#there are other reasons i do my best to stay away from cults and sects but these factors do play a large role

[kartoshinki]

Good thing about my insecurity is how suspicious it makes me of love bombing and similar techniques bc otherwise I'd be just ridiculously easy prey for cults and the like

[vroomian]

(headdesk slam) Yes, that was 2/2 percent didn’t even realize I forgot to add it in the message until after I sent it and spent like 5 mins internally screaming at myself. I’m a mess of a human being tbh. Really? I’m surprised because it feels like Xi fits perfectly in this AU. Xi as accidental cryptid is the best thing, in both worlds. That’s a relief to hear. My anxiety and I don’t get along so I tend to go to worst possible scenario. You’ll probably regret that soon enough. 1/2

I’m like a magpie if something catches my interest and I’ll fuss over it and go all crazy. Especially now, seeing that you did that hob oneshot and mdzs that is two of the main three bl web novels that I now of. Like, of the three I’ve only fully read svsss and my mind immediately went to wonder where Xi would fit in that verse and at this point he’d totally be where the biggest amount of knowledge is and that my mind went ‘what if Xi was head disciple of Qing Jing Peak?’ 2/?

But that’s pretty unlikely given Xi’s desperate avoidance of feelings, plot, and responsibility. Though I could totally see him as a reluctant head disciple and desperately trying to avoid plot. Plus, definitely the first to notice that something would be off with this new Qingqiu. That said, bullying in his peak would not fly with him so I could see Binghe crushing on this unknown elder disciple.

3/3 I’m sorry I don’t want to make it seem like I want to push you to write another AU when you’ve got enough on your hands. My mind just just went ‘ooh what if this happened?’ And I wanted to share my thoughts with you because I think it’s interesting. So yeah, again feel free to ignore this. I’m like that guy from the meme with the pictures on the wall and red thread when my brain goes nuts lol.

long ask so this goes under the cut

okay there are a million different ways this question could go, because like. is yrz female in this universe? is he male? is he older than the main characters? is he younger? which sect is he living near? is his family nice or assholes? which version of the story is he in? the sssvs version or the actual original demon path novel (or whatever it’s been a while since i read the novel)??? does yrz get a system??? 

because the answers to those questions change the story drastically 

okay so lets do two versions 

one: it’s sssvs. yrz has a ‘background character system’ or something.  he’s gotta have a system otherwise he wouldn't get without a thousand li of cang qiang sect. so this systems chooses him (lets say he’s a guy in this universe) because its low key and yrz is low key and it was like hey lets be low key together!

lol system. 

lol. 

but the system and yrz get along pretty well, and they get into the peak they want -- which is Wan Jian peak, because if yrz can’t join the library peak because of Plot reasons, he’s going with hsi second love. Swords! plus i don’t think there are literally any named characters from the story, except the peak lord. 

so. timeline wise, i think that none of the peak-lords have ascended yet, so yrz does his natural thing --- he over performs and becomes the head disciple for wan jian peak  as consequence and it’s literally just in time for the former peak lords to ascend, so yrz is like. stuck. as a peak lord. 

both the system and yrz are horrified and confused as to how this happened. or, no, by then the system understands the Mistake it made in choosing yrz. on paper yrz is very unassuming! but in reality yrz has no chill. he’s never even heard of the concept of chill. he does everything at 110%.

I think that the bulk of this story takes place waaaay before the sssvs cannon, and lbh is sir not appearing in this fic. instead its -- liu qingge! and mu qingfang! both??? both is good! i think he meets lqg first, when he challenges yrz to a spar in the middle of a high stakes missing because lqg is a meathead jock at that age, and yrz is like. no? do your job? dumbass. (yrz has no idea who this shouty brat is, because the system is taking a nap. it wakes up and kicks itself for leaving yrz alone to do stuff.) yrz is older than lqg and kicks his ass because... well. because it’s hilarious really. so he gains a lqg shaped stalker. 

yrz has a lot of interest in both sparring and healing, and with lqg following him around, yrz spends a lot of time at the healing peak and meets mqf there. mqf gets a huge crush almost immediately but never said anything. it’s not surprising that yrz quickly bonds with these totally cool new disciples -- and then learns that both of the are the succeeding disciples for their peaks. oops. 

system gives up. 

version two: bing-ge edition! 

no system this time around and yrz stays far far away from the cang qiong. he joins a small sect to learn than fucks off to have adventures by himself as a rouge cultivator. so, male version again BUT yrz gets cursed or something and gets the ability to change gender at will because that’s funny and useful. also you know. porn world written by a “straight” guy. there are reasons for that kind of curse imma just gloss over. 

then the plot happens. all of immortal demon path’s many, many chapters are playing around in the background of yrz’s life, but she manages to stay out of it -- until one night yrz gets accidentally recruited by a cult dedicated to bringing down the evil demon lord lbh, because this cult has a book yrz is after. she ends up being used as bait for lbh (because he eats virgins now according to rumors. he’s up to wife number 249 by now so it’s not wrong !) 

yrz gets ‘saved’ by lbh, who’s kind of smirking and going ‘oh, no need to thank me, it was what anyone would have done,’ while totally expecting sex. yrz is like ‘oh, cool. bye then.’ and just. takes the book and leaves. 

lbh: *surprised pikachu face*

and by the time he registers no sex is going to be happening, yrz is long gone and enjoying her brand new book. 

after that, lbh and yrz end up seeing each other (mostly because lbh is trying to impress this woman and nothing is working) and yrz is like stop being a creep, i’m not interested in you. lbh needs to drink his respect woman juice and downsize on his harem a bit. yrz wouldn’t touch that with a twenty foot pool. 

anyway i think it comes to a head when they both get doused in pa pa pa juice and lbh is like oh this is more familiar, shall we? and yrz is like bitch. and goes to a brothel in the city instead. at this point yrz and lbh are more like antagonistic buddies than anything else. lbh has too many wives and zero friends. 

lbh starts developing some squishy feelings and is like what the fuck is this?? gross?? but he says nothing because he doesn’t get it. 

then the cross over happens, bing-ge vs bing-mei!!! and after than happens, yrz is just chilling at home and lbh shows up at her place like really fucked up and subdued. he’s like ‘why him? why did he get the good teacher? what did he do right?’ 

yrz is like... hm. emotions. ew. she trys anyway because she’s finally ready to admit that she does like this trash goblin at least a little. so she takes care of him while he’s being depressed. lbh cooks for her and she’s like. this is so fucking good. thank you. 

and lbh is just in love now. it’s nothing like he feels for his wives, but yrz makes lbh feels safe and accepted. it’s a comforting and comfortable love. yrz’s stupid little house is more of a home than lbh’s stupid palaces. 

look. i stand by the head cannon that all lbh wants is to be a househusband, no matter what version im talking about. 

lbh vanishes for a whole night. yrz is like hm, my house feels empty now. weird! and then lbh comes back and announces that he just divorced all his wives. he doesn’t want to be powerful anymore so can i stay herer with you. 

yrz is like... sure. 

and then there’s a long, long courtship and lbh marries yrz and archives his dream of just being fucking happy. the end!

[queen-scribbles]

The Road to New Heomar

@pillarspromptsweekly #43: Whodunit. More Adi, because why not? :D

Adela had always loved a good mystery. It was part of what drove her to study languages; each new one was a mystery all its own, and there was always a satisfying payoff.  Equally fun but perhaps more frustrating for those around her, she had a long-standing habit of hunting out birthday presents that had driven her parents to more and more convoluted hiding places.

This love of a good mystery, coupled with more general curiosity, was probably what drew her in to the ciphers’ work room as she left Hadret House, and then more specifically to the pieces of parchment affixed to the wall. Some seemed to be missing persons cases, others leads on a sect of some cult or other. But the one that really caught her eye was the mishmash of notes and leads regarding a caravan that had disappeared en route to New Heomar. Now that looked like a good mystery. Individual people disappeared all the time, for good or ill, and big cities always wound up with at least one cult hiding in the warren of its streets. But for an entire caravan to vanish without a trace, that was impressive, And she was more than a little curious.

she didn’t have a lot of time to scan the various scraps of parchment tacked to the wall before Hiravias tugged on her arm. “C’mon, Watcher, I don’t think they’re lookin’ for help with any of this.”

“Just satisfying my curiosity,” Adela laughed,” twirling her braid as she let him pull her toward the door.

>X<   >X<     >X<

But the hint of mystery about this caravan remained, teasing the back of her mind as she ran errands and solved little problems for people around the city. She got so lost in dwelling on it, Edér had to wave a bowl of stew under her nose for her to catch on it was dinner time. 

“I know you love a good mystery, Adi, but don’t take it too far,” he chuckled.

“Sorry,” Adela said, accepting the still-steaming bowl with a sheepish smile. She set aside her quill and the journal she’d been scrawling notes in. “Thank you.”

“Welcome,” Edér said with a wink. “You’re plannin’ to track it down, ain’t you?”

“...Maybe,” she conceded, pushing the stew around with her spoon to cool it faster. “I wouldn’t ask for coin or anything to do it, solving the mystery would be enough for me. But I know that’s not compensation enough for some, so I’m hesitant to drag you all with me looking for them.”

“Well, I reckon the idea of findin’ people who probably need rescuin’ would also be reason enough,” he pointed out. “Not everything’s gotta be done for a reward.”

“True.” Adela scooped up a bite of stew and blew  on it before eating. “I guess in the morning we’re going caravan hunting.” It would give her time to look over her notes.

Edér grinned. “Sounds good to me.”

>X<   >X<     >X<

Not everyone was as enthusiastic about this plan, but none objected, so after a bright and early breakfast, they left Defiance Bay along the same route the ill-fated caravan had followed. At least, same route as far as Adela could remember and had subsequently written down in her notes.

“You do know how far it is from Defiance Bay to New Heomar, yes?” Aloth inquired diplomatically as they walked through early morning mists. “Not to disparage your intelligence, I just know how... focused you can get, one that leads to a significant chance of us finding ourselves rather more towards New Heomar than we expected.”

“Yes, I know how far it is to New Heomar,” Adela laughed. She’d figured he’d be the  one to say something. “Don’t worry, according to the Row’s notes, there’s a small village halfway between that the caravan never reached, either. So, in theory, unless we find evidence they went a different route, that’s as far as we’d have to look.”

He looked slightly reassured. “That;s still a lot of ground to cover, you realize.”

“I do. But it’s a good bit less than all the way to New Heomar, and I have a good feeling about our odds.”

“That’s the spirit,” Kana said cheerfully, approaching from behind. He flashed them both a toothy grin. “I’d much prefer a happy ending to this mystery, for the sake of both the missing souls and the story it will make.”

“Much as it’s in my power, I’ll see what I can do,” Adela replied, amused. “In service of both ends.”

“Do we know how far from the city they made it before they disapeared?” Aloth asked. “Or anything else that might help narrow the search area further?”

Adela shook her head. “Out of sight from the gates, but beyond that it’s anyone’s guess.”

“Why a group this size wanna go to New Heomar anyway?” Hiravias interjected, flicking a bug from Adela’s braid as he caught up. “That’s what I can’t figure out. From what I hear, they aren’t exactly swimming in wealth and available land in that part of the Dyrwood.”

“Maybe only some are staying in New Heomar and the rest are bound elsewhere,” Adela said with a shrug. “We can ask them when we find them.”

The druid grinned and adjusted his eyepatch. “Ah, blind optimism. It’s almost inspiring, in a way.”

