#Spiritual Infancy | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

cobragardens · 7 months

Text

Self-Therapy in the Form of an Open Letter to Neil Gaiman and My Fellow Ineffables

Dear Ineffables, and Dear @neil-gaiman

I want to talk about Good Omens for a sec, ok? You are not obligated to listen! But if you want to listen, I have a Thing I need to say. And it's important to me and I have a Tumblr, so you can see where this is headed.

I know Crowley and Aziraphale's relationship, book and show, is primarily about the absurdity and tragedy and miraculousness and contagiousness of being human. I know it's about wanting friendship and cake instead of victory and ashes, and I love that. I know it did not start out as an intentionally or unequivocally queer story, and I know that neither the queerness nor the Christianity is the main theme of S1 or the book. And I think those are all good things: one of the big strengths that makes Good Omens so remarkable and so charming is its lightness of touch.

But Crowley did not start out as a demon, and Aziraphale did not start out as a butter-smooth liar, and they are neither of them the angel the other knew, and there are reasons for that. And S2 starts discussing those reasons, and now Crowley and Aziraphale have shared a very human kiss and have started a more overt phase of their ongoing conversation about what they are to each other. So one of the things we need to talk about is what it’s like to love the wrong person in a world like the world of Good Omens.

And I feel like I have some (very small) amount of expertise in this field. I do not have the skill as a writer to tell you what that was like to grow up Christian and deeply in love with my (also female) best friend in Colorado Springs, Colorado, the evangelical Christian Mecca of the United States. But I did it--or, rather, it happened to me--so I'm the person who has to write about it now.

It was Before Ellen. Homosexual sex was against the law in around half of U.S. states. Only one state (Rhode Island, which I am not convinced actually exists) had a law prohibiting discrimination against LGB people in housing, services, or employment. One U.S. state—my state, Colorado—amended its state constitution to prohibit prohibiting discrimination. Same-sex marriage did not exist. Same-sex couples could not adopt children. Being any flavor of queer could cost you custody in family court of any children you did have.

Queer young-adult novels did not exist. Movies and tv shows with queer characters did not exist unless they were serial killers or dying of AIDS. Safe-sex education did not exist, the LGBTQ section of the bookstore did not exist. Social media did not exist, the Internet was in its infancy (I was typing up papers in AppleWorks on an Apple IIe), smartphones did not exist. Porn was in magazines your friend’s older brother or uncle kept under his mattress.

The guy everybody in school thought was gay got beat up daily. The girls I'm not sure about. I only ever saw two girls/women who were out before I was 28 and met an openly lesbian woman in a university class.

In Colorado Springs, bumper stickers for Colorado for Family Values and Focus on the Family, both headquartered in the city, were common. Crosses and ichthys decals proliferated. There were only a few “God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve” stickers, but “Marriage = One Man + One Woman," or the same message in Ladies and Gents toilets symbols (with a pair of ladies and a pair of gents crossed out) were a regular sight on the backs of cars every day, every drive, my whole life there.

This was a world where there was one very specific God, who has one very rigid Plan, and whose Agents and Enemies fight each other for the eternal souls of every human being. And every player on the board was clear about this.

I was 12 when my dad and I met two women on a hiking trail and, after we all said hello and they three had chatted a bit and the women had walked on, he asked me if I had "gotten any spiritual witness about them." He told me he suspected they were lesbians.

I was 14 when I burst into tears and shouted at my dad when he spoke viciously of the two gay men who had come into his place of work earlier in the day. He called them “flaming” and “faggots.” I told him we were Christians and we were not hateful about people in that way. I didn’t know what the word faggot meant, not for sure (I picked up the meaning of flaming from his imitations), but I could tell it meant they were people who did awful things, and that he hated them.

I had never seen my dad like that before, hating someone. I had never heard him speak that way about anyone.

I was 16 when I rode in the back seat of our next-door neighbors’ Ford Focus on the way to Bible study and listened to the handsome Christian newlyweds up front discuss how awful it was that gay and lesbian couples were now allowed to adopt children in the state of New Jersey. It was bad, they said, that children could find homes with queer people “because children learn from their parents.”

I was 17 when 2 straight men beat and tortured Matthew Shepard and left him tied to a split-rail fence on the side of a road 3 hours north of Colorado Springs as a warning to the rest of us. A scarequeer.

A joke in poor taste, you may feel, this little pun. It is a pun, but it's not a joke.

One of Shepard’s murderers used the gay panic defense in court. In the U.S. the gay panic defense is one of reduced responsibility: a man cannot be held fully legally responsible for murdering another man if he claims he thought his victim was gay and making a pass at him. Because, under U.S. law, it is considered common for men to go temporarily insane and murder men they think may be gay and making a pass at them. I have rewritten this paragraph five times and that is the absolute least bananas I can make this sound. It is real and it is still a thing.

I was also 17 when Pastor Luis, the head of my church, preached in sermon about a member of the congregation who had fallen in love with another woman. He told us firmly: "She is no longer a lady. She is a lesbian."

He refused to counsel or marry them, services he insisted upon performing for the heterosexual couples among his congregants. He said he told the woman and her fiancee that they and their sin were not welcome in his house of God. He told us, the ones left, that we were not to contact the ejected woman or continue any friendships with her.

It was a small church, only about 60 people. Pastor Luis looked right into my eyes and held the eye contact with me (other peoole turned to look) when he said, "And if you don't agree with that, you are not welcome here either. You can leave now and never come back."

I did. For 10 years after that, I thought God had told Pastor Luis about me. That Pastor Luis had gotten the same "spiritual witness" off me that my dad had gotten off the 2 women we met backpacking. That he somehow knew—that any Christian might know if they listened, if they sniffed carefully enough. The smell of evil, I thought, must linger on me.

I was 18 when I got my first tattoo. My parents were relieved when I told them that’s all it was. "We thought you were going to tell us you were pregnant, or gay," they said.

I was 19 when a trans woman at a coffee shop told me about how she'd been fired as a substitute teacher from the biggest school district in the state. She didn't pass, so she dressed as a man when working. One day she made the mistake of wearing a women's button-down shirt (with the buttons on the left, not the right), and someone noticed and complained.

I was also 19 when my boyfriend's parents became concerned that he might be gay. (He had gotten his ears pierced and dyed his clipper cut pink while away at college.) As Christians his parents were against premarital sexual activity of any kind, including masturbation or sexual desire, so my bf couldn’t tell them how he knew he wasn’t gay, and for over a year they wouldn’t believe him. His mother bought some books from Family Christian Booksellers, the biggest Christian publisher in the U.S., about how as a Christian she should respond to her child’s queerness.

Throw them out, cut them off, and do everything you can to make sure your child starves and suffers, said the books. (I read them all.) Hunger and homelessness were the goal, they advised, but any misery you could cause was helpful. Turn other relatives against them, don't let them take their belongings when they go, cancel phone contracts and insurance plans.

When your child asks for help because they can't support themselves, you can force them to leave their beloved and drop their friends in exchange for survival, said the books. They will either eventually see that you and God are right and loving, and repent of their sin, or you will catch them lying to you and sneaking around, which is proof that homosexuality and other sins go hand in hand.

One book acknowledged that cutting them off would endanger teenagers and young adults and leave them vulnerable to rape, murder, and human trafficking (though it called being trafficked "prostitution"). But Christian parents acting in the name of God's love would not be responsible for the harm their kids suffered, it said: the children were bringing whatever happened to them on themselves as a natural consequence of living a sinful lifestyle.

In fact, said the book, being attacked or abused could be good for your children: if they suffer enough they may realize it’s their gayness that has caused all their problems and repent of their disgusting unacceptable love and desire.

In the United States, LGBT children represent 40% of homeless youth under 18. "Family conflict" is the number-one cause of LGBT youth homelessness.

I was 22 when the pastor of my boyfriend’s church received news that one of his congregants was engaged in a same-sex affair. Extramarital affairs were very common in his church—three of the deacons were cheating on their wives with other (also married) congregants, and my bf’s parents had been swingers —but this was the first and only time the pastor ever called a church member to the altar, outed him by described his sin to the congregation (c. 350), and demanded the man apologize to everyone and ask their forgiveness. The pastor told him that if he did not apologize he and his wife and children were not welcome to continue attending.

I was 23 when I heard that same pastor’s sermon on avoiding sexual temptation. Give up affection if it causes you to sin, he said. Scoop out your own eyes, cut off your own hand. He instructed men only to hug other men side-along, one arm around their shoulders, lest a real embrace cause them to feel sexual desire for another man. (No mention was made about how women should hug, or that women might ever feel sexual desire at all.)

I remember listening to this pastor's sermon and thinking, I know something about this man that he does not know about himself.

