#this is what i mean when i say 'humans cannot experience objective truth but our goal in seeking truth is to come as close as possible'

[ynsbrightorbs]

do you think its ok that I call myself a lesbian even if I fanatasize about guys? I mean it's not even real guys or at least rarely, but it's the other aot characters like Erwin, Miche, Reiner and Levi. I know some people are like you're not a lesbian if you find men attractive you're bi.

Which is a valid take and makes sense. But also when it comes to nb people they are also go by he/him. And I know some people who are lesbians in the hanji fandom call Hanji their husband and use he/him pronouns, so wouldn't that just just be contradicting.

i was just having a conversation about this with some lesbians and honestly in my personal opinion it all comes down to personal identification and what you are personally comfortable with. i've seen (mainly and by mainly i mean only on tiktok) people being very black and white when it comes to this conversation, saying that any form of attraction to men disqualifies lesbianism but hot take, i don't think that is 100% correct. Im also just some guy with still so much to learn so don’t take my word as the only truth

i say this all as someone who's experienced and overcome comphet, i've dated men as much as i've dated women and i've been through conversion camp, been through a literal exorcism for homosexuality, i have truly seen it all. that said, there was a period in my life where i genuinely believed i was bisexual because i was "attracted" to men. by this i mean, i think attraction is a very broad word. exactly like you said, i've experienced attraction to men who have all been either fictional or unattainable, but even then i have seen real life men and thought they're attractive. wow i know so scary, but that's the truth. and the important question to ask yourself isn't if you think they're physically attractive, it's if you think you'd want to pursue this person. would you talk to them? would you date them? etc. etc.

like i said, i've dated men and women. and what makes me certain and validated in my experience with lesbianism in particular instead of bisexuality is that the difference i feel around the word attraction is completely different between the two. i know i could spend the rest of my life with a woman and be more than content and fulfilled, i cannot say that about a man. sure jean is hot as shit, now if he were to manifest and come up to me with a marriage proposal, would i say yes? absolutely not! there is a difference between simple attractiveness and romantic/sexual attraction that most forget.

now when it comes to butch or he/him lesbians, this is a very long conversation with so so much history behind it that i recommend you read about. something important to keep in mind though is that pronouns and gendered terms do not equal gender identity. gender is not one size fits all. i may experience being non-binary in a completely different way than another person. that doesn't take away either persons validity, it just proves how simply complicated this conversation is. that's what the white stripe in the lesbian flag is all about, this unique experience of womanhood. lesbian can be a gender identity!

another thing i feel is important to think about is the way sexuality and gender was expressed before colonization. i won't get all into this because again it's a long long conversation with so so much history but i feel it is as important to read about and remember when it comes to this conversation. not just with lesbians, but with any form of queerness that people tend to police. i am nahua descended, and sexuality and gender are very prevalent in our culture and religions in very broad spectrums. i feel most get caught up in very western and colonized ideas of queerness.

last thing i want to add is that humans have this knack of needing to put labels on everything. same way we have the tendency to see faces in inanimate objects because it's instinctually comforting. it's hard to sit with the questions and the i don't know, it can be scary. but some things don't need labels. some things can simply be and there's no need or rush to figure it all out. just be queer and be happy and be you and do what makes you feel right and comfortable and validated! there is also nothing wrong with being bisexual, it does not take away from your queerness

if you read all that ily, sorry if it's not helpful but these are just some things i've learned in my short queer life of speaking to many many lesbians from all sorts of places and of all ages. literally just be, it's okay and it'll be okay

[faithfulsheepdog]

what do you mean I don’t have to throw reason out the window to be a Christian? What about the whole faith is blind thing?

Hi, Anon! That's a good question! Thanks for asking.

So, the phrase "faith is blind" comes from different Scriptures to indicate that there is some merit to believing in things you can't see.

Hebrews 11:1 is a popular one. "Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen." (ESV) And a few verses down, verse 6 says, "And without faith it is impossible to please Him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that He exists and that He rewards those who seek Him." (ESV)

Jesus Himself said in John 20:29, "You believe because you have seen Me. Blessed are those who believe without seeing Me." (NLT)

What the blind faith thing references is really more regarding our response to God's direction. If He tells us to do something, more often than not, we are not going to get every detail of His plan when He tells us to do something. He gives us what we need to know to take the next step, and for us, that doesn't always feel enough. But He also promises that He will be with us every step of the way, even if we can't physically see Him right there with us. So we have to step out in faithful obedience despite not knowing the full plan, despite not knowing what's going to happen next.

Like me starting this blog if I'm being 100% honest. I didn't have the full plan, but He gave me a desire and a next step. And even though I was nervous to take that step in obedience, I have to have faith in Him that He will take my obedience and use it for His purposes and that He will be with me through this process.

That is what it means when we say, "Sometimes faith is blind."

What I mean when I said you don't have to throw reason out the window to be a Christian is God never asked you to not use the brain He gave you. Because let’s face it: humans aren’t necessarily rational, but we are certainly very curious.  And while we can’t shake off a level of subjectivity with our personal perspectives and experiences, when it comes to faith and belief, a lot of people - a lot of Christians - have fallen for the lie that faith/belief cannot be in the same room with evidence/reason.  This leads to the assumption that Christians deal in myth and fantasy while the rest of the world deals in facts and reality.

But the truth of the matter is that Christianity is true.  Not a truth; it’s the truth.

Christians know it, and we really want the rest of the world to know it too.  It’s an important cornerstone of reality that’s too often overlooked for various reasons, and we want people to not ignore it any longer.

Most often though, the problem is today’s Christians, myself included, are not really equipped to talk about how it’s true.  How can we defend the faith if we don’t even know how or why it’s true?

An evidential faith blends the objective (historical & scientific) evidence of the Gospel with the subjective (feelings & personal revelations through the Holy Spirit) experiences of the Gospel, with Jesus as the cornerstone of it all. 

It’s one thing to experience God and believe He exists and is active in our lives through subjective experience, which is a beautiful thing. It’s another to experience God through historical & scientific data to find that the God of the universe not only exists but is also telling the truth about Himself, the world we live in, and you. And that too is a beautiful thing.

Hope this helps, Anon!

[exhaustedsasha]

Excuse the quality, I quickly snapped pictures of these pages from my ereader. And yes, I have the warmth set very high because ya local gremlin gets migraines at the drop of a hat.

Bram Stoker's Dracula is known for a lot of things. Many of which could easily be misconceptions. But that is besides what I want to say:

This book balances science and mysticism on a blade tip. My favorite line 100% has to be...

"Ah, it is the fault of our science that it wants to explain all; and if it explain not, then it says there is nothing to explain." - Van Helsing.

Science believes itself to be infallible, and humans naively believe so, too. And perhaps it would be....except it is practiced by fallible humans.

Science is fallible.

Science may be the physical explanation to our existence, but it can only explain the building blocks from which we come, not so much the "why" or "how."

Science is only able to explain basics, not meaning. That's where theories come in, and humans have to build these theories by manner of what they see. And even so, science is liquid. It transforms, and what may be true in one case can be the exact opposite with a tiny little poke in the wrong direction.

"Do you not think that there are things which you cannot understand, and yet which are; that some people see things that others cannot?"

Not all truths are objective for everyone.

"But there are things old and new which must not be contemplate by men's eyes, because they know---or think they know---some things which other men have told them."

Question. Everything. For. The. Love. Of. Gods.

Pretend you are 3 years old again trying to figure out why the sky is blue, the grass is green, and who that pretty lady your dad keeps bringing home when mama isn't around is.

That totally wasn't from experience....

Is this book an extremely christianized tale? Of course. That's just a symptom of when it was written. But, there is much to gather from it if you only open your mind and know where to look.

TL;DR- Sasha is yapping about Dracula and how you should question everything and not take every word as objective fact.

P.S. This doesn't mean to not go get vaccinated. Idk who tf needs to hear that, but I can see some crunchy weirdo taking what I say here out of context and massacreing my point as an excuse that science doesn't EVER work. Vaccinations are important. Don't be dumb.

OKIEBYYYE!

