#i'm not a bad person just because christianity has labeled my actions as sins because i don't operate by that moral code | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

kira-ani-mcgrath · 3 years

Note

I've little interest in Frozen stuff but I've seen bits and pieces of this Hans stuff you've mentioned on and off and I'm curious about something. When you say someone is acting un-Christlike by saying a character is irredeemable, what is it you exactly mean? Because sometimes yea, it can be narratively unsatisfying to randomly redeem a character in a story. Example: People debating if it would be narratively satisfying if Azula got redeemed. It's got nothing to do with worldview imo.

For context, this ask comes in the wake of this post.

I’m posting this reply publicly so I can refer back to it if needed in the future. I received a similar ask [hopefully that link works] on the heels of this post, which I answered privately without saving a copy of my response, and it would have been useful if I’d saved and/or posted it. Thus, here we are.

I want to make something 100% unquestionably clear to anyone who follows me or reads my posts: whenever I criticize someone labeling Hans “unredeemable”/“irredeemable” it is ALWAYS in the context of someone declaring him un/irredeemable because of what he has done.

It is NEVER people saying they don’t think Disney should redeem him because they’re worried WDAS will do a terrible job of it. It is NEVER people saying they don’t want him redeemed in an unsatisfying manner (i.e.: “BTW he’s good now, he changed off-screen and now he’s back like nothing bad happened.”). It is NEVER people saying that his redemption may not fit well into a particular scenario. It confuses me that people are interpreting my words this way, because if I were to express concern about the way a character’s actual or potential redemption were handled, I would never do it by labeling the character irredeemable or saying the character shouldn’t be redeemed at all, full stop. I would include the nuances I am referring to, such as “The character shouldn’t be redeemed off-screen,” or “The character shouldn’t be redeemed in this movie.” Therefore, if I am saying people shouldn’t call a character irredeemable, I’m not referring to specific cases such as “The character shouldn’t be redeemed by this creative team,” or, “The character shouldn’t be redeemed in this manner.” I am referring to a much larger picture.

I am criticizing people who say Hans is evil, malicious, unfeeling, manipulative, abusive, a villain, a sociopath, and/or a murder, and therefore he can never and should never be redeemed. I am criticizing people who don’t want Hans redeemed because they have a personal grudge against the character. I am criticizing people who think that once a character crosses a particular line (and apparently this line is unique for Hans, based on what he actually did compared to every other “bad guy” in fictional history), the character is now 100% bad and can never be good in any way ever again.

A Christian should never think this way. There is no unforgivable sin (besides attributing works of the Holy Spirit to Satan, as some of the Pharisees did). We are to love our enemies and desire what is best for them - to be saved, redeemed - and yet I see people with the word “Christian” in their bio bragging about how much they hate Hans because he was so terrible to Anna and Elsa, rejoicing that Hans remains unredeemed in canon, cheering when Anna punches Hans in Frozen, laughing when the Frozen Fever snowball crashes into him, agreeing with Elsa calling him an “unredeemable monster” and approving of her destroying his snow-figure in Frozen II. I see those who say they belong to Christ - the Savior who took on every sin imaginable - saying that Hans is simply too mean, too horrible, too evil to be redeemed. I hope this is obvious, but there should be no such thing as “too [x] for redemption” to the Christian. There is never anyone, real or fictional, beyond salvation and redemption. [The only exception I could think of would be a fictional world where the rules are the antithesis to Christianity - then you could say a character is irredeemable because the very nature of that universe doesn’t allow for the character’s redemption. But that certainly doesn’t apply to Frozen.]

Now to address the Azula example brought up at the end. I’m not an A:TLA fan, but I did watch the entire show and I see the occasional meta cross my dash now and then. I’m not familiar with any debates as you have referenced, so I’m just going to give my own examples to hopefully add some extra clarity to my position.

First, I fail to see how a well-done redemption arc could ever be “narratively unsatisfying,” particularly for the Christian. If it’s well-written and you see the steps the character takes, their failings and their successes, I would think that'd be quite a satisfying story. So what is the actual issue when debating characters’ redemptions? I believe it’s concerns of quality, characterization, and actions.