I was 24 when I went with my boyfriend to Pulpit Rock Church, seeking answers from the sermon they advertised on their signboard about sex and sexuality and gender. My boyfriend loved wearing women's clothes. Transgender and cross-dressing were just starting to replace transsexual and transvestite as the accepted terms for the things he might be. Nonbinary and genderqueer were not words we had. He wasn’t sure yet which thing he was; the thing he was was still, for us, unspeakable.

"Men are created to be men and women are created to be women," preached the pastor at Pulpit Rock. "Men and women are different in a way that can't be explained, and they fit together in a relationship in a divine way. A man and a man or a woman and a woman may love each other, but they'll never have the spiritual connection of a godly relationship that a man and a woman can have. We don't have to understand it, but we shouldn't question it, because that’s the way God made it."

Then he talked about how he and his wife could both make French toast (or maybe it was pancakes), but the way his wife made French toast was female somehow--ineffably--because she was a woman, even though the French toast was the same. My bf and I left in the middle of the sermon.

I was 25 when Ted Haggard, best friend of Focus on the Family founder James Dobson (of “Spongebob is teaching our kids it's ok to be gay” controversy) and pal of George W. Bush (the POTUS who pursued, in his own words, "a Crusade" in Iraq with the U.S. military to fight the influence of demons "Gog and Magog[…] at work in the Middle East"), was publicly outed. Male escort and Mike Jones—whom Haggard hired to sell him meth and give him happy-ending massages—recognized ‘Pastor Ted’ as the leader of Colorado Springs evangelical megachurch New Life Church, a nationally famous preacher who denounced the evils of homosexuality from his pulpit, and Jones, a big damn hero, tipped off the press.

I had heard Pastor Ted preach twice. New Life Church was a lot like Heaven in Show Omens in that it had a lot of open space and bright fluorescent lighting and smiling well-groomed people in it, as well as several giant digital screens floating in the air to either side of its dais on which the face of the straight-passing white man bringing his people the word of God was projected as he spoke. This latter feature also resulted in a slight resemblance to a Hitler rally, but there was more medium-stained oak in play than either Hitler or Heaven would find tasteful.

I was 26 when I acted as an informal lettings agent for one of my landlord's other apartments and the young Christian woman living downstairs asked me refuse shelter to any gay or lesbian people because she didn't want to have to live in the same building with them.

When I asked her how I was supposed to know whether someone was gay, she said, “Well you can just tell, can’t you?”

I was 30 when I came out to my Christian parents. Having read the Christian parenting books, I was hugely relieved when they didn't throw me out of their house, where I was living after college (and a few major depressive episodes and two global recessions). I was relieved that they wanted to continue to have a relationship with me at all, in fact.

"I still think it's a sin, though," my mother gently reminded me. My father has refused ever to discuss it at all.

I was 31 when I moved to the UK. I've spent 11 years trying and failing to scrape a living in the Thatcher-hollowed market towns around Manchester, under the fucking Tories, through fucking Brexit, through fucking May and fucking Boris and that weird little cabbage Liz Truss, in order to stay out of Colorado Springs. I can't get medical care on the NHS and I can't work or leave my apartment bc I can't get medical care and I can't heat my apartment in winter on Universal Credit and I’ve been threatened and assaulted by doctors and raped by a nurse and I’ve tried suicide a few times, and I'm in some smallish danger of dying here in Britain's left armpit, but I am not in Colorado fucking Springs today, am I. So that's something at least.

I was 41 and living in the UK for a decade when a homophobe with Christian parents shot up the only gay venue in Colorado Springs, Club Q, murdering 5 people and shooting 19 more. I'd been to Club Q a few times, on dead nights, when I lived in the city. The shooting was 24 years after homophobes tied Matthew Shepard to a fence and left him dying as a warning to the rest of us.

I never told my best friend I was in love with her.

Instead I had anxiety dreams in which my subconscious warned me I wasn't safe. In one dream, Not Yet appeared tattooed on the back of my hand as I looked at a female classmate who was dating another girl. I had to wear gloves to hide the rainbow that had appeared, indelible, on my ring finger.

My first kiss was with a (Christian) boy.

I knew what I felt for my best friend was effervescent and golden and breath-stealing. I knew I wanted to spend the rest of my life with her, knew I wanted to live with her in a little house in the Pacific Northwest in the mist and the trees and make her coffee with a Turkish press anytime she wanted it and cuddle her on the closed porch and gripe about the wool in her sweater prickling my arms when I hugged her. I knew her eyelashes made her eyes look like they had stars in them and that she had the lushest curves and most perfect skin I had ever seen, and that when she smiled or laughed the shape of her mouth made something in me ache like tuning forks must ache when they're struck and made to sing.

I never told my best friend I was in love with her because I didn't know those were the words for what I was feeling.

Not until years later, after she had left my life. I had been told (frequently) by a Higher Authority that queer love was disgusting and ruinous and sinful and ugly and twisted and inferior, not this perfect fragile thing as soft and trembling-alive as a bird in my hands. Why would I think this was queer love?

I didn't catch the worst of it. I wasn't chained to a bed or forced to drink water from a dog dish, like the foster parents of the gay kid in class did to him. (The school asked him to give a talk to our class so they'd bully him less, so he told us about his life as the teachers looked on. He was 12.) I wasn't sent to conversion therapy like one classmate. I didn't spend most of my childhood in Bible School like other devout Christians' children; my family read the Bible a lot, and prayed together, but my parents weren't regular churchgoers. I was so, so lucky.

It destroyed me anyway.

The thesis of my essay runs thus, fellow ineffables: A happy ending for Crowley and Aziraphale is necessary.

It is necessary not just because Bury Your Gays is an overdone trope and an act of homophobia in the hands of straight writers; not just because Good Omens has been crafted with such loving care in both book and show incarnations to be optimistic, even sunny, against a backdrop of Orwellian, cosmic, and Kafka-esque horror; not just because casting miracles of the magnitude of David Tennant as Crowley and Michael Sheen as Aziraphale happen once a generation and it would be a shame and a waste not to write more magic for them to chew on; it is necessary because, in most places here in Shitworld, there are real people having the experience Crowley and Aziraphale are having, and not all of us are able to make happy endings for ourselves.

We don't have ethereal/occult powers or authorial control, so we need stories to show us how to love and when to fight and why to fucking bother. And the harder those things are to see in this world, the more we need those stories. And the more we need people with influence and audience and privilege telling them, not just all us little Tumblr rats and AO3 and Pillowfort perverts.

Crowley and Aziraphale exist in a fascist universe run by the ultimate Authoritarian—not Big Brother, but Big Father. There is nowhere for them to go, not even their own minds, where it is safe for them to love each other openly. I am completely prepared to believe someone in those circumstances could go 6,000 years without realizing the love they feel for their best friend is the kissing kind of love. I know someone can go a whole lifetime without saying it.

The hosts of Heaven and Hell will take away even the words for love when they can. We need people who don't just wield words but the power of the word spreading the message "There is a way to make this work. There is a way to exist. You can make a new world."

Mr Gaiman, I know from reading some of your other work that a big part of your whole Deal as a writer is an ongoing enthusiasm for the immense, even mystical, power stories have to shape individual and shared realities—sometimes to doom people and lock them into a destiny, but as often to let them escape their fate by imagining and conceiving a new way of living, or of living with each other, where none was possible before.

Hate and hope are the result of the stories we tell each other--I know you know this because I know you know that in saying it I am referencing a story you wrote. Like the hate, that hope only exists if an author says it does. And real people’s hearts, real people’s lives, are made and broken by listening to the wrong stories or hearing the right ones.

Crowley and Aziraphale are your characters, and Good Omens is your story to tell. You have written a setup in which, if you want these characters to be able to love each other, you (they) will have to create a world where that is possible. Please write us a romance. Please put enough sweet in with the bitter that we can survive it.

We have such faith in you because you have shown your readers and your audiences that you deserve that faith. Please choose your phrases wisely. ❤️

#good omens #good omens 2 #human rights #Colorado Springs #lgbtq #writing #religion #christianity #aziracrow #aziraphale x crowley #neil gaiman #stories #ineffable husbands #good omens s2 #trauma #mental illness #tmi #say your right words the goblins said

62 notes · View notes

iwonderwh0 · 2 months

Text

I wanna expand on Emma's character. She likes attention, she likes filming herself. There are piano in their room, so it's practically inevitable that she learns to play it. Who is her teacher? It's possible that it is human as, you know, music, maybe her rich parents think that it's best to learn it from humans. At least, we never heard that household models could teach playing instruments. Or actually, she probably learns using built-in program in the piano itself. Like, we saw this holographic screen when Markus was playing, it must include some learning modes.