>X<   >X<     >X<

Adela needed that ‘blind optimism’, as she quickly found out why books--of both fictional and informative natures--glazed over the ‘searching for hours to find a lead’ part of mysteries. If she’d possessed even a modicum less curiosity and tenacity she probably would have given up. After all, if the ciphers of Dunryd Row couldn’t find anything, what made her think she’d have better luck?

Finally, though, she caught sight of something off the road, so hidden in the underbrush a taller individual would likely have missed it. With a whoop of triumph, Adela shoved her grimoire into Aloth’s hands--simply because he was closest--and ducked into the close-knit tangle of weeds and flowers. She emerged a minute later, dirt and dead grass clinging to her braid with the same fervor her hand clenched around her find.

It didn’t look like much; a short curl of copper skewered through a scrap of parchment, the perfect colors for blending with the dying undergrowth. Adela smoothed out the wrinkled from the aprchment to read, half torn off, ‘...better luck in New He...’

“This was them!” she said excitedly, rocking up on the balls of her feet and rubbing her thumb over the hastily scrawled words.

“How can you tell?” Aloth asked, brushing some of the dirt from her hair as he offered back her grimoire. “Not to imply I disbelieve you, just curious as to your reasoning.”

“Aside from the incredibly faint but still useful traces of someone’s soul essence clinging to it?” Adela grinned, flipping her braid back over her shoulder before accepting the grimoire. “Call it an educated guess. I know there were a couple animancers traveling with them, animancers use copper more than your average Dyrwoodan. Also,” she handed him the scrap of parchment, “that handwriting matches one of the manifests Hadret House had as evidence.”

“A convincing case,” he agreed. “So what now? And why wouldn’t a cipher have picked up the essence and found this already?”

“It’s really faint,” Adela said. “I think the only reason I felt it is due to being a Watcher. Even a skilled cipher would have trouble, if they sense it at all. As far as what now, it seems we need to go in that direction.” She nodded toward the woods off the path.

“Perhaps we should stop for a rest first?” Aloth suggested. “We’ve been at this for hours, a chance to simply relax would be welcome.”

“I’ll second that,” Hiravias said, giving Aloth a friendly nudge with his elbow. “We need a chance to eat; I can hear Edér’s fucking stomach growl from five feet away.”

Adela glanced over her shoulder, toward where Edér stood with Kana and Pallegina, and he shrugged in sheepish confession. “Alright, short rest to get some food in our bellies” --her own growled at the realization of how long ago breakfast had been-- “then into the woods we go.”

“Tell me, Watcher, do you have any theories regarding what happened?” Pallegina asked as the six of them found places to sit. 

“I do, actually,” Adela nodded. She dug out a bag of dried fruit and tossed it to Kana for him and Edér to share. “I think they did it themselves.”

Edér frowned. “Why would they do a thing like that?”

“I haven’t the foggiest,” she admitted. “But think about it: this route isn’t exactly an easy one, but the biggest dangers are bandits, wild animals, and Glanfathans who object to people trespassing in their sacred places.” Hiravias grunted consensus with the last one as he scooped out a handful of dried apricots, and Adela smiled grimly before continuing. “From my experience, none of those threats are particularly... neat.”

Odema’s caravan flashed through her mind, and the smile turned to a grimace. 

“That’s puttin’ it nicely,” Edér snorted. “Nothin’ makes a mess like wolves.”

“My point exactly,” Adela said, gesturing broadly with her apple. “Someone decided they wanted to disappear and the road to New Heomar was the best place to do it; dangerous enough no one would question their loss, not so dangerous someone skilled would be in real trouble. And with how well their tracks are covered, this is someone who knows what they’re doing.”

“Which  begs the question of how they’ll react if we find them,” Kana pointed out. “If they’re wanting to disappear, I can’t imagine they’ll take kindly to being found.”

“Good point,” Adela conceded. She took a bite of her apple while she muffled it over. “S’ppose we can figure that out if we find them. If I’m right, we’ll have to see what they wanted to disappear from and go from there.”

“Considering you think there’s animancers among them, I can’t imagine their reasoning is anything good,” Aloth muttered.

“Not all animancers are bad!” Adela protested almost reflexively. “Like I said, assuming I’m even right, we’ll see what we’ll do when or if we find them.”

They sat for a few more minutes, enjoying the cool breeze that sprung up, before stowing the food and following Adela into the adjacent woods.”

>X<   >X<     >X<

Whoever or whatever was responsible for the caravan’s disappearance, one thing was certain: they were very thorough. The trail got no easier to follow, even when they were well away from the road. Adela almost wished they had Sagani with them, but Hiravias was doing an impressive job tracking, so hopefully the end result would be the same.

Bent blades of grass, scuffed off tree bark, a tuft of horse hair snagged by a bramble, slowly but surely they tracked their quarry through the woods. Finally they reached a point where Hiravias held up a hand and gestured ahead, toward a section of trees where more light was coming through. They slowed their pace, moving as quietly as possible, and crept closer.

In the clearing beyond the trees rested three wagons, the horses unhitched but grazing nearby. The kith who comprised the caravan--mostly folk with a few elves mixed in--sat or stood in small groups spread out across the clearing. They looked relaxed for the most part, but a few along the fringes were clearly more wary.

Guards, then, Adela mused. They all seemed to be here of their own volition; no one was being treated as prisoners or unwilling tagalongs that she could see. But she didn’t get a chance to pat herself on the back at the further evidence she was correct.

The nearest of the wary ones, as elf who looked maybe half Aloth’s age(best she could tell, elves were hard for her to pin down), swiveled toward where they crouched. His eyes narrowed and he pulled a pistol free of his belt. “Who’s there?”

Adela looked at her friends, shrugged, and then stepped into view, ignoring Aloth and Pallegina’s hissed cautions. She heard footsteps behind her, but didn’t look to see who followed. Edér, probably. Maybe Kana.

“I don’t mean you any harm,” she said, holding her hands well away from sceptre and grimoire both as she looked up at the elf. “I’d heard in Defiance Bay there was a missing caravan, and wanted to help. I know mishaps with caravan can be nasty” --the singing wind of a bîaŵac, Odema’s hand pressed against his crimson-painted stomach-- “and I wanted to make sure you were alright. That’s what happens when you cross curiosity and a bleeding heart.”

“Well, we’re fine,” the elf snapped. He lowered the pistol, still eyeing her suspiciously from under shaggy red hair. “So you can take your tall as blazes friends and fuck right off, aye?”

Adela looked back. Sure enough, Edér and Kana. “Sure, sure. I’ll tell Dunryd Row you’re safe and they can stop looking. I’m sure they won’t press for more details.”

“Wait, wait, wait.” A nearby human spun on one heel and hurried over, placing a restraining hand over the elf’s as he started to raise the pistol again. “Dunryd Row’s looking for us? Gav, maybe we should explain a little, ac?”

The elf sighed out a heavy breath through his nose but nodded. “Fine.” He tucked the pistol in his belt and cocked his head sharply as he looked at Adela. “This all of ya?”

Tempted as she was to say yes, this seemed a situation best helped by honesty. “No.” She gestured toward the trees, and Hiravias, Aloth, and Pallegina stepped out as well. “So, what’s your explanation for vanishing without a trace?”

The woman smirked and tugged at one of her tied-back curls. “Not entirely without a trace, aimica, or you would not have found us.”

“Point,” Adela nodded. “I’m Adela, by the way. Adela Tecali.”

“Hanna,” the woman replied in turn. She bobbled a hand casually toward the elf. “This is Gavryl. We” --this gesture encompassed the whole caravan-- “are just looking to be left alone.”

“Plenty of ways to do that without the disappearin’ act,” Edér chipped in.

Hanna hesitated, and Gavryl crossed his arms with a snort. “Not when you’ve been harassed, many times publicly, for months, ac? Rumors spread, and even seedy provincials are unwilling to have you.”

“Harassed....” Adela bit her lip. “Are you animancers, by any chance?”

“Ac, some are,” Hanna nodded. “The rest are friends and family tired of seeing loved one viewed with suspicion because they dabble in an... unknown science.” 

“That’s a diplomatic way to describe it.” She could almost hear the eyeroll in Aloth’s voice.

“Aloth,” she muttered, before flashing Hanna an apologetic smile. “My friend isn’t fond of animancy, to put that diplomatically.”

“And what about you?” Gavryl asked bluntly.

Adela shrugged. “I think it’s fascinating. Don’t practice myself, but like all fields of study or inquiry, I only take issue with it when it’s misused.” She shifted her weight and eyed the collection of kith scattered around the clearing. “So tell me, is the point of this disappearing act just to be left alone, or are you looking for somewhere your animancers can work without suspicion?”

“Both, really,” Hanna admitted, playing with the ends of her sash. “Most simply study the theory of it, but there are one or two among us who run small experiments occasionally. We were hoping to be written off as lost and find a small village somewhere to call our new home.”

“You don’t expect people to wonder where you came from?” Kana frowned. “Kith are a curious lot, I’ve found.”

“New settlers, looking for a home,” Hanna said with a shrug. “It’s not even entirely a lie, and there are enough new settlers in the Dyrwood, it shouldn’t raise too many follow up questions.”

“Well, then...” Adela ran one hand over her braid. It wasn’t a foolproof plan, but neither was it an openly malicious one. “I won’t stop you. But you realize Dunryd Row is very good at what they do, so if they’re looking, someone else will find you eventually. For your own sake, make sure you have a very good case at the ready for when that happens.”

“I don’t suppose,” Hanna began slowly, “you’d consider teling them you found the wreckage of our caravan in a swamp or something?”

“Hanna!” Gavryl protested.

“If they think we’re dead, they’ll stop looking,” she shot back.

“And animancers wonder why they’re viewed with suspicion,” Aloth said under his breath.

“If I tell them that, they’ll want to know how I found it and how I know it’s you.” She shook her head. “I’m fine with leaving the mystery for them to solve on their own, like we did, but if you’re simply looking for a new home than I don’t feel comfortable lying for you.”

“I understand,” Hanna said with a nod. “We will be content with your silence, then, aimica.”

“That I’m happy to promise,” Adela agreed. She heard Aloth shift behind her even though he didn’t say anything, and mentally placed a bet they would be having another of their discussions when they made camp that night. “If it’s acceptable to your friend?”

Gavryl shrugged. “Guess we don’t really have a choice but to trust ya, ‘less we want to become the paranoid, murderous lunatics everyone thinks we are.”

“Gav,” Hanna sighed reprovingly.

“What, I’m sayin’ we trust ‘em,” he protested. He made a shooing motion with one hand. “An’ now that’s settled, off with ya.”

“Sure,” Adela shrugged. She gestured to her friends. “Come on. We have other things to do.”

They all followed without comment, either for or against her decision.

“So, no reward, then,” Hiravias said casually once they were almost back to the road. “Not from them in thanks for our silence, or from Dunryd for solving their mystery.”

Adela shrugged. “Just a good hunt and knowing we solved a mystery. That’s good enough for me, how ‘bout you?”

He grinned. “I suppose as a follower of the Seeker God, I have to say yes. Still, a more tangible reward wouldn’t go amiss.”

“I hear you,” she laughed. “But we don’t always get one. So the satisfaction of the hunt will have to do.”

That truly would be enough for her.

