The teacher’s a brave man, and Tanner at least seems like he just wants to help kids not go down a bad path.
You have to remember (from a Christian perspective) that most of this discourse from ALL sides is just the Devil setting us against each other. Baseless accusations that never end, creating more chaos and sin. Speaking the truth with love, standing firm and confident with your beliefs, is a good way to go.
Recently I’ve been trying to keep this in mind so I don’t demonize people, and instead recognize the actual demons behind them.
Yeah, I'm begging to have a much better understanding of the mythological moral lessons in Christianity.
A lot of Christianity's opposition to 'the devil' and 'satanic' actions makes a lot of sense as a metaphorical opposition to the behavior of tyrants, slaves, and power-mongers.
I think that's a lot of the reason why they seem to imitate or demonstrate themselves is classically villainous ways, or even embrace satanic iconography unironically. Their behavior is literally that of "demonic", "satanic", "classically villainous" characters in Christian mythos.
I still don't believe in God, Satan, angels, demons, or any of that stuff. But I do believe in evil. Of that, there is no question. I would have a harder time believing in good, than I would believing in evil. The evil we are facing is mostly the evil of many selfish ignorant little devils, spurned on by 'prince of darkness' egomaniacs. We are surrounded by narcissistic predators.
"Good" is being taught as a synonym for "compliant".
What's interesting about the concept of "good" is that it actually stems from what we would call "pious". The term "good" actualy stems from "Goodly" and "God-fearing".
The term "Good" was affixed to some leaders as a title. You've heard of William The Conqueror, and Richard The Lionhearted, and Alexander The Great. "The Great" is affixed to someone who expands their kingdom's lands. "The Conqueror" is someone who did that to your land and took over. "The Lionhearted" is actually in reference to Richard's ruthlessness during his war with Saladin.
One "Good" King you might have heard of is in the Christmas song "Good King Wenceslaus", which is a modern way of saying "Wenceslaus The Good".
The story basically goes that Wenceslaus was having a Christmas feast, and realized that Christmas was meant as a time of special generosity and care for Christians, and that it was important to show your humbleness and that you were not above God, and should not be treated as such. That you must be a humble, patient, wise, and generous person in reflection of Jesus The Christ. Knowing this, and knowing that his subjects were going through a rough winter, he went out into the Eastern European snows and IIRC either invited the peasants to his castle to participate in the feast, brought them food, or both.
The reality of the story is irrelevant. The point is that he was seen as being highly pious, which is why when he was rewarded for this deed by the Church, he was granted the title of The Good.
"Good" and "Goodly" can be looked on as: someone who is attempting to reflect the virtuosity and humility of Jesus Christ. To be humble, generous, and responsible is to act in a way that is not "God-like" but is "Goodly" because you are nearing the optimal image of man that God has for you. That's the thought.
That being said, this concept appears to have been bastardized as "obedient to religious law". Well, as we all know, what is moral and what is the law are two very different things (regardless of what a theocratic or a zealot may say). We know that "Divine Command Theory" is an inherently unethical system because it can proscribe any and all actions as morally valid. There is no ethical system to judge whether something is or is not morally valid. It is simply decreed by someone claiming to speak on behalf of an unknowable authority. Hence, it can't be an ethical system, but more than a few religious authoritarians latched onto it.
But the concept of piety, to take personal responsibility in reflecting the teachings of The Christ. That is not related to any particular religious law. Wenceslaus, was never required to entreat his peasants to a feast. His humble generosity was Goodly, and it made him Good.
If this concept makes sense, the concept of "The Anti-Christ" also makes perfect sense. The Anti-Christ is a Satanic (tempting) figure that teaches people that what is Good is Evil because he has taught people that Good is obedient to him rather than pious to God (or The Christ). He is a false Christ.
This dynamic makes a bit more sense of the good/evil dynamic.
Good isn't the opposite of Evil, not exactly.