She has favourite bands. She probably has some kind of spiritual beliefs, probably not like any specific religion but a mix of some new-age ones, at least their home looks like they are like this, like, if I remember it correctly there are Buddha statues so that's one thing. I think Emma, at least, believes in a few things, like karma and manifestations.

Her wrists are full of those handmade bracelets. Did she make them with someone? Alone? Are those friendship bracelets and there are some friends of her that have them too? She must've made at least one of those with Daniel, and it would be such a nice detail for him to wear one in-game. Missed opportunity. Maybe he took it off?

Daniel was activated for four years (huh, I thought longer, but it's still years though), so his character must've been quite developed for a while even prior to deviancy. Or, actually, maybe he deviated a lot earlier than the day we see him in the game. It is entirely possible that there was another event that made him freak out of his line, perhaps after fucking up and accidentally endangering Emma (they kept it a secret. I headcanon that Emma loves secrets. It makes her feel special), but he just stayed and continued his life with Phillips as if nothing happened without change because he liked it and felt responsible about it. I mean, it's not like he had somewhere to go — he doesn't know about Jericho as was confirmed in the evidence room. But ever since that day of his potential deviation he started to accumulate suspicions and paranoia that tipped over when he found out about AP700.

You know, it's kinda ironic that kids with household androids raise them as much if not more than household androids raise them. For kids those androids are part of their life, for androids it's their whole world (I mean, outside of some additional errands and other family members interactions that I don't think are composing even half of the time androids spend with kids they're looking after). Emma was 5-6 years old when Daniel was first introduced into her life. She must've already had friends and all kind of interests by that time, so Daniel didn't raise her from infancy.

You know, it's possible even that those kinds of androids get jealous of kid's other friends and family members. Daniel definitely feels like a jealous type, I doubt August 15 was his first time feeling resentment. The fact that he became Emma's first choice in four years must've been a really deliberate effort on his part, which, I mean, he spends the most time with her so he had this advantage.

Daniel belongs to the Phillips family but at the same time Daniel developed such a possessive attitude towards Emma as if she was his property. He integrated himself into her life as a "need, not want" and he will take her with him on his death row. He wants to believe that Emma needs him, but the truth is he needs Emma much more than she ever could. And it drives him mad.

Hear me out

What if

What if he was so jealous of Emma's other friends and so paranoid about her distancing herself from him that he cultivated circumstances where Emma preferred him over anyone else. A victory. And he put so much effort competing with other people for her attention that possibly of Emma replacing him with another android never crossed his mind. Until it hit him like an anvil. All of his work was for nothing. All this time he thought of himself as her friend. A person. Competing with other people. Turned out he wasn't even within the same category. He had always been only a toy.

#dbh #dbh emma #dbh daniel #dbh headcanons #detroit become human

30 notes · View notes

mineofilms · 17 days

Text

Kuron sakusei ni tsuite wa dodesu ka?

The concept of the human soul is deep, rooted in philosophy, religion, and spirituality. Its definition varies across different cultural and philosophical ideas. A textbook definition of the human soul might be considered as: “An immaterial, eternal, and indivisible essence that embodies the unique identity, consciousness, and spiritual nature of an individual human being. It is believed to transcend the physical body and is often associated with qualities such as morality, emotions, intellect, and the capacity for free will. In many religious and philosophical concepts, the soul is considered the core of human consciousness, the source, the locus of personal identity beyond the physical plain of death.” ~ChatGPT In this talk we will expand upon the human soul’s root in philosophy, religion, and spirituality. We are going to add physics, binary information systems, robotics, biomechanical, sociology, quantum mechanics, gravity and other technologies to this talk about the human soul. We will repeat ourselves often here. Be ready… 1) Is the human soul, a piece of quantifiable data?

In 1901, Duncan McDougall, a physician in Haverhill, Massachusetts attempted an experiment to determine whether the human soul has physical weight or not at the exact moment of death. The experiment was to use a very sensitive weight scale of the time period to weigh the body at the moment of death to test whether or not substantial mass leaves the body at the moment of death. The experiment did have results but could not be collaborated by other experiments, often the results were inconclusive, and the scientific community as a whole would later recognize McDougall’s experiments as unreliable. However, despite this, the experiment popularized the urban legend that the human soul weighs 21.3 grams. The question of whether the human soul can be measured or quantified gets into some pretty deep, critical thinking and problem solving thought experiments about what makes us, well, us… The soul is like the core of our identity, consciousness, and people have been talking about it since the first humans looked up at the sky and asked; “Each of us at some time in our lives, turns to someone - a father, a brother, a God... and asks...” “Why am I here? What was I meant to be?” “Is this all that I am? Is there nothing more?” ~Kirk/Spock talking about V’ger, “Star Trek: The Motion Picture” (1979).

Traditional religious ideas say the soul is beyond what science can measure. That the soul is beyond human comprehension. They see it as something divine, connected to God, and lasting forever. In more recent times, with all our technological growth since 1901, science tries to look at the soul in a more practical and scientific way. Religion says the human soul and God is beyond science and that is correct, “from a certain point of view.” ~Obi-Wan Kenobi, “Star Wars: A New Hope” (1977). Right now, that is true. Our complete knowledge of science, specifically physics, is extremely incomplete. We are trying to solve a problem with only a fraction of the data and science we need to tackle the problem. The amount of science-things we did not know in 1901 is daunting. We didn’t know back in 1901 what the structure and function of DNA was. We didn’t know about the existence and properties of subatomic particles such as electrons, protons, and neutrons yet. We didn’t have the theory of relativity proposed by Albert Einstein. Any concept of quantum mechanics and its implications for understanding the behavior of particles on a very small scale. No knowledge on the extent of the universe and the nature of galaxies beyond our own Milky Way or the role of bacteria and viruses in causing diseases. We didn’t have the causes and mechanisms of genetic inheritance or the full extent of Earth's geological history, including plate tectonics and continental drift. We were only in the infancy stages of the complexities of human psychology and the workings of the brain. The potential for space exploration and travel beyond Earth's atmosphere wasn’t even known as science-fiction yet. They were still calling these stories ‘fantasy.’ Flash-forward 123 years to 2024 and science learned all those things above that we did not have in 1901. Science uses tools like brain scans to understand how our brains work and how they relate to our thoughts and feelings. They think that maybe the soul is just the result of all the complicated processes happening in our brains. This might sound like they're taking away the magic from the idea of the soul, but it's more about trying to understand it in a new light. Some even wonder if we could create a kind of digital version of ourselves, keeping our memories and personalities alive in computers. So, while old beliefs say the soul is beyond measurement, new science is pushing us to rethink that. It's a big question that mixes religion, science, and our own deep thoughts about who or what we are. The human soul is a big puzzle that we keep trying to solve. It is part of what makes us human, always curious about the mysteries of our own existence.

2) Does the soul have mass? If so it ‘must’ obey the laws of physics in the form of the conservation of mass and energy, respectfully.

When we talk about whether the soul has weight, we're really asking if it behaves according to the laws that govern our physical reality, which is physics. The conservation of mass and energy says that you cannot just magically have “stuff” pop in or out of existence from nothing—it can only change shape or form. The conservation of mass and energy in its infancy was theorized as far back as 520 BCE by the Jain philosophy, a non-creationist philosophy based on the teachings of Mahavira, stated that the universe and its constituents such as matter cannot be destroyed or created. It was later expanded upon through expression dating back to Hero of Alexandria’s time. The law can be seen in the works of Joseph Black, Henry Cavendish, and Jean Rey. One of the first to outline the principle was Mikhail Lomonosov in 1756. He may have demonstrated it by experiments and had discussed the principle in 1748 through correspondence with Leonhard Euler. The conservation of mass and energy was later heavily defined in science when experiments later carried out by Antoine Lavoisier; who expressed his conclusion in 1773, and was popularized as the principle of conservation of mass and energy.

A friend of yours comes up to you with one of those giant cookies. Your friend cannot just make the cookie disappear or create a new one out of thin air. Instead, they can change the cookie into something else, like crumbs or energy when one eats it. The total amount of cookie-stuff (mass) and the energy it contains stays the same, even if it changes form. So, it's like saying you can't make something out of nothing, but you can transform what you have into different things. This is a universal law and everything of EVERYTHING physical applies to it except for a universal law that would combine gravity of the macro reality with that of the quantum one. Most of this statement is true. There is a slight misconception though. The principle of conservation of mass and energy does indeed assert that you cannot create or destroy matter or energy; instead, they can only change forms. However, the part about exceptions related to gravity and quantum mechanics is not entirely accurate. Conservation laws, including the conservation of mass and energy, are fundamental principles that apply universally to all physical processes, including those involving gravity and quantum mechanics. There is no exception to these conservation laws. While our understanding of gravity and quantum mechanics may lead to complexities in certain situations, the conservation of mass and energy still holds true as a fundamental principle governing the behavior of ALL Matter and Energy in the UNIVERSE.

