims that the Bible supports the Law of Assumption, and constantly references it. However, if you actually check the source texts (he cites the NKJV in specific), it's obvious that he just ripped things out of context. Like he constantly pretends the New Testament was referring to the Law of Assumption when it was actually referring to the Jewish law.
Basically everything he claimed about early Christianity was horseshit. Please check out the work of Dr. Bart D. Ehrman if you want to get an academic historical perspective on early Christianity.
The metaphysics he teaches are internally inconsistent. Supposedly everybody has full individual agency when it comes to manifesting their own happiness. But people who treat you badly or act like assholes in general are supposedly just doing it because you manifested their behavior. Basically, whether or not other people have agency depends on whatever allows him to blame individuals for their circumstances at the moment.
He claims that you can manifest literally anything into existence by believing in it. Now let's be real, a lot of people believe in dragons and other fairy tale creatures, so we should be seeing a lot more of those if his claims are true. But we don't, so that pretty much blows that out of the water.
And yes, everyone should be seeing them if people are really manifesting them into reality. He claimed that the Titanic was manifested by fiction author Morgan Robertson.
The success stories featured in The Law and the Promise are all formulaic and written in the same writing voice... almost as if he wrote them all himself or had an assistant write them for him. Can't prove he did, but c'mon, the guy obviously made up Abdullah and deliberately took Bible quotes out of context, so it's not really a stretch to think he'd lie here, too.
No, Neville Goddard did not "predict his own death." He predicted that he would die at some point in his sixties. He died at sixty seven years old. It wasn't exactly uncommon for a guy to die in his late sixties in 1972.
And before anybody comes at me with "but there's success stories though??", please read this: If the Law of Assumption is fake, what about the success stories?
25 notes
·
View notes
Note
Hey!
I was raised aetheist, and I never really realised how badly Christianity could screw people up. There were some people in my extended family who were religious, but it was always just this vague distant thing that existed on the periphary. The only times I entered churches were in a touristy way, and only then because my mum dragged me into them - I've always hated churches, they have bad vibes.
Then I met my best friend who was raised in a religious family, and they described a lot of the strange, disturbing rituals they would perform in church. Around the same time, I began watching a content creator who was raised in a religious family and was going through the process of reconciling their religious upbringing with their homosexuality.
Since then, I've been really fascinated by how this religion can screw people up and make people doubt their entire being. I think a lot about how on earth this one religion - or cult - from a city thousands of years ago became so persistent and all encompassing.
I was wondering, what do you know about the real-world history of the Christian religion and Jesus? One can assume that Jesus was a real person, but what are the details? Was he a cult leader? A rebel? Both? How did he make people believe he was a prohpet? Why did he make people believe he was a prophet? I'm fascinated by the real historical events that occurred to create such a long-lived ripple effect, but I'm cautious of researching "religious history" on my own because I don't know how to avoid the many dangerous people one would be likely to come across in that feild. Do you have any knowledge to share?
-🟪
My favorite biblical historian is Dr. Bart Ehrman (link to his website). He’s a former Christian, current agnostic which I think gives him a balanced view of biblical history. He talks about what it was like to believe in the Christian story, what it was like to figure out what is real and what isn’t, and what actual biblical scholarship should look like. His books helped me disentangle the complicated stories around Jesus and develop my own sense of scholarship.
Most historians believe that Jesus was a real person who existed around the same time and place as was claimed in the Bible. We have no eye witness testimony about anything Jesus said or did. All we have are copies of copies of legends that people wrote about him decades after his death. We have no real way of knowing what Jesus thought about himself or what he claimed to be.
That being said, we can try to understand the traditions of the stories told about Jesus. I’ve heard a lot of fundamentalists claim to be going back to the “early Christian church” but there were so, so many traditions that sprang up around the story of Jesus all believing different theologies. For example, early Christian mysticism is a weird, wild rabbit hole to go down if you’re ever curious.
We can try to understand the man that Jesus was by looking at the stories told about him. These stories were based in apocalypticism under Roman rule: the belief that the end would come, but hey at least it would free people from Roman tyranny. Jesus was an apocalyptic preacher whose death caused shockwaves of grief among his followers. I do believe that he made promises about the coming kingdom and when those promises were suddenly impossible after he was killed by his government, his followers found a way to make those promises relevant again in their own minds.
I find this stuff interesting, but I really wish that this specific history didn’t affect people’s lives in the modern world. I wish it were just a weird history niche instead of a direct threat to people’s wellbeing. Being hesitant to research biblical history makes sense. There’s a lot of nonsense out there to dig through and it can be exhausting. Take care of yourself first. Biblical history is not as important as your wellbeing. But if you do enjoy researching, have at it! Find people that you respect, hold on to ideas loosely so you critically evaluate them, and be ready to take a break if you burn out.
19 notes
·
View notes
Text
I literally recently discovered my deep interest in religion, now that I don't believe in any of them. I've been reading Bart Ehrman (secular New Testament scholar) and taking notes, and I wish I knew of more secular scholarly work that is Mormon-specific. Maybe I need too get into Sunstone more...
Kinda fucked (but also kinda the best possible way it could have happened) that I developed a special interest into mormon doctrine, theology, and history AFTER I stopped believing in it.
I know sooooo much more now than I ever did as a believing member. And I think you can only fully acknowledge the history after you've stopped believing so maybe this was the only way I would have learned as much about mormonism as I have
13 notes
·
View notes
Text
Episode 19 Transcript: I'm Out of the Closet Now So I Don't Need Telekinetic Powers Anymore
C: Hey, BAB pals. A quick note from Crystal here. Apologies in advance for the quality of the audio - my audio - in this episode. The place I usually record was not available to me during that time, so I sound like what someone would sound like if they were sitting on the floor of an active laundry room instead of the usual quality. So, yeah. Happy listening nonetheless, and see you on the other side.
[intro guitar music]
G: Hello, my name is Grey.
C: And my name is Crystal.
G: And this is Busty Asian Beauties, a Supernatural commentary podcast where I, someone who has seen this show several times…
C: And I, someone who only knows the show through social media, discuss every single episode of Supernatural from start to finish. Also, we are both Asian.
G: Both Asian!
-
G: So for today's episode, we will be discussing Season 1, Episode 19: “Provenance,” written by David Ehrman, directed by Phil Sgriccia.
C: Who is this David guy? I don't like him.
G: [laughs] The thing is, like, I know from your messages and everything that you don't like this episode.
C: Yeah.
G: I think this is the first episode where we will have a major disagreement on like, the episode. I don't unders- like, maybe you'll convince me that this is an episode to be loathed, but I thought it was all right, and I actually enjoyed it. I was gonna make a comment that Phil Sgriccia was having so much fun this episode, and it shows.
C: Too much fun. [G laughs]
G: So, uh, "Provenance." Before going in, what did you know about this one?
C: Um, nothing. Like, I knew about Sara Blake, but I didn't know she showed up in season 1. She seemed more like a season 2 kind of person to me. So yeah, in terms of this specific episode, I had no clue. I'm just- the next plot thread that I know about is like, John coming back and them looking for the Colt, so until that happens, I'm pretty unsure about what's going on.
G: Okay! So, there's no "previously on" again.
C: Yeah, which is weird, but okay.
G: I'm confused as to which episode does or does not get a "previously on" in this show. I mean, I feel like, this would have benefited from a "previously on" where we see Sam feeling guilty about Jess, you know? Shit like that.
C: Yeah, like the dreams...
G: Maybe even Mary burning in the ceiling thing.
C: [laughs] For the 17th time.
G: Yeah, exactly. But alas, this does not have one. It starts with a couple hanging up a painting over their fireplace. The painting is of a family portrait, and if it is... I don't know. I am not an art critic, and everyone in the episode keeps on saying it's a bad piece. Like, at some point, Sarah calls it a "monstrosity." But I thought it was pretty decent. Like, it's obviously like, a picture that they put a filter over, you know.
C: [laughs] Right. Yeah, no, they ran a photograph through Picsart and printed it out and called it a day.
G: And the couple talks a bit. Through their talking, we discover that they got this painting at a charity auction. The woman remarks that it's like, kind of creepy, but that immediately devolves from, you know, having a conversation to making out with her partner. And so, she asks her partner to go upstairs with her, and the guy says like, "Okay, I'll just lock up," and so she turns to leave, and the guy starts locking up, and just then, the man in the painting comes alive. Like, his head turns. As the guy locks up, we hear some creaking, and we pan over back to the painting, where a razor at the edge of the painting is now gone. So, we go over to the woman, who is now in some lingerie.
C: How many women has Supernatural killed while they were wearing their lingerie? Like, there was the cop’s wife in “Asylum,” right?
G: Yes.
C: Was there anyone else, or is this just the second?
G: I think this is just the second one that we have, like, already actively called out.
C: Still pretty bad.
G: At least this one has a reason. Like, they're about to have sex, so like, of course she's- it, it makes sense.
C: Yeah, but they didn't need to write it like that. At least the man also died shirtless. Hashtag feminism, hashtag equality.