Given where we see Azula at the end of her fight with Zuko in the finale, it would certainly be unsatisfying if she was chilling in Iroh’s tea shop with everyone in the final moments of the series. Likewise, I would not want to see a Hans redemption where we are re-introduced to Hans and he’s completely apologetic and ready to right any wrongs. In fact, I am put-off by fanfics that start with Hans having already repented, changed, etc., from his canon actions and self. I want to see the process of change, so that it is satisfying when he finally makes the right decision.

Given the existing three seasons of A:TLA, people are free to debate on whether or not room could have been made for an Azula redemption arc. Given the current Frozen material, people are free to debate on whether or not room could have been made for a Hans redemption arc.

Had there been further canon A:TLA material, and there was an Azula redemption arc done as well as Zuko’s (such as described in this Twitter thread), I would have found that very narratively satisfying. Now, others may not like how that theoretical redemption was handled, plotted, etc. That’s perfectly fine. Likewise, people may have certain ways they don’t want a theoretical Hans redemption handled, plotted, etc. Again, perfectly fine. One can disagree on the way a redemption arc was/might be handled without dismissing the redemption altogether.

People may want Azula to remain unredeemed because they believe she would choose to be so. That’s fine (though others are allowed to disagree). For example, if she were to maintain that she did nothing wrong and reject any help Zuko and Iroh offered, then she would remain unredeemed. Alternatively, she could realize that what she did was wrong, but then go the opposite direction and believe she doesn’t deserve anything good, so she would reject love and help at every turn for the rest of her life, and thus remain unredeemed. However, I have never seen anyone call a character “irredeemable” and mean that they believe the character would actively choose to reject offers of redemption.

People may say Azula or Hans shouldn’t be redeemed because it would be out-of-character. From an unbeliever’s perspective, that may be correct, as they think certain traits as immutable. However, that’s wrong from a Christian perspective, as anyone can change if enabled by the grace of God. In fictional worlds that don’t have any Christianity, you simply use an imperfect archetype to play a pivotal role in the character’s transformation (i.e., Uncle Iroh to Zuko).

People may not be against an Azula or Hans redemption in and of itself, but think it makes the most narrative sense to leave the characters unredeemed - whether it be because there wasn’t enough time in canon, or there’s other characters to focus on, or some other behind-the-fourth-wall reason. That doesn’t make the characters irredeemable, it just means that’s the way the story currently stands. There’s no reason that story can’t change in the future.

However, if people are saying Azula shouldn’t be redeemed at all because what she did was too wrong, then that is un-Christ-like. Likewise, saying Hans is irredeemable because what he did was too wrong is indisputably un-Christ-like. Now, of course, I can’t expect unbelievers to act Christ-like, so it doesn’t surprise me when I see them express such sentiments. However, when a Christian argues against redemption on these grounds, I absolutely question why. You claim to stand on the Word of God, but declare there are actions too heinous to be forgiven and characters that don’t deserve redemption? God rebuked a man for his desire to see people punished instead of forgiven [Jonah], forgave adultery and murder [David], and transformed a man from persecuting to teaching the Church [Saul/Paul]. Yet you put your stamp of approval on a lack of redemption for a character because of the actions of that character? Further sanctification is needed, whether in love for the lost or in fully surrendering all to Christ. A lack of redemption should only serve as a warning of what happens to those who reject truth, love, and forgiveness - because, as we know, not everyone will be saved. A Christian should never be against redemption because they personally hate the character, or think the character is unforgivable, or believe the character doesn’t “deserve” it, or any other reason antithetical to who Christ is and what He has done.

#Hans #redemption #forgiveness #Christian #KAM's thoughts #ask

18 notes · View notes

just-graysexual · 6 years

Note

So... *sigh* ...I know I'm gonna open a whole can of worms by asking this question. If you want to ignore it or say I'd rather not have this on my blog, you are more than welcome not to answer but... if you could point me in the right direction, I'd he forever grateful. I'm gray-ace. Exactly WHERE I'm still figuring it out, but I kinda like the label because it just sort of... takes the bits and pieces from all the identities that I fit into and mushes them into one big label. And I love (1/?)