[intrepid-fictioneer-7]

"[Mages] are liminal creatures at odds with their ineradicable humanity". What I spent thousands of words to say in a long ass post, someone managed to say more succintly and far shorter. While my verbous, pompous post argued that the idea the fandom has of a "perfect magus" is reductive and most the characters people think embodify it actually fail, the line I'm quoting is someone arguing that the very concept of "perfect magus" isn't real and isn't represented by *any* character in Type-Moon. The life of a magus is the story of how a person cannot avoid falling short of that ideal of a "perfect magus" - either because it becomes muddled by their humanity (Rin is the quintessential example, but you also have Kayneth and Gordes of all people), or because, in abandoning humanit,y they lose sight of their goal and cause their own downfall (Roa, Zepia, and Zouken being perfect examples).

Kinda like what Medea says in Fate/hollow ataraxia:

"Hmmm, the combination of magic and everyday life. Caster, what do you think about that?" Since I don't know a lot of magi, I'm a little curious. "That though in itself is incorrect, boy. 'Magic' and 'everyday life' cannot coexist. You should not even think about combing them. The fundamentals of magic are "distortion and reversal." No matter what kind of magic it is, when used, it will distort the norm. Therefore, if you want to live correctly, you have to separate magic from normal life." "You can't live in both worlds?" "You must wholly life in both worlds, that is. A magus is someone who crosses that boundary all the time. He is free to focus on either side, but he must never try to erase the line that separates both. In order to fully immerse yourself in magic, you must exclude your normal life. Once you choose that path as a human, you create an inner and an outer face in order to master it. Then you can start deciding how to live as a person divided between magic and real life." "Then what about you? You are Kuzuki-sensei's wife now, but what about your side as a magus?" "It's no different from what it used to be, naturally. I have no doubts about the magus side of myself. I just use my powers as I see fit. But it's true that nowadays, I don't turn into my magus self as often as I have in the past."

Or what Waver says in Case Files:

It wasn’t limited to magecraft. It wasn’t limited to those beyond humans (monsters). In a world of common sense (the obvious), it was something everyone understood. If you said that misunderstandings, miscommunications, disagreements, and false understandings are what connected them, then… “We are misrecognition. Our world itself is misunderstanding. We can experience a multitude of truths, not just one single reality. No matter how wise you are, or how much time you are given, you will never reach something like a single truth. Magi may just be those who continually reject that fact.” Speaking as if in self-deprecation, my master had pursed his lips at that. He had finally realized that his words and the objective that all Magi pursued, known as the “Spiral of Origin,” were in contradiction.

It's why Reines laments the Clock Tower focusing on petty political squabbles. The heart of the world of magecraft miring itself in human emotions and concerns, forgetting their original esoteric goals in the process. This, to me, is far more illustrative of magi than the often repeated "to be a magus means to walk with death". (An aphorism which, as far as I can tell, is mostly the result of fandom telephone. FSN does talk "magus having death right besides them" and "the essence of magi is in death", but the specific formulation of "walking" with death is nowhere in canon I think, and I checked Mahoyo and KnK to make sure. But that's for another post.) Ironically, what spurred this on is that, that post I mention? It was someone arguing Sanda is the *worst* TM writer for how he wrote magi, and I, as Sanda's strongest fighter, had to fight for his honor to mixed results lol.

[eternal-echoes]

Creativity, therefore, it is important for a Jesuit. Pope Francis, during a visit with the Jesuit priests and other staff members of La Civiltà Cattolica, had articulated a triad of important characteristics relevant to the cultural initiatives of the Jesuits. I turn my thoughts to that day, June 14, 2013. I recall that back then, in a conversation just before the meeting with the entire group, the pope had already informed me about this triad: dialogue, discernment, frontier. And he insisted particularly on the last point, quoting Pope Paul VI. In a well-known speech, Paul VI had spoken directly about the Jesuits: “Wherever in the church—even in the most difficult and extreme fields, in the crossroads of ideologies, in the social trenches—there has been and is now conversation between the deepest desires of human beings and the perennial message of the Gospel, Jesuits have been and are there.” I ask Pope Francis for a further explanation: “You asked us to be careful not to fall into ‘the temptation to tame the frontiers’: one must go out to the frontiers, not bring the frontiers home in order to paint them a bit artificially and tame them.” What were you referring to? What exactly did you wish to tell us? This interview, as you know, was organized by a group of magazines directed by the Society of Jesus: what invitation do you wish to extend to them? What should their priorities be? “The three key words that I commended to La Civiltà Cattolica can be extended to all the journals of the Society, perhaps with different emphases according to their natures and their objectives. When I insist on the frontier, I am referring in a particular way to the need for those who work in the world of culture to be inserted into the context in which they operate and on which they reflect. There is always the lurking danger of living in a laboratory. Ours is not a ‘lab faith,’ but a ‘journey faith,’ a historical faith. God has revealed himself as history, not as a compendium of abstract truths. I am afraid of laboratories because in the laboratory you take the problems and then you bring them home to tame them, to paint them artificially, out of their context. You cannot bring home the frontier, but you have to live on the border and be audacious.” I ask for examples from his personal experience. “When it comes to social issues, it is one thing to have a meeting to study the problem of drugs in a slum neighborhood and quite another thing to go there, live there and understand the problem from the inside and study it. There is a brilliant letter by Father Arrupe to the Centers for Social Research and Action on poverty, in which he says clearly that one cannot speak of poverty if one does not experience poverty, with a direct connection to the places in which there is poverty. The word insertion is dangerous because some religious have taken it as a fad, and disasters have occurred because of a lack of discernment. But it is truly important.” “The frontiers are many. Let us think of the religious sisters living in hospitals. They live on the frontier. I am alive because of one of them. When I went through my lung disease at the hospital, the doctor gave me penicillin and streptomycin in certain doses. The sister who was on duty tripled my doses because she was daringly astute; she knew what to do because she was with ill people all day. The doctor, who really was a good one, lived in his laboratory; the sister lived on the frontier and was in dialogue with it every day. Domesticating the frontier means just talking from a remote location, locking yourself up in a laboratory. Laboratories are useful, but reflection for us must always start from experience.���

-INTERVIEW WITH POPE FRANCIS by Fr Antonio Spadaro, August 19, 2013

[lifechanyuan]

The Great Way (Tao) and the Small Path

Xuefeng

（Translation edited by Qinyou）

LIFE walks the Great Way, while human experience walks the small path.

One cannot logically walk two paths at once—how can a person walk on two roads simultaneously?

Limited understanding leads to confused thinking, which in turn leads to disordered consciousness, ultimately resulting in a failed life.

A life without an ultimate goal, no matter how glorious, is ultimately a failure. A LIFE that has not experienced joy, no matter how many merits are achieved, is ultimately meaningless.

The best life is one that not only enjoys a rich and colorful journey but also elevates LIFE to higher-dimensional realms.

When we understand the principles of LIFE, master its mysteries, and steadfastly walk the Great Way of LIFE, our minds and eyes are opened, allowing us to enjoy life playfully.

When we know the value and meaning of life and understand that life is merely a journey for LIFE, we can go with the flow, act naturally, and happily explore the small path of human nature, enjoying LIFE along the way.

To Walk the Great Way of LIFE

First, we must understand the origins of LIFE, the cycle of reincarnation, and LIFE's various realms. Without grasping these concepts, our lives will be lost in confusion. Where did I come from? Where am I going? Without direction or goals, we’ll spend a lifetime going in circles, ending up with nothing but fleeting illusions. What value or meaning is there in that?

Walking the Great Way of LIFE, neither mystical methods nor techniques constitute the Way. There are no fixed rules; there are countless paths, and each path may lead to heaven. However, each path may also lead to hell. How can we be sure that the path we practice leads to heaven and not hell? Whether it’s this practice or that one, these are merely tools. How do we know if what we’re learning is not sorcery or witchcraft, but rather celestial or Taoist techniques?

Moreover, words and scriptures are not the Way. The Bible, the Quran, Buddhist sutras, the Tao Te Ching, and the writings or lectures of any master are not the Way. These are all fingers pointing at the moon, but focusing on the finger will never let us see the moon. We must learn to read the sky, the earth, people, objects, and phenomena. We must learn to comprehend through Zen enlightenment, to awaken, and to sense deeply. Likewise, the guide is not the Way either. The guide is not the scenic destination but merely a living finger pointing the way. Have you truly understood this? Each of us knows this truth within our own hearts.