G: Someone enters the door, but we don't see who it is. A little bit later, the guy who is actually the partner of the girl in bed comes in and remarks that it's so dark and she should hit the lights. And he goes over to the bed, and when he lands on the bed, he hears squelching.
C: And it wasn't that wet ass pussy.
G: Yeah, it wasn't the wet ass pussy of his partner. It was blood on the bed. Lots and lots of blood.
So he freaks out, and he likes stumbles backwards, and then he looks off screen towards the camera, and he screams. He is dead too.
G: I thought this intro was very full of life. I mean, they die, but like, you know, like, these people are believable people, and the horror of like, you go to bed, and you hear squelching, and it's all blood. It's like, very, very fun.
C: Yeah. That was pretty good, yeah. I guess I was mostly just stuck on "Please, why did you have to kill her in her lingerie?" But yeah, I think that the blood reveal was done quite nicely.
-
C: So we cut to a bar where Dean is flirting with yet another woman. I think at this point, I was like, "Was this episode written by Kripke?" But no, it wasn't. It was... whoever it was. And he's getting her phone number. Then, the camera pans over to Sam, who is ignoring all the women and looking through newspapers, which is like, the fourth time that this has been the intro to an episode. Like, that man is aroace and/or gay. Like, for realsies.
Sam gestures Dean over, and he tells Dean that they think that they found a case, etc, but- [groans] is this the thing that you messaged me about?
G: Uh, yes.
C: When Dean says-
G: Can I be the one to mention it?
C: Yes. Please.
G: Sam asks Dean, "So what have you introduced yourself to these girls this time?" And Dean says, "Oh, I introduced myself as a reality TV scout."
C: So... he should die? Like, he should die. I think he should literally die and drop dead, and I should shoot him between the eyes, like, with a gun, like empty a clip on him, and then he should like, die some more, and I will like, die and go to Hell and be a demon and then torture him while he is dead in Hell being tortured. [G laughs] That's just my thoughts. What are yours?
G: The thing is, lying for information, you know, lying for whatever, it's like, you're doing a job, and this is how you do the job.
C: Yeah.
G: So like, sometimes it's not too good, like, for example, if Sam didn't actually like Sarah, and they were like, still doing the "I'll pretend I like her just so I can get information," like, it doesn't taste good to the mouth, but like, I understand why someone would do that because for a job, and it's for the greater good. But this is literally not even a job. And like, I have been so forgiving of Dean flirting with women, because, like, I don't think there's something wrong with that. Like, I think he can flirt with women like, that's fine, right?
C: [laughing] No, he's not allowed, but continue.
G: But this has taken a turn from just flirting with people to something a lot more nefarious. Because like, of course, like, if a girl like, wants to get out of the town and like, become an actor, or something, like, of course, if they see a reality TV scout, they're going to be nicer, you know. They're going to be more accommodating. And the fact that Dean is using that fact to his advantage to sleep with these women... I'm gonna kill him. [laughs] Like...
C: Yeah.
G: It made me so upset that like, throughout the rest of the episode, all I can think of is like, "But remember when Dean told those girls that he was a reality TV show scout? I'm gonna kill him." [C laughs]
C: Yeah, yeah. I mean, yeah. Didn't we both message each other that we hate Dean and want him to die like, about this scene?
G: Because I knew- I know what this episode is about. And I thought, like, "Dean is fine." Like, he's a bit pushy with Sam, but generally, like, I didn't see that as a problem. So you watched the episode first, so when you were messaging me, I was like, "What did Dean do this time? Crystal is being so mean again." [both laughing] And then I watched the episode, and I got so upset, and I was like, "I'm sorry, Crystal, for ever doubting you." [C laughs more]
C: Exactly. I'm always correct, thank you. But yeah, I fully agree with what you said, and adding onto that, okay, first, like, it's already a huge problem in the entertainment industry that men in positions of power-
G: Yeah, and the fact that this was written by someone in the entertainment industry-
C: Yeah, this was written by someone in the entertainment industry who was like, "Actually, it's totally normal and fine for TV scouts and producers to go around and- basically-" 'Cause, like, it's established in the entertainment industry it's like, people in positions of power will help you out and get you roles if you fuck them. Like, to a point where people assume after they help you out in the entertainment industry, that like, you accepting that help is equivalent to consenting to sex with them, and that's like, a huge problem and has led to so much rape and sexual assault within the industry. So the fact that Dean is specifically taking advantage of that, and that, yeah, again, this was written by people in the entertainment industry is so disgusting.
G: If Sam was shown to make a face or be like, "Dean, that's- that's not good." Or like, you know, make a comment. But all he does is an exasperated laugh. I'm- I'm like, maybe even looking into it when I say the laugh is exasperated. Like, I think he was literally just laughing!
C: Yeah, he was literally just laughing. Yeah, um, so, five points for Dean?
G: Five? Just five? I feel like he deserves a lot more.
C: Ten? Ten points for Dean?
G: I don't know.
C: Twenty?
G: [laughs] Twenty.
C: A hundred.
G: No. At this point, we should like, do, you know, a scale of 1 to 10, and then like, what is- what is the worst thing that you can do, I think that should be a ten, and then the more casual misogynies are like, ones.
C: Yeah. I support that.
-
C: So Sam tells us about the death of the couple, Mark and Ann Telesca, and how their throats were slit but there were no prints or murder weapons, and the house was locked from the inside. And there were three other murders in the same area of upstate New York in the last century that matches this MO. Yeah, Dean agrees that this could be a case, but [pained] he says that "We can't pick this up until tomorrow morning, right?" And Sam says, "Yeah." And Dean goes back to the bar with Brandy and her friend, and he lies to them again and tells them that him talking to Sam was him talking to his producer, and it looks like there's a good chance that they can get on this reality TV show. And then he puts his arms around them. And also, by the way, he said it was a reality TV show for people "with special skills," and he's probably going to ask them to demonstrate those skills on his dick later tonight, and then I'm going to kill him.
G: The thing is like, I understand that, like, Dean has to hook up at the beginning of the episode because of the themes that they're establishing in this one.
C: Yeah.
G: But it didn't have to be this way.
C: Like, literally, people think that he is hot. Like, he could just hook up to people.
G: I'm gonna kill- I'm gonna kill this guy. What other episodes did this writer write?
C: He's the o- this is the only one that he wrote, so that's good.
G: Good. Never come back, you fucking creep.
C: Yeah. Never come back.
-
G: It's morning now, and in the car, Dean is sleeping with some sunglasses on, and Sam comes around and beeps the car honk and wakes Dean up, and, you know, Sam laughs, he hops into the car, and apparently, there's also the scene- and apparently, the house was free of EMF. So there's no spiritual whatever in the house, and also, he mentions that while Dean was going out, and then Dean like, laughs and says-
C: "Good times." And, well, he forgot the part where I stabbed him in the neck, and he died, and he died, so yeah.
G: [laughs] Yeah. God, I hate him!
C: I hate him so much, I hope he dies. [laughs] This cannot be the whole podcast, I will calm down.
G: And the house didn't have any history, the people were all okay, etc etc. And then Dean says, "Maybe it's a cursed object," and Sam says, "The house is clean," and Dean's like, "Oh, you already said that," and Sam's like, "No, not from EMF. It's clean of anything. There's no furniture, there's no nothing." So Dean asks where the stuff is, and we then go to the parking lot of a- what can be assumed is a fancy place. Later, we learn it's an auction house.
C: Also, one of the- the camera does this thing where it pans across all the cars in the parking lot, and one of them has a license plate that says "THE KRIP" like K-R-I-P, Kripke.
G: Yeah. Boo. And, yeah, we learn it's a fancy place because, like Crystal said, it pans across some beautiful cars. Like, polished vintage cars, sports cars, and we get three of those, and then we get the Impala, which is all things up dinged up and dusty. She's not looking well, and all I can think of is, like, like, "Dean would never allow-"
C: Yeah, Dean would not do this.
G: Yeah! Would never allow the car to look this bad!
C: Yeah, like, that's not her.
G: Yeah, that's literally not Baby. And, and also like, my second thought was like, "Go, Phil Sgriccia! He's having fun." [both laugh]
C: Yeah, he is.
-
G: So inside, we are at an auction house, and it's a quite formal affair. Like, people are in suit and ties, and Sam and Dean stick out like a sore thumb because they're wearing their Carhartt hoodie and just whatever the fuck they wear.
C: Yeah, and also Sam's hair and bangs... Like, he looks so wet and pathetic, like, he looks like a little dog.
G: And Dean like, looks around and is like, "Oh, this looks like a garage sale for WASPs," and then he gets some food from a passing waiter, and just then, he gets greeted by a guy who's, you know, into the the whole affair. Like, he's also wearing a suit and tie, which Dean assumes means he's a waiter. So he turns around, and he says, "Oh, I'd like some champagne, please." [both laugh]
Anyway, Sam introduces himself as Sam Connors and Dean as his brother, and that they're from Connors Limited. They're art dealers. And the man introduces himself as Daniel Blake, owner of the auction house, and he says that this is a private viewing, and they're not on the guest list. So Dean looks at him and says, "We're there, Chuckles. You just need to take another look." And he gets a passing champagne from a waiter and walks away.