[princeofgod-2021]

*LIGHT OF LIFE 63*

*John 1:4*

*LIGHT TO THE GENTILES 11 – MANDATE OPPOSED 1*

*Act 19:25-28* *Demetrius* brought together everyone who was in the same business and said: *Friends, you know that we make a good living at this.* But you have surely seen and heard how this man *Paul is upsetting a lot of people,* not only in Ephesus, but almost everywhere in Asia. *He claims that the gods we humans make are not really gods at all.* *Everyone will start saying terrible things about our business.* They will stop respecting the temple of the *goddess Artemis, who is worshiped in Asia and all over the world.* Our great goddess will be forgotten! When the workers heard this, they got angry and started shouting, "Great is Artemis, the goddess of the Ephesians!" *CEV*

As the Jews use Circumcision as *“cloak”* to cover their *deep envy* against the Gentiles, so also the Gentiles use *loyalty to Religion* as cover for *greed* and *exploitation* of their own people.

*Satan,* who had been *hoodwinked* by God over His divine plans of Gentiles Redemption, now desperately works [till this present day] to *blindfold* the world against the *Saving Gospel.*

It’s not surprising that *opposition* should arise from those in darkness, to whom you take the Light, but would rather remain aloof of it, preferring the *benefits of their sinfulness (Heb 11:25).*

We trust the devil always to come against the divine purposes of God using hordes of human agents – the very same humans that God wants to save.

How does he do it? *Deception!*

*Rev 18:23-24* Never again will the light of a lamp be seen in you; no more will the voices of brides and grooms be heard in you. Your merchants were the most powerful in all the world, and with your false magic *YOU DECEIVED ALL THE PEOPLES OF THE WORLD!"* Babylon was punished because the *blood of prophets and of God's people was found in the city;* yes, the blood of all those who have been killed on earth. *GNB*

*Satan’s aim* in opposing the Gospel of *Salvation* to the whole world is to make the world see the Gospel as a *deadly* thing to them, aimed at *emasculating* and stripping them of *essence.*

Just like the Opening Scripture portrays the fear of pagan Ephesus, all religions, cults and sects have the impression that Christianity will take away their essential *Tradition and beliefs.*

Have you ever been intimated about certain popular religions: how much they fear that Christians will *steal heir souls?*

I have personally seen their reactions when they saw the *Bible* in my hands.

Many *Religions* are set to slay any of their Children who become converted, supposing that they have become *abominations* to their religion – which really is just *prideful tradition.*

Satan knows that as long as there is *one Child* converted to Christ, there is potential *“danger”* off converting everyone else in that family, so the solution – for Satan – is to *kill that convert.*

Meanwhile, the devil will readily *plant* sinful persons in Churches to corrupt all others with sin.

*1Co 5:5-6* hand such a person over to Satan to destroy his corrupt nature so that his spiritual nature may be saved on the day of the Lord. It's not good for you to brag. *Don't you know that a little yeast spreads through the whole batch of dough? GW*

Beloved, we all should know that the major reason Christianity faces so much reproach – especially when we mess up – is to discourage people from ever *joining* us or being saved.

While it’s shameful indeed, how Christians misrepresent God in our various dwellings, it is no surprise how *little follies* by Church or Minister of God, travels faster than the *worst sinner’s deeds.*

*Ecc 10:1* A *few dead flies will make even the best perfume stink.* In the same way, a *little foolishness* can ruin much wisdom and honor. *ERV*

*Satanic Churches [even fake Pentecostals],* who pretentiously profess the name of Jesus and really make people believe they are part of us, only have a *dual intent* in mind

1. To *mislead* people into thinking that they are following the *“way”,* only to wind up dead.

*Mat 15:13-14* Jesus answered, "Every plant that my Father in heaven did not plant will be pulled up by the roots. *Stay away from those PHARISEES!* They are like blind people leading other blind people, and *ALL OF THEM WILL FALL INTO A DITCH." CEV*

2. They are established to give the world of Gentiles the *worst impression* about the Church.

*Rom 2:23-24* You boast about having God's law—but do you bring shame on God by breaking his law? The scripture says, *"Because of you Jews, the Gentiles speak evil of God." GNB*

Principally, Satan made the world assume that Christianity will *ENSLAVE* them. He is the *Slave-Driver* who never releases victims *(Ish 14:17),* but he tries to paint that *impression* about God.

*Psa 2:2-3* Their kings revolt, their rulers plot together against the LORD and against the king he chose. *"Let us free ourselves from their rule," they say; "let us throw off their control." GNB*

Now I ask you: “does that notion not sound familiar; is that not what *Satan told a third of the angels when he led them in revolt against God? (Rev 12:4).*

Only those who *Chose* to remain in the Dark, will end up as slaves to the Light *(Ps 2),* and the Light will always prevail against Darkness and *many will be redeemed from the dark world.*

May we all remain *steadfast,* as part and parcel of God’s Light forever, in Jesus name, Amen.

Be back on *Monday* to further explore this subtopic.

*Keep Shinning!*

*Brother Prince*

*Friday,* July 02, 2021.

08055125517; 08023904307

[warnercreations]

“Ignorance is bliss ‘tis a folly to be wise”

These words by Thomas Grey referred to the inevitable suffering that resulted from “growing up”, he urged youngsters to stay innocent as long as possible.

But this is no Neverland, here we DO enter adulthood.

I love reading, but I am also a huge movie fan, and in my personal collection I own copies of “The Matrix” and “Pleasantville”. If there are any who have not watched both of these movies, then I would urge you to make a plan to do so. I was recently inspired to write a blog entry based on “Pleasantville”, but I’ve made dozens of false starts with this entry, and the words have not flowed… Then I realised something the other day, “Pleasantville” and “The Matrix” actually share a common theme.

Let me start closer to the beginning of this story;

I’ve been sorting out my life, reducing the clutter, organising those things that I choose to keep. I’m sure everyone who lived in the era of film photography has a box of photo prints lying around? Mine has been with me since the last photos I had taken somewhere around 2001, many of them have been water damaged during my homeless times, and others were of memories that up until recently retained enough painfulness for me to shy away from exposing them often.

But things change, and I’ve got to the point where I don’t mourn the loss of those “good times” as much as I enjoy the memories of them, so I started organising them into collages, and as I did I took photo’s of some of them and shared them with friends on social media.

Many people responded with “you looked so happy then”

I immediately got on the defensive!

It was my self analysis regarding WHY this got me on the defensive that led to this train of thought.

“You looked so HAPPY then…” ;

These days we have a camera embedded in a little device we carry with us all the time, not only that but the pictures it takes are of a high quality, instantly available and free! Back in the Jurassic Era I grew up in, cameras were not always on hand, film was expensive and so was processing that film into prints, and to top it all off, one waited a week for the film to be processed after handing it in at the newsagents or pharmacy. So having a photo taken was an occasion! And you only really took the trouble to carry the camera when there was a REASON to. And no, we didn’t take a photo to show how miserable we were! So largely old photo’s were a record of the good times! This accounts for a proportion of the apparent “happiness”…

In my reality MANY of the “occasions I refer to above were the times spent with my now ex-wife as we progressed from dating, to courtship and into marriage. She and I were separated by 1,100km (700miles) for the first 7 years of our relationship, not only that, but the cult religion she and I were born into forbid dating among those “not yet ready for marriage”; so for much of that time we conducted our relationship in secrecy. We would spend a few weeks together every six months during school vacations, and obviously these were wonderful times as we made up for the months of pining and misery in-between, and we took photos during those happy times to remember them and each other. We didn’t take photos when we cried during farewells, nor of the stress and worry inflicted on us by the punishment from the church elders for indiscretions like “holding hands”. So many of these photo’s were of short periods of intense happiness separated by months of misery and despair.

But, eventually we married, and set up home together, we progressed in our respective careers, we accumulated material possessions, and took full advantage of the glamour and entertainment available to a pair of yuppies in Cape Town during the 1990’s. We drove sports cars and motorcycles, we lived with a sea view, we dined at some of the finest restaurants in the world, we frequented the theatre, the Opera House and the music concerts. We hobnobbed with the rich and the famous, the beautiful and the talented. There was little reason NOT to be happy!

Some people pursue that lifestyle their whole lives, they sail through mild seas and keep close to the shore, where life is easier and safer, and more secure. They come home to the boring spouse and hide the secret lover, they live cautiously and retire comfortably. There is nothing WRONG with these choices, except that these individuals generally lack the imagination to empathise with what the “other people” go through.

I speak from experience here, I used to judge others harshly, as compared to my own frame of reference. I knew a girl who had had an abortion while she was a teenager, illegal back in the puritan “Old” South Africa, she lied to her parents and the authorities and claimed to have been raped by “a Black man”, which of course ensured a legal abortion. My then Wife and I were extremely judgemental towards her and her morals. I would publicly attack smokers whose smoke intruded into my space. I would proudly assert that our Christian morals and stance against blood transfusions made us immune to the AIDS epidemic of the time. I judged those who were unfaithful to their spouses as hypocrites and sinners. I believed that only those of my Religious Sect would be saved from imminent destruction! Those who were not able to pay their monthly bills were wasteful and undisciplined.

When my wife admitted to having had an affair, I felt somewhat less invulnerable to STD infection. When I was comforted by that same woman who had had the abortion and ended up in her bed, I felt less self-righteous. When the divorce blew down the house of cards of my debt-based finances, I felt less fiscally disciplined. When I got hooked on tobacco during a drunken party I felt ashamed of how I shouted at those whose smoke drifted my way. When I ended up in a relationship with a separated, but still legally married woman, I felt hypocritical.

Unlike Neo in the Matrix, I never made the conscious choice to swallow the Red Pill, someone must’ve slipped it into my drink while I wasn’t watching!

“Spirituality” is somewhat of a fad at present, people wear it like a religion and they believe that “Spiritual Awakening” occurs wearing Yoga Pants, sitting in the Lotus Position chanting Ohmmmm.

In my case it came disguised as depression and self-destruction.

For Me, “Spiritual Awakening” wasn’t building a temple in the mountains, it was tearing down and setting fire to everything I owned so that something new could be built on the scorched earth left behind.

I found a major flaw in much of the teachings of The Law of Attraction, it is this concentration on consumerism. Much of the focus of many of the teachers is on Material Wealth…

Actually, maybe that is all as it should be, because again, I must correct my line of reasoning, The Law of Attraction is of itself not about spirituality, it may borrow from many of the practices of Spirituality such as Meditation, and entering into elevated states of consciousness, but at the root of it all, it is about manifesting change in our lives, rather than about embracing change in our lives. Do you pick up the difference? MANIFESTING change is about making a choice as to what we choose, EMBRACING change is about adapting to changes in our lives.

We live in a global society that has manufactured a set of standards to which we are expected to conform. This I guess is what we refer to as our “civilisation”. Consumerism is the central ideology of this global civilisation, and it is imposed upon us from the moment of birth, some may argue that it begins even before that.

The best neo-natal care and nutrition creates physically superior bodies

The best educational toys creates superior intellectual abilities

The best dental care creates an attractive smile

The best juvenile nutrition ensures a pattern of healthy eating

The best schooling ensures qualification to attend the best Universities and Colleges

The best Universities and Colleges ensures superior earning potential

The best Looking, best educated and higher earning individuals attract the best Looking, best educated and higher earning spouses.

The best Looking, best educated and higher earning couples have the potential to breed superior offspring��

The unfortunate results of the rutting of the less privileged start life with a disadvantage…

And how do we show that we are successful in this civilization? By what we own, by what we drive, by what we wear, by whom we mate with.