The study of LIFE is not a gamble; it cannot be approached with the mindset of a gambler. Some say, "If you just believe, you will gain LIFE." If that were true, does it mean anyone who believes can win in a casino? Or that if you believe hard enough, jumping from a tall building won’t harm you? Others claim, "If you chant a mantra daily, you’ll be reborn in the Western Pure Land." If that were true, could we say that eating ginseng daily will guarantee long life and immunity to disease? Or that bathing daily will make one’s skin as smooth as jade? Without investigating the principles and instead clinging to lucky hopes, unwilling to take steady, practical steps, always looking for shortcuts to instant success—where does such a wonderful thing exist? The study of LIFE is an exact science; there is no room for ambiguity or chance. Every step must be taken with precision, and every detail must be thoroughly understood. Thus, LIFE must walk the Great Way, not the small path.

To Walk the Small Path of Life

The path most people follow is repetitive and monotonous. For thousands of years, it has remained the same: we are born, go to school, study more, find a job, buy a house, get married, have children, watch them grow up, retire, and wait for death. This entire process can be imagined without ever experiencing it. Why bother following the same steps as everyone else? Life is a journey, just a process for LIFE. Whether you repeat others' paths or blaze a new trail through uncharted jungles, the outcome is still death. So why not focus on enjoying every moment and aspect of life?

I advocate that “life is but a dream, all is emptiness, fully experience it without regret.” Confucius didn’t understand the meaning of “following the heart’s desires without overstepping boundaries” until he was seventy—too late! Can you still follow your desires at seventy when you’ve lost all your teeth and can’t even bite into an apple, let alone dry beans? How can you follow your heart’s desires then? So, life should walk the small path. Dare to take roads others have not taken. If everyone goes to the desert, I’ll go to the forest. As long as it brings me joy and doesn’t harm others or society, why must I follow others' paths? If I have a headache, will you suffer for me? Every person is unique, and no two things in this world are exactly alike. Therefore, life’s paths should not be forced into uniformity but should be diverse and colorful.

Life is short, but LIFE is everlasting. Let our brief life be rich, colorful, and filled with joy, while our long-lasting LIFE remains ever hopeful and full of infinite dreams. Onward! With joy and happiness, let us climb toward the highest realm of LIFE—the Celestial Islands Continent of the Elysium World!

[almaqead]

"The Zum." Introduction to Surah 39, Az Zumar, "The Summer."

Az-Zumar (Arabic: الزمر, ’az-zumar; meaning: "The Troops, The Throngs") is the 39th chapter (surah) of the Qur'an, the central religious text of Islam. It contains 75 verses (ayat). This surah derives its name from the Arabic word zumar (troops) that occurs in verses 71 and 73. Regarding the timing and contextual background of the believed revelation (asbāb al-nuzūl), it is believed to have been revealed in the mid-Meccan period[1] when persecutions of the Muslim believers by the polytheists had escalated.[1]

I have changed the banner to mean "Summertime" vs. "the Troops" to change our strategic objectives with this particular Dua. In general Troops in Hebrew are laws which are obeyed without question. The President tells the General, the General tells the Seargeant and then the troops march.

Even though we just finished Saaffat and Sad which list processes and procedures and personalities a persona a la Allah would follow, I think it is best to embellish this Surah with some good news.

Thus begins the Surah.

39: 1-4:

"The revelation of this Book is from Allah—the Almighty, All-Wise.

Indeed, We have sent down the Book to you ˹O Prophet˺ in truth, so worship Allah ˹alone˺, being sincerely devoted to Him.

Indeed, We have sent down the Book to you ˹O Prophet˺ in truth, so worship Allah ˹alone˺, being sincerely devoted to Him.

Had it been Allah’s Will to have offspring, He could have chosen whatever He willed of His creation. Glory be to Him! He is Allah—the One, the Supreme.

He created the heavens and the earth for a purpose. He wraps the night around the day, and wraps the day around the night. And He has subjected the sun and the moon, each orbiting for an appointed term. He is truly the Almighty, Most Forgiving.

He created you ˹all˺ from a single soul,1 then from it He made its mate.2 And He produced for you four pairs of cattle.3 He creates you in the wombs of your mothers ˹in stages˺, one development after another, in three layers of darkness.4 That is Allah—your Lord! All authority belongs to Him. There is no god ˹worthy of worship˺ except Him. How can you then be turned away?"

Commentary:

I was correct, we are not discussing an army but the effect of the sun overhead at midday during midsummer. Allah is absolute with regards to His Disposition with human perceptions the same way the term mid-July is unmistakeable to the human race. Midsummer has this emotive context of "we finally made it, and there is plenty of time left."

Muhammad was clear throughout the Quran, there is no other experience of God than one that is this solar centric. All the rest is of the imagination. This conflicts with Jewish which uses Kabbalah and mystical equations to teach the mind how to be independent from imaginary things, but Muhammad did not want to bother too much with all of that. His Quran is "clear" meaning, one can do what the Quran states if one is intelligent without too much trouble or worry of making a mistake.

Even still, Mo was in contact with the angels, a ruthless one in particular and He spoke in His own way. We must therefore use the Angelic Code to understand why Allah sent Jibril with thus Surah based on the figures included in its Fatim.

The presence of the Angelic Code in the rubrics of the Surat of the Quran is a sign Allah wanted to target Muslims with their own unique instructions and set them apart.

For this section of Zumar the Values in Gematria are:

This revelation is for a prophet in truth: The Number is 12686, יבם‎ףו‎, Yevam Ephu, "He wrinkled his nose."

To tell the truth is the smallest and also the greatest thing one can do. If one cannot tell the truth one's face falls into the dust. The Quran says Allah is sky blue. To attain to Allah one must hold one's nose up. Ground level is not enough.

Glory be to Him, He is the One. The Number is 8610, ףו‎י‎, foy, "to be baked."

Allah told Muhammad the world was to tell the truth all at once. There is an unseen ethical Spirit that controls the universe and we are at His Behest. In the Quran He says "bake it up."

"The verb φυω (phuo) describes a sprouting and growing up of plants primarily and secondarily of people.

Together with the common preposition εκ (ek), meaning out: the verb εκφυω (ekphuo), meaning to produce out or bring forth (Matthew 24:32 and Mark 13:28 only).

Together with the preposition εν (en), meaning in, at, on: the adjective εμφυτος (emphutos), meaning inborn or implanted: descriptive of something that sprouts within but which not necessarily originates from within. This word occurs in James 1:21 only, in a reference that clearly deploys the metaphor of the Word sown as seeds on the field of one's heart (see Matthew 13:1-23).

Together with the familiar adjective νεος (neos), meaning new or young: the adjective νεοφυτος (neophutos), meaning newly sprung up (1 Timothy 3:6 only).

Together with the preposition συν (sun), meaning together or with: the verb συμφυω (sumphuo), meaning to spring up together (Luke 8:7 only). From this verb comes:

The adjective συμφυτος (sumphutos), meaning sprang up together, united with, innate (Romans 6:5 only)."

He created the earth for a purpose. If you think the purpose was to make a soundstage for the swine, you are mistaken. What is happening in Riyadh is unholy and it does not meet the standards set forth by Allah to the House of Saud "of human welfare" for how the world should work. The King of Saudi Arabia is supposed to be the world's light, its greatest prophet, whoever he shall be. He is the Zum, the mouth of the sweetest water in paradise."

The Number is 9809, טףט‎‎, tefet, "theft."

The Words of Allah cannot be stolen out of the mouth of His Prophet. The penalty for this is death. The King of Saudi Arabia and his court must adjudicate the hearing between the US and Russia absent the plaintiff, Ukraine and its people according to the Will of God.

The Imji says if the people of America and Russia are repentant for th war and carnage they waged against Ukraine they can leave. If they are unrepentant they cannot leave in one piece.

He creates you in stages. The Number is 9505, טןה‎ ‎, tena, "the claim, the argument" .

"In three layers of darkness. That is Allah." The Number is 11163, קיאסג‎, kiasg, because of the sag, the saj, "and its rhyme, meter, and ending."

At the end of the Quran, Muhammad asks Allah to protect mankind from itself.

The argument at the beginning is God is good, at the end of it, Muhammad says, however, man is not good enough.