C: Yeah, I- I hate him, but he is still funny when he's funny.
G: Yeah! He's charismatic. This is why like, he's already charismatic! Why does he have to lie? [laughs]
C: Yeah, like literally, he did not need to do that. No one needed to do that, and that did not need to be shown, but anyway.
So Sam and Dean look around until they reach the creepy painting. As they're looking at it, this woman comes down from the staircase and says, "A fine example of American Primitive, wouldn't you say?" It's Sarah Blake! Hi Sarah! She is cool. She is very pretty. Sam and Dean both sort of stare at her. And then, Sam says, "Well, I'd say it's more Grant Wood than Grandma Moses, but you knew that. You just wanted to see if I did." So, you know, immediately, we know that there is a romance that's going to be shoehorned into this.
G: [sighs] Okay, I- I'm gonna disagree and say that-
C: I- okay, okay, I know. I know you disagree.
G: I don't think their romance is shoehorned. I think it's fine. So if- [laughs] so if you are pro this episode-
C: Like, Sarah Blake is literally in the same category as Andrea to me in terms of like, realistic writing of woman love interests.
G: Nooo. Nooo!
C: Sorry, but she is.
G: No! No! I like her! [laughs]
C: I like her too, but like, she doesn't make sense to me.
Okay, so she introduces herself as Sarah Blake. Sam introduces himself. Sarah seems amused at Dean stuffing his face from all the food going by, and Sam asks her about the Telesca estate. Sam asks specifically if he can see the provenances, which we find out later is sort of like, a catalog showing the history of all the pieces on auction. So, all their previous owners, where they came from, etc.
G: Do you think that has a relevance to the plot of this episode? Like, this- the whole point is like, the history of Sam, right? And like, previously, everyone around him dies, so like, he doesn't want... I don't know.
C: Yeah, no, he's like the painting, a bit.
G: I think something interesting to do in Supernatural like, in the future- oh my god, do you want to do this segment? Like, we go "Why is it called this episode?" Because in season 1, it's pretty basic, right?
C: [laughing] Yeah, it's called "The Benders" because it's about the Benders, and they kill you.
G: Yeah. But like, why is "Goodbye Stranger" called "Goodbye Stranger "? Why is "When the Levee Breaks" called "When the Levee Breaks"? Like, those are interesting questions, I feel like.
C: Right.
G: Maybe like, when it comes up in the episode, as like relevant because the title is interesting, we can do it.
C: Yeah.
G: "Inherit the Earth" is fucking a great episode title. Too bad the episode is subpar, but like- [laughs]
C: Yeah. Before Sam can get the provenances, Sarah's dad shows up and says, "You're not on the guest list, get out." Dean continues to be a silly goofy guy, but Sam ushers both of them out. As they leave, Sarah tells her dad, "Dad, that was just rude."
-
C: Sam and Dean enter the motel room [G starts laughing], and then Phil Sgriccia has too much fun.
G: [laughing] I love it! I loved this scene!
C: So- [laughing] it's like a... How would you describe this room?
G: It's like, disco-tech.
C: Yeah, it's very disco-tech is the decor. And Sam and Dean and walk in, and they stare. This funky electronic music starts playing as the camera just like, zooms in and out of random sections of the room.
G: It pans over the entire room, yeah.
C: Yeah, the camera's simply bopping Sam and Dean stare at this room. And then the funky music stops after like, too long, of a time. [G laughs] And-
G: And Sam and Dean both go, "Huh." Which- [laughs]
C: Yeah. Which is cute.
G: The thing is, like, it's really irrelevant. Like, it doesn't matter, it's never acknowledged again. But like, it's fun, you know? And we're watching a TV show that's supposed to be fun, so it's fine.
C: So, as they're walking in, Dean asks Sam like, "Hey, how did you know about all that stuff you were talking about?" And Sam says, "Art history course. It's good for meeting girls." Sam.
G: He definitely took that class because of Jess. Like, I'm 100% sure.
C: Oh, yeah, I agree.
G: Like, he was like, "Oh, like, I wanna- I wanna have something in common." What do you think- okay, we've talked about Sam's major before. He was pre-law. [laughs] Stupid-ass-
C: Which is not a major, but yeah.
G: Which is not a major. So he may be like, sociology, or like, economics. It could be those things. But what do Jess's major was?
C: I think if they met in art history, then she could have been an art or art history major.
G: Yeah.
C: Because we just don't really know anything else about her.
G: But she knew about the LSAT and she knew, like, what a good grade entails. So maybe she's also in law, also in-
C: That's just being supportive, though.
G: Yeah, maybe so.
C: Because if she had also taken the LSAT, they would be discussing their scores together and their law school applications together, not just her being supportive one-sidedly.
G: Yeah. Maybe she is an art major. Maybe that's why Sam also felt a connection with Sarah. [laughs] He likes art girls. [both laugh]
C: Maybe so.
G: Maybe.
-
C: So Dean mentioned that they're probably not going to get the provenances out of Sarah's dad, who he continues to call "Chuckles," but Sarah might talk. And Sam jokes that like, "Oh, yeah, sure, maybe you can flirt it out of her," but Dean says, "Not me. Because it wasn't my butt she was checking out." And then, Sam says, "So, you want me to use her to get information." Which like, I'm glad that he's taking a bit of a stand against this, but like, what were you doing yesterday night, Sam, huh?
G: Yeah!
C: Huh? Huh, Sam? Like, this is morally wrong, but what Dean was doing yesterday wasn't? Like, do you think it's better to lie for sex than it is to lie for information to prevent murders? Like, bro. Broski.
But Dean says, "Call her," and waves a phone at Sam.
G: How do they even know their number?
C: Yeah, how did they fucking have her phone number? She literally never gave it to them. Like, maybe she- if she works at the auction house, maybe her work number is listed on the auction house website, but like, that's probably not her personal cell, and she's probably not like, tuned into it during the night, so I don't get it, but okay, whatever.
-
G: So, Sam does call, and him and Sarah end up in a very fancy restaurant. And they're having dinner. She says that she's surprised that Sam called, but glad. And she started teasing him about being so bad at asking her out. And he says that he hasn't been on a date in a while, and Sarah says, "Welcome to the club." So immediately, that's like, our mark that like [laughing], Sarah, I guess, has a personality and has a backstory.
C: [laughs] Yeah. Andrea has a backstory, too. Her husband died. Sarah's not getting more points than Andrea yet.
G: [sighs, then laughs] I don't- I'm trying to figure out how I can turn you into a Sarah enthusiast, but I feel like I'm not going to succeed.
C: Okay. I like Sarah, I'm not a Samsarah enthusiast.
G: So they get given a menu and a wine menu, and Sam doesn't really know what to do with the wine menu. Like, he he's flipping through it, and the waiter's looking at him funny, and Sarah is like, sitting there a bit, I don't know. She's waiting for Sam. And so she says, like, "I don't know about Romeo here, but I'll have a beer."
C: Which is like, so obviously, like, a writer choice to be like, "Oh, she may seem rich and perfect, but actually she's a cool girl, and she can slum it with the hunters 'cause she likes beer." Like, whatever, I don't care.
G: I didn't see it as that, I didn't see it as that. Maybe that was the intention and I'm being naive, but I saw it more as like, she's trying to make Sam more comfortable.
C: I think that's part of it.
G: Like it wasn't her being like, "I'm a cool girl," but I think the main intention is that Sam is having a hard time, obviously, looking at the wines, so she's gonna give him a little leeway and meet him in the middle, [laughing] and I think that's really nice!
C: I do think it's nice, but I also do think that they try very hard to make Sarah a cool girl in this episode. Like, specifically, having Dean approve of her so loudly after she like, wants to go on the hunt with them, etc, I don't know. It's just- she's very crafted for her only role as love interest.
G: I mean, obviously, she is. Because she is made to be a love interest.
C: Yeah.
G: But like, you- you like Deancassie, and Cassie was made to be a love interest as well.
C: Yeah, but Cassie has more going on.
Okay, but also, I refused to believe that "I'll have a beer is enough in this fancy establishment." Like, they're probably chock full of like, 20 different brands of craft beer, like, the waiter would be like, "Oh yeah, that's pages 20 to 25 of our wine menu, please flip over there."
G: No! Usually, like, from my experience- wow, [snooty voice] from my experience eating in fancy restaurants - I've eaten in one fancy restaurant. But like, my experience there is like, they have arrays of wines and they have a beer
C: I guess this was probably filmed before the craft beer craze started, so I guess that would make sense.
G: So they begin talking. Sarah was in art school, but was allegedly bad at it, so she didn't proceed with doing art. And she brings up that Sam is pre-law, and asked, "Bu you didn't continue with law, so what's up with that?" And Sam refuses to elaborate. Which is the beginning of a thing in this episode where Sam like, just shuts up at opportune moments.