When we talk about whether the soul has mass, it's important to think about what the soul really is? In relation to the law of conservation of mass and energy, the soul is energy, yes, but it is in a form our current understanding of physics cannot yet define. Under these circumstances we cannot ‘force’ our understanding of this till the science catches up. Take this ‘thing’ called the ‘soul.’ It’s obviously a ‘thing.’ It is a form of energy, but since we cannot yet quantify it in physical terms does it have to obey the laws of physics? That is the question that if we can answer it, then we can do something about that, with that. Traditionally, people think of it as something separate from the body, like a spirit. So, saying it has weight might sound strange because weight usually goes with things that have physical mass. We can touch and measure it. If a thing can be measured then it must obey the laws of physics. It cannot outright break the laws of physics. The only thing we can sort of understand that does this is a black hole. Nothing else discovered fits this definition. If the soul does have attributes that make it a real and tangible thing, which it is, because we experience it, but we cannot properly define it in science terms, it would have mass which means it has weight, it would mean it follows the rules of physics. Like how matter and energy can't just appear or disappear—they can only change from one form to another. This idea makes us think that maybe the soul is a part of the physical reality and interacts with it. In the end, whether the soul has mass and follows the rules of physics is still something we're trying to figure out. It's a big question that makes us think hard and brings together different ideas from religion, science, and philosophy. The actual truth lies somewhere in between all of that; and as we know none of these things play very well together in the sandbox at the park, we call the UNIVERSE...

3) However, do we even have ‘that great an understanding’ of all of physics?

We know next to nothing about physics as a whole. In doing research for this blog I found a “List of unsolved problems in physics,” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_problems_in_physics. Where I counted 121 separate subjected-areas of study that the human race cannot answer. There are loads more to discover and understand. As we make strides the answers and solutions tend to come in waves. We solve one problem it may shed light on others, opening up doors to all of the problems, all at once. Gradual improvements, adding new data, and solutions till the next discovery that opens the next door and the next. They can happen quickly or over long periods of time. Have no doubt though, there is a lot more to discover. When we put AI to these problems, this also may warrant some progress.

Our incomplete understanding of physics can be demonstrated in the 2014 Christopher Nolan film "Interstellar." That data from inside a black hole’s singularity can provide clarity on mastering energy, mass, and gravity into one grand unifying theory of everything. This premise touches upon several themes related to our lack of proper understanding of physics and the quest for knowledge that transcends current scientific boundaries. Black holes represent all the answers to all the questions we ever had about the universe and will ever have. The most extreme environments in the universe, where the laws of physics as we currently understand them literally break down into nonsense. This is the only thing in existence that has these attributes. Within a black hole's singularity, gravitational forces become infinitely strong, and space-time itself undergoes dramatic distortions warping the fabric of space-time onto itself. It is so heavy and the gravity is so strong it collapses onto itself where it pulls everything within its reach, into itself. The belief that accessing data from within a black hole could provide clarity on mastering energy, mass, and gravity stems from the notion that these extreme conditions may hold the key to unlocking new insights into fundamental physical phenomena of the universe. Humans seek this information in the quest for a unified theory of physics that reconciles quantum mechanics and general relativity. Current theories offer powerful explanations for phenomena at different scales, but they are not yet fully compatible or integrated into one another. The belief that data from within a black hole singularity could shed light on this unification reflects the desire to understand the underlying principles that govern the structure of the universe itself and at its most fundamental level.

Despite the progress made in the field of physics and technology, there are still many crazy things that elude explanation within the framework of quantum mechanics and general relativity. Dark matter, dark energy, and the nature of consciousness are just a few examples of mysteries that challenge our understanding of the universe on a daily basis. The belief that accessing data from within a black hole could save the human race stems from a recognition of the limitations of our current understanding of physics and a hope that new discoveries could provide solutions to pressing existential threats. It's important to note that "Interstellar" is a work of speculative fiction, and the concept of obtaining data from within a black hole singularity is a narrative device called a “macguffin,” main thing that is used to drive the plot and characters forward. While the film's premise is based on scientific principles, it takes liberties with current knowledge and concludes into the realm of speculative conjecture. Still, the film's exploration of these ideas sparks curiosity and imagination, prompting contemplation of these mysteries of the cosmos, the limits of human understanding and the imagination.

4) If the soul is quantifiable then how can it be described in binary?

The concept of translating the soul into binary code, a language of ones and zeros used in computers, is a thought-provoking idea that connects with many areas of study, like the brain, philosophy, and technology. While it opens up exciting possibilities for understanding consciousness, it also raises deep questions about who we are and the limits of our existence. Imagine if we could represent the soul, the essence of our consciousness, with just ones and zeros, like how computers store information. It suggests a way to simplify something complex into basic parts. But consciousness isn't like a simple computer program—it's a mix of thoughts, feelings, and experiences that can't easily be broken down into digital terms like binary code. Thinking about the soul in terms of binary also brings up big ethical questions. If we could copy someone's consciousness like we copy a computer file, what would that mean for our sense of self? Would we still be unique individuals, or just copies of each other? And should we even be messing with something as fundamental as our consciousness in that fashion? It is only now that we are gaining control over our genetics where we could, and probably will, alter our future evolutionary path. A few decades ago nature was in 100% control of future human iterations. Every couples of years now we gain more and more control over this process. It's not just about science and technology but also philosophy, ethics, and even our understanding of what it means to be human. If we ever figure out how to map the soul in binary, it would change everything we know about ourselves and our place in the world. But until then, it's a fascinating question that shows just how complex and mysterious the human mind really is. Just think of it though. Take your consciousness and put it into different bodies at will. Be an interesting dive.

5) Is it a clone of the body or the person itself? What if we make a bunch of Dwayne Johnson's (The Rock) but they only look, sound, identical and have individually different souls/minds?

Cloning brings up big questions about who we are and what makes us unique, especially when we think about whether we're cloning just the body or the individual- personality that also belongs to that original body. Imagine, making copies of Dwayne Johnson, also known as ‘The Rock.’ They might all look and sound exactly the same, but would they be the same person inside? Cloning technology can make genetically identical individuals, but it cannot copy everything that makes a person who they are. Things like memories, experiences, and personality are shaped by lots of different events, like how we're raised, where we grow up, and the people we interact with. So even if we made a bunch of Rock-clones and raised them all the same way, they'd probably end up being different people. Each clone would go through life in their own way, learning and growing based on their unique subjective experiences. This means they'd develop their own personalities and ways of thinking that are separate from each other. Even if they started out identical, they'd become individuals over time. When we talk about the soul, it adds another layer of complexity. Some people believe that there's something more to us than just our bodies and brains—that there's a soul or spirit that makes us who we are. Cloning might copy the body, but it can't copy whatever that ‘soul-stuff’ is. So, even if we could make a bunch of Dwayne Johnson clones, they wouldn't all be the same person. They'd each be their own individual with their own thoughts, feelings, and experiences. It's a reminder that even with all our technology, there's still a lot about being human that we don't fully understand. However, if we go back to mapping the entirety of one’s ‘soul’ into binary code? I mean, if we could actually do it and made it work. Now you could have a way to do it. Granted, we’d need one hell of a “macguffin.”

6) Can two identically copied consciousness’s coexist in the same space, time, and space/time simultaneously? Or would they cancel each other out if they came into direct physical contact with one another? From the science fiction film, “Timecop,” (1994), per the grandfather paradox.