If those evil disgusting greedy men from DC and Moscow are hamstrung like horses, then the people of Ukraine and Russia and every place in this world suffering from their wickedness will benefit. I do not want to them leave Riyadh in peace or in one piece. The only way to prove to God we are good enough.

We must free the people of Eastern Europe from this scourge before talks continue. We may not get another chance. The Trump Presidency is illegal, it has no negotitating power. He disrupted life on earth during his insurrection on January 6 because of my Book. He cannot be the President, he cannot be anything because of this.

The Russian Presidency is wanted for war crimes. God is on the side of the righteous who want to parley with legitimate envoys of peace. The rest, He has asked us to destroy utterly.

Also for the record, in February of 2022, as Russian troops were queing before their invasion of Ukraine, three Ukrainian soldiers asked me to intervene and save their lives and those of their countrymen. Donald Trump is a filthy, bombastic liar. The Ukrainians did not start a war with Russia, Vladimir Putin did because he was opposed to my offer to help finance the Third Temple. Donald Trump must be excised from the human race for his role in the mass murder taking place all around this world.

That is my Claim, and I stand behind it. I have been trying ever since this happened to get the Russian army and its Chain of Command to return home and publish the peace. I will not stop promoting their causes until this is done, and the Russian government and people agree to my request.

He says we have allowed a few fearful men to endanger the unborn, and cut the Summers short for the rest. He says delaying the fears will not save us, only the Zum.

The Surah will continue.

[globalworship]

Virtual Book Group starting soon: "Beauty is Oxygen"

My friend and ministry colleague Dr. Dianne Collard will lead the Spring 2025 Arts & Faith Book Group.

The Virtual Group will be on Tuesdays at 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time.  It begins on February 11.

The chosen book this time is Beauty Is Oxygen: Finding a Faith That Breathes (2024)

Author bio: Dr. Wesley Vander Lugt teaches theology and directs the Leighton Ford Center for Theology, the Arts, and Gospel Witness at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary. He has also served as lead pastor of Warehouse 242 in Charlotte and theologian in residence at First Presbyterian Church, Tulsa.

+++

Excerpt from the Introduction: Why Beauty Matters

Beauty is notoriously difficult to define, but I take beauty to be traces of divine glory in the natural world and human culture marked by an alluring wholeness of entangled forms, experiences, and ideas. Let me unpack that a little. I believe all beauty comes from God, since God created and sustains this world, and this God is indescribably beautiful as three-in-one, an alluring wholeness of entangled, trinitarian being.

Some theologians are hesitant to call the triune God beautiful, preferring “glory” as the proper attribute, but I have no qualms stating that God is Beauty just as God is Truth and God is Love. I also believe that beauty is a matter of wholeness and entanglement, which is to say beauty emerges when certain combinations, juxtapositions, and differences create a fitting, compelling whole. The traditional language for this is proportion, harmony, and perfection, but I think that language emphasizes wholeness more than the entanglement of differences, and both are a part of the allure of beauty. For example, a forest is beautiful because it is a wholeness of entangled organisms, processes, histories, colors, smells, and sounds, all of which make a forest alluring, whether physically or experientially. Similarly, a piece of music is beautiful because of its alluring wholeness of entangled components, and so is a painting, a body, a conversation, a strategic plan, a prayer, a memory, or anything else.

Objects can be beautiful, but so can experiences, actions, ideas, and the connections between all these. Furthermore, beauty cannot merely be reduced to what I like and find alluring, as beauty is a feature of divine being and created reality that I may not naturally appreciate in its fullness and variety because I lack attentiveness, receptivity, or imagination.

Rather than continuing to labor over the definition of beauty, however, this book focuses on the impact of beauty, which I believe is necessary for vibrant faith, hope, and love. Without beauty, our spiritual lives would wither and die, which is why beauty is oxygen. Sometimes beauty is like a slight breeze and other times it’s like a gust, but it always carries with it the oxygen necessary for a breathable faith. If we are receptive, it can fill us with wonder, desire, and joy. To claim that beauty is oxygen is not to name it as an inanimate thing, some impersonal element on the periodic table. Rather, beauty is oxygen because through beauty we encounter the animating force of all life. Beauty is oxygen because it flows from the breath of God, the Creator Spirit.

Beauty is alluring—whether the beauty of artistry, the beauty of this wondrous and entangled world, or the beauty of human existence and interaction—because it witnesses to and participates in the beauty of God. If, as Dillard writes, “beauty and grace are performed whether or not we will or sense them,” then “the least we can do is try to be there” and breathe them in like oxygen for our souls.

What we make of beauty, of course, depends on what we make of anything within our framework of meaning. In this secular age, at least for those of us living in the West, it has become increasingly difficult to believe in anything outside of what philosopher Charles Taylor calls “the immanent frame,” a disenchanted framework of meaning severed from the possibility of a transcendent, divine reality. Within this framework, life is what we make it, and we don’t need God or anything else to figure it out. Beauty may help us cope, but it’s not connected to a deeper mystery. This book addresses that framework, the ache that often accompanies the inescapable search for meaning, and how beauty is an invitation into an enchanted, breathable life.

+++

Read a lengthy review at https://englewoodreview.org/wesley-vander-lugt-beauty-is-oxygen-review/

Excerpts from this review:

With Vander Lugt, we travel a variety of thematic terrain, searching out beauty in nature, theology, art, literature, philosophy, psychology, contemporary life, and cultural diversity. He also engages with candid honesty the ugly realities by which much of our world is organized and the false promises of counterfeit beauty, such as the “distorted aesthetic” of racism. Vander Lugt’s treatment of beauty and its opposite in light of 21st-century events is timely and particularly cogent....

Reading 'Beauty is Oxygen' feels in some ways like more of a community experience than a literary one. The variety of voices contributing insights into beauty can perhaps best be described as a chorus of many singers producing a dynamic and satisfying harmony. The author draws on philosophers such as Charles Taylor, Elaine Scarry; theologians such as Karl Barth, N.T. Wright, Hans Urs von Balthasar; poets such as Mary Oliver, Christian Wiman, Gerard Manley Hopkins; and authors of fiction such as Flannery O’Connor, J.R.R. Tolkien, and Fyodor Dostoevsky. Add to that the voices of filmmaker Terrance Malick, painter Makoto Fujimura, and activist Ta-Nehisi Coates, plus helpings from the psalms of David, the prophetic writings of Isaiah, the love poetry of Solomon, the laments of Job, and the gospel teachings of Jesus. The chorus rings out with strength and a complex resonance.

+++

To express interest in participating in the online book club, email Dr. Collard at dbcollard [at] me [dot] com

+++

[sofipitch]

what if lestats side of the story is an important part of the path forward to make lestat worthy of louis again?

I think Lestat's side of the story would only matter if it is post being murdered he goes on like a journey of becoming better. Like having a shitty childhood and trauma does not excuse inflicting that trauma on others, so personally Magnus trauma is not gonna cut it when Lestat also used Claudia's SA against her.

IN TVL we honestly don't get a lot of that, Lestat does a lot of excusing/denying rather than explaining how he has changed. However the part that convinces most fans he is worthy of redemption is when Lestat says that he deserved to have his throat slit.

From the epilogue "Interview with the Vampire" in TVL:

I betrayed him when I created him [Louis] , that is the significant thing. Just as I betrayed Claudia. And I forgive the nonsense he wrote, because he told the truth about the eerie contentment he and Claudia and I shared and had no right to share in those long nineteenth-century decades....