C: Sarah's putting all of the effort into this relationship. Sam is giving her nothing.
G: Mm, Sam is a- is a handsome man. [laughs] Like, that's what he's giving.
C: [laughing] That's it? [both laugh]
G: That's what he's giving!
C: Well, I just- you know how Meg is so overly emotionally invested in Sam in "Scarecrow," but that's because she's a demon who is trying to get him to come with her. But Sarah's not a demon, like, she's a normal human woman, and she's supposed to care this much about the guy? Like, no, she isn't.
G: I mean, don't you care about people? Like, haven't you met someone and been like, "Oh, I care about you immensely for no discernible reason other than we have chemistry"?
C: Like upon first meeting?
G: Yes! Yes!
C: She hasn't dated in a year, and this is the guy who gets her to change her mind? Like, no.
G: No, I think she was already like, "I'm gonna start dating," and then she sees this guy, and she's like, "Oh, he's cute. And also, we have chemistry." Like, I think that's enough reason to be invested in someone.
C: Is chemistry even a real thing?
G: Yes.
C: Like, what does that even mean.
G: You meet someone, and you know! That's chemistry!
C: No, you don't. [both laugh] You're lying to me and everyone's lying to me, and also, Sam is like, aromantic as hell.
G: I do think like, readings of Sam as aromantic is reasonable, and by reasonable, I mean like, I participate in it, because I think, especially in later seasons, it's like, very apparent. I don't know. It's r- like, this episode, they really- like, I don't want to say they force it because-
C: They do.
G: - I think it makes sense. Like, they have chemistry! They have chemistry!
C: For what? Why?
G: It's- [frustrated sounds]
C: [laughing] I know it's not a "for why" sort of thing. But I don't know, like, it's a TV show, and I don't believe it, so. [laughs]
G: Okay, fine. Anyway, she says, like, "You're not like any art dealer I've ever met," and they look at each other, and the camera is so close up. And then I wrote in my notes, "Is this forced? What does Crystal think." [laughs] And now we know.
C: Crystal thinks it's so forced!
G: Anyway, Sam asks why she hasn't been on a date in a while, and apparently, Sarah's mom died a year ago.
C: First, when he asks, he says, "Oh, did you say that because you're trying to make me feel like I'm not such a loser," and then Sarah says, "I'm sure you're many things, Sam. I'm also sure loser isn't one of them." You just met this guy! Like, whatever. Like, who cares? He is a loser. Like, who cares?
G: [sighs] Have you never, like, spoken to anyone on fucking Bumble? [laughs] Like of course that's what people are gonna say!
C: It's excessive! Like you would just say like, "haha no." Like, what is she doing?
G: No, you say like, "I'm sure you're cool," like, you say that shit. [laughs]
C: Okay, but she's so fucking emphatic. Like, she says this like, this is her religion. Like, it's it's so bad how emphatic she is.
G: It's alright! It's fine!
C: She is talking like a therapist dealing with someone with like, low self-esteem, being the main reason they're in therapy.
G: You talk to me like this! [laughs]
C: Do I?
G: Yes! [laughs]
C: Okay, well my tone would be a lot more casual than her like, her wide eyes and emphatic pronunciation. [laughs] I'm not therapizing you for low self-esteem, I promise. [G laughs]
G: Basically, she says that when her mom died, she retreated into a shell, but realized that that's not what her mom would want for her. And then she says, "You're a reasonably attractive guy." So true. And she says, "Why haven't you been out and about?" And Sam goes quiet, and he says, like, "It's another long story for another time."
C: Well, he doesn't say that. [overlapping] Sarah says that. He says nothing. He's literally giving her nothing. Like, she just was very vulnerable with him-
G: No, he's playing the mysterious guy!
C: He literally is not. He's just aro!
G: I think they genuinely have a connection. Like, whether romantic, or, you know. Just like, a connection.
C: Sure. They could be friends. If Sam said a single thing to her, ever.
G: Again, like- like- this is just- haven't you just like-
C: No.
G: - met someone- [laughing] No!
C: Not to like, announce on Spotify and to the entire world that I've never been on a date or have sex, but like, no? Like, this is all- this is fake. Like, none of what's happening on my screen makes sense to me.
G: Well, as the representation in BABPod for someone who has been on a date and has had sex-
C: [laughing] Yeah, as a Chad on BABPod-
G: [laughing] I- I say this is pretty realistic.
C: Okay, she just told him about her mother's death, and he won't tell her a single thing, and we're supposed to like, assume that she invites him back to hers later tonight? For what? For silent sex where he, like, looks off to the side and cries? Like-
G: No! Of course Sam like- his mindset is on the case, right? So of course he's gonna find a way to get back to her apartment to get the provenance.
C: But, okay, we're sorry but she invited him back, right?
G: No, we're assuming that Sam asked for the proven- I don't know.
C: Ohh.
G: Maybe. It's assumed that like, their kiss later is their first kiss, right? So, like, literally nothing happened in that apartment. Maybe he just like, walked her home or something?
C: And then went inside?
G: No like, stood at the door?
C: How did he get the paper?
G: She gave it to him!
C: I- but like, why? [both laughing]
-
C: Sam- Okay, well, we cut to the motel room, and Dean is sharpening his knife. Which I think is pretty funny to see because it's a very sudden cut from the candle-lit date to Dean sharpening a knife. But yeah, Sam has returned and is looking through some papers. Sam says, "We went back to her place, and I got a copy of the papers." And okay, now that you mention it yeah, okay, she probably did just give it to him, but for some reason, what I was imagining was like, she invited him back to her place for sex, he was like, "Yeah, sure," midway through like, being there, he was like, "I have to go to the bathroom" and then got the papers, made a copy of all the papers, and then snuck out the window-
G: Noo.
C: - and she was like, "Where the fuck did he go?" But yes, it makes more sense that she just gave him the papers.
Yeah, he says he got a copy of the papers, and Dean says, "And?" And Sam says, "Nothing. I left." And Dean says, "You didn't have to con her, or do any special favors or anything like that?" Dean, die. Like, literally die. Like, just do it. Just drop dead. Um, so, Sam's kind of angry, and he tells Dean to get his mind out of the gutter. And it would be lovely if that was because he respects women, but I think it's just because of Jess. [laughs] And then Dean says that, "Hey, we could stick around for a bit after this case because you could ask her out again because it's obvious that you're into her." Sam ignores that and is still looking through the paper, and he finds that the creepy portrait that we looked at was the portrait of Isaiah Merchant's family, and basically, everyone who owned that painting historically got murdered. So it's either haunted or cursed, and Dean's like, "Okay, let's burn it."
So Phil Sgriccia's-
G: [excitedly] Yes! Yes!
C: - having so much fun again.
G: Yes! [laughing] I wrote in my notes, "I'm in love with Phil Sgriccia." [laughing] Me and Phil Sgriccia have chemistry. [both laughing]
C: Phil, if you're listening to this, Grey's number is- I don't even know what it is, so. [both laugh] You can email us. Yeah, Grey manages the email, so you don't have to worry about your email sexting being read by me. [both laugh] So... God. Episode 16, we did Kripke x Reader, Dean x Reader, and Sam x Reader. And now we're doing Phil Sgriccia x self. [laughs] Okay.
G: So true.
C: So we cut to the outside of the auction house, and there's this heavy rock music playing as Dean and Sam scale the gates- or the fences by like, jumping and doing a lot of acrobatic-looking maneuvers. The camera does a lot of like, shaking and quick cuts in tune with the music, I think. It's just all very-
G: It's fun.
C: - like, action movie-esque?
G: Yeah.
C: Yeah. They head in and they start to disarm the security alarm, which I think is the most high tech thing we've really ever seen either of them do.
G: Yeah, yeah. That makes sense.
C: Right? Yeah, but good for them, I guess. Very heist movie. Dean picks the lock, they run inside, they find the painting, they cut it out of its frame, and they run outside, where they burn the painting. Dean calls it an "ugly ass thing" and says that they're "doing the art world a favor." But as the painting is burning, we cut back to the auction house, and the painting is reappearing in its frame. Uh-oh!
-
G: So we go back to the motel. It's morning now, and Dean is walking around, all razzled up. And he says that he lost his wallet, and Sam's like, "How is that my problem?" And Dean says, "Because I possibly lost it in the auction house." So they need to come back and get it before anybody else sees it and wonders why Dean's ID is in there. In the auction house, they start looking for the wallet when Sarah comes in. And Sam makes up an excuse.
C: She's wearing a black turtleneck, and she looks really good.
G: Her makeup looks are very excellent, I feel like.
C: Yeah.
G: And like, it's not as - you know, she's not outwardly grieving like, say, Andrea at the end of "Dead in the Water," so her makeup makes sense, you know? So I like her style. and she's she's an auctioneer and apparently in a very high.