(2/?) that about it. I honestly think that it’ll stay around for a while yet at least. Problem? Well… I’m a Christian. Which… doesn’t bring up any IMMEDIATE concerns. I mean, Priests are celibate, and nuns are celibate and so like… everything should be a-okay, right? *sigh* My romantic orientation is still in the works. I’m a very… “go where the wind takes me” type of person when it comes to love and… well… commitment is hard. Because I want to do it right, you know? So… as far

(3/?) as I know, I’m pan romantic. I could be biromantic. Or simply heteroromantic. I really don’t know. And… A lot of this… “compromise” (but I don’t really see it as a compromise???) in my beliefs is that… the whole BASIS of Christianity is founded upon Compassion, and love, and forgiveness. Yeah, you should love God but like… I don’t claim to know EVERYTHING about God. I don’t know why he made some people Transgender and others gay and some people asexual. In way, its like asking why

(4/?) God made someone black. Or have red hair. Or green eyes. Or have 3 freckles on their left cheek. I don’t know! He just… He wanted them that way. For a reason. And you’d have to be CRAZY to try and put words in God’s mouth. I mean, this is the same being that (at least I believe) created the stars in the sky. Why would I claim to know how He thinks? And here’s the craziest thing right: the LGBT+ sometimes seems a better practitioner of Christian values than a lot of Christians. The Ace

(5/?) Community has been so loving, and compassionate!! Like, it’s crazy!! And I mean, I just left heated from my church this past Sunday for DARING say that no sinner is worthy of love. Like… you entirely miss the point of love if you try and say that you are either worthy of it or not. Love is a GIFT. You give it to someone because… you care. They aren’t “worthy” or “unworthy.” “Deserving” or “undeserving.” It’s whether or not you decide to give it and that’s what makes love beautiful.

(6/?) Besides. That’s INSANE to say that a HUMAN BEING. Whether they be a child, or a broken adult, or some other lost soul in search of SOME form of companionship or forgiveness, doesn’t DESERVE LOVE. Like, we’re all human being. We all fuck up. But come ON NOW. That’s just CRAZY. And like… I don’t expect God (in whatever form you want to believe him in) ever thought we were going to get it 100% right. I mean, otherwise, why wouldn’t he just come down and rule the world himself? Fixes all

(7/?) all the bickering, right? And that’s where faith comes in. “We walk by faith, not by sight,” or whatever? But recently, I’ve basically been… well… barraged, to say the least, with both the LGBT+ and fellow Christians saying that I have to be one or the other. I have to be Gay or Christian. Otherwise, I compromise my beliefs. But I don’t see it that way? And like… being on the aspec yourself, I’m sure you understand how difficult it is to be torn between the Ace Community and the

Hey Anon,

These were the only messages I received. It looks like tumblr might have eaten anything else that you sent me and I am sorry for that. I hope you are feeling better though. Feel free to come and rant or vent anytime you need to. It looks like you really wanted to get this out there. And I’m glad you found a place to do it. Sometimes we are not always free to express our frustrations, so I am here if you ever need to.

You can be LGBTQ+ and religious! You can be Ace and religious! You don’t have to chose between one or the other. There is nothing wrong with being yourself and following your beliefs! There are many religious people who are LGBTQ+ and Ace; you are not alone. Many of us can relate to where you are coming from. I hate all this hostility between religious people and the LGBTQ+; not to mention the immense toxicity it has on religious LGBTQ+ members. It’s not easy being religious and LGBTQ+, but it is possible.

I completely underhand what you are growing through. I am Christian myself (Roman Catholic to be exact) and growing up non-heterosexual is extremely hard. To hear how my fellow “Christians” talked about people who were gay, especially my family members scarred me deeply. Ever since I was a little kid I knew that I was not heterosexual. I just knew, but there was not a lot of resources for me to look into and I didn’t know of any other orientations besides heterosexual and homosexual. And I was taught homosexual was wrong.

As time went on, I would literally drop on my hands in knees in prayer crying, tears pouring down my cheeks, to make me heterosexual. I begged and pleaded with God to help me and save me. I didn’t want to be bad. I didn’t want to be non-heterosexual. I didn’t want my own family members to hate me because I was non-heterosexual. I didn’t want God to hate me and send me to Hell for being non-heterosexual. I was scared, lost, and hurt. I never got an answer. So, I grew to hate God and religion. I turned my back God and despised religion and Christians who do nothing but preach love, but spread hate.