But what had I done to Claudia? And when would I have to pay for that? How long was she content to be the mystery that bound Louis and me so tightly together, the muse of our moonlit hours, the one object of devotion common to us both? Was it inevitable that she who would never have a woman's form would strike out at the demon father who condemned her to the body of a little china doll? I should have listened to Marius's warning. I should have stopped for one moment to reflect on it as I stood on the edge of that grand and intoxicating experiment: to make a vampire of "the least of these. " I should have taken a deep breath. But you know, it was like playing the violin for Akasha. I wanted to do it. I wanted to see what would happen, I mean, with a beautiful little girl like that! Oh, Lestat, you deserve everything that ever happened to you. You'd better not die. You might actually go to hell. But why was it that for purely selfish reasons, I didn't listen to some of the advice given me? Why didn't I learn from any of them-Gabrielle, Armand, Marius? But then, I never have listened to anyone, really. Somehow or other, I never can. And I cannot say even now that I regret Claudia, that I wish I had never seen her, nor held her, nor whispered secrets to her, nor heard her laughter echoing through the shadowy gaslighted rooms of that all too human town house in which we moved amid the lacquered furniture and the darkening oil paintings and the brass flowerpots as living beings should. Claudia was my dark child, my love, evil of my evil. Claudia broke my heart. And on a warm sultry night in the spring of the year 1860, she rose up to settle the score. She enticed me, she trapped me, and she plunged a knife over and over again into my drugged and poisoned body, until almost every drop of the vampiric blood gushed out of me before my wounds had the precious few seconds in which to heal. I don't blame her. It was the sort of thing I might have done myself. And those delirious moments will never be forgotten by me, never consigned to some unexplored compartment of the mind. It was her cunning and her will that laid me low as surely as the blade that slashed my throat and divided my heart. I will think on those moments every night for as long as I go on, and of the chasm that opened under me, the plunge into mortal death that was nearly mine. Claudia gave me that.

Honestly just rereading that section breaks my heart, how much Lestat loves Claudia, you can see why book fans were broken hearted by Lestat hating Claudia in the show instead, which I think is further made worse/exacerbated by Claudia being black and Lestat being white, as if that could potentially be a reason he doesn't want her/love her

[qedavathegrey]

I think that quite often people focus far too much on the ~~"Objective Reality"~~ of a thing. What do you truly gain from proving or disproving existence? Why is it so important?

Every day we touch, see, experience, are guided and limited by things that have no "objective" reality: money, time -- constructs. But none would say to a dollar, "Because you are subjective, you have no power." We know that isn't true. You would not say of the billionaire, "Money isn't really real, so thus they are without real power." Even if we -- individually -- assign no power to the dollar, our world does. We can laugh at the billionaire for his folly, but so will he laugh at us from his mansion bought with riches "unreal." Money has power because we agree that it does, because we believe that it does. Certainly subjective power is more fragile than "objective" (a majority could collectively rescind their belief and devalue it), but so long as belief in it remains, it will never be without.

None of this is to say there is no value in seeking out the "objective" reality of a thing. There is. But understand that entering the objective into the subjective will not have the results you think it will, especially when the thing's power has only ever been subjective. This is because the subjective has power of its own -- for better or worse. It is a contractual power, but it is still power.

The lesson here, or perhaps my caution, is to say: the subjective must be undone by the subjective. The subjective can be bolstered by the objective, but rarely is it undone by it. The objective does not magically reframe the subjective when it is "discovered." A new subjective must be built around it and must eclipse the old by way of contract, by way of acceptance. For example: fact may be fact, but if no one believes it, does it matter? Objectively, yes. But we are not objective instruments, we are not objective beings, despite whatever emphasis on Logic and Reason we have been fed. You can wave facts and figures in as many faces as you like, but until you find and sell and contract the subjective to the subjective, whatever objective discovered will be more a danger to you than it is transformative on the minds of others. And even if you construct a flawless argument, build a flawless subjective reality, that does not mean it will be accepted. Not broadly, anyway. And no anger or fury or insistence will undo that, only patience. Even then, there is no guarantee.

This is why I say I think too much time is spent on a thing's ~~"Objective Reality"~~. It does not have the inherent power over the subjective you've been told it does. In truth, it has lesser power than the subjective -- again, "for better or worse." Many will call this a failure, a disservice, a tragedy. Namely those whose subjective is most rigidly informed by (to the point of masquerading as) the objective. And perhaps it is. But I think there is also a wisdom in understanding that most (if not) everything having to do with humanity is subjective and that's okay. Only through acceptance and acknowledgement of this, might we come to understand the power and value in it. And might we come to change the things we feel need changing. That is the magic of the subjective: it is not static, it can be changed and is ever-changing. The river flows subjective and its course can be adjusted.

So, yes, seek objective but understand that its value extends only as far as can it be framed subjectively to the subject. And do this framing through recognizing and understanding your own role as subject: you cannot escape bias, but you can be conscious of it, you can be plain about it. Find me a man without bias and I'll tell you he is no longer man at all, he is nothing.

[pilgrimdrewbert-blog]

Of Cults & Counterfeits

Dear Fellow Sheep,

Cults claiming to be Christian always have their beginnings in a transfer of authority away from the objectivity and sufficiency of Scripture. The spiritual authority is transferred to men and women who claim to hear directly from God. These self appointed prophets and apostles invent new doctrines and obscure the clearest teachings of Christ with their dreams, visions, angelic visitations, and purported trips to Heaven. They preface their new revelations with “I feel the Lord saying” and “I think God wants me to say”.

  But this is not how the Biblical prophets speak. The authors of Scripture did not have to tune into the right frequency or sit in silence waiting for heavenly whispers. God doesn’t have problems being heard. When He spoke, they heard Him loud and clear. There was no guesswork or ambiguity.

  The refrain of Scripture is “Thus says the LORD”. And all of Scripture is ultimately about the redemption of sinful humanity in the person and work of Jesus Christ. Prophets profiting off of your hunger for an experience are no spokesmen for God. He hasn’t authorized them or sent them. They sent themselves. They prophesy financial increase, healings, breakthroughs, shifts, anointings, and deliverances, but they do not preach Law and Gospel. They speak of glory and destiny and reigning in life, adding so many glittering distractions that the whole point of Christianity is lost.

  Christianity isn’t about your personal breakthrough into a happy and prosperous life. Christianity is about Christ crucified for the forgiveness of sins…to bring guilty sinners to God.

  Christianity is also not about making a difference….It’s more specific than that…It’s about making disciples in all that Christ commanded.

If you are sitting under a ministry that doesn’t leave you with the Gospel ringing in your ears, then ask yourself why. What has taken first place in the pulpit? Is God’s Word being twisted to say something other than its clear meaning? Is it being handled in its immediate and broader context?

  We must take very seriously those who claim to have a fresh word from God. If they are sent from God, we had better pay close attention, because all God’s utterances are equally authoritative. But if they are not sent by Him, then our job is clear: mark and avoid them. Do not fear them.

  Those who continue to twist God’s Word after being confronted must also be marked and avoided. Truth matters. For the sake of their souls we cannot agree to disagree when it comes to the issue of divine revelation.

  Jeremiah 23:25-32 “I have heard what the prophets have said who prophesy lies in my name, saying, ‘I have dreamed, I have dreamed!’ How long shall there be lies in the heart of the prophets who prophesy lies, and who prophesy the deceit of their own heart, who think to make my people forget my name by their dreams that they tell one another, even as their fathers forgot my name for Baal? Let the prophet who has a dream tell the dream, but let him who has my word speak my word faithfully.

  What has straw in common with wheat? declares the LORD. Is not my word like fire, declares the LORD, and like a hammer that breaks the rock in pieces? Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets, declares the LORD, who steal my words from one another. Behold, I am against the prophets, declares the LORD, who use their tongues and declare, ‘declares the LORD.’ Behold, I am against those who prophesy lying dreams, declares the LORD, and who tell them and lead my people astray by their lies and their recklessness, when I did not send them or charge them. So they do not profit this people at all, declares the LORD.”

Dear friends, please hear me. 

Jesus warned that false prophets would always be with us but that their deceptions would increase as the end of the age approaches. These days, there are thousands of people on the internet and television claiming to be Christian prophets. They conduct seminars on how to hear God’s whispers. They promote their books that contain secrets to hear from Heaven. The question we must answer without delay..... Did God send them to us? 

Today’s prophets gathered together on Zoom calls to prophesy the end to Covid and that Trump would win re-election in 2020. Many of them doubled down after the election, saying God would still reinstate Trump before Biden’s inauguration. But this is just one massive piece of evidence. Even the honest ones among them say that their accuracy in prophetic words is 20% at best. Does God have trouble speaking or being heard? Is He only 20% accurate? Does He endorse these people? No. No. No.

God has made it very plain to the world that He is NOT speaking to these men and women. He has not sent them or authorized them to speak on His behalf. They have prophesied falsely and they grossly twist Scripture. Listen to any of their teachings with an open Bible and see for yourself. 

God’s prophets are still speaking today through the Holy Scriptures. They speak of the Messiah coming to save His people from their sins. He HAS come and HE IS the message of God to dying humanity. 