The question of whether two identically copied consciousnesses could coexist in the same space, time, and space/time simultaneously delves into the realm of speculative science fiction and metaphysical philosophy. This concept raises profound questions about the nature of identity, the fabric of reality, and the potential consequences of encountering alternate versions of oneself by method of time travel. In popular science fiction scenarios like the grandfather paradox, time travel often serves as a narrative device to explore the complexities of causality and temporal dynamics. The paradox speculates a hypothetical scenario in which a time traveler goes back in time either accidently or purposefully to prevent their own grandfather from meeting their grandmother, thereby erasing their own existence. This scenario highlights the potential paradoxes and contradictions that arise when encountering alternate versions of oneself in the temporal continuum. In Peter Hyams 1994 film "Timecop," it is specifically stated that the same matter cannot occupy the same space at the same time. One cannot travel back in time and occupy the same exact space as their younger self. Coming into direct physical contact causes both pieces of matter, people, to annihilate themselves in a self-contained implosion of matter coming together and then vanishing from existence. In "Timecop," It's like trying to fit two puzzle pieces into the same spot—they just can't both be there at once. So, if someone from the future meets their younger self in the past, using this logic, and they touch each other or come into direct physical contact, it causes a kind of implosion. It's as if the matter from both versions of the person or object suddenly get squished together and then disappear in a few moments. Think of it like trying to shove two magnets with the same poles together—they repel each other so strongly that they can't stay in the same place. It's a unique way for the movie to show the consequences of creating a time paradox. The rule, ‘macguffin,’ that says two identical things cannot occupy the same space at the same time. Similarly, the idea of two identically copied consciousnesses coexisting in the same space/time raises intriguing philosophical dilemmas. Is the human soul, a piece of quantifiable data? Does the soul have mass? If so it would "have to obey the laws of physics” in the form of the conservation of mass and energy. Everything in the universe has to obey these laws. The only exception to the rule as of now is black holes. Do we even have ‘that great an understanding’ of all of physics? There are still many wonders that escape explanation within physics. The nature of consciousness is just one example of the mysteries that challenge our understanding of the universe. If the soul is quantifiable then how can it be described in binary, digital, terms or binary-code? Is it a clone of the body or the person itself? If consciousness is viewed as a fundamental aspect of individual identity, then encountering an identical copy of oneself could challenge one's sense of self, agency, God, creation and existence itself. Would the presence of another identical consciousness diminish or negate one's own sense of identity, leading to a cancellation of consciousnesses? Or would the two consciousnesses coexist harmoniously, each maintaining its unique perspective from the divergent point of view and agency within the shared reality? One possible interpretation is that the encounter between two identical consciousnesses could lead to a merging or integration of experiences and perspectives, resulting in a richer and more nuanced understanding of selfhood and existence. Alternatively, the encounter could give rise to existential conflicts and existential crises, as individuals grapple with the implications of encountering alternate versions of themselves that have different thoughts, feelings, perspectives and experiences from the observer’s point of view.

7) Religious implications... Is cloning against the God of religion, all religions?

The religious implications of cloning are deeply subtle and vary significantly across different religious traditions. While some religious perspectives may view cloning as inherently incompatible or as a violation of the sanctity of life, playing GOD, others may adopt more refined positions that consider the ethical and moral dimensions of cloning within a broader theological basis. Improving the quality of life by curing diseases with cloning-type technologies. Whether cloning is against the God of all religions, it's essential to recognize the diversity of beliefs and interpretations within all the religious communities. While certain religious traditions may explicitly prohibit or condemn cloning based on theological principles, others may offer more delicate perspectives that take into account the complexities of modern science and technology. For example, within Christianity, interpretations of the Bible vary widely, leading to divergent views on cloning. Some Christian denominations may view cloning as opposing to the biblical concept of God as the ultimate creator of life, while others may emphasize human gatekeeping over creation and the responsible use of scientific knowledge for the betterment of all-mankind. Within Islam, there is a range of opinions on cloning, with some scholars arguing that it is permissible within certain ethical guidelines, while others may express concerns about the potential ethical implications of cloning human beings. Probably not the best option to go digging into Islam for anything permissible and/or ethical. Much of the world sees Islam as dangerous and radical, but not for the faith in a God but how they treat anything that does not believe in what they believe, which is fundamentally wrong to force any idea onto another person or group. In Judaism, views on cloning also vary, with some Jewish scholars drawing on traditional ethical principles such as the sanctity of life and the concept of "tikkun olam" (repairing the world) to inform their perspectives on cloning. In Hinduism and Buddhism, the concept of reincarnation and the interconnectedness of all life influence attitudes toward cloning, with some believers expressing concerns about the potential disruption of karmic cycles or the creation of beings without a predetermined destiny. The question of whether cloning is against the God of all religions isn’t a straightforward question to answer. It requires careful consideration of theological principles, ethical values, and scientific insights within the context of ‘each religious tradition.’ While some religious perspectives may oppose cloning, others may offer more focused and contextualized approaches that seek to balance theological concerns with considerations of human welfare, pursuit of knowledge, and improving the quality of life for all-mankind. It will always come down to; does one, some, many, all believe in the one-God creation myth and it is a myth.

8) Sociology implications... What is the purpose of the clone? The intention?

Cloning brings up a lot of questions about how it is used and what it's meant for. Looking at why we clone things and what we want to do with them can tell us a lot about how cloning affects society as a whole. One big thing to think about is why we're cloning stuff in the first place. It's not just about making copies—it's about what we want those copies to do. Cloning could be used for all kinds of things, like treating diseases by making personalized medical treatments or helping people have babies when they can't do it on their own. When we use cloning for medical stuff, the goal is to make people healthier, happier and to live longer, healthier and happier. There is always going to be questions about who gets access to these treatments and whether everyone can benefit from them equally. On the other hand, when we use cloning for making babies, things get a bit more complicated. Some folks might want to clone themselves to keep their family line going or to have a child who's genetically related to them. Others might want to pick and choose specific traits for their baby, like picking out clothes from a catalog. Drawn to the prospect of creating "designer offspring" with desired traits. This will bring up big ethical questions about whether we're treating people like products and whether everyone should have the same chance to have kids the way they want. Cloning also raises concerns about identity and how clones fit into society. If someone is cloned for a specific purpose, like being a soldier or a worker, do they have the same rights as everyone else? And what happens if they rebel against their creators? Understanding the motivations and/or perversions behind each of these purposes is essential for assessing their societal implications. What about abuse of this technology? Build a Clone Army like in “Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones” (2002). The Arnold Schwarzenegger led 2000 film "The 6th Day," a man discovers he's been illegally cloned and must fight to reclaim his identity in a world where cloning is a dangerous reality. "The Island" (2005) - Directed by Michael Bay, follows a group of clones who discover the truth about their existence and rebel against their creators. "Splice" (2009) - Tells the story of two scientists who create a human-animal hybrid, leading to disturbing consequences. "Moon" (2009) - Follows a man working alone on a lunar mining base who discovers a shocking truth about his identity and purpose.

It's not just about making copies—it's about what those copies mean for all of us. 9) Cloning just parts for medical purposes?

Imagine if science could grow new body parts, like fingers or hands, from your own cells to replace ones you've lost in an accident. It sounds like something out of a sci-fi movie, but it's a real possibility with cloning technology. This kind of medical cloning, called ‘regenerative medicine,’ has the potential to revolutionize healthcare, but it also brings up some big ethical questions. One of the main concerns is consent—making sure people have a say in what happens to their own genetic material. Even though growing replacement body parts could be a game-changer for people who need them, it's important to respect their right to choose whether or not to use this technology. You do not want your genetic material out there like some of your all’s personal data or signing it away to said company for them to allow you access like phone apps. They grow you a new leg and in-turn get to keep your genetic makeup for their own uses. I would think most would want control over those sorts of aspects. One can wonder though turning human tissue into a commodity. As cloning gets more advanced, there's a risk that body parts could be bought and sold like products on Amazon. To avoid this, we need strong, but very clear language, rules, and guidelines to make sure cloning is used responsibly and ethically in medicine and not for nefarious intentions. What must be understood are the complex context of cloning... Cloning for medical purposes and using it to make babies are not one in the same or even the same thing at all. The only thing they have in common is they use cloning technology to come their intentional outcome. Medical cloning here in this sub-point is all about making replacement tissues or organs to help people get better, while reproductive cloning is about making whole new organisms. Keeping these two things separate, we can focus on the medical benefits of cloning without getting caught up in ethical debates about creating life. There's still a lot we do not know about cloning, especially when it comes to just making parts instead of whole bodies. As previously stated we might not even be able to do this without the whole body. We have to be careful not to accidentally create conscious beings without realizing it. It's a tricky balance between using cloning to help people and making sure we're not doing anything unethical in the process. And therein lies the problem… By what specific criteria do humans judge a thing, anything, ethical and/or unethical? By what actual standard?

10) We can clone the body but, not the mind/spirit. Instead, science uses a way to create an image of a person's personality using their entire INTERNET history. See example “Caprica,” (2009) “Battlestar Galatica Re-imagined” (2004-2009) prequel series about how AI/Cylon is created in that fictionalized-Universe.