Separating myself from God and religion actually helped me in discovering myself. I immersed myself with the LGBTQ+ community. I tried various different labels and researched as much as I could, until I found asexuality and the ace spectrum. Since then, God has called me back. I am reworking on my faith and relationship with God. I have heard God’s voice…and y’know what he told me? “I am always with you.” I never felt anything so powerful and so loving in my life. I felt every single positive emotion that a person could feel. And I learned something. God loves me. Growing up I though God abounded me. I though God hated me. I learned, that that’s what other people told me He felt. But through God I learned that he loves me. And I think there is a reason I am not heterosexual, especially in such a religious family. I think me being graysexual definitely made my parents (mostly my Father) question themselves. My Father still has a lot of work to do, but my Mom is doing so great with accepting people and supporting me.

Reevaluating my faith and relearning my religion has made me more comfortable in my graysexuality, actually. Remember, God created you in his own image…and saw that it was good (Genesis). Remember what God told Moses? “Who gave man his mouth? Or makes him mute or deaf, sighted or blind? Is it not I?!” (Exodus). God knows you, “Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you. (Jeremiah). He knows who you are. He has plans for you. He wants you to be the person He is calling you to be: yourself.

And don’t forget Jesus. Remember all that Jesus taught us: LOVE. Jesus gives us the greatest commandments: Love your neighbor like yourself (Matthew). Love one another as I have loved you (John). And don’t forget this one, “Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love” (John). So, you are right. We are called to love and support one another. That’s what a good Christian is supposed to do. Be that example!

You are do nothing wrong by following your faith and being Ace. I don’t understand where your parish is coming from with the not loving sinners part. That doesn’t make sense to me. Because, we are all sinners! Again, remember what Jesus said, “let he who is without sin cast the first stone” (John). We are all sinners. Everyone of us. Sin does not recognize color, race, political party, or orientations. Sin is your actions, your thoughts, your words. You sin by doing, not by being.

It sounds like you need a little break from religion for awhile. Or at least to separate your orientation from your faith. It’s okay to take a break from your religion. Give yourself some time to work through what you are going through one-by-one. Work on your orientations, sexual and romantic. And find your way back to faith once you are more comfortable with yourself and who you are. Maybe you will learn to see things through different eyes. God will not abandon you and God will not stop loving you. Remember, the prodigal son parable (Luke). God will be waiting for you with open arms.

Don’t let what other people say get to you. You are right. Love and love one another. God made you from His own image, don’t create God into your own image. A lot of people do that nowadays. No one can say what God believes or thinks. No one can claim what God feels about you. No one can say what God has chose to do. Everyone deserves love and we are all sinners.

Keep doing your best. Be the example. Show the world it’s okay to be who you are and it’s okay to be religious. Many people, on both sides, don’t like the fact that I am religious and queer. It’s like a tug-o-war. Don’t let others force you to choose. You can be both. It’s not easy, but it’s possible. You are not alone. There are quite a few Queer Christian Communites:

https://www.qchristian.org

http://scmcanada.org/queer-resources/

https://www.believeoutloud.com/background/christianity-and-lgbt-equality

http://queergrace.com/communities/

And a few tumblr blogs:

https://acecatholic.tumblr.com

http://christianandqueer.tumblr.com

http://asexualchristian.tumblr.com

https://lgbt-christian-safe-haven.tumblr.com

You hang in there, Anon. It’s not easy being LGBTQ+ and religious, but it’s okay that you are. Both sides need to do some serious work. Christians need to take a step back and realize all the harm they are actually causing. They need to stand up and be Christians. Keep being yourself. Keep doing what is right, by the Lord. Help bridge this gap. I hate the hate, but I hope in time things do get better. You are loved. God loves you. God is there for you. God will not abandon you. It’s okay for you to be ace and Christian. That’s who you are. You are not hurting anyone by trying to be true to yourself. Don’t listen to anyone that causes you harm. Give yourself some time. Find yourself in your orientations first. Give yourself time to really understand your labels and identities. And come back to your faith in your own way, not how other people tell you to do it. Hang in there. If you ever need to talk, rant, or vent I am here feel free to message me anytime.

#ace religious #religious ace #religious queer #queer religious #christian and queer #ace:question

35 notes · View notes