Hebrews 1:1

“God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom He also made the world.”

2 Peter 1:19-21

“And so we have the prophetic word made more sure, to which you do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts. But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture becomes a matter of someone’s own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.”

I’ve listened to countless hours of teachings and prophecies from the modern day prophets. They twist Biblical texts into whatever shape fits their unbiblical theology. Absolutely none of it edifies the soul by pointing to Christ and His Everlasting Gospel. It’s all about tapping into your divine potential, unlocking your destiny, and finding your purpose. It’s about YOU. 

Christianity is Christ. 

Just last week, I took the following screenshots straight from the online bookstore of Bethel Church in Redding, California. Does this resemble Biblical Christianity to you? 

This Is Not From God

There’s not enough time in my busy life or yours most likely to unpack all that those screenshots contain. But know one thing for certain. These false prophets are peddling Gnostic Mysticism to Evangelicals. They aren’t giving you Jesus.

Instead of preaching the Word of the Cross, they encourage you to “press in to the more of God”. They entice with smooth words, “There’s so much more in God for you to experience. His secrets are waiting to be discovered. There is a power and an anointing that you need in order to change your world. Don’t settle for the unsupernatural life.”

When pressed on it, these teachers can often give you an orthodox Gospel outline, but the Gospel is not the content of their teachings. They put words in God’s mouth and misrepresent His nature and His will. They would have you believe that God demands that you prophesy and work miracles in order to be a Spirit-filled Christian. They would have you be discontent with the Bible so they can sell you hundreds of books on how to unlock new levels in your anointing and how to use God’s authority to rule your world. 

If you follow them, the Gospel fades into the background as you endlessly pursue glittering counterfeits. You’ll become like them, always needing more. More new revelation. More lying signs and wonders. More me-centered revivals. More emotion. More surrender. 

You’ll never surrender enough and you’ll never be satisfied. It’s an addiction to a deadly substance that God hates. He hates it when people misrepresent Him. False prophets claim God’s authority as their own. They use “Thus says the Lord” to create new doctrines that lead to more new doctrines. Before you know it, you’re stuck in a cult with unaccountable leaders. Once you try to escape, they will invoke God’s authority and God’s name to bind you and keep you in place. 

So, dear ones, open up your bibles and read EVERYTHING God says about true prophets and false prophets. You’ll find pretty quickly that today’s prophets are counterfeits. They aren’t hearing from God. They are hearing from themselves, or worse, different spirits. True prophets don’t twist God’s Word. They don’t have to learn to hear God. They don’t have to try. God chose and personally appointed His prophets. He spoke to them clearly and understandably. 

Compare and contrast. Be good Bereans. Cling to Christ. Cherish the Gospel. Mark and avoid false teachers and false prophets. 

You don’t have to be nasty about it. Stay focused on souls and God’s glory. 

For the record, I would be first to rejoice if a false prophet repents and finds mercy from our wonderful Savior. I pray for that! Look up Dawn Hill. She was a false prophetess in the Charismatic Movement (New Apostolic Reformation specifically). She repented, and as promised, she received mercy. It’s wonderful to see God’s work in her heart. 

So, be discerning. God doesn’t want you chasing a counterfeit version of Him and His gifts. He also doesn’t want you in a cult. 

Pray for wisdom and get into a faithful Church. God wants you to be planted in Biblical soil, growing in grace, and thriving in Gospel sunshine. This is His way. The truly Spirit-filled way. 

Dear fellow sheep, Keep the Faith.

In His Grip,

Just Another Sheep

[imgonna--explode]

alrighty. again, not in order.

yup, most adolescents/minors don’t get diagnosed with pds because of hormone imbalances that could be the actual cause. i agree fully. yeah, you probably shouldn’t claim to have a pd you’re not diagnosed with. i see where you’re coming from. concern about echo chambers is reasonable. i agree with that. and let me just say: stop saying sorry for things i’ve gone through. it doesn’t help (me). you don’t need to bear the responsibility of easing experiences you weren’t there for and weren’t asked to ease.

when i said i was okay with a kid dying, i wasn’t trying to enable suicide or child murder or whatever you thought. i was just saying that if a kid did commit suicide and was successful, that it was for their greater good. people dying is always morally neutral. i just wish that when people talk about teen suicide they wouldn’t try to preach in teens’ faces how they just need to keep on going with their lives, but try to make a better environment for teenagers in general. and yeah, it hurts me biologically, but mentally it’s lost its effect because YOU NEED TO SEE PAST YOUR PAIN SOMETIMES AND RECOGNIZE THAT THE PERSON WHO DIED WAS GOING THROUGH GREATER PAIN (/nm). they died, but it’s fine. suicide shouldn’t hurt as much as it does. and i love how you end it off with that “you’re not alone” bullshit. i’m sorry, but i don’t understand how that helps.

you say there’s no easy solution to grief or suicidal ideation; well, i think there is. death is fine. needed, sometimes, especially in cases of suicide. i know you’ll try to twist my words and say that i was saying that i hate suicidal people or whatever, so what i mean by that is needed by the individual. again, death is fine. many don’t want it, that’s also fine. grief hurts, that’s just objective. but it’s okay to die, and it’s okay to die young. it hurts for the people around the dead youth but ultimately, it’s not as if they committed a crime by dying. i’m not trying to enable suicide or demean grieving people, i’m just saying that it’s morally neutral.

yeah, to be fair, i did put words in your mouth and i’m not gonna try and deny that. sorry. again, i’m stupid, my frontal lobe isn’t developed, etc. that’s just an objective statement and not me trying to demean myself or try to make you feel bad, i’m just being honest.

protect from what? how come you say you care but i haven’t even seen you in real life? how do you know i’m not the worst person to exist?

it’s weird that you say you’re not trying to help anyone here but are trying to preach to people to not be in communities like these because they only “made you worse” or can only harm you down the line. while i may have implied something wrong with these communities by saying you’re trying to help us, i truly meant to say you’re trying to help the individual with their individual problems.

and as i said, saying life gets exponentially harder to younger people who have suicidal thoughts is going to make them fucking die. since you’re so adamant on having kids survive to their next chapter, maybe don’t say that? me, personally, i’ve accepted that life will always be shit and will continue to get more shit as i (maybe) go on, but others probably might take that wrong. you say you care so much for these kids you don’t even know behind your screen, act like it. if you want them alive in their twenties, conceal the truth.

and? fuck around and find out? genuinely, what are you trying to say by that?

i’m not saying to give up on people who are still alive. i understand why you think i may have implied that. again, words are hard, refer to me being a minor and not having a developed frontal lobe. but, as hard as it is, have trust in the people who killed themselves that they did it for a good reason. death is only natural. you cannot deny the inevitable.

love and support is basic human decency. i get that. how are our communities not showing love and support? that’s all i get from here.

i may have missed some points and made some flawed statements but i’m tired and i don’t want to review further or write more. sorry.

“Kids shouldn’t be on jiraiblr!” You’re right, they shouldn’t. They should be enjoying life as a kid. But they’re not, they’re fucking miserable, so shut the fuck up and stop complaining. If that’s all you whine about get the hell off jiraiblr, nobody wants you here.

[straighttohellbuddy]

is it too much to expect? that i would name the stars for you?

A/N: 1151 words. No Love Interest specified, but he/him pronouns for the L/I. No pronouns specified for the reader. This came to me very suddenly and I’m not quite sure what it is. Part imagine, part meta, part think piece about the nature of rpf x reader imagines. It’s a love letter to the genre, it’s a love letter to the poet Richard Siken, who’s quotes I’ve taken and sprinkled throughout, it’s love letter to you. I don’t remember when I started writing x reader fics, all I remember was that I needed to feel loved, and I put out my work in case someone else needed to feel loved too. (also this was definitely written and posted within a single hour)

----

You find him in a coffee shop.

You find him through your screen.

You find he’s been your best friend this whole time.

You find him through a series of crazy random happenstances.

Over and over again you find him, and you love him. You learn to love him each time, from friendship, from hatred, maybe you’ve loved him all along, maybe in this new world, all you focus on is a moment, is a feeling, is the undeniable truth that is your love for each other. 

Sometimes he breaks your heart. Sometimes he can’t say the words you want to hear until the very last minute. Sometimes you spend so long denying your feelings that the words feel alien on your tongue.