The concept of replicating a person's mind or personality using their internet history raises intriguing questions about the intersection of technology, ethics, and identity. While advancements in artificial intelligence and data analysis techniques have made it possible to analyze vast amounts of digital information, the idea of creating an accurate replica of a person's consciousness remains speculative and troubled in complexities. The ability to generate an image/copy of a person's personality based on their internet history opens up possibilities for understanding human behavior and understanding in unprecedented ways. By analyzing patterns in online activity, such as social media interactions, search queries, time eyes are tracked on specific things on your screen(s), comments you leave, notes you take and digitally save and browsing habits, researchers may gain insights into the details of individual personalities and decision-making processes. This could have applications in fields such as marketing, psychology, and personalized healthcare. However, privacy concerns loom large, as the collection and analysis of personal data from online sources raise questions about consent, autonomy, and the potential for surveillance and manipulation. The unauthorized use of individuals' digital footprints to create virtual replicas of their personalities without their explicit consent could violate their rights to privacy and self-determination. On the other side of this how accurate could this possibly be? There's the question of how well computers can really understand human stuff. Sure, they're good at crunching numbers and spotting patterns, but they're not so great at understanding emotions or social situations. So, even if they analyze all your internet history, they might miss out on the real you—the one with all the messy feelings and thoughts that don't always show up online. Or do they? Not everything you do online reflects who you are in real life. People don't always act the same way online as they do in person. Many don’t actually. So, even if they collect all this data about you, it might not paint an accurate picture. Not everyone or even most are verbatim who they are in real life using their computer. Much is lost in translation. An example would be do you post everything that comes into your mind as far judgements go on all your social media platforms? No of course not, most do not, while some actually do though. We see you Karen… What I am saying here is if one often thinks in those terms and then does not replicate that same logic, attitude, and behavior in the way they use a computer, smartphone or the internet. How accurate would that image be when compared to the real you? Much is lost in translation. AI would have to fill in the gaps with its own interpretation of that same logic. In order for a copy of something to be perfect it has to be perfectly copied. While artificial intelligence algorithms may excel at identifying patterns in data, they may struggle to capture the degrees of human consciousness and subjective experience. In most science fiction AI tends to struggle with understanding, conceptually, what the ‘human element’ actually is and how it functions. Factors such as context, emotion, and social dynamics are difficult to quantify and replicate accurately, raising doubts about the reliability of personality replicas generated from computer data and internet history alone. If we went by my own internet history I would appear to be a sci-fi nerd obsessed with cloning humans haha… While it's fascinating to think about recreating personalities from internet data, there's still a lot we don't know. It's like trying to copy a painting without knowing all the colors—it might look similar, but it won't be quite right. It would be something familiar but likely a hyper-radical of a portion of that person’s personality but not their personality verbatim.

Ok, see what I mean? I do not think I can just say “CLONING” in a simple way and it just be understood. In my defense, cloning isn't exactly a simple concept... It isn’t a MEME or TIKTOK—it's a complex subject that touches on various fields.

Science helps us understand the natural world, including our bodies and minds. It guides us in thinking about how cloning could work and what it might mean. Technology is key in making cloning happen. We must think about the ethics of using it to create and manipulate life. Robotics we are getting pretty good at in recent years. Making robots that act more-like humans. So, how close are we to making biological copies, too? Biomechanical looks at how living things interact with machines. It helps us think about creating biological beings that are part-human, part-machine. Medicine is all about health and healing, but when it comes to cloning, we have to consider the ethics of tinkering with our bodies. Sociology is about how we live together in society. So, we need to think about how cloning might change our social norms and values. Different religions have their own views on the soul and what makes us human. So, we have to think about how cloning fits into these beliefs as well. Spirituality explores beliefs about the soul and what lies beyond the physical world. It's important to consider how cloning might challenge and/or open up these beliefs. Philosophy dives into big questions about life, consciousness, and who we are. It helps us think about things like the soul, whether cloning is ethical, and what it means for our identity. The psychology of it digs into how our minds work. The psychological impact of cloning on people. Physics tells us about the rules that govern the universe. Understanding these helps us see how cloning fits into the bigger picture. While metaphysics looks at reality beyond what we can touch and see. It ponders how our souls fit into the physical world and then later into the spiritual one. Computers use binary code (ones and zeros) to do stuff. Can we really quantify and copy something as complex as human consciousness with it? Conservation of mass and energy are basic rules of the universe. Understanding how they apply to the soul and cloning helps us think about what's fathomable. Quantum mechanics explores the weird reality of tiny particles. Could quantum stuff affect consciousness and cloning? A complete understanding of gravity would be a big deal in how we understand how the universe works. The theory of everything, that grand theory that explains everything in the UNIVERSE. How might this tie into cloning and our understanding of the soul? What we are missing in physics is we do not know everything about how the universe works. So, there are still gaps in our understanding of consciousness, how cloning might affect it and basically most other subjects connected to it, which is EVERYTHING...

Cloning isn't just about making copies—it's a journey through science, ethics, philosophy, religion, and what it means to be a ‘THING,’ existing, at all. Being human…

Kuron sakusei ni tsuite wa dodesu ka? Japanese (What About Cloning?) by David-Angelo Mineo 4/13/2024 6,233 Words

7 notes · View notes

u5an5 · 1 year

Text

If what I’m going to say sounds familiar, it's probably because it's heavily inspired by this post and comments under, but

Guys. We really have to start to put more weight to names of things. Specifically USDTP.

United States Department of Temporal Phenomena. Temporal means ”relating to time” (it is also said to be “relating to worldly as opposed to spiritual affairs; secular.”, but not the topic rn). It implies that there's enough time fuckery happening to have it's own Department in the US government.

And you may say "It doesn't make sense, there's not any-" And I say

Wrong!!!

We actually get to see it a lot, with the most prominent example being Adam's age. (Ofc it's him, lately everything is abt him. Mandela #1 Special Boy himself)

Like, he’s said to be kidnapped as an infant. And it supposedly happened in 1992 (which is also coincidentally the year of divorce his parents took. Also, Mark killed himself this year. Exactly 17 days after their divorce to be precise).

But he's said to be born in 1988, which makes him 4 at the date of kidnapping (infancy is the first month after birth, but child can be called an infant up to second year). But in 2007 he's said to be still learning at high school (being 19), when Sarah, that's stated to be born a year after him, already graduated at the time.

Also Sarah.

Sarah whose birth date is said to be 1987. When in Exhibition we see a photo of her taken in 1982 (and she already looked at least a few years old). And BPS interviews from the MPD page happen somewhere in 2004. Which means it had to exist before that.

But how could it be created then if Sarah and Adam never met before 2007?

(In the interview with Wendigoon, Alex said that page “won’t have any more significance than what it already shown”, which I’m going to interpret as “anything that was on this page is canon, but there won’t be any new stuff related to it”. Plus he mentioned that ppl didn’t catch on all the stuff that was here, so).

And interviews (Interrogation?) with BPS members being here imply that they’ve been already caught (at least once if they somehow managed to escape/were released for some reason). In her interview on this page she said that Mark would be 30 this day (his exact date of birth is supposed to be July 24, 1974). Evelin’s interview from that page appears in Adams “In memorial” video for Jonah, which would suggest that an alternate that tampers with this video got it from this page.

A page that stopped being supported in January 2004.

(There is an annotation saying that “page not being supported since 2004” is false, but not about page being here since before 2004)

And the most obvious one and the one that most people seem to just ignore for some reason, even when they see it.

Supposedly, Vol.2 takes place during Winter Break of 2009. This year it falls between December 24th, 2009 and January 4th, 2010 (”How do you know it?”, you may ask. And I’ll answer you “From here*”). But in Vol.4, in a video made by Adam, Jonah’s date of death is stated to be January 13th, 2009 (and considering that Sarah didn’t say anything about that, we can assume that they both were convinced that it happened on this day of this month).

But literally moments later, in the same video, we see that user “XXxNOAHxXx” on December 13th of unknown year invited Adam to play Left 4 Dead 2 with them.

A game that came out in November 2009.

I refuse to believe it’s all just a coincidence.

37 notes · View notes

officialyourdailyinspiration · 12 days

Text

Devotional Hours Within the Bible by J.R. Miller

Elijah on Mount Carmel (1 Kings 18)

Elijah challenged Ahab to a test of Baal’s power. He demanded that the question should be settled, whether the Lord or Baal was the true God. Baal’s prophets were summoned, therefore, to meet with Elijah on Mount Carmel. On one side stood Elijah, alone, as the prophet of Jehovah; and on the other side the four hundred and fifty priests of Baal. All day, from morning until evening, Baal’s priests had been about their altar, crying, dancing, and gashing their flesh, after the custom of their heathen worship. But Baal had not answered, and, with mortification in their hearts and curses on their lips they turned away in defeat. It is now Elijah’s turn. Will Jehovah answer by fire and thus prove Himself the true God?

Elijah called the people to come near to him, that they might see all that he did, for there were no secrets in the worship of the true God. Then he repaired the altar of Jehovah, which had been broken down. Once the fires had burned on this altar but it had been neglected, the people having turned away to worship calves of gold, instead of the true and living God.

While this picture of the ruined altar is before us we may think of other altars that are broken down. There are homes where once the voice of prayer was daily heard, where the family bowed in worship. But now no longer does the morning and evening prayer ascend. There are those who at their mother’s knees were taught to kneel, and who through infancy and youth continued to pray but who no longer bow before God. All about us, everywhere, are these broken - down altars. The first thing the prophet did at Carmel that day was to rebuild God’s altar which was in ruins. The first step toward blessing in prayerless homes and lives is to build again the old altar of God.