Sam makes up an excuse that they're leaving town, so he just came to say goodbye. Dean, from the back, goes, "Whatcha talking about, man? We're gonna be here for like, at least two more days." And he goes, "Anyway, I owe you 20 bucks, right?" And he makes a show of taking out his wallet and giving the 20 bucks to Sam. This is a good scene. I really liked it.
C: [laughs] It is a good scene.
G: I liked it so much! It's kinda stupid, but like, it's good stupid.
C: Yeah, it's so funny. Yeah, no. 'Cause, okay, we see Dean encouraging Sam to get in a relationship in "Shadow," but like, it's really gross. Like, he is immensely sexual in all of his comments. I think Dean was a little shit at the beginning of this episode, but generally, I think that the way he's pushing Sam at Sarah is more believable and more fun.
G: Wait, so you think he didn't lose his wallet and he just came back?
C: Yeah, he didn't lose his wallet.
G: Damn! I thought, like, he was like, "Ah, fuck, my wallet's right here."
C: No, no, like, he didn't lose his wallet, like that was the point of the scene. [G laughs] It was like, he had his wallet on him the whole time, he just lured Sam over there to see Sarah.
G: [laughing] I thought he found it! I thought he found it.
C: No. [both laugh] No.
G: No! God, my critical thinking skills are down the drain.
C: [laughing] Yeah, you like Samsarah!
G: [laughing] Noo! They have chemistry!
Anyway, Dean leaves, and Sarah tells Sam that she had fun last night, and they should go on a date again. And Sam says, like, "Oh, we really are leaving today. I'm sorry. Like, Dean's just being a fuckhead." And then! [both laugh] He sees the painting they destroyed yesterday being lugged around, and he goes, "Oh my god!!" And he says it like that. He says it actually more emphatically-
C: Louder than that.
G: He says it like, "OH MY GOD!" Like that. And Sarah's like, "What the hell?" And Sam continues on- [laughing] he says, [breathlessly] "That painting looks so good!" [both laugh]
C: I have seen this scene in gifsets. It's very good.
G: This is the part where Sarah calls the painting a monstrosity, but she's like, "Yeah, maybe." And she relays that her dad wants to sell it, but she won't let him because it's in bad taste. And Sam's like, "Yeah, make sure he doesn't. I'm gonna call you! Also, apparently we're not leaving tonight anymore? Uh, bye-bye!" [C laughs] And then he leaves.
-
C: Sam and Dean are like, "What the hell, we burned it, what's up?" So they decide that the painting is probably haunted by the subject of the painting, and they need to do research. So they go into this like, library or bookshop and talk to this very enthusiastic man whose acting choices feel really weird. Did you get that vibe?
G: No, I just think he's like, a crime buff and he's very happy to see fellow crime buffs, you know.
C: Yeah, maybe so. So he's really excited to help them, and he says, "Are you guys crime buffs?" And Dean's like, "Kinda, why do you ask?" And it's because it turns out that Isaiah Merchant killed his entire family and then himself using a straight razor from his job as a barber. He says- he starts reading from the paper and it says, "People who knew him describe Isaiah as having a stern and harsh temperament. Controlled his family with an iron fist." While I'm saying this, I think Dean and Sam sort of look at each other, and I was like, "Does this remind them of John?"
G: I don't know.
C: But I don't- I don't know if that was0 yeah. But I choose to read meaning into that look. And then, yeah, he had a wife, he had two sons, and he had an adopted daughter. And the wife was going to take the kids and leave, and that probably caused him to kill them. Apparently, all the bodies were cremated, so that doesn't help them, and he shows them a picture of the family in the book. But it looks slightly different from the painting that we saw. So Sam asks for a copy for it, and they get one. Meanwhile, back at the auction house we find out that Sarah's dad has sold the painting off to someone named Evelyn because she offered a lot of money for it. Uh-oh.
-
G: So in the motel, Sam is convincing Dean that the painting changed. In the picture from the library, the man is looking forward, and in the painting, he's looking to the side. So, most probably, this is the guy haunting the painting. Dean says that maybe there are clues here, and maybe other things change, and that can show them, like, what the painting does. Sam replies to this saying, "Oh, like, in Da Vinci Code?" [laughing] And Dean pauses and says, like, "I don't know. I'm still waiting on the movie for that one." [laughs] Anyway, he decides that they need to get to the painting, and he says that that's a good thing, because Sam can "go crush on his girlfriend." Sam starts to earnestly get upset. He's mad that Dean has been pushing him and Sarah together. Dean says, like, "You like her, don't you?" Sam goes like, "What's the point? We're just going to leave anyway." So, like, he doesn't want to pursue the relationship because of that. Dean says like, "I'm not talking about marriage, though," implying that he's talking about just, you know, casual hookups, and Sam says, "Why do you care if I hook up?" And he's saying this very angrily. And Dean says like, "Because then, you won't be so cranky all the time." And that line was treated by the director as something very important, because- [C laughs] It's like, closer to Dean's face. I actually like, rewatched the scene to see like, the choices of the shots used for Dean, and this one is the closest we get his face. So it's supposed to be like, a gotcha moment, right?
C: That's just siblings, though.
G: Yeah. And it's followed by silence for a little bit, and then Sam exhales exasperatedly. Dean continues on. He says, like, "This is not about hooking up. I think Sarah can be good for you." And he continues, "No disrespect, but this is about Jessica, right? I don't know what it's like to lose somebody like that, but I would think she would want to be happy." And Sam says, "Yeah, you're right. Part of this is about Jessica, but not the main part." And Dean is like, "So what is the main part?" But Sam goes silent yet again.
C: "It's because aromantic and also gay." [laughs] I know that that is not the point of the episode. The point of the episode is because he thinks everyone he cares about dies, but also like, he is aromantic and gay, so...
G: When you see gay, do you mean gay?
C: I don't know, I just think he could be like, either or both.
G: [laughing] What do you mean "either or both"? Oh, or gay.
C: Well, you could be aromantic but attracted to guys.
G: Mm, yeah, I mean we get evidence of Sam, as you know, a bisexual person, like.
C: Oh yeah, no, I do think that he is bi, but also like, he is also gay, and he is also aromantic, and he is- Sam is L&G&B&T, as people like to say.
G: Okay, so Dean backs up, and says, like, "Go call her, still, though, because we still need it for the case." So he calls her, and they say their "hi"s and "hello"s, and then Sam learns that Sarah has sold the painting. And he asks for the address of where the painting was sold, and we go to the house where the painting is.
-
C: I'm really glad that we find out later that Sam expanded on this and was like, "Evelyn's probably in danger," because if I got a call from some random guy, and he was like, "I really want to buy this painting. Wait. You sold it? Where is the address of the person you sold it to?" And then later that woman was dead? I'd be like, "He fucking went over and murdered my friend to get this uglyass painting." But, yeah.
We get to the house, and there's Evelyn who's like, an old woman who's reading. The man in the painting turns his head. When Evelyn picks up her glasses, there's a reflection of a razor in it. So she looks up, there's a noise, and then she kind of screams, and then that's the end of that scene. Sorry, Evelyn.
C: So Sam and Dean show up at Evelyn's house - too late - and Sarah also shows up. She's asking Sam what's happening, but Sam keeps telling her that she shouldn't have come, that she should stay outside. But Sarah insists on going in because she says that Evelyn is a friend, and if she's in danger, then she needs to go in and try to help her. Dean eventually breaks down the door, and they run inside. Evelyn is sitting in the chair that we last saw her in, but she's completely still. Also, the painting is different 'cause Isaiah's looking at his daughter, like, he's looking down instead of straight ahead. So Sarah is trying to get Evelyn's attention, so she reaches out to touch Evelyn's shoulder. But then, Evelyn's head falls backwards, showing that her throat has been completely open, except it was just like, balanced on top of her head before so we couldn't tell. Which is so cool and fun. And Sarah starts screaming.
They go back to the motel and Sarah comes in. Her hair looks really good! Like, she redid it somehow between those two scenes, and it's in these two brands that look really nice. Like, good on you, you just saw like, probably the worst thing- one of the worst things ever, it was extremely gory, and also like your dead friend who you cared about enough that you ran into the house to like, get her, but like, yeah, no go do your hair, girl.
G: She has like, waterfall bangs. [laughs] It actually looks really nice.
C: Yeah, no, her hair is great.
So, she tells him that she lied to the cops and said that she found Evelyn alone. But she says, "I'm gonna call them right back if you don't tell me what the hell's going on. Who is killing these people?" So Sam decides that he should be the one to break the news about monsters being real. So he says, "It's not who's killing these people. It's what. We both saw that painting move, like, impossible things happen in the world, it's haunted..." Sarah thinks that it's a joke at first, but then is like, "Okay, fine you're not joking. God, the guys I go out with." So Sam explains that they're just trying to stop the painting because wherever it goes, people die. And Sarah says, "Okay, well then, I'm coming with you." Sam tells her that she should stay home because "this stuff can get dangerous, and... and I don't want you to get hurt." Sarah says, "Well, me and my dad sold that painting that might have gotten those people killed. I'm not saying I'm not scared, because I'm scared as hell, but I'm not going to run and hide either." She heads out, and then she says, "So, are we going or what?" And after she walks out, Dean says, "Sam, marry that girl."