You’re in a car with a beautiful boy, and you’re trying not to tell him that you love him, and you’re trying to choke down the feeling, and you’re trembling, but he reaches over and he touches you, like a prayer for which no words exist, and you feel your heart taking root in your body, like you’ve discovered something you didn’t even have a name for.

But you’ll find him again, and love him again, and suspend your disbelief, mould your self perception to fit this universe, to fit this character that he loves back, because they’re almost you, or similar enough that it’s not jarring, and you let yourself be taken along for the ride. 

You know that he loves you like he loves everyone who needs to feel it enough to be reading it, to be sharing it; a piece of understanding and comfort that you know is both yours and the world’s, but it’s okay. Loving them doesn’t mean he loves you any less, so you come back, time and again, and can hear him say it every time; I love you. 

You love him, yes, though in each universe you love the idea of him that’s been so lovingly handcrafted by the writers who love him too. This love is a shared experience; this love is something you need or want in the moment you’re searching for it. It’s not wrong to need love. It’s not wrong to want love. 

The enormity of my desire disgusts me. 

Because this world isn’t built from an authority, this world is built from love, from passion, from people just like you, and people are so self critical, so worried that people like them will not do the things they love justice. But you trust the writer. You let yourself fall in love, you let yourself be loved. Maybe you keep your mouth shut about it, maybe they won’t understand the rush of suspending your disbelief, believing, if only for a moment, that the people you look up to might see you as an equal, might see you as a something they could love too. 

Wish fullfilment comes in all forms; don’t be afraid to wish to be in love. I’ll tell you a secret; I wish it too.

I made this place for you. A place for to love me. If this isn’t a kingdom then I don’t know what is.

I’m overwhelmed with love, with desire, with the need to script a world in which the person who gives me comfort will comfort me specifically; will comfort you specifically. Worlds of words sprawl in my mind, over and over I see new ways to hear the words I need to hear; more than anything I want to share those worlds with you. What good is understanding that in another universe, he’ll love me, if I can’t show you that in that universe, and so many more, he’ll love you too. We are pack animals, scrambling and searching for love, for a safe place to store our heart, our feelings, so I will write worlds where you can feel human, and feel loved, and feel powerful in equal measure.

I will write worlds where you are the star, where you are the object of desire, where he loves you, because each universe comes with an understanding, comes with a tweaked version of you, dear reader, so that you may find new things to relate to, new ways to fall in love, with him, with yourself. That rush of first love over and over again; that safety of a secure kind of love that comes from years of hard work, because sometimes you need that warmth without the build up, so I’ll give it to you for free. Here, I hand craft these worlds for you, so I suppose in my own way, I love you too.

Here is the part where everyone was happy all the time and we were all               forgiven -

And you’ll fall in love with more than just him, because these worlds are populated by friends and found family who you will grow to love too, because your life does not depend on romantic love, because you are worthy of more than just romantic love, you are worthy of a circle of people who understand you. Find allies in your idols time and time again, each universe has a new way to connect to them.

The worlds I write may not always be kind, for the world itself is not always kind, but the people who matter will love you, will understand you, and you’ll hold your own against the world because you are strong. 

You deserve love. You deserve a world where you can see as the object of desire by those you find desirable. I’ll write them for you; I’ll write my fantasies, let them become my legacy, and hope you understand the love I’m trying to put into words.

You see, I take the parts that I remember and stitch them back together to make a creature that will do what I say or love me back.

But please be kind to him, to the real him, be respectful; he has given comfort and given love, and given inspiration for all these worlds in which I can envision a version of him loving me, of loving you. 

Be kind to him, because I cannot imagine how terrifying, how overwhelming it would be to have a world that loves you, but that doesn’t respect, at least in part, that you are not the version that can love them all in return, in the way they deserve. He can appreciate us, so please, let’s appreciate him for who he is, and love the versions of him, the whole universes writers have been inspired to create just so he can love us in the way we deserve.

In the mean time, here; I know it’s not a lot, but I think it’s what you deserve. It’s the world. It’s his love. I made it just for you.

Who am I? I’m just a writer. I write things down. I walk through your dreams and invent the future.

[hyenahunt]

Conquest - Prologue

Writer: Akira

Season: Spring

Proofreading: royalquintet (JP & ENG)

Translation: hyenahunt

Hiyori: But the problem is, we're not enemies at all. We're allies, aren't we?

[Location: ES Breakroom]

[One day in late spring...]

Hiyori: "Eden Breaks Up?! The decisive battle fans have all been waiting for: Adam VS Eve —"

—Or so says this ridiculous performance plan I just received over HoldHands.

I'd greatly appreciate a detailed explanation of just what is going on. Depending on your answer, chances are I won't let you off.

Nagisa: ...Wow, Hiyori-kun, your expression is frightening.

Ibara: Aye-aye! Allow me to offer you an explanation. After all, it is my job to see to it that this incomprehensible world is dissected, cooked up and arranged for serving.

That being said, however, this appetising proposal came from the higher-ups themselves, and as such I myself am not too clear on how it came to be.

All the same, I do have some grasp of the overall outline.

Nagisa: ...I had no idea about this. While I did receive it on HoldHands, I leave all administrative matters to Ibara.

Hiyori: Nagisa-kun, you're pretty much the leader of both Eden and Adam, aren't you?

I do feel it would be for the best if you managed such things yourself, but well, everyone has their individual strengths and weaknesses, I suppose?

Nagisa: ...Yes. I'd rather not concern myself with the everyday world. It's troublesome.

...And having Ibara look over it results in a more accurate understanding. He's the right person for this.

Ibara: Ahahaha! Receiving such praise and trust from you is truly an honour, Your Excellency!

Nagisa: ...I simply state the truth. By the way, Jun, did you know about this proposal?

Jun: Ugh, please don't drag me into this, Nagi-senpai. Ohii-san's been in such a crazy awful mood all morning and I wanna have nothing to do with it, y'know~?

In situations like these, I'm the one who usually ends up as his stress outlet, after all —

But whatever, I guess. What'd that proposal say again...?

It sounds like something only the unit leaders receive, so there's no way an underling like myself would know anything about it, yeah~?

Nagisa: ...Ahh, it does seem like that's how it works.

...It's set up so that all messages I receive are immediately forwarded to Ibara, so it doesn't concern me, though.

Hiyori: Nagisa-kun, are you alright with that?

If you leave every little thing to Ibara like that — or grow dependent on him, I should say—then aren't you going to have trouble living on if he randomly drops dead one day?

Ibara: Worry not! I won't be dying any time soon — I cannot allow myself to die when we've gotten this far already!

Hiyori: Well, even if Ibara does kick the bucket, I can look after Nagisa-kun like how I used to so everything will be just fine.

Ibara: Indeed, should such a situation ever arise, I will leave him in Your Highness' capable hands.

...Anyway, to return to the topic at hand, I do believe the current proposal isn't completely devoid of points worth considering.

Hiyori: ... In what way, may I ask?

Jun: (Woah. Ohii-san's face is seeeriously scary as hell right now. He's usually all silly laughs and smiles, so when he's got a serious face on you know shit's gonna go down.)

(This time he seems kinda actually really upset about things, huh?)

Ibara: Right. Firstly, it is essential to note that this proposal is by the restructured top brass of CosPro, after the majority of its executives were fired due to the scandal at the end of last year.

They're all most eager to repair their damaged reputations — money is no object in their quest to prove their innocence and competence.

So in short, they intend to create something of great extravagance with this proposal. They'll pull out all the stops, no matter what it takes.

And since this comes right on the heels of the scandal, even the higher-ups will be careful not to attempt anything dubious behind the scenes — so everything should be safe.

Nagisa: ...Well, true fools tend to repeat the same mistakes over and over, though.

Ibara: All the same, it's common knowledge that after the last scandal, we as Eden collectively denounced and drove out the top brass.

Taking that into account, the fact that they've put out a proposal means that they're prepared to face such a situation once more.

This is a proposal of great importance—one that puts their lives on the line, if you will.

At the same time, if we were to reject this proposal, which is composed of the desperate desires of these higher-ups, they'll simply shrink away and believe anything they do or say will be pointless.

I'd greatly prefer to have some clumsy fools bumbling about their jobs rather than frightened figureheads cowering in a corner.