Elijah then made preparation for the great test. He prepared the altar, put the wood in order, cut the bull in pieces, and laid it on the wood. That was all he could do; the fire must come down from God. Common fire would not do it must be fire from heaven. It is the same in our sacrifices. “Present your bodies a living sacrifice” to God, is our part. God will never lift us up on His altar we must lay ourselves there willingly. We present our bodies a living sacrifice when we yield our will and surrender ourselves to God with love and praise, ready for obedience and service.

We cannot change our own heart Elijah did not bring fire from some furnace or smoking hearth to kindle the wood on his altar; he prepared the sacrifice and then waited for God to give the fire. When all the preparations were made, Elijah prayed for God to send the fire. We get nothing spiritual from heaven, without prayer. Prayerlessness receives no blessings. A day without prayer is a day unblessed, unsheltered, and open to all disaster. If we are seeking blessing and are ready to yield our wills and affections to Christ we have but to cry to God, and He will send down the divine fire to consume the sacrifice which we have laid upon His altar. But we must always pray. “Ask and you shall receive.” Mere waiting is not enough there must be supplication as well as consecration .

The form of Elijah’s prayer must be noticed. “Let it be known this day that You are God in Israel.” The prophet was not seeking his own glory but God’s. He was not trying to work a miracle to show his power but to show the people that Jehovah was the true and the only God. We should never think of honoring ourselves in doing God’s work our aim always should be to honor God. After anything we have done for God, we should not exult in our own exaltation but should thank God and honor Him.

A king, when his army had won a great victory, bared his head in the presence of his soldiers and reverently repeated, “Not unto us, O Lord, not unto us but to Your name be the glory!” We should never concern ourselves about our share of the honor, about the reputation or the glory we are to get from any work we have done, any duty, any sacrifice we have made; we should seek that God’s name alone shall be honored, that it may be known that He is indeed God.

All day, the prophets of Baal had prayed in vain beside the altar but the moment Elijah began to pray “the fire of Jehovah fell, and consumed the burnt-offering.” A god that cannot answer prayer is not the God for needy, tempted, perishing, dying men. Baal had been proved no god. He was unable in that great crisis to give any answer. But the moment Elijah prayed, the fire fell.

The test of Mount Carmel is being repeated every day in thousands of places on the earth. Our God is the Hearer of prayer. Burdened hearts are crying to Him and He is answering their requests. Blessings are falling upon needy, suffering lives in response to earnest, faith-filled supplications. The fire of the Lord is always falling. It fell on the day of Pentecost on the praying disciples. It has fallen since on millions of heart - altars, consuming earthliness and sin, and leaving the glowing flames of love, devotion, and holy service.

The effect on the people was tremendous. When they saw it they “fell on their faces, and they said, Jehovah, He is God !” Jehovah had been forsaken and His worship abandoned. Jeroboam’s sin had thus ripened into its full, terrible fruitage. Baal was now accepted as the god of the nation. Jehovah’s prophets had been hunted to death. So utterly had idolatry driven out the true worship, destroying or sending to hiding places, the followers of the true God that Elijah thought he was the only one left in the whole land who was loyal to Jehovah. Then came this test. It was a magnificent occasion one man against king, prophets, priests, people; but one man with God is more than a match for all the world against God.

This test is going on still. Baal’s worshipers are yet prominent in the world, though known now by other names. What are the evidences of Christianity? What demonstration of power have we ever had which shows that Christianity is divine? We may point to the whole history of the Church, in answer to this question. Wherever the gospel has gone through the centuries, divine power has been with it. A little study of history and a little examination of the map of the world will show thousand of Carmels. Idolatry and false religions have done their best but nothing has come of their experiments no moral improvements, no lifting up of the people, no sweetening and purifying of homes, no building of hospitals and asylums, no restoring of lives, no saving of souls.

Then Christianity entered with its simple story of divine love, its fire from heaven, the power of the Holy Spirit; and wherever it has gone all has been changed. Men have turned from their sins unto God. Evil hearts have been made holy. Cruelty has given place to gentleness. Happy homes have been built up. Society has been transformed. As we see these wonderful results of Christian life the Carmel days over again we can say with joy and triumph, “ Jehovah, He is God !”

The victory was complete. The fire consumed the burnt offering, even the stones and the dust, and licked up the water that filled the trench. Baal’s prophets had been defeated and must die. They had been proved guilty of high treason, as representing idolatry. Events moved rapidly. Elijah announced to Ahab the coming of rain. The prophet then went to the top of Mount Carmel, and we see him next in the attitude of prayer praying for rain. Although God had promised the rain yet it was necessary that Elijah should pray for it. “Ask and you shall receive.”

Elijah’s prayer suggests to us also the importance of expectation. When we ask for things which God has promised, we should look for an answer. The prophet sent his servant to watch for the clouds. The picture is very beautiful. The answer did not come immediately but the prophet continued pleading with God. Again and again and again the servant went up and looked but there was nothing to be seen, no cloud in the sky. At last, a little cloud as small as a man’s hand appeared. The answer was coming. The prophet ceased to pray and set out on his journey to Jezreel.

12 notes · View notes

walks-the-ages · 3 months

Note

hello, may i ask what an endogenic person is? i'm sorry if i'm being rude!! <3

Someone who is endogenic is a Plural system that did not form from trauma, which can happen in a wide variety of ways, from natural neurodivergence to a whole host of other reasons including spiritual/cultural etc.

If you do not know what a system is, think "multiple personality disorder"-- which is an outdated, no longer used medical (?) term for specific forms of plurality.

Unfortunately just like a lot of groups, such as the queer community vs [targeted excluded group of the year] , Officially Diagnosed Autistics vs Self Diagnosed Autistics or people with invisible disabilities--

Endogenic systems are often targeted by Officially Diagnosed systems as somehow:

"faking for attention/to be special!", (you know, like how people claimed bisexual and asexual people were faking it to be included in the queer community?? "But don't worry, we *promise* this is completely different rhetoric to those bigots!"

"lying about not having a traumatic origin (aka, pretty much saying everyone has to expose deeply personal traumatic events to every single stranger online to be 'valid' , or need to unbury hidden traumatic memories to be 'valid')

"you need to have an official diagnosis to be part of this community!!" ( because everyone totalllyy has access to affordable healthcare. Uhuh. The healthcare system which is totally infallible! Also as others have pointed out, many endogenic systems form for spiritual/cultural reasons, and these are excluded from the diagnosis book)

"if being a system doesn't cause you unending distress and absolutely ruin your life, you're not actually a system and you're faking for attention!" (Aka, the old rhetoric from every in-group ever of 'if you're not suffering as much as I am/did, then you *deserve* to suffer like I did before you are considered "valid" in my eyes')

As someone who is aromantic, asexual, and autistic that was originally self-diagnosed autism before finding out I'd been officially diagnosed my entire life since infancy but had it hidden from me,

aka,

I've been the target of more than 3 Online Exlusionist Campaigns already, I know bullshit when I see it, and I'm not afraid to stand up for others and call it out.

#plurality #plural system #not actually plural #endogenic systems #endo positivity #ableism discussion

7 notes · View notes

antiquitiesandlabyrinths · 5 months

Text

Kemeticism Under the Advice of PtahHotep, the Great One, Vizier of the Pharaoh Isesi

I have mentioned a few times now the teachings of the PtahHotep, the divine father, who lived in the era of the Old Kingdom of Egypt. His teachings are of great influence to me and would be of great use and importance to any practicing Kemeticist who truly desires to know the spirituality of Kemet, of the Netjer, and of the ancient Egyptians. Thus I’ve decided to start a series of posts to share his teachings with those ready to listen, and to explain in greater detail what lessons we can glean from each piece of the great Vizier’s wisdom.

There are 37 maxims and 9 epilogues, but for this post, we will be starting with the prologue. The translation we will be using will generally be Christian Jacq’s, however we will also analyze the direct translation. Jacq’s translation is used to communicate Ptah-Hotep’s ideas in terms and vernacular more familiar to the English language and to modern times. However, a great deal of the time the two translations are quite similar.

Translation of Prologue:

Here is wisdom taught and set down by the noble one, the leader, the divine father, beloved of God, the one who listens in the six great domains, the one whose word forever brings peace to the whole country, the town’s highest official, the Vizier Ptah-Hotep, the great one, serving under His Majesty the King of Upper Egypt, whose symbol is the Sedge, and the King of Lower Egypt, whose symbol is the Bee, the Pharaoh Isesi. May the King live according to the eternity of cycles and the infinity of the instant.