G: Maybe Sarah is the blurry wife. [laughs]
C: I think Deansarah. I mean, she does not deserve to be saddled with this awful, awful man, but I think that, like, he does have a thing for her.
G: They don't have chemistry. [both laugh] I'm really hammering down on this one.
-
G: So Sam and Dean and Sarah enter Evelyn's house, and basically, Sam and Dean play a game of spot the difference with the library photo and the painting. And they notice two differences. One is- well, they notice three, the obvious one being the man looking up and looking to the side, and then the second one, that the razor is different. In the library painting, it's closed, in the painting, it's open. And the painting in the painting is different as well. In the actual painting, it's a mausoleum that says "Merchant." So the three go around and look for a mausoleum that says "Merchant," and they find one in a cemetery. And as they walk, Sarah asks Sam if that's what they do for a living, like, you know, hunting ghosts and shit. And Sam says, "No. Because we don't get paid." And, finally, they find a mausoleum. Dean notices that there are only four urns, and the dad is not here in the crypt. Meanwhile, they also notice a bunch of toys that are encased in a glass case in the crypt. And apparently, back in the 1910s, at the time of the murders, this was a common phenomena. Did they just make that up for Supernatural, or is it really a common thing?
C: I don't know. I don't know.
G: I also have no idea.
G: Dean goes into the county office to look at death certificates, and Sarah and Sam wait outside and talk. So, at first, they're talking about how Dean got in. Sam's just doing some exposition. And then suddenly, he notices- [laugh] some eyelash on Sarah's face.
C: Not the fucking eyelash trick! I just think that if you need the eyelash scene to develop a relationship, you have not written a good relationship.
G: The thing is like, this could have been removed, and it would have been fine.
C: [laughing] Yeah, the entire relationship could have been removed, and it would have been fine.
G: [laughing] Fuck off! Fuck off. [C laughs] I think- I don't mind the romance, and like, when the eyelash scene happened, I was like, "Oh, they're doing this?" Like, this is just igniting what I see as the problems in the relationship, which is like, Sam doesn't speak, and also, they have to do this thing to prove that it's a romance. And it's already a romance! Like, they already have [pauses, laughs a little] chemistry.
C: They do not, but.
G: So- I don't know. It irritated me, but I was also like [imitates giggling], you know. Because it is cute. And then, Sarah finally asks Sam if there is something going on between them, or if she's delusional. And Sam says, "You're not delusional." And Sarah goes, "But there's a 'but' following that statement." And Sam continuous. He says, "I don't think this would be a good idea... because I like you." And I was like, "You dramatic-ass bitch, Sam!"
C: [laughing] I know!
G: You fucking drama king! Like, at this point like, I feel like he should have just lied, you know? [laughs]
C: Yeah.
G: Like, I get what he's trying to say, and I'm glad he's able to open up, but also like, this is the kind of situation where you just lie, bro.
C: Yeah, do not be straight up, bro. Do not just be yourself, bro.
G: [laughs] Exactly. He says like, "When people around me, they get hurt." And he finally tells Sarah about Jess and Mary and that he thinks he's cursed because death follows him around. So he's scared having feelings for Sarah would hurt Sarah.
C: Yeah, and when he says, "It's like I'm cursed or something. Death just follows me around." That's a direct echo of Lori in "Hook Man" saying, "It's like I'm cursed or something. People around me keep dying." So yeah.
G: And Sarah says, like, "That's very sweet. And also very archaic." And she says, like, "I'm a big girl, Sam. It's not your job to make decisions for me." And Sam, at first, rejects this idea and he says, like, "This is not just like, a broken heart and Haagen-Daz. This is serious stuff. This is like, physically hurt. This is death." And she says, like, "Well, tomorrow I can get hit with a bus. That's what life is." And she says- and she says she knows what it's like to lose someone. But when you shut out pain, you shut out everything else. And Sam says, "But the pain I went through... I just can't go through it again."
C: I mean like, aw, yeah, but also like- [sighs] Sorry. I just- I'm going to continue disliking this relationship. Why is she therapizing him so hard. They just met!
G: I don't think she's therapizing him. I think she's just making a case that, like, "if this is your fear like, there are ways to go around that." I don't think this is therapizing. I think this is just people talking. Not just because someone is telling you, like, just because someone is talking to you seriously doesn't mean it's therapizing.
C: I just- maybe it's like, an issue that I have with her actress, just in the way that she words her sentences, but it just always comes off as therapizing. 'Cause, I don't know, like, you know how Supernatural is the show where the actors look directly at the camera and state the themes? Like, she is the actress who looks directly at the camera and states the themes. Like, the whole "when you shut out pain, you shut out everything else, too," like, I don't- you don't really come up with that kind of stuff spontaneously, I feel like. Like, it feels unnatural.
G: Like, maybe not spontaneously, but obviously she's been thinking about it from her own personal experience.
C: I guess.
G: Like, this is not just her sitting down and being like, "This is what you should do, based on nothing at all." Like, she went through the same shit. She also lost her mother.
C: I know. I'm aware, but I just- [frustrated sounds] I just don't get it, I don't get why she's trying so hard for this relationship, and I don't get why she's saying all the sentences she's saying. Like, okay, I think if there was more lead up to this. I think if it wasn't made more explicit that this was about her mom, or- I guess, okay, it's more like, I feel like she should still sort of be a mess, and I think sometimes when people are messes they like giving advice to other people because it makes them feel like, they have like, a better control of things, but that's not the vibe I'm getting off of Sarah I'm just getting a "We have lines that Sam needs to hear, so let's put them through her" vibe.
G: I don't know. The fact that she's like, kind of projecting was very visible for me, so...
C: I mean, it was clear she was projecting, I agree, but I also just think that- I guess I just don't get why she's so ride or die for him, like, already. Like, he was just like, "Everyone around me dies a physical death," and she was like, "Yeah, that's fine, though."
G: I am a hopeless romantic. I feel like going forward into the podcast, this is an essential thing that people should know about me. [C laughs] This is our in reconcilable difference. This is our immovable object versus unstoppable force.
C: Yeah. Right.
G: Anyway. Dean arrives and interrupts, and basically says that the dad wasn't cremated with the family, he was buried, so there are still bones to burn. And Sam like, asks him, "You do know where the bones are, don't you?" And Dean gives the goofiest, biggest smile, and I was like, "I still remember what you did." [both laugh] "I haven't forgotten, you fucking asshole!" [C keeps laughing]
-
C: So we go to a graveyard. Sarah is holding a flashlight and looking uncomfortable as Sam and Dean dig up the grave. Sarah says, "You guys seem to be uncomfortably comfortable with this," and Sam says, "Well, this isn't exactly the first grave we've dug. Still think I'm a catch?" And I think this was the only moment when I liked their relationship in the entire episode. I was like, "Oh, it's nice that Sam gets to banter with someone who isn't Dean once in a while, and it's nice that like, Sarah does think that he's charming, despite the grave dirt." Though like, I personally- like, if I saw someone that I liked digging up a grave like, that would make them more attractive to me, but you know we can't all be me. [laughs]
So Dean finally reaches a box, and he opens the coffin, and there's like, this janky-ass Halloween skeleton in there. They salt and burn the body. Dean's saying that Isaiah has been "a real pain in the ass, good riddance," and then he burns it up.
G: He burns it with a match. And at this time, I was like, "Why don't we see the Zippo? I want to see the Zippo!" But we see it later, so it's fine. I was satisfied.
C: Well, as we've seen later, maybe he should just not have the Zippo and just use matches. [G laughs]
G: Truly. He just- he should give the Zippo to me.
-
C:So they show up at Evelyn's house, thinking that the painting is probably fine now. Sarah says that she wants to go in to check on the painting with Sam, and Dean says like, "Oh, hey, then I'll stay here." And he tells Sam, "You go make your move." Like, girl, the place to make your move is not the house of Sarah's recently dead friend.
G: [laughs] Yeah! Literally, it's still a crime scene.
C: So, Sarah and Sam head into the house, and [laughing] Dean starts playing a love song on the radio at them really loudly. Sam like, glares at him a bit and makes him turn it off, and Sam and Sarah head inside. And something is wrong with the painting, because the little girl in the painting is missing, and so is the razor. And they hear creepy laughter from a little girl, and the door shuts. I love evil women, I love creepy little girls. So that was- that was nice, even though I think they did a bad job with her storyline for the rest of the episode.
G: Yeah. There's a line in the epilogue that made me cringe so hard regarding her.
C: So angry! So mad! We'll get to it.