There is only one way to be Good: reflecting the moral teachings of The Christ. But Evil comes in many ways, including teaching people to believe that what is Good is Obedience, which are two completely different concepts. Goodly behavior is never necessarily Obedient. This is therefore one way Evil manifests.
There is a battle between Good and Evil, but they aren't really opposites. Good is supposed to be a line of behavior that grants you and your society the most benefit, and sin is how you stray from Goodly behavior. Evil exists to present itself as a false Good, led by a false Christ, a false God. Promising you all sorts of benefits, but only leading you down the path of subservience to the Anti-Christ. What form that takes is never clear because Evil is, I don't think I have a good word for it but, many-shaped. It comes many forms. You can't really have an opposite when you have a one-to-many relationship. So it's opposite, but it isn't going down the path that will "save you" from the disaster that awaits everyone who sins (strays from the path).
That is basically how I see the Good-Evil concept.
It's funny because I'm an atheist, but I think that gives me a better understanding of what the Christians are actually going for when they are doing everything right. I have always just felt that the Christians weren't doing anything right because I always saw them doing what was Obedient, as opposed to what was Good.
Nothing to add, just really enjoy looking at religious teachings and morals as concepts separate from the mythology itself.
Helps to understand why religion was used as it was and also provides useful concepts to think about and apply to one's own life, even without buying into the entire concept of God or Jesus.
Yeah, calling me a “tradcuck” when I’m just pointing out how people should stand up for their beliefs and recognize that poison doesn’t purely come from their neighbor is not a good argument to label me that.
I’m the person who days ago defended the Conan and Xena depictions of fiction, I really don’t think I fit the priest/nun mold.
Not trying to argue with you though, since like my previous comment said, baseless accusations help pretty much no one.
This is the point. It's a kind of religious test, make people say something that's obviously not true so you can sort out the loyalists from the unbelievers who won't fall in line.
The teacher’s a brave man, and Tanner at least seems like he just wants to help kids not go down a bad path.
You have to remember (from a Christian perspective) that most of this discourse from ALL sides is just the Devil setting us against each other. Baseless accusations that never end, creating more chaos and sin. Speaking the truth with love, standing firm and confident with your beliefs, is a good way to go.
Recently I’ve been trying to keep this in mind so I don’t demonize people, and instead recognize the actual demons behind them.
"Father forgive them for they know not what they do"
More like:
"A man that beareth false witness against his neighbour is a maul, and a sword, and a sharp arrow." - Proverbs 25:18
Yeah, I'm begging to have a much better understanding of the mythological moral lessons in Christianity.
A lot of Christianity's opposition to 'the devil' and 'satanic' actions makes a lot of sense as a metaphorical opposition to the behavior of tyrants, slaves, and power-mongers.
I think that's a lot of the reason why they seem to imitate or demonstrate themselves is classically villainous ways, or even embrace satanic iconography unironically. Their behavior is literally that of "demonic", "satanic", "classically villainous" characters in Christian mythos.
I still don't believe in God, Satan, angels, demons, or any of that stuff. But I do believe in evil. Of that, there is no question. I would have a harder time believing in good, than I would believing in evil. The evil we are facing is mostly the evil of many selfish ignorant little devils, spurned on by 'prince of darkness' egomaniacs. We are surrounded by narcissistic predators.
"Good" is being taught as a synonym for "compliant".
What's interesting about the concept of "good" is that it actually stems from what we would call "pious". The term "good" actualy stems from "Goodly" and "God-fearing".
The term "Good" was affixed to some leaders as a title. You've heard of William The Conqueror, and Richard The Lionhearted, and Alexander The Great. "The Great" is affixed to someone who expands their kingdom's lands. "The Conqueror" is someone who did that to your land and took over. "The Lionhearted" is actually in reference to Richard's ruthlessness during his war with Saladin.
One "Good" King you might have heard of is in the Christmas song "Good King Wenceslaus", which is a modern way of saying "Wenceslaus The Good".