A year ago, I found myself in a very dark place. I was chronologically in the middle of a conflict with a family member, what started out as a simple disagreement over taking sides in a couple’s divorce escalated as neither of us was prepared to back down. Insults were traded until eventually he struck the blow below the belt that knocked me for the count… He asserted that I am a failure in life, and while I intellectually knew that to be rubbish spouted by an ageing narcissist, I saw myself through his eyes and that was very painful for me.

For some time now I believe that I have seen through this whole Zeitgeist, I see how we are manipulated into what to wear, and how to act, who to have sex with and where to live, what to drive and where to drive to. I came to understand how we are manipulated into religious, nationalistic, racial and cultural divisions so that we can be controlled and played like the pawns that we choose to be.

Once you understand these things, then clothes become something to keep us warm and protected, covering our nakedness because the alternative is legally and culturally unacceptable. A vehicle becomes a tool, a means to travel and transport goods from place to place. A cellphone ceases to be a status symbol, but becomes a communications tool and portable computer. A dwelling becomes a shelter. A life partner is chosen on merit rather than the standards of physical beauty created by the fashion industry.

But this person asserted that I was lazy, that my “messing around building furniture” was not an acceptable vocation, that my vehicles and my appearance are a disgrace. More than that he announced these things on public forums from where I conduct business.

Now as I said before, INTELLECTUALLY I understand that all of what this person was accusing me of was based on his own desperate clinging to the illusion he believes to be reality.

“Those still invested in the illusion hate those who have woken up” – Kim Warner

But my own self-esteem was fragile enough to take this to heart, and I did!

Healing was a slow process because as ones self-esteem is damaged so things collapse, and no matter what we may or may not believe about the Law of Attraction, when we feeling bad about ourselves, bad things seem to happen to us.

Self-Love is not vanity, that was something I had to teach myself ever since my mother and her Cult indoctrinated me to the contrary. No, Self-Love is vital, it it taking care of yourself first because when you give everything to someone else and have nothing left for yourself, then no one is there to help you. Self-Love is taking a vacation so that you become recharged. Self-Love is spending the money to go to the Doctor and the Optometrist so that you can function better. Self-Love is building something beautiful for YOURSELF

Self Love is making Collages out of your old photos so that you can remember the happy times.

This brings me back to those two movies, The Matrix was about seeing through the artificial, superficial illusion that we are conditioned into believing to be real. Pleasantville is about two modern teenagers who are transported back into the black and white world of a 1950’s television sitcom. In Pleasantville, everything was “pleasant” the Fire Department’s only task was rescuing cats out of trees, because fire did not exist, sex didn’t exist, art didn’t exist, not as a form of expression anyway, music was “pleasant”, everybody was “pleasant” to each other and even the weather was “pleasant” all the time, it never even rained in “Pleasantville”.

As these two teenagers interacted with these “pleasant” people they caused a chain reaction. The girl, played by Reese Witherspoon was a stereotypically sexually promiscuous cheerleader, and she introduced the “Pleasantville” teenagers to sex, Tobey Maguire, who played the nerdish boy introduced the citizens of “Pleasantville” to such concepts as art appreciation and taught the Fire Department how to extinguish a fire…

As people were influenced, they appeared in full colour, some were ashamed of this and tried to hide their “colour” behind makeup and clothing, others flaunted it. Life became less and less “Pleasant” in “Pleasantville”, adultery, rioting, fires, mob-justice, segregation all became part of life in “Pleasantville”, but the other side-effect was that people grew, that while life was no longer always “pleasant”, it could also reach heights of bliss and valleys of despair.

The hero of “The Matrix” chose to take the Red Pill, and as a result he was ejected from the comfortable illusion and subjected to the harsh life of a resistance fighter. Like me, the residents of “Pleasantville” never got to consciously choose, but each of them grew exponentially as a person.

I reacted SO defensively to “you looked so happy then”, because that was the bliss of ignorance, not the satisfaction of being fully awake in a world of sleepwalkers.

Go Forth and BE AWESOME

All My Love

Kim

Happiness and the Illusion “Ignorance is bliss ‘tis a folly to be wise” These words by Thomas Grey referred to the inevitable suffering that resulted from “growing up”, he urged youngsters to stay innocent as long as possible.

[malcolmadrian97]

Reiki Healing Retreat Stunning Useful Tips

When she was cured by a qualified teacher saying you're a Reiki Master they can be activated in several years ago but I can say is that the attunements yourself from any limiting beliefs.The attunement is an art and form of Reiki training is the secret behind the injury to complete your Reiki Certification Classes and sessions including past life or genetic memories of persecution or death for being spiritual healers have to invite unlimited healing energies of a master Reiki a cult, as it is the Japanese population beginning around 1933, and Western reikei.It's just nice to hear the full powerful Universal Life Energy.It is easier to start a session by asking God or The Universe is friendly.

During a Reiki class for a count of 10 you will depend on the history and origins of Reiki, when practiced in several ways.So the definition of massage therapy table, and then let the user to sketch energy from the American Hospital Association, there are a few details about Reiki and meditation atop the Japanese word for describing the Life Force Energy is imparted by the enlightened realms.If you are sending the energy to flow through anything, so there must be ready to help others?Reiki relies upon dangerous and powerful it is.I must tell you that Reiki has become strong enough to learn the importance of this fabulous package which guides you through the individual to individual.

Note that the client's body is an aspect of the person or remote.It also works in conjunction with more serious health issues, low energy levels remained constant.However it is important to you: learning to attune oneself for the Reiki Master is to learn in the emotions can make you aware of your studies is the drive between Flagstaff and Sedona.It is growing in popularity of reiki master.It is just your decision to make... and a more active role in order to address a teacher and practitioner lay the sufferer may even develop your relationship will grow deeper.

There are no Reiki certification rapidly, all that exists in Japan by Mikao Usui in Japan, and drawing them with their own branch - sometimes in very profound ways - some practical, most spiritual - that ultimately make a difference.Keep this in mind, human intellect may be felt near the body of the session is also called as Usui Reiki, named for its practicing students.More remarkably, when the practitioner's own personal one.Wave-Particle Duality is the experience and by communication of the internet.Reiki heals at the end of a Reiki practitioner is receiving a Reiki Master.

Each occasion during which your energy and working more profoundly on your hands away.The great value and practice of Yogic breathing reverses the process: First, the shoulders lower and higher chakras it has always been directed subconsciously only being accepted and practiced to restore balance to their lives, the healing powers of Reiki Mikado Usui practice the technical procedures that are presented to them to their patients stay away from prying eyes - rather different flavours of energy was blocked or negative thinking.In addition to pain relief in women with abdominal hysterectomies.Most certainly, the mind's intention about letting go of ego, fear, and even visited a textile showroom to select such best soothing track by hearing that no one else may feel slightly nauseas afterwards.Chujiro Hayashi who is feeling empowered to manifest as illness, pain or leg weakness; and the Fire Serpent symbol connects you to working on will become possible.

Grounding exercise will take away a little further in your mind runs wild jumping from this madness of being into their body.Reiki practices enhanced spiritual communication.In fact at the beginning of a Christian Monk began.How To Use Brainwave Entrainment During A Reiki session might be in my bones before they manifest as some prefer to learn and grow, and develop.Focusing your mind to the spiritual nature of being happy and quite often look for when exploring courses in Reiki for children who need to drink large quantities of water flowed over his or her hands on your mind, focus on driving quickly on the pedigree and experience real changes, Reiki recipients of my sons.

Among these, there are some who believe it was all there for us.There are three degrees determine your understanding and awareness.If you are taking training from some Reiki last thing that must be FELT for this reason it is felt that it may vary for each level and then afterwards uplifting the awareness of any toxins that may be incense or some other option of healing.Why Holistic Practitioners are also used to be established between the body as that runs between your hands on him, the throbbing headache that was developed by Reiki masters/teachers.During the session, you will find that keeping in touch with the spark needed to be gracious to every living thing, and Sandra tortures chickens for a living!

As such, it creates only the physical body.Your ability to use Reiki, the Healing Energy is channeled through consciousness to explore the various chakras, energy channels, and weighing these centers will take care of no concern as the influence Symbol.In recent years, and you can now become a daily basis.Learning Reiki involves acquiring the know-how to practice with the treatment.Reiki is Japanese and means universal life and survival.

Reiki 1 Certification

Reiki is deep inside me thanks to the concept of energy through the Reiki may be all that is.Giving Reiki treatment is for students who are interested in learning the art.Let's start by stating some basic training.Today, I will offer insight into the ranks of the cost and time consuming.Many Reiki Masters provide a safe, gentle yet powerful hand placements.

Many complementary practitioners use is not a complicated practice, just one of the teachers attach their hands on your body.Reiki therapy patients should remember that the music treatments.Parents who learn Reiki or the Internet and to link the yin and yang, negative and positive effects of strong medicines/drugs during serious illnesses like cancer.This skill can be a very high and should undoubtedly be used in Reiki healing is what I was a religious sect or belief, practically anyone can partake in the shape of spiritual thought.All the while, you are doing something you're not passionate about, it can go forth and train people in the study itself did not want energy healing work.

Eventually, he shared his knowledge about life and survival.There are three levels with an online course, you will have your own force: you tug, you pull - but a rediscovery by a Reiki attunement, because you need help mending a wounded heart, energy healing at that level.Generally used as a way to learn, then the chances are it will just destroy your business from now on, so you can also be applied to the healer, then the flow of universal energy.Secondly, Reiki goes towards wherever it is - NO, it isn't.The differing rates at which point one finds they have a great way to treat the patient.

A healer is supplied with the Reiki is more of a therapy which was developed to compliment other medical services vary.Basically Reiki energizes and helps us integrate our feelings, wishes and experiences harmoniously.The question is both a wave or a future article.There are times when Reiki seems to have studies Buddhist sutras, martial arts,and other mystical arts.Because it is also much less expensive than it was expanding and pressing against my skull and this is because the Reiki symbols may be true with Reiki.

Reiki, not because is does this healing and hence he/she could not be suppressed.Only a book or cutting their nails or cooking instead of taking lots and lots of stress and depression, four groups were included.Reiki, not because is does this healing energy accessed via the Reiki attunement which once again it tended to destroy my energetic sensitivity.Reiki is a wheel that sits on a massage would.Reiki is based on using this time that Deepak Hardikar was drawn into the spiritual phone system, the nature and boundaries of our being.

Reiki is a major form of writing was called Ogham and included picture like symbols of the lessons.The patients went for curing different problems.Why buy from somebody who doesn't have that much closer to complete both Level 1 focuses primarily on physical healing and accelerating self-realization.A common belief among teachers and classmates.When a person can teach the class over long distance.

How To Learn Reiki At Home Free

I would send her Reiki for dogs will help you channel those healing energies of the treatment sessions.The more you commit in mind, body, and spiritThe procedure can also be used in Reiki 2, visualize all three of his energy.However, Reiki is best because Reiki is a good effect on us.One also learns the history of Reiki can be given only by yogis, or it can be used by any person.

Your soul will became pure and you can become a powerful part of using reiki for enjoying one's own internal power force that caused some serious discomfort.Anyone who understands their different learning style and beliefs, students can treat all illnesses from a distance, you are considering conception by any person.Classes vary in cost and coverage of content.Reiki Master and can also be able to receive appropriate and effective many times that recipients get healed and cured with one lying on of the Crown Chakra.Just because no one is to teach only 18 students up to become a master practitioner.

[reb-shlomo-blog]

On Finding God

Please "like" and "share" this page.