C: So Dean is running up the stairs and trying to get in, but cannot open the door. So Sam decides to call Dean, and they talk through the phone through the door, which I thought was really fun, actually. So they're talking, and Sam's like, "Yeah, I think maybe the little girl might have been the bad guy all along. Like, maybe the dad was looking at her in the painting because he was trying to warn us." So Dean cannot get in, so Sam and Sarah are running around the house, trying to find something that wards off spirits, such as iron or salt. And Sam, looking around, yells out his iconic line, "What kind of house doesn't have salt? Low-sodium freaks!" Which- in context, I like less, 'cause he's literally insulting Sarah's recently dead friend.
G: And like, she's an old woman. She probably has health issues, right?
C: Yeah. Right, yeah, like, she probably wants to eat a low-sodium diet to, you know, stay alive longer, even though that didn't work out.
They are still not finding anything, and then the wind starts blowing. More doors slam shut. And then the little girl appears! She's holding a straight razor in one hand, she's dragging this little doll by the foot along her like, alongside her as she walks. She's like, walking in sort of the glitchy way that some ghosts move in Supernatural. Like, I remember the woman in white moved that way too. I don't really like the effect-
G: I also don't.
C: But, yeah, it just looks bad. And also the little girl, like, one side of her face is kind of bruised, and she's kind of pale, but, like, other than that she looks fairly like, regular, I suppose. Sarah says about the ghost, "That is just so wrong," which I thought was fun.
As the little girl, gets closer Sam is backing up, and he sees the fire poker. So he picks it up and swings it at her, and she disappears, so yay. It was iron.
So, Dean calls again, and they're trying to figure out what's up, why this ghost is still around, even though her body was cremated. And Sarah says, "Sam, wait, we used to handle antique dolls at the auction." [overlapping] And Sam says [G groans, C laughs], "That's fascinating Sarah, but is it important right now?" Like, shut up, Sam! Like, what the- you are so rude.
G: Maybe- maybe you're right. Maybe Sarah doesn't deserve Sam, [laughs] and he gives nothing to the relationship. [C laughs]
C: Yeah!
G: And they shouldn't be together. [both laugh]
C: Yeah! Exactly.
Maybe Sam is giving her literally nothing, as she gives him everything, and she deserves so on who could treat her right, like me, Crystal BABPod. [laughs]
Like, come on, Sam! Like, you're literally in a TV show. Obviously, it's important right now! [both laugh] So Sarah says, "Back then, they made the dolls to match the kids exactly, and they would use the kid's real hair for it." Which means that hey, there's still human remains of this kid out here. So Sam and Dean - they "realize," but it's actually Sarah who realizes -that they have to go back to the mausoleum and burn that doll. So Dean is driving towards the graveyard really quickly. Meanwhile, this little ghost girl is like, wrecking Sam and Sarah's shit. She whacks Sam with this cupboard that pins him to the ground. And it's like, bro, what happened to your psychic powers? Like, you moved that entire bookshelf out of the way in episode 14 because you didn't want Dean to die. Is Sarah not important enough to you because she gives everything to this relationship, and you give nothing, and she should find someone who could treat her better like, Crystal BABPod? Maybe so.
G: Wait, do you know that like, that never comes back again?
C: Wait, he literally never moves anything, ever again?
G: Yeah. That was just one time.
C: What the fuck is wrong with the Supernatural writers?
G: I know. He was literally like, "I'm out of the closet now, so I don't need telekinetic powers anymore." [C laughs]
C: Yeah, in this world, you can only be one of two things: telekinetic or gay. [G laughs] And Sam chose gay and aromantic.
So Sarah's trying to get him out from under the cupboard, but it's not working. And, uh-oh! Little ghost girl's right next to her, holding up her straight razor, ready to slit her throat.
Dean's at the mausoleum, and he's trying to get to the doll. He keeps punching the glass and smashing it with his gun, but it just doesn't work. And then he steps back and looks at his gun and makes a sort of like, "Dean, are you stupid?" face at himself and then just shoots the glass. [laughs] Which I thought was fun.
G: Yeah, it was.
C: Like, I remember what you did this episode, Dean, but also, that was funny.
So and then he goes and grabs the doll. He reaches for his famous Zippo, but it's not lighting. He tries a bunch of times, and it's just not working. Dean, just get your matches out, broski. Sarah's just about to get yoinked by this ghost, but then Sam manages to push the cupboard off and sort of launches himself at her to get her out of the way. And, as this happens, the dolls hair catches on fire, and ghost girl just burns and reappears in the painting.
So Sam and Sarah panting, like, "oh my god, we made it." Sarah has like, a little bit of blood on her face. Hi, Sarah. [laughs] Email me at [email protected]. And Dean calls, interrupting Sam and Sarah's moment and asks if he's good. And Sam says, "I'm not bad." And such ends the scene.
-
G: In the auction house, apparently, according to Dean's research, the murders was done by the adopted daughter, and he knows this, because the reason why the daughter was adopted was because her biological family were all killed in their beds. And then the daughter was-
C: Girlboss behavior.
G: And so, this girl probably killed the Merchant family too. They're saying this in front of two guys who are handling the painting, who are just trying to do their job.
C: [laughing] Yeah.
G: And they're hearing shit like this. And I'm like, "I feel so bad for you guys." Anyway, Sarah tells the two guys to burn the painting, and so they do. They go out.
C: And this was after they packed it up in wood. Like, they didn't work for nothing. Come on, Sarah.
G: Sarah asks why the girl did it, and Sam says [C screams], "Some people are just born tortured." [both laugh hysterically]
C: [laughing] Girl. What the fuck does that mean?
G: Coming from Sam, like, it's him projecting, right?
C: Yeah.
G: But also, it's just such a way to put it.
C: It's so... Right, like, "Some people are just born evil. They're just evil, and they do murders for no reason. It does not matter her reasoning. She was just born as an evil little girl." Like, what the fuck? And this fits perfectly into Supernatural's whole, like, biodeterminism thing, right? Where all monsters are evil, all humans can go to heaven, because they have souls, no other creatures have souls, etc. And it's just so stupid. It's so stupid. Also, we know that her dad was like, shitty.
G: Yeah, exactly! That was what I was gonna say. Like, you could have just made the point that like, she probably killed her family because the guy was terrible and she didn't like her adopted family, and she- like, the mom was gonna take them away, or she didn't want to leave, so she just killed them- you know, like, something else, not like, "She was just evil."
C: Yeah! Not just, "Well, some people are just born evil, so when they die, their spirits are just as dark." [G laughs] Like, I don't care. Like, shut up!
G: Exactly. That's exactly what Dean says. Dean was like, "Eh, whatever, like, I don't fucking care." And Sarah says like, "Oh, are you guys leaving now?" And Dean goes silent. Well, both of them go silent, Sam and Dean. And then Dean says that he'll wait in the car. And he proceeds to walk away, and while walking away, he says to himself, "I burned the doll and destroyed the spirit, but don't thank me or anything." [laughs]
C: This is what Dean gets for all of the early season 1 episode where like, the girl of the week, like, kisses him and completely ignores Sam.
G: Yeah. Back to Sarah and Sam. Sarah says, "There's a million things I want to say to you, but I can't think of one right now."
C: Literally, what does she have to say to him? Like, nothing. Like, what do they have to talk about? Sam has given her nothing.
G: We don't know that! We didn't see the rest of their date. Like- [laughing]
C: Um, yeah, but we saw Sam's general vibe, which was "look away angstily every time he's asked a question that's slightly personal" while she was willing to be open with him about her mom's death and her various insecurities, and also, like, be the one to make him comfortable during the date, and be the one who compliments him during the date. She says that he's not a loser, she says that he's attractive, she- He doesn't compliment her like, a single time. [G sighs] Like, he doesn't say, "You look nice," he doesn't say that "You are nice, thank you for ordering a beer, like, thank you for agreeing to come on this date with me," like, he gives her nothing. What does she have to say to him? Nothing.
G: Fine. You take this round. [C laughs] I am still an immovable object. [C laughs more]
Sam says- Sam laughs at the fact that Sarah doesn't know what to say, and he says, "Yeah, I'll miss you too." Which I thought was sweet. [laughs] That's- that's my only-
C: Yeah, that is sweet. I agree.
G: Yeah, it was sweet! And then, Sarah proceeds to say, like, "There's a lesson in all this. I didn't get hurt, so maybe you're not cursed. Maybe you'll come back and see me." And he says, "I will." Sam walks out-
C: Doesn't Sarah come back and die?
G: Because you don't know, I'll just shut the fuck up.
C: I feel like I saw... I feel like I saw that she came back and died, so the point of this episode is kind of useless.
G: Well, like, I think this was like, he says, like, "I'm gonna come back," and the fact that he comes back to immediately, like, that's supposed to be what the callback is for.
And then Sam walks out, and Sarah stands over the door.
C: Sorry, one thing- Okay, at first, because I don't remember if Sarah comes back or not. So when Sam said, "I will," I was like, "This is literally just Dean telling Cassie that he's coming back and then never doing it," and then I think I wrote down, "Have we considered Sarah x Cassie." So yeah, everyone get on that.
G: [laughs] Yeah.