Here is what the director of the town, the Vizier Ptah-Hotep says:

‘Sovereign, my master, old age is upon me, my great age has drained away, exhaustion and weakness have overcome me and I spend each day sleeping as if back in infancy. My eyesight is failing, my ears are growing deaf. There is no strength in my heart. My mouth is silent, it speaks no longer. Thoughts fade and memory fails. All my bones hurt constantly. What was good is now bad; taste has completely vanished. The effects of old age on humans are detestable in every way. My nose is blocked, it can no longer breathe. It is as painful to stand as to sit down.

‘May it be decreed that Ptah-Hotep, this your servant here present, fashion a stick for his old age in the form of a spiritual son. Let me pass on to him the words of those who know how to listen, the instructions of the ancestors, the guides, who, long ago, listened to the divine powers. May I, Ptah-Hotep, succeed in doing this for you. May conflicts be averted thanks to the spiritually aware and may the two banks of the river of life work in your favour.’

His Divine Majesty, the Pharaoh, said: ‘Ptah-Hotep, teach your disciple the word of the Tradition, and may it be a model for the children of the great ones. Once the perfect thought has been expressed, may they be suffused with understanding, for no one is born a sage.’

Here begin the maxims of the accomplished Word of the noble one, leader, divine father, beloved of God, eldest son of the Pharaoh, partaking of his essence, the town’s highest official, the Vizier Ptah-Hotep, teaching knowledge to the ignorant, and the law of the accomplished Word.

For those who listen there is benefit and enlightenment, but those who let it pass will be the losers.

Breakdown:

The first paragraph is an essential introduction of names and titles honoring both the sender/writer of this message, and the receiver, the Great Pharaoh Isesi. From the last line there is a revealing of an idea commonly related to eastern ideologies, and from then on we can find detailed lessons with close gazes.

Lesson

Jacq’s translation

Direct translation

There is a cycle to the earth and a cycle of life which is unbreakable. As well, within even an instant lay an infinity of understanding and perception.

“May the King live according to the eternity of cycles and the infinity of the instant.”

“May He (King Isesi) live according to the eternity of cycles and the eternity of the instant…”

Youth passes into old age; nothing lasts. Connection to our bodies is worth very little. The cycle of life and aging takes us all.

“My master, old age is upon me… exhaustion and weakness have overcome me and I spend each day sleeping as if back in infancy. My eyesight is failing, my ears are growing deaf… no strength in my heart… thoughts fade and memory fails… what was good is now bad.”

“Sovereign, my master, old age has come, a grand old age has struck, weariness has arrived, weakness occurs again. He* (Ptah-Hotep) spends each day as if he had returned to infancy. The eyes are diminished, the ears** constricted, for the one whose heart is tired feels his strength faltering, the mouth… no longer speaks, the heart… does not remember yesterday anymore. The bones are painful due to the length of existence, what is good becomes bad.”

The guidance of our ancestors is a path to our future. The translated term ‘ancestors’ in this context does not indicate that people have been left behind, but instead that they open our path to knowledge as they lay their lessons before us.

“Let me pass on to him the words of those who know how to listen, the instructions of the ancestors, the guides, who, long ago, listened to the divine powers.”

“… would that I could tell him (a spiritual son, i.e a student) the words of those who listen, the directives of those who are in front and who, in times gone by, listened to the divine powers.”

Being spiritually aware avoids conflicts

“May conflicts be averted thanks to the spiritually aware.”

“May the conflicts be rejected, according to those men and women who know***…”

The perfect thought can be expressed but it must be met with perfect understanding. Even with understanding, it must be comprehended fully and enacted within one’s own mind, emotions, and thought process. This is why it is called perfect understanding.

“Once the perfect thought has been expressed, may they be suffused with understanding…”

“May understanding penetrate him (a spiritual son), every correctness of the heart has been said to him…”

No one is born a sage; it something learned and mastered by those capable of opening their minds.

“… for no one is born a sage.”

“… (for) no one is a sage from birth.”

Listening will lead to comprehension, understanding, and enlightenment.

“For those who listen (to the accomplished word) there is benefit and enlightenment; those who let it pass will be the losers.”

“… teaching the ignorant towards knowledge and towards the law of the accomplished word; here is what is luminous**** for whoever listens, but vacuous for whoever bypasses it.”

* - Authors frequently change personal pronoun in Egyptian texts, from ‘he’ to ‘I’ and vice versa.

** - Ears can be translated even more literally to ‘living ones’, as listening is the basic spiritual principle behind Kemetic thought; life penetrates man through the ear. Listening is of utmost importance.

*** - Knowing is to understand and adhere to one’s teachings, and thus sources of conflict can be avoided.

**** - Luminous is translated from the word akhet, meaning useful, luminous, profitable, and enlightening.

So, despite being no more than an introduction, there is a lot to learn from these words, and it is important to dissect and understand what is said here by Ptah-Hotep as much as possible, as they are the only remnants of his wisdom.

When one practices Kemeticism, they have a duty to understand its’ culture and its’ way of thinking. Unlike Christianity, or any of the other Abrahamic religions, there is no greater figure to lead us anymore. No priest leads ceremonies so we may blindly follow, and they do not preach. Even in ancient Egypt there were few ceremonies practiced with common citizens. It is a duty and responsibility—as well as a sign of respect to the Gods—to understand and enact proper knowledge, speech, and most importantly, perfect listening. Kemeticism is most comparable to eastern religions, and in these practices, when one wants to learn the ways of their chosen religion, they choose a spiritual master. Someone to guide them towards enlightenment, the betterment of mind and soul, and the proper way to worship. In the case of Kemeticism the spiritual master is called a sage, and takes on a spiritual son (who is usually not blood related, but instead takes lessons from the sage as a son would from a father). With no surviving strains of the original Egyptian worship, we must look to what remains in texts, which is what makes Ptah-Hotep’s teachings so valuable, and thus why it is so important to study his maxims as intensely and thoroughly as possible. As you can see, even from an introduction one can glean a good deal of information.

Ptah-Hotep’s words are suffused with teachings and understanding of his world, of the eternally present Rule (which is the Rule of Ma’at). The perfectness of his words come from a lifetime of honing the art of perfect listening which, as mentioned before, is a cornerstone of Kemetic thought. The perfect word can be spoken but it is worth little without perfect listening, in turn leading to perfect understanding.

This practice takes time; as is stated clearly, no one is born a sage; no one is born enlightened. Using the guidance of our ancestors as a path to lead us forward is a great aid in this process of gaining understanding, however it is important to note that in this context, ancestors does not necessarily mean our direct predecessors. It more accurately defines the old masters, priests, and sages of the Kemetic faith. Although these people are gone, and the chain link connection of master and spiritual son has been terminated for over a thousand years, we are still connected to our ancestors through listening to the advice which remains, once more highlighting the importance of Ptah-Hotep’s text. By opening our ears—the Living Ones—we can open ourselves to the wisdom, understanding, and enlightenment which stands ever before us.

Enlightenment breaks us from a cycle of suffering. It allows us to live in accordance with Ma’at—a Rule of harmony, balance, and truth. Ma’at personified is a Goddess who symbolizes this Rule.

“The Rule of Ma’at is simultaneously the precision, the truth, the harmony and the coherence of the universe. From this flows civilizations and society’s equilibrium, provided there exists a pharaoh (leader, ruler) willing and able to apply Ma’at in every sphere, from the most abstract to the most concrete… in the absence of Ma’at reign disorder, injustice, violence, and the realm of darkness. Therefore, come what may, the sage must follow the path of Ma’at, let Ma’at be the inspiration of his words and deeds.” (The Wisdom of Ptah-Hotep, Christian Jacq, p. xv)

By listening well to Ptah-Hotep’s words we can better understand the Rule, and thus comprehend the natural flow of the universe. As we move forward in reading the lessons and maxims of Ptah-Hotep, this Rule is better explained as more than just cohesion of the universe. Its’ effect is overarching on all things great and small, and it cannot be changed by any human endeavors. Indeed our choice is only to flow with the universe or attempt in vain to fight against Ma’at, which only leads to suffering, for only what the Gods ordain comes to pass. Ma’at lives on past us, and despite all the vanity of humans, has not been disturbed since the beginning. Understanding this essence of Kemetic thought is paramount to understanding the universe of the Netjer, and to achieving peace and oneness with the universe and the Gods.

In my next post we will discuss the first maxim and break it down in the same way we have done with the prologue in this post.

For those who listen there is benefit and enlightenment, but those who let it pass will be the losers.

#ptahhotep #ancient egypt #kemetic #kemeticism #egyptian mythology #egyptian hieroglyphs #egyptology #wisdom text

15 notes · View notes