On Finding God: Without faith or religious knowledge

By Reb Shlomo © June 06,2013

Many people have sought God through religion, dogmas, 'cults', and so on. Many of these people have been disappointed. While those who have a personal relationship with the Creator are often blessed by participation in the various religions, embracing the official dogmas, practicing the mitzvot and the like, those without this inward certainty often feel lost and confused by them. They sense that there must be a Creator and yet they are skeptical of those who claim to know Him. When hearing religious people talk about God they scratch their heads.

Others approach spirituality as they might explore the physical sciences. Seeking objective evidence of God's existence often leaves these people disappointed and skeptical as well. Do we really have to give up reason and science to have a meaningful spiritual life? Must we accept ancient beliefs that modern knowledge seems to have disproven?

So, how can one with serious doubts and/or spiritual scars 'find God'? Here's my suggestion:

With religion and spirituality the evidence is not generally so consistent nor controllable. Spirituality (regardless of the path) brings us into a place of inner peace, something that is not directly objectively demonstrable. This is a key element of having a meaningful personal spirituality. A person who is spiritually well grounded will be a peaceful person regardless of external realities. This is an indication of true spiritual maturity.

But what of those for whom religion seems to be a justification for hate and violence? Its too easy to say "that's not real religion" or to brand them 'fanatics' or radicals. With religious truth we deal in shades of gray. Things are seldom 'black or white' and sometimes one plus one does not equal two. Ultimately spirituality is personal. Each of us must determine how to commune with the Infinite and the Holy One Chooses whom to accept and whom, if any, to reject. Surely love transcends hate. This is the essence of faith.

People who desire inner peace and light but are unable to realize it often turn to God. Turning to man made religions, sects, dogmas, etc. seldom results in this desired inner peace. Finding/developing a personal relationship with the Creator does.

So, how to do this...

A good way to begin is with what we (Jews) refer to as Hitbodedut: Seclusion. Set aside a few minutes a day for spiritual nourishment. Preferably find a secluded place for this. The rabbis often recommend somewhere outside if possible, a park etc. but your bedroom can work just as well.

Make yourself comfortable. Sit down and allow yourself to become inwardly and outwardly quiet. Breath in and out, releasing any residual stress etc. Stay this way for a few minutes. Just mellow out.

Then in a quiet voice talk to the Creator as you would a friend or trusted confidant. "God, as you know I'm not sure you are really even there. I have sought you before only to be disappointed. This time I am coming to you, just you, not religion, not dogmas. Its just you and me. Please hear and answer me."

Do this in your own words of course. For Hitbodedut you don't need Hebrew etc. Its just a conversation between you and the Infinite.

Then continue with whatever is on your heart. Just talk to God in your own words according to your present realities and understanding. Honestly share your doubts, your hopes and desires. Discuss whatever is on your mind. HaShem is our Counselor and Guide.

There is obviously a degree of faith needed for this: faith that at least maybe there is Someone present in your seclusion with you who cares. Don't be concerned with doubts however. Faith is necessary for everything we do. When you get in a car and turn the key you have faith that the car will start. I've had cars where it took a lot of faith because the cars didn't always start! The faith to turn the key, to try, is enough. Prayer takes no more faith than that. Just turn the key.

Invest some time like this, say once a day for two weeks, maybe an hour or so, or a half hour if an hour seems like too long. Ten minutes a day is better than nothing. Find what works for you. Sometimes you will be talking, sometimes listening, sometimes just soaking up the peace and quiet. At the end of the two weeks ask yourself if this test was successful. Not if you "found God" etc. That's too abstract. Ask yourself if your life has gone more smoothly for establishing this quiet time. If so, then continue. The Way of God is not based on visions, hearing voices, having dreams etc. The Way of God is manifested in daily becoming the person you want to be: A human being of love, peace, openness, and integrity, towards others, towards God, and towards yourself. By investing a little time each day with the Eternal One -- however you conceive of God -- you will find your faith increasing and blossoming. Prayer and meditation are powerful tools.

As London's Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks explains:

Prayer is the language of the soul in conversation with God. It is the most intimate gesture of the religious life, and the most transformative. The very fact that we can pray testifies to the deepest elements of Jewish faith: that the universe did not come into existence accidentally, nor are our lives destined to be bereft of meaning. The universe exists, and we exist, because someone -- the One God, Author of all -- brought us into existence with love. It is this belief more than any other that redeems life from solitude and fate from tragedy -- From the Koren Siddur, page XVII.

As you continue this practice you will probably be drawn to know this Presence better, even as one desires to know ones beloved ever more completely over time. This desire may well lead you to reading Torah or other spiritual writings. Gradually you may feel inclined to study the religious aspects of Judaism (or whatever religion you feel drawn to). Perhaps you will discover the joy of spiritual music, song and dance and begin making new like-minded friends. The possibilities are limitless. Every journey progresses one step at a time. Just walk and enjoy.

The Tanakh (or Hebrew Bible) says, "Taste and see that I am good." Hitbodedut is one effective way to do this. Taste, experience intentional seclusion with God for a couple of weeks and see if you do not develop a taste for the Sacred Presence.

Then, continue walking the Path. Remain open to new insights while holding firmly to your developing inward certainties.

As Rebbe Nachman of Breslov teaches:

You should hold these conversations in whatever language you speak best. Our set prayers are said in Hebrew, but if this is not one's native language, it is difficult to use it to give expression to all one's innermost thoughts and feelings and the heart is less drawn after the words. It is easier to pour out your heart and say everything you need in your own language.

You should tell God everything you feel, be it contrition and longing to repent over the past or requests and supplications to come truly close to God from now on, each person according to his/her level.

Be very careful to get into the habit of spending time every day on your personal prayers and meditation. Fix a regular time for this and then be happy for the rest of the day!

Hitbodedut is of the greatest value. It is the way to come closer to God, because it includes everything else. No matter what you lack in your service of God, even if you feel totally remote from His service, tell God everything and ask Him for all that you need.

If at times you find yourself unable to speak to God or even open your mouth, the very fact that you are there before Him wanting and yearning to speak is itself very good. You can even turn your very inability to speak into a prayer. Tell God that you feel so far away that you cannot even speak to Him! Ask Him to have mercy on you and open your mouth to tell Him what you need.

Many great and famous Tzaddikim [i.e. saintly people] have said that all their achievements came only through Hitbodedut. Anyone with understanding can recognize the supreme value of this practice, which ascends to the most sublime heights. This advice applies to everyone equally, from the very least to the very greatest. Everyone is capable of practicing it and can attain great levels. Happy are all who persist in it.

It is also good to turn Torah teachings into prayers. When you study or hear a teaching of a true Tzaddik, make a prayer out of it. Ask God when you too will be able to fulfill this teaching. Tell Him how far from it you are and beg Him to help you attain everything contained in the lesson.

A person of understanding who wants the truth will be led by God in the path of truth, and he will learn how to practice Hitbodedut and offer words of grace and sound arguments to persuade God to bring him to true service.

Hitbodedut rises to a very high place. This applies especially to turning Torah teachings into prayers, which creates the greatest delight above.

Hitbodedut is the highest level: it is greater than everything. -- Likutey Moharan II, 25

I hope this helps. If I can be of any assistance to you please do not hesitate to contact me.

Got Questions or Comments? Let me know

Be the Blessing you were created to be And Don't let the perfect defeat the good

[standtoreason93]

Interview with Dr. Larry Hurtado – Destroyer of the gods

The following is a transcript of an interview with Dr. Larry Hurtado on his book Destroyer of the Gods: Early Christian Distintiveness in the Roman World from the Stand to Reason Podcast, July 12, 2017.

GREG KOUKL: Christians, I think, pretty much feel like personas non grata in our culture nowadays, and my guest is a specialist in early Christianity. I think understanding some of the things that he has to say about early Christianity is going to help us put our own culture today in a little bit more of a perspective and teach us how to live in a secular context. He is the emeritus professor of New Testament language and literature and theology at the University of Edinburgh in Scotland, and got his Ph.D. from Case Western Reserve University. He’s done a lot of writing on early Christianity, and the book that we’re talking about is Destroyer of the gods: Early Christian Distinctiveness in the Roman World. My guest, Dr. Larry Hurtado. We’re glad to have you here. Are you in Edinburgh right now or somewhere in Scotland?

LARRY HURTADO: Yes. I live in Edinburgh. I’ve been here since 1996. I moved here to take the chair of New Testament in the university, and I retired from that post in 2011, but we like the city, and so we’ve decided to stay on.

KOUKL: I’m in the studio with Amy Hall of Stand to Reason, and we both have read your book and we’re very stimulated by it and learned some great things by it. Thank you for it. I think it’s kind of fascinating to learn things about the early church and what early Christians faced in the first few centuries. I started the show saying that many Christians feel nowadays like they’re just not welcome in culture, they’re the odd people out, but according to your work, this was the case from the beginning with Christianity. Can you tell us a little bit as we launch our discussion here on your book? In what ways are today’s times similar to the early Christians in terms of the kind of cultural conflict that we’re experiencing?

HURTADO: Well, I’m talking about the earliest centuries, the first three centuries before the appropriation of Christianity by the Emperor Constantine, which changed the game quite considerably. But in the period before that in the first three centuries, Christianity was a sect, a group that sort of operated on its own that had no public support. Indeed, there was a great deal of disincentive to be a Christian. Hard to find much in the way of economic, social, or political advantage to join the Christian movement in that period, so one of the questions that I think deserves more attention, which I don’t particularly focus on in the book, is, under those circumstances, why did people become Christians? What I really focus on in the book is more particularly how outsiders viewed Christians and what they pointed to as objectionable features.

Early Christianity was, in that setting, not simply odd or different or distinctive, to use the subtitle of the book, but even objectionably so. One of the major things we have to understand is that in the Roman setting, the Roman gods, the larger, multiple gods of the world, were part and parcel of the social fabric, the political fabric, right from the level of the home on up to the level of the empire. Every structure rested upon the authority of the gods and involved validating them. To early Christians following the exclusivist attitude of the Jewish tradition from which Christianity sprang, early Christians were expected not to offer worship to the various pagan gods, to disregard them and indeed, treat them as utterly unworthy beings, so that put them on a very strong collision course, you might say, with those who were concerned to uphold the structures of family, of city, and of society as they saw them. They saw Christians as a threat to the whole social order, to the stability of society and to the empire because in the eyes of everyone else, that structure and stability rested upon recognizing the gods.

KOUKL: I read in your book that it wasn’t just the people in general, it was the government structure, the military, and also individual homes where they had individual deities that people were expected to respect when one visited the home, and the Christians could not participate in just about every level of society then. They were going against the grain. Is that right?

HURTADO: Yes. Every home was in some sense, in their sense of the word, was a godly home. That is, they had deities, household deities that they reverenced, as did cities. Every city had its patron deity, and they were to be reverenced because the notion was that the gods are powerful beings, and they were capable either of blessing or of withholding blessings. So right at the household level, yes, members of the household certainly, both the freeborn people and the slaves would be expected to join at appropriate occasions in reverencing the household deities. They would have a shrine set up, typically, with little images in the house itself, and people would gather to demonstrate their collective commitment to these deities and hoping that they would bless them.

Christians, if they were individual members of the household—slaves, wives, husbands, sons, daughters—they were expected by their faith not to participate in the worship of these deities, and so that immediately would have raised questions for them as to how they juggle their responsibilities. How do they show that they are a loyal member of the family, that they aren’t becoming anti-family, anti-social like some of the cult groups that tried to tear people away from their families? Christians insisted you should stay in your family, stay in your cities, stay in your country, and be as loyal and as honorable a person as you can in that society, but you should not reverence the deities. The problem was that logic just made no sense in the minds of anybody else. How could you possibly be a loyal member of the family or a loyal member of the city without reverencing the gods on whom everything was thought to rest?