Sam walks out, and Sarah stands over the door when Sam comes back and knocks. And Sarah opens the door, and they make out. The end.
-
C: Sam's nose gets all squashed.
G: I mean, deserved. His nose deserves to be squashed.
C: Yeah, yeah. The sacred nose deserves a bit of squashing.
Does she die, though?
G: Do you really want to know?
C: I mean, I'm pretty sure she does.
G: Yeah, but it's a matter, of when, right?
C: So, like, I'm not gonna keep believing it. Like, does she eventually die, I guess, at some point on the show?
G: Yes. Okay, I'll give you two guesses as to which season she dies.
C: I always thought that she was in season 2, so she maybe dies in season 2?
G: Okay, wrong.
C: Okay. It's too fast if she dies in season 1, right?
G: Yeah, it is. 'Cause it's just a couple of episodes left.
C: 3? 3?
G: No. No. She dies-
C: Wait. She comes back after the angels? Like, they fucking Missouri-ed her?
G: Yeah, exactly. She dies in season 8.
C: What the fuck is wrong with the Supernatural writers?
Anyway, should we- Grey, what did you think about this episode?
G: I actually- I really like, as we have mentioned, I really like, the directorial work. I really enjoyed the episode because of I really like the way it was shot, shit like that. I don't know, like, every single time I was like, "Oh, Phil Sgriccia's having fun," I also was having fun, so it's fine. And about Sam and Sarah, as I've said, like, I do have a soft spot for romance, so I like seeing them, I thought they had chemistry. I think that you're right that Sam was like-
C: Giving her nothing?
G: Yeah. That Sam was giving her nothing. The thing is, when you introduce someone for the sole purpose of being a romantic interest, you are gonna come across problems in that department, you know? So for what it is, I enjoy it for what it is, which is she was introduced a love interest, and that was her purpose, and I enjoyed for that.
C: Okay, but Eileen was also introduced as a love interest, and she's my best girl, so this is a Sarah-specific problem.
G: Yeah, you know what? I'm going to be that person and say that I don't really like Sameileen that much. So!
C: I don't know you don't, but that's- yeah, no, okay. I look forward to having like, this debate but the other way around when we reach season 11.
G: Yeah! The thing is, like, I fucking love Eileen. I think she's so fun and she's so cool, and I think she has the same problems with Sarah that like, they made her out to be the cool girl, right? But it works, because she is cool.
C: Yeah, but it's okay, because she's- yeah.
G: Yeah. So it's the relationship that I'm against, so yeah, maybe like, when we get there, it will be this discussion again but inverted.
How about you? What did you think about this episode?
C: I think I very loudly expressed this in a way that like, you should probably cut out most of it because I repeat a lot, but I don't know, I was disappointed. 'Cause you seemed excited about this episode, so I was like, "Oh, it will probably be good," but I did not like it. I thought that the relationship was very much shoehorned in, like it did not seem like, that much better than like, Samlori to me, honestly in terms of how much the camera work and, like, other characters talking was like, put in to make us believe that Sam liked her, and also in terms of Sam giving nothing. I thought that the case was decent. Like, creepy paintings are fun, evil little girls and like, creepy dolls are fun. But yeah, the whole ending with like, "well, she was just evil," that was bad. It's quite one-off-y for a late season 1 episode. I figured that they try harder to get the Azazel plot going by this point, but like, it was fine. But, I don't know. It felt more like an early season 1 episode to me just because I've been expecting better quality in the last half of the season.
G: What you said, like, about, the episodes should be getting better towards the end of the season... Supernatural is very bad at that. Like, genuinely. [C laughs] They're so bad at it. [laughing] It's just never gonna happen, you stupid slut.
C: Okay. [laughs] I understand. I'll stop having hope.
G: There's always gonna be like, an episode at the end of every season where you're like, "Why are they still doing this?" Especially like, at the very end of the show.
C: "Drag Me Away (From You)"?
G: Yeah! My fucking beloathed episode "Drag Me Away (From You)." "Drag Me Away (From You)" does to me the opposite of what "Dog Dean Afternoon" does for me. [laughs]
-
G: Anyway, Best Line/Worst Line. So I think we - okay, I'll start with the worst line because I think it's pretty obvious. But Dean saying-
C: Yeah, that we both-
G: Uh, there's two, actually. The one at the beginning, the Dean saying that he is-
C: "A reality TV scout looking for people with special skills."
G: Yeah. And also the one at the end where Sam's like, "she's just evil because she was born that way." Hashtag Lady Gaga-core.
C: Yeah. [laughs]
G: So how about best line? What's your best line in this episode? I feel like it's difficult to choose, for the lack of it.
C: Uh, I just- yeah, I just can't think of anything. I think maybe the moment that I probably felt the most touched was when - oh god, I hate that I'm doing this - but when Dean says, "I don't mean any disrespect, but I'm sure this is about Jessica, right? Now, I don't know what it's like to lose somebody like that, but I would like to think that she would want you to be happy." Like, it was nice to get a moment of like, considerate, emotionally honest Dean in an episode of "I hate Dean so much," so yeah.
G: I was gonna say the same thing, but only the second line. Like, "I don't know what it's like to lose someone like that." I like it because I remember in - was it "Asy"- no, it was not "Asylum." I remember in "Scarecrow"-
C: Ohh yeah.
G: When Sam, like, tries to shove it into Dean's face that he doesn't get it, and he doesn't understand what Sam's going through. And I think that's a bit unfair to Dean. Like, because he's comparing it to Mary, right? But here, Dean, like, accepts it and accepts it gracefully that he doesn't know what it's like to lose someone like that, but yet, he's still trying to empathize. And he's still trying to make Sam feel better and all that. And I appreciate that.
-
G: IMDB rating. What's your IMDB rating?
C: Huh.
G: I feel like this one is a bit low.
C: Yeah, 'cause it's bad. [laughs]
G: No, it's just not significant. And I feel like people will be like, "But we're so near the end, why is it still like, a case episode?"
C: Yeah, um... 8.2. Off of vibes.
G: 8.2. I'll go 8.3. Okay, okay. Let's go.
Oh my fucking god! Okay, I'll give you another shot. Take another fucking guess.
C: Huh? Is it like, really low?
G: I'm not gonna say! You just have to take another guess.
C: 7.9?
G: No. Okay, third time. I'll give you yet another guess. It's not lower than. That's the conclusion we make. So.
C: Wait, it's not lower than 7.9, or it's not lower than 8.2?
G: It's not lower than 8.2.
C: What the fuck? Is it like, a fucking like, 8.7.
G: Exactly!
C: Why? Why?
G: I don't see why. [laughs]
C: Literally why?
G: I like this episode, but even I am like -
C: It's not good.
G: It's not excellent. It's not worth 8.7.
C: Yeah, 'cause currently, the pilot is an 8.6, right? And like, I mean, I didn't like the pilot, but this is not deserve a higher rating than the pilot.
G: I think there is a- there is a thread that is being tied up, which is like, Sam mourning Jessica, and this is him like, letting go off his guilt, you know, and trying to be happy for once.
C: Yeah.
G: So if you're - I think if you're more into that, you can see this as a better episode than it is. I'm not as into that, I just think Sam and Sarah are cute.
C: One of these reviews says, "Dean just gets wittier and cooler with each episode."
G: Noo.
C: No he fucking doesn't!
G: Noo!
G: Oh, so "the writers finally focus on Sam and decide to give him more than- more to do than just follow Dean around and complain about not having a normal life. Jared was given a good opportunity, and he sure nailed it." Blegh.
C: Blegh. Jared's not real.
Okay, some people seem to like the case, which, I guess that makes sense. Like, from a horror perspective, it's fun.
Oh, so true. The person who said, "The Sam and Sarah romance is utterly forced, and, more to the point, feels much more like a plot point than an organic relationship." Soo true.
G: I mean, it's true, but - [sighs] Fine. [C laughs]
C: Wait, wait, there's someone else who's so true. [laughing] The title of the review is "Sam is weak and not very friendly lover." And then it says, "Nice girl, very pretty and so interested in him. But Sam is a little dumb that he won't even cares. It made me cry and very sad." So true, me too. [both laugh].
G: Generally, I'm surprised that it got this high a rating.
C: Yeah. I don't get it. But I guess people- like, the people saying nice things mostly liked the case?
G: Yeah, maybe so.
G: So that's it for this episode of Busty Asian Beauties. Next time, we'll be talking about Season 1, Episode 20: "Dead Man's Blood." Leave us a rating or a review wherever you get your podcasts.
C: Follow us on social media! We are on Twitter at twitter.com/BeautiesPodcast and on Tumblr at bustyasianbeautiespod.tumblr.com. Our official tag is #babpod, B-A-B-POD, and also, thank you to everyone who's donated to our Ko-Fi at ko-fi.com/bustyasianbeautiespod.
G: You can email us any feedback, comments, or inquiries at [email protected]. See you guys next time. Bye!
C: Bye!
[guitar music]
3 notes
·
View notes