The story basically goes that Wenceslaus was having a Christmas feast, and realized that Christmas was meant as a time of special generosity and care for Christians, and that it was important to show your humbleness and that you were not above God, and should not be treated as such. That you must be a humble, patient, wise, and generous person in reflection of Jesus The Christ. Knowing this, and knowing that his subjects were going through a rough winter, he went out into the Eastern European snows and IIRC either invited the peasants to his castle to participate in the feast, brought them food, or both.
The reality of the story is irrelevant. The point is that he was seen as being highly pious, which is why when he was rewarded for this deed by the Church, he was granted the title of The Good.
"Good" and "Goodly" can be looked on as: someone who is attempting to reflect the virtuosity and humility of Jesus Christ. To be humble, generous, and responsible is to act in a way that is not "God-like" but is "Goodly" because you are nearing the optimal image of man that God has for you. That's the thought.
That being said, this concept appears to have been bastardized as "obedient to religious law". Well, as we all know, what is moral and what is the law are two very different things (regardless of what a theocratic or a zealot may say). We know that "Divine Command Theory" is an inherently unethical system because it can proscribe any and all actions as morally valid. There is no ethical system to judge whether something is or is not morally valid. It is simply decreed by someone claiming to speak on behalf of an unknowable authority. Hence, it can't be an ethical system, but more than a few religious authoritarians latched onto it.
But the concept of piety, to take personal responsibility in reflecting the teachings of The Christ. That is not related to any particular religious law. Wenceslaus, was never required to entreat his peasants to a feast. His humble generosity was Goodly, and it made him Good.
If this concept makes sense, the concept of "The Anti-Christ" also makes perfect sense. The Anti-Christ is a Satanic (tempting) figure that teaches people that what is Good is Evil because he has taught people that Good is obedient to him rather than pious to God (or The Christ). He is a false Christ.
This dynamic makes a bit more sense of the good/evil dynamic.
Good isn't the opposite of Evil, not exactly.
There is only one way to be Good: reflecting the moral teachings of The Christ. But Evil comes in many ways, including teaching people to believe that what is Good is Obedience, which are two completely different concepts. Goodly behavior is never necessarily Obedient. This is therefore one way Evil manifests.
There is a battle between Good and Evil, but they aren't really opposites. Good is supposed to be a line of behavior that grants you and your society the most benefit, and sin is how you stray from Goodly behavior. Evil exists to present itself as a false Good, led by a false Christ, a false God. Promising you all sorts of benefits, but only leading you down the path of subservience to the Anti-Christ. What form that takes is never clear because Evil is, I don't think I have a good word for it but, many-shaped. It comes many forms. You can't really have an opposite when you have a one-to-many relationship. So it's opposite, but it isn't going down the path that will "save you" from the disaster that awaits everyone who sins (strays from the path).
That is basically how I see the Good-Evil concept.
It's funny because I'm an atheist, but I think that gives me a better understanding of what the Christians are actually going for when they are doing everything right. I have always just felt that the Christians weren't doing anything right because I always saw them doing what was Obedient, as opposed to what was Good.
Nothing to add, just really enjoy looking at religious teachings and morals as concepts separate from the mythology itself.
Helps to understand why religion was used as it was and also provides useful concepts to think about and apply to one's own life, even without buying into the entire concept of God or Jesus.
Yeah, calling me a “tradcuck” when I’m just pointing out how people should stand up for their beliefs and recognize that poison doesn’t purely come from their neighbor is not a good argument to label me that.
I’m the person who days ago defended the Conan and Xena depictions of fiction, I really don’t think I fit the priest/nun mold.
Not trying to argue with you though, since like my previous comment said, baseless accusations help pretty much no one.
This is the point. It's a kind of religious test, make people say something that's obviously not true so you can sort out the loyalists from the unbelievers who won't fall in line.