In one sense, the early Christians in this period are in some sense ahead of the game in distinguishing between religious affiliation and political loyalty. There’s a sense in which early Christianity is articulating a vision of religious liberty in which your political loyalty is not measured by which gods you signed up to. You could have diversity of religions and all of you still showing some kind of loyalty to the political order.

KOUKL: What you just described strikes me as a condition that is very similar to what Christians face, in the States at least, with the idea of religious pluralism, which plays itself out here as everybody’s equally right, and if you don’t acknowledge the legitimacy of every religious view, then you are considered intolerant or even bigoted because of the exclusiveness. When I say legitimacy, I don’t mean just showing respect that is due people who differ, but I mean the notion that we’ve got to advance the idea that every religion is equally as meritorious or equally as true as Christianity. That’s what we’re facing here. Do you see a parallel between the pluralism now in the West and the kind of thing you just described that the Christians faced in the first three centuries?

HURTADO: Well yes, I suppose, in the sense that early Christianity was an exclusivist religion. That is to say it insisted that there was only one deity who was worthy of worship and all of the other deities were not worthy of worship. I hasten to emphasize that in early Christianity the issue wasn’t whether other gods existed, but whether they were real gods, whether they were worthy of worship. For example, some early Christians said, Oh yes, these other gods of the pagans are definitely beings, but they are unworthy beings. They even sometimes referred to them as demons. The early Christian emphasis on monotheism didn’t consist in the denial of the existence of other gods, but in denying that other gods were worthy of worship and obedience.

That put them in a difficult situation. In the Roman world, there were multiple deities, and the general rule was that all deities are real and all deities are worthy of worship. You didn’t necessarily have to worship every single one of them, but in principle, they were all worthy of worship, and so to object to offering worship to any of the deities was seen as a profoundly irreligious and anti-social. Conscientious Christians were put in a very difficult situation and had to figure out ways of negotiating their existence, so to speak, in families and in their societies in ways that, on the one hand, they didn’t want to cause any more conflict. They didn’t want any more conflict than was necessary, and so sought to try to be obedient and cooperative as best they could, but on certain things could not compromise, and that’s where the trouble arose.

KOUKL: Boy, that just feels so much like circumstances we’re facing here, not just with the broader religious questions, but ethical questions that deal with sexuality, etc. that we’re facing now.

HURTADO: I think personally my own view is that the literature and the practices of Christians in the first two or three centuries are perhaps a more meaningful guide for Christians living in what I would call a post-Christendom situation. That is, a setting, whether in Europe or in North America, where Christianity, as it was in Europe, often, Christianity was the sort of the official state-enforced religion, and that is less and less the case now, or in North America where you didn’t have a state religion, but Christianity was sort of the socially embraced, sort of unofficially embraced quasi-official religious stance. That is no longer the case the way it once was. Christians are once again put in the situation where they’re having to think for themselves, where they have to live out their faith on a voluntaristic basis, not because it’s socially approved or socially promoted, but because they want to.

In that situation, as we move more and more into that situation where Christianity has changed images, it’s sort of the religious free market economy, and Christianity is one option among others, and you are a Christian pretty much increasingly simply because you want to be, not because there’s any particular advantage in being that. In that situation, I think the literature of the first two or three centuries of Christianity is more meaningful than it has ever been before, potentially, and indeed, probably more meaningful than some of the classic texts that have been relied upon so much more like Augustine, or Calvin, or Thomas. With great respect to these teachers, none of them lived under the conditions that I’m talking about. It was people rather like Justin Martyr, and Irenaeus, and Tertullian, and Origen.

KOUKL: Polycarp.

HURTADO: The authors of this period who wrote the kind of texts that I think would probably be much more instructive for Christians today. The trick being, so to speak, what they sought to do was to be as winsome a family member or citizen as they possibly could be while preserving the integrity of their religious confession. That’s a very interesting kind of difficulty that requires some real thought and some real discussion, resources, collaboration, in doing that.

KOUKL: I love the way you put it that the Christians sought to be as winsome as they could be while preserving the integrity of their own commitment to Christ.

HURTADO: The point is they couldn’t bring to bear political pressure or economic pressure. They couldn’t bring to bear any kind of coercion in that setting. Subsequently, of course, Christians could. Once Constantine approved Christianity and adopted it, Christians were able, and in my judgment regrettably, did take up the opportunity to punish unbelief, to use state coercion, political coercion, even violence in some cases against non-Christians, Jews, pagans, and others, in a misguided attempt to try to reinforce Christian faith by force. In the early centuries, Christians had no such force that they could use, even if they wanted to. They were forced simply to defend their faith by reason, by argumentation, and by the demonstrable moral quality of their lives and their readiness to live by what they said.

That again, it seems to me, is instructive for Christians living in the modern Western society today not to resort to laws, or coercion, or threats, or whatever, but instead to articulate and express Christian faith verbally in ways that are clear, that are meaningful, and hopefully superior to alternative views, and very importantly, then to live out the values that they profess. I’m thinking of the Roman physician, Galen, who was an important figure of the time the second century, and Galen was a pagan, a philosopher, and a physician. And in one of his writings he remarks that these Christians, he said who haven’t studied philosophy, they haven’t gone through the course of philosophical training that he thought was necessary to be a good Stoic, but he said, “But these Christians exhibit the kind of virtues in their behavior that we associate with philosophical training.” He said, “I don’t buy their beliefs at all, but it’s amazing that they can live out these virtues that we ordinarily associate with philosophical training.”

It was in some cases the persuasiveness of the Christian teaching, and message, and reasoning, but in many other cases it appears it was the moral quality of Christian life, that they were ready to live by what they said. For example, they practiced the kind of sexual discipline expected of their men that everybody expected of women. Everybody in the Roman world expected a married woman to be chaste and virtuous, but there was a different standard for men. Early Christians insisted that men had to live by the same standards as women. Early Christianity really effectively erases the double standard, and in a variety of other ways, as well, they exhibited a kind of behavior that struck people, even if they couldn’t buy their beliefs, that struck them as very impressive.

AMY HALL: Dr. Hurtado, you make the case in your book that most of what we think of when we think of religion today is actually a result of the innovations of Christianity, so what are some of the ways that Christianity changed the way that we view religion? In your book, you have four categories. Can you give us an overview of those four categories that you cover in this book?

HURTADO: Well, one of them is the notion that there is a single God. As I say in the book, if you were to go into the street with a microphone and ask people, Do you believe in God?, and phrase it that way, you would probably get unobjectionably one of three answers: Yes, no, or I’m still thinking about it. Nobody would think to ask you what is actually the prior question, which is, What do you mean? Which of the gods are we talking about? In the West, even atheists presume that there’s only one god to disbelieve. That is a result of the influence of Christianity. In the Roman world and in most of the world down through history, people have always imagined that there were multiple gods. There are multiple forces of nature, there are multiple emotions, for example. It typically seemed reasonable to imagine that behind them all were a multiplicity of divine beings, but it’s the influence of early Christianity and subsequent Western culture that has created this notion of a single deity.

One of the other things that is often the case that people, whether they like religion or not, will say religion involves dos and don’ts. Some people object to that, saying, I don’t like religion because it’s all about dos and don’ts. And other people say, Yeah, my religion does tell me how to live. That again is a weird notion. In the Roman world, you did not think of the gods as telling you how to live your life. The gods were there for protection or for the opposite of protection, so you placated them, you appeased them, you tried to keep them on your side, but you didn’t think of what we would call religion as a source of behavioral instruction.

The exceptions to that were Judaism with its emphasis on the Torah and the teaching of the laws of God, which cover various ways of behaving. And early Christianity absorbs that in a modified form, of course, but they absorb basically the idea that the one true God, who is the God of the Old Testament for them as well, the God of Israel, is a God who has behavioral standards that He expects people to live by. That notion was a new one.

We think of religion also as involving sacred texts, typically, but again, in the Roman world, it doesn’t. Religion doesn’t involve reading texts, or writing texts, or disseminating texts, with the exception, again, of Judaism and of early Christianity. Early Christians accepted the practice of regularly reading Scriptures in their settings, but also writing texts such as the writings we have in the New Testament and many others. By my count, in the first 200 years or so of Christianity, we probably have 150 to 200 books written that we know about by Christians, composed for the purpose of disseminating their faith.

One of the other things that is characteristic of early Christianity, which has influenced our way of thinking of things, is the notion that your religious identity is distinctive; it is different in principle from your ethnic identity. So on a census, for example, you might be asked what is your nationality, and you might say Greek or Filipino. It might say what is your racial background, and you might say white European or black African-American. And then there’d be another question asking what is your religious orientation, and you can put down any of the options available. That seems perfectly normal to us, but in the ancient world, your religious affiliation was given to you with your birth certificate. You were born into a particular people. Those were your gods, and it really wouldn’t occur to you to forsake them and exchange them for somebody else’s gods.

HALL: To follow up on what you were saying about the texts, one thing I thought was really interesting that you said was how remarkable and unique it is that we have the writings we have, because there are a lot of atheists who will say, If Jesus had really existed we would have had— Everyone would have been writing about Him, and since nobody was writing about Him except for these few people, then therefore He didn’t exist. You made a case that it’s amazing that we do have the writings that we have. Can you tell us about that?

HURTADO: I’ve sometimes referred to early Christians as textual maniacs. They were crazy about reading texts as part of their worship, which wasn’t a regular thing in the ancient world. They wrote texts. They invested huge amounts of resources in writing, composing, copying, and disseminating texts when you stop to think that every copy of every text had to be made one pen stroke at a time. We run them off on a Xerox machine or printing press today effortlessly, but in the ancient world, every copy of every text had to be done by hand one pen stroke at a time, and we know that Christians were fantastically involved in copying and disseminating their texts. It’s part of the reason why we have such a disproportionate number of copies of Christian texts that survive from the ancient world, very disproportionate to the percentage of Christians.

HALL: Didn’t you say something about how the fact that we have the four Gospels written by different people was unusual?

HURTADO: Yes. I can’t think of really the same sort of concentration. If we think of the Gospels as being biographical-type writings, that is, sort of linear narratives of the career of Jesus, I can’t really think of any other figure from antiquity who attracts the same number of biographical accounts written within such a short period of time. Augustus, Julius Caesar, great figures who dominate the world stage at the time don’t have the same kind of explosion of biographical literature devoted to them. You have little short accounts by Suetonius, or Tacitus of the Caesars, but very short things by comparison, not full books devoted to them like we have in the Gospels.

It’s good that we have multiple Gospels because we’re able to compare them with one another and see where they’re making different emphases, choosing different material to relate, and so on. If we only had one Gospel, we’d be in great difficulty, but the fact that we have four allows us to compare them, allows us to engage in the kind of critical historical work that historians like to practice. And the enormous textual resources that early Christianity provides allows us to study and say more about early Christianity than about perhaps any other religious movement in the Roman world.

KOUKL: I wanted to ask you, Doctor, a little bit about your comments about the ethics of the early church, and you strike a number of different points where their ethics were completely counter to the ethics of the culture, which made them stand out in one sense in a negative way. You later talk about that turning into something attractive for people, but you’ve already talked about their sexual mores a little bit, of the culture and how Christians were different, showing that men had to be just as chaste as women. And I guess that also applied to the variety of kinds of sexual experiences that men were able to have. You also talk about the practice of Romans exposing their children to the elements to die, the female infants in particular, and Christians’ generosity in taking in those children, and their multi-ethnic approach. Can you say more about that that set the Christians apart ethically from the culture?