To be frozen in place is no different from being dead, after all. And corpses certainly can't be mobilised for war.

Simultaneously, always saying anything and everything is out of the question will never allow for growth in us humans.

...Well, such overprotective and motherly behavior seems to be a favorite of His Highness Hiyori.

Hiyori: ...In what sense? I certainly feel as though you're mocking me right now, you know?

Ibara: Of course not, I would never do such a thing... It is but a misunderstanding.

But in any case, for the sake of the top brass gaining experience, and to grant them that sense of self-confidence and achievement, I would dearly like for us to accept their proposal.

Nagisa: ...It's actually an interesting proposal, too.

...A confrontation between Adam and Eve... I've never considered such a thing before.

Jun: Well, it kinda feels like something guys would be pretty into. It's almost like pro-wrestling.

Seeing who'd win if Adam and Eve faced off... that might really catch our fans' interest, actually~

Hiyori: Ngh... A lion is still the king of beasts even if he doesn't go around proclaiming it, right?

Ibara: Certainly. That being said, a performance is essential in allowing the masses to actually understand this, as they are rather slow on the uptake.

And it is for that purpose that we now have this current plan: "Conquest".

For us of Eden, who were regrettably only the runner-ups for the idol world's greatest festival, Winter Live, at the end of last year...

Perhaps it's a rather ambitious event, to try and realise that domination that once slipped through our grasp —

That world domination, thwarted by Trickstar, or rather obstructed by traitors within our own camp.

Now is the time to see it through — that, I feel, is the current sentiment borne by the higher-ups of CosPro.

Conquer all, and we shall seize the world within our hands.

Hiyori: Well, in all honesty, I do have faint regrets that we weren't able to conquer the nation at the end of last year.

But we'd still be able to make the world ours just by doing things as we always have. Why make a show out of something so unsightly as an internal quarrel—

Ibara: That's not the case. ES has now been established, and in this new era of oligarchy between the four agencies, it'll prove difficult to stand out if we simply go about our days without aim.

If we are to use a single showpiece to launch ourselves to the top, then it is essential for it to be explosive in nature.

In that sense, I believe Conquest is the ideal plan for it. Since the earliest times, people have always been drawn to showdowns of destiny, after all.

Such as Holmes and Moriarty, Godzilla and King Ghidora, Goku and Vegeta... Would you understand those examples, Your Highness?

Jun: Oh, I totally get you.

Ibara: Good. Let's see... it would be something akin to the War of the Roses — does that make sense?

Hiyori: Mm... I can't deny that a showdown between age-old enemies would be exciting, of course.

But the problem is, we're not enemies at all. We're allies, aren't we?

No... I consider Eden a family, but am I the only one who feels that way?

Nagisa: ......

✦✦✦✦✦

✦ all ✦ next →

[t4t4t]

Modern English language quite literally comes from no place. No indigenous people spoke or speak it. It works as a conglomeration of languages, a mishmash made for one purpose: trade. If languages provide us with a context with which to perceive the world, then English programs people to see the living world through the lens of exploitation: trees as dollar bills, animals as units of meat, humans as slaves. English tells us from the moment we utter our first word to our last that the world exists for one purpose: commerce.

By now you may have noticed something weird or different about my writing style that you can’t quite put your finger on. I’ll let you in on a little secret. I’ve written this book in E-Prime (or English Prime), a version of the English language that excludes the use of the verb “to be.” You heard me right. I do not use is, was, am, were, be, been, are, or any of their contractions. Stop for a second and write a paragraph or two or three and see if you can write without using “to be.” Pretty hard, huh? Now just think how hard it would feel to write a whole book in it!

E-Prime came about because some very clever scientists realized that B-English (“regular” English, which does not exclude “to be”) creates a false projection of reality. The world constantly changes, and B-English interferes with this change by attempting to fix reality in stone. It seems only natural that a sedentary culture that resists change would eventually evolve a language that projects our perception of control into the natural world. We do it with the plow, and we do it with our words.

While doing who knows what kind of experiments, these nerds discovered that an electron, when measured with one instrument, appears as a wave and when measured with a different instrument appears as a particle. We have a problem here: in Aristotelian B-English, an electron cannot “be” both a particle and a wave, as surely as a table cannot also “be” a chair. He realized that by “be-ing,” we label something as it “is,” fixing it into an unchangeable object.

For example, I cannot simultaneously “be” both stupid and smart. But what happens when Person A observes with a set of instruments (Person A’s senses) that I have intelligence, and Person B observes through a different set of instruments (Person B’s senses) that I say idiotic things? Our linguistic world eats itself, and arguments ensue. “To be” prevents us from experiencing a shared reality—something we need in order to communicate in a sane way. If someone sees something differently from another, our language prevents us from acknowledging the other’s point of view by limiting our perception to fixed states. For example, if I say “Star Wars is a shitty movie,” and my friend says, “Star Wars is not a shitty movie!” We have no shared reality, for in our language, truth lies in only one of our statements, and we can forever argue these truths until one of us writes a book and has more authority than the other. If on the other hand I say, “I hated Star Wars,” I state my opinion as observed through my own senses. I state a more accurate reality by not claiming that Star Wars “is” anything, as it could “be” anything to anyone. Similarly one could say, “I’ve seen Urban Scout act like an idiot before,” while another person could say, “Man, Urban Scout has really made me think. I really appreciate him.” We have two perceptions that do not contradict one another but that came about from different perspectives.

“To be” plays god. It attempts to chisel reality in stone and works as the backbone of the civilized paradigm. Of course it does: its birthplace lies in the land of economic commerce, not a biological community. English works to domesticate the world as much as tilling means to domesticate it. Every element of our culture urges for domestication, for slavery. If language shapes how we perceive the world, nothing stands more fundamental (aside from the practice of agriculture itself) to this process of domestication than our own language.

Some people believe that language marked the beginning of hierarchy and we should walk away from language as well. But where do you draw the line? At vocalization? Birds vocalize. Body language? Every animal uses body language. Every animal has a language. If I run from a bear it will chase me. If I stand my ground and avoid eye contact, I let the bear know I don’t mean harm. The bear will huff and gruff and bluff to test my stance. Eventually the bear will walk away and let me go. This confrontation has a language to it. Peaceful confrontations do as well. Birds use songs, companion calls, and alarms to communicate, to emphasize their body language.

We know that indigenous peoples lived sustainably with beautiful, poetic spoken languages. We also know that no indigenous cultures used the verb “to be.” Knowing that, and understanding what “to be” does to our perception of reality, it makes sense that the first step to rewilding the English language should involve eliminating Aristotle’s mistake. Willem Larsen has taken this concept much further and created “E-Primitive,” a version of E-Prime that stresses verb-based sentences (among many other changes). Most indigenous languages based themselves in verbs rather than nouns. This shows us their focus on a fluid, ever-changing perception of reality. Our noun-based sentence structure shows us another symptom of our fixed-reality language.

E-Prime hardly fixes English (pardon the pun!). But it greatly defangs it. It tears down many of the language’s footholds on control and allows for a more chaotic, changeable paradigm to fall into place. The more I write in E-Prime the more I see how “is” takes control of the world and how fluid English can sound. Of course, I speak B-English and use it in most of my other writings. I also have no illusions that E-Prime could ever stop civilization from destroying the planet. Rather, E-Prime works as a means of reconnecting myself to the wild through language. It merely helps me to see the world through a more dynamic, accurate linguistic paradigm.

[beddhead-red]

We fit things into patterns to try and understand them, then those patterns change and we try to make new sense of them, either fitting them into the old way, or making up something new.

Our understanding is limited by the vessel in which we inhabit, but men are clever, and create theories and testable hypotheses and find ways to understand the universe in ways previously thought hopelessly out of reach.

We fit things beyond our comprehension into something we can comprehend, and adjust as needed when we find something new.

The universe is as it always has been, and will be. The universe is constant, though in flux, and our vessels are constant constraints on our understanding. We merely shift these constraints around and gaze through a blurred lens into all of the beauty that makes up the universe, and try to understand it.

human beings love to be like 'heres a thing with a finite number of variations' & then sort it into categories. & theyre always wrong. everything is multitudinous & unfathomable & theres nothing you can do about it. but the human desire to make sense of the universe is also boundless & inexorable & theres nothing you can do about that either.