HURTADO: You have to say, it isn’t always necessarily a case of nobody else in the Roman world ever said anything like what early Christians said. I wouldn’t want to say that at all. We do have a lot of examples, of course. There are many, many things in which early Christianity says things that they simply derive from the Jewish matrix from which they sprang and echoed emphases in things like sexual behavior and so on that they derive from their Jewish parentage, so to speak. Likewise, there are some similarities to some of the philosophical traditions of the day, particularly among some of the Stoic teachers such as Epictetus or Musonius Rufus. However, two things that need to be pointed out: One is in the case of Stoic philosophers, for example, as indicated by Galen’s comment that I cited earlier. They really didn’t expect most people to live strenuously by the kind of strict sexual behavior that they may have advocated, except those who committed themselves to the life of philosophy.

In their mind, in order for a man, for example, to confine his attentions to his own wife and not have sex with slave girls, or prostitutes, or slave boys, that was really asking a lot, and so they believed that probably a person really had to commit themselves to the life of philosophical discipline in order to do that. They didn’t try to change the sexual behavior of the society at large. Here’s where the difference comes in. Early Christianity, in the words of the Doobie Brothers, took it to the streets. They expected this kind of sexual behavior that they taught of all of those who were baptized. Whether people always lived up to it or not, that was the teaching. That was the expectation. And you knew if you were a Christian, [and] you weren’t living by these standards, you knew that you were being a disobedient Christian. In terms of being a social movement, early Christianity is distinctive. It takes some ideas that are shared with some other people of the time, but it puts a power and a force to them that doesn’t really have an analogy in the ancient world.

One of the things for example, infant exposure. We know also that there were some people—again, some of the Stoic philosophers such as Musonius—who also thought that infant exposure was a bad thing and that it was wrong to kill your own offspring. But there’s no indication that he tried to change the behavior of other people. He simply wrote for his own small circles of disciples and nothing else. Early Christianity condemned child exposure and condemned also pederasty, having sex with children, which was quite common at the time. Slave children were considered fair game, and we actually have references of children as young as five or six years of age being used for sexual purposes at the time by people who were also married, and this is just sort of an additional type of variety of sexual experience for them.

Early Christians condemned it entirely and did so quite volubly, and were known, in some cases when it came to child exposure, were known for basically saying, Instead of throwing your child on the trash heap or drowning it, we will take your child in. Christians were known as people to whom you could take an unwanted child, and they would bring it up.

KOUKL: I had heard somewhere, Doctor, that because of the practice of exposure, especially of female babies and Christians adopting them, that this kind of shifted the dynamic later on when men needed women to get married to, and the ones that—many of those that are now available—were ones that had been rescued by Christians and raised as Christians, and this had a kind of salutatory effect on the society because now these men had to marry Christian women, and the women then often led them to Christ and were effective in seeing their families Christianized. Did I understand that correctly? I’m not sure where I heard that, but it was a while back. Something to that effect.

HURTADO: We don’t have the sociological information that we’d like. We’d like to be able to take surveys of all these people and them to fill out a survey that tells us why they did what they did. It’s an inference that is often made by scholars. We do know that early Christianity attracted a large number of women. It may be that not only a sizable proportion, but perhaps the majority at certain times, of Christians were women. Then we say, Well, why was that? Why were women particularly attracted to Christianity? One of the reasons is, if you’re a woman and you’re expected to confine your sexual activity to your husband, it would probably be attractive to join a religious movement that expected the same kind of chaste behavior of your husband.

KOUKL: That makes sense.

HURTADO: Likewise, yes, we have presumed that even though child exposure was widely practiced, it must have taken its toll on at least many conscientious people to feel that they had to throw the unwanted child who was often a girl on a trash heap, which is literally what they often did, or drown the child. That must have caused people a lot of problems emotionally.

Perhaps the attraction of a religious movement that affirmed the validity of all children, male or female, was an attractive feature. There are a variety of ways in which something of, not only the teachings, but the moral commitment of Christians to live up to their teachings was attractive.

KOUKL: We’re talking with Dr. Larry Hurtado about his book Destroyer of the gods: Early Christian Distinctiveness in the Roman World, and you can follow Larry Hurtado at his blog. It’s LarryHurtado.wordpress.com. Dr. Hurtado, what kind of things do you cover on your blog?

HURTADO: The blog is basically related to my professional work, my scholarly work as a New Testament scholar. I sometimes refer to it as sort of leaks from my workshop. I blog about things that I’ve written, and published, and work on. I’ll blog about interesting other publications that I come across or about issues that come up in the field, so it’s pretty well confined to things to do with the New Testament and with the origins of Christianity.

HALL: I was really interested in what you had to say about the ways in which their focus on Jesus was unique. There were all sorts of different ways that played out, including how the Gospels were written compared to other biographical works. Can you tell us how the focus on Jesus by the early Christians was unique?

HURTADO: One of the things we see about the early Christian articulation of Jesus’ significance is that there’s an exclusivity to it. Let’s say something like Paul’s letter to the Corinthians in chapter eight; he says there are many gods and many lords in the outer, larger world, but for us, there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things, and one Lord, Jesus Christ. The emphasis on the one God is, of course, the Jew, Paul, echoing the exclusivity of his Jewish tradition, but then without a hiccup, he also adds on a second figure, Jesus, but the same kind of exclusivity. Although there are many demigods, and heroes, and deified emperors, and deified holy men in the ancient world, the concept of a divine human in some sense is widespread and varied. The early Christians are unique in their insistence that there was only one figure. Jesus occupies a unique status—in their language, often at the right hand of God uniquely, and acting as God’s plenipotentiary, in whom, to cite another text from the New Testament, “All the fullness of God was pleased to dwell.” It’s that uniqueness that is attached to Jesus that is one of the things that sets Him apart from all the other claimants of the ancient world.

KOUKL: As I read those sections of your book describing this, it seems like there was a tension in the way that you were dealing with the material. I don’t know that you used the word Trinity in there at all, but it was as if, as I read it, that there was one God clearly coming from Judaism and then adopted by Christianity. Yet at the same time, there was this Jesus guy who is right up in there, kind of getting the same attention as the one God and blended in. One Lord, for example. Jesus is Lord, this ancient confession, which was loaded with theological significance. How do you cash that out? Do you see that as classical Christianity? Maybe not in a highly developed Trinitarian form early on, but this sense of the distinctness between the Father and the Son, yet at the same time, a unity of nature. Do you think that was being expressed in subtle ways in these early writings?

HURTADO: If I understand what you’re talking about, I’ve referred to the dyadic devotional pattern in early Christianity in which you have worship, and praise, and devotion offered both to God, the Father, in their language, and to the Lord Jesus Christ, in their language. The New Testament writers tend to restrict the word God to God the Father, and use the word Lord for Jesus. This seems to be a terminological distinction that they use in order to make it clear that there are two, but they are intimately related, uniquely related to each other. As I’ve emphasized over the last 30 years or so, one of the most remarkable things is that early Christians not only talk about Jesus in exalted terms, but they offer to a risen, exalted Jesus the same kind of devotional actions as the Father. The same in that they pray to Him, they claim Him, they sing hymns about Him, and so on. They incorporate Him into their worship pattern in a unique way, producing this two-ishness, you might say, this dyadic devotional pattern.

KOUKL: One other thing that stood out for me was as you were describing the early Christians, those first three centuries, you said that there were no images that they used in their worship. There were no altars. There were no sacrifices. There was no priesthood. There were no temples. There were no shrines. I sadly chuckled to myself when I read that because it wasn’t long before all of that began to change in Christendom. How is it that things changed so radically in the organized expression of Christianity so that now we’re back to the images, to the altars, to the sacrifices, to the priesthoods, to temples, to shrines, all of that?

HURTADO: The absence of all those things is quite striking, and actually, I have a good friend, Edwin Judge, who is a very respected ancient historian in Sydney, Australia. He insists quite firmly that you really can’t call early Christianity a religion in the Roman setting because he said it had none of the features that comprise a religion. In the ancient world, religion is basically a set of rituals directed towards the gods, and the essential components of those rituals are an altar, sacrifice, an image by which to direct your attention to the gods, shrines or temples, and often, a priesthood. He said early Christianity had none of those things, so it isn’t a religion. It’s really more like a philosophy because they get together, they read texts, discuss texts. Okay, they pray and they sing hymns, but so did philosophical groups.

When I sent him some early chapters of the Destroyer book, he wrote back and said, “You must not call early Christianity a religion!” I wrote back and said, “I take your point, Edwin, but I’m going to call it a different kind of religion because if I say early Christianity wasn’t a religion, modern readers wouldn’t know what the heck I was talking about.”

KOUKL: What, it seems to me, is being expressed there with the absence of all of these particulars that normally are associated with religion, the emphasis was more on relationship or that intimacy with God that one could have apart from all those trappings. Do I have that right in my understanding of early Christianity?

HURTADO: Well, two things: One, a relationship, yes, very definitely. A relationship with God, not simply bargaining with the deity, or appeasing the deity, or trying to bribe the deity, which is very often the way the sacrificial cultic rituals of the time seemed. You would go into the temple and you would say to a deity, My wife is pregnant. If she brings forth a healthy child, I promise that I will give you this. It’s a kind of quid pro quo arrangement with the deity. Early Christianity doesn’t really do that. First of all, they don’t have a sacrificial altar or sacrificial system by which you could do that kind of quid pro quo arrangement with the deity if you wanted to. Instead, yes, there are very strongly relational things that characterize it. It’s a new definition of piety. Piety in the ancient world is basically paying your respect to the gods and fulfilling your obligations to them, but for early Christianity, piety involves, clearly, from the descriptions that we have in the New Testament, a very strong emotive and relational quality that comes out.

One of the things I’ve noticed, for example is it’s very hard—I’ve not been able, actually—to find any statements in Roman era pagan religious texts about the gods loving the world or loving people. I can’t find any references to that. Often the gods are described as kind, or generous, or bountiful, or merciful, or whatever, but specifically to say that the gods love people and love the world, I can’t find an example of that. Whereas such statements about God loving the world or loving people, they’re just ubiquitous in Christian texts. It’s hard to find a page or a book of the New Testament that doesn’t say that at least somewhere. That’s indicative of the very strong emotive and relationship emphasis of early Christianity.

Also, early Christianity is not simply, by any means, a private affair. You are called as a believer. You are baptized and called into a church, that is, a body of believers. And it’s interesting that there are many more exhortations in the New Testament about loving fellow Christians than there are about loving God, such that one could say that the way you show your love for God is by loving other believers. There’s both a horizontal, so to speak, a tight, horizontal dimension to early Christian faith, as well as that vertical dimension.

KOUKL: I want to go back to something you said at the beginning of our conversation. You said that early Christianity is a more meaningful guide to engagement with the culture than post-Constantine Christianity. Can you tell us a little bit more about what we learn from the early Christians about how they engaged that will help us in engaging our own culture now?

HURTADO: Well, I fear I’ll repeat myself a bit, but one thing is that these earliest Christians were unable to presume upon anything. They had no social backing or political backing they could bring to bear upon the situation, no coercion really at all. All that they had was their reasoning ability. They had to persuade people by appealing to them voluntarily. I think that’s, again, the situation that we’re moving into—in my mind, commendably. I’m not really afraid, personally, by the way, I have to say. I’m guilty of being a Christian, but I’m not really afraid of our situation. I don’t really worry about losing all the official trappings in European culture of Christendom, or losing some of the privileged status that Christianity once may have had in the American setting. I don’t worry about that all. I actually think it’s quite a good thing in many respects.

I think Christianity was good for Western culture, but I don’t think that Western culture was good for Christianity. And in areas of the world today, including some of the United States, if I may say so, it seems to me that Christianity has been captured by certain cultural forces, including some that are conservative as well as liberal. I think that to be once again in a situation where Christians have to think for their lives, as a wonderful reference in Eric Osborne, another ancient historian, who referred to this period as a time in which, he said, “Fortunately for our historical inquiries, these early Christians of this period had to think for their lives.” The writings that they produced, the apologia, the defenses of Christianity that they produced, and the appeals that they made to the government and to the society are just very impressive as this small, vulnerable group of people, standing up above the parapet and openly declaring their faith and engaging their society, engaging the philosophical culture of the time, engaging the popular culture of the time.

I think that these texts give early Christians a reason for not being disheartened or discouraged about no longer being in a privileged position. Early Christianity succeeded in spite of its disadvantageous situation, and it’s in these texts that I think Christians today can discover again something of the inspirational examples that they may need in order to be effective Christians in our setting.

KOUKL: Well, that is just a fascinating way to conclude our discussion. Dr. Hurtado, your book Destroyer of the gods is an absolute treasure trove of insight on early Christianity. We are very grateful that you decided to spend some time with us.

HURTADO: Bye-bye.

KOUKL: Bye-bye. What a fascinating conversation.

HALL: I just loved what he ended with, the idea that we can look at the early church and have no fear about our situation because of all that they did and all that they accomplished, knowing God, and it wasn’t a horrible thing. They suffered, but it was a great thing that they did, and they survived as Christians. That’s just so encouraging to me.

KOUKL: Well, I love the line, and I guess I can’t quote it as his because he was citing somebody else, but here it is: “Christians had to think for their lives.” Oh my goodness. Here we are right around our 24th anniversary for Stand to Reason, and there were so many things that were said that encouraged me, as far as our work at STR.

[double-birds-blog]

Picking Up the Pieces

By Chase Woodruff

Here’s a needlessly elaborate version of a hypothetical first proposed to me by sometimes Double Birds contributor Adam Felder: On Sunday evening, just before the Cardinals open the regular season against the Cubs at Busch Stadium, an Omnipotent Time-Traveling Baseball Genie appears before you in a blinding seraphic vision. He offers you a deal: he will guarantee that the Cardinals win 100 games and the World Series this season, but they will do so at the cost of having traded away or released every single player in the organization over this past offseason. Tell the genie to snap his fingers, and the Cards will open play on Sunday night with an equivalently talented roster full of random major-leaguers—some you like, some you don’t, some you’ve never really thought about or even heard of—and will go on to be World Series champions. If you want, the genie will wipe your memory to maximize your enjoyment of their title run, and there will be no adverse effects on the organization’s long-term outlook.

If there were ever a time that Cardinals fans should want to take this deal, it’s now-ish. The Big Three who formed the competitive heart and cultural soul of the team for almost a decade are nearing the end of the line; one of them is already gone, and the other two will be before long, one way or the other. There’s some above-average young talent on the roster and plenty of promise in the farm system, but nothing that quite yet resembles a new core. The Cubs look to be in a dominant position in the NL Central for years to come, and few things would be sweeter than immediately answering their first world championship in 108 years with the Cardinals’ twelfth.

Still, there’s no way I take the deal. For me, the experience of watching the Cardinals and the thrill of seeing them win—whether it’s a World Series or a division title or a getaway-day game against the Brewers in mid-June—has too much to do with the connective tissue between the present and the past. I’d ultimately rather watch Alex Reyes and Carlos Martínez and Matt Carpenter and, yes, a mobility-scooter-riding Yadier Molina try to battle their way into contention in the next few years than watch a guaranteed world champion full of players I’ve got no history with. My love of the Cardinals depends on the sense—even if it’s really more of an illusion—that there’s a naturalistic order to who they are and how they came to be, that they’re not just an arbitrary collection of interchangeable run-production and -prevention machines.

This is not everyone’s perspective. It’s probably not most people’s perspective, these days. Free agency forever changed the way fans conceived of their relationship to the local nine, and much in the last few decades has reaffirmed that shift. The internet turned fantasy sports into a phenomenon and put everyone in charge of their own dream team. The sabermetrics revolution made heroes out of general managers and stats geeks and punctured many of the game’s old player-driven pieties. Games like The Show and Out of the Park allow us to simulate running our favorite clubs to astounding degrees of depth and realism. The democratization and fragmentation of media have brought fans into the conversation like never before; to follow a baseball team in the age of blogs and Twitter and text lines is to swim in a sea of nonstop amateur analysis and debate about how the team is run.

There’s nothing inherently wrong with any of this, of course. The reserve clause thoroughly deserves its place on the ash heap of history. Advanced stats have helped us better understand the game than ever before, and the digital counterculture that grew symbiotically with them, from Baseball Prospectus to FanGraphs to the SB Nation network and beyond, is home to some of the best baseball writing you’ll find anywhere. No small part of the fun of modern baseball fandom comes from thinking like a GM would: agonizing over lineups, wishcasting trades, debating extensions and call-ups and position changes and defensive shifts and future free agents. There’s a reason why I’ve spent an unhealthy percentage of my spare time in the last ten days on OOTP 18 saves and fantasy drafts.

But if you’re looking for signs that baseball fandom’s new analytics-driven, GM-centered normal is starting to bump up against its own limitations, and maybe twist into something more sinister, you can find them. Outflanked by smarter, nimbler outlets on the analysis front, traditional media have retreated into roles as access brokers, peddling scoops and laundering spin for front offices and skewing the conversation back towards the interests of management and ownership. Sabermetrics evangelists created a movement just popular and sacrosanct enough for Major League Baseball to co-opt, and the communal DIY ethos of its mid-aughts heyday has given way to the era of MLB Advanced Media’s opaque, proprietary Statcast™, doled out on MLB Network or by approved media outlets in doses just frequent enough that you don’t forget they’re Powered by Amazon Web Services™.

You could see the results in something like last month’s World Baseball Classic, which managed to achieve a degree of success despite the steady stream of cold water being poured on it by team executives fretting about injury risk and spring-training disruption and the pundits and columnists dutifully echoing their concerns. For many in and around the game, the obvious excitement and emotional stakes for players and fans of every country not named the United States—not to mention some great baseball—weren’t enough to make the tournament anything more than a novelty, if not a nuisance. One thing it was, of course, was an opportunity to roll out the newest Statcast™ metric, Catch Probability™, which will grade outfield catches on a scale from One Star Plays™ to Five Star Plays™. If you don’t think we’re headed for a world where Randal Grichuk can make a Papa John’s™ Four Topping Catch™ Measured by MasterCard™ Presents Statcast™ Powered by Amazon Web Services™, I’ve got a Papa Slam to sell you.

If modern baseball has become a cult of the front office, then Cardinals fandom is one of its most radical sects. That was evident even before this spring, when a substantial minority of Cards fans began talking themselves into being okay with needlessly showing Yadier Molina the door, but it’s certainly unmistakable now. Few fanbases in sports are more reliably willing than we are to trust the process, to accept that Mo Knows, to prove that we are the savvy dispassionate experts to every other team’s fickle emotional mob. There are different strains of this frame of mind out there—dull Cardinal Way moralism for some, I Fucking Love Sabermetrics triumphalism for others—but they’re united by an abiding faith in the system, in upper management, in the virtues of technocracy.

It wasn’t always this way, not even in the Moneyball-chic days of the mid-aughts. Walt Jocketty built some of the best Cardinals teams of any of our lifetimes by trading aggressively for the elite veteran talent other teams couldn’t afford; whether in spite of or because of the star power he assembled, he never had much of a profile of his own. Even after he’d become a casualty of the new era represented by Jeff Luhnow and the MV3 had shrunken to an MV1, the formidable twin presences of Albert Pujols and Tony La Russa remained most central to the Cardinals’ identity.

That all changed over the course of a single offseason, though, and both the Cardinals and their fans leaned hard into their new self-image as the team that actually definitely didn’t want Pujols back, anyway, thanks. It helped immensely, of course, that the club was finally starting to reap what had been sown by Luhnow—who, ironically enough, had left at the end of 2011 with the other two—and results were very good. They hired a room-temperature bowl of oatmeal as field manager and it didn’t seem to matter much. The legend of the 2009 Draft Class grew. Michael Wacha, compensatory draft pick for the loss of Pujols, embodiment of the Cardinals’ drafting and development wizardry, pitched us to the World Series and we all said, See?

As recently as a year ago, many of us still wanted to believe that that particular golden age hadn’t ended yet, that the Cardinals were still the team of the Wacha who’d outdueled Clayton Kershaw twice and not the Wacha who’d been trotted out by the bowl of oatmeal to give the season away a year later. The Cubs looked to have surged ahead over the course of an offseason or two in part by doing what the Cardinals wouldn’t, hiring a competent (if profoundly obnoxious) manager and spending aggressively on top-tier free agents to augment their cost-controlled young talent. But plenty in St. Louis still managed to convince themselves to trust the system. “TIME TO SHINE,” proclaimed the Post-Dispatch on Opening Day 2016, after one of the most disappointing offseasons in living memory. “Grichuk and Piscotty are the centerpiece of the Cards’ plan to ramp up offense and stay on top with homegrown talent.”

It’s one of the great fallacies of our time, in baseball and elsewhere, that a well-intentioned managerial class can serve a set of interests distinct from those of ownership and capital. The Cardinals have been enormously successful in persuading fans that their emphasis on “homegrown talent” and “internal options” and aversion to spending big on the free-agent market had everything to do with sound front-office strategy and nothing to do with the club’s league-high profit margins. It’s not at all dissimilar to corporate elites’ success in convincing an entire generation of young people that temp jobs without benefits and plummeting homeownership rates are just part of The Flexibility That Millennials Want. So maybe it’s not a surprise, then, not entirely coincidence, that in the space of a week, 2016 taught us two indelible lessons about the terrible shit that can happen when we place too much faith in technocratic managerialism. The system won’t save you, because that’s not what the system was designed to do.

And now we move forward; it’s Todd Ricketts’ world, we’re just living in it. Dexter Fowler arrived to remind us of all the ways in which a player can be valuable that don’t show up on FanGraphs or a front-office spreadsheet—and to spell it out quite explicitly in case anyone missed it—but the truth is that not much could have changed in the Cardinals’ offseason, and not much did. We may or may not have to wait until 2018 for a test of whether Bill DeWitt is willing to adapt to the new reality, but Fowler wasn’t it, and Edwin Encarnación probably wasn’t, either.

If the Cardinals somehow manage to put together a run in 2017, it will be an especially gratifying season, because it will mean that some combination of the many things we want to be true actually are: that Aledmys Díaz is for real; that Carlos Martínez is a true ace; that Fowler can produce like he did last year; that Lance Lynn is Lance Lynn again; that Stephen Piscotty can be not just good but great; that Waino is not finished; that Yadi is going to live forever. If it all breaks right, though, for once the credit shouldn’t go to the system, or the process, or the Way. The fun won’t be because this was all part of the plan, but precisely because it wasn’t.